GHOSTBUSTERS Pre-Release - film discussion only, no social commentary please!

So, having read through the pre-production thread, I'm curious from those who actually work in the business whether this is all pretty typical of how films get made.

If so, it pretty much confirms my attitude that idiot suits who don't understand or care the first thing about storytelling are running the show, and it is nothing short of a miracle that decent films end up being made at all.

I'm not so much in the business myself. Most of my friend are, but I've gone more the business/government route because I actually like things like...paychecks that show up on time, and food, and sleep. Honestly, I've had pets that get treated better than Hollywood CGI workers.

But my understanding is...sadly, that it's not only common, but it's BY FAR the norm. It's a business, they are there to make money. Half the time even the toys start production before the story is finalized. That old commercial where they talk about banging out the script over the weekend wasn't parody, it was practically a documentary.

Having said that, this movie seems to be as obvious about it as any I've ever seen. Motorcycles...a dinosaur...there's just no pretending that things like that didn't happen because there was a board room meeting and one suit said "They should have motorcycles! Motorcycles are cool!" and another said "What about a dinosaur? That dinosaur movie looks like it's going to be huge this year!"

In the end, we're just lucky the notes didn't get mixed up and they aren't actually riding the dinosaur.


But having said that...NOT AT ALL uncommon. Especially with casting. Getting some names attached often precedes much of the funding, so it's often the case that the writer hasn't even been hired before the cast is chosen. From a business side, it makes perfect sense. The names are a huge part of what puts butts in the seats. The same movie starring an unknown vs. starring Tom Cruise could be a 50 million dollar swing. I might be willing to invest some bucks in the next Stallone movie because if its even in English it'll sell some tickets. Doesn't matter if it sucks. As long as it covers the spread opening weekend, before anyone even finds out what a turd it is, we'll still make bank.

But is sucks form a story sense, and is the reason why we get so many oddball sequels that run the exact same gags as each other. Because those suits are not story tellers. They are businessmen, and there is a checklist in a sense. It may not be written down, but "things that movies do that make millions of dollars" is often just thought of as another way of saying "Things we're damn well going to do in our next film even if we have to waterboard the writer and director into including it."


Now for this movie, I have no way of knowing if thats really whats going on here, and even if it is, that does NOT always mean the movie will be bad. The right people can save even the weakest script, and even the most obvious cliches can become funny parodies in the right hands. But it's certainly not the slam dunk they seem to think it is.
 
thats why I don't get culling all this talent from SNL. Most agree the show hasn't been good since Farley years. And I couldn't really name a cast member past probably 2005 other than Tina Fey. so with that, hopes for this go further down.

I think the SNL talent is a good sign. Kate McKinnon is terrific (up for an Emmy this year), and Kristen is obviously having a great and wide-ranging career after she left the show.

And if you haven't heard of Seth Meyers, Bill Hader, Jason Sudeikis, Andy Samberg, Bobby Moynihan, Will Forte or Amy Poehler, maybe it's time for a refresher. All those people were/are part of the cast long after '05.

Slightly off-topic, but I think SNL is the most mis-remembered show ever made. From Episode 1, even the best of the best are about 50% watchable, and even fewer sketches are remembered for more than a year or two.

The "era" that people claim SNL was at its best have much less to do with the quality of the show and much more to do with the "era" that the person speaking was in their teens/twenties.

Go back and watch any episode with a great Farley, Spade, Ferrell, Chase, Meyers, Carvey, Aykroyd or Belushi sketch in it, and you'll realize the rest of the show is mediocre at best. It's always been incredibly hit-or-miss. The things people remember are single sketches and the great comedians that went on to build respectable careers. Say what you want about SNL as a show (I certainly have/do), but they consistently cast some of the funniest comedians working. The quality of the show has little to do with the quality of the vast majority of their cast, and that's been true since 1975. (Even more off-topic, the writers are also incredible - it's Lorne's insistence on his own sensibilities that is and always has been the double-edged sword of the show.)

All that said, the ability of the cast to handle the comedy of this film, whatever the quality might be, is something I'm the least worried about.
 
Also keep in mind that Blues Brothers, Wayne's World, MacGruber, Bob Roberts, Office Space and A Mighty Wind were all based on SNL sketches.

True, although they've also had some stinkers in recent years.

I should clarify what I said earlier though: while I think the odds are against this being at all original, I do think it will make money.

When was the last time we had ANY highly anticipated summer blockbuster comedy? Can anyone even remember? This thing could stink up the whole theater, but still probably turn a profit from opening weekend alone. From a purely business standpoint, it looks like a solid investment. I do think butts will be in seats, at least for opening.
 
thats why I don't get culling all this talent from SNL. Most agree the show hasn't been good since Farley years. And I couldn't really name a cast member past probably 2005 other than Tina Fey. so with that, hopes for this go further down.

Kristen Wiig had decent success with Bridesmaids, and has been also doing some indie work in dramatic roles, apparently with pretty decent reception. At a guess, that's why they went with her. Plus, Feig wanted her. She's part of his crew.

She's not SNL, but Melissa McCarthy has had several decent-to-hit comedies in recent years and is basically one of the hot actresses for comedy roles in Hollywood. And, she's Feig's muse the way Johnny Depp is Tim Burton's muse. She is, however, a former Groundlings member.

Can't speak for the other two. The only thing I've heard about Leslie Jones is that she caught some flak for something apparently racially tinged or something on SNL? I dunno. I didn't pay close attention to it. I've never heard of Kate McKinnon prior to her casting in this.

Frankly, I didn't even find SNL all that funny in the Chris Farley years. The problem with that show has always been its 90 min format. In the Comedy Central 60-min reruns, it was always much funnier, because they could cut the lame bits and only show you the good stuff.

Anyway, that's as may be. In fairness, SNL has a history of taking cast members from improv groups like the Groundlings or Second City. Sometimes that translates well, sometimes not. In the case of Akroyd and Murray -- both Second City alums -- it proved to be a goldmine. Ramis was also a Second City alum.


The thing is, a lot of these actors are actually incredibly talented and versatile. But the problem is that they only ever appear as good as the material they're given. There's only so much you can do with crap direction and especially with crap writing. My fiancee LOVES Gilmore Girls and thought McCarthy was terrific on it. But if you give her weak material, a poor director, and/or interfering production suits, there's only so much she can do.

Kevin Smith in one of those live "evening with Kevin Smith" things talked about shooting that film he did with Bruce Willis. The bottom line is that half the time actors who become known for doing a particular "thing" end up being stuck doing that "thing" because it makes money. People may forget, but Bruce Willis used to be a comedic actor before he was a tough guy action star. Now, though? He's a tough guy action star who works a little comedy into his stuff, and he does his "Bruce Willis thing." McCarthy's recent outings may be more a product of her having done a particular thing well, and then various execs saying "Get her to do that thing she does again. It made money last time."
 
Yep, they went for the low hanging fruit, that's for sure.

Tina would've been good as part of a broader cast!

thats why I don't get culling all this talent from SNL. Most agree the show hasn't been good since Farley years. And I couldn't really name a cast member past probably 2005 other than Tina Fey. so with that, hopes for this go further down.
 
Office Space was out of an SNL sketch??

I think SNL usually has a great pool of talent mixed with a few one-noters (who can either be lovable, forgettable, or obnoxious in their limited range). For as long as I can remember, the show's been the goal for an improv/sketch comedian. Perhaps it's lost a touch of that allure in recent years, but I'd wager that owes as much to a changing landscape as a decline in SNL's quality. There are a lot of different paths to success for the few comedians who "make it," and certain formats seem to fit different tones or styles of comedy better than a weekly live sketch show airing late on a weekend. Some people who would have once dreamed of joining the cast now emulate Louis CK or Amy Schumer instead of Tina Fey or Bill Murray.

For the couple decades of SNL material that I do know, I'd say it's about 5% timeless gold, 20% really good, 30%watchable, and the rest is about what you'd expect to fill in the slots if they need to come up with one of these every week and execute it with an outsider of questionable improv talent in pivotal roles...
 
And if you haven't heard of Seth Meyers, Bill Hader, Jason Sudeikis, Andy Samberg, Bobby Moynihan, Will Forte or Amy Poehler, maybe it's time for a refresher. All those people were/are part of the cast long after '05.

Slightly off-topic, but I think SNL is the most mis-remembered show ever made. From Episode 1, even the best of the best are about 50% watchable, and even fewer sketches are remembered for more than a year or two.


true, and you also have the immense star power of that first cast that people remember fondly, kind of mixing in with the SNL days.

Seth Meyers, but only because of his talk show. Bill Hader, but I couldn't tell you from what. Jason who? Andy Samberg? bobby Moynihan, name only...and last name mostly at that. Will Forte and Amy Poehler, name only.

I couldn't for the life of me call off the top of my head anything I might have seen any of them in. although I've probably seen someone by at least one of all...(Looked up their imdb credits. I've only seen their voice work. and I honestly couldn't have told you from that who they where. Recently saw Inside out, thoroughly enjoyed it...no idea who the lead was)
 
But my understanding is...sadly, that it's not only common, but it's BY FAR the norm. It's a business, they are there to make money. Half the time even the toys start production before the story is finalized. That old commercial where they talk about banging out the script over the weekend wasn't parody, it was practically a documentary.

I can confirm that this is sadly pretty true.

That said, I think people often blur the line between execs and creatives in a situation like this - the branding BS, money chasing, demographic concerns etc. are almost always on the exec side. No self-respecting writer, director or actor working out there today is doing anything but trying to make good work. Creatives don't need to make those stupid considerations, because execs are all too happy to make them for us, whether we want them to or not.
 
true, and you also have the immense star power of that first cast that people remember fondly, kind of mixing in with the SNL days.

Seth Meyers, but only because of his talk show. Bill Hader, but I couldn't tell you from what. Jason who? Andy Samberg? bobby Moynihan, name only...and last name mostly at that. Will Forte and Amy Poehler, name only.

I couldn't for the life of me call off the top of my head anything I might have seen any of them in. although I've probably seen someone by at least one of all...(Looked up their imdb credits. I've only seen their voice work. and I honestly couldn't have told you from that who they where. Recently saw Inside out, thoroughly enjoyed it...no idea who the lead was)

Wait... are you serious?
 
Wait... are you serious?

I just don't watch alot of recent stuff. Most of my stuff is from 90s on down. anything in the tv Realm I like, either starts to stink and gets cancelled early....or doesn't last very long (sleepy Hollow, for instance.....) So, when most of the shows you tend to get into don't last past a season or two, your willingness to check out new stuff tends to drop. and with all this reality crap on TV, I watch even less of it. I have not seen Ted 2, or Ted 1 for that matter(one of their credits listed)..... I've only seen a few episodes of the Office. I've seen maybe one or two episodes of shows like the Big Bang Theory (that's on long enough that I feel safe buying box sets). How I Met your Mother, I've only seen in passing. but now that it's ended, i'm checking it out more.

My TV and movie watching habits have virtually dropped 50% in the last decade or so. I think the last show I watched from start to finish might have just been Spin City. and even that I started to stop once Charlie Sheen hit.
 
I can confirm that this is sadly pretty true.

That said, I think people often blur the line between execs and creatives in a situation like this - the branding BS, money chasing, demographic concerns etc. are almost always on the exec side. No self-respecting writer, director or actor working out there today is doing anything but trying to make good work. Creatives don't need to make those stupid considerations, because execs are all too happy to make them for us, whether we want them to or not.

Right. That's about what I figured.

To be clear, what I see in the email thread is execs doing their ****ty exec thing, and Feig and Reitman trying to walk the line between creative and executive, which I guess is why nobody knows what a producer actually does?

Anyway, all of the crappy aspects of this film strike me as being down to the execs. The individuals involved may be immensely talented. The film may even end up doing well and being genuinely funny. But if any of that happens it will be a triumph in spite of the executive involvement.
 
Anyway, all of the crappy aspects of this film strike me as being down to the execs. The individuals involved may be immensely talented. The film may even end up doing well and being genuinely funny. But if any of that happens it will be a triumph in spite of the executive involvement.

Agreed.

- - - Updated - - -

I can't wait to see the replies. yes, I know, I'm a dinosaur. Goes back to watching Bewitched ;o)./

Ha ha, not from me. You do you, man.
 
And if you haven't heard of Seth Meyers, Bill Hader, Jason Sudeikis, Andy Samberg, Bobby Moynihan, Will Forte or Amy Poehler, maybe it's time for a refresher. All those people were/are part of the cast long after '05.

To kinda sorta not really side with Neil here: Seth I only know because he hosts that late night show nobody watches. Bill Hader I know. Jason I have no clue who he is. Andy I know from Lonely Island, easily the funniest on this list for my taste. Bobby and Will I've never heard of and Amy I know but only from hearing about her, don't think I've seen anything she's in.

To be completely fair though, I stopped watching SNL in the mid 90's.
 
To kinda sorta not really side with Neil here: Seth I only know because he hosts that late night show nobody watches. Bill Hader I know. Jason I have no clue who he is. Andy I know from Lonely Island, easily the funniest on this list for my taste. Bobby and Will I've never heard of and Amy I know but only from hearing about her, don't think I've seen anything she's in.

To be completely fair though, I stopped watching SNL in the mid 90's.

Well, my original point was that all of them have successful careers outside of SNL.

I mean, I'm not crazy to say Amy Poehler is a household name. Parks and Rec ran for 7 seasons. She's hosted the Golden Globes 3 times.

But I digress. Sorry to get off topic.
 
Neil, to very briefly continue this digression, I HIGHLY recommend Parks & Rec. The first season is a little...odd, but by Season 2, it really takes off and stays good throughout. It has heart, too, and seems to genuinely love the quirks of its characters, as opposed to viewing them purely as fodder for ridicule, if you know what I mean. Some shows have a "tone" where it's like they're laughing "at" the characters. On this show, you're more laughing "with" the characters, or to the extent you're laughing at, it's not a mean-spirited version.
 
Re: Office Space and SNL, Mike Judge originally created the Milton character as an animated series of shorts that aired on SNL in 1991 (apparently the funny years!)
 
Well, my original point was that all of them have successful careers outside of SNL.

I mean, I'm not crazy to say Amy Poehler is a household name. Parks and Rec ran for 7 seasons. She's hosted the Golden Globes 3 times.

But I digress. Sorry to get off topic.


No you are not crazy, She is a house hold name, has been in a lot of movies. Has she had some stinkers, yes, but what comedian hasn't? Probably the Best know SNL alumn, and the first one to go big on his own Eddy Murphy had some crappy movies in his time.

You guys dismiss Seth Myers as the show no one watches, but no one brought up Fallon (who I'm going to guess is the show everyone watches) and he is out of SNL. Sandberg I never liked until I saw him on Brooklyn 99, and if you haven't seen that show you should, really very good.

There is really nothing wrong with this group of lady's individually and the fact that 3/4 of them came from SNL isn't a problem. The real problem is the direction and concept of the movie, that's what you guys created this thread to discuss. The fact that all of this other stuff keeps coming up is an attempt to pick at low hanging fruit, because the direction of the movie can only be harped on so much. SNL is not the reason this GB will suck or not.
 
No you are not crazy, She is a house hold name, has been in a lot of movies. Has she had some stinkers, yes, but what comedian hasn't? Probably the Best know SNL alumn, and the first one to go big on his own Eddy Murphy had some crappy movies in his time.

You guys dismiss Seth Myers as the show no one watches, but no one brought up Fallon (who I'm going to guess is the show everyone watches) and he is out of SNL. Sandberg I never liked until I saw him on Brooklyn 99, and if you haven't seen that show you should, really very good.

There is really nothing wrong with this group of lady's individually and the fact that 3/4 of them came from SNL isn't a problem. The real problem is the direction and concept of the movie, that's what you guys created this thread to discuss. The fact that all of this other stuff keeps coming up is an attempt to pick at low hanging fruit, because the direction of the movie can only be harped on so much. SNL is not the reason this GB will suck or not.

To be fair, I brought it up because I agree that the production of the film is unsettling at best, but the cast I'm actually really excited about. I've got somewhat mixed feelings about Kristen and Melissa, but Leslie and Kate are terrific, and Neil Casey and Matt Walsh are seriously two of the funniest dudes in the biz. I think Katie Dippold is a terrific writer as well.
 
This thread is more than 7 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top