Ghostbusters 2016 sequel?

I might be thinking of Wes. I'm bad with names.

Sent from my Hewlett Packard 48G using Tapatalk

Is wes the guy who banned himself cuz prop projects were ruining his life? I remember laughing cuz I can see how that happens...
 
sorry guys i didnt mean to take this thread off topic. i was confused

As for the film, I am glad they don't plan on making a sequel. I would rather them start something else Ghostbusters related. There were many cool cameos, throw backs and Easter eggs and I just recently learned my friend's daughter's dance instructor was one of the background army soldiers!

That's the thing, it would have been so easy for them to make it continuation of the original, a few lines here, another few lines there and it establishes the movie as basically Ghostbusters 3. It might not have made it a much better film but by throwing a bone to the fans it certainly would have bought both Feige and the studio some goodwill with the fans and might have actually resulted in a few more tickets sold.
 
That's the thing, it would have been so easy for them to make it continuation of the original, a few lines here, another few lines there and it establishes the movie as basically Ghostbusters 3. It might not have made it a much better film but by throwing a bone to the fans it certainly would have bought both Feige and the studio some goodwill with the fans and might have actually resulted in a few more tickets sold.

I was hoping for the girls to be the daughters of the original cast, regardless I love seeing my local areas on the big screen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I was hoping for the girls to be the daughters of the original cast, regardless I love seeing my local areas on the big screen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Or at least one to be a daughter, and maybe 2 of the others to have visited them on a school trip when younger or something and they loved it. Something like that. The trailer made it look more like that in the first place.
 
I liked it. It was funny, not the funniest movie I've ever seen, but I enjoyed it.

Not the best movie, but few are.

I was hopeful for a sequel with a different director and more in-line with what fans wanted in a GB movie.
 
Or at least one to be a daughter, and maybe 2 of the others to have visited them on a school trip when younger or something and they loved it. Something like that. The trailer made it look more like that in the first place.

Exactly. Or they could even have it where they're no relation but were interested and bought a franchise/got permission from the originals to start their own branch, or take over because they retired or were forced out. Regardless, lots could have been done to tie the new one to the originals without it affecting the base story at all, just slightly different dialogue at a few points early on and that's it, nothing else would need to change except for maybe the cameos.
 
I found it mildly entertaining, some genuine laughs (Hemsworth), but I think what spoilt the fun were retread/knowing wink laughs from the original. If you hadn't seen the original, it was probably much more fun.

And that's where I think the reboot/remake genre goes bad, there will always be a comparison, and remaking a highly successful and beloved film is just asking for trouble.

If, instead of inventing all this incredible equipment (which would've otherwise made them millionairesses), they'd found it in Uncle Ray's storage locker and thought, "Hey, we can still use this, think there's money in the ghostbusting game, still?" it would've been OK. Could've had some fun with it, e.g. "Wow, this 80s proton accelerator is so clunky, today this whole thing would fit in your purse…"
 
Exactly. Or they could even have it where they're no relation but were interested and bought a franchise/got permission from the originals to start their own branch, or take over because they retired or were forced out. Regardless, lots could have been done to tie the new one to the originals without it affecting the base story at all, just slightly different dialogue at a few points early on and that's it, nothing else would need to change except for maybe the cameos.

It all goes back to the boardroom. They brought Feig on because they told him he'd have creative freedom with the project and could just do what he liked. Then it seems like they gradually walked that back and worked in more references to the original films (like Ernie Hudson's cameo, going to the MTA tunnels, the whole startup of the business, etc.).

Feig wanted to do his thing, the studio said "YES!! Come on board! Oh, by the way, could you just add this one little scene...?" and then that just kept happening. "Oh, you just need to add this other thing." "Oh, and this one other thing." "Could we maybe have a reference to that moment?" "They really should have an experience like this. That bit worked well in the original film..."

I gather there was plenty that was new in the film, so Feig did get a lot of what he wanted, but it sounded like a film that wasn't clear on its identity and fell into the classic reboot trap: If you go too far from the source material, why'd you make it a reboot? If you just recycle the old film, why'd you bother doing a new movie at all?

And in the end, all of this only came to be because Harold Ramis was dead and couldn't oppose it anymore (just my hunch there).
 
I gather there was plenty that was new in the film, so Feig did get a lot of what he wanted, but it sounded like a film that wasn't clear on its identity and fell into the classic reboot trap: If you go too far from the source material, why'd you make it a reboot? If you just recycle the old film, why'd you bother doing a new movie at all?

And in the end, all of this only came to be because Harold Ramis was dead and couldn't oppose it anymore (just my hunch there).

Harold Ramis is dead. Bill Murray stuck a fork in his character years ago. That's half the group.


As for the remake issue, I don't think the latter point (why'd you bother doing a new movie at all?) is a big factor once most movies are 30+ years old. These days the remakes are done with less betting on the original fans to show up, and more reliance on the simple fact that the franchise ever worked at all.

The combination of a modern cast + an idea that once worked = enough for the studios to trust doing the whole thing again without much change. I think we keep getting more dramatic changes now because the filmmakers (rather that the studio brass) don't want to be making cookie-cutter copies of someone else's movie. That, and studios & filmmakers just thinking audiences' tastes have changed. The old CHiPs TV show was about two squeaky-clean cops going around doing good deeds. That just feels like a bygone era in general. The typical studio thinking is "when in doubt, make a total joke out of it." But at any rate, I don't think the studios would be against doing a pretty cookie-cutter remake of anything if there wasn't a specific reason not to.
 
Last edited:
The typical studio thinking is "when in doubt, make a total joke out of it."
Maybe that will change after "CHIPS" and "Baywatch". They might go in the opposite direction. Make "Gilligan's Island" into a gritty survival/horror movie.

I rented Ghostbusterettes when it came out on video. I told myself to be open minded, but that was dashed a few minutes in when the tour guide talked about some sort of anti-Irish fencing. Granted, back when the house the tour was taking place in was built that could have been an actual thing, but my response was "ugh". Overall, it was OK. It was bad material and possibly bad direction because I have seen them all in other movies and they were much better. Heck, Kristen Wiig needs to get more non-comedy parts.
 
I just didn't see the reason for it to NOT just be a sequel set 25 years later. Instead of just ignoring the original, just make it a continuation with new characters. I had no problems with a female cast and had a few genuine laughs with this one. Just didn't see the reason for it being a reboot.
 
The reboot is easy: that's what Feig wanted when Amy Pascal got him on board. Basically, at least the way the emails read, it went like this.

Amy: "Paul, we LOVE your work. How would you like to direct the relaunch of the Ghostbusters franchise?"

Paul: "Meh. It's just...it's not really anything I'm that interested in, to be honest."

Amy: "Ok, well, what can we do to make it more interesting for you?"

Paul: "I dunno...um...well, if I could just tell my own story the way I want to. I don't want to have to just ape what came before and do it again. I'd want to cast women in it, too."

Amy: "Of course. We know that's your style. That's why we came to you! We want you to bring the Paul Feig style to Ghostbusters!"

Paul: "Well, yes, but what about having the freedom to basically create my own Ghostbusters universe?"

Amy: "No problem. We can just reboot the series. We do that all the time."

Paul: "Ok, send me the paperwork, and if my lawyers don't have any problems with it, I think we're in business!"

Amy: "Great!"

Later....

Paul: "Here's my signed paperwork! I'm really looking forward to working on this project with you."

Amy: "Great! I know the rest of the production team is excited. Unfortunately, I won't be working with you on this at this point. I'm moving to a new position. Um...outside of Sony. Sorry."

Paul: "Oh, too bad. Well, here's hoping the next exec I deal with is as great as you've been!"

Amy: "Good luck with that!"

Paul: "?"

New Exec: "Hi Paul. Good to touch base with you. We have some notes about things we want to make sure make it into the film. You can still do your reboot thing, but, well, we just think it'll be more recognizably 'Ghostbusters' if the following list of stuff makes it into the film..."
 
I saw the 2016 movie and am so glad that Playmobil chose to mke toys based on the original movies. The 16 movie was a complete turd. I had expected an okay to good comedy, but the gags were lame, the timing was off, the characters were flat, the whole world in itself did not work.

However, as said before by others, a crossover should have been considered before and it might work in a sequel. But they need a director who actually understands comedy beyond fart jokes and has a feeling for timing when it comes to physical comedy aka slapstick. I think Lord and Miller should do a GB movie.
 
Sorry this is unrelated, but after reading the article I had to mention it. I used to be an avid reader of moviehole, then I got distracted by other things and kind of forgot about it. What the hell happened to it? There is so much going on with that website, its like an ADD persons wet dream. Its so busy I thought I was going to ahve a seizure looking at it. Blaugh. :wacko
 
Sorry this is unrelated, but after reading the article I had to mention it. I used to be an avid reader of moviehole, then I got distracted by other things and kind of forgot about it. What the hell happened to it? There is so much going on with that website, its like an ADD persons wet dream. Its so busy I thought I was going to ahve a seizure looking at it. Blaugh. :wacko

:lol:lolThank you! I thought it was just me that felt that way!:lol:lol
 
This thread is more than 6 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