Ghostbusters!

Discussion in 'THREAD ARCHIVES' started by Nydanna, Mar 3, 2016.



  1. As someone who grew up in the time of Ghost Busters (I was 6 when it came out. Yes, I know I'm old!) I was a bit depressed about the idea of a remake, especially when I heard it was going to be a female cast. Add to the fact that Harold Ramis passed away, it just didn't seem like it was anything to get excited about.

    However, after watching the trailer, I'm actually kind of excited about it.


    As long as Bill Murray is in there somewhere....
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. Looks better than expected, but not anything that's going to park my ass in the theater.

    This is more of a "I am bored and I see it on Netflix" kind of movie.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. I have never had a problem with remakes and re-imagings! 8D Sure sometimes you get some shitty stuff, but sometimes you get really awesome stuff too. (I mean, the whole wonderful world of fandom roleplay wouldn't exist if people didn't wanna create their own stories, versions and universes based on stuff they loved. >:3)

    And this one looks like it's going to be a LOT of fun! 8D I wasn't sure what to expect at first, cause recapturing the feel and atmosphere of something without it's original people can be really hard to do, but it looks cool.
     
  4. Words cannot convey my disdain for reboots in general. The trailer wasn't terrible beyond feeling like a knock off of the very first movie. Actresses are all.. Incredibly unattractive. Except the older one. She reminds me of Sarah Jane from DocWho.

    Heard (but haven't confirmed) that they forced Murray or Akroyd into the movie over threats of being sued. Which is bullshit if it's true.

    Did get to make a couple people laugh with a quip on this gem.

    I call it. "Spawn Camping."

    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 2
  5. I don't see the relevance at all?

    As for the movie in general. I disliekd the idea of a remake. Becouse remake tend to not come out to well. I had no real opinion on a all female cast. It neither add or detracts to any of it. The Extreme Ghostbusters cartoons were fucking awesome and had a female member. So the idea of female ghostbusters were nothing new.

    I liked the trailer though. It looks like a good "watch when in need of killing some time" movie.
     
  6. At least wanting to bang one actress can make a terrible movie tolerable.

    Gimme Weaver any day and we'll talk. Not these three.. Eeeh.. Not sure what to call them.
     
  7. To be fair, the original all male cast of the Ghostbusters wasn't what most women would call eyecandy either. XD And it was still a good movie.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. I'll probably end up watching it in passing some six years from now at a hotel, because I have no intention of spending money at the theater.

    Not to mention, that whole hospital visit was kind of a dick move.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Thank Thank x 1
  9. Good acting is always preferable to appearance. No denying that.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Looks aren't that big of a deal for me. Considering that one of my favorite movies is Spaceballs, that kind of gives a peek into what I look for. If I can laugh at least a little bit, than I won't care. I most likely won't go see it in theaters, because for one I have kids and taking them to the movies is a damn nightmare, and for two, it's not something that I'm overly anxious to see. However, I'll definitely watch it once it's on DVD.
     
  11. I can't help it feel that going from an all male cast to now an all female is plainly stunt casting rather than casting for the sake of good talent. Melissa McCarthy is still channeling her usual Chris Farley imitation while the gags seem forced and unfunny (the slapping scene). Then, as with many reboots and remakes, seems to just be borrowing iconic moments from the first two films and mashing them up into the one film.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Love Love x 1
  12. I'll probably see this. It doesn't seem half-bad!

    THAT SAID:

    It looks like we're getting cardboard cutouts of standard Melissa McCarthy characters and Kristen Wiig characters. Fine if you like either actress and their movies, but for me? It gets old. I mean, I guess it's one of those "What did you expect?!" from a comedy. Still, either of these characters are types I'm not a huge fan of.

    I will say, I'm so stoked for Kate Mckinnon. She's adorable in the role she's in, and looks like she'll be the scene stealer in, well... Every scene she's in! If anything, I'll see it for her. And the random Bill Murray cameo.

    I'm still wondering though. Is this a rebootquel, a sequel, or a straight-up reboot?
     
  13. Oh come on.

    Who didn't fap to Dan Aykroid?
     
  14. It was all about that Harold Ramis for meeee! 8D
     
  15. Dem specs tho.

    RIP good sir.
     
  16. I dunno. Let me play Devil's Advocate for a moment.

    This film is trying to live up to an incredible legacy among comedy films. It's one of the most well known and beloved franchises in American film culture. I mean, by Zeus' balls, listen to the sheer ham of its theme song and tell me you don't immediately feel nostalgia? This film was an excuse to get four great comedians in an incredibly silly setting and telling them to go nuts on it.

    If this was just "film about ghosts which takes cues from/pays homage to Ghostbusters" would there be as much vitriol toward it as is being expressed now? I mean, is it even really fair to compare it to a film that is so loved, that it has been parroted countless times in just about every form of media for decades? It could very well be a decently produced flick: But it will always pale in the shadow of the giant it's trying to reach toward. So it might just get unfairly treated because of that.

    /Devil's Advocate.

    In all honesty though, my personal opinion is this is a film that was produced to check off some gender quota boxes and little else. If you take away the fact that it's set in the Ghostbusters setting, there's nothing there that really screams "I wanted to make this" on the part of anyone there. Every imaginable generic checkbox is ticked off here. "Black lady is crazy and slaps people while screaming like a raving lunatic." Please tell me I'm not the only one who thinks this is a really old and childish joke?

    I mean, it's not even that Ghostbusters was a particularly classy film. It was made by and for the proletariat masses. There was a joke in the original about Dan Aykroyd's character getting a hand job/blow job by a ghost in the ghostbusting montage midway through the film. It was fucking hilarious, mind you, but it was still there. :ferret:

    It doesn't have to be this way either. You could totally make a Ghostbusters B-Team squad comprised entirely of women and then make the film self-aware of that for fun, and have the B-Team take over for the A-Team by following in their footsteps as the A-Team retires. You could do that. That's totally possible.

    But I suspect they'll go for the cheap social commentary jokes and "look at the crazy black lady being a crazy black lady" jokes instead. It'll be too busy drowning in hubris to be funny. Because ultimately, what made the original film hilarious was that it was comprised of four lovable losers that fucked up everything they did. They didn't have the "greatest physicists ever" (Mary Sue alert), they had uni drop-outs and borderline conmen. They were worthless losers who would have been relegated to janitorial duty or fast food services, who instead became comically foolish but surprisingly competent ghostbusters. They were human characters, and very flawed characters. This new ghostbusters, at least by the trailers, totally fails to establish this with our four protagonists, who instead all fall into a range of shitty stereotypes: The flawless woman archetype, the supergenius archetype, the crazy black lady who is only in the film to checkmark a minority quota box archetype, et cetera.

    I really, really hope I'm wrong, because I'd like this film to be better than "gender quota: the movie" but I'm a pessimist by nature, so... Le shrug.

    tl;dr: The writing is looking like shit, even if the actors might be able to do the job, and the premise itself is actually something you could do quite well.
     
  17. I think I rolled my eyes so hard at that part in the trailer my orbital socket became its own solar system. Loud, obnoxious characters do very little for me. I mean, it's not Jessie Fucking Eisenberg as Smarmy Lex Luthor bad, but it's still pretty bad. Like finding a bandaid in your Subway take out order bad.

    I'm also kind of at a loss of why they decided to make this movie in the first place. Much like the last two Terminator movies and the remake of Robocop, did literally anybody want this to be a thing, or even ask for it?
     
  18.  
    • Bucket of Rainbows Bucket of Rainbows x 1
  19. I prefer Neil DeGrasse Tyson Pig.

     
    • Love Love x 1
  20. Hollywood is running out of original ideas. Let's face it. The 80's and 90's were a period of time where things were a lot simpler, and people are trying to rekindle that feeling through entertainment.

    Comedy back then was actually funny. There wasn't a bunch of perverted stunts, discriminatory humor, or outright obnoxious behavior. Maybe I'm old school, but I always prefer a humorous innuendo over an outright perverted joke. It's always funnier when someone accidentally trips and crashes into a wall, than when someone slams someone else in the face with a 2x4. Don't get me wrong, I love comedy of all sorts. I'm the type of person who can laugh at pretty much everything, but I honestly prefer the old school humor over what is considered humor today.

    But I think that's what this is. An attempt to bring modern humor to a classic comedy. Newer generations might know about Ghostbusters, but they'll never fully appreciate the original version because of the time they grew up in. I try to get my kids to watch some of the movies I enjoyed when I was younger, and they simply look at me like I'm on drugs when I start laughing. I mean....they can't even find humor in Monty Python and the Holy Grail! Sometimes I swear they aren't my kids.....

    There will never be another Ghostbusters as an original. If they had pulled it off before Harold Ramis' death and used the original cast, I doubt we'd be having this conversation. But, the sad truth is, kids these days wouldn't be able to relate to that. All they would see is a bunch of old geezers running around saying and doing stupid shit that makes no sense to them. The slapping scene in the trailer is a case in point. Senseless violence is funny, and while it's always been mildly funny throughout generations, these days it's the one of the only things that most kids find hilarious. I'm sad to see that no, there will never be another movie with Venkman and friends, and I will always love the original over any remakes that come. However, I'm open to giving the new one a shot, if only to reminisce about the older films, and hope that my kids will become interested in watching them to compare the differences.
     
    • Like Like x 1