GhostBusters 2016 **SPOILERS FROM POST 1751 ONWARD**

Oafley Jones

Bacchus wrote: »

So is this from a scene setting up how they all met while doing community service picking up litter on the highway?

I've liked the pics so far (even if they are shameless nostalgia hooks) but that cast picture is a bit of a lame duck. I'm guessing the girl on the right is going to be a relative of Egon? She's sporting a similar haircut and specs. Wigg looks miserable as usual.

Just a nod to the animated series I'd guess, nothing more. The pics so far make me appreciate the production design of the original all the more. There's an ugliness to this that I dislike. I wish they went their own way on this.

Tony EH

Gintonious wrote: »

Count me out on this one.

Just looks like a box ticking exercise doesn't it.

JP Liz V1

Deleted User wrote: »

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=44830

First pic of the cast in costume, I'm really not liking the look of anything we've seen so far. Hopefully the first trailer/teaser is good

Looks like a SNL skit

Frank Bullitt

"Who ya gonna call?"

None of this shower!

pixelburp

I dunno, they look ok to me, I really can't get too steamed about this until I see something resembling footage proving / disproving this was all a terrible idea.

What can we possibly tell other than the production design has done a good job so far nodding towards the original designs? I can't help but suspect though that the stream of social media coming from Feig n' co is an attempt to get the hordes onboard after the ludicrous overreaction about not only new Ghostbusters, but (gasp) female ones!

Mickeroo

I've really not seen anything from this that has given me any reason to write it off yet, looks very much like it's in the same spirit as the original and it has a director that's made a few decent comedy movies over the last few years.

expectationlost

not liking the orange striping

Oafley Jones

pixelburp wrote: »

I dunno, they look ok to me, I really can't get too steamed about this until I see something resembling footage proving / disproving this was all a terrible idea.

What can we possibly tell other than the production design has done a good job so far nodding towards the original designs? I can't help but suspect though that the stream of social media coming from Feig n' co is an attempt to get the hordes onboard after the ludicrous overreaction about not only new Ghostbusters, but (gasp) female ones!

Era, **** em.

The original is one of my favourite movies and what I'd regard as a near perfect film, but am I going to get upset of this? Not a chance. It's just the nature of Hollywood; recycle anything that's been successful. It's so much easier than originality. At least it's been 30 years here.

There's a chance it might even be good. Sure, Feig is a journeyman film maker, but it does have Wiig. Who has received my nod for the coveted award of "Female Paul Rudd". But I do hate this pandering.... "Look how much reverence we're showing to the original with these designs".

Someone else, on some other site, said they were a bit "try hard" and I'd agree. Take the car, it's a 1984 model don't 'cha know. There's that ugliness to the aesthetic that I think just misses the mark. The original Ecto was a wreck that was made to look cool, here they've a wreck that's made to look retro. That big orange light on top. Hate it. It's 2015, where did they even find that. Dare I say there's a hipster aesthetic at play here.

Mickeroo

Just in the door from Spy and it was actually much better than I expected, if this ends up being half as clever and enjoyable I'll be delighted.

JP Liz V1

Bill Murray In

syklops

syklops wrote:

I still think my idea is better where Peter Venkman is, well, an older Peter Venkman and he is "training" 3 hot college students in the ways of the Ghostbusters, while simultaneously hitting on them every chance he gets. Thats the Peter we all know and love right?

senordingdong wrote:

I think anything would be better than what we're getting.

It is a sad reflection that lads on a forum can think up better ways to reignite the franchise, than the Hollywood cronies.

pixelburp wrote: »

Re-ignite the franchise by wheeling out one of the original crew, the actor being now a very old-looking 64?

We know nothing of this new film bar its cast and director; I don't have any great optimism myself but I'd sooner wait 'til a trailer comes out before completely giving up

JP LIZ V1 wrote:

Bill Murray In

/me feeling vindicated.

syklops

Bacchus wrote: »

Bill Murray was 30 in the first Ghostbusters movie. Weaver was 31. There is no weird age gap there. As for hitting on college girls... he was 30, not 64. It was a bit creepy then but Murray walked the line superbly and as you say, it's part of who Venkman is. I won't say it would never work cause it's impossible to know how they would play it out (and Murray is still a great actor) but a 64 year old Murray hitting on 3 hot college girls as the setup for Ghostbusters 3 would be veering into American Pie style generic college fare, but with ghosts.

I was slated for my idea that Venkman might be in it. Guess what happened next...?

Mickeroo

syklops wrote: »

I was slated for my idea that Venkman might be in it. Guess what happened next...?

The fact they've done it doesn't make it a good idea., we'll see how it turns out I guess. I don't think he'll be too central a character.

Doesn't the fact that Murray has agreed to be in it show that it at least has promise to be good? I mean, doesn't he see Ghostbusters as his baby, pretty much. Will Ackroyd be in it too?

It would be lovely if they acknowledge the passing of Ramis. Of course I'm basing this on the assumption that the events of #1 and #2 actually happening in timeline for #3.

Mickeroo

Deleted User wrote: »

Doesn't the fact that Murray has agreed to be in it show that it at least has promise to be good? I mean, doesn't he see Ghostbusters as his baby, pretty much. Will Ackroyd be in it too?

It would be lovely if they acknowledge the passing of Ramis. Of course I'm basing this on the assumption that the events of #1 and #2 actually happening in timeline for #3.

I think Feig's track record gives it more promise tbh, this just sounds like they threw a load of money at Murray, which is grand as who doesn't like Bill Murray, I just hope they don't get too bogged down in fan service and nods to the original though.

humanji

Has it been confirmed if Murray is going to have a large roll or not? He could just be doing a cameo to win over fans.

pixelburp

syklops wrote: »

/me feeling vindicated.

Uhm, I 'slated' you over the icky idea of having mouldy old Bill Murray perving on a bunch of college girls. No harm over innocent spitballing, but it was and still is a really gross idea

Just because he's now in the movie, presumably for a single-scene cameo so the trailers can use it & hook passing fans in, doesn't suddenly mean it'll be the greatest thing since sliced bread. It just means it's (apparently) happening as a thing. I remain cynical about any actor who starred in not one, but two Garfield films

Tony EH

Since when was Bill Murray the savior of cinema?

A lot of talk centers around Murray playing a new character which would mean that this film is completely removed from the world of the original films which is no bad thing if plans really are in motion to create a male centered sequel.

syklops

pixelburp wrote: »

Uhm, I 'slated' you over the icky idea of having mouldy old Bill Murray perving on a bunch of college girls. No harm over innocent spitballing, but it was and still is a really gross idea

Just because he's now in the movie, presumably for a single-scene cameo so the trailers can use it & hook passing fans in, doesn't suddenly mean it'll be the greatest thing since sliced bread. It just means it's (apparently) happening as a thing. I remain cynical about any actor who starred in not one, but two Garfield films

I never said mine was a good idea. I was simply saying it was more plausible then 4 girls simply "coming up" with the ghostbusters idea and running with it.

Im sorry you think 64 year old men dont perve on girls. They do. 99% of them do.

Edit: And don't ever call Bill Murray "mouldy".

johnny_ultimate

syklops wrote: »

I was simply saying it was more plausible then 4 girls simply "coming up" with the ghostbusters idea and running with it.

As opposed to four boys simply "coming up" with the Ghostbusters idea and running with it?

pixelburp

syklops wrote: »

I never said mine was a good idea. I was simply saying it was more plausible then 4 girls simply "coming up" with the ghostbusters idea and running with it.

You literally did say that:
"I still think my idea is better..." quoth the skylops

But once again, the huge caveat in this entire, circular, discussion is that we know next to nothing about this film bar the imagery released on Twitter from Paul Feig. Who knows why these 4 'girls' decided to become ghostbusters, I'd rather wait and see before getting too het up about which idea's better.

syklops wrote: »

Im sorry you think 64 year old men dont perve on girls. They do. 99% of them do.

I didn't say they don't, I said it's gross, more than a little pervy and wouldn't be a particularly appealing or hilarious idea for a comedy script. It's skeevy in real life and it'd be skeevy in a plot.

But again, it's all conjecture up the wazoo here.

Bacchus

syklops wrote: »

/me feeling vindicated.

no-one bites...

4 days later...

syklops wrote: »

I was slated for my idea that Venkman might be in it. Guess what happened next...?

That's some high horse you must think you're up on.

You proposed a movie centered around Venkman training up 3 hot college girls. How is that ANYTHING like what has transpired. Are you seriously taking kudos that you predicted an ex-Ghostbuster would turn up in the new Ghostbusters movie? It's practically part of the deal on 80's remakes these days (see Starsky & Hutch, Jump Street, A-Team). So far there is no word at all about what kind of role he has in the movie but considering it's well into production, it's not that critical a part, most likely a cameo.

Mickeroo

Mickeroo wrote: »

I think Feig's track record gives it more promise tbh, this just sounds like they threw a load of money at Murray, which is grand as who doesn't like Bill Murray, I just hope they don't get too bogged down in fan service and nods to the original though.

You're probably right about the money - I just seem to remember Murray being very particular about a 3rd Ghostbusters, so his agreeing to be in it shows that it has a lot of promise.

I'd love to see a Blues Brothers 2000 style headnod to Ramis' passing. Ackroyd getting out of jail and waiting for his brother to arrive was a great acknowledgement of Belushi's death. But you're right, the references back should be kept to a limit, because it could possibly overtake the next two movies.

With regards to the all-male Ghostbusters, will they be referring to that as Ghostbusters 4 or Ghostbusters 3 Part 2?

Tony EH

Mickeroo wrote: »

I think Feig's track record gives it more promise tbh.

Does it?


I Am David
Unaccompanied Minors
Bridesmaids
The Heat
Spy

Mickeroo

Tony EH wrote: »

Does it?


I Am David
Unaccompanied Minors
Bridesmaids
The Heat
Spy

Spy is great, one of the better films of the summer so far. Bridesmaids was pretty good but suffered from being a bit too long. Not seen The Heat but it got decent reviews. People write him off when it comes to ghost busters because the cast is female and perceive his previous films to be "chick flicks" as far as I can see.

Tony EH

Out of the five films he's helmed, only 'Bridesmaids' and 'Spy' have been well received, although I can't claim to be a fan of either TBH.

Two out of five is pretty good going, in fairness.

johnny_ultimate

Keep it civil folks. Just had to delete one post, but a few above are skirting the line of being a bit too personal as well.

JP Liz V1

First look of Chris Hemsworth as Kevin


http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/news/a663949/see-the-first-picture-of-chris-hemsworth-in-full-ghostbusters-costume.html?utm_source=tw&utm_medium=dsuk&utm_campaign=twdsuk#~plKckRAeLdoJKe