Another new Ghostbusters

aardvark · 17 Jan 2019 at 19:48

robgmun said:
I don't want Murray in this as he came across as a real a-hole in the last couple of decades about GB3 and when he finally had a cameo in the new one he came across as a phoned-in a-hole. He's just going to sour the whole thing and bring the film down. I think the best way to go is Ackroyd as a fire house chef type and Hudson as an on the ground vet training the new recruits. Heck, have one the girls be Ramis daughter inventing the latest gear

this - murray is a great actor but is often a massive ****

Gerard · 17 Jan 2019 at 21:22

The third movie in the last 10+ years was always meant to be a handover movie to a new generation. Had Murray not been such a massive bellpiece in the 90's the Ghostbusters in hell concept might well have happened. Though considering his childish fallout with Ramis at the time it's hard to say. He only really spoke to him again when he was on his deathbed.

I'd be interested to see where they can go with this movie, depends a LOT on casting. They've had umpteen years to get a decent story in place for a third movie, in retrospect the script for GB2 was done under pressure from Sony pretty much demanding a sequel after the first movie was a surprise hit.

It really does surprise me that seemingly Murray is onboard with this after being a holdout for over 2 decades. I would have thought after the feminazi reboot disaster he would have washed his hands of the franchise for good. Nothing is confirmed yet obviously.

Morve · 17 Jan 2019 at 21:50

They need the original cast, maybe rick moranis (Lewis) can take over from Egon

R3X · 18 Jan 2019 at 13:20

Bit more news revealed today.... they will bypass all the above issues with original cast talk by simply having a set of teens running the show instead.

https://screenrant.com/new-ghostbusters-sequel-teens/

They said it may be there off spring or original cast members children, probably the only way to avoid all the back lash and budget.

aardvark · 18 Jan 2019 at 15:08

sounds like they are going for the stranger things vibe.
might be good - can't be any worse than the last one!

Minusorange · 19 Jan 2019 at 13:56

I was kind of neutral to this just because of the mess of the last "reboot" attempt

Then I heard that they won't be referring to the ghosts as ghosts because China has a thing about the supernatural and as such it wouldn't get licensed so instead they will be referring to the ghosts as monsters

https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/ghostbusters-3-may-not-use-word-ghosts/

So yeah, not keen on this movie because of that and a lot of other things

Gerard · 19 Jan 2019 at 16:29

They could refer to the ghosts as spectres, apparitions, phantoms etc. Or they could just redub the wording for the Chinese release and keep it as Ghost for everywhere else.

hominid · 19 Jan 2019 at 18:48

Ghostbusters died with 2016 SJW edition.. I read that they probably won't be calling the ghosts ghosts, but instead calling them monsters. This is because China has issues with releasing ghost films, so go get it released in China it will have to be changed. If true that's sad.

They need to let it die, no point in trying to milk it any more. I would love to see a film with all the remaining cast but I don't think it'll happen, too may people with agendas set on ruining things for everyone else.

VincentHanna · 19 Jan 2019 at 20:03

This sounds like BS to me.

The film is called Ghostbusters. It's in the title.

This was from a few years ago:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/magazine-35008573

=XDC=FluphyBunny · 20 Jan 2019 at 09:39

The last reboot was complete garbage. I don’t see them doing anything good to be honest. Better to put it to rest for a few more decades.

R3X · 20 Jan 2019 at 12:03

If they can't call it 'ghost'busters then that is an epic failure before its got off the ground.

According to that link the internet or world has had a mixed response about teen ghostbusters, not encouraging at all really.

Gerard · 20 Jan 2019 at 21:19

https://www.thewrap.com/leslie-jones-calls-new-ghostbusters-squel-insulting/

LOL, the movie went down the crapper and she thinks its insulting Sony are trying something different.

dowie · 21 Jan 2019 at 02:24

She really does bring it on herself, no doubt she'll be claiming to be a victim of harassment etc.. as a result of this latest tweet and the responses to it.

Plenty more people on that twitter thread also pointing out the ratings, revenue and this notion that it was a reboot whereas this new movie follows on from the originals... She seems pretty entitled here, bit of a ridiculous thing to get "insulted" by simply because she was an actress in a reboot and someone else is going to make a move to follow on from the originals.

Of course various "woke"/SJW journalists are now validating her over this too:

https://www.bustle.com/p/leslie-jon...ing-insulting-yes-her-anger-is-valid-15862447

Even though the new director is complimentary towards her and the others:

In his interview with EW, Reitman said that the new Ghostbusters would pick up where the original two — 2016's Ghostbusters was the third in the universe — left off, but set in the present time. Reitman addressed the 2016 movie, saying, "I have so much respect for what Paul [Feig] created with those brilliant actresses, and would love to see more stories from them. However, this new movie will follow the trajectory of the original film."

aardvark · 21 Jan 2019 at 12:59

i thought she was one of the better things in the garbage reboot but thats just pathetic.

Gerard · 21 Jan 2019 at 14:29

aardvark said:
i thought she was one of the better things in the garbage reboot but thats just pathetic.

Apparently incapable of accepting their movie bombed at the box office. It allegedly needed to make in the region of $400 million to break even and get the possibility of a sequel. It made under $230 million. But it was all because of the anti female agenda and not that the movie blew goats.

SixTwoSix · 21 Jan 2019 at 14:39

Gerard said:
Apparently incapable of accepting their movie bombed at the box office. It allegedly needed to make in the region of $400 million to break even and get the possibility of a sequel. It made under $230 million. But it was all because of the anti female agenda and not that the movie blew goats.

Didn't the talentless lead actress Melissa McGetoffmyscreen get the highest movie paycheck of the year as well?

Gerard · 21 Jan 2019 at 14:43

SixTwoSix said:
Didn't the talentless lead actress Melissa McGetoffmyscreen get the highest movie paycheck of the year as well?

I've no clue how she gets cast in any movie, she has a voice that's like nails down a blackboard.

Gerard · 21 Jan 2019 at 15:24

Removed dailymail bs.

something daft already!! · 21 Jan 2019 at 15:30

Lets hope there are no queef jokes in this one.

IvanDobskey · 21 Jan 2019 at 16:37

Oh dear, well I guess it can't be any worse than the recent feminist reboot.