237 replies to this topic

[The Dove]

As long as Aykroyd isnt writing it I'm good. He used to be a great writer but his sequels leave a lot to be desired.

The Blues Brothers 2000..enough said!

[bondboy007]

I bought the game yesterday and it is a lot of fun so far. A nice bit of rehashing past villains/scenarios/settings as a bit of a training and yet they still advance the story enough to make it new, and I'm not even that far into it yet.

A 3rd movie should be awesome though. I've never understood the Ghostbusters II hate, I thought it was a fine sequel, just not as good as the original. A 3rd one needs to have the original actors in some capacity, but I'd rather see the the original actors back in the starring roles.

[tdalton]

I bought the game yesterday and it is a lot of fun so far. A nice bit of rehashing past villains/scenarios/settings as a bit of a training and yet they still advance the story enough to make it new, and I'm not even that far into it yet.

A 3rd movie should be awesome though. I've never understood the Ghostbusters II hate, I thought it was a fine sequel, just not as good as the original. A 3rd one needs to have the original actors in some capacity, but I'd rather see the the original actors back in the starring roles.

I don't understand the GHOSTBUSTERS II hate either. I actually like it just as much as the first film, even though I would probably say that the first film is, overall, a better film (if that makes any sense).

As for GHOSTBUSTERS III, I simply can't wait. I know that I complain time and time again about the lack of originality in Hollywood with their constant sequels/reboots, but this one is a film that I've been waiting for since I walked out of the theater after seeing GHOSTBUSTERS II. I honestly never thought that it would happen, but now that it looks like it's going to happen (assuming that the screenwriters that are currently working on the script turn in a good script, of course) I can't help but be rather excited about it. Making it even more exciting is that all of the original cast members will be back in some capacity, which alone will be worth the price of admission.

[bond 16.05.72]

I bought the game yesterday and it is a lot of fun so far. A nice bit of rehashing past villains/scenarios/settings as a bit of a training and yet they still advance the story enough to make it new, and I'm not even that far into it yet.

A 3rd movie should be awesome though. I've never understood the Ghostbusters II hate, I thought it was a fine sequel, just not as good as the original. A 3rd one needs to have the original actors in some capacity, but I'd rather see the the original actors back in the starring roles.

I don't understand the GHOSTBUSTERS II hate either. I actually like it just as much as the first film, even though I would probably say that the first film is, overall, a better film (if that makes any sense).

As for GHOSTBUSTERS III, I simply can't wait. I know that I complain time and time again about the lack of originality in Hollywood with their constant sequels/reboots, but this one is a film that I've been waiting for since I walked out of the theater after seeing GHOSTBUSTERS II. I honestly never thought that it would happen, but now that it looks like it's going to happen (assuming that the screenwriters that are currently working on the script turn in a good script, of course) I can't help but be rather excited about it. Making it even more exciting is that all of the original cast members will be back in some capacity, which alone will be worth the price of admission.

It might be different if you remember going to the cinema to see the original loving it and going back numerous times after then queuing up several years later to watch a film which was too influenced by that awful animated version and just turned the film into a travesty.

The good and bad slime element, yes essentially whole concept was silly but that first film managed to be engaging, witty, warm and thoroughly entertaining. The sequel was rubbish full stop, it's the same as trying to justify Crystal Skull to me it was tosh.

I feel actually same about another 80's classic Gremlins, love the original and like GB will always have special place for me, especially at Christmas but the sequel sucked big time, that female gremlin joke just made me cringe especially the way the film ends.

I've had friends countless times try to justify the 2 sequels to me but it won't work, they didn;t go to the cinema and see them like me, I was teenager in the 80's and if you weren't I don't think you can understand where I'm coming from.

As for Ghostbusters 3, well we'll see about that one not holding my breath expecting anything special.

[Safari Suit]

Well, I wasn't born until 1986 so I probably can't really see where you're coming from, and in fact I think in both cases I actually saw the sequel before the original, but I think Gremlins 2 does at least deserve more credit than Ghostbusters II. I don't think it holds up as well as the original, and it's nowhere near as charming or unique, but it is one of the more unusual big budget sequels from the era, and it did the whole "postmodern" thing before it really became commonplace. I'm not trying to change your mind just putting my case forward. I think Ghostbuster II is a far lazier film, I watched it into the ground when I was about 5/6 (I had it on tape before the original) but it doesn't stand up. Gene Siskel said that, even though he knew they hadn't, it felt like they had filmed the first draft of the film, and he's right. I don't hate the film it just isn't particularly good, and rather sloppy; the way they set up Viggo as a villain is particularly poorly handled, and I doubt I'd buy into the character at all if I saw the film for a first time as an adult/teen. It also has possible the worst joke I've ever come across in a major motion picture:
Louis: I got my law degree at night school.
Ray: Well, that's fine, Louis. We got arrested at night.
Seriously, WTF is that?!? The only really interesting thing about Ghostbusters II is that it predated the Rocky Blaboa/Rambo "coming out of retirement" motif by more than a decade and a half, which also kind of means they shot their load for GBIII if it ever gets made.

And the cartoon was not crap! Nah, just kidding ya, but it was one of the better ones from that era.

Incidentally, both Ghostbusters and Gremlins were released on the same day, both in the US and in the UK even though the release in the UK was a good six months later. Personally, I think Gremlins holds up better despite all my affection for Ghostbusters, but both show how good summer blockbusters can actually be when someone puts actual effort into them at all stages of production.

[Major D.Smythe]

I picked up a copy of the game today, and it's lots of fun. Zap a ghost, slam 'em down to the floor, roll out a trap and watch the suckka' get pulled in. I'd like to see a 3rd film, only if Ramis, Aykroyd, Murray, Hudson and Potts, reprise their roles. To me, without them, it just wont be the Ghostbusters I loved as a kid.

[tdalton]

Comingsoon.net has a fairly in-depth interview with GHOSTBUSTERS star Harold Ramis about GHOSTBUSTERS 3.

Harold Ramis Talks In-Depth About Ghostbusters 3

[Matt_13]

Saw this and was very pleased with his approach to the project. Good stuff.

[Jeff007]

Nice interview. Casually watching GB II on AMC right now.

[tdalton]

Saw this and was very pleased with his approach to the project. Good stuff.

I'm very pleased with the approach right now as well. Hopefully the writers deliver a quality script so that everything can move forward and we can finally get Ghostbusters III.

[JimmyBond]

I know I said earlier that I'd be happy as long as Aykroyd isnt writing it. But then I got thinking, it's his baby, I know he' signed off on the idea but will it feel like the same characters from the first two with different writers on board? It's not like the Bond films where it's commonplace to have different writers take stabs at it, even Maibaum wasnt the end all be all when it came to who should write a Bond film.

I would like to think Aykroyd will at least be able to step in and see that the characters remain true to their original selfs.

[Righty007]

I know I said earlier that I'd be happy as long as Aykroyd isnt writing it. But then I got thinking, it's his baby, I know he' signed off on the idea but will it feel like the same characters from the first two with different writers on board? It's not like the Bond films where it's commonplace to have different writers take stabs at it, even Maibaum wasnt the end all be all when it came to who should write a Bond film.

I would like to think Aykroyd will at least be able to step in and see that the characters remain true to their original selfs.

Aykroyd and Ramis, the original writers, have veto power over the script, I believe. If it doesn't satisfy them, the movie won't get made. Murray, Hudson and maybe Reitman (I'm not sure about him) also have veto power, which means everybody has to agree to make the third movie regardless of whether he is involved or not (i.e., Murray has to approve production of a third film even if he doesn't appear in the film).

[tdalton]

I know I said earlier that I'd be happy as long as Aykroyd isnt writing it. But then I got thinking, it's his baby, I know he' signed off on the idea but will it feel like the same characters from the first two with different writers on board? It's not like the Bond films where it's commonplace to have different writers take stabs at it, even Maibaum wasnt the end all be all when it came to who should write a Bond film.

I would like to think Aykroyd will at least be able to step in and see that the characters remain true to their original selfs.

I actually kind of wish that Aykroyd and Ramis were writing the film, but I am interested to see what a different set of writers could do with the characters and the storyline.

As for the involvement of Murray, I would have to think that he's at least open to doing the film, as he actually returned to the franchise to do voice work for the game, something that I would have doubted that he would have even done a couple of years ago. Even if Murray decided not to reprise his role, though, I don't think that it would be a huge loss for the film. I really think that, now that the idea has taken hold that there will be a new team of younger Ghostbusters, that the original actors will probably be featured significantly less than we'd like to believe.

At this point in the "development" of the film, I don't really care who does or doesn't reprise their roles as long as the film ultimately gets made. If Murray doesn't want to return, then I'd still like to see them go ahead and make the film anyway. I think that there's plenty of funny actors and actresses in Hollywood now that they could do something great and original with the franchise without having to rely solely upon the original actors.

[JimmyBond]

At this point in the "development" of the film, I don't really care who does or doesn't reprise their roles as long as the film ultimately gets made. If Murray doesn't want to return, then I'd still like to see them go ahead and make the film anyway. I think that there's plenty of funny actors and actresses in Hollywood now that they could do something great and original with the franchise without having to rely solely upon the original actors.

I agree to an extent. I still think a good story could be fashioned around the original Ghostbusters and how they continue to perform their job while dealing with getting older. It would be a really interesting take. You know, something that Crystal Skull promised us but ultimately only payed lip service to.

[tdalton]

At this point in the "development" of the film, I don't really care who does or doesn't reprise their roles as long as the film ultimately gets made. If Murray doesn't want to return, then I'd still like to see them go ahead and make the film anyway. I think that there's plenty of funny actors and actresses in Hollywood now that they could do something great and original with the franchise without having to rely solely upon the original actors.

I agree to an extent. I still think a good story could be fashioned around the original Ghostbusters and how they continue to perform their job while dealing with getting older. It would be a really interesting take. You know, something that Crystal Skull promised us but ultimately only payed lip service to.

Absolutely. Seeing all four of the original actors return to reprise their roles is still what I most want to see, but after waiting for this film to be made for the better part of 20 years now, I'll take the film any way that I can get it. I'd love it if Bill Murray, Harold Ramis, Dan Aykroyd, and Ernie Hudson all returned (and all reports indicate that they're all willing to return), but if any (or even all of them) decided to sit the film out, I'd still like Sony to move forward with it anyway. There's plenty of great comedic actors and actresses out there that I could easily see doing a fine job with this franchise, and I'd rather see that than not see a Ghostbusters III at all.

I see this as being the last chance for this franchise to get going again, and I hope that Sony takes advantage of it. They have the opportunity to restart a very lucrative franchise, and to make a whole new series of films, and I hope that they take advantage of that and move forward with this film, because if it's not done now, I don't see it every happening.

[JimmyBond]

I've always loved the concept, I've always felt it could have been bigger than the actors. But apparently the studio never felt that way. Paranormal investigators that behave more like common exterminators is a really interesting premise. One that I felt could have, and probably still could, lend itself to a weekly tv series.

[Matt_13]

I still think Danny McBride, Steve Carrel, and Seth Rogen would make perfect new age Ghostbusters. Hopefully things come together.

[tdalton]

I've always loved the concept, I've always felt it could have been bigger than the actors. But apparently the studio never felt that way. Paranormal investigators that behave more like common exterminators is a really interesting premise. One that I felt could have, and probably still could, lend itself to a weekly tv series.

I could easily see the concept as a weekly TV series as well. Ideally, such a project could be taken on by the creators of CHUCK, as that show has a good blend of comedy and action that a GHOSTBUSTERS TV show would need to have.

[Safari Suit]

I still think Danny McBride, Steve Carrel, and Seth Rogen would make perfect new age Ghostbusters.

No offence, but between them those three seem to be in pretty much every comedy that comes out these days. If it can't just be a film with the original cast in it I would prefer to see someone a bit more unexpected.

[tdalton]

I still think Danny McBride, Steve Carrel, and Seth Rogen would make perfect new age Ghostbusters.

No offence, but between them those three seem to be in pretty much every comedy that comes out these days. If it can't just be a film with the original cast in it I would prefer to see someone a bit more unexpected.

Agreed. If the original cast wasn't on board for the film, I'd rather see them pull together a cast of lesser known actors. I can think of several actors and actresses I'd rather see take on the franchise rather than McBride and Rogen.

My choices for a new cast of Ghostbusters would be:

• Nathan Fillion: I think that he's hilarious on CASTLE, and his style of humor would fit perfectly into a modern GHOSTBUSTERS.
• Adam Baldwin: can handle action very well, and is very much at home delivering the type of comedy that the series would need
• Yvonne Strahovski: from all accounts, there's going to be a female Ghostbuster in the third film, and this would be my choice of actress. Can handle action extremely well, and also has great comedic abilities as well. She's also not very well known at all in the US, as very few people actually watch CHUCK.
• Steve Carrel: simply because of his star power. There needs to be a somewhat big comedic star in the film to pull people into the theater, which Carrel would be able to do.

I chose two of CHUCK's cast members because I see them as being natural fits in the Ghostbusters franchise, as that show has a similar tone and style to what a modern Ghostbusters movie or TV show would need to have. They're both very funny and good actors as well. I'd also like to see that show's writers take a crack at the franchise as well, although for this new film, the writers of THE OFFICE are writing the script.

With the exception of Carrel, I didn't pick any truly big stars, as I think that the goal of a modern GHOSTBUSTERS film would be (besides making a great film, of course) to take relative unknowns and make them into big stars through the film.

[B. Brown]

I've liked "Ghostbusters" since I was a kid. So, if they do release this, I'll be sure to check it out, at least.

[coco1997]

My choices for a new cast of Ghostbusters would be:

• Nathan Fillion: I think that he's hilarious on CASTLE, and his style of humor would fit perfectly into a modern GHOSTBUSTERS.
• Adam Baldwin: can handle action very well, and is very much at home delivering the type of comedy that the series would need
• Yvonne Strahovski: from all accounts, there's going to be a female Ghostbuster in the third film, and this would be my choice of actress. Can handle action extremely well, and also has great comedic abilities as well. She's also not very well known at all in the US, as very few people actually watch CHUCK.
• Steve Carrel: simply because of his star power. There needs to be a somewhat big comedic star in the film to pull people into the theater, which Carrel would be able to do.

I'm almost certain that a current cast member or two from Saturday Night Live will end being cast in GB3.

[tdalton]

My choices for a new cast of Ghostbusters would be:

• Nathan Fillion: I think that he's hilarious on CASTLE, and his style of humor would fit perfectly into a modern GHOSTBUSTERS.
• Adam Baldwin: can handle action very well, and is very much at home delivering the type of comedy that the series would need
• Yvonne Strahovski: from all accounts, there's going to be a female Ghostbuster in the third film, and this would be my choice of actress. Can handle action extremely well, and also has great comedic abilities as well. She's also not very well known at all in the US, as very few people actually watch CHUCK.
• Steve Carrel: simply because of his star power. There needs to be a somewhat big comedic star in the film to pull people into the theater, which Carrel would be able to do.

I'm almost certain that a current cast member or two from Saturday Night Live will end being cast in GB3.

While it wouldn't surprise me if that was the case, a current SNL cast member being in GHOSTBUSTERS 3 is just about the only thing that could dampen my enthusiasm about this project. SNL hasn't been funny in close to a decade (the only time it's worth watching is during a presidential election), and I can't think of any of the cast members that would be good in in such a film.

Edited by tdalton, 13 July 2009 - 05:08 AM.

[coco1997]

My choices would be as follows:

* John Krasinksi - From "The Office," very dry and aloof actor whose humor is tinged with sarcasm but always comes off likable. He could portray an outcast kind of character who somehow gets caught up in the fold of the Ghostbuster organization.

* Zach Galifianakis - From "The Hangover," really the only funny part of a horribly unfunny movie. Could play a hopeless but well-meaning mental midget-type sidekick character(imagine Louis from the "GB" films as a Ghostbuster).

* Bill Hader - From "SNL," could play the leader of the group as he reminds me a lot of a young Dan Akroyd. He's the SNL cast member who seems least rumored to land a role in "GB," although I feel he's the most deserving.

* Dule Hill - From "West Wing," a very dry, sarcastic and talented actor who could easily step into Winston's shoes.

* Elizabeth Banks - From "The 40 Year-Old Virgin," "Zach & Miri Make a pørno," etc. Apparently the new crop of GB's will feature at least five new recruits, and I'd like to imagine that at least one of them will be female. Banks is not yet a household name, but a role in this film would be a surefire launch to stardom. She's both extremely attractive and naturally charming.

Edited by coco1997, 13 July 2009 - 05:12 AM.

[tdalton]

* Elizabeth Banks - From "The 40 Year-Old Virgin," "Zach & Miri Make a pørno," etc. Apparently the new crop of GB's will feature at least four new recruits, and I'd like to imagine that at least one of them will be female. Banks is not yet a household name, but a role in this film would be a surefire launch to stardom. She's both extremely attractive and naturally charming.

Elizabeth Banks would be my second choice for for a female Ghostbuster behind Yvonne Strahovski.

[jwheels]

I can't wait for this to be made, GB is one of my favorite childhood movies. Being a sucker for all the recently resurected franchises (Indy, Batman, Die Hard, etc.) I'll be happy to add this to my collection when the time comes. I am a little worried about how it will turn out though. As others have mentioned, Aykroyd and Ramis haven't been that great lately. It's sad that all the great comedians just aren't that funny anymore, look at Steve Martin and Eddie Murphy

[Scottlee]

I can barely distinguish between Ghostbusters I and II, they're so similiar. I enjoyed watching them as a kid but even then it was never one of my favourite franchises. I think I'd only go and see a part III if the original cast were still going to be the main ghostbusters ; I enjoyed the camaraderie between those guys a lot. Seeing four young bucks fresh out of the OC rolling out the traps just wouldn't do anything for me.

[coco1997]

Make no bones about it, anyone, the intention is to bring back the original four, and it's confirmed that they've all agreed to do it, so long as the script is acceptable. But it seems that the film will also serve as a "passing of the torch" for a younger generation of Ghostbusters, which I think the plan was all along since the "GHOSTBUSTERS III: HELLBENT" script from the mid-90's that had Akroyd and Ramis picturing Chris Farley, Ben Stiller, Chris Rock and Conan O'Brien as the new recruits.

As long as the cast is solid, it could be great. Contrary to popular opinion, there are, in fact, plenty of capable and genuinely funny actors and actresses out there today. For God's sake, Bond has been recast five times! And I feel people hold Bond on a much higher plateau than the Ghostbusters.

[tdalton]

Make no bones about it, anyone, the intention is to bring back the original four, and it's confirmed that they've all agreed to do it, so long as the script is acceptable. But it seems that the film will also serve as a "passing of the torch" for a younger generation of Ghostbusters, which I think the plan was all along since the "GHOSTBUSTERS III: HELLBENT" script from the mid-90's that had Akroyd and Ramis picturing Chris Farley, Ben Stiller, Chris Rock and Conan O'Brien as the new recruits.

As long as the cast is solid, it could be great. Contrary to popular opinion, there are, in fact, plenty of capable and genuinely funny actors and actresses out there today. For God's sake, Bond has been recast five times! And I feel people hold Bond on a much higher plateau than the Ghostbusters.

Well, hopefully the script turns out to be acceptable. I have my doubts on that, though, after the disaster that everyone is saying that YEAR ONE was, which was written by the writers of GHOSTBUSTERS 3 and directed by Harold Ramis, who I read somewhere would be the choice to direct GHOSTBUSTERS 3 if Ivan Reitman were to pass on the project for some reason.

Also, if the cast of Stiller, Rock, O'Brien, and Farley was one proposed by Akroyd for the third film that should have happened in the 1990s, then I hope that he has zero input into the cast of GHOSTBUSTERS 3.

[Safari Suit]

Well bear in mind the quality of scripts writers write varies greatly. For example, many critics considered Star Trek the best film of the summer so far and Transformers 2 the worst, but they were written by the same guys (personally, I thought they were not far from being about the same level, but that's by the by). Another obvious example is Purvis and Wade writing both Die Another Day and Casino Royale; OK, they had some "help" on the last one, but I don't think their work on it can be dismissed entirely (and they had some "help" on DAD too).

I know we're in a distinct minority on this one, but I didn't mind Year One and I have a friend who actually liked it enough to see it twice! It wasn't great or anything, but it made a decent change from all the rauchy teen or "lovable loser" comedies which generally get high profile releases these days.