237 replies to this topic

[Royal Dalton]

Or, maybe he saved us from the Ghostbusters equivalent of The Blues Brothers 2000?

[The Dove]

This is just plain dumbness on the part of Hollywood that they even have the nerve to consider pushing forward with Ghostbusters III.. It's OVER!... Ghostbusters: The Video Game is in my mind, a terrific 3rd film substitute. Any third theatrical release should have happened no later than 1994. Yes I think that this would definitely be ten times worse than The Blues Brothers 2000 should a 3rd film actually get green-lit.

[tdalton]

I would gladly take a mediocre/bad Ghostbusters III over a lot of the other crap that Hollywood churns out these days.  Ivan Reitman has a much better track record amongst his recent work than Landis did back around the time that he did Blues Brothers 2000, so I can't imagine that it would be all that terrible to begin with, especially not on the level that Blues Brothers 2000 fell to.  There are plenty of actors out there who I think are either reverent enough to the Aykroyd/Ramis style of comedy or are simply themselves gifted enough comedians to slide right into the mix and feel like they belong there. 

 

The biggest pitfall that they would have to overcome would be the seemingly obvious desire to build a lot of the comedy around the fact that Dan Aykroyd and Ernie Hudson are too old to be doing what they're doing.  If they avoid that, put a halfway decent story on the page (and one that doesn't feel like a recycling of the previous two films, which was a downside to the Ghostbusters: The Video Game), and put a solid cast of newcomers together, then I think that they could make a solid third film. 

[tdalton]

Ghostbusters 3 to begin filming in 2015

Ivan Reitnman will NOT direct

Original actors featured in minor roles

[coco1997]

Ghostbusters 3 to begin filming in 2015

Ivan Reitnman will NOT direct

Original actors featured in minor roles

We've heard this same old song and dance before.   

[tdalton]

 

Ghostbusters 3 to begin filming in 2015

Ivan Reitnman will NOT direct

Original actors featured in minor roles

We've heard this same old song and dance before. 

 

 

True, but I think that there's a bit more momentum behind it this time.  From what I've gathered, they were prepared to move a couple of other times, but ultimately decided not to since they couldn't get Bill Murray to do the picture.  This time around, from what Reitman said in a different article, the new script doesn't have a role for Murray.  I do think, however, that if they don't actually get the picture into production in either late 2014 or early 2015, then that'll be it for the project. 

 

There's also some news on the director search (which Ivan Reitman is assisting in):

 

Phil Lord and Chris Miller, directors of The LEGO Movie, eyed for Ghostbusters 3

[coco1997]

This thread hasn't been touched in a while, but I figured I'd bump it up seeing as this film looks closer to a reality than ever before.

 

'Ghostbusters' Eyes Melissa McCarthy, Jillian Bell and Cecily Strong

[tdalton]

I'm all for Cecily Strong being on board.  Melissa McCarthy, however, could be a deal breaker for me.

 

In all honesty, this is quite sad.  All this time waiting for Ghosbusters III and this is what it's turned out to be.

[coco1997]

I'm all for Cecily Strong being on board.  Melissa McCarthy, however, could be a deal breaker for me.

 

In all honesty, this is quite sad.  All this time waiting for Ghosbusters III and this is what it's turned out to be.

I don't get the appeal of McCarthy at all. To me, her whole schtick is playing the stereotypical "loud mouth fat chick" in every single one of her films. I don't understand what Paul Feig sees in her. 

I agree about Cecily Strong, though. She's the best part of the current day SNL cast.  

[tdalton]

I think that your basic description of McCarthy fits in exactly with what Feig's sentiment is as a director.  

 

I'd really like to thank Bill Murray for the Ghosbusters franchise reaching this point.  His continued refusal to play along has robbed us of a chance to see what a real Ghosbusters III could have been.  I also wish that Dan Aykroyd would take a stand against this and push forward with some of the ideas that he has been working on with this film over the past couple of decades.  Pretty much any of them would be better than what Feig is going to do to the franchise.  Even if Aykroyd had to push forward with just himself and Ernie Hudson, along with a couple of brand new funny people (Paul Rudd, Nathan Fillion, the aforementioned Cecily Strong, for the obligatory SNL connection), and I'm there opening night.  This nonsense, though, I might not bother with, and I'd venture to guess that a lot of other Ghostbusters fans might not either.

[Call Billy Bob]

Even if Aykroyd had to push forward with just himself and Ernie Hudson, along with a couple of brand new funny people (Paul Rudd, Nathan Fillion, the aforementioned Cecily Strong, for the obligatory SNL connection), and I'm there opening night.  This nonsense, though, I might not bother with, and I'd venture to guess that a lot of other Ghostbusters fans might not either.

Agreed. I remember before Harold Ramis' death reading about a possible script treatment where Venkman had left for the Ghostbusters corporate offices (apparently, they had finally begun to franchise as Pete had hoped in the first film!) and Jonah Hill would be the new recruit in the New York office. I'd have been OK with that for sure. But I'm just sad about the whole situation now... Guess I'll still consider the PS3 game from a few years ago as the true GBIII.

[tdalton]

I wouldn't be as upset about it if it weren't for the fact that there are ways forward for a true Ghostbusters III, even without (sadly) Harold Ramis and Bill Murray.  Like you said, they could explain away Venkman's absence easily.  Maybe we see him at a brief memorial or remembrance of Egon (respectfully done, of course) and he's gone again out of the picture.  

 

They could move forward with just Aykroyd and Hudson from the original cast, maybe with Annie Potts back as Janine.  Then you pick up the slack with some actors out there who would fit in perfectly with this type of film.  I could see Paul Rudd and Nathan Fillion sliding right into the voids left by Murray and Ramis and do quite well with it.  That's not to say that they could top either of them, nobody could, but they are both actors who could play those parts and play them well.  Then they could expand the team from there if they wanted to, with someone like Cecily Strong for the SNL connection or they could go in a completely different direction altogether.

Edited by tdalton, 16 January 2015 - 06:27 AM.

[Call Billy Bob]

Sign me up for your GBIII, tdalton... if only in an imaginary capacity...

[SecretAgentFan]

I wouldn't be as upset about it if it weren't for the fact that there are ways forward for a true Ghostbusters III, even without (sadly) Harold Ramis and Bill Murray.  Like you said, they could explain away Venkman's absence easily.  Maybe we see him at a brief memorial or remembrance of Egon (respectfully done, of course) and he's gone again out of the picture.  

 

They could move forward with just Aykroyd and Ramis from the original cast, maybe with Annie Potts back as Janine.  Then you pick up the slack with some actors out there who would fit in perfectly with this type of film.  I could see Paul Rudd and Nathan Fillion sliding right into the voids left by Murray and Ramis and do quite well with it.  That's not to say that they could top either of them, nobody could, but they are both actors who could play those parts and play them well.  Then they could expand the team from there if they wanted to, with someone like Cecily Strong for the SNL connection or they could go in a completely different direction altogether.

 

Perfect!

[The Dove]

*Yawn* At this point, I no longer give a damn about whether this dumb movie gets made or not.. I still will NOT be seeing it...it's a guaranteed flop it it does get made..

[SecretAgentFan]

I fear it would be a success - but the target audience would change completely... and so would the style, the content and, well, everything that GHOSTBUSTERS was about.

[tdalton]

It's hard to tell whether or not it's going to be a success.  Creatively, it's almost certainly going to be a flop.  But commercially, it's hard to tell.  Feig's brand of "comedy" has been inexplicably popular, but I can't see anyone who was brought up on Ghostbusters turning out for this.  So basically, anyone that's roughly 25+ years old may very well stay away.  I know I will be unless Feig bucks his usual trend and the film actually looks good, but that's almost certain not to happen as well.

[Agent 76]

At this point all about this project sounds lame. 

 

 

TDalton's idea would be an interesting way to move the franchise forward, 

 

I grew up with the first two, and it was the chemistry between Ramis,Murray and Ackroyd that made Ghostbusters a cult favorite.

[coco1997]

The GHOSTBUSTERS reboot cast has officially been announced.

 

It’s official! Meet your new Ghostbusters! Paul Feig, the director of the upcoming reboot, just took to Twitter to reveal his new cast. Headlining the supernatural comedy are Kristen Wiig (Bridesmaids, The Secret Life of Walter Mitty), Melissa McCarthy (The Heat, Tammy), Leslie Jones (“Saturday Night Live,” Top Five) and Kate McKinnon (“Saturday Night Live,” Life Partners).
 

A remake of director Ivan Reitman’s 1984 comedy classic, Feig’s take on the property is said to be targeting a scarier tone that will not maintain any continuity with the original film or its 1989 sequel (or the surprisingly continuity-heavy animated series “The Real Ghostbusters,” for that matter).
 

Back in September, original Ghostbusters star Bill Murray revealed his own “fan cast” for a female-driven franchise reboot, which included both McCarthy (his St. Vincent co-star) and Wiig alongside Linda Cardinelli (“Freaks and Geeks,” “Mad Men”) and Emma Stone (The Help, The Amazing Spider-Man). 
 

Plans call for Ghostbusters to shoot this summer in New York.

[Call Billy Bob]

I am sad...

[coco1997]

Wiig and McKinnon are hilarious, so it's great to have them on board. McCarthy is terrible but hopefully as part of an ensemble cast she won't be as grating. Jones I'm not too familiar with, as she only recently joined the SNL cast.

 

I do hope Feig is able to get Cecily Strong as the/a villain.

[tdalton]

This is just heartbreaking.  I've been hoping for GHOSTBUSTERS 3 for a very long time now, and this is what is being delivered.

 

I really wish that they would stop referring to this as a remake of GHOSTBUSTERS.  The description they give of it in the article contradicts their own claim that it's a remake.

[The Dove]

What bullshit...    I'm getting more and more furious at the fact Hollywood is once again is about to destroy a beloved childhood memory for me with a totally pointless and most likely crappy remake/reboot.. (Transformers, G.I. Joe, Ghostbusters, Karate Kid, Footloose, TMNT...etc..) thank god Bob Zemeckis and Bob Gale are adament that nobody will every be allowed to remake Back To The Future while they have anything to say about it..

[tdalton]

The thing that really irritates me about this, even more than the casting (which, aside from McKinnon leaves a lot to be desired), is that it's not going to acknowledge either of the original films. If they feel like they have to go this route, then set it in the same universe that the first two took place in. That would still leave some room for Dan Aykroyd and Ernie Hudson to remain a part of it and, should Bill Murray have a stunning change of heart down the road, also leave the door open for a true GHOSTBUSTERS 3. Now, that door is pretty much closed due to this reboot and Aykroyd and Hudson will, at best, get blink-and-you-missed-them cameos as completely new and unrelated characters.

[SecretAgentFan]

I love Kristen Wiig, so this re-boot has that going for it, which is nice.

 

Apart from that... I think the all-women-approach is a mistake, and Paul Feig is not the right director for this etc.

 

But I do not get the "Hollywood is destroying my childhood"-criticism.  The original films are there and can be enjoyed.  No reboot has to be watched.  No reboot ends the availability of the original.

[Call Billy Bob]

But I do not get the "Hollywood is destroying my childhood"-criticism.  The original films are there and can be enjoyed.  No reboot has to be watched.  No reboot ends the availability of the original.

True, but what happens when I have children and they think this new abomination is better than the original? That's the problem I have with remakes of classics.

[tdalton]

I'd have to disagree with the idea that there's no validity to the "Hollywood is destroying my childhood" criticism. I think it's very valid, actually. Yes, I'll always be able to put on GHOSTBUSTERS and GHOSTBUSTERS 2 and be able to enjoy them for what they are, but there's also the fact that those films are forever going to be linked to this new, most likely inferior product. Like Call Billy Bob said above, it's the fact that a new generation is going to see this and think that this is what GHOSTBUSTERS is, and no amount of showing them the originals is going to change that because, for whatever reason, Melissa McCarthy seems to be the go-to comedian of this generation.

And for the record, because I've seen elsewhere that a lot of those who are criticizing the casting are being told that they object only because they cast four women, I have zero problem with an all-female GHOSTBUSTERS. Now, I would have chosen some different actresses to be a part of it, and I do like the casting of McKinnon. My problem is in the reboot angle. Like I've already said, they could have very easily set this in the original universe where Murray, Aykroyd, and Hudson's characters still exist. It's not hard to fathom the idea that the Ghostbusters would have franchised the idea and it would have grown, because the idea of a single team servicing the entire New York metropolitan area is a bit absurd anyway. Just make this new team one of those franchises, leaving the door open for Aykroyd and Hudson to appear as their characters while also leaving open the possibility (even if it never happens) of GHOSTBUSTERS 3.

[SecretAgentFan]

I'd have to disagree with the idea that there's no validity to the "Hollywood is destroying my childhood" criticism. I think it's very valid, actually. Yes, I'll always be able to put on GHOSTBUSTERS and GHOSTBUSTERS 2 and be able to enjoy them for what they are, but there's also the fact that those films are forever going to be linked to this new, most likely inferior product. Like Call Billy Bob said above, it's the fact that a new generation is going to see this and think that this is what GHOSTBUSTERS is, and no amount of showing them the originals is going to change that because, for whatever reason, Melissa McCarthy seems to be the go-to comedian of this generation.

 

But any future generation can easily and quickly be told what came before, what is really linked and what not.  I don´t see this is a problem.

 

When I introduced my nephews to "The Lord of the Rings" I showed them the Bakshi version.  Later on they delved into the Jackson films - and they had no problem with different takes on the story.  

 

Just like they instantly understood that "Never say never again" is not a film within the official line of EON offerings.

[tdalton]

It's also not so much about it necessarily being different takes on the story, but we have a pretty good idea as to what this film is going to be, based on Feig and McCarthy's previous work. That's not something that I particularly want to see attached to the Ghostbusters franchise.

I have zero problem with them bringing in new, younger characters. The all female team isn't a bad idea either, and I love the McKinnon casting. Given how Aykroyd had already spoken about having a new team involved in the films when he was still steering GHOSTBUSTERS 3 towards development, I think that Feig and McCarthy could have easily set this film up to take place alongside GHOSTBUSTERS and GHOSTBUSTERS 2 and have Aykroyd and Hudson there to pass the torch as they had often talked about doing, which would pave the way for the Ghostbusters franchise continuing forward which is undoubtedly what Sony wants.

[dtuba]

I'm probably the only one here that approves of the new cast. I think these four women are funny (even Melissa Mac). Sad that Cicely Strong's not involved, but 3 women from the current cast of SNL would be a bit much.

 

Personally? Much as I love Bill Murray in anything, he and Aykroyd are too old to be chasing ghosts. Murray would be good as an old ex-Buster advising the young hires, but might that be a bit too "Bosley from Charlie's Angels"?

 

Anyway, without Ramis, there's no point anyway.