Sci-Fi Ghostbusters (2016)

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member
Looking forward to the new all-female (except for the receptionist) Ghostbusters, opening this week.
Please let us know how it is! I'm a bit disappointed that it is a reboot of the franchise but the commercials so far seem pretty good.

For the reboot part... the all-female cast doesn't bother me, I just wish that it wasn't a total reboot of the franchise that essentially wipes out the older movies. Couldn't they just have a bit of intro saying something like "After years of peace & quite, and the original team members long ago retired, the ghosts are back and a new team needs to be assembled!"?
 

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member

Couldn't they just have a bit of intro saying something like "After years of peace & quite, and the original team members long ago retired, the ghosts are back and a new team needs to be assembled!"?
HHHmmm.... ask a question and 'ye shall receive an answer! :D

From io9...
The Rise and Fall of Ghostbusters 3

Ever since Ghostbusters 2 premiered in 1989, there’s been talk of a third movie. For nearly 20 years, various scripts and ideas and rumors circulated until Paul Feig’s new reboot, opening July 15, finally put the possibility to rest. io9 spoke with original film’s director Ivan Reitman, as well as Feig, about what actually happened with Ghostbusters 3.

“I was working on a more traditional pass-the-torch sequel,” Reitman said. “I was working on it with Harold [Ramis], Danny [Aykroyd], and Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnisky, two very funny writers. We had a great script. We actually had a script in which Bill Murray dies in the first five minutes because that was the only way he was going to do it. And he was a ghost character for part of it. They’re passing the torch on to a group of younger Ghostbusters, one of which was Oscar, Bill’s supposed son from the second movie. It’s not clear if its his son or not. And it was very funny.”

Things we were looking good. Sony Pictures greenlit the film and everything was progressing, but then tragedy struck.

“Unfortunately in sort of the last half year of development or so, Harold got really sick and about a year later he passed away,” Reitman continued. “And I realized there was no way I could do this film. If I was going to do Ghostbusters, I had to do it with the Ghostbusters. I was not interested in doing another Ghostbusters movie without Harold and with Bill sort of dragging his heels.”

With Reitman’s desire to make the movie gone, he made a deal with Sony to allow the studio to continue pursuing things in the franchise. Which is when Ivan Reitman called one of the best comedy directors out there, Paul Feig.

“Paul came along with an idea to basically reboot it and still pay tribute to the original,” Reitman said. “And he already had Melissa McCarthy and Kristen Wiig interested in doing it. So I said ‘This is a no-brainer. These are two of the funniest women in the world,’ much in the way Bill and Danny were when I did it. So we started working with Paul.”

This is where Ghostbusters 3 becomes the new Ghostbusters, which in recent weeks has been officially (but quietly) retitled by Sony as Ghostbusters: Answer the Call, to differentiate it from the original film.


“When Ivan first contacted me there had been two scripts written, one by friends of mine, Lee and Gene, and then Etan Cohen had done one and they were really good scripts,” Feig told us. “The problem for me creatively was I didn’t like the idea that the Ghostbusters had been forgotten. I love Ghostbusters 2 but I always bumped on that at the beginning. They’re disgraced? After saving New York? It felt like you have to crawl out of the morass to do that in a way. I didn’t respond to [it]. And also I didn’t want [the new characters] to be handed the keys to the kingdom in a kingdom that had already seen these ghost attacks.”

Feig’s comedic and dramatic sensibilities simply didn’t connect with the plans Reitman, Ramis, and Aykroyd had been working on all those years. He pitched something different.

“I can only get inspired by stories of underdogs,” Feig continued. “The idea of, ‘Wait, if we start this again in today’s world where we’ve never seen a ghost... that would be a much different experience. Then on top of it, I know how to tell a story about people who are undervalued. Who don’t know their place in the world and who people think aren’t worth their weight. So a story about those people who are right and end up proving that they’re right by saving the world? That I have juice for.”

The result is a Ghostbusters that pays tribute to the original film in numerous ways, but has a different, more epic story, with a more modern sense of action and humor—all things that Ghostbusters 3 may not have had.

“I couldn’t figure out how to do [that movie],” Feig said. “[Maybe] somebody else could’ve. When people get mad at me about it, [I say] ‘They came to me.’ That’s all I can tell you, ‘They came to me.’ So I’m sorry.”

But if you’re hoping to get a peek at what Ghostbusters 3 might have been, there’s still hope. We asked Reitman if there was ever a way fans might get to see that original script—perhaps as a book?

“That’s an interesting idea,” he said. “We’ve not talked about it. I think it’s a complicated rights issue. But I guess Columbia owns them so it would be up to them.”

Ghostbusters open July 15. We’ll have much more on the film soon.
I've updated the thread title with the new official name of the movie, Ghostbusters: Answer the Call.
 

Jethro

Moderator
Staff member
And Sony have delivered a stinker :bag:

I reckon Tom and myself could have knocked up a better script after a week long whisky bender :beer:
 

astonwest

Writing Fool
Writer
It was okay as a popcorn film...but way short on plot development, too focused on the ghosts/CGI, and tried too hard to tie in to the original movies with cameos and 'gotchas.'
 

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member
It was okay as a popcorn film...but way short on plot development, too focused on the ghosts/CGI, and tried too hard to tie in to the original movies with cameos and 'gotchas.'
Hopefully the lackluster response and low box office (Sony is expecting to take about a $70 MM loss on it) won't kill plans for the "Ghostbuster Universe" that was planned of different movies & projects (possible TV show, additional movies, games).

I still think making the current movie a total reboot instead of a continuation 'soft' reboot was the biggest mistake that could've been made in the franchise.
 

Jethro

Moderator
Staff member
Strangely there was a fan made "Ghostbusters vs Freddy" movie floating around on the web a while back, @Tom ever run across it? - they didn't a better job of handing down the baton to a new generation, though I would have added a female or two ghostbuster and mixed it up a bit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tom

An Old Friend
Well, I finally watched this movie last night.

The movie was filmed well enough but the story was what I found seriously lacking.

I tried to view it as its own stand-alone movie. It has been years since I have sat and watched the originals.
Still, aside from the obvious references and cameos it was a mess.

I noticed it was a parady of sorts. The witless humor never made me crack a smile even once. I found the comedy that which a 6 year old might find mildly amusing. It had some pretty decent effects shots but those never recified the poor writing. It seemed every portrayal of comedic presentation was 'borrowed' from other better-known comedians.

My knee-jerk reaction was to shut it off during the first 10 minutes but I stayed the course and completed the film against my better judgement.

Its NOT funny, its stupid.
Its nowhere near an original.
The slap-stick is shallow and over-bearing.

All during the movie I kept wondering who would greenlight such a mess?

Its...Just...Not...Worth...Watching. (That being said it still goes in my GhostBusters Set)
 

Kevin

Code Monkey
Staff member
Just watched this one on DVD (Netflix, not available for streaming yet). I really hope this didn't kill the franchise.

First, the good stuff...
  • Kate McKinnon has a few funny spots as the genius mad inventor. Her character is played subtle and carries the scenes with her & Melissa McCarthy and her & Kristen Wiig.
  • Leslie Jones does a good job as the outsider non-scientist who joins the group. Her character being the one with knowledge of the city history seems like a realistic thing as the boredom of her former (maybe former? Did she quit her job to join the GB?) job would lend itself to lots of time to study.
  • The group operating on a severe budget is a lot more realistic than the original GB. The rent on the firehouse in the city being a good example.
But the bad stuff....
  • I didn't find Melissa McCarthy funny. At all. Not even a single smile.
  • The movie would've been nearly the same without Kristen Wiig's character. Seriously, the character didn't bring much, if anything, to the movie. That is not a reflection on Wiig but rather on the storyline, or lack thereof. The original had four main characters so, gosh darn it, the reboot was going to have four also even if one of them doesn't really have much to do or say.
  • I'd be willing to put money on a bet that 99% of the non-talent budget was spent on CGI special-effects and 1% or less on the writers. The CGI was just so over-the-top that it made me think of those little films that accompany amusement park rides where everything is neon bright with luminescent accent on everything with camera angles coming straight at you with too-loud music blaring.
  • Chris Hemsworth as the receptionist wasn't a bad idea as part of the gender-swapping of characters but to have him play the character as borderline mentally incapacitated was pointless. Yeah, we get it... he is "eye candy" for the women but that doesn't mean had to be played like that.
  • Tell me again why this had to be a reboot? With about 10 minutes of work the overly simplistic storyline could've been doctored as an extension of the original movies.
  • Speaking of amusement park rides... the ghosts behind the mirrors in the hotel basement look exactly like the holographic picture frames like you'd see at Disney.
  • What was the motivation of the bad guy again? Jeez, I just got done watching the movie and can't answer why he was intent on devastation.
  • So... ghosts can now command an entire platoon of soldiers just by pointing at them and making them do dance moves? Um, yeah.
Ever watch an SNL skit where every single line tries to come off as being funny and after each line the actor pauses expecting the audience to laugh but instead gets silence so it just ends up being cringe material? Try two hours of it with a bunch of video-game-esque graphics.

There is an "Extended Version" available on DVD & Blu-Ray and that supposedly fills in a few of the more obvious plot gaps. The longer version might help with the pacing but I won't be the one to find out as I'd much rather break out the original GB movies than watching this again.

This reboot was supposed to be the launching point for an entirely new "Ghost Corps" verse of movies, games, & TV projects. If those other projects ever get made hopefully some more thought will go into them.
 

Similar threads

The 5th Wave (2016)
Tagline: Protect Your Own
Genre: Science Fiction, Adventure, Action
Director: J Blakeson
Release: 2016-01-14
Replies
2
Views
2K
Passengers (2016)
Tagline: There is a reason they woke up.
Genre: Drama, Romance, Science Fiction
Director: Morten Tyldum
Release: 2016-12-21
Replies
4
Views
1K
Top