Movie News/Discussion Thread 2

[Hexx]

[Tafdolphin]

That is one weird-ass trailer.

[Rex Kramer]

I may be in the minority but I really quite like the look of that. Just as long as they keep Aykroyd out of it.

[Tafdolphin]

Odds on a badly CG Harold Ramis appearing as ghost at some point?

I'd say evens.

[Rex Kramer]

Would still be a more lifelike performance than Aykroyd in the 2016 movie.

[Tafdolphin]

I think my problem is that it's very IT/Stranger things coded. Ghostbusters 1984 is for many the definitive New York film, and the sequel doubled down on that. This rejection and inversion of that feels...forced rather than a natural progression.

[Jazzem]

Huh, not really sure what to make of GB trailer...is funny that the previous Ghostbusters films got more juvenile with each entry while this has swung really far in the opposite direction. The first film is surprisingly dramatic at points but still very goofy and comedic, surprised at how straight this seems to be played.

But I do get what folks are saying, it's probably a good shout to differentiate it as opposed to trying to recapture GB1 yet again, while perhaps going after the Stranger Things audience. I'm just not sure if it gelled with me just going by that trailer alone. Certainly an interesting and unexpected direction whatever the case

EDIT: In terms of New York, amusingly the second film at one point had a draft for it to take place in Scotland...gosh that'd have been odd ._.

[Hexx]

Nostalgiatastic!

[Ironhide]

Its probably because I only really know about the Arrowverse Sara/Laurel Lance and Dinah Drake incarnations of the character but Black Canary wearing yellow just looks wrong.

Sara Lance incarnation ftw

[7256930752]

I think my problem is that it's very IT/Stranger things coded. Ghostbusters 1984 is for many the definitive New York film, and the sequel doubled down on that. This rejection and inversion of that feels...forced rather than a natural progression.

I agree with this 100% but this really needed to try something completely different to work in 2020 otherwise we'd get something truly horrible like "Who you gonna tweet?" "#Ghostbusters!". strawberry float that.

It's going to weird seeing the original play the role of grizzled Vietnam vets though.

[Cheeky Devlin]

Really liked that trailer. Seemed fairly straight, and what humour was there wasn't slapstick. So in that regard it's already closer to the originals than the last one.

The bit where they played over Venkmans "Call it fate" speech had me grinning.

Quietly confident.

[Tomous]

I think my problem is that it's very IT/Stranger things coded. Ghostbusters 1984 is for many the definitive New York film, and the sequel doubled down on that. This rejection and inversion of that feels...forced rather than a natural progression.

Yep, they're trying to re-establish the franchise, they're not trying to naturally follow on from the originals. They're obviously thinking in multiple movies terms and trying to make a foundation they can build up that suits current tastes, rather than make Ghostbusters 3 with the original cast. That doesn't necessarily mean it'll be bad, and it could do very well, even if it loses some of the old school fans looking for their nostalgic kick. I mean, plenty of sequels to old franchises have failed because they simply tried to repeat the magic of the originals and failing, so it might be better they're moving in a different direction.

[Cheeky Devlin]

I don't think anyone really wants or expects a new franchise based on the old characters. All I'm hoping for in this one is a passing of the torch, which I believe was always what Ackroyd wanted for GhostBusters 3 anyway. So I'm happy for them to take it in a new direction. I just hope the send-off for the originals is appropriate and that their inevitable 3rd act entrance in this one is as awesome as we hope it will be.

I also want Rick Moranis and Annie Potts to turn up for a final cameo. He's been gone far too long.

[Hexx]

No Sigourney Weaver, No Hexx in the cinema!

[captain red dog]

It looks OK, I just hope the original 3 have a bit more than a cameo, but a bit less than Han Solo in Force Awakens. It's a curious balance.

[Cheeky Devlin]

Actually, I don't buy for a second that Egon would have had Ecto-1 and not Ray.

I hereby declare this movie shite and an abomination!

[LewisD]

DAY ONE!



Anyone else catch the Spores, Moulds and Fungus in the basement?

[PatSharpsMullet]

It looks OK, I just hope the original 3 have a bit more than a cameo, but a bit less than Han Solo in Force Awakens. It's a curious balance.

Given that Sigourney Weaver and Annie Pots (Janine) are also back for it, I'm guessing that the original three will have more than a cameo appearance. My guess is that they'll suit up towards the end (along with Paul Rudd's character) to defeat whatever the main ghost villain is.

[Godzilla]

This would be the most amazing film for Rick Moranis to make a big screen comeback in.

I suspect it'll have a lot of heart and an actual plot. So it's instantly better than the remake. Also the first sequel was very enjoyable and suitably creepy. Plus it had some amazing moments and wonderful lines.

[Return_of_the_STAR]

Loved the trailer. I believe they’ve deliberately kept the original stars out of it for a bigger later reveal.