Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
I understand that this was in development hell for decades (and that they made the other recent GB movie as a result of this one not coming together, basically). It's just a shame that it didn't get into production before Harold Ramis died, as he was in a way the heart and soul of the franchise. But I'm glad it's finally getting done, nonetheless.
This would be amazing. I was so disappointed in Answer The Call. It had terrible pacing, awful camera work and I remember thinking that only one of the main characters was funny, but clearly not all that funny as I don't remember which one.
Though guards may sleep and ships may lay at anchor, our foes know full well that big guns never tire.
Hmmm rietman is invloved, that gives me hope at least, as for new cast memebers, I don't have an issue with it per say as long as they deliver a good story and a good enough job at acting.
Interesting, but I think they'll have an added uphill battle if it resembles in any way possible to the recent awful film. I hope it can distance itself from that and enjoys a decent run.
If you don't think the new cast is going to catch a bunch of gak you are kidding yourself. And if you think the female cast are not going to get a bunch of gak directed at them related to the fact that they are female you are delusional.
It doesn't matter how good the movie will/won't be. They are all going to get this gak before it ever releases in theaters. And if the movie is anything less the universally praised as the perfect sequel they will get even more after it comes out.
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
I really think you guys might be overselling the harassment thing a bit. There is nothing special about Ghost Busters movies that make them targets of online harassment compared to pretty much anything people do in the public square. It's just that certain blogs get a lot of hate clicks when they report on some loser's nasty tweet.
Luciferian wrote: I really think you guys might be overselling the harassment thing a bit. There is nothing special about Ghost Busters movies that make them targets of online harassment compared to pretty much anything people do in the public square. It's just that certain blogs get a lot of hate clicks when they report on some loser's nasty tweet.
I think Ghost Busters is one of many sacred cows that 80s idiots place on a pedestal.
Ghost busters gets gak like SW gets gak, like Back to the Future would get gak, so on and so forth. The harassment is inevitable for that alone. I don't think it will be a majority of people that would do it. Just like it wasn't a majority before. But that minority will be LOUD. Just like they have been before.
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
Sure, they will be loud on Twitter, but that's what Twitter is. At this point, that's basically why it exists. If you don't think you can go on Twitter and find someone you've never met who hates you, it just means you're lucky enough not to have looked.
I think it's unlikely we'll see the whole of the original team. For one, Egon has snuffed it. And Venkman has been exceedingly reluctant to return.
Stanz and Zeddemore? Well, they're arguably the 'closest' buddies, going on GB2. After all, who is it keeps the uniforms and the car, and does kids parties?
And what caused them to disband this time? Maybe Egon's untimely death etc?
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Luciferian wrote: Sure, they will be loud on Twitter, but that's what Twitter is. At this point, that's basically why it exists. If you don't think you can go on Twitter and find someone you've never met who hates you, it just means you're lucky enough not to have looked.
This. Sooo much this. It's getting extremely tiring to see repeated attempts to brand whole fandoms as "toxic" based on a wee band of angry twitter arseholes and some 4chan trolls, and the desperate attempts of companies who make questionably received or just outright bad movies to use that tendency to taint all criticisms of the work by association is genuinely harmful.
The people doing it are rampant hypocrites as well of course. Ghost in the Shell got all the same garbage as Ghostbusters, but apparently there it was OK because the people sending a female actress death threats and angrily denouncing the film and everyone involved with it as trash were The Good Guys defending Milady Animoo from "cultural appropriation"
As to the movie - meh, we'll see. I was born a bit late to be bitten with nostalgia for the original movies, I liked them but they're not a sacred cow for me. The new movie was alright, in a forgettable way, but I never saw it as some travesty, just one of those films you see once and then never bother with again. If they can use at least some of the original cast and handle the "handing off to a new generation" thing with a bit more tact and talent than the SW Sequels have, and with less of the above cynical marketing shtick, it should be worth a watch and might even spawn a decent new series.
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
Don't forget those same idiots chased scarlet Johansson away from a role as a trans person because she wasn't trans, they are all full of Gak anyway, GB 2016 was just the first large attempt to push away negative press for a shoddy movie using "ismphobes" as an excuse, they used the stupid people on Twitter and they didn't even know it.
Crack on 3 years and several films later and we can all see the shill critics for what they are, those who cant, cannot be helped.
Luciferian wrote: I understand that this was in development hell for decades (and that they made the other recent GB movie as a result of this one not coming together, basically). It's just a shame that it didn't get into production before Harold Ramis died, as he was in a way the heart and soul of the franchise. But I'm glad it's finally getting done, nonetheless.
It wasn't really in development hell. Bill Murray just refused to do another, and apparently Aykroyd and the rest didn't really think it would work without him.
Apparently they've decided to just move forward regardless. (signs point to Murray not being in this)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/17 14:26:02
Elbows wrote: Interesting, but I think they'll have an added uphill battle if it resembles in any way possible to the recent awful film. I hope it can distance itself from that and enjoys a decent run.
I.....didn't hate the 2016 film. I wouldn't describe it as "amazing" or probably even "good", but I'd say most of the flaws lay firmly with a mediocre script, rather than the cast.
I think a "next generation" approach could work, let's just hope this one can avoid getting mired in culture war silliness.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/17 16:05:11
"The 75mm gun is firing. The 37mm gun is firing, but is traversed round the wrong way. The Browning is jammed. I am saying "Driver, advance." and the driver, who can't hear me, is reversing. And as I look over the top of the turret and see twelve enemy tanks fifty yards away, someone hands me a cheese sandwich."
Elbows wrote: Interesting, but I think they'll have an added uphill battle if it resembles in any way possible to the recent awful film. I hope it can distance itself from that and enjoys a decent run.
I.....didn't hate the 2016 film. I wouldn't describe it as "amazing" or probably even "good", but I'd say most of the flaws lay firmly with a mediocre script, rather than the cast.
I think a "next generation" approach could work, let's just hope this one can avoid getting mired in culture war silliness.
Agree. The real issue with that fil. Is the third act, where its just cgi smoke and nonses for 15 minutes. Then we get teased the ghost world but never get to actually see it.
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
The last ghostbusters film just felt like a cheap SNL movie with a vague script trying to tie it to a fun, goofy old movie (which, if we're honest - were not amazing films). It felt like a phone-in throw away nostalgia grab with a contrarian casting effort for no real reason. It was the epitome of lazy film making to me.
When I first heard of the GB remake I was stoked. I didn't care if it was all-female leads as I was a huge Melissa Macarthy fan.
I still think it stunk. Limited chemistry between actors, racist Black stereotypes, rehashed-old jokes, vaginal fart jokes, forced and strained character played by Hemsworth,... well the list goes on.
Forbes is now bashing this sequel as well. The author making some rather dubious claims like "the 2016 movie was just as good as the original", and that it's a waste to let a cis white male direct this.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/19 08:41:08
I think the best way to describe ‘Answer The Call’ is competent.
It’s well shot, the plot holds together, and the acting is decent enough.
I for one enjoyed it, but I do get that it doesn’t quite measure up to the originals (and I’m a fan of the second one). Now, how much of that is me not being 9 years old at that point, and it being objectively ‘by the numbers’, I couldn’t say. But it’s still entertaining enough. I’ve got the Blu-ray, and it’s defo on my ‘want to watch something different’ list.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
Elbows wrote: Interesting, but I think they'll have an added uphill battle if it resembles in any way possible to the recent awful film. I hope it can distance itself from that and enjoys a decent run.
I.....didn't hate the 2016 film. I wouldn't describe it as "amazing" or probably even "good", but I'd say most of the flaws lay firmly with a mediocre script, rather than the cast.
It didn't have much of a script. Dig into the director's commentary and you'll find that they routinely just filmed improv takes for hours at a time and then edited scenes together later.
The film was disjointed and often incoherently directionless by deliberate choice of the director. The cast did what they could, but were just told 'more, more.'
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/01/19 16:45:37
Making such a film this soon after the previous disaster shows that someone really believes this IP is very valuable, which honestly seems pretty questionable. Maybe the issues is, if the don’t make a likeable film now then they will have missed the boat forever because the demographic likely to care will have aged out.
