Even before Paul Feig’s reboot of Ghostbusters hit theatres, there was a fair amount of sequel chatter over at Sony. It made sense, too, given the immense popularity of the franchise and the talent that the director had brought on board for his updated take on the iconic film. However, after a less than impressive theatrical run, the studio has seemingly changed its mind about a follow-up.

Though it didn’t completely bomb, Ghostbusters‘ $229 million take at the box office wasn’t enough for Sony to break even and while a good amount of fans did enjoy the reboot quite a bit, it certainly didn’t please everyone. As such, it’s probably safe to assume that those sequel plans have been placed on the back-burner for now.

That doesn’t mean we should give up hope, however, as Feig told The Daily Beast that he’s still up for making another one – Sony just has to give him the green light:

That’s up to the studio because they have to pay for it. Nobody’s called me. But I love those characters and I know they are now heroes and mean a lot to a lot of people, so in a perfect world it would be great if we could see them bust more ghosts, kick more ass, and be awesome again.

The core cast has been contracted for two more sequels, so there would be no problem getting them back, and obviously Feig is down to return, so it really does seem like the ball is in Sony’s court now. Given some of the criticisms levelled against the reboot, the studio could also choose to move ahead with a new director at the helm, but personally, I’d be all for Feig coming back. Ghostbusters was certainly a bit uneven, but on the whole it was a solid blockbuster with some strong, original ideas behind it – even if it did fumble them near the end – and a stellar cast to boot.

For now, we’ll just have to wait and see how this all plays out. Obviously, a Ghostbusters 2 is far from a priority for Sony right now, but with the cast still under contract and Feig game to return, we’ll remain hopeful that a sequel will eventually materialize.

The fastest I've yet seen a thread get to where you all know it's going.

 Snake Tortoise wrote:
By all means make a sequel, but also make a film for men too. I don't know... maybe a 40k movie. A terrifying, apocalyptic vision of the future that plays out primarily as a horror movie with war and sci-fi elements. Only the darkest humour, and with a bittersweet ending at best. IG vs daemons perhaps, and then introduce space marines in the sequel, chaos space marines in film three. A film that gives people nightmares and courts controversy.

Let women have Ghostbusters.

 kronk wrote:
"Though it didn’t completely bomb, Ghostbusters‘ $229 million take at the box office wasn’t enough for Sony to break even"

Holy feth balls! How much did it cost?

Google says: The film grossed $229 million worldwide against a production budget of $144 million, as well as a large amount spent on marketing, the studio has stated that the film will need to gross at least $300 million to break even and was considered a box office disappointment.

 Snake Tortoise wrote:
By all means make a sequel, but also make a film for men too. I don't know... maybe a 40k movie. A terrifying, apocalyptic vision of the future that plays out primarily as a horror movie with war and sci-fi elements. Only the darkest humour, and with a bittersweet ending at best. IG vs daemons perhaps, and then introduce space marines in the sequel, chaos space marines in film three. A film that gives people nightmares and courts controversy.

Let women have Ghostbusters.

Jacksmiles wrote:
The article says the movie didn't even break even, but calls it a solid blockbuster. I thought blockbusters were supposed to be movies that make an obscene amount of profit.

I never saw the movie, probably never will unless someone just turns it on and I'm there to watch. Everything about it seemed "Look lady ghostbusters!!" as opposed to "Ghostbusters reboot!!" and that made all the difference to me. I didn't care that the characters were all women, I cared that the whole point seemed to be that the characters were women.

 kronk wrote:
"Though it didn’t completely bomb, Ghostbusters‘ $229 million take at the box office wasn’t enough for Sony to break even"

Holy feth balls! How much did it cost?

Google says: The film grossed $229 million worldwide against a production budget of $144 million, as well as a large amount spent on marketing, the studio has stated that the film will need to gross at least $300 million to break even and was considered a box office disappointment.

Asterios wrote:

Jacksmiles wrote:
The article says the movie didn't even break even, but calls it a solid blockbuster. I thought blockbusters were supposed to be movies that make an obscene amount of profit.

I never saw the movie, probably never will unless someone just turns it on and I'm there to watch. Everything about it seemed "Look lady ghostbusters!!" as opposed to "Ghostbusters reboot!!" and that made all the difference to me. I didn't care that the characters were all women, I cared that the whole point seemed to be that the characters were women.

because it was all about the women, they didn't make a ghostbusters movie they made a female ghostbusters movie, they could have always done a continuation of the original movies with the kids of the original Ghostbusters or their grandkids, but no they had to reboot it with nothing but female ghostbusters.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I myself quite enjoy a good passing of the torch story.

Asterios wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I myself quite enjoy a good passing of the torch story.

thing of it is they could have even had the kids or grandkids be all female and it would have come off better, but instead they did what they did they had characters all over the place with no unity and such, like seriously what was the deal with Holtzmann ? and then the idiot Kevin, this movie was sexist, to make women look strong and men look weak and stupid, why not try doing a movie where the men and women are strong together?

 jreilly89 wrote:

Asterios wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I myself quite enjoy a good passing of the torch story.

thing of it is they could have even had the kids or grandkids be all female and it would have come off better, but instead they did what they did they had characters all over the place with no unity and such, like seriously what was the deal with Holtzmann ? and then the idiot Kevin, this movie was sexist, to make women look strong and men look weak and stupid, why not try doing a movie where the men and women are strong together?

Because it was pretty clear what market they were going for. What bugs me is I like Melissa McCarthy, she's a funny actress, and they totally shoehorned her into a bad movie. This could have been a good movie, the actresses were funny, there were just a lot of bad decisions made.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Without getting into the culture war stuff, the movie looked like a bad scooby doo live action flick, and I passed on it. Given that it doesnt seem to have recouped its costs, its hard to see where a sequel is warranted.

 AduroT wrote:
They only catch One ghost in the entire movie, then spend the rest of it with fancy new gadgets that kill them instead.

Asterios wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
They only catch One ghost in the entire movie, then spend the rest of it with fancy new gadgets that kill them instead.

and the one ghost they caught got away.