Ghostbusters (2016)

[Azrael]

I'm open to a new female-centric Ghostbusters film. But not if Melissa McCarthy is involved. Can't stand her. I did like Bridesmaids, just not her in it. Though maybe she'll be playing Slimer seeing as her thing seems to be jokes about being fat, obnoxious and gross.

Kristen Wiig, Tina Fey, Maya Rudolph, Rose Byrne, Amy Poehler, Elizabeth Banks, Kaitlin Olson, Leslie Mann, Jane Lynch, Wanda Sykes; Any of them would be ok.

Or if they were looking for a younger cast then people like Anna Kendrick, Aubrey Plaza and Emma Stone.

[Guest]

Just got home - didn't bother staying for Labyrinth.

The place was rammed - I don't think there could have been more than 5 seats left in a theatre that probably holds 1000-1250 people, maybe more. Really good crowd of people who were more than up for it. The Astor has a very strict no phones policy and everyone adheres to it.

The film itself was utterly brilliant. Made even better by most of the crowd obviously having seen the film before. Many, many laughs, and the print and sound quality were exceptional. A timeless classic.

10/10

You didn't stay for Labyrinth? Why not? It's a classic.

[Paulando]

We went to see a showing of Ghostbusters a couple of years ago and the print was horrendous Small parts skipped, it was covered with scratches and other marks and the audio dropped out in a few places. That just added to the whole experience though.

And yeah, GB2 is still really good. The first bit isn't great, but from where they first see the slime river onwards is brilliant.

[deerokus]

There was a remastered DCP release this year, but nothing beats an original scratchy and warped old print of a film.

[DarhkFox]

You didn't stay for Labyrinth? Why not? It's a classic.

Indeed! Much prefer it to ghost busters actually.

I actually watched ghost busters 1&2 a few months back after not watching for a decade or two. Loved the first one but the sequel to me was pretty underwhelming. Seemed much more kid friendly and just wasn't as good as the first. Reminded me of what they did to the tmnt sequel actually.

[Goose]

I skipped on Labyrinth because I wanted to get back home, and wasn't as concerned about seeing it. I'd have stayed for GB2 but Labyrinth normally gets a few airings a quarter.

[gone fishin]

Ghostbusters 2 is pretty good. It's fine. I've never disliked it. However it's definitely not in the same league as the first film. The Red Letter Media guys (the ones who make the Plinkett reviews) did their own commentary track for Ghostbusters 2, and I think they do a good job of highlighting the film's problems. http://redlettermedia.com/ghostbusters-2-half-in-the-bag-commentary-track/

Some of the things that let Ghostbusters 2 down:

• The musical score is like bad romcom music.
• The plot structure is near-identical to the first film.
• It's aimed at a younger audience and influenced by the cartoon.
• What the hell happened to Janine? She's a cartoon version on Janine. Same for Louis.
• Bill Murray is phoning it in.
• The Vigo painting is cool, but the actual Vigo hardly does anything.
• Statue of Liberty scene just because they need something giant walking around New York to reference the first film. But wouldn't it scare the shit out of people rather than lift the mood of the city?

Some good points on there.

Ghostbusters II was a weird one, it came out in 1989 which was a massive year for films. Batman, Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade, Back to the Future 2, Lethal Weapon 2, Look Who's Talking, The Abyss and the greatest James Bond film ever - Licence To Kill.

I remember going to see it at the cinema and it felt a bit underwhelming, but still a decent film. It was massively hyped although looking back on it, it just seemed a bit more of a commercial repeat of the first one (look, we've got BOBBY BROWN singing the theme instead of some unheard guitarist who played with Barry White, except the original was a better song... kind of summed up everything really).

The issue was, you had a load of better, and more memorable, films released in the same summer. Lethal Weapon 2? Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade?? Batman??? What was that Ghostbusters film again?

I'm also sure I read that Bill Murray was completely burned with Hollywood after Ghostbusters. It does feel like he's doing Ghostbusters 2 purely for the money.

Even the game was crap compared to the original Ghostbusters. Yeah, it was BIGGER and SLICKER but it was just a bit shit compared with the fun of the original.

Wait.. was that the game or the film?

[Steve McQueef]

The deleted scenes on the GB II blu-ray highlight just how bad things could have been.

[Guest]

Ghostbusters II is ace. What are you all on about?

VIGO.

[gone fishin]

Right, so I thought I'd give Ghosbisters 2 another go. It's on Canadian Netflix...

And it's not terrible. It's just boring. And completely pointless.

It adds nothing at all that wasn't already said or done in the first one.

It's interesting comparing it to the first one. It seems so commercial (the product placement in it is outrageous, the prominent Sony products puts Bond to shame) and soulless. Everyone is also now a Yuppie. Gone is the down to earth grime of the first one, at times the ghostbusters look like they should be on either Wall Street or Working Girl. Even New York looks way more cleaner than the first one.

I'd forgotten just how close they made it to the Real Ghostbusters cartoon. Which I suppose was massive at the time and I guess had a big part in the sequel getting made.

One thing that's good is the cameos: Cheech Marin, the teacher out of Ferris Bueler's Day Off that says "anyone, anyone, anyone"and Bill Murray's brother. The one out of Caddyshack, and the father out of the amazing "Get a Life".

To be honest, it's probably good that they're rebooting it. Judging by how boring the second one is, god knows what a new one would be like.

[gone fishin]

And I've started watching the first Ghostbusters.

The sequel doesn't even come close to it.

Although the first one does feel a lot like a Bill Murray vehicle. And that's a good thing, it's classic slacker Bill Murray. It's very similar to Stripes or Meatballs. You know, the same character that Vince Vaughn has been stealing for the past 10 years.

It would be interesting to see how much screen time Bill Murray is in the first compared to the second.

The first just looks so much better. Feels like it's been better directed and the shots are much more interesting.

And the comment about the music in the second. Is there even a common theme or riff used in the second? The first has an instantly recognisable soundtrack theme - and I'm not talking about the Ray Parker Jr song... The sequel has an instantly forgettable soundtrack.

I stand by the comment that the second one is pretty boring as a standalone film.

But compared to the first, the second is pretty shit.

Goose, the sequel would make an interesting topic for your 80s thing. It would be interesting to know why they made it and what script they even had coming into it. I remember reading the first had to be seriously cut back due to budget constraints - maybe that's what made it so good, distilling it down.

[Guest]

Ghostbusters 2 was my favourite film as a child.

I HATE YOU ALL.

[deerokus]

The latest episode of the badly-named-for-searchability-but-usually-interesting film discussion/retrospective podcast 'Review' is about Ghostbusters. Worth a listen. They hate Ghostbusters 2.

[MansizeRooster]

Sarah Silverman and Tina Fey could both easily do Venkmann and Spengler-types, though I veer towards Tina for Spengler and Sarah for Venkmann.

Amy Schumer would be perfect for a Ray-based character.

Angela Bassett would be great for Zeddemore if she could keep the mean bitch act on a tight enough leash. Zeddemore is meant to be the nice, friendly non-technical guy.

[Goose]

Sony are now said to be courting Murray for some kind of role - not necessary Venkman.

If he's in it but not as that character, won't it be a little jarring?

[gone fishin]

The more I think about this, the more it sounds like a typical Sony plan to try and keep the rights for the movie by making something, even if it's shite.

They seem to have no shame in doing that, what with the recent Spiderman films...

[Jumble Jumble]

Why would it be shite though? Unless of course you thought Bridesmaids was shite, in which case fair enough.

Sarah Silverman would be absolutely amazing but she's not really in the Feig circle. Could happen I guess.

[gone fishin]

Maybe it's just a bargaining ploy.

Really piss off Dan Ackroyd and Ivan Reitman by taking the option of a Ghostbusters 3, then dumping them all and replacing them with women - unless Bill Murray agrees to come back.

Then they'll do the proper Ghostbusters 3..... With a CgI Harold Ramis Ghost.

[Jumble Jumble]

I don't see why Aykroyd or Reitman would be pissed off. I would think that what probably happened is that when Reitman left the project after Ramis' death, Sony started hunting around for a replacement director, and were impressed with Feig's pitch.

[MansizeRooster]

Just imagine Sarah Silverman in the psychic shape card scene, flirting with some beefcake while shocking a girl at every opportunity. She'd nail that scene.

[Jumble Jumble]

You had me at "Just imagine Sarah Silverman".

[gone fishin]

I don't see why Aykroyd or Reitman would be pissed off. I would think that what probably happened is that when Reitman left the project after Ramis' death, Sony started hunting around for a replacement director, and were impressed with Feig's pitch.

It totally stinks of executives brainstorming a reboot of Ghostbusters.

I think the biggest problem they gave is that the original is a brilliant film and still stands up well to this day. That's why the sequel was so underwhelming, it could never have topped the original.

I honestly don't see what a reboot could achieve, and by going with the gimmick of an all female cast, I'd be willing to bet the storyline and script will be a half arsed retread of the original.

"never mind it's the same story, look at they sassy ghostbusters!!!"

Seriously, what could it do that's better than Ghostbusters? Slightly better matte effects? A 3D slimer? Bigger explosions at the end? Bah!!!

[Jumble Jumble]

It totally stinks of executives brainstorming a reboot of Ghostbusters.

It does no such thing. My guess at what happened is equally valid, as neither of us know what actually happened. There are many other possibilities of how it's come about, too.

However, your idea does allow you to turn your nose up at it for being cynical. You've made up your mind about it already, and so far there are four names associated with the film: Aykroyd (for having invented the characters he'll get a credit, plus exec producer probably), Reitman (production), Feig and Dippold.

I'm not saying it's definitely going to be great, but equally I don't think we know anywhere near enough to say it's definitely going to be terrible. All we really know is that "it will star hilarious women", and that the director made a very successful comedy with a female ensemble cast and feminist credentials once before.

The further they get from a remake the better chance they have of making a decent movie that steps out from under the original's shadow and can be judged on its own merits. Making the Ghostbusters female is a huge step towards that, as would be setting it in San Francisco or something. Of course, that would draw equally passionate howling from people who want there to be no remake, but if there is a remake, that it should be as close to the original as possible in every regard.

I can't help but agree with Goose's prediction about the trailer though. Seems inevitable.

[K]

It's a sad state of affairs when a blockbuster film that has women in the lead roles is considered a gimmick.

[Chadruharazzeb]

If people stopped focusing on the fact it's all women then it'd probably stop being a gimmick and just be a Ghostbusters reboot.

[NEG]

Know the worst thing? The amount of the film that will be CGI.

[MansizeRooster]

I'd say it still needed to be in New York. I'd love it to be full of non-blatant nods to the original.

Imagine a sequence where they're hiring for the 4th ghostbuster, and all of the applicants are hopeless - one of them being a weird old slovenly Bill Murray. They'd take one look at him and go, are you fucking kidding?

[MansizeRooster]

Holy shit, look what I just found:

[gone fishin]

It does no such thing. My guess at what happened is equally valid, as neither of us know what actually happened. There are many other possibilities of how it's come about, too.However, your idea does allow you to turn your nose up at it for being cynical. You've made up your mind about it already, and so far there are four names associated with the film: Aykroyd (for having invented the characters he'll get a credit, plus exec producer probably), Reitman (production), Feig and Dippold.I'm not saying it's definitely going to be great, but equally I don't think we know anywhere near enough to say it's definitely going to be terrible. All we really know is that "it will star hilarious women", and that the director made a very successful comedy with a female ensemble cast and feminist credentials once before.The further they get from a remake the better chance they have of making a decent movie that steps out from under the original's shadow and can be judged on its own merits. Making the Ghostbusters female is a huge step towards that, as would be setting it in San Francisco or something. Of course, that would draw equally passionate howling from people who want there to be no remake, but if there is a remake, that it should be as close to the original as possible in every regard.I can't help but agree with Goose's prediction about the trailer though. Seems inevitable.

Sorry, but you're talking about a guy who's only major movie directing credits are Bridesmaids and The Heat, both films from genres normally focused on male leads (Frat type comedy and cop movies), changed them female focused films and are utter, utter crap when you get past the gimmick (yes, it's a gimmick) of it being female leads.

But what about his writing credits? Yeah... That would be "I Am David" and the upcoming Spy... Can you guess what that's about?

Compare those credentials to the team behind the original. Ackroyd had come off Saturday Night Live and The Blues Brothers, Ramis had written Meatballs, Stripes and Caddyshack Reitman had directed two of them.

If it's going to be called Ghostbusters, it will be compared to the original. There's no getting away from that.

[MansizeRooster]

How about we see what it's like before we write it off?

I mean, just imagine if it turns out to be a good film, respectful of the original. Are you not going to welcome it with open arms in that case?