please, nuke hollywood
Didn't see a thread and this may or not be old news but this popped on my twitter feed recently
Report: Jonah Hill and Emma Stone offered Ghostbusters 3
please, nuke hollywood
So much time has gone by that I don't think anyone even knows why the first one was good.
If they can score Rick Moranis that would add some credibility.
He's already said no. After his wife died he retired completely from acting.
Ghostbusters is in my top 5 all time. With that said, no Moranis, no Murray, adding Jonah Hill? Do not want.
What a clusterfuck this will be. Why cant they just clean up the original and rerelease it in the theater? I would pay actual dollars to go see it. I missed it the first time it was at the movies.
Reboots + Remakes + prequels + sequels = 21th century hollywood
Last edited by ohkcrlho; 11-13-2013 at 12:08 AM.
A war is coming, I've seen it in my dreams. Fires sweeping over the Earth, bodies in the streets, cities turned to dust... retaliation.
Hollywood is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until everything you love is dead.
Havent see as many remakes, but sequels are on full steam it seems.
Seems like the focus of Hollywood is shifting from the one movie to the potentialy longer storyline.
Lotr trilogy was amazing, marvel movie universe is done right, and a few others have made decent sequals and such. However we tend to get sequals and series that dont deserve it. Grown Ups 2? Star Wars prequals? Ghostbusters with no original cast and Jonah hill? Hollywood is in a pretty sorry state where they value making easy sequals and having a massive merchandising option than to risk making a truly spectacular movie that may or may not be considered a flop.
this year was a massive failure for hollywood, the worst part is most of those flops were original films. world war z and elysium anyone? lone ranger was a reboot but they rebooted a franchise from 30 years ago, which bombed back then too. sequels are a safer bet, so dont expect those to go away, the original flicks are in danger. biggest bomb of 2012 was john carter and that was original
World war z wasn't a failure money-wise.
Not everything on the internet is true - Abraham Lincoln
my point was they are still making original films but they are bombing, either because the studios dont know how to make great original films anymore or the great directors are too busy making sequels. i think its because studios think shiny things first and story second. these budgets are so fucking overblown because of needless CGI that most are doomed to fail before they ever get released. did anyone expect after earth to be anything but a pile of shit?
there are exceptions of course,such as gravty. though i doubt the budget for gravity was anywhere close to elysium, lone ranger or wwz
i just checked the wikis on these flops and seems like they all made profits. even the lone fucking ranger took in more than its 255m budget. worldwide grosses must be saving their asses. john carter made a profit too.
Last edited by Astr0Chuk; 11-08-2013 at 09:05 AM.
Original movies still have sources and a fan base that expects certain standards. How smart was it to make a movie about a really old SF series, spruce up the visuals while making the story suck? Is that a good montage for that author? Will it bring in new fans? Hell no. Why bring back a very old western that had failed years earlier and then spruce it up with some CGI and another really poor story? Why make it at all similar to Pirates? To bring in a new fan base with shitty story again? Why didn't paramount know their 'epic' movie's ending before all that wasted time and money? Why did it have carte blache? Stupid decisions made these movies do poorly not the originality.
Matrix came out of nowhere. Avatar and Titanic exploded. Inception = awesome. Etc,etc,etc. It wasn't the CGI, actors, or producers who brought in money. It was the stories that people wanted to enjoy. These stories brought people in, provided strong word of mouth, and second viewing opportunities. The rest was just added benefits. Make a really good story... see money roll in.
Real question is Dan Akroyd involved in this if it will be decent or not IMO - considering he was the primary writer in the first place. (And apparently his dad was a paranormal investigator type for real or some such weirdness?!?)
yeah I dont know.
first, I dont really trust Hollywood to understand what made Ghostbusters so good. hell they didn't even know back then with ghostbusters 2, which also missed the mark.
remakes, original movies... some weird stuff here. Based on a book, or based on a movie 30+ years ago, is a weird definition honestly. I know what you are saying but still. Pacific rim was original. Dredd was based on a comic. And also, not a reboot, or remake of the shitty previous movie. Making a movie off something will a well established fan base already is hardly original.
Dan akroyd. man look at his career. dude was always just all over the place. I don't trust him much really.
I had rented Ghostbusters a bunch of times as a kid and even at 9 I remember being disappointed with the sequel when I saw it in the theater. It's grown on me over time but I still don't understand why it is so goofy. The Real Ghostbusters cartoon was randomly holy fuck dark and it was those episodes that I liked the most. Ghostbusters 2 just wasn't anything like that.
ghostbusters 2 had some good moments, but the story stalled a lot during the movie so they could do goofy shit that had little to do with anything. they also hijacked several characters from the first movie. rick moranis went from being a little dweeb in the original to hooking up with the secretary in 2 who for no fucking reason seems to be batshit insane now. then sigourney weaver has a baby all of a sudden. what? when? who? then the ghostbusters themselves, at the end of ghostbusters they were the heroes of the city, then in part 2 they could only get jobs appearing at parties but venkman is a tv show host.
then you have the villain and the plot. i have seen the movie probably 4 times and im still not sure on it. there was an evil picture that wanted sigorney weaver's baby so he could be reborn as a human? there was a river of slime under the city that caused the evil picture to be evil or vice versa? anyway, the baby plot was fucking terrible. where did this baby come from and why should i care that an evil picture wants it? the movie was a goddamned mess, though i did like the courtroom scene and some other stuff. it doesnt make a good movie if it has no story to tie everything together.
Last edited by Astr0Chuk; 11-08-2013 at 10:56 PM.
see, the thing is. Hollywood thinks Ghostbusters is a comedy. and its really not. It takes itself entirely seriously, and plays it straight. and this is why it works.
Every ghost, save slimer was pretty much scary as fuck. not a cartoon at all. even him, in the first one, leaned more creepy.
you take comedians, stick them in a horror movie, and they react to it in amusing ways. Other movies do this too of course. Fright night. and its remake totally understood it too. And thats why the Fright night remake is easily one of the best remakes ever.
Ghostbusters 2 was really off the mark though. It didn't get it. It was a cartoon.
you know, I was just thinking about it. and really there are some movies out there I think that get a similar tone. or tv shows.
like, I could see James Franco. Danny mcbride, craig Robinson(Daryl in the Office, and nick in Hot tub time machine.). I would trust them.
In general. Land of the lost, The office, Hot tub time machine these get the tone pretty close, although do lean more towards the cartoonish nature of 2 for Land of the lost, Hot tub time machine.
Hollywood probably could pull it off honestly.
Every movie is going to flop in sales when you can wait two months and see it for a dollar at red box. Cheapest place around is 16 bucks for the family , with bonus of the attendants not giving a shit about carried in snacks
I remember me and my best friend used to play Ghostbusters all the time, had the proton packs and everything. We would play at his house and we always pretended a ghost lived in this painting he had in his living room of a spanish conquistador (we were actually convinced it was haunted). Then Ghostbusters 2 came out and we saw it in the theaters and shit our pants.
the sad thing is ghostbusters could be rebooted, they fucked up the second one so they stopped right there also without murray in it there is no point, but if everyone was on board they could keep it going if they had a good story to go with it. i can see the ghostbusters busting up different types of supernaturals and maybe even at different locations other than NYC too. but what i dont think they could do is successfully reboot the series with weak B listers and the weaker original cast members. you will end up with a weak product even with a good story.
get murray in this movie, introduce a strong new lead (not jonah hill, more like will ferrell) get a real beefy story, hell even if it ends up with the originals dying at the end and the new guys taking over there is a potential for a kickass new life for the franchise.
Last edited by Astr0Chuk; 11-10-2013 at 02:38 AM.
I've watched the original Ghostbusters countless times. I saw Ghostbusters II in the theater and have never watched it since. The plot was a major step down: went from saving the world to some ghost in a picture. Such a disappointment.
Anyway, I would love to see a "Return of Gozer" or something and introduce a new ghost busting team. Obviously have Murray, Aykroyd, and Ramis do a cameo. These guys are so old and fat, though, I don't think I could see them being part of the main cast anymore.
yeah but the ghostbusters didnt really need to be super agile. they just pointed their ghostbuster boom sticks at stuff and reeled it in. the highpoint was murray's comic moments. the dude is still funny. who cares if everyone is a blimp now, it works better that way. they would want to be retiring and need more ghostbusters to help them out. they all need to have more than cameo appearances though, this has to be a full on oldschool ghostbuster movie. cameos just make you wish for the original film. you dont want your audience to be cockteased. id rather their B team be more like cameos.
for shits n gigs lets say the new guys, ferrell, rogan, hill and that funny heavyset black dude could pop in to help out through the film.then at the end when the OG ghostbusters die or quit then the new guys pick up their ecto packs and start busting ass. bam, then credit roll.
Holy shit, that's the worst idea I've ever heard for a movie... It's almost like you're actually a real Hollywood script writer... (Well actually second worst idea ie ever heard), Kevin smith's story about superman against the giant mechanical spider w/ the wild Wild West reveal at the end ranks up there too.
wait, what was my idea for the movie? you think the original stars of the original movie coming back to star in the reboot and that at the end they pass the torch to the new guys is the worst idea since mechanical spiders?
[/QUOTE]Dan akroyd. man look at his career. dude was always just all over the place. I don't trust him much really.[/QUOTE]
Was never a big Aykroyd fan, especially after the abortion that was Blues Brothers 2000. I also can't see anything good coming from GB3, whether any of the original cast are involved or not. Just let the franchise be - unless it's perhaps another cartoon series, and then just maybe.
Will Ferrell and Seth Rogan are probably two of the worst casting choices for a reboot. The Ghostbusters are supposed to be scientists, not some pot head and a guy who only knows how to be funny BY BEING REALLY REALLY LOUD.
I was referring to the nebulous anypeople of Hollywood. The dudes who call the shots and green light garbage. The people who want to add popular young people actors of the day like Emma Stone and Jonah Hill to the cast.
Will Ferrell and Seth Rogan couldn't hold hold Murray's comedic jock-strap.
you're right, but neither are going to be playing his role. they will be part of an ensemble cast, that could carry a ghostbusters movie if they decided to make one with the guys i suggested. you cant surpass the original GB, but you can reboot the franchise enough to make it enjoyable to watch. there is definitely room to improve from GB 2
everytime i hear ghostbusters, i get sad cause i know one of the scripts for the 3rd movie was being developed for Chris Farley and Chris Rock and original cast
It's not the actors. It's the mentality.
Maybe I'm just gun shy after The Beef was cast as Indy's son in Crystal Skull.
fuck jonah hill, need will ferrell and zach G and louis CK as ghostbusters. key and peele can be the black ones
Is it going to be as good as the original? Fuck no! You don't simply recapture the magic of one of the greatest comedy of all times. Jonah Hill and Emma Stone are fine choices though, they've both shown to be capable of the type of dry sardonic wit that was present in Ghostbusters.
Gritty Ghostbusters reboot? HOLLYWOOD GOLD
In my life I have taken up the Monkey's Paw too many times and wished for a another film, another sequel or prequel or parallel story. I have wished for more.
I have been given the Neverending Story 2, and Aliens 3, and Dead Like Me : Life After Death. And god help me I was given The Phantom Menace.
No more! If another Ghostbusters I will bare no responsibility for the outcome! No one will be able to look back and say, "Arbitrary. You asked for this just as we all did. Your blame is equal to ours."
I don't care if you have 100 Will Ferrells. Bill Murray > All and if he's not in it, I'm not interested
Jim carrey, heh no point in bothering with it. That dude had been washed up for ten years. He may reboot dumb franchises he starred in, but not other franchises
If jim carrey is there, no way, i'll see it in hell. He'll just complain that it's too violent.
I'd love to post some angry comment here about how I won't see this because of thisactor or thatactor or somestupid reason. Unfortunately, I will 100% see this on opening weekend and pay full ticket price because I was a kid of the 80s/90s and I grew up on Ghostbusters.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)