Movies: Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2020)

[Tuggy]

https://io9.gizmodo.com/a-new-ghostbusters-movie-set-in-same-world-as-the-orig-1831788046

directed by Jason Reitman—who’s found plenty of success with his own career (Tully, Young Adult, Up in the Air, Juno), but also happens to be the son of original Ghostbusters director Ivan Reitman.

Though there’s no word on if any O.G. Ghostbusters stars will return, Reitman—who co-wrote the screenplay with Gil Kenan—further teased “wonderful surprises and new characters,” though he made it clear that we won’t be seeing any of the “brilliant actresses” who starred in Paul Feig’s 2016 reboot: “This new movie will follow the trajectory of the original film.”

Click to read more...

 

[Pilky01]

I'll see how it plays out but Ghostbusters 2016 really soured my enthusiasm for the franchise.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

I don't pay close to attention to that stuff but did the women ghostbusters bust or something? I know the trailer was downvoted into oblivion but I don't know what happened after that.

 

[John Price]

I don't pay close to attention to that stuff but did the women ghostbusters bust or something? I know the trailer was downvoted into oblivion but I don't know what happened after that.

IIRC despite populist backlash it got moderately good reviews, that being said I'm glad they're moving on from it like it didn't exist

 

[Jussi]

“This new movie will follow the trajectory of the original film.”

Sold.

 

[Pilky01]

 

[NyQuil]

I can recall hearing Ivan Reitman talk about how the secret of Ghostbusters is that it's really a movie about three guys starting a small business in New York City.

Dan Aykroyd's idea had huge set-piece battles and epic storylines but it was Reitman who pared it down to something that would resonate with viewers.

"Fighting evil corporations" just sounds too much like Dodgeball.

I'm not sure if it's possible to recreate the character of the original film, but that's not going to prevent them from trying I suppose.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

The sequel was disappointing and the remake was absolutely awful

Just move on and you cant have a 3rd Ghostbusters with original cast when one of the ghostbusters is dead and another member of original cast is retired completely from acting business

 

[Pilky01]

Ghostbusters 2 was not good. Especially compared to the first one, which was lightning in a bottle.

 

[CaptainCrunch67]

Let me guess the cast will be Chris Hemsworth, Chris Pine, Kevin Hart and Will Ferrell.

 

[Pilky01]

I liked the bit of a pitch I heard from that Max Landis guy. It was going to start with like a joke Ghostbusters thing, where they are played by the liked of Channing Tatum, The Rock, and other super ripped celebs, then it was going to pan out to the real Ghostbusters who are like, Patton Oswalt, Sarah Silverman, and a couple other comedians. That sounds like a decent gag. I've kinda been set on Oswalt and Silverman as Ghostbusters ever since I heard that; it just feels like they fit the role perfectly. "Normal" looking people who aren't slapstick comedians like the stars of GB2016.

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

I liked the bit of a pitch I heard from that Max Landis guy. It was going to start with like a joke Ghostbusters thing, where they are played by the liked of Channing Tatum, The Rock, and other super ripped celebs, then it was going to pan out to the real Ghostbusters who are like, Patton Oswalt, Sarah Silverman, and a couple other comedians. That sounds like a decent gag. I've kinda been set on Oswalt and Silverman as Ghostbusters ever since I heard that; it just feels like they fit the role perfectly. "Normal" looking people who aren't slapstick comedians like the stars of GB2016.

Well I love Patton Oswalt in everything so that would be cool. Dang, a lot of Ghostbusters II hate in here.

 

[Osprey]

This is sure coming out of nowhere. I don't know how you can call it Ghostbusters 3 without at least confirming most of the original cast returning. That teaser and the film being in "pre-production" almost seem like a pitch to Bill Murray, who might've said, "Prove to me that you're serious about this and I'll consider it... maybe." If it doesn't at least star Murray and Aykroyd, with a couple of Weaver/Hudson/Moranis/Potts in at least supporting roles, I'd rather that they not even do it. It already feels way too late as it is.

If they're going to do it and do it with the original cast members, it has to feel honest and believable. Start with Venkman (Murray) and Stantz (Aykroyd) having had a falling out (which would seem believable, especially when it comes to Murray), but meeting for the first time in decades at a memorial for Spengler (Ramis) (which would address his demise, rather than ignore it); then, have them learn of something that Spengler was uncovering and reluctantly team up again to continue his work, and go from there. I'd do it a little like Grumpy Old Men, with the bulk of the jokes coming from Venkman and Stantz insulting and undermining one another (in progressively better humor), but that's just me.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

Well I love Patton Oswalt in everything so that would be cool. Dang, a lot of Ghostbusters II hate in here.

Its a mediocre sequel

It has a few good moments but overall is just massive disappointment and such a drop in quality from 1st one

It is very forgettable movie overall

 

[Ceremony]

I can recall hearing Ivan Reitman talk about how the secret of Ghostbusters is that it's really a movie about three guys starting a small business in New York City.

Dan Aykroyd's idea had huge set-piece battles and epic storylines but it was Reitman who pared it down to something that would resonate with viewers.

"Fighting evil corporations" just sounds too much like Dodgeball.

I'm not sure if it's possible to recreate the character of the original film, but that's not going to prevent them from trying I suppose.

I think the point of that tweet passed you by

 

[NyQuil]

I think the point of that tweet passed you by

So it did.

My excuse was the all-nighter I pulled yesterday.

 

[The Nemesis]

Ghostbusters II wasn't Ghostbusters I, but it's a watchable enough movie. I'm not going to hold the 1st movie against it because there was no realistic way it was going to be able to replicate that success.

The recent reboot film though, that was bad. As much as I like most of the individual actors in it when they are in their own wheelhouses, It was just a mess that felt like it was lazily cramming itself into a Ghostbusters suit to try and be bigger. The other thing that I've noted in discussing that movie with other people is that the original 4some had balance. You had Venkman as the 100% comedy character, Winston as the 100% straight-man (though he still got a couple of good joke lines in) and Ray and Egon in the middle, able to be sincere, serious, or funny as the dynamic of the scene demanded. Even Janine was a mixture of eye-rolling serious to the guys' antics coupled with sassy secretary/help gags. The reboot cast was basically all a mish-mash of different comedic types that never landed because they didn't have something to play off of. You just had the neurotic one, the bombastic slapstick one, the screwloose nutty one, the loud "having none of this" sassy one, and even Hemsworth's supporting role was mostly as the vacuous idiot.

After watching the teaser (side note, I find it funny that this video is listed in its thumbnail as a "trailer" when it's a 40 second teaser, while the Spider-Man one that released the other day was mostly called a "teaser" when it was in fact a multi-minute actual trailer.) I had an idea of how you could bridge the gap from the last film, explain away the lack of any characters you can't get the actors for (Egon obviously, Lewis probably, Peter maybe, Dana possibly?) and set them up to have a dramatic plot element to help link the new generation to the old. Then I realized it was probably far too dark for a comedy movie and mostly irrelevant given that Reitman has already penned a complete script and there's not much point in positing how anyone would write a continuation.

 

[MadDevil]

They're fighting AMC?

 

[NyQuil]

The trick to Ghostbusters is that the ghosts are secondary.

The best scenes have no ghosts in them at all.

The low cost of CGI has ruined any chance of a good Ghostbusters film.

 

[Osprey]

The tricky thing with Ghostbusters is that the original was a lot darker and more serious than people tend to remember. It was a product of the early 80s, in which many films, like Gremlins, Poltergeist and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, were rated PG and targeted at all age groups, but were relatively scary and sinister. We sometimes think of Ghostbusters as a lighthearted comedy, but it really wasn't at all. It's likely that no sequel will ever really compare to it because a film like that won't be made again. Even by the end of the decade, Hollywood had already changed and "lightened up," which is why Ghostbusters II and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (both 1989 releases) were lighter in mood than their predecessors.

Since Ghostbusters will never be duplicated, it's tricky to make a sequel because it's going to feel different and, thus, disappointing. One of Ghostbusters II's problems is that it felt different than the original. The Real Ghostbusters cartoon, as fun as it was, also felt different because it was very lighthearted. The 2016 "remake" had the same problem. The best that you can do is identify as many original elements that worked, that fans remember fondly and that will still play nowadays and hope that fans are OK with the necessary differences. So far, nothing has exactly pulled that off, which is why it's a franchise that has always struggled to live up to itself.

 

[Drytoast]

IIRC despite populist backlash it got moderately good reviews, that being said I'm glad they're moving on from it like it didn't exist

Had it been a success they would have followed up with a sequel instead of retreading and doing a proper sequel to the 80's version.

Hope hollywood has learned a valuable lesson.

 

[beowulf]

Sucks they waited this long and that we are down one of the original characters.

 

[John Price]

Kind of like the retro throwback music in the trailer.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

Had this been news before the craptacular 2016 version, it would be a lot bigger.

 

[NyQuil]

The tricky thing with Ghostbusters is that the original was a lot darker and more serious than people tend to remember. It was a product of the early 80s, in which many films, like Gremlins, Poltergeist and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, were rated PG and targeted at all age groups, but were relatively scary and sinister. We sometimes think of Ghostbusters as a lighthearted comedy, but it really wasn't at all. It's likely that no sequel will ever really compare to it because a film like that won't be made again. Even by the end of the decade, Hollywood had already changed and "lightened up," which is why Ghostbusters II and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (both 1989 releases) were lighter in mood than their predecessors.

I saw Ghostbusters in the theater and the scene with the librarian scared the living crap out of me as a kid.