I was older than that when I saw it and I don't recall Slimer being all that scary.FincAg said:
Maybe I am in the minority but I remember as a kid the ghosts in both I and II were on the edge of scary, which made it more Gremlins/Poltergeist than Scooby Doo. The female remake was so campy and technicolor cartoony that it just didn't feel like a ghostbuster story.
Hopefully this new Ghostbusters will have that same edge.
***Ghostbusters:Afterlife***
43,886 Views |
362 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by oragator
More like Gozer and his/her "dogs", the shock of the old librarian in the opening scene of Ghostbusters, Vigo's was such a convening evil character, slime alive that would pull you under. You are right, Slimer was a misunderstood foodie not an evil character. Rowan North as the alter stay puft marshmallow man getting knocked in the junk was pretty meh I thought. Same for the dragon at the rock concert.
agproducer said:
I could see this story as this:
After Ghostbusters II, things calmed down in New York. The original Ghostbusters capitalized on their fame, but without supernatural experiences, there was not much of a need for them anymore. Hence, the Ecto-1 being in a barn in a location where maybe Egon retired before he died.
Now, 30 years later, there has been an upswing in ghost activity and the Ghostbusters are needed again. But -- the old team is just too old to deal with the major fights -- like the one with Zuul. So, whey have to find teens (maybe relatives) to help. the old Ghostbusters train the teens to take down the baddie at the end -- a passing of the torch so to speak.
I'd be in for that.
My headcanon for this is that there will be Ghostbusters franchises run by Venkman and co.
Ray's family owned a farm didn't they? Maybe he's been storing Ecto all these years with hopes (just like Dan) that one day the Ghost Busters would be needed again
Good call. I could definitely see Ray in the old mentor/scientist role - the one keeping hope alive, retired on the farm, etc. Kind of like the Doc Brown to a group of teens, one of which could be his grandson/granddaughter.
Ray: My parents left me that house. I was born there!Daveintx said:
Ray's family owned a farm didn't they? Maybe he's been storing Ecto all these years with hopes (just like Dan) that one day the Ghost Busters would be needed again
Venkman: You're not gonna lose the house, everybody has three mortgages nowadays.
rhutton125 said:
Finally watched the original Ghostbusters for the first time about a year ago and I thought it wasn't very good. Come at me, bro!
Disgraceful.
Also where did you grow up that you didn't see this?
Can the intro scene be Ray and Peter in a theater watching the female ghostbusters.. and then they get up and walk out?
I just hope Rick Moranis returns.
I'm very into this. I was obsessed with all things Ghostbusters as a kid. My kids have enjoyed the cartoon on Netflix and should be old enough when this actually comes out.
So, after the events of part 2, the Ghost Busters are buried in law suits, etc from the city due to all of the destruction of property (including a national monument). They break up, Ray moves home but takes his toys with him in hopes of one day returning to busting. Egon goes back to his studies, during which time he becomes ill and passes, Winston, being tired of all the publicity, etc surrounding having been a part of the crew moves off in an attempt to disappear, and Peter moves in with Dana.
Current day, Dana has passed, Peter shares an apartment with Oscar (now in his mid 20's), one day, Oscar comes home to find Peter dead with a message scrawled on a sheet "Gozer"....
Que title card
Current day, Dana has passed, Peter shares an apartment with Oscar (now in his mid 20's), one day, Oscar comes home to find Peter dead with a message scrawled on a sheet "Gozer"....
Que title card
The sandman and boogeyman episodes of the Ghostbusters cartoon of the first seasons cared the every-loving sh t outta me. I was five or so, and it was no fun thinking a monster lived in my closet.
Those two.. as well as the Poultrygeist, Samhain, and CthulhuRPM said:
The sandmand and boogeyman episodes of the Ghostbusters cartoon of the first seasons cared the every-loving sh t outta me. I was five or so, and it was no fun thinking a monster lived in my closet.
Oh.. and Sandmans voice was the creepiest thing ever.
bigjag19 said:rhutton125 said:
Finally watched the original Ghostbusters for the first time about a year ago and I thought it wasn't very good. Come at me, bro!
Disgraceful.
Also where did you grow up that you didn't see this?
Texas. The amount of dead air between Murray's goofiness and everyone else's complete earnestness just... I dunno man. It just did not work for me, or for my wife. I can't help but wonder if it works for new viewers anymore, or only for those who grew up with it.
Truth is this project has been in development since long before her version. The new take did okay at the box office, but was hardly screaming for a sequel.
Idiot libs gotta take a shot at Trump any chance they can even if there's no correlation at all.
#MicDropATM1876 said:
"I'm not making the Juno of Ghostbusters movies,"
I'm guessing Ellen Page will not be offered a role in this movie.
MookieBlaylock said:
And what is this Ghostbusters universe? there is no universe without Murray and Akroyd and the black guy that saved the baby from the ridiculous hot nanny that banged Tom cruise on the L train
Rule 1 on hot nanny
he apparently had to apologize for this portion of his statement, because somehow this was deemed sexist or something.Quote:
Talking on the most recent edition of Bill Burr's Monday Morning Podcast, Reitman went out of his way to reassure those still seemingly traumatized by Paul Feig's all-female 2016 reboot of the franchise that his movie wouldn't be anything like that, saying, "I'm not making the Juno of Ghostbusters movies," referencing his 2007 Ellen Page film centering on a pregnant teenage girl.
"We are in every way trying to go back to original technique and hand the movie back to the fans," said Reitman, noting that his team painstakingly researched techniques used in the 1984 original film, directed by his father Ivan Reitman, for the movie's first teaser.
Good gosh, this whole situation is so incredibly stupid. So let me get this straight...
- Paul Feig and co took a beloved franchise and "ignored/erased" its history by not only "rebooting" it, but turning it "female" (which is fine in and of itself in a fun/playful/wink-wink way).
- But then Jason Reitman "ignores/erases" that version by simply making a sequel to the original iteration - the iteration his FATHER directed - and now Paul Feig and co are upset about being "ignored/erased"???
I'm all for diversity and equality, and admittedly annoy more than my fair share of people here with that stuff sometimes, and was even vocal here about giving Feig's version a chance when the first trailer dropped (though I never saw the final product myself because of how bad reviews were), but sh*t like this really rubs me the wrong way. How can Feig and co not see their hypocrisy here?
- Paul Feig and co took a beloved franchise and "ignored/erased" its history by not only "rebooting" it, but turning it "female" (which is fine in and of itself in a fun/playful/wink-wink way).
- But then Jason Reitman "ignores/erases" that version by simply making a sequel to the original iteration - the iteration his FATHER directed - and now Paul Feig and co are upset about being "ignored/erased"???
I'm all for diversity and equality, and admittedly annoy more than my fair share of people here with that stuff sometimes, and was even vocal here about giving Feig's version a chance when the first trailer dropped (though I never saw the final product myself because of how bad reviews were), but sh*t like this really rubs me the wrong way. How can Feig and co not see their hypocrisy here?
That said, Reitman's "back to the fans" comment is pretty dumb. Not because it is sexist, but because it can be so easily interpreted as sexist. Just make your movie and let these people say their own dumb things in the press.
A. Solzhenitsyn said:he apparently had to apologize for this portion of his statement, because somehow this was deemed sexist or something.Quote:
Talking on the most recent edition of Bill Burr's Monday Morning Podcast, Reitman went out of his way to reassure those still seemingly traumatized by Paul Feig's all-female 2016 reboot of the franchise that his movie wouldn't be anything like that, saying, "I'm not making the Juno of Ghostbusters movies," referencing his 2007 Ellen Page film centering on a pregnant teenage girl.
"We are in every way trying to go back to original technique and hand the movie back to the fans," said Reitman, noting that his team painstakingly researched techniques used in the 1984 original film, directed by his father Ivan Reitman, for the movie's first teaser.
The only way that statement is sexist is if you assume either the fans are exclusively male OR the Feig version was bad BECAUSE of the female cast.
I mean I get what you're saying, but it's not a reasonable standard to expect every single person in every single interview to think through every single thing they say in regards to every single way it could be interpreted. In fact, I don't think his comment CAN be that easily interpreted as sexist.TCTTS said:
That said, Reitman's "back to the fans" comment is pretty dumb. Not because it is sexist, but because it can be so easily interpreted as sexist. Just make your movie and let these people say their own dumb things in the press.
His only mistake was apologizing.
TCTTS said:
Good gosh, this whole situation is so incredibly stupid. So let me get this straight...
- Paul Feig and co took a beloved franchise and "ignored/erased" its history by not only "rebooting" it, but turning it "female" (which is fine in and of itself in a fun/playful/wink-wink way).
- But then Jason Reitman "ignores/erases" that version by simply making a sequel to the original iteration - the iteration his FATHER directed - and now Paul Feig and co are upset about being "ignored/erased"???
I'm all for diversity and equality, and admittedly annoy more than my fair share of people here with that stuff sometimes, and was even vocal here about giving Feig's version a chance when the first trailer dropped (though I never saw the final product myself because of how bad reviews were), but sh*t like this really rubs me the wrong way. How can Feig and co not see their hypocrisy here?
Because people like those "offended" by Reitman's comment, specialize in turning everything into identity politics and are by their nature hypocritical and obtuse. They're professional victims, who always cry about injuries being inflicted upon them while using that victim card to claim immunity for anything they say or do.
Anyway, enough politics, I'm actually excited about this Reitman version.
I just don't see that as sexist in any way. I know females that are fans of the original.TCTTS said:
That said, Reitman's "back to the fans" comment is pretty dumb. Not because it is sexist, but because it can be so easily interpreted as sexist. Just make your movie and let these people say their own dumb things in the press.
I suspect the ones that take that comment as sexist, besides you of course
, mostly think the bad reviews are coming from women hating men and not from the view that the movie was bad regardless of gender. Featured Stories
See All
14:22
7h ago
1.7k
A&M's season ends with microcosmic second-half collapse in Las Vegas
by Olin Buchanan
Learned, Loved, Loathed: USC 35, Texas A&M 31 (2024 Las Vegas Bowl)
by Olin Buchanan
BoxingAg84
Did Miami coach know Ward wasn't going to play in 2nd half?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
7
Terence Kitchens
Did Miami coach know Ward wasn't going to play in 2nd half?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
6
satexas
Did Miami coach know Ward wasn't going to play in 2nd half?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
6