Ghostbusters 3

[Tiny Poster]

I think they'd be wise enough not to go near. It's more likely to be Dave Franco and Danny McBride.

[Rev]

Thing is, right, thing is:  there's absolutely no reason why a third Ghostbusters film couldn't work.  It's somewhat horrible to say, but Harold Ramis dying at least clarified that whatever ends up happening won't be the old cast wheezing about in backpacks again.  As recently as ten years ago I'd have wanted that - but no, it has to be a new cast now, and the franchise concept makes it work as being within the same universe rather than a reboot.  And Dan would shore up for a bit, of course.

As with the Gremlins reboot/remake, what we have here is concept that is completely open to be being revived, but we'll end up with some horrible sludge that was focus-grouped to death at the script stage. 

[touchingcloth]

What they really need to do is reboot it by mixing it with another franchise, e.g. Parks & Rec, or Flashman.

[thraxx]

As with the Gremlins reboot/remake, what we have here is concept that is completely open to be being revived, but we'll end up with some horrible sludge that was focus-grouped to death at the script stage.

Or a film where the Gremlins an analogy for Muslims.  In fact they should just call it that.

[touchingcloth]

Muslimbusters - a subtle morality play demonstrating how muslims are bad and whites are good.

[Johnny Textface]

The best and funniest parts of the two Ghostbusters films are those prior to the actual catching of ghosties.  This is down to a. Rapport between the cast and b. The script.  The main plots that revolve around Ripley are shit really.  Also, the first film, while only perfect for the first half, is as near dammit perfect as they're ever going to get, so fucking leave it alone. I don't want to see an old Venkman or Stantz in the same way I don't want to see an old Indianna Jones.  Or Luke Skywalker for that matter.

[biggytitbo]

Make the 4 ghostbusters in this actual ghosts. Then even Harold Ramis can still be in it.

[Old Nehamkin]

Female cast thing is happening: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/08/paul-feig-new-ghostbusters_n_5954682.html?utm_hp_ref=entertainment&ir=Entertainment

[Johnny Textface]

This'll be shit I reckon.

[surreal]

This has to be at least a partial re-boot - the way I was thinking was that you have the 3 (4?) women doing much the same as the guys originally, paranormal research.  Events of the first movie have fallen into folklore and disbelief (you could set it a bit into the future if 30 years isn't enough) and when odd stuff starts happening again it's brought up by one of the women in her research.  They go looking for the abandoned (possibly demolished / buried) firestation and find the remains of the kit, backpacks and containment units and we go from there...

[Ignatius_S]

This has to be at least a partial re-boot....

That's always been on the cards as soon as the focus was going to be on the next generation, rather than the old team.

[surreal]

Yeah, but I meant not have a literal "handing over" to the new team, they need to find a good way to restart it without losing all of the history but without any awkward Ackroyd cameos...

[Ignatius_S]

Yeah, but I meant not have a literal "handing over" to the new team, they need to find a good way to restart it without losing all of the history but without any awkward Ackroyd cameos...

The more recent stories being touted don't have that kind of handing over (that I think) you're talking about. For instance, Ghostbusters became a franchise company and there are a lot of teams operating and the film would focus on one of them.

[Shaky]

I've got no real issue with a new GB team in theory (male or female), especially if half the originals were going to be noticibly absent anyway, but Paul Feig's tweet chills the blood:

"Hilarious women. That's who I'm gonna call."

It sounds like someone who's never actually seen the film trying to quote a line they've heard somewhere. He might as well have added a "Whasssup!!!" to the end. That plus, y'know, he's behind Bridesmaids and The Heat.

[BPFHAY]

Oh god, and that film features Melissa McCarthy. When he said "hilarious women" I thought "good, because it's surely not going to be Melissa McCarthy. That would be too predictably bad".

[madhair60]

Yes.  It's true.  This cast has no dick.

[Old Nehamkin]

You know who'd be good for this? Pamela Adlon. Get Kaitlin Olson in it and all.

Don't have much faith in the writer of The Heat, though.

[Noodle Lizard]

I'm calling it:  Kristen Wiig, Tina Fey and/or Amy Poehler and probably Melissa McCarthy.

Oh and it'll be shit, I reckon.

[surreal]

Yes.  It's true.  This cast has no dick.

Fair warning, I'm stealing that line...

[madhair60]

Fair warning, I'm stealing that line...

Fair cop; I stole it off a mate. And he probably stole it too.

[Old Nehamkin]

This is a full reboot and an origin story, according to Feig:

"My favorite thing to do is work with funny women," Feig says. "I was like, what if it was an all female cast? If they were all women? Suddenly, my mind kind of exploded: that would be really fun. And then I thought, well, what if we just make it new? It's not coming into the world that existed before. It's always hard if the world has gone through this big ghost attack, how do you do it again? I wanted to come into our world where there's talk of ghosts but they're not really credible, and so what would happen in our world if this happened today?

"I love origin stories. That's my favourite thing. I love the first one so much I don't want to do anything to ruin the memory of that. So it just felt like, let's just restart it because then we can have new dynamics."

http://www.sfx.co.uk/2014/10/09/ghostbusters-3-is-a-reboot/

I don't really see the point in that, to be honest. It'd be perfectly simple to just set it in the same universe and have it follow a new team- it's not like there's some deep, complex mythology that needs to be cleared away for new viewers. And I don't follow Feig's argument that resetting the whole thing is the only way to have "new dynamics". This sounds like it's just going to put off fans of the original.

[clingfilm portent]

What a tool. He sounds about as Hollywood as you can get, knowing something is shite then going ahead with it anyway, because after all, money! Guess what fella? You could have just said no, what a stupid idea, I have no hope of capturing what made the original so special if I'm honest.

Die.

[VegaLA]

I'm calling it:  Kristen Wiig
Oh and it'll be shit, I reckon.

Sure cert.

And now I've discovered its a reboot, it's a sure cert on that second comment. Shame!

[Sexton Brackets Drugbust]

I tell you what, I'd like to see someone finally nail a 'how the Ghostbusters got started' story.

[I.D. Smith]

Selfishly, I'm really relieved this is going to be a reboot film, mainly because I've got such massive affection for the original 2 films and I didn't want to see anything that could possibly stink-up the universe of those movies - the 2009 video game was touch-and-go enough for me (that's my Ghostbusters 3)

[I.D. Smith]

I'm calling Stone Cold Steve Austin as the male Janine Melnitz, though.

[BPFHAY]

I'd love for Amy Poehler to be in this. She's really one of the standout physical and verbal comedians of today. An enthusiastic Ray character, perhaps?

[Kelvin]

I look forward to the three film build up to Gozer.

[Tiny Poster]

This'll wisely save them from having to awkwardly answer "where's Pete and Egon?" in the movie.

[Noodle Lizard]

This is a full reboot and an origin story, according to Feig:

http://www.sfx.co.uk/2014/10/09/ghostbusters-3-is-a-reboot/

I don't really see the point in that, to be honest. It'd be perfectly simple to just set it in the same universe and have it follow a new team- it's not like there's some deep, complex mythology that needs to be cleared away for new viewers. And I don't follow Feig's argument that resetting the whole thing is the only way to have "new dynamics". This sounds like it's just going to put off fans of the original.

I don't see why it's so "exciting" to have an all-women cast for ... er ... 'Ghostbusters'.  He basically said "Yeah, Ghostbusters 3 would be shit, why would anyone do that ... oh wait, if we put FEMALE LADIES in it instead then it'd be amazing!"  I really don't follow the logic here.

"My favorite thing to do is work with funny women,"

This is just a weird thing to say.  "My favourite thing to do is work with funny black people", "my favourite thing to do is work with funny men", "my favourite thing to do is work with funny teenagers" ... there's something odd about this guy.

Oh, and his movies are shit, but even if they weren't ... what about his work makes him the appropriate choice for 'Ghostbusters'?  And I'm not one of those people who absolutely loves the first two, I only casually like them.  I'm just wondering what the angle is here.

It's not coming into the world that existed before. It's always hard if the world has gone through this big ghost attack, how do you do it again? I wanted to come into our world where there's talk of ghosts but they're not really credible, and so what would happen in our world if this happened today?

That is an absolute trainfuck of a sentence.  Did he only just get the job yesterday or something?