Author Topic: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed  (Read 6092 times)

SteveDave

  • My LPs are still for sale in all good record shops
    • BUY BUY BUY
Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« on: January 16, 2019, 10:25:11 AM »
Apparently this is happening, directed by Jason son of Ivan Reitman.

https://ew.com/movies/2019/01/15/new-ghostbusters-movie-jason-reitman/

The vans of money must be making their way to Bill Murray's house as I type.

Mister Six

  • Half-masted, bass-boosted, sling-backed
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #1 on: January 16, 2019, 01:07:33 PM »
Christ. Aykroyd and Hudson look all right but Murray looks like he could crumble to dust at any moment. I assume if the original lot get involved it'll be in more of a cameo/mentor role for a new team.

Perhaps they could have built Ghostbusting into a proper big business, as was the original plan for the first film.

My only hope is that the script is good. If it's another "just film six hours of people ad-libbing and trim it down" Feigfest then all hope is lost. Still, without the (apparent) script involvement of Aykroyd I don't really see the point.

Shit Good Nose

  • Several bags of balls
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #2 on: January 16, 2019, 01:23:49 PM »
Interesting that the guy who did the Poltergeist remake - which is a pube's width away from being an out and out parody - is also involved.

icehaven

  • I will be in the bar, with my head on the bar
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #3 on: January 16, 2019, 01:42:49 PM »
I assume if the original lot get involved it'll be in more of a cameo/mentor role for a new team.


They all (except Ramis obviously) did that in the girl one though so it'd be a bit lame to do it again.

Shit Good Nose

  • Several bags of balls
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #4 on: January 16, 2019, 01:45:55 PM »
They all (except Ramis obviously) did that in the girl one though so it'd be a bit lame to do it again.

Reitman Jnr has gone out of his way to say that his film will be a direct sequel set in the same universe, but 30 years later, and completely ignoring the recent one.  On that basis, even if they are just cameos in terms of length of time they're on screen, one assumes that they will be playing the (proper) Ghostbusters.

Mister Six

  • Half-masted, bass-boosted, sling-backed
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #5 on: January 16, 2019, 01:57:41 PM »
Not if it was in character as the original team and they were properly worked into the plot - just not in a running away from ghosts capacity, lest their joints be utterly pulverised.

I just can't see a bunch of geriatric Ghostbusters - who are themselves on the way to becoming ghosts (although their thoughts on this matter could make for a nice subplot) - plausibly being the protagonists for an entire film. Ten years ago, maybe. Twenty, sure. But they really all do look ancient now, especially Murray.

Plus, I can't see Murray wanting to sink months of his life into making Ghostbusters 3 with Venkman at the forefront, and without Ramis or Moranis (who's retired) they're going to have to get some new blood in anyway.

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #6 on: January 16, 2019, 02:00:31 PM »
Why can't they just leave it alone?

Shit Good Nose

  • Several bags of balls
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #7 on: January 16, 2019, 02:02:55 PM »
Why can't they just leave it alone?

Because the recent one was so bad.  Until that came out and was mightily shit on, no one would touch a sequel to the originals.  Reitman Jnr's being very diplomatic about Feig's film, but I detect an underlying sense of "I'm not going to let you completely ruin my father's main legacy."

Jerzy Bondov

  • get sum!!
    • Wrongfully Adapted
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #8 on: January 16, 2019, 02:24:42 PM »
Because the recent one was so bad.  Until that came out and was mightily shit on, no one would touch a sequel to the originals.  Reitman Jnr's being very diplomatic about Feig's film, but I detect an underlying sense of "I'm not going to let you completely ruin my father's main legacy."
Kindergarten Cop?

Shit Good Nose

  • Several bags of balls
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #9 on: January 16, 2019, 02:26:30 PM »

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth

  • Has he thoughts within his head?
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #10 on: January 16, 2019, 02:43:03 PM »
Ghostbusters 2 was hardly considered a classic anyway.

Shit Good Nose

  • Several bags of balls
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #11 on: January 16, 2019, 02:47:26 PM »
No, but it's still quite good I think.  It's aged pretty well.

Small Man Big Horse

  • Member
  • **
  • Writers wanted for comedy website, pls click below
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #12 on: January 16, 2019, 04:09:14 PM »
Not if it was in character as the original team and they were properly worked into the plot - just not in a running away from ghosts capacity, lest their joints be utterly pulverised.

I just can't see a bunch of geriatric Ghostbusters - who are themselves on the way to becoming ghosts (although their thoughts on this matter could make for a nice subplot) - plausibly being the protagonists for an entire film. Ten years ago, maybe. Twenty, sure. But they really all do look ancient now, especially Murray.

Plus, I can't see Murray wanting to sink months of his life into making Ghostbusters 3 with Venkman at the forefront, and without Ramis or Moranis (who's retired) they're going to have to get some new blood in anyway.

Moranis hasn't technically retired, he just took a lot of time off when his wife died to raise the kids but has said if the right script came along he'd be happy to act again. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/rick-moranis-reveals-why-he-829779

I've no real opinion on the new film, if the reviews are good I'll watch it, if they're bad I'll pretend it doesn't exist. I used to love Ghostbusters but made the mistake of watching it a couple of years ago and I didn't think it's aged well at all.

Shameless Custard

  • PAUSE FOR THE JET
    • My RUBBISH
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #13 on: January 16, 2019, 04:44:02 PM »
I reckon they should do an animated one, a bit like that Spider-Man one. Cos then you could make them young and make Ramis alive

Replies From View

  • Rubbing linseed oil into the school cormorant.
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • Gargoyles have milk bags.
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #14 on: January 16, 2019, 04:47:39 PM »
No, but it's still quite good I think.  It's aged pretty well.

Yeah; don't watch it immediately after the first one and it's fine.

Replies From View

  • Rubbing linseed oil into the school cormorant.
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • Gargoyles have milk bags.
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #15 on: January 16, 2019, 04:48:33 PM »
I reckon they should do an animated one, a bit like that Spider-Man one. Cos then you could make them young and make Ramis alive

Yes they could call it The Real Ghostbusters or something.

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth

  • Has he thoughts within his head?
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #16 on: January 16, 2019, 04:51:17 PM »
I used to love Ghostbusters but made the mistake of watching it a couple of years ago and I didn't think it's aged well at all.
Venkman bringing thorazine on his date with Dana certainly hasn't.

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #17 on: January 16, 2019, 04:57:47 PM »
I reckon they should do an animated one, a bit like that Spider-Man one. Cos then you could make them young and make Ramis alive
They did do a Playstation 3 game with all four of the original Ghostbusters team reprising their roles, made to look like they hadn't aged since 1989 or so, along with yer man who played Walter Peck. Just a shame it wasn't much cop to play.

Bad Ambassador

  • Sit down, Mario!
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #18 on: January 16, 2019, 05:01:38 PM »
Why can't they just leave it alone?

Money. Same reason as the last one.

Sony is looking for IP it owns that it can exploit, and has been flailing around for several years in desperation to copy the success of the MCU. Men in Black International looks exactly like GB16, based on the trailer - it even stars Chris Hemsworth - and I don't doubt they will try to turn this into a new cinematic universe*. They're just throwing anything they have at the wall and seeing what sticks.

*I'm half-expecting Roy Neary to appear at the end of the film.

St_Eddie

  • *The Patron Saint of Scallywags*
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • LIKES: Deviled eggs DISLIKES: The Devil & bad eggs
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #19 on: January 16, 2019, 05:09:45 PM »
The title of this thread rubs me up the wrong way, to be honest.  It's playing up to the bullshit scapegoating, by implying that everyone who had a problem with the absolutely appalling remake was a misogynistic arsehole, when in actuality, most of the critics were people like myself, who recognised a piece of shit for... dun dun dun, being a piece of shit.

The gender of the leads was not the issue.  It never was.  However, Sony's marketing team made damn sure to highlight the misogynistic minority and delete all of the very valid criticism from the trailer's YouTube comment section (whilst simultaneously, and very purposefully, leaving the misogynistic comments up there, for all to see) and go on a campaign of labeling all and sundry who opposed their awful remake as evil men, who hate women (handily ignoring the fact that a good portion of the critics were women themselves.  Sony probably tried to label them as self-hating or something).

As for this proposed third installment; it's Sony Pictures.  I wouldn't trust them to process my holiday snaps, much less make a decent motion picture.  There are exceptions, of course but on the whole, their output is fucking awful and this movie, if it ever gets made, will be awful too.  Fuck off, Ghostbusters.  You were great in 1984 and that movie has stood the test of time.  Everything else is needless and artistically bankrupt cash cow milking (the sequel had its moments but it was a recycled plot, with a lot of watered down, child pandering nonsense).

Shameless Custard

  • PAUSE FOR THE JET
    • My RUBBISH
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #20 on: January 16, 2019, 05:26:30 PM »
In the comics, the original Ghostbusters meet up with The Real Ghostbusters, and also the wimmin ones. True story. It's called All The Ghostbusters Doing All The Ghostbusting

St_Eddie

  • *The Patron Saint of Scallywags*
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • LIKES: Deviled eggs DISLIKES: The Devil & bad eggs
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #21 on: January 16, 2019, 05:36:00 PM »
In the comics, the original Ghostbusters meet up with The Real Ghostbusters, and also the wimmin ones. True story. It's called All The Ghostbusters Doing All The Ghostbusting

It sold one copy, which was later taken back to the store for a refund.  Fact.

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #22 on: January 16, 2019, 06:04:57 PM »
Just get the Spiderverse gang to do an animated one, ffs.

Replies From View

  • Rubbing linseed oil into the school cormorant.
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • Gargoyles have milk bags.
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #23 on: January 16, 2019, 06:10:20 PM »
Just get the Spiderverse gang to do an animated one, ffs.

What if no more cartoons are left?

Shameless Custard

  • PAUSE FOR THE JET
    • My RUBBISH
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #24 on: January 16, 2019, 06:20:59 PM »
It takes a lot of time to do the drawing for animated films. And no one can be arsed to do it anymore. And they get through too many pencils. Bloke in the pub told me

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #25 on: January 16, 2019, 06:54:54 PM »
Perhaps it's a new version of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4-Io8xMHL4

I know I watched this, because nearly every time I hear the word 'Ghostbusters', the opening line of the theme tune pops into my head. None of the rest of the tune, just the 'We are the Ghooooostbusters. He's Spencer, I'm Tracy, he's Kong' bit.  That's literally all I can remember about it.

thecuriousorange

  • WELCOME THRILLHOU
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #26 on: January 16, 2019, 07:10:48 PM »
Gammonbusters

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #27 on: January 16, 2019, 07:14:20 PM »
The gender of the leads was not the issue.  It never was.

Agreed. It was always the black one's height that was the problem.

Blumf

  • Not long now
    • IGNORE ME!!!
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #28 on: January 16, 2019, 08:00:58 PM »
There seems to be a cinematic universe already in production ready for Sony Pictures to take over:



Episode 9 already, probably won't be able to keep up with the plot.

Twed

  • "J" Joe Jeans and his jelly beans
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #29 on: January 16, 2019, 08:17:56 PM »
On the subject of geriatric Ghostbusters: has there ever been any fiction where the story of the aged versions(s) of a character is explored in a thoughtful way? I feel like there is an obvious one I'm missing.