Author Topic: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed  (Read 6112 times)

BritishHobo

  • That is a really reductive impression
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #30 on: January 16, 2019, 08:23:18 PM »
I never knew there was a Ghostbusters before the Kristen Wiig film. Was it in black-and-white?

thecuriousorange

  • WELCOME THRILLHOU
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #31 on: January 16, 2019, 08:26:22 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.

There's at least a few comics about an aged Batman and Ian McKellen played an OAP Sherlock Holmes with dementia.

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #32 on: January 16, 2019, 08:27:59 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.

The Dark Knight Returns?
Robin & Marian?

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #33 on: January 16, 2019, 08:31:22 PM »

They need to think laterally here and diversify the franchise more widely.  Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you:

Dracleabusterers...

Skellingtonbusterers...

Frankingsteinbusterers...

Werwolvesbusterers...

The possibilities are endless

Phil_A

  • HE WAS AN ROBOT
    • Chasing The Bumblebee
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #34 on: January 16, 2019, 08:35:43 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.

Twin Peaks?

Shameless Custard

  • PAUSE FOR THE JET
    • My RUBBISH
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #35 on: January 16, 2019, 08:52:09 PM »
Logan?

Twed

  • "J" Joe Jeans and his jelly beans
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #36 on: January 16, 2019, 08:59:54 PM »
Twin Peaks?
It might be this I was thinking of. Although I feel like there's something more British along these lines...

I'm probably thinking of Red Dwarf, which destroys the "successfully" aspect.

Mister Six

  • Half-masted, bass-boosted, sling-backed
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #37 on: January 16, 2019, 09:01:09 PM »
Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads?

Twed

  • "J" Joe Jeans and his jelly beans
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #38 on: January 16, 2019, 09:13:33 PM »
Nah. They're still ladz.

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #39 on: January 16, 2019, 09:18:41 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.

Grant Morrison's Dan Dare

probably.

thecuriousorange

  • WELCOME THRILLHOU
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #40 on: January 16, 2019, 09:20:19 PM »
Cold Feet.

St_Eddie

  • *The Patron Saint of Scallywags*
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • LIKES: Deviled eggs DISLIKES: The Devil & bad eggs
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #41 on: January 16, 2019, 09:48:34 PM »
Agreed. It was always the black one's height that was the problem.

Obviously, height and race has nothing to do with it.

All are welcome to enter the 'Non-Discriminatory Competition' indeed, up to and including; midgets, (black or white), dwarves (black or white), Tom Cruise (white).

In truth, only the shortest and most pale of freaks shall qualify for entry.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2019, 10:12:19 PM by St_Eddie »

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #42 on: January 16, 2019, 09:52:14 PM »
The Dark Knight Returns?
Robin & Marian?

I'd maybe add Logan to this too.

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #43 on: January 16, 2019, 10:11:02 PM »
No one bothered to post the teaser yet then? Mirror here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulQmDFkGevo

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #44 on: January 16, 2019, 11:15:26 PM »


Never read it, mind.

Twed

  • "J" Joe Jeans and his jelly beans
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #45 on: January 17, 2019, 12:21:08 AM »

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #46 on: January 17, 2019, 12:26:30 AM »
No one bothered to post the teaser yet then? Mirror here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulQmDFkGevo

Okay, that is good. A proper teaser, too, not one of these modern four-minute-long trailers that are released as teasers.

chveik

  • NON SERVIAM
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #47 on: January 17, 2019, 12:38:01 AM »
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.

In Search of Lost Time

Shaky

  • I drink your thread
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #48 on: January 17, 2019, 01:45:12 AM »
Fuck them for making me excited about this. It will very, very likely be shit but, as with Indy 5, these fuckers know which buttons to press with us aging nerds.

Having said that, I can sort of see a mentoring role work without the original GB's having to be too energetic - they'd have decades of ghost knowledge which could play into the new film at the very least. Anyway, they're not exactly athletes in the originals either. Elderly schlubby janitors forced to get their shit together again could be... argh!

Damn you, Hollywood.

kidsick5000

  • Gotta be groovy for the moovy
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #49 on: January 17, 2019, 02:00:29 AM »
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.

Robin And Marian - excellent take on a much older Robin Hood and refuses to rose-tint everything.

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #50 on: January 17, 2019, 02:05:07 AM »
Here's what I predicted about Ghostbusters 2016:

Quote
It'll come out and be surprisingly not bad but not amazing, and get generally decent reviews, and it'll do well at the box office, and whether or not it becomes a franchise with sequels and blah blah will depend on whether the studio can manipulate the right combinations of people into making them, and the nerds will have had no influence on it whatsoever.

Talking bollocks there I was. It was mediocre at best and did pretty badly financially, didn't it? Though I still don't really understand how, looking at its box office results.

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #51 on: January 17, 2019, 02:33:10 AM »
Here's what I predicted about Ghostbusters 2016:

Talking bollocks there I was. It was mediocre at best and did pretty badly financially, didn't it? Though I still don't really understand how, looking at its box office results.

Because of the combination of spending a huge amount of money on marketing the film and the cut of the profits that goes to cinemas. A film's production budget doesn't take into account the marketing. So even though it made over 200 million it needed to make over 300 before it would break even for the studio.

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #52 on: January 17, 2019, 02:40:38 AM »
Because of the combination of spending a huge amount of money on marketing the film and the cut of the profits that goes to cinemas. A film's production budget doesn't take into account the marketing. So even though it made over 200 million it needed to make over 300 before it would break even for the studio.

Yeah, I'm just so naive I'm amazed it needed to make that much to make a profit.

FerriswheelBueller

  • Golden Todger or
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Very tired. Sorry if my recent posts are shit.
    • I am antsy for baseball in the off-season.
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #53 on: January 17, 2019, 04:24:16 AM »
Maybe they should bust the ghost of this franchise BECAUSE ITS DEAD

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #54 on: January 17, 2019, 04:45:16 AM »
If anything I would say there being old and the time gap seems like the more interesting setup, the best stuff in the sequel was picking up on the characters and there getting back together.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kiiuc0M4L40

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #55 on: January 17, 2019, 04:50:54 AM »
I've never really understood why the Ghostbusters are so cynical about the paranormal at the start of GB2. You think of all people they'd be open to it.

St_Eddie

  • *The Patron Saint of Scallywags*
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • LIKES: Deviled eggs DISLIKES: The Devil & bad eggs
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #56 on: January 17, 2019, 05:08:37 AM »
Damn you, Hollywood.

Pertinent.  With Sony Pictures, this is very pertinent.  Sony Pictures raped my Mother.  I shall never forgive them for that.  Sony Pictures is not a good person.

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #57 on: January 17, 2019, 05:16:54 AM »
I've never really understood why the Ghostbusters are so cynical about the paranormal at the start of GB2. You think of all people they'd be open to it.

The first film does give the impression that its Goza behind all the paranormal activity so after that there back to just dealing with cranks until Vigo/the slime turns up.

St_Eddie

  • *The Patron Saint of Scallywags*
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • LIKES: Deviled eggs DISLIKES: The Devil & bad eggs
Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #58 on: January 17, 2019, 05:32:19 AM »
There would be a shit ton of footage of the Stay Puft marshmallow man stomping around New York City, like a big old yum yum monstrosity.  Can't say that they put something in the water when your "hallucinations" are caught on camera.  Ghostbusters the Second makes no sense!
« Last Edit: January 17, 2019, 05:46:28 AM by St_Eddie »

Re: Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed
« Reply #59 on: January 17, 2019, 08:27:11 AM »
I'm honestly quite hung up on you saying that "the gender of the leads was never the issue" wrt the internet's reception to the 2016 Ghostbusters.

I contend that it definitely was an issue to some people, sometimes. Even here, on CaB.