RE: Ghostbusters III (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Future Films



Message


mlavagna -> RE: Ghostbusters III (12/8/2006 10:27:16 AM)

If the script is written once again by ramis and aykroyd and it is directed again by Ivan Reitman I don't see any reason why it shouldn't have the same heart.




anakin solo -> RE: Ghostbusters III (14/8/2006 4:36:08 PM)

I would like to see a mixture of the old Ghostbusters with a few new ones against a more darker more scarier bad guy maybe a demon of some kind instead of the big shouldered melon headed evil ghost painting.




Mindy -> RE: Ghostbusters III (15/8/2006 2:59:44 PM)

Ghostbusters is my favourite film and I would love to see a third film made.
I don't think it would take anything away from the first movie even if GB3 was bad, afterall ghostbusters 2 was average at best and it didn't ruin the first movie for me. I think they should bring back as many people from the original cast as possible, but spruce it up with some younger actors. I like the idea of Jack Black, Will Ferrell etc, but what about Jason Schwartzman, Topher Grace or Aaron Stamford? Does anyone know what the last two are like at comedy?




matthewforan -> RE: Ghostbusters III (15/8/2006 3:30:21 PM)

Topher Grace is a great shout I really like him. He was great in That 70's Show and I can't wait to see him in Spiderman 3.




fireboy -> RE: Ghostbusters III (18/8/2006 12:56:57 AM)

Thats funny, I was thinking of a third Ghostbusters. It seems so obvious...Do it.

I agree with Fluke Skywalker in that you should have the second generation of GB's, with the old ones in the background, being grumpy and silly. It would be brilliant.




matchbox -> RE: Ghostbusters III (20/8/2006 7:52:13 PM)

Maybe Reitman should act as a producer, not as director. He hasn't exactly been very succesfull lately.




mlavagna -> RE: Ghostbusters III (20/8/2006 9:22:13 PM)

I don't think that that's down to his directing ability though. I think it's just been down to films which have had weak scripts and average performances.

He directed Ghostbusters and we all know how popular that was. I don't think a director loses their ability to direct. If an good script is written for Reitman, he's working with the right people and doesn't have any constraints on him from the film company, I think he can still create a hit.




Recoil -> RE: Ghostbusters III (21/8/2006 12:57:07 PM)

Continuing a franchise that is not only successful, but that he utterly loves working on will show us whether his passion and skill of filmmaking is still there. I agree with mlavagna, though, and I dont want to pre-judge this film based on his recent work.

I also think Topher Grace would be really good in it. I dont know why, exactly, although I can picture him in the suit. 




lympo -> RE: Ghostbusters III (21/8/2006 1:30:18 PM)

Good idea, however, I can imagine the film being very very slapstick. Good or bad?IM not sure...




mlavagna -> RE: Ghostbusters III (22/8/2006 9:41:42 AM)

Slapstick would be a bad thing. There are enough slapstick comedies out there already. Ghostbusters was never slapstick. Turning Ghostbusters into a slapstick comedy would destroy the beleivability of the movie which is delivered through its mundaneness, dry wit and deadpan humour.




Peter Dragon -> RE: Ghostbusters III (21/6/2007 5:22:46 PM)

bump




jasperoosterveld -> RE: Ghostbusters III (22/6/2007 9:58:16 AM)

I thought dan akroyd was going to do a cartoon version?




JagLover -> RE: Ghostbusters III (22/6/2007 10:03:08 AM)

Ghostbusters II is an OK film. It is very funny in the first 1/2 an hour then starts to lose it's way.

I would like to see a Ghostbusters III with the original cast.




Sarge -> RE: Ghostbusters III (22/6/2007 12:27:03 PM)

I loved the first two Ghostbusters flicks and given how similar they both are, I don't see how you can like one but not the other.

As for the deadpan v slapstick debate - It definitely can't be slapstick. The joy of the first 2 was the wry, straightfaced wit of Murray and Ackroyd. Try and turn this into Men In Black type vehicle and it will die on its arse.

I've also heard that Ackroyd has mentioned that it would be CGI only and apparently Bill Murray has refused to do a live action version.





ElephantBoy -> RE: Ghostbusters III (29/6/2007 1:07:24 PM)

A Director can be just as important in making a film watchable as the script you know.   

I'm quite certain it will happen one way or another.  We don't need it,  the first one was a classic espically at the time,  number two really was a bit of a Dog.   We'll see it may well need a bit of a make over if it's going to work today.




emmie -> RE: Ghostbusters III (3/7/2007 4:51:14 PM)

yeah, without bill murray i'm just not interested




Timon -> RE: Ghostbusters III (7/9/2008 11:48:30 AM)

So Columbia have announced that Ghostbusters III is happening and Bill Murrary WILL be returning which is just fantastic...if it's true.

But according to Ramis....it might be!

"yes, columbia is developing a script for GB3 with my [Year One] writing partners, gene stupnitsky and lee eisenberg. judd apatow is co-producing [Year One] and has made several other films for sony, so of course the studio is hoping to tap into some of the same acting talent. aykroyd, ivan reitman and i are consulting at this point, and according to dan, bill murray is willing to be involved on some level. he did record his dialogue for the new ghostbusters video game, as did danny and i, and ernie hudson. the concept is that the old ghostbusters would appear in the film in some mentor capacity."
 

Mentor capacity. That means  Columbia are clearly thinking of creating a new franchise with some new Ghostbusters....which could be interesting. Seeing as Apatow is involved, I'm all for the likes of Paul Rudd, Seth Rogen, Bill Hader and perhaps Craig Robinson (Darryl in The Office USA, also bouncer in Knocked Up and frequent face in most of Apatow's line up) donning the proton packs.

Of course, will it work with new faces? And how much will a new Ghostbusters film cost in terms of stars (I imagine Rogen, Murrary, Ramis, Akroyd, Rudd would all add up) and FX.
The FX though have always played second fiddle to the comedy so either way, I can't wait.

As Apatow often says, "We're all the bastard children of Ramis and we worship at his altar." Just hope Reitman is back as well. Perhaps Weaver? Moranis? Hudson? Well of course, he'll be back, he's stuck doing DTV movies these days.




sdaveak47 -> Please sign up, we can stop this (7/9/2008 11:50:11 PM)

Those bastards can not be allowed to further desecrate my childhood with their poxy sequels.

They cocked up Indiana Jones, they cocked up Star Wars, and now they want to get their greedy mits on Ghostbusters, is nothing sacred anymore.

If they make a sequel, have no doubts it will suck. Dan Ackroyd hasn't been funny for 20 years, have we learned nothing from Blues Brother's 2000 ?

This affects everybody, even if your not fan of Ghostbusters sign up. I'm talking about drawing a line in the sand, Dude.

As these *beep* wont stop with Ghostbusters, once they've managed to make that *beep* they will move onto the Goonies or Weird Science or whatever and ruin that.

My plan is to get enough people to sign up, then i will fly to hollywood and destroy anyone involved with making this film.

http://www.new.facebook.com/group.php?gid=34754962785




Marwood -> RE: Please sign up, we can stop this (8/9/2008 9:56:25 AM)

Breathe dog, breathe.

You can't stop this without resorting to assassination and pyrotechnics. You could always, y'know, not watch it. Thats what I did with Indy IV, basically pretended it was just another big dumb summer blockbuster (oddly a lot of people who have seen it refer to it like that as well) that I'd have no interest in watching. Mind over matter.





Geldart -> RE: Please sign up, we can stop this (8/9/2008 2:55:06 PM)

i can't believe no-one has mentioned steve carrell from 40 year old virgin?
him and jack black, man that's immediately conjuring up some funny scenes in my head ,lol!

plus, bill murray had a small role in get smart, and his and carrell's chemistry was great.
this could work, just don't do an indy or star wars.




themightyroadflower -> RE: Please sign up, we can stop this (8/9/2008 5:04:53 PM)

great idea as long as they remember the humour came from the straight faced, sardonic, sarcastic wit ramis, ackroyd & murray had a lock on back in the day.

by all means hire paul rudd, jack black, seth rogen, vince vaughn, ryan reynolds, even jason segel but dont just put the usual apatow guys together 'cause people are getting tired of the same schtick...

why not try adding andy samberg (who was fantastically silly-funny in the underated & little seen hotrod), topher grace (who has an easy warmth & innocence much like ray stantz from the original), even mathew perry (given the chance to compete in the comedic stew of these other class comedy clowns he could shine! it's just his films that have been weak, he is, if you remember the best of  friends & studio 64 on the sunset strip, very funny)...

all im saying sony is get some apatow regulars as anchors, but then add some new spice to the recipe, there are lots of proven funny guys who'd be great together & this is the ideal opportunity to get them firing on career best cylinders.

i mean which comedy actor of that generation wouldnt love to be involved in the successfull resurrection of a prime comedy gold classic such as this?

btw i have no objections to steve carell's involvement, 'cause when he's good, he's great, and considering the writers hired i think it's pretty much a certainty he will be involved, but... just... please... make sure he doesn't just roll out his usual routine, he tends to repeat his stuff fim to film nowadays (shouting randomly etc) & what we dont need is laziness if this is to succeed.

if done with reverence & love this could be great...

fingers crossed.

themightyroadflower




ArtDepartmentAlbert -> RE: Please sign up, we can stop this (8/9/2008 5:38:35 PM)

Jason Bateman has to be involved in this film, somehow.




hitchcock -> RE: Please sign up, we can stop this (8/9/2008 7:03:38 PM)

NNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

But seeing as it is i gotta few ideas

  • As much as i love the new SNL, fratpackers......keep them away from GB3
  • All the old cast back inc Moranis
  • Reitman directing
  • no younger GBs
  • old skool effects
  • PLEASE BE GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




Incanus -> RE: Please sign up, we can stop this (8/9/2008 7:51:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marwood

Breathe dog, breathe.
You can't stop this without resorting to assassination and pyrotechnics. You could always, y'know, not watch it. Thats what I did with Indy IV, basically pretended it was just another big dumb summer blockbuster (oddly a lot of people who have seen it refer to it like that as well) that I'd have no interest in watching. Mind over matter.


You know, I have a theory about why Tinseltown's eye wonders on sequels of  '80s movies.

They think, people had a lot of fun back then watching Indiana Jones and Ghostbusters and Terminator. Let's just make them suffer now. It's like going through Purgatory only in film terms. They make us suffer here so we can hope to reach film Heaven someday.

Another suggestion would be that them making us suffer now is their twisted notion of Delayed Juvenile Justice (hereafter referred to as DJJ); allow me to elaborate:

Remember how in some movies a bunch of teenagers go on vacation to some woodland lakeside shack, where they have a lot of sex, beers & fun, till some inbred pervert starts to hack them down one by one with his axe, just to make the point that no fun comes without a price to pay? That's what they are doing to us: "You had your frivolous fun 30 years ago, here comes your long overdue punishment."




Tank Boy -> RE: Please sign up, we can stop this (8/9/2008 7:57:51 PM)

This just cannot happen without Murray. And even then, the 'training in new recruits' thing sounds a bit of a let-down.




sdaveak47 -> RE: Please sign up, we can stop this (9/9/2008 12:04:49 AM)

The sequel will totally suck

It will have an annoying kid in it

one of the ghostbusters will be a feisty girl

there will be a cute ghost designed to sell toys (not designed as a tribute to john belushi)

the first half of the film will be about putting the band back together again, like in blues brothers but 100 times crapper

i'm to old for this sh*t




Indio -> RE: Please sign up, we can stop this (26/9/2008 10:41:17 PM)

Bill Murray admits he might actually get involved - http://www.aintitcool.com/node/38496 [8D]




UTB -> RE: Please sign up, we can stop this (26/9/2008 11:09:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tank Boy

This just cannot happen without Murray. And even then, the 'training in new recruits' thing sounds a bit of a let-down.


But without the new recruits it would just be the same brought out of unemployment (this time retirement) routine that GB2 had.

Like Space Cowboys with ghosts.




adambatman82 -> RE: Please sign up, we can stop this (27/9/2008 2:02:28 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Indio

Bill Murray admits he might actually get involved - http://www.aintitcool.com/node/38496 [8D]


this does sound very positive, and at least hes honest about ghostbusters 2 being a tad rubbish.




rupert303 -> RE: Please sign up, we can stop this (27/9/2008 11:51:32 AM)

I'm normally pretty anti on these 80's re-hashes...but Ghostbusters 3 could, just could work.

It sounds like they're having a crack at the script, so if it doesn't work it wont just be rolled out.

I think Ackroyd probably learnt a few things from the Blues Brothers sequel.

The game sounds fun, too.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.09375