Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021)

[Head bugs]

I like the teaser.

[R3P0]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Yeah, I think Reitman Jr can count on Aykroyd and Hudson to show up for the opening of an envelope, but he'd be better off writing Murray out of it from the start rather than hoping against hope that he'll deign to appear. Murray still needs to give his blessing, as GB lore tells it, but this franchise can and will continue without him, so unless they do something really outrageous re: disposing of Venkman then he needs to stop being such a tart about it.

Well ppl still clamor for him as Venkman IE heres his last apperance in a GB outfit, listen to that crowd reaction

Bill Murray's Acceptance Speech: Scream Awards 2010 - YouTube

[CyberpunkCentral]

Judging by everything we are hearing, it sounds like this is going to be Ghostbusters meets Stranger Things. Since the new Ghostbusters will be teens and it looks like it may be set in a small town. Which makes perfect sense, since filming in big cities like New York City is way too expensive. It's one of the reasons why the last movie, Feigbusters, flopped.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by R3P0

Well ppl still clamor for him as Venkman IE heres his last apperance in a GB outfit, listen to that crowd reaction

Bill Murray's Acceptance Speech: Scream Awards 2010 - YouTube

I know they do, Ghostbusters is literally one of my favourite films of all time and Murray is a HUGE part of that. But while he's happy to tease ^ (and to turn up playing a sceptic in the Feig film) it's a different story when it comes to GBIII proper as he's stymied it at every turn. It's his right to do so, but if they want a clear direction for GBIII then they need to omit him completely. If he turns up and says "hey, I'd like a cameo!" then they'd accommodate him - I would - but creating a whole new storyline that features Venkman will be on a hiding to nothing IMO.

[jess1581]

Originally Posted by DenOfEarth

NO, no recasting of Venkman, Stantz, Egon and Winston! Murray IS Venkman, Ramis IS Spengler, Ackyrod IS Stanz and Hudson IS Zeddimore! accept no substitutes, i dislike the idea of recasting those iconic characters with someone else.

They are not the same as Batman, James Bond (He was a literature character who was brought to life in print before he had movies), Superman, Sherlock Holmes, Catwoman, Wonder Woman, Pennywise, Jud Crandall, Dracula, Raiden or any other character that was established and brought to life in print like comics/novels/books and in video games.

Some people are actually defending recasting iconic film characters with different actors. And even more so with the recent release of Solo which i disliked. They actually think that all film characters are fair game for a new actor portraying them.

And it's fine that they feel that way. But I vehemently disagree and I just don't understand. Sure. I do have exceptions, like Bond (he was a literature character) or characters from novels or comic books and video games. But for the most part, I want beloved film characters (original characters made for film and not from other sources) to remain pure and untouched by half-assed or horrible attempts to recapture lightning in a bottle.

Some roles have actors that were born to play them and there really are no substitutes. Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones, Stallone as Rocky Balboa, Peter Weller as RoboCop, Bill Murray as Peter Venkman, Michael J. Fox as Marty McFly and Robert Englund as Freddy Krueger are all examples of this. And any actor that will attempt to play the character will pale in comparison. They have the charisma and personality that is unique only to them and that is what makes these characters so iconic and what brought them to life.

And don't give me the "They will make it their own" response. Make it their own means they will take the character and make it something completely alien to the character we all know and love in order to separate it from the original, potentially swap the genders, or just half-heartedly attempt to capture the same magic.

I have never seen a single remake with an iconic character or film have a lead in a sequel (like Robocop 3 for instance) that is anywhere near as memorable or as effective as the original for these same reasons. The track record is abysmal and that is why I don't agree with the idea of every character in every film is fair game for a re-imagining.

The rare times I have seen a remake be successful is when the character was not played by an actor that was irreplaceable or the film featured different characters altogether. And I honestly prefer the second approach. In three of the most well-received remakes of all time The Fly and The Blob, they all have one thing in common. They don't have the same characters as the originals. They have their own. And because of this their films stand on their own two feet and have created new characters that audiences loved and still remember fondly to this day. Even Evil Dead remake which despite i disliked it, at least created it's own characters and not the same character like Ash since Campbell IS Ash.

What's the better option, continue to dig up popular cinematic characters out of the grave every ten or twenty years and try to do the impossible and find the perfect actor to play the role again, or stop doing that and put that effort into finding new characters for a new generation?

There need to be limits. Otherwise, you get A wannabee John Cena as RoboCop, and a southern friend Freddy who sounds like Sling blade. I would rather these iconic made-for-cinema (created by cinema) characters be retired on film and only brought back in books, comics, and video games then see lazy attempts by Hollywood to bring them back with new faces in "new" films just to piggyback off the success of the previous franchise.

I'd say if you want to do a GB sequel just have 2 of the old GBs be teachers and have new characters to be ghostbusters instead of recasting the established characters of Venkman/Zeddimore/Spengler/Stantz as the DNA of ackroyd/Ramis/Murray/Hudson are in those characters, just create new characters.

I'm done with this franchise already, i just want something new.

If you're done, why do you keep posting long winded diatribes about how you're done with it? You had us at "i'm done with this franchise", now please move along.

[jess1581]

Originally Posted by The Debts

Hope the fanatical nerds of the le filme artistique masterpiece that is Ghostbusters (1984) are happy or something.

Sure am. Is your manbun in knots?

[ben6543]

Originally Posted by jtu128

Ok so here is my cast for the main team,

Danny McBride as Peter Venkman
Jonah Hill as Ray Stantz
Lakeith Stanfield as Egon Spengler

...let’s be honest, we don’t need a Winston

Sacha Baron Cohen as Louis Tully
Charlize Theron as Dana Barrett

no you don't recast the Original team

[Prog5000]

I enjoyed the teaser more than the reboot from 2016.

[dgoswald]

Originally Posted by CyberpunkCentral

Judging by everything we are hearing, it sounds like this is going to be Ghostbusters meets Stranger Things. Since the new Ghostbusters will be teens and it looks like it may be set in a small town. Which makes perfect sense, since filming in big cities like New York City is way too expensive. It's one of the reasons why the last movie, Feigbusters, flopped.

Good points. For some reason when I heard they were looking to cast teens, I thought they were sadly going for the likes of Emma Roberts, Lucy Hale, and whoever happens to be their male equivalents. I'd like the actors cast in these roles to be capable of playing convincing schlebs which goes beyond donning a pair of spectacles and having a messy haircut.

[ben6543]

Originally Posted by Prog5000

I enjoyed the teaser more than the reboot from 2016.

A Prostate Exam would be more enjoyable than the reboot from 2016. I mean both hurt but one is less painful than the other

[oilers73]

Yet another unnecessary reboot/remake/sequel. Crap like this is why I stopped reviewing films for a living.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by CyberpunkCentral

Judging by everything we are hearing, it sounds like this is going to be Ghostbusters meets Stranger Things. Since the new Ghostbusters will be teens and it looks like it may be set in a small town. Which makes perfect sense, since filming in big cities like New York City is way too expensive. It's one of the reasons why the last movie, Feigbusters, flopped.

They should just put the Stranger Things cast in it as the new Ghostbusters. They could even call two of them "Venkman."

[ben6543]

Originally Posted by oilers73

Yet another unnecessary reboot/remake/sequel. Crap like this is why I stopped reviewing films for a living.

its not unnecassary. fans don't want Ghostbusters last movie to be that terrible Fiegbusters movie. This is gonna be the passing of the torch movie the 3rd movie should have been

[kylor]

Originally Posted by oilers73

Yet another unnecessary reboot/remake/sequel. Crap like this is why I stopped reviewing films for a living.

This movie isn't unnecessary at all. It's an apology movie for the 2016 garbage that came before it.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by ben6543

its not unnecassary. fans don't want Ghostbusters last movie to be that terrible Fiegbusters movie. This is gonna be the passing of the torch movie the 3rd movie should have been

Exactly!

And as far as I'm concerned...

[Samus Aran]

Originally Posted by oilers73

Yet another unnecessary reboot/remake/sequel. Crap like this is why I stopped reviewing films for a living.

Well considering that "crap like this" has always been around, shouldn't it have prevented you from even starting?

[Lava24]

Originally Posted by kylor

This movie isn't unnecessary at all. It's an apology movie for the 2016 garbage that came before it.

This.

[dgoswald]

I wonder what moved Reitman Jr. to begin working on the film?

[oilers73]

Originally Posted by kylor

This movie isn't unnecessary at all. It's an apology movie for the 2016 garbage that came before it.

"We're sorry you paid money to see Ghostbusters (2016). In order to truly apologize to you, we'll need you to pay money to see Ghostbusters (2020)." Yeah, that sounds about right.

[jtu128]

Originally Posted by dgoswald

I wonder what moved Reitman Jr. to begin working on the film?

$