Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021)

[Guy87]

Originally Posted by Dalekbuster523Bluray

Ghostbusters: Answer The Call to me is a return to the quality of the first film. I laughed so many times during the 2016 Ghostbusters.

[kylor]

Originally Posted by Dalekbuster523Bluray

I find Ghostbusters 2 pretty average, whereas Ghostbusters: Answer The Call to me is a return to the quality of the first film. I laughed so many times during the 2016 Ghostbusters. I hope they find a way to cross them over to the 1984 universe like in the comics, so they can appear in a sequel to Ghostbusters Afterlife.

[Deathbymonkeys]

Originally Posted by Dalekbuster523Bluray

I find Ghostbusters 2 pretty average, whereas Ghostbusters: Answer The Call to me is a return to the quality of the first film. I laughed so many times during the 2016 Ghostbusters. I hope they find a way to cross them over to the 1984 universe like in the comics, so they can appear in a sequel to Ghostbusters Afterlife.

[Jennifer Lawrence Fan]

I bought the Ghostbusters Afterlife cereal at my job today. On sale 2 for $5.

[Dalekbuster523Bluray]

Originally Posted by Guy87

It's only around the extreme corners of the internet where anybody hates it that much. The overall consensus I've seen is that it's a harmless comedy flick that wasn't worth all the vitriol leading up to the release.

I do seem to be one with a more overwhelmingly positive opinion on it than many, but I don't think it's dramatically uncommon really.

I think Ghostbusters: Afterlife is going to be a pretty great movie also; it looks very promising so far, and I loved the teaser with the mini Stay Pufts.

[CreasyBear]

Originally Posted by Dalekbuster523Bluray

I find Ghostbusters 2 pretty average, whereas Ghostbusters: Answer The Call to me is a return to the quality of the first film. I laughed so many times during the 2016 Ghostbusters. I hope they find a way to cross them over to the 1984 universe like in the comics, so they can appear in a sequel to Ghostbusters Afterlife.

[Rodney-2187]

[Mikezilla3k]

Originally Posted by kylor

I just want you to know.

[sandman slim]

Originally Posted by CreasyBear

Wasn't db permabanned? Like five years ago?

[Guy87]

Originally Posted by Dalekbuster523Bluray

It's only around the extreme corners of the internet where anybody hates it that much. The overall consensus I've seen is that it's a harmless comedy flick that wasn't worth all the vitriol leading up to the release.

I do seem to be one with a more overwhelmingly positive opinion on it than many, but I don't think it's dramatically uncommon really.

I think Ghostbusters: Afterlife is going to be a pretty great movie also; it looks very promising so far, and I loved the teaser with the mini Stay Pufts.

I found GB 2016 to be insultingly unfunny.

Every character was obnoxiously loud as opposed to witty, a lot of daft slapstick falling over, punching or flying around on lasers, far too many dance numbers (one is too many, this movie had three). I could go on.

I have no issue with there being female leads, although I did take issue with Paul Feig refusing to make the movie until he came upon the idea of 4 female leads and then deciding he'd now "found an angle" for it, despite the gender of the four leads making literally no difference on the plot as far as I can remember (although to be fair I've tried to forget it).

Yea I wished it was good, or even passable, but (IMO of course) Ghostbusters license or not it was just painful.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by Guy87

I have no issue with there being female leads, although I did take issue with Paul Feig refusing to make the movie until he came upon the idea of 4 female leads and then deciding he'd now "found an angle" for it, despite the gender of the four leads making literally no difference on the plot as far as I can remember (although to be fair I've tried to forget it).

The post that's compelled you to reply with this didn't even mention the gender of the lead characters.

[Guy87]

Originally Posted by Martoto

The post that's compelled you to reply with this didn't even mention the gender of the lead characters.

I'm aware, but the gender of the four leads IS one of my pet peeves with the movie. Not because the four leads are female, but because the director couldn't figure out the project with male characters, then asked if he could make the four leads female as suddenly he had a "hook" for himself into the project...

...but then did nothing with that hook.

I have no issue with the leads being female just for the sake of it, and I have no issue with the leads being female to make a point about femininity or women's values, etc. But to consider casting four women instead of four men, or a mixed team, as the director's big idea that got him into the project (or so interviews tell me) just shows to me how little the man had to give to "Ghostbusters" lore or the franchise in the first place.

[SilverFox84]

Just for the record i only laughed once at GB2016, and that was a deleted scene that took place right at the end with Chris Hemsworth when he was getting a sandwich and drink tossed to him off camera.

The fact they cut the only funny scene in the movie tells me what a dismal project the whole thing was. It's such a miserable film all round.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by Guy87

I'm aware, but the gender of the four leads IS one of my pet peeves with the movie. Not because the four leads are female, but because the director couldn't figure out the project with male characters, then asked if he could make the four leads female as suddenly he had a "hook" for himself into the project...

...but then did nothing with that hook.

I have no issue with the leads being female just for the sake of it, and I have no issue with the leads being female to make a point about femininity or women's values, etc. But to consider casting four women instead of four men, or a mixed team, as the director's big idea that got him into the project (or so interviews tell me) just shows to me how little the man had to give to "Ghostbusters" lore or the franchise in the first place.

You have no issue with the gender of the leads but the gender of the leads is one of your pet peeves?

I don't see what's so objectionable. Sony wanted Feig onboard with Ghostbusters. He wasn't interested in making a sequel but he wasn't interested in a Ghostbusters movie with four of the hottest female comics/SNL cast of that. It doesn't mean that he had no love for Ghostbusters or that he couldn't get his head around GBs unless they were all female. He just thought he didn't have a good enough reason to meddle with it until it was decided that a reboot/remake could be done with an all new cast.

Bill Murray being super reluctant to return as a Ghostbuster at that time must have also made the prospect of a sequel at that time even less attractive to Feig.

If you go through cinema history you're going to find that scenarios like that one are the norm. They are not the exception. Studio wants to make x film with y producer/director/star and they will make change(s) z to get them to agree. And you will find that the less you want to make a movie the more a studio will do to encourage you to make it.

Joe Dante was offered Batman to direct in the eighties. After a bit of work on the script he told them honestly that he couldn't make it for them because he was more interested in The Joker than he was in Batman. And certainly more than in Robin (whom WB wanted to be in the very first movie). I imagine if Dante had more pull at that time he'd probably have gotten his way.

By the way. The leads of Answer The Call being women is not the hook of the film. The hook of the film is the same as the hook of the original film.

[Batman1980]

Yeah there's a reason I've never seen it and never intend to, sounds like it's a rather insulting stain on the legacy of the first two films.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by Batman1980

Yeah there's a reason I've never seen it and never intend to,....

Bigotry?

[postmodel]

God damn...I’m a diehard GB fan since before I had memories and I cannot wait for this movie to come out...and one of the big reasons, yet nowhere near the top, is so this rehashed argument about GB16 can die down. It’s my least favorite of the 3 films, but I have zero issue with anyone who loves it, especially kids.

Let’s bring some love in.



Cut to everyone’s reaction:

[Show spoiler]

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Martoto

Bigotry?

Nope not a bigot as far as I know. Everything I've seen and heard about it just suggests it fails on every possible level as a film. Add in the fact that it's meant to be Ghostbusters 3 and the first 2 are 2 of my favourite films of all-time and my interest level is zero.

[Guy87]

Originally Posted by Martoto

You have no issue with the gender of the leads but the gender of the leads is one of your pet peeves?

I don't see what's so objectionable. Sony wanted Feig onboard with Ghostbusters. He wasn't interested in making a sequel but he wasn't interested in a Ghostbusters movie with four of the hottest female comics/SNL cast of that. It doesn't mean that he had no love for Ghostbusters or that he couldn't get his head around GBs unless they were all female. He just thought he didn't have a good enough reason to meddle with it until it was decided that a reboot/remake could be done with an all new cast.

Bill Murray being super reluctant to return as a Ghostbuster at that time must have also made the prospect of a sequel at that time even less attractive to Feig.

If you go through cinema history you're going to find that scenarios like that one are the norm. They are not the exception. Studio wants to make x film with y producer/director/star and they will make change(s) z to get them to agree. And you will find that the less you want to make a movie the more a studio will do to encourage you to make it.

Joe Dante was offered Batman to direct in the eighties. After a bit of work on the script he told them honestly that he couldn't make it for them because he was more interested in The Joker than he was in Batman. And certainly more than in Robin (whom WB wanted to be in the very first movie). I imagine if Dante had more pull at that time he'd probably have gotten his way.

By the way. The leads of Answer The Call being women is not the hook of the film. The hook of the film is the same as the hook of the original film.

One of the reasons I dislike the movie is that, beyond changing the gender of the leads, which had literally zero impact on the narrative so isn't really an 'idea' to begin with, he brought nothing new or interesting to the project.

Casting female leads was Feig's "hook" into the project creatively

"It just felt too difficult. How do you do it and not screw it up? But then it was bugging me for the next few days because Ghostbusters is such a great thing and everybody knows it, and it’s such a great world. It’s a shame to just let this thing sit there. I want to see another one. My favorite thing to do is work with funny women. 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."

As he did literally nothing with that hook narratively speaking, then there really was no new hook or idea at all. That was the limit of his big ideas for the movie.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by Batman1980

Nope not a bigot as far as I know. Everything I've seen and heard about it just suggests it fails on every possible level as a film. Add in the fact that it's meant to be Ghostbusters 3 and the first 2 are 2 of my favourite films of all-time and my interest level is zero.

That's demonstrably untrue as there are several contributors to this thread alone who are positive and sometimes effusive in their praise of the movie.

It's not meant to be Ghostbusters 3 either.