Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021)

[dgoswald]

Originally Posted by postmodel

Meet the family:

The lady in the middle has something of Sigourney Weaver about her.

[Poya]

Originally Posted by Region_unlocked

The little girl was in Captain Marvel. She played Carol in the go-cart flashbacks.

She’s also in Young Sheldon, not that that really matters.

[phobicsquirrel]

So this is basically the 2016 gb but the all female thing isn't as in your face. The family thing sounds silly AF too. I have to say I wasn't expecting much but all this info really feels like this will once again be meh or bad. Maybe not 2016 gb bad but that's a really, really low bar.

[captveg]

The all female thing wasn't the real issue with GB16. Rather, the primary problem (conceptually) with that film was that it was a remake and not a continuation/sequel. Some properties are better done as sequels, even if you are handing it off by the end of the film to a younger generation of lead characters. See: Star Wars, Rocky, etc.

[SethRex]

Originally Posted by phobicsquirrel

So this is basically the 2016 gb but the all female thing isn't as in your face. The family thing sounds silly AF too. I have to say I wasn't expecting much but all this info really feels like this will once again be meh or bad. Maybe not 2016 gb bad but that's a really, really low bar.

All female? You do realize one of the people in those pictures is the young man from Stranger Things, right?

[stvn1974]

I predict that the original Ghostbusters are in this for a total of 8 minutes.

[postmodel]

Originally Posted by leburn98

If we go by Carrie Coon's real age, she would have been 3 during the events of the first film. It's also quite possible that Carrie is the niece of one of the guys. In the novelization of the first film, it is stated that both Egon and Ray had siblings. Egon had a brother and Ray had a brother and a sister. Not sure if these are considered canon today.

Since they don’t dive into their families and earlier lives really at all in the films then anything is game. She could be the product of a Venkman/student affair that he doesn’t learn about until after the events of GB2...I doubt it but just pointing out it’s possible.

She could be a niece of one of them...or even Janine. I think she mentions having nieces and/or nephews in part 2..?

My early speculation is there are two correlating stories that come together. Ghostbusters in Manhattan (whether old or new or old/new GB combo) figuring out the source of the latest evil...it turns out to be in a surrounding small town...this family’s farm and the kids are trying to figure it out themselves after some GB inspiration from TV or whatever.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Region_unlocked

The little girl was in Captain Marvel. She played Carol in the go-cart flashbacks.

Oh. Haven't seen Captain Marvel.

[Shingster]

Coon doesn't have to be playing a woman in her early 40s, she looks young enough to pull off mid-30s at the youngest. She could be the daughter of any of the Ghostbusters born after the sequel.

[Poya]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Oh. Haven't seen Captain Marvel.

You don’t need to. I saw it two days ago and I’ve completely forgotten it.

[Zivouhr]

It's tough to replace the original cast of Ghostbusters. The new cast would have to offer equal energy in terms of character and personality that made the first film a hit.

With Expendables the series, bringing back old characters as the leading roles can still result in success in theaters.

[drb999]

Carrie Coon is a great actress. Really looking forward to this now.

[leburn98]

Originally Posted by phobicsquirrel

So this is basically the 2016 gb but the all female thing isn't as in your face. The family thing sounds silly AF too. I have to say I wasn't expecting much but all this info really feels like this will once again be meh or bad. Maybe not 2016 gb bad but that's a really, really low bar.

The all female thing was an issue for a vocal minority. The majority of fans who were onboard with a new Ghostbusters film, wanted a film within continuity of the originals. I think most of us realized that we likely were not going to get a 2 hour film with 60 year old men running around busting Ghosts. Many of us, myself included were hoping for a passing of the torch film.

I thought it was very simple. They realize they can no longer handle the task of busting Ghosts and decide to expand the franchise by licensing the rights to other paranormal teams. Cue new Ghostbusters team... Have one or more of Ray, Peter or Winston train the new team. End with a hint of an expansion into other cities/countries to set up new teams for future films.

[wonderer99]

Within the confines of the Ghostbusters world it would be reality that ghostbusting would be a popular career choice. Ghosts would be everywhere all over the world. Having one team makes little sense. It would be cool to see ghostbusting as menial mundane job nowadays. Until some big event that requires the old boys to come back for one last hurrah.

[phobicsquirrel]

Originally Posted by leburn98

The all female thing was an issue for a vocal minority. The majority of fans who were onboard with a new Ghostbusters film, wanted a film within continuity of the originals. I think most of us realized that we likely were not going to get a 2 hour film with 60 year old men running around busting Ghosts. Many of us, myself included were hoping for a passing of the torch film.

I thought it was very simple. They realize they can no longer handle the task of busting Ghosts and decide to expand the franchise by licensing the rights to other paranormal teams. Cue new Ghostbusters team... Have one or more of Ray, Peter or Winston train the new team. End with a hint of an expansion into other cities/countries to set up new teams for future films.

Yeah no, that's wrong. If it was then it would have done MUCH better. Shoving it down our throats was a bad move and now they are doing something similar and as added bonus it'll be a kiddie fest.

[Wildcat2000]

Originally Posted by wonderer99

Within the confines of the Ghostbusters world it would be reality that ghostbusting would be a popular career choice. Ghosts would be everywhere all over the world. Having one team makes little sense. It would be cool to see ghostbusting as menial mundane job nowadays. Until some big event that requires the old boys to come back for one last hurrah.

Ghostbusters Inc. That’s what I want. I’m cool with this though. I just hope it sets up expansion for the business.

[leburn98]

Originally Posted by phobicsquirrel

Yeah no, that's wrong. If it was then it would have done MUCH better. Shoving it down our throats was a bad move and now they are doing something similar and as added bonus it'll be a kiddie fest.

Plenty of reboots fail. It's because they do not understand what made the original so successful. Ghostbusters 2016 was no different. The franchises that softbooted have done much better (see Jurassic World, Halloween '18, Mad Max: Fury Road). The point I was making was that the Ghostbusters community are not misogynist pigs. The ones who complained about it being an all female cast are in the vocal minority. Did the media and the studio latch on to that? Absolutely. Did it perhaps piss off some fans? Sure. Do I think it was the biggest factor in GB 2016's failure at the box office? No. The originals were both creepy and hilarious. GB 2016 made everything a joke. GB 2016 was an average movie that missed the tone of the originals completely and word of mouth reflected that.

As for this being a kiddie fest. Just because you have kids as the leads, does not mean you are making a "kiddie" film. Both It: Chapter 1 and Stranger Things feature kids in the leads, neither are what I would classify as a 'kiddie fest'. The fact they have cast Finn Wolfhard as a lead (who appeared in both properties I mentioned above) suggests that Ghostbusters 2020 will be anything but a kiddie fest.

[wonderer99]

Modern sequels to older classics do not necessarily fail, they just dont gel in the way they did back then. People can confuse this for mediocrity. There is a difference between a bad film and something that cant work due to decades of physical and cultural change. This movie will be the same. You could have all surviving cast members return for this and it still would not be the same. You cant make a 2019 movie feel the same as a 1984 one.

With a modern sequel like this you have a choice. Set the movie in the same era as the original with new a new cast. But then you lose the chemistry of the original. Or set it years later with the original cast returning in some capacity and you may hope to keep the chemistry but the modern setting and pc restrictions mean the film is tonally different. I disagree with the poster above that modern movie-makers dont understand what makes the original so beloved. Its not that, its that it is borderline impossible to have everything come together and recreate that magic. The best we could hope for is a good film in its own right, nothing more.

[wonderer99]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

I predict that the original Ghostbusters are in this for a total of 8 minutes.

Yes, including the time it take for their names to scroll past at the end.

[leburn98]

Originally Posted by wonderer99

Modern sequels to older classics do not necessarily fail, they just dont gel in the way they did back then. People can confuse this for mediocrity. There is a difference between a bad film and something that cant work due to decades of physical and cultural change. This movie will be the same. You could have all surviving cast members return for this and it still would not be the same. You cant make a 2019 movie feel the same as a 1984 one.

With a modern sequel like this you have a choice. Set the movie in the same era as the original with new a new cast. But then you lose the chemistry of the original. Or set it years later with the original cast returning in some capacity and you may hope to keep the chemistry but the modern setting and pc restrictions mean the film is tonally different. I disagree with the poster above that modern movie-makers dont understand what makes the original so beloved. Its not that, its that it is borderline impossible to have everything come together and recreate that magic. The best we could hope for is a good film in its own right, nothing more.

I agree with you to an extent, but there are plenty of reboots that just don't get it, Ghostbusters 2016 is one of them. Paul Feig turned his Ghostbusters into a straight up comedy. One of the reasons why the original works so well (besides the cast obviously), was that it was able to creep you out one minute and make you laugh the next. The closest the remake got to a creepy scene was the mannequin scene with Patty, but even then they couldn't help but throw in a Holtzmann goof to break the tension.

I also should state that I do not hate GB 2016 like some here. I did give it a 3.5/5 (bumped up to a 4 for the poll) when it came out after all. I stick by that rating. GB 2016 was a slightly above average comedy that had some funny bits for sure. It just never felt like a Ghostbusters film. It lacked that creepy element that the previous films had and was very noticeable.