Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021)

[kylor]

Originally Posted by Martoto

Surely you knew even before Answer The Call came out that it was a remake/reboot. Right?

So how come you and other fans still let it live in your heads rent free, seeking perpetual confirmation and affirmation when it's not needed?

I did know it was a reboot. Also, I wasn't seeking any confirmation. I just posted a news article from 6 hours ago.

Are you letting the article live rent free in your head? Your assumptions seem to be very high on the speculative scale today.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by postmodel

I just want to know how GB2 connects to Afterlife, meaning the whole Statue of Liberty thing and Ecto 1A. I feel like Rudd's character would have to mention the Statue of Liberty basically coming to life on New Year's Eve 1989, simply by saying "news report say your grandpa figured out to hook it up to come to life. They controlled it like a video game!" That would be so cool to hear your grandfather had a part in something like that. Sure taking out a marshmallow man is way up there, but the Statue of Liberty is an already existing structure that they pretty much animated to life through the use of positively charged slime.

The problem with the statue is that everything after it is a bit of anti climax.

A bit more thought into the script might have made a that the actual climax of the picture, with Ray possession, Dana and the baby stuff all prior to that. Maybe had Venkman separated up from the rest of the guys and he has to team up with Louis and Janine to break in to the museum to rescue them and so on.

Originally Posted by kylor

I did know it was a reboot. Also, I wasn't seeking any confirmation. I just posted a news article from 6 hours ago.

Are you letting the article live rent free in your head?

I'm replying to your expression of gratitude for 4 year old news. It's about the third such expression this week.

Originally Posted by TheWildWhelk

No, it's the publicity department at Sony using a sledgehammer to get the point across to the general public that Afterlife is not connected to the badly received 2016 reboot. There is absolutely no negative side to this. Regular GB fans will dismiss it, and more casual cinema patrons will be 100% in the clear it's not connected.

Actually it's Ernie Hudson saying "It's in line with what the fans have always wanted..." and an independent British journalist putting a redundant "disregarding the narrative" spin on it to appeal to a group of people who have made it their hobby to be offended for the past 4 years. It's hardly a sledgehammer.

[kylor]

Originally Posted by Martoto

I'm replying to your expression of gratitude for 4 year old news.

Beleive it or not, it's possible to have a discussion on a movie discussion forum about an older movie without it "living in my head rent free" - how you put it.

And yes, I am glad that the SNL parody skit isn't canon and won't be acknowledged and is set in a completely different universe from the true and original Ghostbusters.

The same way I'm glad that 2014's Robocop in no way ties to the original movies as it's a reboot/remake.

So yes, my gratitude for that 2016 garbage being completely disconnected is over 9000.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by kylor

Beleive it or not, it's possible to have a discussion on a movie discussion forum about an older movie without it "living in my head rent free" - how you put it.

And yes, I am glad that that that SNL parody skit isn't canon and won't be acknowledged and is set in a completely different universe from the true and original Ghostbusters.

The same way I'm glad that 2014's Robocop in no way ties to the original movies as it's a reboot/remake.

So yes, my gratitude for that 2016 garbage being completely disconnected is over 9000.

Let me know when you start talking about the movie for this thread.

It's called Ghostbusters: Afterlife (for now)

[kylor]

Originally Posted by Martoto

Let me know when you start talking about the movie.

It's called Ghostbusters: Afterlife (for now)

That's what I posted a news post about, how Afterlife will connect to the first 2 films. It was you who had to exacerbate and bring up the 2016 film when it could have been ignored, but you had to pipe up about it.

If you want to be so on topic, try it yourself first sometime. Otherwise, don't say anything lest you become what you detest.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by kylor

That's what I posted a news post about, how Afterlife will connect to the first 2 films. It was you who had to exacerbate and bring up the 2016 film when it could have been ignored, but you had to pipe up about it.

If you want to be so on topic, try it yourself first sometime. Otherwise, don't say anything lest you become what you detest.

I addressed the headline to the article you posted and the author's spin on it which he puts right at the top of the article. After that I'm responding to you.

[kylor]

Originally Posted by Martoto

I addressed the headline and the author's spin on it which he puts right at the top of the article. After that I'm responding to you.

So how about you focus more on the Afterlife information, which is what the title of the article is about and ignore the nonsense non-information from the blogger?

Personally, I like that in some way, it will connect the first two films. That's all I've truly wanted from a third Ghostbusters film.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by kylor

So how about you focus more on the Afterlife information, which is what the title of the article is about and ignore the nonsense non-information from the blogger?

It was all discussed when the trailer came out. Months and months ago. There's nothing new about Afterlife. The article is clickbait for certain attitudes.

[kylor]

Originally Posted by Martoto

It was all discussed when the trailer came out. Months and months ago. There's nothing new about Afterlife. The article is clickbait for certain attitudes.

And it successfully baited you, it seems. I am only interested in what Ernie had to say regarding the article and Afterlife.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by kylor

And it successfully baited you, it seems. I am only interested in what Ernie had to say regarding the article and Afterlife.

That's not what click bait means. But baiting is against forum rules so you might want to reconsider making that boast.

[kylor]

Originally Posted by Martoto

That's not what click bait means. But baiting is against forum rules so you might want to reconsider making that boast.

You're the one claiming a news article is bait and is clearly taking offense to it. Maybe you reconsider revoking that claim and chill out. Nobody else has an issue with the news article, only you.

I will not remove a recent news article that contains information of what Ernie Hudson has said regarding Ghostbusters: Afterlife. It is valuable information, knowing that in some way it will connect to the first two films.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by kylor

You're the one claiming a news article is bait. Maybe you reconsider revoking that claim. Nobody else has an issue with the news article, only you.

I'm perfectly entitled to identify the intent of an article, by its publisher, to be click bait based on the headline and the first paragraph, and also due to the fact that it's four year old information. Calling it out is not a boast and I have not attempted to bait anyone.

I didn't click on any link so the bait failed in that regard. However, I've no say in what is uploaded to this thread. Since you copied its content I can make comment on its value, particularly in the context of the thread.

In a nutshell Ernie Hudson tells us what the trailer already told us and what everyone that needs to know has known for years.

I've no wish to argue about it further.

[kylor]

Originally Posted by Martoto

I'm perfectly entitled to identify the intent of an article, by its publisher, to be click bait based on the headline and the first paragraph, and also due to the fact that it's four year old information. Calling it out is not a boast and I have not attempted to bait anyone.

I didn't click on any link so the bait failed in that regard. However, I've no say in what is uploaded to this thread. Since you copied its content I can make comment on its value, particularly in the context of the thread.

In a nutshell Ernie Hudson tells us what the trailer already told us and what everyone that needs to know has known for years.

I've no wish to argue about it further.

And I'm perfectly entitled to post an article and have gratitude for whatever I wish. Nuff said.

[kylor]

Another article from 40 minutes ago which contains some more dialogue from Ernie:

Ghostbusters: Afterlife is what "fans have been hoping for", teases original star

Ghostbusters fans don't have anything to fear when it comes to the upcoming Ghostbusters: Afterlife movie according to star of the original movie Ernie Hudson.

The actor, who starred in the original 1984 comedy and its 1989 sequel, is back for the new Ghostbusters outing as Winston Zeddemore alongside his fellow original stars Dan Aykroyd (Ray Stantz) and Bill Murray (Peter Venkman).

And he's revealed during an interview with Yes Have Some that the new film, which is arriving over 3o years after Ivan Reitman's original, will please fans of the classic films because it "really ties into the first two movies".

"There's been so many announcements and so many things that fell apart," he said of Afterlife's long journey to the big screen. "It wasn't until I got the script and read the script that I thought, 'Okay not only is it happening, but this is really good'. It's really in line with what the fans have been hoping for and it really ties into the first two movies."

He added that being able to continue the story of the much-loved Ghostbusters characters was "very, very special", saying that he was hugely excited to get to reunite with his co-stars.

"I like the movie with the ladies (2016's female-led Ghostbusters directed by Paul Feig) but it was kind of a different take on it," he said. "So once I got the (Afterlife) script I began to get excited about it and felt like I knew something definite. But up until then, it was still 'if, maybe, and whatever.'"

He continued: "For me it was kind of like a spiritual get together. A movie that had so much impact and meaning in my life, to go back into that was just emotional to me. To see Danny Aykroyd and Bill, it was very, very special."

Also reprising their roles from the 80s movies are Sigourney Weaver as Dana Barrett and Annie Potts as Janine Melnitz, while we'll also meet a collection of new characters including single mother Callie (Carrie Coon), her two children, Trevor (Finn Wolfhard) and Phoebe (Mckenna Grace) and science teacher Mr Grooberson (Paul Rudd).

Hudson was full of praise for the newer cast members too, calling them "great" and promising that they are "all bringing their best to it and I think bringing what (Ghostbusters) deserved".

"Not something that sort of was thrown together just for the studio to make some more money," he said. "But really, Jason's (Reitman, the film's director) just love of it and commitment to it, I was very touched by it."

Ghostbusters: Afterlife is currently due for release on March 5, 2021.

https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a3...-satisfaction/

[Martoto]

[Show spoiler]

I think that fans should prepare themselves for the original cast having minimal involvement in the story. They'll be present at some point to reinforce the narrative continuity. But there seems little room for more than a check-in to endorse the new generation.

Or maybe they'll be the stars and the trailer merely shows the preamble to them rediscovering their mojo. Who knows?

[Morsoth]

I'm still very afraid that it'll be a kid version of Ghostbusters and that it will mostly ignore the events of the second movie. I have put my hopes very low anyway.

[Martoto]

The trailer definitely hints that it's primarily aimed at kids who are not immersed in the original two movies at all. The movie is set in an environment where the kids are disinterested. It's THEIR story.

[TheWildWhelk]

Originally Posted by Martoto

The trailer definitely hints that it's primarily aimed at kids who are not immersed in the original two movies at all. The movie is set in an environment where the kids are disinterested. It's THEIR story.

Totally, Martoto you Laichlanner, we knew this from day one. This was no reunion film for the original cast and out, and this comment from Ernie Hudson bears this out:

"Not something that sort of was thrown together just for the studio to make some more money," he said. "But really, Jason's (Reitman, the film's director) just love of it and commitment to it, I was very touched by it."

[Martoto]

I don’t see the connection.

[TheWildWhelk]

Originally Posted by Martoto

I don’t see the connection.

Narratively speaking? Confusion understood. You meant the cynicism...