1. Welcome to the Muppet Central Forum!
    You are viewing our forum as a guest. Join our free community to post topics and start private conversations. Please contact us if you need help with registration or your account login.

  2. Christmas Music
    Our 17th annual Christmas Music Marathon is underway on Muppet Central Radio. Listen to the best Muppet Christmas music of all-time through December 25.

  3. Sesame Street Season 48
    Sesame Street's 48th season officially began Saturday November 18 on HBO. After you see the new episodes, post here and let us know your thoughts.

Ghostbusters 3 finally on the way? You decide!

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by frogboy4, May 20, 2009.

  1. Pig's Laundry

    Pig's Laundry Well-Known Member

    Seriously dude, your being really rude and defensive for no reason at all. She debated with you. There's a difference between disagreeing with someone and actually disrespecting someone's opinion. If you can't handle someone debating with you than maybe you shouldn't comment on the internet at all.

    What Heralde was trying to say was, you were using Harold's death as a reason the reboot shouldn't have happened. But his daughter says you shouldn't do so because even Harold himself knew for a long time that he wouldn't be involved in the next film but still wanted the torch to be passed and for the next film to happen.
     
  2. Drtooth

    Drtooth Well-Known Member


    I don't think any Ghostbusters movie would have been necessary. Especially not a third one. The second was dumb enough, a 30 year old stalled sequel wasn't going to get good reception, no matter who was behind it. Look at Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull. I still fail to see why that was Star Wars prequel bad (the direction wasn't wooden), but if that got bad reception I don't think anything could have. Mad Max Fury Road, sure, at least that one had the respectful fanbase that knew that the creator was trying to get that one out for decades.

    As for the saga of the third film, I can't say I agree completely with the fact they made it because Ramis died. Bill Murray drug his feet for the better part of a decade and a half as well. They either could have done the movie with out him and gave us that "Next Generation" plot that no one wanted or would have reacted well to (remember: the names being tossed around were stoner comedy movie staples before they became a little too old for that sort of thing). Overall, I think no GB movie past the first one was necessary. The second was a juvenile mess that seemed to troll the fans of the cartoons series which was better written on every level. if there is anything I can give the remake over the second film, it's the fact the second film's plot seems like it came out of one of the "Slimer and the Real Ghostbusters" episodes at the end of the series. Heck, "Halloween Door" was a far better, far more satisfying sequel.

    Still, considering this is the year we got a crappy Independence Day sequel that was far more the insult to the original movie you could ever accuse this film of being, a completely pointless Pete's Dragon remake that takes all the cartoony fun out of it, and a new Ben-Hur that...who is that even for? I'm shocked no one's talking about those. Heck, the Uncle Buck in name only sitcom was that under the radar, and that's far worse.

    Like I said before, if I hated this movie, I'd be more upset Sony wanted to milk the franchise, and still a little annoyed that the original cast couldn't get its stuff together and make that third movie we'd all hate just as much anyway.
     
  3. Reevz1977

    Reevz1977 Well-Known Member

    Ok, I want to try and calm this down a tad and put the whole "disrespectful" thing to bed.

    Harold Ramis, Ivan Reitman, Bill Murray and Dan Aykroyd were all rights-owners for Ghostbusters. Sony could not move forward in any direction without their consent - that is a well-documented fact. The "passing the torch" concept would still have required the approval of the rights holders to go forward, with Sony having the option of whether or not to green light the financing. Bill Murray lost his rights after refusing to take part in a "Ghostbusters 3" several times, but Ivan, Dan and Harold remained in control. Harold Ramis's rights obviously were lost in his tragic passing and that ultimately lead to Ivan Reitman stepping back. Because Bill, Ivan's and Harold's rights reverted back to Sony (that latter two being a direct result of Harold's passing), they had full control of what happened with the "Ghostbusters" brand from that point on.

    Ghostbusters is currently in a mess. Sure the new one has it's fans, but the truth is that it is a huge financial money-loser ($70-$75 million is currently the estimated loss). The critics gave it the thumbs up, but audience reaction was not that great and a lot of fans of the original are not that happy with what happened to Ghostbusters - based on the choice to remake it, the quality of the remake, the tone of the remake and NOT because of the female aspect. As a result and as can be currently seen in the media, the future of Ghostbusters movies looks quite bleak at this point. This is all Sony's fault and only happened when Harold Ramis passed away, which is what I was saying when I said "I am quite passionate and disappointed by everything that has happened to it since the loss of Harold Ramis, which was tragically the catalyst for where it stands now". That statement is in no way disrespectful...at all. Had Harold Ramis not passed away, he, Ivan and Dan would still be in control of Ghostbusters. If you read the leaked Sony emails regarding Ghostbusters, Sony was very underhand with regards to everyone involved in the originals, suggesting they use legal persuasion to strong arm cast members to be in the new one and had original director and rights owner Ivan Reitman removed from the set. It is once they got full control, things got ugly.
     
  4. heralde

    heralde Well-Known Member

    I accept your apology. You had every right to state your opinion and I'm sorry if I went for a low blow. You weren't attacking me, you were attacking a movie, and I should learn to let things go sometimes, lol. You have to understand, I have been harassed by supposed fans on social media for months because I didn't join the bandwagon against this movie. Those people, and not this movie, are the ones I consider the enemy (I'm not including you with them, just to be clear). Sony is a soulless corporation, I don't expect much from them, lol. But I did expect better from the fans. And what I got instead made my heart sick. It has made me think twice before ever wanting to be part of a fandom again. Reboots happen all the time, for many beloved movies, and we just go about our lives. But now somehow this movie has become the all purpose whipping post for all reboots? I don't get it, and frankly I don't want to.

    What's funny is I've always been the Muppet purist on this board, lol. Maybe it's my karma to experience how the other side gets treated.
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2016
  5. Reevz1977

    Reevz1977 Well-Known Member

    Believe me, I read some comments that made me embarrassed to share the term "ghostbusters fan" and to even be considered the same species. I also defended Paul Feig in comments that he "liked" and defended Lesley Jones with the disgusting Twitter attack. A minority of "fans" showed themselves to be vile, bottom-dwelling "human beings" but most of the fans are just like Muppet fans on here who didn't want to see a greedy corporation like Sony ruin a beloved franchise - I remember reading this forum when Disney bought the Muppets, though fortunately for us Disney has done some truly unbelievable and amazing things with the Muppets. When the Sony emails leaked, it showed the fans the utter contempt that they had for them and they rightly or wrongly reacted. I also wanted this movie to be great, even if I was one of the many put off by the trailers, as it would have been awesome for Ghostbusters in general - it's just sad that I didn't feel, and a lot of the general public agree, that it was a good movie. At the very least, I gave it my money.

    I became sensitive to being labelled disrespectful as I would never knowingly disrespect anyone or hurt anyone's feelings. I have been on the receiving end of such on this forum (a reason I rarely ever post any more) and wouldn't wish it on anyone. Disagreeing and debating on the other-hand is healthy and normal. I know I probably hold controversial views on certain topics and right now it's not a good time to say you're an original Ghostbusters fan. I just wanted to offer my 2 cents on the movie as I am sure there will be others on the forum or readers of the forum who feel the same as me.

    I'm glad we can end this on a happy note :)
     
    heralde likes this.
  6. heralde

    heralde Well-Known Member

    I'm still giving away that Comic Con ticket; I do not want or need it any longer. But yes, you and I are good. :)
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2016
  7. Drtooth

    Drtooth Well-Known Member

    I'd like to point out that it's funny this movie is considered that much a loss considering how poorly most of the summer movies did. It all comes down to Hollywood book-keeping, and the film made back its production budget, but they threw so much at advertising, it's considered a failure. Meanwhile, it's second week competition Star Trek Beyond made less money and had a higher budget. The only reason why this year's horrid flops are successful is China keeps bailing them out. Ice Age 5 opened an abysmal 20 something million and disappeared quickly here, but made a fortune world wide. If China's cultural ministry wasn't so...ehhhh...Ghostbusters would probably have been a hit there too. On the one hand, China's involvement is leading to a second Pacific Rim. You know the good movie about giant robots which had a disappointing opening against "Adam Sandler has a vacation and acts like he did when he was 20 well into his 40's part 2?" On the other hand, Warcraft and Tarzan. Both would have quietly disappeared and would have been forgotten.

    As far as the concern Sony wanted to make any Ghostbusters movie, that I totally agree is where the outrage lies. As I keep saying, I really don't think GB needed a follow up of any kind, especially considering that GB2 was a disappointing muddle of cartoony humor, character derailment, and wasted potential. Sure, the original cast was back and they acted the heck out of a meh script (that they wrote, which is more disappointing). Even then, the only reason they got a follow up that time was the same kind of cynicism that lead to one of three Ghostbusters movies that weren't a direct sequel being made. It's clear that Sony was slowly pulling hairs out one by one in frustration that GB3 kept gaining traction, only to be derailed every time they had a solid start. Sure, we got the video game which was supposed to be an animated DTV film at some point which serves as the true third movie. And I agree. After Ramis passed, they said *&^% it, and made their own film(s) anyway. While I keep joking we could have got an Adam Sandler's Ghostbusters, I wouldn't be surprised if that was a possibility. And while I am looking forward to the animated one, Sony could have just made more money with more GB merchandising. Maybe a decent Real Ghostbusters toyline instead of those meh 1970's style doll figures that were 20 bucks a pop.

    But they wanted a movie, the third one wasn't being made fast enough, they made their own, but on the positive side, the film was not a direct sequel that retroactively ruined the original film, nor was it a prequel, same universe thing. I can't even give it the title "reboot" or "remake" instead of an "alternate universe spinoff" or a "what if." I hate the fact that the word "remake" is associated with "replace" (Dirty Rotten Scoundrels was the only remake that replaced a forgotten flop) and "Reboot" is associated with "ignore the original" (though in the world of super hero based films it does, but only because by then the franchise either wildly gone off the rails). I think a lot of anger lies there as well. Like this film or not, it was a cash grab by Sony, and while the movie's probably going to lose some marketing cost, the money they're going to get from merchandising alone is going to more than make up for that.
     
  8. heralde

    heralde Well-Known Member

    I'm right there with you. Fans are literally complaining that their movies have been "erased." Um, no, it's right there on your shelf. Go watch it, no one's stopping you. How about worrying about the lives that were erased on the news this morning?

    What has happened to fan culture?
     
  9. heralde

    heralde Well-Known Member

    With all the drama going on with this fandom lately, I thought this clip would be appropriate :):

     
  10. Drtooth

    Drtooth Well-Known Member

    If there's one thing I hate about how this movie is reported, it's the word "Reboot." I totally think it was a placeholder film and one GB film of many, and clearly made because Sony just wanted another GB film out there. I really don't see how any Ghostbusters movie would replace the original no matter what the result. "Reboots" are for when they screw up a super hero movie. Like The Hulk. Or Fantastic Four with the added bonus of them all getting progressively worse to the point where the cheap-o Roger Corman made so someone could hold onto the rights was the best of the bunch. Especially considering the last time was made so someone could hold onto the rights.

    I'm still appalled that the stars of the movie keep getting crap when no matter what your feelings on the film are, it was Sony that felt the need to make it. What's going on with Leslie Jones is just beyond disgusting, and she was one of the best characters in the movie. All the blame of this film lies squarely on the fact that Sony didn't think comic books, t-shirts, Funko vinyls, and assorted other merchandise wasn't making enough. The franchise didn't need a third movie, be it a one off original film that takes place in another universe or an actual sequel by the original writers. We got one anyway and it was actually pretty good for what it was, it's something that's easily ignorable if you don't like it.
     
  11. heralde

    heralde Well-Known Member

    It's not even "the stars," it's only Leslie Jones who keeps getting dumped on. Partly because she's had the nerve to answer the trolls back. Now, you might argue it would have been more prudent to ignore them (as the other stars probably are). But you should check out her Twitter feed and see how brazen and nasty those trolls have been for months on end. Even if I was able to ignore them, I would be royally creeped out and afraid, not to mention angry. Only speculation, but I think it's safe to say this hacker was annoyed that his (or her) hero Milo was banned from Twitter. Maybe h/she's also embarrassed that the creator of Ghostbusters called him/her a racist Trump supporter, lol. If it's actually because the movie was a reboot, then that person needs professional help, stat. Sadly, that help may be coming from the FBI. :oops: In any case, I hope they grow up one day and feel some remorse for what they've done. It's going to be hard living with knowing you caused that much pain in someone's life...over a movie.
     
  12. heralde

    heralde Well-Known Member

    OK, this is a must see, a fan recently posted a home movie in which he (as a child) got to meet the cast on the set of Ghostbusters II. A truly amazing, time capsule of a moment. It didn't even happen to me and yet I could feel the excitement! Just...just watch!

     
    Reevz1977 and MikaelaMuppet like this.
  13. heralde

    heralde Well-Known Member

  14. Luke kun

    Luke kun Well-Known Member

    Or for an awesome CGI cartoon from the 1990s. OH WAIT.
     
    MikaelaMuppet likes this.
  15. Pig's Laundry

    Pig's Laundry Well-Known Member

Share This Page