Not a chance they bring them in for just cameos.Now about the new one. Weaver, Aykroyd and Murray will likely just have cameos. You know just like all 3 of them had in the 2016 version.
Not a chance they bring them in for just cameos.Now about the new one. Weaver, Aykroyd and Murray will likely just have cameos. You know just like all 3 of them had in the 2016 version.
I wanted the reboot to be good to spite the online worms hate campaign.Time for all the incel idiots to start writing blog posts about Answer the Call being wiped from existence or some nonsense.
Edit: Yes, I'm bitter at people claiming that Answer the Call was somehow the worst Ghostbusters-related thing ever when the franchise already got a miserable sequel in 1989.
Me either. I'm one of those weirdo that enjoyed it more than the first :/
It's on par for me. Possibly GB1 a little ahead.Me either. I'm one of those weirdo that enjoyed it more than the first :/
I wanted the reboot to be good to spite the online worms hate campaign.
It was absolute fucking garbage though unfortunately.
I'd rather watch GBII on a loop for a week than sit through that painfully unfunny excuse for a 'comedy' again. (The hyperbole over how bad GBII is is pretty crazy.)
Keep burning?Is Ghostbusters becoming the new Predator? You know, where they just keep burning hundreds of millions of dollars in attempt after ill-considered attempt to match the success of one good movie they made a bajillion years ago?
Your own hyperbole is pretty crazy.
ATC's downfall is they spent way too much money on it for how borderline niche Ghostbusters is. If that film cost forty million, it'd have had a sequel by now. Ghostbusters is not a big enough property to support a mega blockbuster budget.
What about that new ghostbusters? The one with the younger cast?
Oh. So a force awakens type movie.
Emma Stone was lined up for the first try at Younger Ghostbusters.This is gonna be a new template to follow
1. Reboot old ass franchise nobody cares about anymore
2. Make it more diverse and inclusive
3. Enrage Anti-SJW manbabies
4. Unboot it with the original cast
Can't wait for Blues Sisters starring Emma Stone and Margot Robbie
What are you doing?
I thought it was just as good as the first. It loses something from being derivative with the same framwork, but gains from having much better villains. Janosz and Vigo were superb, Scoleri brothers was the best scene in BOTH films imo
Yeah Murray popped up when he heard Ramis was dying. Doesn't change the way he treated him when he wasn't.
The downfall was a director who allowed his actors to ad-lib much of the film, and then used that footage. Spending less money wouldn't have saved the film from being a pile of crap.Your own hyperbole is pretty crazy.
ATC's downfall is they spent way too much money on it for how borderline niche Ghostbusters is. If that film cost forty million, it'd have had a sequel by now. Ghostbusters is not a big enough property to support a mega blockbuster budget.
People don't care about the franchise as much as they care about the actors and characters they play.Sure, but you know that Murray & Akroyd are going to be the main selling point of this movie now. This stood to be a more interesting film if they either weren't involved, or only appeared in a surprise cameo.
It's the Star Wars sequel trilogy problem. Just by bringing back the original characters, you're taking focus from the new cast & limiting their growth.
What? Do you not remember what I was originally replaying to that you quoted?
The "my dad says you guys are full of crap" line got me, haha.
Ok so Winston's on stage, there's no way he isn't in the movie. I just hate how Ernie Hudson is treated as an afterthought in reporting/promotion :(
Yeah it's weird how he always gets pushed to the side. Hopefully he is in the new movie or at least asked to be in it.
Because he was just a guy. The original plan was to have Eddie Murphy in the role and I would love to pop my head into that alternate timeline.
Oh I know, I'm a big fan. That would have been....... something for sure, not sure if it would have been better though.
Not a good reason to sideline him though. Winston was an awesome addition to the team. Also Ernie is a great actor and held his own when being thrown in with those big names, he's very a underrated actor imo.
Purely a case of "it's not as good as the first and therefore shouldn't exist." Also, it retreads the first movie and therefore is an unoriginal piece of shit.
You're not the boss of me.
I guess I'm alone here but I saw this as less of a "I don't have to put up with Ramis anymore so I'll do it" and more "he's gone, I wish we had reconciled a long time ago- I owe him this".
I also remember Ramis' daughter doing an interview where she said what happened between them and when it was resolved.
Ramis and Murray were constantly arguing about their creative process during Groundhog Day. At one point, Ramis became so frustrated and incensed with Murray that he grabbed him by the shirt collar and threw him down. Murray cut him off cold after that.
She said Bill Murray was dealing with some kind of personal trauma and it sounded like alcoholism? So he was very sensitive and easily shaken, said Ramis felt awful but Murray wouldn't return his calls. They went 20 years without speaking.
Apparently when Bill Murray heard he was sick he showed up at their house with a box of donuts. She said he didn't bring up the past just hugged him, shared old stories and kept making him laugh.
I'll try to find the interview but I think it was from her book as well.
I remember it vividly because it fucking broke my heart to learn about it. I loved those two since I was a child, I loved their movies. I hate that this happened between them and I wish we still had Harold Ramis.
I thought it was just as good as the first. It loses something from being derivative with the same framwork, but gains from having much better villains. Janosz and Vigo were superb, Scoleri brothers was the best scene in BOTH films imo