Ghostbusters Reboot

[Sir Slash]

Could be worse. Could have starred Roseanne.  ::)

[mirth]

Could be worse. Could have starred Roseanne.  ::)

Or Rosie O'Donnell....where's that vomit emoticon?

[Gusington]

I will never see this film  8)

[mirth]

If there's too many more reviews like that, I'll probably pass on it too.

The Fall Out Boy/Missy Elliot re-do of the Ghostbusters theme SUCKS. So much so that I'm not even going to post a link to it here.

Yeah, I made the mistake of listening to part of it. It's really bad.

Wow. That's total crap.

[mirth]

The Chinese have the good sense to keep this thing out

https://www.yahoo.com/movies/ghostbusters-denied-release-in-china-203600062.html

[Nefaro]

The Chinese have the good sense to keep this thing out

https://www.yahoo.com/movies/ghostbusters-denied-release-in-china-203600062.html

Funny because that was probably a large chunk of their target audience.

[JasonPratt]

I applaud Honest Trailer for acknowledging the original Ghostbusters show (that ran when I was a little boy). Which got a semi-ambitious but often painful cartoon remake from Filmation around the time the mostly-genius movie-inspired "Real Ghostbusters" cartoon was playing.

I will definitely be finishing my playthrough of the real Ghostbusters 3 3PS game, written and performed by the original crew (even Max Von Sydow as the voice of the Carpathian), following as a clear sequel to the movies. Sure it panders to the audience as much as any nostalgia-bait sequel might dunder-headedly do -- Stay-Puft is the first boss out of the gate, for crying out loud -- and it takes some of the actors time to start getting back in the mood of things. But you get to join all four Ghostbusters as the rookie 5th guy, in what amounts to a virtual reality fan-fiction movie.

[Centurion40]

So the family and I saw it in 3D IMAX tonight, and I enjoyed it. 40 Jr. didn't, he just griped about the Ghostbusters being girls (but he sure looked like he was into it during the film). There were a couple of 3D pay-offs and the big screen probably added a bit to my enjoyment. All of the original Ghostbusters had cameos, although Harold was a bust (literally). Bill got the most screen time out of the 4. There were even a couple of genuine chuckles and scares.

See it, don't go see it, whatever. It didn't suck and it is well placed for a sequel. It was a solid B+.

[mirth]

So the family and I saw it in 3D IMAX tonight, and I enjoyed it. 40 Jr. didn't, he just griped about the Ghostbusters being girls (but he sure looked like he was into it during the film). There were a couple of 3D pay-offs and the big screen probably added a bit to my enjoyment. All of the original Ghostbusters had cameos, although Harold was a bust (literally). Bill got the most screen time out of the 4. There were even a couple of genuine chuckles and scares.

See it, don't go see it, whatever. It didn't suck and it is well placed for a sequel. It was a solid B+.

Unless my kids ask, I'm not going to see it.

Honestly, I think it would be okay as it's own thing. The mistake was hanging "Ghostbusters" on it. Someone wanted a cash grab and they FUBARed it.

[Centurion40]

Without giving it away, I can see how the antagonist could have been originally written to be pitted against the original Ghostbusters. But Bill was dragging his feet, and then Harold died. So they re-wrote with an all-new team, a reboot. Peter Venkman and crew never existed in this Ghostbusters universe.

Dan Ackroyd is the Executive Producer and one of the writers, almond with Ivan Reitman.

[BanzaiCat]

Angry Joe is...well, see for yourself.

[Gusington]

FYI the original just started on the Sundance Channel, as of 5pm est 😎

[mirth]

Angry Joe is...well, see for yourself.

Very angry. Understandably so.

[JasonPratt]

Moviebob (Bob Chipman) thinks it's okay, not great not bad, and continues to radically misunderstand why most of us were leery about it. No big surprise there.

No, Bob, most of us actually like women.  :P The previews looked universally weak or worse.

Haven't seen it yet myself; somewhat heartend (....why does that not look like a word?...) by the very wide reception which, regardless of my suspicion about the merits of the reception from some quarters, is a whole lot better than universally panned by everyone. Played Ghostbusters: the Game this weekend, got further on that (mostly Sunday), enjoyed it despite the tough boss fights, haven't finished it yet, suspect I'll end up liking it better than the new remake, but when I do see it I'll keep my mind open: I actually do like the property and want to be entertained by it. (And it isn't as though the game's production wasn't beset by varying levels of love or indifference.)

[JasonPratt]

What's great about the toxic reviews from Angry Joe & Company that are mad about the quality of the film and the writing, crapping all over the legacy and being the worst kind of cash grab and an insult to what the original creators did...

...is that this is "an Ivan Reitman film written by Dan Ackroyd and Harold Ramis".

The first film was kind of accidentally great; and as with the cartoon sequel series showed, it had potential to be consistently great. But that doesn't mean the original creators were competent to do it again. GB2 proved that demonstrably. And we probably got the best possible polished original creator sequel to both movies with The Game already -- which while often good with flashes of occasional genius, didn't exactly set the world on fire with its awesomeness.

(Also, some of the complaints about the crass humor seem to be forgetting the awkwardly crass humor in the original, dialed down barely enough to rate PG, or PG-13 nowadays.)

That said, I kind of trust Joe's review (and its spoiler sequel) more than some of the other reviews. He and his crew are specific about problems, and I can see why those would be problems. But I think they lack perspective -- whatever this movie it, the original creators had a strong hand in it.