• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Ghostbusters 3 set for a 2020 release

giphy.gif
 
There was an optimal time for this, and it passed. If I recall correctly, there was a time when everyone was on-board for a sequel except for Bill Murray. I like him, but I think he is to blame for what happened to the franchise. 🙁
 
I love the original Ghostbusters, but as the sequel and the remake proved- just leave well-enough alone.

The first movie mainly worked because of the new computer-gadget craze that occured in the 80's. We were still learning about computer technology, so anything that showed smart people using clever gadgets was fascinating. A lot of the movies and TV shows from that era had a similar premise: rag-tag heroes using technology nobody else has knowledge of to fight evil. We saw this in Blue Thunder, Knight Rider, Airwolf, and countless others.

People today are jaded with technology. We can turn our lights and appliances on with our voice, we have all human knowledge available from a screen in our pocket, we're shooting things into space on a whim...that kind of thing doesn't excite as much as it used to.
 
Fritzo said:
I love the original Ghostbusters, but as the sequel and the remake proved- just leave well-enough alone.

The first movie mainly worked because of the new computer-gadget craze that occured in the 80's. We were still learning about computer technology, so anything that showed smart people using clever gadgets was fascinating. A lot of the movies and TV shows from that era had a similar premise: rag-tag heroes using technology nobody else has knowledge of to fight evil. We saw this in Blue Thunder, Knight Rider, Airwolf, and countless others.

People today are jaded with technology. We can turn our lights and appliances on with our voice, we have all human knowledge available from a screen in our pocket, we're shooting things into space on a whim...that kind of thing doesn't excite as much as it used to.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I wouldn't agree with that assessment of why the movie worked. It worked because the cast was completely fantastic, the writing was flawless, and the premise was fresh and new. The "technology" was completely secondary... if not even a factor. IMHO, completely incomparable to Blue Thunder, Knight Rider etc
 
Fritzo said:
I love the original Ghostbusters, but as the sequel and the remake proved- just leave well-enough alone.

The first movie mainly worked because of the new computer-gadget craze that occured in the 80's. We were still learning about computer technology, so anything that showed smart people using clever gadgets was fascinating. A lot of the movies and TV shows from that era had a similar premise: rag-tag heroes using technology nobody else has knowledge of to fight evil. We saw this in Blue Thunder, Knight Rider, Airwolf, and countless others.

People today are jaded with technology. We can turn our lights and appliances on with our voice, we have all human knowledge available from a screen in our pocket, we're shooting things into space on a whim...that kind of thing doesn't excite as much as it used to.
Click to expand...

That's my problem when you throw stuff in like nano-bots, because then you can literally do anything you want.

Writing sci-fi is tricky because you have to close all of the trap doors. For example, if your world has holograms & force fields, then what's to stop you from building literally anything? Project a holographic tank, then put a force-field around it. Boom. Got replicators? Use a replicator to materialize a holographic projector & force-field generator. Boom.

I think that's why stuff like Mission Impossible is still fun...it's still a dude (well, Cruise, in every single one lol) vs. real-world conditions.
 
Kaido said:
That's my problem when you throw stuff in like nano-bots, because then you can literally do anything you want.

Writing sci-fi is tricky because you have to close all of the trap doors. For example, if your world has holograms & force fields, then what's to stop you from building literally anything? Project a holographic tank, then put a force-field around it. Boom. Got replicators? Use a replicator to materialize a holographic projector & force-field generator. Boom.

I think that's why stuff like Mission Impossible is still fun...it's still a dude (well, Cruise, in every single one lol) vs. real-world conditions.
Click to expand...
Some folks want "hard" scifi, others are more focused on the worldbuilding or on the fantasy escapism.
I have a hard time suspending my disbelief in movies where people who get shot fly backwards, or where people get punched across a room, or any other number of comic book style effects... But, I think lots of people simply ignore that due to overexposure.
 
Yea, she's way off on this one. She forgets that her movie ignored the previous movies for no reason as well. That isn't even speaking to how bad it was. Even if it was the first ghostbusters movie, it would have been okay at best.

Also, hollywood doesn't really care. They did the same thing with Halloween last year. It's not some conspiracy against Ghostbusters.
 
Sonikku said:
"Reitman is looking to cast four teens in the lead, specifically two boys and two girls. "

Leslie Swan is pissed, likens the new direction for the franchise as the work of Trump.

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/ghostbusters-leslie-jones-is-very-unhappy-about-th/1100-6464519/
Click to expand...
I was wondering why a Nintendo person (Leslie Swan) would weigh-in on this 😉

Anyway, I don't know why Jones would insist that they continue in a direction that ultimately lost money. It's not good business to throw money away, and it's unreasonable to expect them to keep doing that. Ghostbusters is still a valuable property and there's money to be made if they don't screw it up.
 
Last edited:
Despite voting against Trump, I actually think her statement is silly and for just the same reason. Rather, I weigh in on Ghostbusters as it, alongside the NES, were the first things I was ever into.

I had watched the movies every time they were on tv, I begged my mother to get me the VHS tapes when we finally got a VCR. The best part of my day was getting home from school and watching The Real Ghostbusters, then playing some Super Mario Bros. while sipping Ecto Cooler. The toys were the best ever created at the time, which was a windfall for me because despite how huge Nintendo was and how much merchandise we got in the 80's. I don't remember much in the way of playable nintendo figures that weren't unposeable figurines. And then there was Ghostbusters the video game. The NES game sucked, but I played it anyway. I just loved all things Ghostbusters that much.

I remember the Ghostbusters 3 discussions being one of the oldest ones I have ever had on the internet, going back to the 96-99 time frame. Ghostbuster fansites were all over the place. Some of the oldest message boards were devoted to talking all things Ghostbusters. We all sorely wanted it, but Bill Murray just wouldn't fucking budge. Year after year it was nothing but "He's in! He's out. He's in! Er, now he's shredded the script". After the 2000's all that energy and enthusiasm just seemed to die. I consider myself grateful for having gotten Ghostbusters the video game, as it is the only closure we're ever going to get to the original four. This announcement would have made my fucking day twenty years ago. But now I fear it's just all too late.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top