Ghostbusters reboot

There are funny women out there, but I cannot abide this “Apatow” style of humour that gets old really quickly. Can’t quite explain it but it’s awkward and drawn out until they’ve rung out every second that they can.
I’ve watched the trailer twice because of your comment and haven’t got a clue what you’re on about.

There are two or three scenes that could have been written specifically for Bill Murray but nothing at all that suggests a Judd Apatow influence.[/quote]

I am alluding to the actresses and the comedy they’re known for, particularly Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy, who both seem to go for the same type of comedy, which just isn’t funny. There is many a scene in both their movie histories that should have ended long before they did, and the slew of films that obviously take their cues from Apatow films.

That was all

My Star Wars comment was a joke as its often a comment made on here. Sadly I now feel I need to be serious, who is Apatow, Wiig and McCarthy.

Have they got a guy playing the Sigourney Weaver part? *

Chris Whatshisface (Thor) is essentially playing Janine AFAIK, if that’s any help to you.

Huey Lewis is going to be happy. I like it. Looks blooming funny
Keep in mind that the originals were a guy fest with some smut and learing at the ladies (re watch and then flame me).

You go girl!

Why (apart from money obvs) does Ghostbusters need re-making?

Because wimminz.

No invented misogyny can not be undone by replacing men with women.

But of course everyone’s to scared to say that this will tank because of it.

According to IMBD, it looks like most of the original cast will be in it as well (except Harold Ramis, for obvious reasons, although i get the feeling he might turn up as a ghost)

But of course everyone’s to scared to say that this will tank because of it.

It was said an awful lot when they first announced it.

It’ll tank coz it’s not funny

Reminds me of the RoboCop remake, just pointless

It was said an awful lot when they first announced

Make a film that fails the Bechdel Test, no-one says anything. Make a film with female leads, millions of Comic Guys complain.

Doesn’t look that bad. Will be difficult to beat the original line-up, but you also have to remember that it was a kids film and we’re now all 30 years older…

What they need is a Star Wars style trailer with Bill Murray turning up at the end.

The humour looks too forced. I think I will wait to *cough* stream it *cough*.

Wow…

…Harold Ramis is dead? I missed that.

yep, couple of years ago if memory serves.

he was the genius behind alot of national lampoons including caddy shack and animal house as well as ground hogg day

I shall watch it when it’s on the telly … for free. 😛

Make a film that fails the Bechdel Test, no-one says anything. Make a film with female leads, millions of Comic Guys complain

Isn’t that an oxymoron?

Why (apart from money obvs) does Ghostbusters need re-making?

All of the fictional characters in every theoretical universe have now been used. There are no more left to be invented or imagined, except by Chuck Tingle. This leaves studio executives and writers with only three viable options:

1) Re-make everything, again and again. This will become more noticeable over time, but it already fairly obvious in the case of Batman. The phenomenon of obsessive fan-service will also make each successive re-make even longer and more tedious, as JJ Abrams (yes, he will be indeed directing all of these by 2019) crow-bars subtle references to Batman: The Dark Knight Rises A Third Time into Batman: The Dark Knight Sleeps Upside Down.

2) Make films about combinations of the already-used characters. This will again become odder as time passes. For now we have Batman vs Superman, but by 2035 we will also have Tintin and Mad Max Crash Weddings, The Curious Incident Of The Dinobots In The Night and Gollum vs Batman: Redemption.

3) Adapt the Erotic Fiction of Chuck Tingle. By about 2040, it will become obvious to everyone that this is the only way to go. Most Tingle adaptations will feature clones of Ryan Reynolds and Taylor Lautner in the lead roles. Obviously, Andy Serkis will play the Living Leftover Chocolate Chip Cookies From My Kitchen Cabinet in the film version of Slammed In The Butt By the Living Leftover Chocolate Chip Cookies From My Kitchen Cabinet and also the Gay Living Donuts in Glazed By The Gay Living Donuts (Yes, these are real titles)

🙂

It looks pants to me. Can’t they remaster the original and just re-release it?

Isn’t that an oxymoron?

…no?

You can’t have a Bechdel Test without female leads.

You can’t have a Bechdel Test without female leads.

You can’t pass it without female leads.

You can theoretically have one with female leads that fails also.

(1) it has to have at least two women in it, who (2) who talk to each other, about (3) something besides a man.[/url]

It’s not a particularly good indicator of a decent film though. Sex in the City will pass, but Gravity will fail.

I’m a little torn on this film though. I thought Bridesmaids was a good film, not without flaws, but a lot funnier than some “comedies” that come out of Hollywood. The dearth of original ideas is more of an issue.

Thanks for the lolz BigDummy 🙂

Hollywood has been remaking movies since the beginning of Hollywood. Think ‘True Grit’, ‘Ladykillers’ etc. If not direct copies then movies based on an original.
It just depends how much time has passed between them that seems to determine how pissy people get. Seems 30 years isn’t quite enough.
Kids will not care a jot, as they don’t have our personal childhood recollections to call upon.

athgray – Member

Harold Ramis must be turning in his grave.

He might make a cameo appearance.[/quote]

😆

When they remake or ‘reboot’ these films you have to remember that the original films don’t go away….

monkeychild – Member

The humour looks too forced.

It does doesn’t it. I didn’t have any other issue with the whole thing tbh, but it doesn’t have any flow, it was pretty much sitcom delivery. But trailers can feel like that- first deadpool trailer was the same frinstance, they’d cut it together in a way that broke all the timing. We’ll see I guess. Very different style of humour, less to my taste but that’s OK. It’s basically start in the same place but let it go in a different direction.

(amuses me a bit, that a lot of the criticism is “why remake things and not really change anything” and a lot is “THIS IS TOO DIFFERENT TO THE SACRED TEXTS!”)

hora – Member

It looks pants to me. Can’t they remaster just leave the original and just re-release it? alone as it’s a classic and needs nothing doing to it

fixed

They’ve still got the street smart black person, though. Because a black scientist would just be ridiculous.

Hold on, there was a Ghosbusters II, how have i missed this?!!?

They’ve still got the street smart black person, though. Because a black scientist street smart white person would just be ridiculous.

FTFY

Hold on, there was a Ghosbusters II, how have i missed this?!!?

You’ve not missed much, TBF.

sandwicheater – Member

Hold on, there was a Ghosbusters II, how have i missed this?!!?

Seriously? SERIOUSLY?

It’s great tbh. Who you gonna call? HE MAN!

Northwind – Member

It’s great tbh. Who you gonna call? HE MAN!

WIIIINNNNNSTTTTOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNN

Well, I’ve got my film for this weekend in the bag.

I knew when my parents told me to play outside more there would be consequences like this. Stupid outdoors.

gonefishin – Member
It’s not a particularly good indicator of a decent film though. Sex in the City will pass, but Gravity won’t

It’s not supposed to identify good films – just show how 50% of the world’s population gets treated on screen (as an accessory for the “interesting” characters, usually).

Someone recut the trailer, making it look much better.

Someone put the old soundtrack over the trailer and chopped some bits out.

Anyway, what makes you think the black lady is ‘street wise’ ?

Perhaps she’s the brains

Anyway, what makes you think the black lady is ‘street wise’ ?

Because she claimed that in the trailer?

Did you watch the trailer?