Ghostbusters: Afterlife


I think Ghostbusters had a real world grounded feel to it, like a modern film. Thankfully it lacked that bright cartoony feel of Ghostbusters 2, which btw was one of my biggest childhood disappointments.

Ghostbusters 3 needs to be a serious film with comedy elements similar to the first film and not be a live action cartoon like the second film. No need to reboot, just continue the story (and probably ignore the events of Ghostbusters 2 )

I like Ghostbusters 2. I don't think it's better than the first one, but it's always surprised me that people hate on it so much. It's different than the first one in tone, kind of, but I like it. I wish it would hurry up and come out on Blu-ray.

The big problem Ghostbusters had is that it was a huge hit with kids... like me, I was only 2 when it came out and I loved it.

But it was an adult comedy, not a kids film. It had swearing, smoking, death and destruction, subtle adult humour. I mean, it was made by the Saturday Night guys ffs.

Ghostbusters 2 had to be dumbed down for kids. Which meant bright colours, rap music, no swearing, no smoking, cute smiles and a baby.

I kinda agree with Strontium. A remake could probably work. New story (ish) new actors etc...

I think going back to the adult side of things and the third film forgetting the kid friendly sequel completely to right all the wrongs of the second film, would just turn the franchise into another Highlander.
Originally Posted by doubledenim
Garbage bag people fighting hippy love babies.

Bots gotta be bottin'

Ghostbusters 2 had to be dumbed down for kids. Which meant bright colours, rap music, no swearing, no smoking, cute smiles and a baby.
So, is that the real reason why Janine (Annie Potts) turned into this:

This is how she looked in the first movie:

In the sequel, she transformed into a fiery red emo fire truck sex kitten librarian.

This is probably the real reason why Ghostbusters III is taking so long to come out -- they're working on a way to make Janine look even hotter than she looked in part two. Annie Potts is going through extensive plastic surgeries. Dan Aykroyd is secretly on a voyage looking for the fountain of youth just to make Janine look even younger and sexier than she looked in Ghostbusters II -- 'cause doesn't she look like a much older woman in the first movie? So they have to top her look in the third film, and that's gonna be harder since it's been, like, 25 years since Ghostbusters II.
Click image for larger version

Name:	ghostbusters202.jpg
Views:	4367
Size:	115.9 KB
ID:	10489   Click image for larger version

Name:	WeGotOne--article_image.jpg
Views:	3094
Size:	15.4 KB
ID:	10490

More news in... apparently it is going ahead after all. Again. Until they cancel it. Again. Then start it up again. Again.

You know, I love Dan Aykroyd, but I'm starting to want to shoot him.

Moranis has been found... the elusive actor has said that he wouldn't not do a third Ghostbusters film.
As long as the script is good because he disliked the second film.

On the outside looking in.
Making a GHOSTBUSTERS sequel without Bill Murray makes about as much sense as making a BLUES BROTHERS movie without John Belushi. Oh wait...

I wouldn t like to watch a remake. Usually remakes of not so old movies are kind of ugly and show a lack of ideas (since you are copying an existing movie instead of creating something fresh and original).

Anyway, I love the first movie and kind of like the second one. Though, I totally agree: a third movie without Murray will not be a real Ghostbusters in my mind.

Ghostbuster 3 news in is that Dan Aykroyd has revealed a small plot insight.

The Higgs-Boson particle that has recently been confirmed as fact, will play a role in new scientific research into four planes of existence: Length, height, width and time...

... and the research leads to a new set of Ghostbusters along with some of the old Ghostbusters, being called in to solve what goes wrong. Possibly an extra-dimension being opened up and all sorts of spooky shenanigans goes on...

Emma Stone and Jonah Hill have been confirmed as being offered roles as leading the new cast as well.
Larry King who appeared in a cameo Ghostbusters has been cemented as a confirmation by Aykroyd as making another cameo appearance.

Filming has been almost confirmed as starting in 2014.

Call me skeptical but not convinced this is ever going to happen to be honest, its been on and off since the mid 90's.

Without Bill Murray I wouldn't want to see it either.
'Blogging is not writing. It's just graffiti with punctuation. ' - Contagion

Call me skeptical but not convinced this is ever going to happen to be honest, its been on and off since the mid 90's.

Without Bill Murray I wouldn't want to see it either.
It's just toooo long since the second one, which was not that good. The first one is one of my all time favorite New York movies, the second one was a do you follow that? Too old actors trying to revive the great days and chase a spook one more time before the get walkers?

My idea: The original Ghostbusters should all be dead. Ray, Egon, Winston and Peter are all dead, right from the beginning of the movie. Not just Peter (because Bill Murray doesn't wanna do the movie) -- all of them. Sigourney Weaver's character is dead, too. They were all killed in some kind of horrible ghost incident/ghost fight that happened to them between Ghostbusters II and Ghostbusters III. Something major happened to all of them again and they didn't luck out and beat the ghosts, like they did in parts 1 and 2. They failed and they all died.

A new, younger cast of people come in and decide they want to open up the Ghostbusters business again. There's a lot of fear involved with people wanting to ghostbuster again because of what happened to the original Ghostbusters. But these new guys WANT to do it. They are fearless. They are brave. And they ain't scared of no ghosts.

Ray, Egon and Winston (and Peter, if Bill Murray agreed) pop in either in one scene or a couple of times -- as ghosts. Maybe just as supportive ghosts who are proud of the new people, or maybe they figure into the plot of the story somehow. But no matter what, they are dead, they are ghosts, they don't put on the Ghostbuster gear again and fight. Unless there's a cheesy ending and a ghost (one of them) destroys the other bad ghosts. Maybe they finally defeat the ghosts that killed them.

This way, Bill Murray (and Sigourney Weaver) don't have to appear in the film if Bill Murray doesn't want to because they could always say/joke that Peter and whatshername/Gate Keeper - DANA - they could say they're together in the afterlife and are perfectly fine with that. They gave up on the fight while the other dead Ghostbusters didn't, which is why they show up.

Having the original cast turn into ghosts is kind of genius.
Here, if you have a milkshake, and I have a milkshake, and I have a straw. There it is, that's a straw, you see? You watching?. And my straw reaches acroooooooss the room, and starts to drink your milkshake... I... drink... your... milkshake!
-Daniel, There Will Be Blood

Having the original cast turn into ghosts is kind of genius.
Thanks, Donuts. I'm probably not the first person to think of that, though.

Murray was always the spanner in the works and they were worried about bringing back the team with one person missing...

But now, they'll have two missing, so it won't make much difference not bringing the original cast back or having only one or two of them.

If anything, not having Murray and now Ramis as well, will probably help the project get put into the filming stage.

I believe you're right, Rodent. That's what I said the other day. Before, it just didn't seem PERFECT to do it without all the original Ghostbusters except Murray. NOW, they have no choice -- there's no way to have Harold Ramis in the movie, unless they wanna make a Ghostbusters/Weekend at Bernie's crossover sequel.

Theoretically, they don't even need Ernie Hudson (who wasn't even mentioned in that article for some reason) to make an appearance. It could just be Dan Aykroyd clowning around. Afterall, he is the one so obsessed with making the movie -- now he can make it and be the big star.

Thing is as well is that they can use the excuse of "In Memory Of" to make the film.

Win-win... just as long as the script is better than GB2 and contains at least some ad-libbing like the original did, rather than just being nothing but badly pieced together scripting.

Although, they'll be hard pressed to find any talent these days in comedy and also serious acting, that can ad-lib as well as those guys could.

Murray and Aykroyd are geniuses at that sort of thing and Ramis was a God in terms of subtle humour. Filling their shoes will be hard for the younger actors taking up the roles.

My post above mentions Jonah Hill and Emma Stone... Stone might be ok, but she hasn't got the skills to take a role and twist it the way that Murray, Aykroyd and Ramis could...
Jonah could, but I don't think his kind of comedic acting is right for the franchise.

Unless they get Ben Stiller on board to lead them as Head Ghostbuster... Stiller could do it, he has a comedic timing that would be good for the franchise.
Stiller with Aykroyd as the Heads of the team... that'd be worthwhile...

Hudson was good at the everyman thing and seriousness, so that role will be easy to replace/refill with the cardboard faux-frowny actors that exist today...