Ghostbusters: Afterlife

Somehow I just predict this will flop

It's not a sequel, it's a reboot. Sexist.

I have no idea who two of those people are (the ones who aren't McCarthy and Wiig) and I'm not a big fan of anyone, director included, involved with this film. Full disclosure, I haven't watched anything Feig directed in its entirety. I saw the last 20-30 minutes of Bridesmaids.

I'm pretty much completely against this idea because there's just no way a new Ghostbusters can live up to the original.

__________________

The blonde girl is Kate McKinnon. She's a current SNL cast member--very funny. I feel like she's nearly replaced Wiig already, which is no small task.

The other is Leslie Jones. Until recently she was an SNL writer, but she started doing bits on Weekend Update and has found her way into the skits now and then. Very brash and energetic; the kind of thing some people will love and some will hate. I go back and forth, but some of her scripted bits are really funny, and sometimes she Farleys her way into elevating decent writing through the sheer force of her personality.

Anyway, I expect a way goofier film as a result of the casting. Which is fine by me--like you say, it's not really realistic (and therefore not a good idea) to try to recreate the feel of the old ones. Better to go in a new direction.

Tbh I have never even heard of the cast apart from Wiig and the only thing I've seen her in is Pegg/Frost crapfest Paul.




I doubt I'll see this.

__________________

She gave an amazing performance in Hateship Loveship.
A comedian turned really powerful actress.

I think the general public should all stay away from this film in a way of public protest.

I don't have a problem with the actresses; I just have a problem with the intent. It stinks of Hollywood using the name recognition of Ghostbusters to pass off another slapstick SNL-esque comedy film. A total cash grab and no respect for the fans. Why don't they just make Bridesmaids 2?

I think they probably will. Nobody even likes the fact that this even exists. Literally. I read everybody's comments on Facebook on all the posts about the cast and such, and everybody despises the fact of this film's existence.

Maybe one or two want to see this...but they probably never even heard of the 80's original. Haha!!

Potato patahto. That's even worse in fact since there will probably be no acknowledgement of the original characters at all.

You wouldn't be interested in a Nelson Mandela biopic featuring him as a white man - therefore you are a racist.

Sexist.

I wrote up some junk about how I feel about this film in general. Here ya go.

However, I am against the idea of a reboot of Ghostbusters no matter who they cast, and, no, I'm not sexist.

The original Ghostbusters is the type of film they haven't made in years. A lot of modern comedies are far more conventional in their jokes. It's set-up/punchline or callback as punchline and Ghostbusters was never like that. It was a film where long lines of techno-babble passed as a punchline and one of the jokes is "Why worry? Each one of us is carrying an unlicensed nuclear accelerator on his back."

Who even writes like that anymore? Is there anyone in Hollywood who can make a comedy like that? I doubt it.

Ghostbusters is iconic. Ghostbusters is an institution. It's an integral part of American pop culture.

I'm not saying I want them to recreate the original film. After all, I clearly don't think anyone could do that anyway. However, I'd like them to make a film that respects the original film. I don't need there to be any gross-out jokes or set-up/punchline predictability.

I prefer my comedy to come more from a place of intellect and rapid fire dialog than from a grown woman taking a dump in a sink or from some character being really stupid. One of the best comedies to come from the 2000's is In the Loop, in my opinion, because it takes the idea that comedy can come from a place that doesn't rely on food poisoning or bodily fluids. The original Ghostbusters came from that sort of attitude. There were no stoned man-children or gross-out moments. It was Ghostbusters, and we loved it for exactly what it was.

Unfortunately, that type of comedy just doesn't come out of modern Hollywood very often and I can't imagine a property with this much attention will be brave enough to be different.

Also 3/4 of Ghostbusters was ad-libbed.


Something missing from today's "comedy geniuses"

Not sure if you were joking then - you said that it's "sexist" if you don't find having an all-female cast a good idea.

Well by the same standard then, someone who wouldn't be in favor of a Batman reboot with Catwoman becoming "Catman" and being in a gay relationship with Batman must be "sexist" too, and possibly homophobic. Right? Right??

The only way I can see this film working is if it's a spin-off - if it's an official reboot of the franchise I think it's going to flop hardcore.

It'll flop... it's a gimmick

Just as well I'm one of the three people on the face of the Earth that doesn't like the original film, then.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

People are angry about Ghostbusters 3 having an all-female cast. Not everyone, of course, but a lot of people are. And frankly, being angry and disgusted with it because it's all-female Ghostbusters is perfectly fine, I think.

I wouldn't call it "sexist." There are WOMEN who are against this. There are women who don't want to see the Ghostbusters go from all-men to all-women.

It is a gimmick, as Rodent said, and I think it's an irritating one. You know why they're doing this. It's another "women empowerment" issue. It's another case of women taking over what men typically do -- "We can do it, too!"

Now, I'm sure an all-female Ghostbusters movie can be just fine... but you shouldn't feel sexist if you're against it unless you really are sexist.

To me, I've noticed a trend where they keep taking something in a film or whatever -- that used to be a man's job -- and they're giving it to a woman now. I can't think of any examples right now, but I've been seeing it. This is another example.

Meanwhile, you never see something that began life as an "all-women" thing turn into an "all-guy" thing. Where is Charlie's Angels 3 starring three men? It won't happen. It won't happen! The women will get and steal everything -- the men will get nothing. It doesn't matter that Ghostbusters started as an all-male thing -- it was an all-male thing and that was that. This would be like taking The Hardy Boys and making The Hardy Girls.

And yeah, there are women who don't like the idea of an all-girl Ghostbusters.

Ghostbusters is a GUY thing -- and many women approve of that and like it as a GUY thing.

If they were now four gay Ghostbusters, I'd be disgusted.

This new all-female Ghostbusters 3 is just another case of penis envy.

Whatever, guys get too many movies to themselves anyway.

Also, I'm amused by "why is is called Ghostbusters if it's an all-female cast" like the word "ghostbuster" is inherently masculine.

How many is "too many"? - You calling for Affirmative Action for movies? lol how about a law that says 50% of all films released in theaters must star a woman? That would be reverse discrimination.

Featuring women as the stars of the movie is a bad idea because it doesn't fit the original series. Just like remaking "Mean Girls" as "Mean Guys" with male actors would be a stupid idea.

Yeah I agree - I'm sure political correctness is a motive behind it, political correctness has gone too far.

The 'role reversal' in the "Get in if you want to live" from the new Terminator teaser is a prime example.

The problem with the PC types is that they use "women/blacks/minorities/etc were discriminated against more in the past" as a perpetual cop-out when issues of PC double standards arise. As if 'two wrongs make a right'

Can you even give me one good reason why the original Ghostbusters had to be male?

I thought the same thing, actually. I saw some stuff about the new Terminator movie that's doing the reverse sex thing, just as you did. That's a good example. Not everyone's gonna pick that up or believe in it, but I see exactly what you mean.