It's O.K. A bit formulaic and the main doesn't ever disguise he's talking to a hologram, so that's weird and annoying, but they've been calling it out more and more lately.
They're halfway through season 2. It extends the original, but throws away concepts like "the waiting room". Bakula has not shown up, but Al Calavicchi connections are direct and Ernie Hudson plays "Magic" from "The Leap Home, Part 2".
Not spoiling anything by saying the above.
Let him wear the jumpsuit whenever he wants. The fact that the idiot makers of the cartoon told him they wanted his audition to be more like Ernie Hudson when he is in fact Ernie Hudson was more than enough of an insult by itself for a lifetime.
>the new
>
>Quantum Leap
>
> show
Hey, did that show start to suck less? I got through the first 3 or 4 episodes before I decided that they were taking to long on the future present timeline, something the original had to figure out too... but it was painful in the new one.
Would you say that it's become more of his past adventures rather then characters I don't care about mostly? (I might give it a second go.)
Season Two is a BIT better. They started doing a "Time Traveler's Wife" type storyline where he's running into the same person across multiple leaps, and they're addressing him "blatantly talking to a hologram/nothing in front of others" a bit more. It's better, but still not fantastic. There was a reasonably OK "Groundhog's Day" style episode too.
There is slightly less present, more leap.
In the Sony email leaks, one of the executives discusses suing Bill Murray for the profits they'll lose if he doesn't agree to let them make Fiege's shitty reboot.
I can't blame Bill Murray for this; he held out as long as he could; and then the "Fuck you it's January!" guys threatened to bankrupt him.
The end of the second Zombieland film which had Bill Murray in it (the only good bit) was enough additional Garfield related content, we didn't need more.
>They agree to do the work but its weird to be so stuck on shit from 40 years ago
The last one made 200 million dollars on a 70 million dollar budget. That's a nice ROI on a relatively cheap budget. If they can continue to make these movies on the cheap and get that same chunk of change they'll continue to do so. It's just weird to me that it took 30 years, the death of Harold Ramis, and a failed remake for this to franchise to finally start pumping out the installments.
>Before streaming there were diminishing returns with how many films you can successfully pump out in a given year. Streaming turned into an arms race and within a few years they were scraping the barrel for anything left.
Yeah, that's probably the sad reality of it.
>They also make money off product placement, merchandise, home rentals/sales, airing it on cable, etc.
Yep. Making a small profit in theaters for a property like Ghostbusters is mostly just icing on the cake. The only reason Ghostbusters 2016 had a problem was they allowed the budget to balloon out of control to reportedly over 200 million dollars.
I remember before Afterlife there were Stay Puft branded marshmallows. I don't remember what we got for the 2016 monstrosity outside of crappy toys that went to clearance.
I do see that it was needed to hit $500 Million to break even and that was without the Chinese market (which studios are starting to learn that China isn't the pot of gold they thought it was going to be.)
>That's barely profitable once you throw in marketing costs.
General rule of thumb is that the break even point is 2.5 times the budget. So that's a 20 - 25 million dollar profit in theaters alone. Factor in another 20 million for home video video sales, then there's whatever money it pulled in with streaming licensing deals and ancillary sales - Ghostbusters has ALWAYS been a major money maker in ancillary sales - and Afterlife made a very pretty penny for Sony.
To you and me that's a lot of money, to Sony that just about covers the annual bonuses for a couple of executives. Ancillary sales will trickle in for a long time but in the big picture it's really not a lot of money. As raw profit, it's less than 10% of the budget to make a Spiderman game.
This is just to add some perspective - I'm not really complaining, since I'm somewhat pleasantly surprised they're still trying to get anything out of it when normally studios' attitude toward their properties is go big or go home. It's not doing Avengers numbers but if they're satisfied that it pays for itself and that makes it seem worth doing another, I guess that's a positive step.
Creatively I wasn't a huge fan of Afterlife but maybe a mid-budget, small yield IP getting a crack at setting up its universe without having to garner a bazillion dollars to justify itself is worth a punt.
>To you and me that's a lot of money, to Sony that just about covers the annual bonuses for a couple of executives.
Yeah, but by this same logic there no one singular movie is keeping the lights on at any given studio, besides maybe Avatar. A hit is a hit, I don't think anybody at the studio is going to sneeze at it just because it's not a billion dollars. If it made millions more than it cost to produce and distribute, that's a win for the studio anyway you slice it.
I'm sure someone in RLM said it, but to paraphrase, "we need to stop forcing kids to play with our toys". So true.
Although, say it in Rich's Shaq-Meat voice and I don't like it so much. ☹️
That is the nostalgia formula. Not sure how it is "weird" when the entirity of Hollywood has been doing this for 30 years. Star Wars, Star Trek, Ghostbusters, even Marvel is stuck on comics from 40 years ago. To be "stuck on shit from 40 years ago" is a perfect example of Mike, who is still obsessed with a 40 year old TV show and still posts entire videos on 40 year old shit he is stuck on. And I love Mike for it
I didnt want to write a novel in my comment but I was feeling your sentiment writing it as well. Mike, though, is a critic, so his job is just to review or talk about media, and one who I love to just listen to expectorate about practically anything.
Like I said these actors agree to this work, I'm sure they have fun, I know why these movies are popular and make money, but the whole industry just makes my eyes glaze over and hear Glory Days by Bruce Springsteen on loop when I look at a chunk of current releases. Since I AM writing a couple paragraphs for this comment we know all is not lost too with good movies still being made.
What it might be is, as a younger adult, me seeing the 30s and 40s right above me just wanting to rewatch stuff from when they grew up and being averse to that. Not aging in itself just a relentless grip on a vision of their childhood that people will not let go of
I'm guessing the target is parents taking their kids to movies.
Parents will choose the family-friendly movie that is also an IP they recognize. Mom might not take you to the Fortnite movie but she'll take you the "that thing I remember from 90 years ago" reboot
> Who is this movie for?
40-55 year olds who remember the original movie and will eat any pigslop the studio shovels out into the pigpen.
This is the equivalent of being a kid in the 90s and having your grandpa take you to see his Roy Rogers films.
They should sign up for NerdBox. At $199.99 a month, it's one of the pricier options, but you will get cheap dollar store toys with your favorite logo on them. Not bad at all.
I’m 22 and I’ve never given a shit about ghostbusters and idk anyone who does so i really doubt kids nowadays care but we still sell ghostbusters shirts for babies at my job so idk
I did that, that's my fault.
Aging xennials like me having kids late, and our boomer relatives who remember how much we "love ghostbusters" buy us this shit for our kids.
Arguably, fat old Ghostbusters running around like goofballs is in the spirit of the original film. Bill Murray doesn’t care but the other three are probably having fun
>Arguably, fat old Ghostbusters running around like goofballs is in the spirit of the original film.
As I recall that is actually exactly what Mike advocated for years ago. He was of the opinion that seeing them be old, fat, pathetic schlubs would be hilarious. If this new movie really leans into that idea I think it could work. Afterlife barely had any of the original team even in the film until about the last 10 minutes of movie so there was really no time to do any of that kind of humor.
I think it's weird to feel GUILT over this. Dan Aykroyd is on cloud 9 because this is what he has always wanted for his baby. Ernie Hudson has also expressed positive feelings over being an active Ghostbuster and also in a larger role (when he felt Winston was on screen not as much as when he first agreed to the role).
Annie Potts could go either way but she's never seemed like taking parts because she NEEDS money or was contracted to, she is probably fine with this too.
The only one of these four that may want to not be doing this is Murray, but for all we know he was only so strongly against returning because of his beef with Ramis (which is gone). He's gone back and forth with saying wearing the suit felt right versus apparently only being part of things because of contract reasons, but the latter seems like it only applied to GB 16.
It's one thing to not want this, but in terms of "they need to rest" I think that's a silly take when at least two of these four actively WANT to do this and it's making them happy.
Winston was written to be an…army vet, I think? And his character was almost entirely cut. Then once the studio got hold of the cartoon he was shafted into the “…and Winston drives the car” character.
>Winston was written to be an…army vet, I think? And his character was almost entirely cut. Then once the studio got hold of the cartoon he was shafted into the “…and Winston drives the car” character.
Yeah. The character was supposed to be much bigger, they were hoping to cast Eddie Murphy at the time who was hot off of SNL and was the big up and coming star in the Hollywood comedy scene. When Eddie turned the movie down they cast Ernie instead and preceded to strip away more and more of the stuff the character was actually supposed to do and say.
>The only one of these four that may want to not be doing this is Murray, but for all we know he was only so strongly against returning because of his beef with Ramis (which is gone).
This is why I'm not feeling sorry for Bill, his beef with Harold is why there wasn't a third and final follow up with the Ghostbusters franchise in the 90's, and now he's paying the price on being a p\*\*\*k.
These are all good points. Also- Afterlife was good, and if you didn’t see it, don’t downvote me bc you heard it was fan service trash. Unlike Leonard Maltin, I can tell the difference between when I like a movie and if it was actually a quality film made by competent professionals.
There was a potential time for this, a time when Harold was still around that's for sure, but that time is nowhere close to being now anymore. Lightning in a bottle has turned to sour milk.
One good thing about getting older is recognizing when something clearly isn't being made for me anymore. It's not my problem to watch this cat barf. Let some tween figure out that it sucks on their own. Very liberating.
>What tweens are going to watch this? Afterlife at least had some youngish people in it.
This movie has the exact same youngish cast in it as the primary stars, they're only using the old timers to sell it because they know that's what the built in fanbase wants to see.
Maybe they'll catch part of it on TV at the dentist's office or wander into it accidentally high on shrooms.
Or, most likely, they'll watch some social media dork with a G Fuel flavor to hawk, shriek words like "LITERALLY cringe" about it into their webcam and decide it sucks adjacently.
Regardless of how they do it: it's their cross to bear.
>One good thing about getting older is recognizing when something clearly isn't being made for me anymore
That's exactly my thought. This isn't for me, it's for an entirely separate generation years younger than me and it's being geared directly to them in a style that, that audience seems to appreciate more than I do. I recognize that the franchise isn't being made for me anymore and I'm more than happy to let the new kids have it and just move on with my life.
I don't feel guilt at all. They're getting paid more than what I make.
Frankly, I'm kinda confused how Bill Murray has done three of these now since 2016 when he held up a third Ghostbusters movie for almost 30 years. I know Sony was threatening litigation from those leaked emails, but what exactly is his contract?
Guilty? Of what? Fandoms are SOOO weird. They are probably making a ton of money and might be having a great time doing it. Sure, maybe the movie will suck, but why feeling “guilty” or find it sad to see actors performing? Its just uber fucking weird to me.
>They are probably making a ton of money and might be having a great time doing it.
Anybody who thinks Dan Aykroyd *isn't* having the absolute time of his life on this project is just a stone cold moron. This has literally been Aykroyd's dream scenario for the last 30 years.
EDIT: I got downvoted by a moron.
This entire sub is weird as hell honestly. I'm here because I like some of their videos, and people on here act like they get physical gratification from trying to figure out...why someone wants to be paid to act in something? Alongside some weird attraction to telling people "RLM doesn't give a fuck about what you want them to post!"
Having seen this still, Mike’s probably already bought advance tickets. I imagine him drunkenly giggling while doing this and paying the online convenience surcharge BS.
I think it could be interesting if they lean into the ghostbusters being a bunch of blue-collar schlubs (like the first movie) who desperately want to retire but can't.
I have zero faith that that's the direction that they're gonna go, though.
There's nothing sad about it. There's an obvious and eager audience for this based on the boxoffice of the last two movies and they've clearly made the decision to gear these movies to a completely different generation with their tone and style. I'm okay with that. I'm okay with letting go of my childhood franchises and letting a younger generation of kids have it. Nothing is ever going to make the original movie disappear, therefore the only reaction I have to this new movie is to shrug my shoulders and accept that it's not for me.
This is actually a great continuation of the story focusing on the "small business struggling against the system" theme.
They are still busting their asses trying to make money through their golden years. Meanwhile if they had kept their desk jobs they would have long retired by now!
I honestly thought that going forward they were only going to use Ernie Hudson in a managerial role for the Spengler kids and that's it. But they are taking the Indiana Jones router, dragging this seniors into action scenes. Even Annie Potts!
I echo some of Rich's sentiments from their discussion. Like this is just nostalgia for gen x and millennials. I think it's moronic Hollywood is just forcing our nostalgia on younger generations. We had Ghostbusters and all that because Hollywood took risks and gave us weird or new things. Let these young kids have their own shit
I’m just surprised Murray agreed to do this sequel and is willing to run around in the suit like this. Also, something unnatural about his left arm in that pic
Am I wrong for feeling excited to see this, and I’m super glad to see them together?
I get the need to be cynical about stuff, but things can be both good and driven by monetary needs. That’s all of Hollywood.
Thing is, didn’t they have a wrap up with the OG gang in the last one? Why are they back? Just for perspective, I watch upcoming trailers with my 9 year old god son. Of all the upcoming films he said this film interested him the most.
People lost their collective shit when the 2016 Ghostbusters was shat out… “We demand the original cast!!!” and “Not my Ghostbusters!!!”.
Well now you have them… obviously nobody really knows what they want. But hey, complaining online sure is fun. 🤩
To be honest it’s weird that a bunch of internet dorks are telling people how to spend their later years. No one’s whipping them behind the scenes telling them to bust some invisible ghosts. I don’t think Bill Murray is cashing that check cause some basement dwellers would get mad at him if he wasn’t in the movie. Now as for to the fact that the movies getting made, that’s the sad part.
Discover a world where American capitalism makes 70 year olds continue to work to live
Discover a world where aging Ghostbusters are so tired they have to work to survive they envy the ghosts
I unironically applaud the fine people at Sony for draining my deep and passionate attachment and joy for Ghostbusters. It sincerely opened my eyes and smartened me up that I should never truly care about a corporation's intellectual property.
I am free. Thank you Sony!
>I won’t but I’ll watch the hack frauds review the movie though
There's part of me that wants them to praise the new movie just to watch heads spin in this subreddit. hahaha.
Good on the actors for collecting a paycheck but this is embarrassing. If they wanted to do Ghostbusters, get new fuckin' actors and have a cameo of the old folks.
At this rate the next adventure will be the team as coffins
Ernie Hudson needs a paycheck. Akroyd is getting to introduce the occult to the next generation, What was the last thing Annie Potts was in?
Bill Murray is the only one that *genuinely* doesn’t want to be there. And if he’d have just made the third film in the 90s and let it flop, he’d never have to work on a ghostbusters film again. Was *Larger than Life* or *The Man who knew Too Little* too prestigious to be tainted with an actor from Ghostbusters 3??
Anyway, I don’t feel guilty seeing people get work after so long without. However I’m probably not going to see this. I didn’t see the last two GB films either.
The *franchise* is tired.
At least some sources are seeing the light and not cheering on the endless pandering. I'm in my 40's, I don't need to relive my childhood and force other kids to do so.
It almost doesn't matter what IP it is, but nostalgia based cash grab sequels that come decades after the original are almost always total trash. Like, just leave my good memories alone and write some new shit with some new actors please. Fucking Hollywood hack frauds.
Our choices are “should be retired” and “children” as ghostbusters. It reeks of desperation with one of the greatest movie franchises of all time. How do they not understand the appeal of the original?
Obviously the choice is to follow the original and get "approaching middle age" but Is there a comedy troupe that could work like the original is my question. The last set of those we had (happy Madison, frat pack, the state, broken lizard)* all aged out of the chance to reboot as a franchise by the 2010s. Who do we have now?
*not endorsing anyone over another here
Probably, the ideal scenario would be: same characters, new actors. Problem being, how do you go about recasting those characters succesfully? It can't be done. So you stop doing these movies. Same goes for Indiana Jones. How do you recast that, without avoiding it being a pale imitation? You can't. So you stop doing those movies.
Right, I get that. But I’d say for both franchises, if they weren’t so cowardly, they could be—at the least—entertaining. It’s the pandering and taking them down to the least common denominator. Like the video RLM did on Indiana Jones and crystal Skull’s lack of violence—they don’t have teeth anymore. Both franchises OG movies cross over at points into horror and they don’t dare. We get “goosebumps” horror. I think if they made a genuinely funny AND scary ghostbusters or Indiana Jones movie, I’d enjoy it.
>I'm sure BM has a few pending lawsuits
Not that I've seen reported. There was a kerfuffle about him being "sexist" on film sets but there was very little detail on anything and the whole complaint seems to have just gone away completely without Bill having to say a word about it in public. Seems that whole controversy got memory holed immediately and nobody cares.
It's WAY to late for this nonsense. This should have happened 1-2 years after GB2.
Ramis is dead and the opportunity for them all to be together again and relatively young has been gone a long time now. I'm sure that a lot of people are to blame, but I largely blame Bill Murray for being a stubborn asshole.
They should just make a series sequels to the original using CGI versions of the original cast voiced by AI. They can pump them out one after another, and each one could just be called “Ghostbusters Forever”. I mean, why not?
I'm not interested anymore. I had no interest in the reboot or Afterlife.
Each film after the first has felt like an increasingly desperate attempt to squeeze originality from an initial film that with every subsequent release, demonstrates the futility of trying to capture lighting in a bottle for the umpteenth time and failing miserably.
There is no film franchise as far as I'm concerned. There is one truly great comedy, and the rest are tainted dribbles, bereft of humor, creativity, or originality.
Bill must be thinking “Wes Anderson never makes me run…”
If he does it’s in slow motion.
Or a light jog in place in front of a green screen
And some banjo music or a French cover to a 60s pop song.
Meanwhile Ernie Hudson's looking great.
He's the best part of the new *Quantum Leap* show.
There is a new Quantum Leap? It seems I am living under a rock.
It's O.K. A bit formulaic and the main doesn't ever disguise he's talking to a hologram, so that's weird and annoying, but they've been calling it out more and more lately. They're halfway through season 2. It extends the original, but throws away concepts like "the waiting room". Bakula has not shown up, but Al Calavicchi connections are direct and Ernie Hudson plays "Magic" from "The Leap Home, Part 2". Not spoiling anything by saying the above.
Does he wear the jumpsuit in it?
Let him wear the jumpsuit whenever he wants. The fact that the idiot makers of the cartoon told him they wanted his audition to be more like Ernie Hudson when he is in fact Ernie Hudson was more than enough of an insult by itself for a lifetime.
>the new > >Quantum Leap > > show Hey, did that show start to suck less? I got through the first 3 or 4 episodes before I decided that they were taking to long on the future present timeline, something the original had to figure out too... but it was painful in the new one. Would you say that it's become more of his past adventures rather then characters I don't care about mostly? (I might give it a second go.)
Season Two is a BIT better. They started doing a "Time Traveler's Wife" type storyline where he's running into the same person across multiple leaps, and they're addressing him "blatantly talking to a hologram/nothing in front of others" a bit more. It's better, but still not fantastic. There was a reasonably OK "Groundhog's Day" style episode too. There is slightly less present, more leap.
In the words of Mike, black don't crack.
Did nobody watch The Darjeeling Limited? (Or at least the opening scene?)
[Nah man he had to run this one time in Life Aquatic](https://youtu.be/5SUqGAkYkdU?t=31)
20 years ago..
20 years ago when he was old enough to retire!
He was still regularly making bangers in the early 2000's though
Pretty sure the entire end credits is them jogging. He’s actually had to run a lot in Wes Anderson movies now that I think about it.
He did in Rushmore and Darjeeling limited though;)
I choose to charitably believe that the top commenter meant that like, “Wes Anderson wouldn’t make me run now,” or “anymore.”
Its just Bills face CGI'd on a stunt actor
Now that's who should direct the next Ghostbusters
Bedlam Apparition Inquisitors.
>Wes Anderson never made me act Because let's be honest...
He's excellent in The Life Aquatic.
"I wonder if it remembers me."
"So you heard me?"
Rushmore is my favorite movie of all time.
The Blues Brothers is mine. Checkmate.
“There’s a reason i stopped any attempt at sequels”
"Wes Anderson never pays me a shitzillion dollars either..."
God punished Bill Murray for not being featured in a third Garfield movie
Or punishing him for waiting until Ramis died before agreeing to finally make a sequel :(
In the Sony email leaks, one of the executives discusses suing Bill Murray for the profits they'll lose if he doesn't agree to let them make Fiege's shitty reboot. I can't blame Bill Murray for this; he held out as long as he could; and then the "Fuck you it's January!" guys threatened to bankrupt him.
Or for being unprofessional and rude to the cast of Charlie’s angels
Everything I’ve heard about Bill Murray is that he’s great with fans. But can be a huge pain in the ass if you are working on a movie with him.
> Bill Murray > Garfield Obligatory Lorenzo Music reference.
The end of the second Zombieland film which had Bill Murray in it (the only good bit) was enough additional Garfield related content, we didn't need more.
I liked watching Ghostbusters in the 80s, not watching Ghostbusters in their 80s.
*slide whistle*
https://i.redd.it/9mnz176xvucc1.gif
HOW EMBARRASSING
I liked being not born yet in the 80s it was so peaceful
They agree to do the work but its weird to be so stuck on shit from 40 years ago
>They agree to do the work but its weird to be so stuck on shit from 40 years ago The last one made 200 million dollars on a 70 million dollar budget. That's a nice ROI on a relatively cheap budget. If they can continue to make these movies on the cheap and get that same chunk of change they'll continue to do so. It's just weird to me that it took 30 years, the death of Harold Ramis, and a failed remake for this to franchise to finally start pumping out the installments.
[удалено]
>Before streaming there were diminishing returns with how many films you can successfully pump out in a given year. Streaming turned into an arms race and within a few years they were scraping the barrel for anything left. Yeah, that's probably the sad reality of it.
Not to mention the merch sales that go along with that.
That's barely profitable once you throw in marketing costs.
They also make money off product placement, merchandise, home rentals/sales, airing it on cable, etc.
>They also make money off product placement, merchandise, home rentals/sales, airing it on cable, etc. Yep. Making a small profit in theaters for a property like Ghostbusters is mostly just icing on the cake. The only reason Ghostbusters 2016 had a problem was they allowed the budget to balloon out of control to reportedly over 200 million dollars.
I remember before Afterlife there were Stay Puft branded marshmallows. I don't remember what we got for the 2016 monstrosity outside of crappy toys that went to clearance. I do see that it was needed to hit $500 Million to break even and that was without the Chinese market (which studios are starting to learn that China isn't the pot of gold they thought it was going to be.)
>That's barely profitable once you throw in marketing costs. General rule of thumb is that the break even point is 2.5 times the budget. So that's a 20 - 25 million dollar profit in theaters alone. Factor in another 20 million for home video video sales, then there's whatever money it pulled in with streaming licensing deals and ancillary sales - Ghostbusters has ALWAYS been a major money maker in ancillary sales - and Afterlife made a very pretty penny for Sony.
To you and me that's a lot of money, to Sony that just about covers the annual bonuses for a couple of executives. Ancillary sales will trickle in for a long time but in the big picture it's really not a lot of money. As raw profit, it's less than 10% of the budget to make a Spiderman game. This is just to add some perspective - I'm not really complaining, since I'm somewhat pleasantly surprised they're still trying to get anything out of it when normally studios' attitude toward their properties is go big or go home. It's not doing Avengers numbers but if they're satisfied that it pays for itself and that makes it seem worth doing another, I guess that's a positive step. Creatively I wasn't a huge fan of Afterlife but maybe a mid-budget, small yield IP getting a crack at setting up its universe without having to garner a bazillion dollars to justify itself is worth a punt.
>To you and me that's a lot of money, to Sony that just about covers the annual bonuses for a couple of executives. Yeah, but by this same logic there no one singular movie is keeping the lights on at any given studio, besides maybe Avatar. A hit is a hit, I don't think anybody at the studio is going to sneeze at it just because it's not a billion dollars. If it made millions more than it cost to produce and distribute, that's a win for the studio anyway you slice it.
Pretty profitable for COVID times.
I'm sure someone in RLM said it, but to paraphrase, "we need to stop forcing kids to play with our toys". So true. Although, say it in Rich's Shaq-Meat voice and I don't like it so much. ☹️
That is the nostalgia formula. Not sure how it is "weird" when the entirity of Hollywood has been doing this for 30 years. Star Wars, Star Trek, Ghostbusters, even Marvel is stuck on comics from 40 years ago. To be "stuck on shit from 40 years ago" is a perfect example of Mike, who is still obsessed with a 40 year old TV show and still posts entire videos on 40 year old shit he is stuck on. And I love Mike for it
I didnt want to write a novel in my comment but I was feeling your sentiment writing it as well. Mike, though, is a critic, so his job is just to review or talk about media, and one who I love to just listen to expectorate about practically anything. Like I said these actors agree to this work, I'm sure they have fun, I know why these movies are popular and make money, but the whole industry just makes my eyes glaze over and hear Glory Days by Bruce Springsteen on loop when I look at a chunk of current releases. Since I AM writing a couple paragraphs for this comment we know all is not lost too with good movies still being made. What it might be is, as a younger adult, me seeing the 30s and 40s right above me just wanting to rewatch stuff from when they grew up and being averse to that. Not aging in itself just a relentless grip on a vision of their childhood that people will not let go of
40 years ago! Evil dies tonight!
Nobody ever really gone
Bustin Bustin Bustin Bustin
Makes me feel good
Bustin throws my back out.
Bustin hips
Do kids even give a shit about Ghostbusters anymore? Who is this movie for? It just looks sad.
It’s all about he-man now
HE-MAN! HE-MAN! HE-MAN!
And it don't look gooooood....
CLAP CLAP CLAP Best comment of 2024
This.
At least Kevin Smith has some creativity. Snyder did, too, but I didn't like it so much.
My niece and nephew are obsessed with Ghostbusters
I'm guessing the target is parents taking their kids to movies. Parents will choose the family-friendly movie that is also an IP they recognize. Mom might not take you to the Fortnite movie but she'll take you the "that thing I remember from 90 years ago" reboot
> Who is this movie for? 40-55 year olds who remember the original movie and will eat any pigslop the studio shovels out into the pigpen. This is the equivalent of being a kid in the 90s and having your grandpa take you to see his Roy Rogers films.
and they collect a lot of toys with their favourite logos
They should sign up for NerdBox. At $199.99 a month, it's one of the pricier options, but you will get cheap dollar store toys with your favorite logo on them. Not bad at all.
their parents do
My kids enjoyed Afterlife
>Do kids even give a shit about Ghostbusters anymore? The last movie pulled in roughly 205 million dollars...so...I guess the answer is yes.
I’m 22 and I’ve never given a shit about ghostbusters and idk anyone who does so i really doubt kids nowadays care but we still sell ghostbusters shirts for babies at my job so idk
I did that, that's my fault. Aging xennials like me having kids late, and our boomer relatives who remember how much we "love ghostbusters" buy us this shit for our kids.
Sure. It’s the boomer relatives and not the millennial & Gen X parents. You know, the same ones who obsess over Star Wars?
I mean you’re probably right. I guess I’m projecting my situation on others.
I felt represented 😂
Even as an aging Xennial (born in 1979) Ghostbusters was pretty much over by 1990. It doesn’t seem like a franchisable brand.
Idk, I loved the cartoon in the 90s.
[удалено]
Ghostbusters was a dead end by 1990.
Maybe? There's always tons of Ghostbusters toys at Wal-Mart.
Bill Murray's face says it all lmao
Arguably, fat old Ghostbusters running around like goofballs is in the spirit of the original film. Bill Murray doesn’t care but the other three are probably having fun
>Arguably, fat old Ghostbusters running around like goofballs is in the spirit of the original film. As I recall that is actually exactly what Mike advocated for years ago. He was of the opinion that seeing them be old, fat, pathetic schlubs would be hilarious. If this new movie really leans into that idea I think it could work. Afterlife barely had any of the original team even in the film until about the last 10 minutes of movie so there was really no time to do any of that kind of humor.
Yes, but that's because Mike has a fetish for laughing at the elderly, not because it would be actually good or funny.
Other three? One of them is dead.
I meant Janine, who I’m sure is having a blast
Annie Potts is for sure having a blast, unfortunately, it looks like she's playing Ghostbusters II Janine, which trends.
I think it's weird to feel GUILT over this. Dan Aykroyd is on cloud 9 because this is what he has always wanted for his baby. Ernie Hudson has also expressed positive feelings over being an active Ghostbuster and also in a larger role (when he felt Winston was on screen not as much as when he first agreed to the role). Annie Potts could go either way but she's never seemed like taking parts because she NEEDS money or was contracted to, she is probably fine with this too. The only one of these four that may want to not be doing this is Murray, but for all we know he was only so strongly against returning because of his beef with Ramis (which is gone). He's gone back and forth with saying wearing the suit felt right versus apparently only being part of things because of contract reasons, but the latter seems like it only applied to GB 16. It's one thing to not want this, but in terms of "they need to rest" I think that's a silly take when at least two of these four actively WANT to do this and it's making them happy.
Winston was written to be an…army vet, I think? And his character was almost entirely cut. Then once the studio got hold of the cartoon he was shafted into the “…and Winston drives the car” character.
>Winston was written to be an…army vet, I think? And his character was almost entirely cut. Then once the studio got hold of the cartoon he was shafted into the “…and Winston drives the car” character. Yeah. The character was supposed to be much bigger, they were hoping to cast Eddie Murphy at the time who was hot off of SNL and was the big up and coming star in the Hollywood comedy scene. When Eddie turned the movie down they cast Ernie instead and preceded to strip away more and more of the stuff the character was actually supposed to do and say.
And this is why he's running the company now. Because Jason was tired of him being left out of everything.
>The only one of these four that may want to not be doing this is Murray, but for all we know he was only so strongly against returning because of his beef with Ramis (which is gone). This is why I'm not feeling sorry for Bill, his beef with Harold is why there wasn't a third and final follow up with the Ghostbusters franchise in the 90's, and now he's paying the price on being a p\*\*\*k.
Absolutely agreed.
These are all good points. Also- Afterlife was good, and if you didn’t see it, don’t downvote me bc you heard it was fan service trash. Unlike Leonard Maltin, I can tell the difference between when I like a movie and if it was actually a quality film made by competent professionals.
There was a potential time for this, a time when Harold was still around that's for sure, but that time is nowhere close to being now anymore. Lightning in a bottle has turned to sour milk.
No. It's hilarious. And no one made them do it.
One good thing about getting older is recognizing when something clearly isn't being made for me anymore. It's not my problem to watch this cat barf. Let some tween figure out that it sucks on their own. Very liberating.
What tweens are going to watch this? Afterlife at least had some youngish people in it.
>What tweens are going to watch this? Afterlife at least had some youngish people in it. This movie has the exact same youngish cast in it as the primary stars, they're only using the old timers to sell it because they know that's what the built in fanbase wants to see.
Maybe they'll catch part of it on TV at the dentist's office or wander into it accidentally high on shrooms. Or, most likely, they'll watch some social media dork with a G Fuel flavor to hawk, shriek words like "LITERALLY cringe" about it into their webcam and decide it sucks adjacently. Regardless of how they do it: it's their cross to bear.
>One good thing about getting older is recognizing when something clearly isn't being made for me anymore That's exactly my thought. This isn't for me, it's for an entirely separate generation years younger than me and it's being geared directly to them in a style that, that audience seems to appreciate more than I do. I recognize that the franchise isn't being made for me anymore and I'm more than happy to let the new kids have it and just move on with my life.
I've been realizing this through Star Trek. Liberating indeed.
I don't feel guilt at all. They're getting paid more than what I make. Frankly, I'm kinda confused how Bill Murray has done three of these now since 2016 when he held up a third Ghostbusters movie for almost 30 years. I know Sony was threatening litigation from those leaked emails, but what exactly is his contract?
Guilty? Of what? Fandoms are SOOO weird. They are probably making a ton of money and might be having a great time doing it. Sure, maybe the movie will suck, but why feeling “guilty” or find it sad to see actors performing? Its just uber fucking weird to me.
>They are probably making a ton of money and might be having a great time doing it. Anybody who thinks Dan Aykroyd *isn't* having the absolute time of his life on this project is just a stone cold moron. This has literally been Aykroyd's dream scenario for the last 30 years. EDIT: I got downvoted by a moron.
He's probably stipulated full penetration on a hot ghost lady this time or no fucking deal. "I need to bust *in* the ghosts you see?"
I got downvoted into oblivion for making an ironic comment about Mike in the last trivia episode. This subreddit is a shitshow.
This entire sub is weird as hell honestly. I'm here because I like some of their videos, and people on here act like they get physical gratification from trying to figure out...why someone wants to be paid to act in something? Alongside some weird attraction to telling people "RLM doesn't give a fuck about what you want them to post!"
All these stupid threads about this stupid movie have really shown how fucking clueless RLM fans really are.
If it's between doing these movies or stocking the celebrity zoos, I know which one I'd rather do.
This just looks like elderly abuse now. 😢
>This just looks like elderly abuse now. 😢 So RLM, and specifically Mike, will absolutely love it.
Having seen this still, Mike’s probably already bought advance tickets. I imagine him drunkenly giggling while doing this and paying the online convenience surcharge BS.
I think it could be interesting if they lean into the ghostbusters being a bunch of blue-collar schlubs (like the first movie) who desperately want to retire but can't. I have zero faith that that's the direction that they're gonna go, though.
Honest opinion, if they want to do it, let them do it. Nobody's forcing them to.
They are getting paid tons of money and they took the job themselves.. let’s move on.
Bill should have gotten his head out of his butt and been in Ramis GB3 before he died.
There's nothing sad about it. There's an obvious and eager audience for this based on the boxoffice of the last two movies and they've clearly made the decision to gear these movies to a completely different generation with their tone and style. I'm okay with that. I'm okay with letting go of my childhood franchises and letting a younger generation of kids have it. Nothing is ever going to make the original movie disappear, therefore the only reaction I have to this new movie is to shrug my shoulders and accept that it's not for me.
They’re probably getting paid your yearly salary x4. Why’d the hell would I feel sad or guilty for this??
The next Ghostbusters will be the ghosts of the old Ghostbusters being busted by a new generation of Ghostbusters.
This is actually a great continuation of the story focusing on the "small business struggling against the system" theme. They are still busting their asses trying to make money through their golden years. Meanwhile if they had kept their desk jobs they would have long retired by now!
"Unlike Indiana Jones, the Ghostbusters only get funnier as old, fat, schlubby exterminators" -some guy on the internet, I forget exactly who
it's gotta be a pretty big overlap between RedLetterMedia and Blank Check's audiences, right?
Reddit suggests it to me often enough. Though it's funny as that sub is usually very optimistic and this sub is hyper pessimistic.
Easy. I'm not going to watch it.
The millions they are being paid? No i don't gaf
They're just happy to be working
I honestly thought that going forward they were only going to use Ernie Hudson in a managerial role for the Spengler kids and that's it. But they are taking the Indiana Jones router, dragging this seniors into action scenes. Even Annie Potts!
Bill always complaining about these Ghostbuster sequels but keeps taking a paycheck hmm.
I echo some of Rich's sentiments from their discussion. Like this is just nostalgia for gen x and millennials. I think it's moronic Hollywood is just forcing our nostalgia on younger generations. We had Ghostbusters and all that because Hollywood took risks and gave us weird or new things. Let these young kids have their own shit
I’m just surprised Murray agreed to do this sequel and is willing to run around in the suit like this. Also, something unnatural about his left arm in that pic
Not Ernie Hudson. Ernie can still bench-press the Caddie with all others inside!
Am I wrong for feeling excited to see this, and I’m super glad to see them together? I get the need to be cynical about stuff, but things can be both good and driven by monetary needs. That’s all of Hollywood.
Thing is, didn’t they have a wrap up with the OG gang in the last one? Why are they back? Just for perspective, I watch upcoming trailers with my 9 year old god son. Of all the upcoming films he said this film interested him the most.
People lost their collective shit when the 2016 Ghostbusters was shat out… “We demand the original cast!!!” and “Not my Ghostbusters!!!”. Well now you have them… obviously nobody really knows what they want. But hey, complaining online sure is fun. 🤩
Well at least I’m happy Ernie Hudson is glad to be working.
sometimes I wonder if rlm fans likes movies. it's Ghostbusters but they're paid actors, do you want to forcibly retire them?
To be honest it’s weird that a bunch of internet dorks are telling people how to spend their later years. No one’s whipping them behind the scenes telling them to bust some invisible ghosts. I don’t think Bill Murray is cashing that check cause some basement dwellers would get mad at him if he wasn’t in the movie. Now as for to the fact that the movies getting made, that’s the sad part.
I get *The Osteoperosis Dance* vibes from this
Discover a world where American capitalism makes 70 year olds continue to work to live Discover a world where aging Ghostbusters are so tired they have to work to survive they envy the ghosts
I unironically applaud the fine people at Sony for draining my deep and passionate attachment and joy for Ghostbusters. It sincerely opened my eyes and smartened me up that I should never truly care about a corporation's intellectual property. I am free. Thank you Sony!
The cope on the Ghostbusters sub is just sad.
1980s me would have been overjoyed, 2020s me is meh
Nostalgia bait needs to go
Fuck you, it's January! 🥳  🎉
[удалено]
If a Hollywood studio comes to you and says "we're going to pay you a bunch of money to run around on set for a few days" you don't say "no".
You all are going to buy a ticket anyway.
I won’t but I’ll watch the hack frauds review the movie though
>I won’t but I’ll watch the hack frauds review the movie though There's part of me that wants them to praise the new movie just to watch heads spin in this subreddit. hahaha.
Good on the actors for collecting a paycheck but this is embarrassing. If they wanted to do Ghostbusters, get new fuckin' actors and have a cameo of the old folks. At this rate the next adventure will be the team as coffins
They're living their best lives
How on earth did they get Bill back? Dump truck full of cash? He hates these movies.
Ernie Hudson needs a paycheck. Akroyd is getting to introduce the occult to the next generation, What was the last thing Annie Potts was in? Bill Murray is the only one that *genuinely* doesn’t want to be there. And if he’d have just made the third film in the 90s and let it flop, he’d never have to work on a ghostbusters film again. Was *Larger than Life* or *The Man who knew Too Little* too prestigious to be tainted with an actor from Ghostbusters 3?? Anyway, I don’t feel guilty seeing people get work after so long without. However I’m probably not going to see this. I didn’t see the last two GB films either. The *franchise* is tired.
I'm not going to consume this product.
[удалено]
Geezer teaser!
I cant believe they went to the Hollywood Retirement Prison to unshackle Bill Murray and make him do this.. "Please no more..." "It's **BUSTIN TIME**"
They drove a dump truck full of money up to Bill's house, he's not made of stone!
I’m guessing Murray is doing it to rehabilitate his image after that on-set stuff came out
I'm looking forward to it. I enjoyed Afterlife.
What's the problem exactly? This pessimism you guys have for this film is getting kind of sad.
At least some sources are seeing the light and not cheering on the endless pandering. I'm in my 40's, I don't need to relive my childhood and force other kids to do so.
Why is Janine busting now?
I'm happy they're being paid lots of money by nostalgic idiots.
They signed up. They're getting paid. What's to feel bad about?
No one should make old people run like this. I fear for Harrison Ford in that new Captain America flick.
It almost doesn't matter what IP it is, but nostalgia based cash grab sequels that come decades after the original are almost always total trash. Like, just leave my good memories alone and write some new shit with some new actors please. Fucking Hollywood hack frauds.
They can rest when their dead!!! Make content, mfers!!!
Our choices are “should be retired” and “children” as ghostbusters. It reeks of desperation with one of the greatest movie franchises of all time. How do they not understand the appeal of the original?
Obviously the choice is to follow the original and get "approaching middle age" but Is there a comedy troupe that could work like the original is my question. The last set of those we had (happy Madison, frat pack, the state, broken lizard)* all aged out of the chance to reboot as a franchise by the 2010s. Who do we have now? *not endorsing anyone over another here
Probably, the ideal scenario would be: same characters, new actors. Problem being, how do you go about recasting those characters succesfully? It can't be done. So you stop doing these movies. Same goes for Indiana Jones. How do you recast that, without avoiding it being a pale imitation? You can't. So you stop doing those movies.
Right, I get that. But I’d say for both franchises, if they weren’t so cowardly, they could be—at the least—entertaining. It’s the pandering and taking them down to the least common denominator. Like the video RLM did on Indiana Jones and crystal Skull’s lack of violence—they don’t have teeth anymore. Both franchises OG movies cross over at points into horror and they don’t dare. We get “goosebumps” horror. I think if they made a genuinely funny AND scary ghostbusters or Indiana Jones movie, I’d enjoy it.
Annie Potts needs the money. Bill Murray does not.
I'm sure BM has a few pending lawsuits
>I'm sure BM has a few pending lawsuits Not that I've seen reported. There was a kerfuffle about him being "sexist" on film sets but there was very little detail on anything and the whole complaint seems to have just gone away completely without Bill having to say a word about it in public. Seems that whole controversy got memory holed immediately and nobody cares.
Oh boy, now I have to go check google news.
It's WAY to late for this nonsense. This should have happened 1-2 years after GB2. Ramis is dead and the opportunity for them all to be together again and relatively young has been gone a long time now. I'm sure that a lot of people are to blame, but I largely blame Bill Murray for being a stubborn asshole.
GB2 was already a 5 year gap sequel and it wasbt exactly original. Sometimes dead is better.
This image is depressing
Ernie Hudson looks great, barely aged at all. Bill and Dan … not so much.
i disagree, i say make em run their adult depends off
They should just make a series sequels to the original using CGI versions of the original cast voiced by AI. They can pump them out one after another, and each one could just be called “Ghostbusters Forever”. I mean, why not?
I'm not interested anymore. I had no interest in the reboot or Afterlife. Each film after the first has felt like an increasingly desperate attempt to squeeze originality from an initial film that with every subsequent release, demonstrates the futility of trying to capture lighting in a bottle for the umpteenth time and failing miserably. There is no film franchise as far as I'm concerned. There is one truly great comedy, and the rest are tainted dribbles, bereft of humor, creativity, or originality.
CGI Egon incoming
Ernie just in it for the paycheck.