Ghostbusters Reboot

ShakenNstirred · 4 May 2016 at 18:27

There now saying its the most disliked video trailer in YouTube history with almost 700,000 dislikes

V F · 4 May 2016 at 19:06

Heh, I heard that on the radio yesterday.

McBain · 5 May 2016 at 09:47

Rightly so! Embarrassingly bad.

Gerard · 5 May 2016 at 09:56

Surprised they've not put out a new trailer to do some damage control instead of re-edits of the first one. Seems they're more focused on getting news outlets to spin the story of the negative reaction into a sexism row, rather than the fact that the trailer was **** and the movie looks ****.

MooMoo444 · 5 May 2016 at 09:58

This might be one of the biggest bombs in history. I doubt many people will pay to see this at the cinema. Rent a DVD or watch on Netflix if bored, maybe, but a conscious effort to go to the cinema? Doubt it.

Marsman · 5 May 2016 at 10:58

Hopefully, for once, people won't pay to watch a **** film. Too many rubbish blockbuster films have made way too much money, that they go on to make more bad sequels. It will be great if this flops so badly, the makers of this film will have no reason to make another one.

cheesyboy · 5 May 2016 at 11:05

I tend to suspect this will turn out out be an average movie, and a terrible trailer.

Some of the cast seem a little perplexed at the content of the trailer, so it's not necessarily indicative of the film being an absolute stinker.

I believe Ackroyd and Murray are appearing in cameos, and I'd like to think they (or Murray, at least) wouldn't have agreed to that if it was looking like total tripe.

V F · 5 May 2016 at 17:41

MooMoo444 said:
This might be one of the biggest bombs in history. I doubt many people will pay to see this at the cinema. Rent a DVD or watch on Netflix if bored, maybe, but a conscious effort to go to the cinema? Doubt it.

I still wonder what Aykroyd was thinking getting onboard this. How could he have not seen this before it got to this stage when even some of the cast called it crap or words to that effect.

Uriel · 5 May 2016 at 17:54

I was considering going to see it until I saw "Four Scientists..." "Four friends..." just made it worse.

MooMoo444 · 5 May 2016 at 18:08

Gerard said:
Watch to the end.

That is just so good

Scrutinize · 5 May 2016 at 18:42

^^^ yer would rather watch that on loop for two hours than go see this monstrosity.

XPE · 5 May 2016 at 18:59

cheesyboy said:
I believe Ackroyd and Murray are appearing in cameos, and I'd like to think they (or Murray, at least) wouldn't have agreed to that if it was looking like total tripe.

He done 2 Garfield films

Gerard · 5 May 2016 at 20:55

V F said:
I still wonder what Aykroyd was thinking getting onboard this. How could he have not seen this before it got to this stage when even some of the cast called it crap or words to that effect.

He's been trying since the 90's to get a third movie made, after the game launched in 2009 there was renewed interest in it and he said over the course of a couple of years that they hoped to begin filming the movie in autumn. But it never happened with rumours circulating that once again Bill Murray was the holdout so a script was made without the Venkman character. Then Harold Ramis died and that put the nail in the coffin for it. But even so Aykroyd has stated that he hopes this movie could pave the way for a true part 3, going by the reception its got so far i doubt it.

I think at this point he's willing to accept anything as a ghostbusters movie to try and get the franchise on the move again, he gets paid for it obviously as it was his concept but its not as if he needs the money. Really makes me scratch my head how they get Murray to cameo so easily but getting him to commit to a third movie is such an impossibility. He is supposedly in real life a bit of a recluse and very hard to get in touch with.

Uriel said:
I was considering going to see it until I saw "Four Scientists..." "Four friends..." just made it worse.

And the real joke is this movie has absolutely no connection with the previous 2, they don't exist in this "timeline" so the starting bit showing the fire-house and talking about 30 years ago makes zero sense.

Grandmaster Fap! · 5 May 2016 at 21:19

Gerard said:
Really makes me scratch my head how they get Murray to cameo so easily but getting him to commit to a third movie is such an impossibility.

Ive read rumours that all of them are doing cameos but they had to somehow threaten Murray to do it, such is the desperation by the studio to get people to see this ****.

Gerard · 5 May 2016 at 21:24

Grandmaster Fap! said:
Ive read rumours that all of them are doing cameos but they had to somehow threaten Murray to do it, such is the desperation by the studio to get people to see this ****.

Its mentioned in the videos on the last page about the leaked script that Sony were allegedly considering litigation against Murray, presumably because it seemed to be primarily him putting the brakes on a third movie.

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=29286187&postcount=244

Steampunk · 5 May 2016 at 22:13

They are going to kill the franchise with this, not reboot it.

V F · 6 May 2016 at 00:41

Gerard said:
He's been trying since the 90's to get a third movie made, after the game launched in 2009 there was renewed interest in it and he said over the course of a couple of years that they hoped to begin filming the movie in autumn. But it never happened with rumours circulating that once again Bill Murray was the holdout so a script was made without the Venkman character. Then Harold Ramis died and that put the nail in the coffin for it. But even so Aykroyd has stated that he hopes this movie could pave the way for a true part 3, going by the reception its got so far i doubt it.

I think at this point he's willing to accept anything as a ghostbusters movie to try and get the franchise on the move again, he gets paid for it obviously as it was his concept but its not as if he needs the money. Really makes me scratch my head how they get Murray to cameo so easily but getting him to commit to a third movie is such an impossibility. He is supposedly in real life a bit of a recluse and very hard to get in touch with.

How odd.

Steampunk said:
They are going to kill the franchise with this, not reboot it.

It will seriously dent those with the money to give any potential future go ahead. After all, doesn't todays Hollywood only like safe projects?

Wizzfizz · 6 May 2016 at 02:13

A new Ghostbusters should have happened a long time ago. They totally missed the boat on this. This one is gonna sail south imo.

iamtheoneneo · 6 May 2016 at 10:10

They dont need to make a third though at all, These are two films that should be left untarnished to modern reboots.
Sure the second could be better, but I want to watch Ghostbusters to see the 4 of them interact and kick ass, the plot holes pretty much come second to that.

Grandmaster Fap! · 6 May 2016 at 10:22

I'm hoping all the mindless sheep dont go and see this and make it 'profitable', it would be nice if this was the nail in the coffin of all these crap reboots, i dont think iver ever seen one and thought "wow that blew the original away!".