"Paul Rudd Joins Ghostbusters' 2020 cast" - Oy vey

Locomotive Derangement said:
Ghostbusters was never that good to begin with.
Click to expand...

833821

Picture of locomotive for reference.
 
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Horrifying
Reactions: Violence Jack, Jaimas, Army Burger and 5 others
kadoink said:
Picture of locomotive for reference.
Click to expand...

Its just a pretty well-known 1980s comedy movie, is all. I don't hate it. Though in my opinion of all the projects that the Ghostbusters alumni got up to, Blues Brothers is probably the best since that movie had me in hysterics the most out of any of them. Haven't seen Caddyshack in awhile though.

I'm still convinced the 2016 remake was a marketing con. Up until they announced it, the discussion of Ghostbusters online was limited to: "Is Ghostbusters 2 any good?", "Are they ever gonna make Ghostbusters 3?", and "Hey, remember ectocooler and those weird cartoons?" Now all the controversy about the 2016 one catapulted the name back into everyone's heads, everyone is absolutely gay for the nostalgia of the originals and I guarentee you the 2020 movie is going to have a much larger turnout as a result than if it came out in another universe where the 2016 remake was never even suggested.

I could have predicted every single minute of how shit the 2016 movie was based solely on the fact that it was directed by the hack that made The Heat. He also dresses like he's selling volcano insurance. They picked him for that project to deliberately make a piece of garbage that would piss people off as much as possible.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: Army Burger, frozenrunner, Marco Fucko and 1 other person
Locomotive Derangement said:
Its just a pretty well-known 1980s comedy movie, is all. I don't hate it. Though in my opinion of all the projects that the Ghostbusters alumni got up to, Blues Brothers is probably the best since that movie had me in hysterics the most out of any of them. Haven't seen Caddyshack in awhile though.

I'm still convinced the 2016 remake was a marketing con. Up until they announced it, the discussion of Ghostbusters online was limited to: "Is Ghostbusters 2 any good?", "Are they ever gonna make Ghostbusters 3?", and "Hey, remember ectocooler and those weird cartoons?" Now all the controversy about the 2016 one catapulted the name back into everyone's heads, everyone is absolutely gay for the nostalgia of the originals and I guarentee you the 2020 movie is going to have a much larger turnout as a result than if it came out in another universe where the 2016 remake was never even suggested.

I could have predicted every single minute of how shit the 2016 movie was based solely on the fact that it was directed by the hack that made The Heat. He also dresses like he's selling volcano insurance. They picked him for that project to deliberately make a piece of garbage that would piss people off as much as possible.
Click to expand...

and from the way he talks about women you could tell me he raped and murdered a girl in 1990 and I would'nt bat an eye.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: frozenrunner and (deleted member)
jellycar said:
Is that the gay Twitter Mexican
Click to expand...

There was some pretentious hipster who got hired to shit on the original in the marketing lead-up to the 2016 remake. I assume that's him, but I can't actually tell these people apart most of the time. He predictably said the movie was bad because it was sexist and focused heavily on the comments made by Billy Murray's character. Which misses the point completely because Bill Murray often plays huge assholes who don't exactly have the best opinion of women or even the other people around them. The character is clearly meant to be an asshole, not a mouthpiece for the whole movie.

You can always tell when a negative review is a marketing shill since they focus overwhelmingly on negative aspects that don't really exist instead of the flaws that do exist in the work. See also, the shills who wrote negative reviews of the original Star Wars trilogy in the lead up to Force Awakens.
 
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Y2K Baby and Uncanny Valley
Although it was totally unrealistic in Ghostbusters II how everybody forgot about ghosts within 5 years, I think they could do that now and get away with it. Use the generation gap in the story. Have all these shitty millennial Atheism+ characters dismiss the Ghostbusters with their "I believe in SCIENCE!!" crap and then Ray sheepily says, "But... this is science."
 
  • Like
Reactions: JohnLenin and frozenrunner
Travoltron said:
Although it was totally unrealistic in Ghostbusters II how everybody forgot about ghosts within 5 years, I think they could do that now and get away with it. Use the generation gap in the story. Have all these shitty millennial Atheism+ characters dismiss the Ghostbusters with their "I believe in SCIENCE!!" crap and then Ray sheepily says, "But... this is science."
Click to expand...

That's not exactly a terrible idea, though you'd think a giant marshmellow man attacking downtown Manhattan would have been this universe's 9/11. This is one of the few settings where I'd reccomend that they just keep ramping up the devastation until its totally insane. The internal logic of the first movie is very weak and filled with holes primarily because its just an 80s comedy. They even make fun of it in the movie with the EPA character thinking the whole thing is ridiculous. You might as well have a Blue Brothers sequel where they get into a cringy theological debate with a fedora atheist at that point.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: frozenrunner and Uncanny Valley
I thought people liked Paul Rudd?

I really don't know who he is other than he's in those Marvel chapter movies.
 
Travoltron said:
Although it was totally unrealistic in Ghostbusters II how everybody forgot about ghosts within 5 years, I think they could do that now and get away with it. Use the generation gap in the story. Have all these shitty millennial Atheism+ characters dismiss the Ghostbusters with their "I believe in SCIENCE!!" crap and then Ray sheepily says, "But... this is science."
Click to expand...

The thing that really fucking sucks about Ghostbusters II is the idea that they didn't spend the 5 years since the original movie busting ghosts.

Ghostbusters was one of those franchises like Star Wars and Indiana Jones that captured your imagination so much as a kid because it encouraged you to imagine your own adventures, it wasn't just a movie but a world.

So II nullifying anything between the movies sucks and it was all in favor of so lazily rehashing the exact same story beats as the first movie.

So it was a deeply flawed movie but it's nevertheless totally saved by two big strengths, one is that at least this time the villain is different enough and memorable (Vigo!) and the movie is still very funny and quotable, plus now it's precious since it's the last time the original cast will ever be together.
 
  • Feels
  • Agree
Reactions: The Littlest Shitlord, PumpkinSpiceBitchMeringue, Uncanny Valley and 2 others
I just got the feeling nobody was passionate about making Ghostbusters II. Nobody tried very hard and they just went through all the motions to get it over with.
The story doesn't even make any sense, really. What is the mood slime? Where did it come from? What does it have to do with Vigo? The photo developing scene, which was a last minute addition I think, implies there's some connection. And then that never goes anywhere.
I also really hated the overly serious score. I'd love to see fan edit where they use Elmer Bernstein's score from the first one.

And yeah, saying nothing happened between Ghostbusters I & II basically retconned The Real Ghostbusters into non-canon, which pissed me off to no end.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: JohnLenin, Uncanny Valley and frozenrunner
Travoltron said:
I just got the feeling nobody was passionate about making Ghostbusters II. Nobody tried very hard and they just went through all the motions to get it over with.
The story doesn't even make any sense, really. What is the mood slime? Where did it come from? What does it have to do with Vigo? The photo developing scene, which was a last minute addition I think, implies there's some connection. And then that never goes anywhere.
I also really hated the overly serious score. I'd love to see fan edit where they use Elmer Bernstein's score from the first one.

And yeah, saying nothing happened between Ghostbusters I & II basically retconned The Real Ghostbusters into non-canon, which pissed me off to no end.
Click to expand...

I think the slime was simply meant to be a special type of ectoplasm that was being generated by the presence of Vigo's ghost in the city.

Vigo was basically a "super ghost" of an individual who had killed untold scores of people, "On a mountain of skulls, in the castle of pain, I sat on a throne of blood!" remember? So I guess the more evil you were in life the more dangerous your ghost is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: frozenrunner and PumpkinSpiceBitchMeringue
Dom Cruise said:
Vigo was basically a "super ghost" of an individual who had killed untold scores of people, "On a mountain of skulls, in the castle of pain, I sat on a throne of blood!" remember? So I guess the more evil you were in life the more dangerous your ghost is.
Click to expand...
I did like Vigo. Reading about how the actor that played him was a villain in real life really adds to the character's menace.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: frozenrunner
Megaroad said:
I thought people liked Paul Rudd?

I really don't know who he is other than he's in those Marvel chapter movies.
Click to expand...

I thought for a second it was the guy from Mad About You. But that's Paul Reiser. I need to better organize my Paul collection.

Anyway, I feel like we don't need another Ghostbusters. It isn't like you are prohibited by law from making a different ghost hunting comedy. Let the series die already.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back