| Author
|
the only way GB3 would work - period
|
bizdog
Ghosthead
Joined: Feb 25, 2002
|
 Posted: Feb 15, 2003 11:36 AM
Hey all,
I wrote the original post that started this, and a few others in between. I havent been back to this site in forever, namely because I have given up on GB3 ever being made. After reading a brief review of it over at protoncharging.com, my fears were confirmed about how low it could possibly sink.
I just wanted to respond to two posts about Ghostbusters 2, in which it was stated that GB2 was "a great film" and "exactly what a sequel should be." Good god, these comments make me sick, and heres why:
Somewhere, long ago, I posted a script analysis and comparison between GB1 and GB2, and found them to be remarkably the same. Im not going to go over it again only because I dont have that much time on my hands, but the basic point is that both films are, structurally, THE SAME FILM. From the inciting incident (the incident early on in a movie that changes the characters lives forever) to the Act 1, 2, and 3 progression and turning points, its all exactly the same. The only difference? It wasnt new. It was a rehash. The same thing done twice.
Now in response to "exactly what a sequal should be." No, this is exactly what Hollywood wants you to think a sequal should be. Lets go over some of the great sequels that exist, such as Terminator 2 and The Empire Strikes Back. They succeed because they take the best elements from their originals and spin them in a WHOLE NEW DIRECTION. And in completion, I consider both films to be superior to their predecessors, thus proving that GOOD SEQUELS ARE POSSIBLE!
I LOVE GHOSTBUSTERS 2. I personally think that the court room bust is one of my favorite moments ever committed to celuloid. That being said, I love it because I love Ghostbusters. It was not a successful movie, at least not in the direction they were aiming. The reviews were terrible (nothing new; a sleeper) and the box office was equally bad.
Lastly, someone said that if Sony execs came to this board thinking of making a GB film, they would read this post and turn away. Fine. Good. I hope they do. Because that would mean they are vapid enough not to have read into the true meaning of these posts. And if their views on another GB film are that shallow, then I hope it never gets made. I consider the first ghostbusters to be a rare event in filmmaking history, the result of the perfect mix of talents. I highly doubt it could be duplicated.
AGAIN: I want GB3 to be a great film. Anything less shouldnt be made.
Nick
PS - to the protoncharging.com guy - I love your site, but come on! "I dont want to ruin (GB3)". Trust me, you arent ruining anything. more details, please.
|
|
|
|
 
|
Shadow_weaveR
Ghosthead
Joined: Aug 30, 2002
|
Posted: Feb 15, 2003 2:38 PM
I would have to agree 100%! great insight man.
_____________
I LIKE PIE!
The Fastest Growing Paranormal Site On The Net!
The Paranormal World: Your Ghost Resource!
|
|
|
    |
|
Jmoney
Banned
Joined: Feb 09, 2003
|
Posted: Feb 15, 2003 8:08 PM
GB3 is gonna own all.
|
|
|
|
|
ILOVEECTO1
Ghosthead
Joined: Mar 13, 2003
|
Posted: Mar 22, 2003 2:34 PM
All I have to say is: Star Trek. Take a look at it, the franchise goes on with a completely different cast than when it started. 5 series and 10 movies later it's only just now starting to lose steam. There's so much that can be done with GB, but problem is too many purists are focusing on keeping it the GBs they know. You could bring in a new team. You could have a totally new concept. You could present an alternate version like say kids in high school who invent the gear. Basically, the possibilities are limited only by our own minds and how much slack we're willing to allow.
_____________
--ECTO-1
atomic_comics@hotmail.com
You can see my picture here.
|
|
|
|
|
GhostBustersIV
Ghosthead
Joined: Feb 22, 2003
|
Posted: Mar 22, 2003 6:18 PM
A new team?! no Peter, Ray, Egon, or Winston!? Never!
_____________
Peter:" We've been going about this all wrong. This Mr. Stay Puft is okay. He's a sailor, he's in New York. We get this guy laid, we won't have any trouble.
If it's somethin' weird an it won't look good,Who are you gonna call?
Proud to be a GhostBuster.
|
|
|
  |
|
gb ray
Ghosthead
Joined: Jun 18, 2002
|
Posted: Mar 22, 2003 6:20 PM
i'll just whate in the shadows till gb3 comes
_____________
GB RAY THE ONE MAN GHOSTBUSTIN TEAM
|
|
|
|
|
Trapper
Ghosthead
Joined: Mar 26, 2003
|
Posted: Mar 26, 2003 1:46 AM
I know its kinda waaaaaaaay late but Bizdog the love the cast suggestion of Bruce "The man,myth, and the legend" Campbell Bruce Rocks! Dare i say Evil Dead 4? hopefully, hehe atleast we have a sweet video game comming out for Evil dead
Later
Trapper
|
|
|
|
|
Paranormalfreak
Ghosthead
Joined: Mar 29, 2003
|
Posted: Mar 30, 2003 12:17 PM
who thinks Rob Lowe should be a ghostbuster?
|
|
|
|
|
TaxiCabFloor
Ghosthead
Joined: Apr 26, 2003
|
Posted: Apr 29, 2003 4:31 AM
In response to Bizdogs well thought out post...
I would venture to say that the "95%" estimation of the improv...that went on during the filming of GB1 is a little high. When Ramis,Reitman, and Akroyd did the re-write...they had Bill Murray in mind for the role of Venkman..and Ramis even said he liked writing for Bills character, now while it IS true that there was improv going on (some of the most genius work on that movie, paticularly Rick Moranis, in his party scene towards the mid-to end of the film). However, i would say the number 95% improv is way off, when it comes to the one-liners in Ghostbusters 1. As it pertains to Mr. Akroyd's writing ability, i agree whole-heartedly, Akroyd had a GREAT concept...and Ivan Reitman recognized that, and suggested that he work on it with Reitman. Reitman viewed it as a going into business movie, while Akroyd's original script has the Ghostbusters set in the future, competing with other Ghostbusting companies. What do i think they could do, to make GB 3 work???
Well as much as i hate to say it...you have to get a new cast, it seems like a cliche, but it's the only way to make ghostbusters thrive. I elaborated abit on what GB3 should be like on another board, however i'm changing it up just abit. Use Ramis,use Hudson,use Akroyd...throw Murray in for a cameo...but you have to find 2 Ghostbusters, Jason Lee might be a good fit for one, David Duchovny for another perhaps? Either way, i'm not committed to JUST these people, but i just want to get the idea across...i want to stay AWAY from Extreme Ghostbusters, I don't want GB 3 to be a poster child for Politically Correctness, No, i don't want a plethora of societies misfits or outcasts, no gothic girl, no wheel chair patients, no stereotypical hollywood latino accents. Just two...normal guys. The emphasis here is NEW characters, we can't go with the "brains,mouth, and hands" concept. This time, you center the story around two new guys. I think Akroyd and Hudson could get the job done with two new guys, as much as i'd love to throw Murray in there, and Ramis, i just can't see them in action, between Bill's gray hairs and Harolds gut, i don't believe it would be appealing to see them in action, as much as i LOVED them in their roles. The idea is...make these two new guys carry THIS film...and the next one. No one said there has to be 4 Ghostbusters. It may seem like a small change, but it changes the face and expectations of Ghostbusters. Also by using just two ghostbusters...you can develop two characters, their relationship, their backgrounds in a much more in depth fashion, I believe this to be very beneficial to the cast, as well as the fans. This may burn into the fans mind...that this is a gradual process, as well it'd be very akward, and would pull back from the movie greatly, if you just brought in Ray and Winston, found 4 random people to be ghostbusters, and then within that hour and 30 minutes, fill you in, on all 4 of these people, and see them evolve and react to this new world that they're being brought into, this new lifestyle. Also, you bring these two new ghostbusters in, and they act as a surrogate to the viewer, much like Winston did in GB1...but of course this duo will have a much more prominent and important role. Now, you still have to define these two characters...but just by definition and experience (story wise) they'll become the brains, and the mouth, and the hands...both of them, this is a very broad outline, but the major emphasis is TWO ghostbusters...so many people assume that we get a new movie, and assume that we'd be getting 4 new Ghostbusters, and i think that expectation ALONE ruins the concept of this movie.
I agree with Bizdog for MOST of what he said, but the new ghostbusters and bringing in new guys is the ONLY way to go, OBVIOUSLY the casting is VERY crucial, as is the story...but i believe they can get the script and story RIGHT...if you bring together Reitman,Ramis and Akroyd and refine the concept. I also agree with Bizdog that Extreme Ghostbusters was very forgettable, I am all for a revival of the Real Ghostbusters cartoon, or something like it, but please...either USE the Original RGB characters...OR get 4 new characters, or two, and gradually work in another character or two...and go from there, and stay away from all of the stereotypical, politically correct characters to draw in a more diverse audience, because it WILL insult your hardcore, and most loyal viewers...which is exactly what EGB did.
_____________
Hey EVERYONE!!!!! IT'S COMING!!!!!!!!!!!! YEAH!!!
CHRISTMAS!!
|
|
|
|
|
evil_toaster
Ghosthead
Joined: Oct 05, 2002
|
Posted: Apr 29, 2003 6:36 PM
Dude, I agree. One of the best things about Ghostbusters, in my mind, is Dan's concept.
And you're right about the new casting, for the most part. Check out my analysis-y post on page 2.
And, welcome, Mr. Floor,  to GBN! You're well on your way to being a legend here by the way you're posting!
Hands new member a couple of smoking traps
_____________
Why are you reading this? GBN's closing in 20 mins. Go read something more important, like the farewell thread. Really. Come on people, stop reading my sig! Right now! I mean it! Ah, what's the use, damn yuppie larvae...
|
|
|
|
|
MuthaPussBucket
Ghosthead
Joined: Feb 25, 2003
|
Posted: Apr 29, 2003 7:44 PM
Hi,
Assumingly..if you're reading this, you've read the rest of the thread. That being said...I think it's very humorous that the guy who started this post didn't even know Bill MURRAY'S last name! It's very simply typed "Bill Martin", now granted this could be a mistake...
Anyhow, I also found a few problems with the original post ideas. For instance, it's stated to get someone who hasn't been made a "character"...yet he suggests Bruce Campbell, known to everyone as Ash.
As for Bill Murray looking old, have you seen Harold or Dan lately? Check out the movie Orange County for an update on Dr. Spenglar.
Lastly, I promise you, there will be a GB3, but it will be with a new cast. With "IT" coming out soon and Hollywood's "seemed like a good idea at the time" attitude, you watch, my friends.
_____________
Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong...
~Ryan
|
|
|
|
|
TaxiCabFloor
Ghosthead
Joined: Apr 26, 2003
|
Posted: Apr 29, 2003 9:44 PM
:reluctantly takes the two traps from Evil:
Thanks, my pleasure.
All kidding aside, I'd just like to see the GB franchise thrive again, and the 3rd movie's best direction...in my honest opinion would be in a direction similar to the one i proposed...but i'm not fixed on seeing the movie (if there is one hopefully) follow that concept exactly...but just specifically stay away from the storylines and concepts that I, and most of us fear the most, which I brought up in my previous post.
_____________
Hey EVERYONE!!!!! IT'S COMING!!!!!!!!!!!! YEAH!!!
CHRISTMAS!!
|
|
|
|
|
bizdog
Ghosthead
Joined: Feb 25, 2002
|
Posted: May 31, 2003 4:10 PM
Ryan, its me, I wrote the original post. First off, it's a stupid mistake, get over it: Bill Martin, Bill Murray. If you want to know the reason, I had just watched the episode of Seinfeld in which Mr. Steinbrenner is listing the number of mistakes he's made with the Yankees and trading away great players...and he keeps repeating Billy Martin over and over. Musta got stuck in my head. That being said, if that rendered everything I wrote irrelevant, than stop reading now. Seeing as I own a replica proton pack, have watched the original films several hundred times, can recite certain episodes of RGB...I promise you I know GB. Again, it should have been blatently obvious from my posts. But just in case you were wondering.
"it's stated to get someone who hasn't been made a "character"...yet he suggests Bruce Campbell, known to everyone as Ash."
If you read what I originally posted and not skipped around, you realize that my argument goes as follows: 1) do not put known actors in GB rolls...2) I listed my dream cast...3) I negated the names I just listed by specifically stating NOT to use them. In fact, I believe I actually said that BRUCE CAMPBELL IS FOREVER ASH, but apparently, you missed that slightly crucial detail. We are in agreement on this one, I believe.
"Lastly, I promise you, there will be a GB3, but it will be with a new cast."
I never said there wouldnt be a GB3. I only asked whether it would be good.
nick
|
|
|
|
|
bizdog
Ghosthead
Joined: Feb 25, 2002
|
Posted: May 31, 2003 4:11 PM
TaxiCabFloor - actually, I dont think my 95% estimation is very off at all. Have you read the shooting script? I am constantly amazed at how different the film is from the script.
nick
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Info
|
|
|
|
|
|
