I still not sure yet. The tone of the film feels very different from the first two and I am a bit scared that the original Ghostbusters will only be in the film for 5 minutes or so. Still I am looking forward to it and it looks less goofy than the reboot so that is a good thing going for it.
shareLooks like an excellent film, well crafted with a lot of thought, that's going to be a huge success. Sure doesn't look anything like the original movies though. I feel like, can we skip this obviously long, dull, overly serious origin story and get right to the fun sequel they're going to make next. Cause i'm already just waiting for the last twenty minutes of this picture.
shareWtf, this looks... Good 🤔
How have they managed to take an 80s property and not rehash it as some low brow self-parodying piece of garbage?
Agreed! This is the opposite of self-parody ... it's sentimental nostalgia without (in my opinion) being sickly sweet
Plus, I never thought I'd get goosebumps at a name like "Spengler" on some boiler suit.
I think Reitman (from the look of the trailer which can be completely deceiving) did the right thing by taking the franchise (such as it is) in a completely different direction, tone-wise.
Which is why I'd be completely OK with the remaining three Ghostbusters appearing for only a cameo. Maybe they show up at Egon's grave at the end. This is not their movie, and I'm 100% OK with that.
[deleted]
I'm actually quite disappointed. I don't particularly like it when the main cast of a sequel (or remake) to a great movie is made to be substantially younger or prepubescent. Unless the movie calls for a kid specific, coming-of-age journey (like IT, Stand by Me, Stranger Things, etc.), I don't really care for it.
The original Ghostbusters worked because it was about a bunch of 30-something year old nerds dealing with a rampant ghost problem; fighting with the local authorities and trying to improve PR and business; having a laugh with one another and hopelessly looking for love. The humour felt organic and the way they dealt with issues seemed more realistic (despite dealing with ghosts). The reason why the 2016 version failed wasn't because they were women, it was because none of the characters had any depth and the jokes were forced and lame. Nothing felt natural and there was no fun to be had.
Still, I don't think Ghostbusters should be centred around kids learning about their family's history and figuring out the horrors/wonders of blah blah blah. We already have too many movies and shows following this trend.
I'm staying optimistic. Honestly, the only Ghostbusters film I really liked was the first one. (and the cartoon). The tone is different, but I'm not hating that. It might not be an award winning movie or anything, but I think it might be enjoyable.
shareShould call it Ghostbusters Kids, not really excited about it.
shareWhy not have the grandfather be one of the four ghostbusters' that are still alive?
shareI think they're doing this one right, trailer looks family friendly and respects the original crew(old tv footage, Spengler's GB uniform).
The CGI of the ambulance in the field is uninspiring but it's not a showstopper.