They were showing Ghostbusters 1 & 2 on TV and it made me wonder if the plan was always the reboot from 2016. I know I heard Bill Murray held up a 3rd movie, but I am honestly surprised nobody said "a female reboot makes no sense" in a board meeting at Sony. I remember they wanted to do sequels but the movie didn't do well enough.
It would have made much more sense to have the remaining crew pass the torch to their kids (a mix of men and women) or something like that. I hope this upcoming movie does well. I remember when it was announced people were screeching on twitter and one guy said "you shouldn't give toxic fans the movie they wanted to begin with". Lesson number 3,543 why you don't listen to Twitter morons.
Also, Ghostbusters 2016 was the first time I started hearing the narrative that if you don't like a movie you are a bad person and seeing critics lose any sense of actual evaluation. Also the first time I saw the now common "the original was never that good" headline which always makes me want to ask "then why are they re-doing it".
Back to my original question was the all female reboot always what was planned?
No, you just got that impression because writers in the 80's were very good at leaving hooks for sequels.
It's a talent that died in the 90's.
No need for sequels what you can just reboot.
Good point about Pixels. I remember after watching Ghostbusters 2016 wondering what movie the critics had seen
The movie is so bad, I predicted the ending after the first minute. They shoot a giant ghost in the dick.
That’s true. I guess I’m assuming they are being logical.
It definitely wasn't the plan. They had to threaten Bill Murrary to get him to go along with it at all. That was the kind of crap they could only make after Harold Ramis was dead.
Ramis wrote a script for part 3 right?
That has been a rumor since the 90s, but I have no idea if it's true.
I'm surprised they DIDN'T make this (maybe this is what the rumour is about though?) because it sounds .. pretty kick-ass, actually, like it could be Little Nicky X Bill and Ted 2 but done right.
Saying passing the torch to the mix, etc. it’s all playing their game. The need to change the identity of the cast should never be a process of writing. A good character is that despite their identity.
You mean despite the actor. James Bond and Doctor Who would be good examples of this (and seriously, if it had been one or two seasons of "youngish female Doctor + older male Companion", it might have been a decent lark, (especially if the stories had been worthwhile) but it's just the OTHER things they just had to throw in along with that (and the stupid baity stories, not to mention that last bit of world-breaking trash) that ruined it. And now did you see, she's gone, and oh, they're finally getting a ginger, apparently. But of course he's a flamey as a dragon with the hiccups.)
True
One of the rumors was that the game released in 2009 was what Ghostbusters 3 would have been. Aykroyd and Ramis had been shopping the idea around for years but never got a studio to commit until out of nowhere Atari noticed in a marketing report that the Ghostbusters logo was right behind Coca Cola (maybe it was Mickey Mouse, I don't remember) as the second most recognized logo on the planet. They decided to cash in on it and got the go-ahead from Paramount to make a game. Aykroyd had already written a script and they brought everyone back to voice it, even getting Max Von Sydow to cameo as Vigo and finding William Atherton to take more abuse as Peck.
The story fit in as well as any sequel could, and it adapted well enough as a game since they only had to write in a few lines referencing "the new guy" or "rookie" for the player character who doesn't even speak. So they adapted an existing outline as a game and even though they got Murray into the studio for voice work he still kind of half-assed it but at least it got made.
If it was the same script, you can see why studios were cagey about it. It would have needed a monster budget and a ton of production time and filming on location. After GB2, it was asking a lot.
I remember the 90s cartoon diversity reboot with a guy in a wheelchair.....
Yea I remember that. I only watched the real ghostbusters cartoon. Although I imagine that 90s reboot is better than what is on today.
I found the cartoon to be much better than the movies. The episodic format is suitable. The movie does its job on establishing the cast and premise, but there isn't much time left in a movie slot to tell all their adventures.
I also have a personal dislike for Bill Murray, who I recall making a stink over the voice actor playing his character, causing a voice actor changeup that just wasn't the same. (I thought this was detailed on wikipedia, but now I'm not sure where I read it.)
The game is the real sequel. The GB16 reboot is just that: a reboot. It discards prior canon and rewrites origins.
And with the new movie coming out erasing 2016 so many Twitter morons were complaining