The Original Ghostbusters Cast Will Return for New Movie

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Sony Pictures announced this week that Jason Reitman would follow in the footsteps of his father, Ivan Reitman, with a new Ghostbusters film involving the original surviving cast, which includes Dan Aykroyd (Stantz), Bill Murray (Venkman), and Ernie Hudson (Zeddemore). The latter has confirmed that all are on board; the script was penned by Aykroyd himself. Leslie Jones, who starred in 2016’s disastrous all-female reboot, has called the sequel “insulting” and “a dick move.”

This year is the 35th anniversary of the original film, which Hudson admits is re-igniting old school fans. He said Murray and Aykroyd have much to offer still for fans. “I think we do. We've grown, we've learned and a lot of really new young talent that I'm sure they'd bring in to it. So it would be a lot of fun. I think it would only deepen. And we'll miss Harold.” Hudson refused to go all out to bash the female reboot, but admitted it was not what fans hoped for.
 
I'm sorry if Leslie Jones doesn't like it, but the fact of the matter is that their movie just wasn't good. It had nothing to do with the fact that it was a group of women, at least not to me. It just wasn't good as are most remakes/sequels/prequels, etc. I really had hoped it would have been better.

That said, I am excited to see this cast reunite but am worried it'll be not great as well. I guess we'll see.
 
I think the reboot failed for multiple reasons. I think one of the biggest was the fact that practically no one wanted a reboot. I know I didn't. I wanted to see a continuation of the originals. Another reason is because the movie moved far away from what the original was. The original movie wasn't made as a comedy but a serious movie with a lot of comedic elements. The banter, conversations and situations they found themselves in were chances to get laughs and tell jokes while still taking the movie and the plot seriously. I didn't see any of that with the reboot.

Here's to hoping that the new movie follows the very successful formula of the first movie.
 
I'm sorry if Leslie Jones doesn't like it, but the fact of the matter is that their movie just wasn't good. It had nothing to do with the fact that it was a group of women, at least not to me. It just wasn't good as are most remakes/sequels/prequels, etc. I really had hoped it would have been better.

That said, I am excited to see this cast reunite but am worried it'll be not great as well. I guess we'll see.

I have to agree. The reboot was hamstrung by a completely underwhelming script. My favorite moments were those with Chris Hemsworth. I'd love to see his character return in some fashion, though I doubt it will. What's likely to happen is that the 2016 film will be entirely forgotten by the threequel and audiences.
 
To be fair to Leslie Jones, she could say that with a face that makes you think she is about to rip your arm off and beat you to death with it... And be entirely joking.... But she will never admit it was a joke, and if you don't get that it was a joke it is your fault for not understanding her humor.

I am not saying this is what happened, just that it could easily be the case. My opinion is she probably doesn't care that much either way about this movie, and her comment was entirely a joke.
 
The original movie wasn't made as a comedy but a serious movie with a lot of comedic elements. The banter, conversations and situations they found themselves in were chances to get laughs and tell jokes while still taking the movie and the plot seriously.

That's a very subtle point, something I usually expect from English Criticism majors. In the original movie the characters rarely ape for the camera, and no matter how ridiculous the situation is their response is reasonable for the character and the condition.

I also think the female reboot failed because it didn't tie itself back to the original. If two of the female characters had been the proper daughters of two of the original cast, I think the situation would have been accepted. And I felt the cameos of the original cast subtracted from the movie more than added to it.


P.S. When the light is green, the trap is clean.
 
My body is ready.

The all female reboot sucked on multiple levels... to me it seemed less like someone trying to do a proper ghostbusters film and more like "hey look at us and what we are doing, it's all women... we are so progressive and cool"

The feeling and message I got was less an awesome story or the continuation of an absolute classic masterpiece... and more of it being just an (attempted) cash grab while trying to use it as a psudo gender soap box.
 
So I'm guessing Leslie won't be cameo-ing in this sequel then.

Here's hoping they can convince Moranis to come out of retirement for this film.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/rick-moranis-reveals-why-he-829779

"When the new all-female Ghostbusters reboot arrives in theaters next summer, nearly all the living actors from the original 1980s films — Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Sigourney Weaver, et al. — will be doing cameos. But not Rick Moranis, who was offered the chance to appear in a walk-on role but turned it down. "I wish them well," says the 62-year-old comedic legend, who's so stunned by the outcry over his absence in the film that he decided to grant a rare interview with THR. "I hope it's terrific. But it just makes no sense to me. Why would I do just one day of shooting on something I did 30 years ago?"

Contrary to what it says on his Wikipedia page — and to the fact that he barely has appeared onscreen in the past two decades — Moranis is not retired. Not exactly, anyway. He did take an 18-year hiatus from acting after his wife, Ann, died from breast cancer in 1997 to focus on raising his two young children (ever the overprotective father, he won't reveal their names). But now that his kids have grown, the actor ("You know who would be great who I haven't seen in a long time? Rick Moranis," Fred Armisen said when asked about his dream collaborator at THR's Comedy Actor Roundtable in August) is thinking about stepping back in front of the cameras again. He's just really, really particular about which cameras."
 
Hopefully it's better than #2!
Sorry, I didn't like #2, except Annie Potts was hot AF, and I sure as hell won't watch the reboot.
 
Leslie Jones is just mad that her film sucked. Bad reboots get developed and forgotten about all the time.
This sequel is about 10-15 years too late to be relevant. Harold Ramis is dead for fuck sake, why not just let the franchise go?
Mr. Aykroyd would slap you right now if he could. If Bill Murray finally agreed to be in the film it's going to get made.
 
I'm sorry if Leslie Jones doesn't like it, but the fact of the matter is that their movie just wasn't good. It had nothing to do with the fact that it was a group of women, at least not to me. It just wasn't good as are most remakes/sequels/prequels, etc. I really had hoped it would have been better.

That said, I am excited to see this cast reunite but am worried it'll be not great as well. I guess we'll see.

As I see it it's no more a dick move for the original cast (RIP Egon) to take back their franchise, than it was for the all female cast to steal it in 2016 to begin with.

The 2016 remake wasn't a terrible film. I mean, it was nowhere as good as the originals, but it was OK for an hour and a half of entertainment. In 2051 when the 2016 film is 35 years old, my guess is it will be all but forgotten, but we are still talking about the original 1984 film 35 years after its release today for a reason.

I wonder when Hollywood will learn their lesson and stop changing films with a cult following. They tried to blame the hate of the 2016 film on misogyny, when in reality fans just don't like seeing their favorite things messed with.

Writers, directors and artists need to stop seeing remakes of old cult favorites as an opportunity to "make the franchise their own". They need to color inside the damned lines and stay true to the originals and not change anything. Star Trek, Star Wars, Ghostbusters, you name it. When you mess with something old that people like, what they are doing is essentially what these idiots did when "restoring" these paintings:

TELEMMGLPICT000167634915_trans_NvBQzQNjv4Bqeo_i_u9APj8RuoebjoAHt0k9u7HhRJvuo-ZLenGRumA.jpg


promo170003383.jpg


Stop messing with old shit, and COLOR INSIDE THE DAMNED LINES!
 
The 2016 idiotic remake will end up just like Highlander 2, and for justified reasons.

I actually enjoy watching Highlander 2. Sure, it's not a good movie but I do find it enjoyable. Beyond that, there wasn't really any other way to keep the Highlander franchise going as the original movie basically stopped any chance of having it move forward. Even more interesting is the fact that you bring up Highlander when it's one of the very, very, very few movies I feel needs to be rebooted simply because the continuity between movies and shows is absolutely horrible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kain
like this
Prediction: This will suck worse than the version with the girls. Its Duke Nukem 3D...its Half Life 3..........leave the corpse alone......
 
she was ok but hot as AF?

She was a 6/10 if that.

I would really love to see what you consider a 9/10 lol.


Everyone has different tastes in the opposite (and some the same) sex.

She is not my type in the slightest (I thought she was kind of homely, but at least not fat, but she played the role well, and that matters much more than whether or not she was my type) but I don't judge because I know these things are different from person to person, and some others might think the girls I find attractive are unremarkable.

I - for instance - don't get why rappers are so into butt. I don't even notice a woman's butt, and most of the women I have dated have had flat butts. I don't trivialize what the rappers like though. They just have different preferences than I do.
 
Last edited:
I loved the first movie but the second fell flat with me and lets not speak of the reboot. With the fact that only 1 out of 3 movies is good I have small hopes that this will be what we're expecting.
 
That's a very subtle point, something I usually expect from English Criticism majors. In the original movie the characters rarely ape for the camera, and no matter how ridiculous the situation is their response is reasonable for the character and the condition.

I also think the female reboot failed because it didn't tie itself back to the original. If two of the female characters had been the proper daughters of two of the original cast, I think the situation would have been accepted. And I felt the cameos of the original cast subtracted from the movie more than added to it.


P.S. When the light is green, the trap is clean.

It should have been a sequel rather than a reboot. This is how the film should have went:

Ominous music as antagonist does evil things. Cut to interview of one of the original Ghostbusters doing interviews. They're interviewing the "new" ghostbusters. A bit of fun banter during the interview, and surprise, all but one of the women are hired. We follow them as they get a history brief of the first film and a how the city relies on them now. Cut to them celebrating (except the one) and they start their first day (except the one. Shows her doing research or something.) They stumble upon a case that leads to the antagonist and movie unfolds. They consult the originals for help throughout the movie and it ends with them victorious. Ending credits scene has the one who didn't get hired unwittingly become possessed.


 
Last edited:
The 2016 film flopped because it was a political agenda being shoehorned into a form of entertainment, while hoping to ride the coat-tails of nostalgia. It was a shitty cash grab trying to cash in on a shitty political climate.

When catering to a political agenda is the focal point instead of the entertainment, the entertainment suffers. It's weak writing material. It's the kind of material you write when you have nothing else for an idea.
 
I thought the cast of 2016 was a talented cast but direction and story sucked. Flat out sucked. I've tried to be on every side of the fence and see some value and that movie was needlessly overcompensating for stereotypes that never existed in the 1st two movies. The originals had little or no sexism and this movie seemed to only exist for it.

I always recommend to the fans that they play the single player campaign for the 2009 Ghostbusters game on PC. Sure the consoles got multiplayer but the PC really looks nice in 4k. Story wise it ends up making the originals into a trilogy with all the original cast(including most side characters) returning for voiceovers. Too me this will always be the final movie.

I hope they can do a good job with this. I know for a while now they wanted to set it up to hand off franchises for newer generations. We'll see if they try to stick with that idea and how it fares.
 
The 2016 film was not the worst thing I have seen, it was enjoyable for what it was but by no means was it a classic it was a brainless popcorn movie that you can put on and just watch and have your brain turn off and get the occasional smerk from. But yeah...... I have hopes for this move yet I also dread what it can do, I am conflicted.
 
This is freaking awesome. :D I’m going to pretend the new one doesn’t exist much like everyone else. I think the real “dick move” here was making the 2016 one in the first place. It was insulting to all the fans.
 
Back
Top