Since 2016, the live-action Ghostbusters films have hardly set the box office alight. The disappointing performance of Frozen Empire is likely the main reason another film hasn’t been greenlit.
From both a financial standpoint and dare I say, an originality one too, I think Ghostbusters should move fully into the horror genre.
If I were Jason Reitman and Gil Kenan, I’d be speaking to the young and talented horror writers and directors working in Hollywood right now and give them carte blanche on a Ghostbusters film. Take Zach Cregger, for example: Weapons became a box office smash (budget $38m) and a bit of phenomenon (currently on $150m), and now he’s directing the next Resident Evil movie. I couldn’t tell you how uninterested I’ve been in a Resident Evil movie, until now.
I just think it’s time to inject new life into the franchise, because clearly it’s not resonating with audiences in its current guise.
And if you make a genuinely horrifying Ghostbusters movie, there’s still plenty of room for edgy adult comedy. You’d earn respect from the horror community, who are just as die-hard and committed as GB fans, and you’d win over the wider audience too.
Could you imagine the reaction to the Hollywood trades if the headline was “Zack Cregger/Mike Flanagan/Jordan Peele/Robert Eggers is writing a Ghostbusters movie”
If Mike Flanagan can write for a DC movie, then Jordan Peele can make a Ghostbusters movie.
One of the core aspects about Ghostbusters is that while it may have elements of horror, it is not a full-blown horror franchise… It is a comedy-spooky/spooky-comedy franchise. I fear that trying to up the horror aspect beyond what we’ve seen in the films or cartoon would result in turning it into something like Spectral or 13 Ghosts, and causing the franchise to abandon its roots.
The current level of horror isn’t the reason why Answer the Call and Frozen Empire performed they way they did at the box office, and Ghostbusters shouldn’t have to adapt to copy the Conjuring or Evil Dead franchises in order to be successful, it deserves to stand apart from them as its own unique thing.
Jason was keen to see what other directors do with the franchise, that wasn’t a blank cheque to abandon what made the franchise what it is in the pursuit of making it more popular. Ghostbusters shouldn’t be drenched in blood and viscera.
You mean pure horror with no lighthearted elements? No.
I’ve always liked that it’s a blend of scary/funny/cute. It’s part of the appeal. That the supernatural is crossing over with daily life. You can make the main villain as scary as possible but don’t get rid of the comic relief or “friendly” (non-evil) type of ghosts.
I think they’ve had enough adult humor. You think it needs more? Honestly there’s been a few times I think they went a tiny bit too far…
Ray’s Sex Dream (I’m in the minority, I’m sure)
Possessed Callie coming onto Podcast (I know there wasn’t anyone else for that scene but odd choice)
GB’16 the “front ■■■■” and attacking Ghost-Rowan in the crotch. Not offensive just dumb.
Edit: Should probably make it clear I’m not against adult humor. I like plenty of adult humor. I’m just talking about GB.
I agree with you on the humor parts. I could have done without the dungeon jokes in Frozen Empire. It got a good response out of the audience, but I felt it was unnecessary. Would have liked to have had the experience of taking my niece and nephew to see Ghostbusters in the theatre.
No more or less necessary than: “Are you, Alice, menstruating right now?”, “I’d like to do some genealogical tests on the mother.”/“Who wouldn’t?” and “Vigo the Butch”.
I get the desire to take your niece and nephew, but Ghostbusters II kinda-aside, these films tent to skew more age appropriate for teens and adults (Ray’s dream sequence being a good example of this).
Ha, maybe. Their parents make the ultimate decisions in approving what they can see. I have no say in that. At least they’ll be old enough to see the next film, but it would have been a nice tradition.
The dungeon jokes don’t bother me. Innuendo and such is fine.
My issue with Ray’s dream is it’s so “explicit”. It moves into sex comedy territory. There’s nothing else like that in either GB1 or 2. Given that it was repurposed as a dream they should have just left it out. I didn’t think much of it growing up but now I feel it really does not fit.
It was 1984. That kind of humor and movie is what these actors were known for. The movie SHOULD have been rated PG-13 had it existed back then. By the time GB2 rolled around, not only did Ghostbusters have the cartoon backing bringing in kids, but that type of humor was also old hat by that point.
Well they’re not actually engaging in anything. Plus she’s possessed and he wants her to stop.
To me it skews farther than anything else in the movie though. It’s not innuendo or a dirty joke…it’s literally a ghost unzipping his pants and then his “reaction”.
Here’s an idea off the top of my head…the female ghost beckons Ray into kissing her but the others don’t actually see her after she disappears. So it looks like he’s just kissing air. Still fits into the montage as one of the places they investigated. Didn’t even need to be a dream. Also Ray wanted to make physical contact because he was excited after Peter was slimed and his first idea was to grab the library ghost. So it works on this level too. It’s believable that he’d be lured into it.
Ghostbusters was originally written to be closer to Animal House, stripes or Caddyshack. But most of the sillier elements were removed in editing. Also people today are way to soft, I’ll take 80s jokes like this over the bland stuff most of Hollywood makes today.
Exactly. Have you seen the reactions to old Married with Children clips? Hard to believe that’s an actual thing on tic tok and youtube but it is. People are actually crying over the fat jokes which were actually written by the actresses that played Ed O’Niel’s targets. Lol. That show would have never been greenlit today, much less anything produced by Rodney Dangerfield.
[quote=Bison256 post_id=5006097 time=1755858823 user_id=52149]I’ll take 80s jokes like this over the bland stuff most of Hollywood makes today.
[/quote]
It depends a lot on the subject matter of the jokes… But it still is possible to have an '80s or '90s-style belly-laugher in the 2020s, the Naked Gun reboot was pretty damn funny.
I’m new here but found this thread from a Google search. I have thought that the newer films are way too glossy and cartoony. The first two films were gritty and the horror elements were a bit creepier. They weren’t full on horror, but the lore and depiction was much scarier in my opinion. Now, I don’t know if it’s because I saw these movies as a kid and they actually did scare me, but on rewatching them they still give me that creepy vibe in a way that the new films simply do not. They’re too polished. Ghostbusters can still retain comedy but they desperately need more of the creepy and gritty element.
