Helped produce animal house? Directed Stripes? Was one of the originators of the National Lampoon/Second City movement? No didn’t do anything for comedy before hand.
The original GB crew were already becoming legends in the field, with SNL, Lampoon, SC TV and a winning streak of instant classics. There is no comparison. Does anyone really think the heat, and Spy are up to par with caddyshack, animal house, Stripes, and blues brothers (I know Reitman wasnt part of this but still..) ?
Furthermore, I think a director is only as strong as their writer.
I think alot of people aren’t putting any focus on Dippold’s back catalogue, who, before writing the Heat, was the main writer for MadTv. All I can say is..yikes.
The original GB actors were stars, but not for being in Reitman movies. Aykroyd was mostly known for SNL and the Blues Brothers. Murray was known for SNL and Caddyshack. Ramis for directing Caddyshack and Vacation.
Ivan Reitman in 1983 had Stripes and Animal House on his directing resume.
Paul Feig in 2015 has Bridesmaids, The Heat, and Spy.
It’s a wash at best, and a slight advantage to Feig at worst. Like I said, no one would have picked Ivan Reitman in 1983 to direct a huge summer sci-fi/comedy film like Ghostbusters. Not if it was just based on his directing resume.
They werent “just stars”. I’m not glorifying them in anyway. But they’re a pretty big part of the National Lampoon/Second City movement, which was a big step and “thing” in the comedy world, they helped shape a whole new “slacker/punk rock” type of comedy prior to GB (reitman included, he was a producer/director for alot of the stage shows) Their Hollywood credits are just more to put on the resume. They had a bit more weight to their legacy than just their movie credits.
Some of you might look at GB for its other elements, but back then it was a new comedy project from the guys that brought you Stripes and Animal House. these guys were legends in the field long before production.
And yes, thanks Lando. It’s a bit different, Reitman and Co were onto something fresh and original (like they’re previous projects and contributions to entertainment).
Again…are we really.comparing The Heat to Animal House? That’s like comparing Blazing Saddles to Meet the Spartans.
My argument is that, just like Reitman came out of almost nowhere to direct GB and make it a huge hit, Feig might do the same.
Remember, I am still thinking this movie has a 60% chance of being awful.
I’m just saying it’s possible that Feig surprises us and does a good job, like I am sure Ivan Reitman surprised many when Ghostbusters was as good as it was.
The sarcasm was uneeded but Ivo said it was on his directing resume.
Edit: @Ivo Yeah thats my point as well
Paul Feig has allot of TV work under his belt too “The office”, “Parks and Recreation”, “Mad men”. Im with Lando and Ivo Shandor you cant really judge how he’s gonna do NGB based on his previous work.
I am changing my mind a lot back and forth. Right now I am in a generous frame of mind and giving Feig a 40% chance of producing a movie that does not suck.
This is up from 15% earlier in the year.
It could go back down based on new info from the set or info about the script.
I think there’s definite value in taking a risk on an original concept vs “your take” on somebody else’s idea. The New Ghostbusbusters will be, at least, a financial hit because the story, concept, and grunt work was already done for the director/actresses. There’s nothing new in this project, just an attempt to put a new spin on an established brand.
Imagine, it’s 1984 and Ivan Reitman gathers Harold Ramis, Bill Murray and Dan Akroyd to star in his remake of “Dr. Strangelove”. You might say “give it a chance, he did great work with Stripes” but truthfully, you’d ask yourself “Why is he bothering with this? Did anyone ask for a remake of this film?”
If the internet was around back then, and you guys were on it and had grown up with the GB casts movies at the time, you would be on the Dr Strangelove forum telling them to give it a chance.
My overall thought on this movie is this: I just don’t care. I’ve been a huge Ghostbusters fan since I was a kid and I’m 31 now. I’ve watched the movies throughout both my childhood and adulthood. My favorite cartoon growing up was the Real Ghostbusters and I still watch it frequently with my kids. I’ve read all of the comics, played with the toys, and collected a lot of junk that my wife hates. I grew up with Peter, Ray, Egon, and Winston. I’m not trying to say I’m a bigger fan than anyone. I assume everyone here is equally a huge fan! I’m just trying to explain where I’m coming from. At this point in time I don’t care to follow another set of Ghostbusters who live in a completely all new all different universe. I haven’t been interested in Ghostbusters just for the idea of busting ghosts. My connection to the franchise has a lot to do with the 4 characters I’ve enjoyed watching or reading about. I’m not so desperate for anything Ghostbusters that I’m dying to see a new movie that has nothing to do with the original. This movie can come out, they can make sequels, whatever, but it’ll never be what I want and I‘m ok with that…now. I was pretty mad at first, but it will never destroy the originals so people shouldn’t get too up in arms. I just can’t get excited or stand behind this project when I know something is missing. I could consider this movie a what if, but in all honesty it doesn’t look appealing enough to me to get me to do even that. I also think making everything a giant multiverse is cliché. I’m sick of multiverses. Every comic and franchise has a giant multiverse. I didn’t like Ultimate Marvel and once Secret Wars is over the Marvel Universe is over for me. While I do like The TMNT/Ghostbusters and RGB/Ghostbusters crossovers in general I think these kind of stories loose their impact when everyone does them too much. Plus the TMNT already did a great Multiverse story in Turtles Forever, I don’t think the Ghostbusters needs to top that.
Nothing about this movie feels Ghostbusters to me. Yeah, they have proton packs, they have an ecto 1, they have the logo, they bust ghosts, but there’s something missing. The characters that made this franchise able to carry on for the past 31 years. I also don’t think it should be considered sexist to say “I wish they just stuck with the original team of characters.“ Nobody should be bullied and labeled a misogynistic jerk because they’d prefer the original guys over this new team. In my opinion the team had a perfect dynamic and they didn’t need any additions of men or women to the team. Obviously, with a true GB3 they probably would have had to pass the torch to new characters and in some way it might be good that we’re not getting that. How could any GB3 live up to the anticipation that’s been building in us for the past 26 years. Especially when sadly Harold Ramis has passed away and Bill Murray is completely reluctant to be involved. I can understand why Paul Feig would want to get rid of some of the pressure of GB3, but I don’t think a reboot is a good direction. I honestly would be happy with no more movies and I would have liked to have seen a newer Ghostbusters cartoon with the original team done well. Both scary and humorous like the best episodes of the Real Ghostbusters. That said I probably would still see any movie with Ray and Winston still involved, but I probably won’t see this.
I wrote a lot to make up for my lack of posts.
The problem is that some members here were not saying that. They were explicitly saying that Ghostbusters shouldn’t be women or that women couldn’t do the job. Those are the misogynistic jerks.
Internet and nerd/gaming culture are surprisingly blind to how sexist they are. Lots of really vulgar comments made about a female cast in many media sites (Proton Charging Facebook anyone?).
It won’t be female Ghostbusters that make this film terrible; Hollywood’s banal storytelling, severe lack of originality, and a dearth of creativity will probably be the culprit… as usual.
