ghostbusters The Ghostbusters Reboot Cast Revealed

[+John. Subscriber¹]

1 minute ago, Slarlac249 said:

Fantastic Four suddenly looks like a masterpiece.

Fanfourtastic ?

[ThisSiteHasLostItsCharm]

3 minutes ago, John. said:

Fanfourtastic ?

eh?

[+John. Subscriber¹]

14 minutes ago, Slarlac249 said:

eh?

 

Oh sorry it's FantFourStic, still a crappy title design either way! 

[Torolol]

On Wednesday, March 09, 2016 at 2:10 AM, trag3dy said:

 

 

Still looks bad and they continue to ###### on the originals even more. The whole bit with the logo..

 

Gotta love the feminist agenda being pushed, too. They couldn't make it any more blatant. The women are the heroes and the big strong man (who they are portraying as an idiot, too, looks like) is the helpless secretary.

On previous trailer that criticized by ghostbuster fans as "idiot-writers-who-did-not-properly-research-what-ghostbuster-really-was",

it said: 30 YEARS AGO FOUR SCIENTISTS SAVED NEW YORK

 

The fans quickly pointed out opening intro text are incorrect, among the original four of Ghostbuster team, only three of them were scientists,

and fans use that fact to said that the writer of the New Ghostbuster (2016) indeed someone who did not watch the original properly.

 

So they changed the Intro text (0:07) on the 'new' trailer, now it said: 30 YEARS AGO FOUR FRIENDS SAVED THE WORLD

Edited March 11, 2016 by Torolol

[HawkMan]

31 minutes ago, Slarlac249 said:

Fantastic Four suddenly looks like a masterpiece.

which one ?

[+John. Subscriber¹]

7 minutes ago, Torolol said:

On previous trailer that criticized by ghostbuster fans as "idiot-writers-who-did-not-properly-research-what-ghostbuster-really-was",

it said: 30 YEARS AGO FOUR SCIENTISTS SAVED NEW YORK

 

The fans quickly pointed out opening intro text are incorrect, among the original four of them only three of them were scientists,

and fans use that fact to said that the writer of the New Ghostbuster (2016) indeed someone who did not watch the original properly.

 

So to they changed the Intro text (0:07) on the 'new' trailer, now it said: 30 YEARS AGO FOUR FRIENDS SAVED THE WORLD

ACK Comic Sans 

 

Good point though, if you're going to destroy a movie franchise at least do some research on it! 

[ThisSiteHasLostItsCharm]

21 hours ago, HawkMan said:

which one ?

the latest one lol, i actually mostly enjoyed it, but suddenly it looks a bit better now. compared to the horrors in the gb trailer.

 

would've been better if they just left out the whole 30 years bit...as it makes it sound like a sequel. yet the original actors in this play completely different characters right?

 

or maybe it secretly is a sequel and they changed their identities? but then what happened to ghosts? hauntings took a break?

 

massive fail on the trailer opening scene..

 

if i'm correct, Dan and *mr not funny anymore cameos haven't been revealed yet right?

 

 

*bill murray, made the mistake of watching lost in translation several years back and didn't find it funny. i miss the old murray.

think the only kinda amsuing bit he's done since  was the tree scene in get smart.

Edited March 12, 2016 by Slarlac249

[HawkMan]

For what it was, it was a decent movie. I mean it's a super hero movie...

[ThisSiteHasLostItsCharm]

11 minutes ago, HawkMan said:

For what it was, it was a decent movie. I mean it's a super hero movie...

just took a while to get to the good stuff, it started off way too slow. also i think you could compare this doom to the guy in the force awakens, as in not that threatening, i found doom in the other f4 movie to be more menacing.

 

younger actors don't always been better characters.

 

back on topic...

 

does anyone know dan and murray's roles yet in this? or did miss that info..

[MikeChipshop Member]

On 03/03/2016 at 9:06 PM, HawkMan said:

The trailer gives me me very mixed feelings.

 

one one hand, the ghosts look great, BUT that's also the problem.  They look too good, in a very uncharacteristic statement from me, There's too much CGI and the CGI is too good. it doesn't look like ghostbusters. 

 

The old classic animatronic and film trick ghosts had a feel to them that made them seem "realistic" in their way. these just look like really awesome CGI. and not the nice gritty real ghosts of ghostbusters. 

 

on top of that. the trailer gives the whole story away, and the whole story is basically a line by line retelling of the original movie. down to the token black "guy" and "his" role. 

 

They simply replaced the characters with women and placed it 30 years in the future and apparently everyone forgot that ghosts even existed in those 30 years... smh.... why... 

 

I'll watch, it. but it's definitely not going to be a classic. 

It's a bit like an explosion in a neon factory.

[trag3dy]

 

Still looks like ######. I also think they couldn't make it any less funny if the tried, which is quite an achievement after how bad the first trailer was.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

5 hours ago, trag3dy said:

 

Still looks like ######. I also think they couldn't make it any less funny if the tried, which is quite an achievement after how bad the first trailer was.

Best part is at 2:13.  Already at 38K dislikes ... 8K likes.

 

This might be a fun movie to watch really drunk...and I mean blackout drunk...so you don't remember it.

[trag3dy]

10 minutes ago, jjkusaf said:

Best part is at 2:13.  Already at 38K dislikes ... 8K likes.

 

This might be a fun movie to watch really drunk.

Personally I wouldn't waste good alcohol on a bad movie like this. 

[adrynalyne]

20 minutes ago, trag3dy said:

Personally I wouldn't waste good alcohol on a bad movie like this. 

I wouldn't waste bad alcohol on it.

[George P Global Moderator]

Only time will tell how it turns out at the box office, but one thing's for sure, if it does bomb, hard, no studio is going to bother doing this again, for any reboot/respin w/e.   Maybe that'd put an end to Paul Feigs crazy ideas of reboots.

[+John. Subscriber¹]

Such cheap, predictable jokes. That was actually painful to watch. That's the best they could find to put in a trailer?

[BinaryData]

2 minutes ago, John. said:

Such cheap, predictable jokes. That was actually painful to watch. That's the best they could find to put in a trailer?

I find the whole reboot of this with 4 females to be a joke. Such an iconic movie being destroyed by Hollywood. 

[MikeChipshop Member]

It's the effects of the ghosts that get me. It's like an explosion in a neon factory!

I'll reserve judgement till it is actually released but it doesn't look like something i'm going to rush out to see.

[HawkMan]

1 hour ago, John. said:

Such cheap, predictable jokes. That was actually painful to watch. That's the best they could find to put in a trailer?

The sad part. if it's like every other trailer in the universe. this IS the best parts of the movie, maybe even the only "funny" parts...

[George P Global Moderator]

I'll be shocked if the critics give this high scores of any kind.  I expect RT to be in the 40s and lower, if it's up over 50% then I don't know what they're smoking.

[ThisSiteHasLostItsCharm]

looks the budget went on bad jokes and bad cgi.

[trag3dy]

 

It's a better trailer than the first two but it's still pretty bad. So at least they are consistent, which is nice.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

Bill Murray seems very umm... sad maybe?

 

 

[George P Global Moderator]

I don't know what it is but Bill never seems to care or want to be a part of any Ghostbusters projects, events, w/e.  I'm actually shocked they even got him to voice act for the game, or even show up at all in this movie.

[trag3dy]

He might've been contractually obligated for some reason. 

 

Anyways all the humor in this movie is just so bad. So forced.