Ghostbusters 3 finally?

[Muse32]

Dunno if this has been posted, just seen it on MSN

25 Years On: Ghostbusters Is Back!
Ghostbusters (image © Rex)

It's exactly 25 years since Ghostbusters was unleashed onto the world. Starring the genial comic talents of Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis as a trio of ghoul-battling exterminators, it's undoubtedly one of the 1980s' funniest and most memorable movies.

Feeling nostalgic? Well so are the good people of Hollywood. Ghostbusters 3, starring the original trio from the 1984 classic, is headed for a release in 2012. As things stand at the moment, original director Ivan Reitman is also returning to the franchise.

If you can't wait that long, the original comes out on Blu-Ray on 15 June.

But Ghostbusters isn't the only 80s franchise making it's return in the years ahead. In a bid to draw in punters with movies they remember from the golden era of materialism and Michael Jackson, movie producers are bringing back a slew of 80s classics.

http://entertainment.uk.msn.com/movies/galleries/gallery.aspx?cp-documentid=147843506&GT1=61502

[BraxtAnFILM]

I always say I hope it won't suck.  But it's not like a third movie will ruin a flawless franchise.  Ghostbusters 2 already sucks, so they might as well make another!

[Muse32]

I always say I hope it won't suck.  But it's not like a third movie will ruin a flawless franchise.  Ghostbusters 2 already sucks, so they might as well make another!

I always enjoyed GB2, but thought it was definitly too scary for kids IMO.

[Bojac]

Why does GB2 always have to take a beating? I loved 2!

Ok so the walking Statue of Liberty was a bit much...

[BraxtAnFILM]

It was just bad.  Poor plot (as in, pretty much the same as part 1, but with a baby), poor cinematography, and just an overall cheap feel to it.  Bill Murray is the only one who manages to remain funny.

[Muse32]

I wonder how they're going to approach this one story wise. I've got a feeling it's not gonna be that good, but will probably get good reviews because some Ghostbusters fans may just want to see there childhood hereos back in action... I dunno.

Hank, do you think they'll be another big stand off in a tall building again, like the previous two?

[BGSchoolcraft]

I wonder how they're going to approach this one story wise. I've got a feeling it's not gonna be that good, but will probably get good reviews because some Ghostbusters fans may just want to see there childhood hereos back in action... I dunno.

Hank, do you think they'll be another big stand off in a tall building again, like the previous two?

When you say tall building you're basically referring to ANY building.
Even Dollar General and Walgreens are pretty tall.
Taller than me anyway... and I'm a pretty tall guy.

Anyway, I've always loved Ghostbusters II.
It has a bad rep for no apparent reason in my eyes. I can't see the world without it... I'm glad it got made.

[Muse32]

I wonder how they're going to approach this one story wise. I've got a feeling it's not gonna be that good, but will probably get good reviews because some Ghostbusters fans may just want to see there childhood hereos back in action... I dunno.

Hank, do you think they'll be another big stand off in a tall building again, like the previous two?

When you say tall building you're basically referring to ANY building.
Even Dollar General and Walgreens are pretty tall.
Taller than me anyway... and I'm a pretty tall guy.

Anyway, I've always loved Ghostbusters II.
It has a bad rep for no apparent reason in my eyes. I can't see the world without it... I'm glad it got made.

You know what I mean, Skyscrapers etc.

[BGSchoolcraft]

You know what I mean, Skyscrapers etc.

Well, the museum in Ghostbusters II was definitely not a skyscraper.
Large building, sure. Skyscraper? No.

Also, the standoff in Ghostbusters was on TOP of a skyscraper.

There's virtually no similarity.
It would be the equivalent of you trying to compare a showdown in a house to one in a boat because both have walls.
Unless they are outside in some field or forest this time then of course they'll be somewhat similar.
There are really only two options, man-made structure or nature.
(Or another dimension, which I count as nature.)

[mrbender]

I link he means the Statue of Liberty.

[Muse32]

You know what I mean, Skyscrapers etc.

Well, the museum in Ghostbusters II was definitely not a skyscraper.
Large building, sure. Skyscraper? No.

Also, the standoff in Ghostbusters was on TOP of a skyscraper.

There's virtually no similarity.
It would be the equivalent of you trying to compare a showdown in a house to one in a boat because both have walls.
Unless they are outside in some field or forest this time then of course they'll be somewhat similar.
There are really only two options, man-made structure or nature.
(Or another dimension, which I count as nature.)

haha yeah I know the original was on top of a skyscraper. Just GB2 was a bit fuzzy, all i could remember was it was covered in pink goo and they were inside fighting the demon picture guy. Sorry if I never got the structure correct, I haven't seen it in years.

[BraxtAnFILM]

GB2 was just anti-climactic.  It was like...all they had to do was show up and spray slime on the picture while shooting it with proton streams.

[BGSchoolcraft]

GB2 was just anti-climactic.  It was like...all they had to do was show up and spray slime on the picture while shooting it with proton streams.

I dunno if there was too much more that a portrait could do, haha.
Possession and electric bolts is about it.

[Muse32]

First of all, Drag me to Hell was not scary.  It relied on loud noises and cheap startle tactics--that's not true terror, that's just annoying. 

If your movie gives me nightmares, then it's scary.



As for female Ghostbusters...no.  Just no.  It's too much of a desperate attempt to gain adulation from the liberal/sensitive/new age/everyone is equal/hippie bullshit.  Ie, it's too gimicky.  Ghostbusters doesn't need gimmicks, Ghostbusters needs talent.

What actress out there is possibly in the same league as Bill Murray?  None.

Put the hot chick behind the desk where she belongs.  Women can't carry proton packs.  They suck ass at being soldiers and I'm willing to bet they couldn't pull their own weight busting ghosts...but I guess we'll never know!



 

Sorry I know this was last month but I just saw the film.

Yeah, a whole lot of loud noises used to make you jump, Ineed quite cheap. Though it was pretty horrific and violent, which is something you don't see in movies nowadays, definitly felt like a Sam Raimi (spelt right?) movie. The end was very predictable but still enjoyable, It felt a lot like Stephen Kings 'Thinner' to me though, with the gypsy curse and all that.

I'd give the story 6/10 and the horror 8/10.

[mrbender]

Harold Ramis on Ghostbusters 3

http://makingof.com/filming_now/media/ghostbusters-3/harold-ramis-on-ghostbusters-3/63/231

[GhostfaceUK]

Check out the latest then! Good news!

Ivan Reitman WILL direct!

http://www.moviehole.net/201022925-ghostbusters-3-director-found

[Omni]

its the 90's all over again, they better go trough with this dammit.

[ShadowSky]

Does this really have to happen? =/ Can't some things just go without a contemporary sequel?

Next they'll be talking about a Back To The Future reboot and Gremlins 3...

[Bojac]

But...........but...........but I want Ghostbusters 3.

[Poot Bort]

Here's a pic of Bill Murray wearing the Ghostbusters uniform at the Scream Awards:

http://www.wwtdd.com/2010/10/dr-peter-venkman-kept-the-scream-awards-ghost-free/