Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Dan Akyroyd confirms GHOSTBUSTERS movie... apparently CGI!!!

Finally! by SkeletonParty	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:10:32 PM
a movie worth seeing
Sweet! by Tommy the Cat	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:10:50 PM

Cowabunga Slimer by Guiness	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:16:00 PM
After seeing the turtles trailer I am up for all of our 80's friends to come back in the wonderful world of CGI... Maybe Venkman will use his CGI whip on Slimer...
Lord Vigo approves! by chrth	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:18:15 PM

"Murray is aboard, but only if they do it CGI." by triplefive	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:19:17 PM
are you sure that's not ole bill just being flippant, like saying, "Yeah, I'll do it, as long as I get to have three arms...and if Egon is played by a pink hippo."
I'd be a liar... by playahatersball	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:19:23 PM
if i didn't admit to being a little psyched about the idea of a fully CG Ghostbusters movie, especially if they get all the original cast members doing the voice work. If they try to sub Ernie Hudson with Chris Rock or Will Smith though, I'd hire ninjas to slit open Akroyd's fat belly and feed him his distended liver.Although, some really should have done that after Blue Brothers 2000.
I'm up for it... by purplemonkeydw	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:24:20 PM
as long as Bobby Brown does the music again, and sports the Gumby cut
A Sign of Things to Come by Bobo_Vision	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:26:33 PM
I remember when they first started making CGI characters, and the Chicken Littles said that one day CGI would replace real actors, and I guess its starting. I suppose its a way to keep the franchise alive with the original players involved, and Egon has blown up as fat as the marshmallow man...Dan Akroyd too. So if this is what it takes to give us another Ghostbusters movie...I'm there.
Sounds good..maybe by Neo Zeed	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:27:05 PM
Depends if it's not tooo kiddy (can they even mention hell?). I know these CGI movies like monster house and Corpse bride deal with occultish stuff, so maybe they can pull it off. I'll tell you this though..I'd see this over a shitty GB remake any day of the week!
Next, Blues Brothers 2010! by theBigE	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:29:03 PM
Yes, the sequel we've all been waiting for. I wish Dan Ackroyd would get more roles like Driving Miss Daisy or Tommy Boy. He does supporting character roles well. Then he wouldn't feel the need to rehash what was great 25 years ago!
sounds like ghostbusters by Lane	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:29:44 PM
is going the way of tmnt (into the SEWER).
I just got off the phone with Ray Parker Jr. by Alonzo Mosely	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:30:50 PM
He screamed something about having a career again and hung up on me...
Hoo-ha! by Venkie007	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:30:56 PM
Hey- I'm for anything that keeps the spirit (sorry) of the boys in greay alive, CGI or otherwise. Still bummed as Hell about that game, though.
Okay by CaptDanielRoe	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:35:13 PM
As long as Andy Serkis plays the big gorilla.
This Franchise was mothballed for a reason..., by Pound Sand	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:40:33 PM
Ghostbusters shot its load back in the eighties, and that's that. Nobody on this board talks about the great friggin' CGI, or how cool slimer looked, or the stay puft man lumbered around. We quote the dialogue. And that's where the latest iteration of ghostbusters will have it's Waterloo.., the script. Not a CGI Belushi for Chrisssakes. What's next..., a CGI Belushi for the Spielberg reboot of 1941?
Who posted that Ghost message? by Err	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:40:35 PM
Oh wait... I did!
I need a moment to soak all of this in... by spaceworlder	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:41:16 PM

Sounds good...better than no ghostbusters by Power_Girl	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:41:58 PM
The rumor is is that the fourth Back to the Future film will go ahead after Beowolf all in CGI and they will bring back Fox and co to do the voices.
Nothing But Trouble 2 by CaptDanielRoe	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:42:23 PM
Gotta give that movie some credit. All it lacked was a memorable title that people could easily call to mind in later years in order to make fun of it. Remember? It was the one with the weird amusement park in PA or someplace. They should have called it "The Valkenheisers."
Okay, I've had my moment. by spaceworlder	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:42:37 PM
WHOOOOOOOOO!
Depends on the script. by superninja	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:44:47 PM
If it's really funny, it could work. I'd go with stylized and not realism, but that's just me.
Really Powergirl? by CaptDanielRoe	Feb 2nd, 2007 06:59:31 PM
That would be awesome. Back to the Future was awesome in its day. Too goofy the way it went though; no soul in those sequels, and no brains either.
Leave it be... by Dolph	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:01:52 PM
I'm a huge Ghostbusters fan, and if it were live action, I'd welcome "Hellbent", but I don't want some quasi-sequel that sits half-way between Ghostbusters and The Real Ghostbusters.
I hope they get Murray's 'Pock Marks' right by Papa CaveDweller	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:14:51 PM
Gosh
Dan & Bill must of watched those YouTube GB videos by Mace Tofu	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:17:34 PM
before they had them removed and Bill Murray must of thought that CGI clip of him in the game demo could work for a new movie. This could work as a Final Fantasy Spirits Within style Vs a saturday morning Cartoon look. Fingers crossed it comes out good.
^^^ That's BS by jrbarker	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:18:10 PM
There is no Back to the Future 4 being worked on. Never was.
Back to the Future IV by Power_Girl	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:19:25 PM
Robert Zemeckis started work on a fourth Back to the Future in the early 90's and left it. When he started Doing CGI movies he played around with the idea of doing a fourth all in CGI...he even did test models of Fox and the Delorean then decided to do A photo real test movie (Beowulf) to get the technology ready...There is no conformation that it will happen on that the subject has seriously been thrown around the Zemeckis offices for a while now.
BttF Part 4 by Err	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:36:53 PM
No offense to Zemeckis, but let it be. Back to the Future Part 1 ended with "To be continued -->". Part 2 ended with "To be concluded -->". And Part 3 ended with "The End." Let it stay that way.
Winston Zedmore is in if he gets a real Proton Pack. by Det. John Kimble	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:41:22 PM
No CGI for my favorite Ghostbuster.
CGI?.... by T 1000 xp professional	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:42:59 PM
I'm a bit confused about this decision, but let's wake up people. The real life thing is never going to happen. There was always room for one more. Call me a Ghostbusters lovesick whore......I'm all for it. Just do it already
"GOOD DAY LA" GOING ENTIRELY CG! by scrivener	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:45:04 PM
Have we forgotten Simone already?
The reason for this by T 1000 xp professional	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:45:33 PM
I'm guessing the inspiration came from Bill Murray after he did the Cgi epic saga Garfield and Garfield 2: a tale of two kitties
I guess this is better than nothing... by JKrow21	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:46:49 PM
I just wish they would do a live action movie.
SLIMER'S GOTTA EAT!!! by screamster101	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:49:52 PM
Thank god they are finally doing something with this. NOW GIVE US THE GODDAMN GAME!!!
I just got off the phone with Ray Parker Jr. by instant_karma	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:52:35 PM
He said "I aint 'fraid of no ghost!" And yeah, I know Alonzo already did the off the phone line. Haven't seen Polar Express, so I don't know convincing this technique is, but right now I'm thinking it'll come of just as a really expensive version of The Real Ghostbuster 'toon. I'd much rather watch a live action version with the original cast as a bunch of old guys who can't cut it anymore.
CaptDaniel... by Darkman	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:58:05 PM
A NOTHING BUT TROUBLE follow-up? As long as it's basically two hours of Aykroyd hamming it up as the J.P (the best damn thing about that movie), I'm sold. "There you go! Does the Pope wear a hat, was Sgt. York's mother an angel and will a banker grope for money?" About this...with a good script, it could work.
Who you gonna call? by Dr Gregory House	Feb 2nd, 2007 07:59:36 PM
I.L.M. apparently
Good call karma by Dr Gregory House	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:01:52 PM
The original cast as a bunch of old guys "gettin' the call" to save the city again, would open up a great can of comic worms.
I just got off the phone with 'I Wanna New Drug' by Dr Gregory House	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:03:24 PM
It's still pissed at Ray Parker Jr.
CG Ghostbusters, Live Action Slimer! by LittleDudes	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:04:34 PM
FOR REALS.
They should just drive a big...... by erichaislar	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:11:28 PM
dump truck full of money up to bill Murrys house. I bet he would make a live action one then.
you know, badmrwonka... by omarthesnake	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:14:35 PM
your basic argument is pretty solid -- old, creaky ghostbusters griping would be fun -- but you cite as evidence of your theory Indy 4???? A movie that hasn't been made, has no evidence that it works, and will probably have Harrison Ford groaning "I'm gettin' too old for this" about 15 times????
hit send too soon by omarthesnake	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:15:52 PM
You know, maybe Murray wants CGI because he's experienced it with Garfield and knows he can crank out the movie in an afternoon without shaving or letting go of his starbucks latte.
20 years later by Dickless	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:16:25 PM
Who's directing? Harold Ramis or Ivan Reitman? And will the script suck or will it almost not suck? I remember a post on this site near the end of 2005 where Ramis was interviewed for The Ice Harvest and talked about the script a little, but it didn't seem like it had everyone's involvement (ie the dumb idea of casting younger actors, with the old boys acting as "mentors"). There was also a script review somewhere else (again - younger cast) that said it kind of interesting but wasn't that funny, and to me, the whole reason the first movie worked so well was because it was, uh, FUNNY. All that crap about the Tuguska blast of 1909 and the Philadelphia mass turbulence of 1947 may have actually "happened," but it just served to make everything funnier. And on a side note, they should briefly show Mr. Stay-Puft being roasted on a spit in hell.
this is CRAZY!!!! by BadMrWonka	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:17:22 PM
why CGI? just cos they're old? indy 4 anyone? I think if they made something tongue in cheek about how they're all old and overweight it could be great. throw in something abotu how ernie hudson still looks great and all that. come ON!! CGI, there's no way it can capture the original essence of the franchise. you know ghostbusters III, with the original guys, live action, and a decent budget would be a HUGE hit. we would all FLOCK to it, you know we would. going CGI to try to get the young'uns is a bad move. with the right script, everyone would come back, egos and all. everyone is still alive and kickin', who cares about a few (read: 75) extra pounds and wrinkles?!? do it right, or not at all!!
wooo by jedimindflayer	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:20:48 PM
i'm with screamster here; any action on this property is good news, and would, i suspect, lead to action on the game. it seems development on these two projects is symbiotic; one could not exsist without the other. at any rate, given that this property has been dormant for the better part of 2 decades, any news is good news. bring it on!!
THROW DAN AYKROYD DOWN THE WELL! by Roid Rage	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:22:34 PM
Give him a CGI dicknose like he had in that shitty movie he directed.
look at it his way by jedimindflayer	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:24:33 PM
ghostbusters 3: AIRLOCK EM ALL if this works, we could actually get that much-fabled stripes 2
If Murray will do Garfield... by jimmy_009	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:27:50 PM
I have a feeling he'll 'slum' for a sweet-ass Ghostbuster movie.
Now that you guys mention it... by Bobo_Vision	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:29:18 PM
...I'm liking this Old Ghostbusters in real life idea more and more...and the joke about how Winston still looks good is funny BadMrWonka...cuz its true.
SLIMER GOTTA EAT!!! by darthhirsty	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:30:58 PM
thats all
I'm down with this by slone13	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:32:41 PM
Gimme a CGI Back to the Future 4, too, I don't care. Maybe even a Lethal Weapon 5. I'm not proud, I just know what I want.
omarthesnake by BadMrWonka	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:37:34 PM
first off, how did you respond to me 3 minutes before I posted? weird second, I'm not saying it's a guarantee to have an older actor revisit a role like this, I'm just saying it's HAPPENING. rocky balboa, indy 4...it's a viable trend, and I wish that the actors could see that, and see that a movie with them kinda creaky, but still witty and funy as ever, could get a very good size budget from a studio, some great merchandising connections, and have all the makings of a real blockbuster. it's just ACHING for it. the money is there, all they need is for everyone to sign on, not asking for too exhorbitant fees, and a script that is funny and massive enough to really do the franchise justice. it can work! akroyd, you know it can!
Cake and eating it. by instant_karma	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:42:07 PM
Have the majority live action and then kill them off in the 3rd act only to have them come back as CG ghost versions of themselves to save the day from 'the other side'. The crowd goes wild!!
as long as its at least a PG-13 i'm there by BLWiseass	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:46:58 PM
need more classic lines like "yes its, true...."
When you think about it..... by Doc_Strange	Feb 2nd, 2007 08:56:25 PM
If the entire movie, or most of the movie is located in Hell, CGI would be the way to go as it keeps production costs down. I'm interested.
EPISODE VII by inthetrenches	Feb 2nd, 2007 09:04:25 PM
nuf' said
Again it's too much focus on the tech/presentation by performingmonkey	Feb 2nd, 2007 09:04:41 PM
What made the first flick good was the script (seriously, isn't it just the best dialogue in any comedy movie?), the play between Murray, Ramis and Ackroyd, the mixture of tongue-in-cheek with real action moments (something Pirates of the Caribbean employs so well). They can do it CG but if it isn't a good script to start with you might as well forget it.
HE WASNT TALKING ABOUT THE MOVIE .... by JeanLuc Dickhard	Feb 2nd, 2007 09:06:06 PM
he was talking about the game universal brought the rights from sony fo rthe game so he is doing motin capture stuff for the game and voice over work .....
more on it by JeanLuc Dickhard	Feb 2nd, 2007 09:07:39 PM
During an interview with The Edmonton Sun, a Canadian tabloid, former Ghostbuster Dan Akroyd gave hope to millions of Bust-nuts. "Universal purchased the rights from Sony for a [Ghostbuster] game," Akroyd told the Sun. "I'm actually going to have to perform and do some motion capture for them. That will be next year." This comes just a few weeks after a video was posted on YouTube showing off an Xbox 360 demo of a proposed Ghostbuster game. ZootFly, the European developer responsible for the footage, confirmed that due to some licensing issues the game was on hold.
A New GhostBusters CGI or not is Cool But... by Donnie_Drunko	Feb 2nd, 2007 09:08:40 PM
Wouldn't a CGI sequel of GYMKATA be the better choice? Speaking of which Where The Hell is the GYMKATA DVD review???!!??
Make it an 'R'... by Dr Gregory House	Feb 2nd, 2007 09:15:20 PM
...and this time, and give the new 'Gatekeeper' a vagina with 'teeth'
I'm all for anything new by sp9543	Feb 2nd, 2007 09:20:37 PM
I'm all for anything new Ghostbusters. They have to have some crazy cgi in the works to pull off an animated sequel to popular live action films. Nevertheless, I've been a Ghostbusters fan forever now, so I'm not getting excited about this until some offical news is heard.
That'll never get off the ground by supermarch	Feb 2nd, 2007 09:22:21 PM
Maybe for TV but that's it.
oh and Jean Luc by supermarch	Feb 2nd, 2007 09:23:52 PM
Sony AND Universal stone walled the game already. A European company was doing it without the rights secured and it got killed. The footage was on youtube but it's all gone now.
I don't like the hell premise but I'll take it by George Newman	Feb 2nd, 2007 09:28:07 PM
Anymore Egon, CG or not is fine by me. "I collect spores, molds, and fungus."
Ghostbusters CGI? General Stryker CGI? by Forestal	Feb 2nd, 2007 09:43:27 PM
Indiana Jones' whip CGI? What's the world coming to????AHHHHHH!!!!!!
I just got off the phone with Rick Moranis by Turd Furgeson	Feb 2nd, 2007 09:55:54 PM
and he's just glad he doesn't have to blow anyone anymore to make ends meet...... Now he has some voice over work to do.....
I just got off the phone with Indy's CGI whip by Forestal	Feb 2nd, 2007 09:58:00 PM
She said she can't wait to work with Steven and George.
Bill Murray only did one sequel, kinda by Orionsangels	Feb 2nd, 2007 10:03:25 PM
He made ghostbusters II after they twisted his arm, but he also voiced again in Garfield II. I guess he might be ok with voice acting in sequels.
I don't see the need of a Ghostbusters sequel by The Founder	Feb 2nd, 2007 10:32:29 PM
I just don't see it. The ist one was classic. The second one was shyt to me.
Just cast new younger actors to carry the torch. by The Founder	Feb 2nd, 2007 10:34:37 PM
I think that'll be better. You got the aging GBs and they realize their time has passed, so they recruit replacements. Could work.
VENKMAN'S GOTTA EAT!!! by TheUglyBaby	Feb 2nd, 2007 10:49:54 PM
(__)__)
Years and years ago, I actually visited NYC. by Darth_Gonz	Feb 2nd, 2007 11:13:08 PM
And part of my trip involved being given a tour of the old firehouse where they filmed the movies. Alas, I got to use the firepole, and it was a blast. The building belongs to Hook & Ladder Company #8 back to this very day (it's the 2nd oldest firehouse in New York history), and it's located somewhere a few miles from downtown Manhattan.
Nobody gets jokes anymore? by RKDN Del Sol	Feb 2nd, 2007 11:23:15 PM
Clearly, it was a joke. "Murray is on board but only if its CGI" (cue laugh-track). itsa friendly 'you're an old fart!' joke from Dan to Bill, and nothing more. Do you people even GET jokes anymore?
I don't wanna BTTF Part IV, I want a NEW trilogy by SnapT	Feb 2nd, 2007 11:42:18 PM
Marty's story has already been told. The new trilogy should focus on Jules and Verne Brown, who have grown up zapping through time (and space?) in a flying steam-powered train could now be around Marty's age circa 1985. That could potentially be AWESOME fodder for a whole new trilogy of adventures with Doc.
What, no GHOSTBUSTERS: THE NEXT GENERATION? by SpyGuy	Feb 2nd, 2007 11:42:50 PM
Starring Ben Stiller, Owen Wilson, Vince Vaughn and Marlon Wayans instead of the cast we want, like Bruce Campbell, Patrick Warburton, Stephen Colbert and Masi Oka.
SnapT by Bloo	Feb 2nd, 2007 11:58:36 PM
not a BAD idea, if you ignore the fact that BTTF was 22 years ago, so Jules and Vern in 1985 were like 7 and 5 so that would make them like in their late 20s now...., so to have a base time would have to be in the mid 90s and I don't think that would work, but not a bad idea to restart that franchise
Nah, does not work for me. by streakerfreak1983	Feb 3rd, 2007 12:05:10 AM
I would love to see the old farts going at it instead.
Anything so Murray doesn't have to get off his couch by Cheif Brody	Feb 3rd, 2007 12:25:06 AM
Does this have anything to do with those Ghostbuster video game demo clips that were posted on AICN a few weeks back? I dunno...I wish Bill would just sac up and strap back on his unlicenced nuclear accelerator one last time for a live action outing. But...change up the city...Move it to LA...I'd love to see them battle the ghosts of Charlie Chaplin...Marilyn Monroe...Abe Vigoda...oh wait...Vigoda's still alive, right?
Abe Vigoda was on CONAN tonight. by wackybantha	Feb 3rd, 2007 12:35:35 AM
He's is definitely still alive.
GB3--NEXT GENERATION GHOSTBUSTERS SHOULD BE... by wackybantha	Feb 3rd, 2007 12:38:25 AM
...Chris Rock, Luke Wilson, Vince Vaughn and Sarah Silverman!!!
Not just a cash cow by Doctor Phibes	Feb 3rd, 2007 01:30:04 AM
I'm glad to see CG used for stuff like this. It seems like a lot of the more mainstream, all-CG movies these days are silly kids movies... And I'll kill the first SOB who calls the original GhostBusters a kid's film. I wonder if they'll do a CG version of Columbia University?
Murray is on board but only if it's latex puppets by BannedOnTheRun	Feb 3rd, 2007 01:32:41 AM
Spitting Image gotta eat!
i heard theyll use a real whip by LarryTheCableGuy	Feb 3rd, 2007 01:38:54 AM
the rules of cgi say cgi whips are too dangerous and theyll have to use a real whip
Back to the Future Videogame by JuntMonkey	Feb 3rd, 2007 01:43:02 AM
Make a new Back to the Future videogame to take place in 1986.
yay?!? by lionbiu	Feb 3rd, 2007 01:51:26 AM
I want to see a Ghostbusters 3, but would prefer live action..........let see where it goes.
Hulk Hogan's voice for slimer... by BatMeister	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:08:30 AM
...who you gonna call brother?
...cus pixels gotta eat too by BatMeister	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:23:41 AM
;)
CGI cinema audience... movie goers too busy to see cr*p by BatMeister	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:24:24 AM
...and while I'm here... where should the comma go in this... (1) I helped my uncle jack, off a horse (2) I helped my uncle, jack off a horse ???
Who Ya Gonna Call? by Boba Fat	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:38:23 AM
Quite like the hell idea, maybe IMAX 3D? There was only one decent film so it's not like there's a lot of heritage to fuck up. What they really need is a virtual director programme to direct CGI films for computers to enjoy. P.S my master thinks I'm on standby
I just emailed Bill Murray, and he said... by HarryBlackPotter	Feb 3rd, 2007 03:03:56 AM
"It's like Tron man. I swear. They put you in this goddam suit and zapp you with lasers and shit. The next thing you know is you're in this zone, where everything is CGI, including your dick. I saw Harrison Ford there but he was pissed off because they'd turned his whip into a walkie talkie. JJ told me Shatner is beaming up later 'cos he needs Shat to look a 100 years younger so they can make the new Star Trek movie. Oh, and John Belushi was there too. Man, he's put on some weight since he died. He's lost his legs too, and gone green. He just floats around scarying the shit out of us! Weird!"
Hook & Ladder 8 was used for exteriors only. by Dickless	Feb 3rd, 2007 03:13:24 AM
The interior stuff in the firehouse was shot in LA, I think.
Everett Robert by SnapT	Feb 3rd, 2007 04:20:08 AM
Though it might contradict the animated series continuity, Jules and Verne could be any age we need them to be in any time period we need them to be in, as it's easy to assume Doc didn't raise them on a linear timeline. For example, they were born sometime after 1885, so by that reasoning they would be either in their 90s or dead by 1985, not 7 and 5 years old. When you travel through time as much as Jules and Verne, it's impossible to match your ages up with a timeline. For all we know, at some point Doc and Clara decided to raise them in the 40th century, on Venus.
Jules and Verne age discussion CONTINUED by SnapT	Feb 3rd, 2007 04:53:23 AM
Though if you did want to follow calendar time, a twentysomething Jules and Verne would be just as interesting if not moreso. You could take this trilogy in a slightly darker direction, dealing with mortality, perhaps. Maybe Clara becomes deathly ill for some mysterious reason, and Jules and Verne are forced to go on an time and space-spanning quest to find a cure for their beloved parent. It could be epic and dramatic like a sci-fi LORD OF THE RINGS, but still with the trademark BTTF fun we all enjoy. Think of Jules and Verne as two young, time-traveling Indiana Jones-type characters. That could be BOFFO.
Who you gonna call? by can-D	Feb 3rd, 2007 05:00:53 AM
ILM?
NAME ONE MOVIE by Cult Exiter	Feb 3rd, 2007 06:32:37 AM
IN WHICH ACTORS SPEAK THEIR LINES ON THE ACTUAL LOCATION, IN REAL ACOUSTIC SPACE? SO... VOICE OVERS AFTERWARDS (IN A STUDIO BOOTH), THAT'S WHAT THEY FUCKING DO ALREADY, IN EVERY HOLLYWOOD FILM - NOT JUST ANIMATIONS. THE MICROPHONES AND PORTABLE RECORDERS OF TODAY ARE SO GOOD, YOU CAN HAVE GREAT SOUND IN ANY WEATHER, ANYWHERE, IF YOU'D REALLY WANT. HOLLYWOOD IS JUST LAZY. IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SHOOT THE PICTURE AND RECORD SOUND OUTDOORS (SIMULTANEOUSLY) IN THE REAL WORLD, JUST STAY INDOORS ALL THE WAY, STAGE THE WHOLE SHIT, MAKE IT FILMED THEATRE INSTEAD... YOU SHALLOW, BICURIOUS, ANTI-NATURAL COCKSUCKERS.
Points to address by Venkie007	Feb 3rd, 2007 06:33:33 AM
Rick Moranis has voluntarily shied away from films, save for voice over work in "Brother Bear"(s) I and II. He released a country (!?) record last year that apparantly was very well-recieved and even won awards of some kind. If GBIII was to made live-action, Harry Ramis would have to go on a super-mega crash diet. He is completely unrecognizable now, save for his deep voice. Aykroyd has voluntarily backed away from movies to promote his new line of liquor....can't remember if its rum, or whiskey.. Sigourney Weaver just wrapped up a film which she plays an autistic woman, also starring the terrific Alan Rickman. Annie Potts kinda fell off the Earth, but I did spot a recent picture of her at a "Designing Women" DVD release party....still holding up alright.
CGI Friday.. by Axl Z	Feb 3rd, 2007 07:41:29 AM
i love the idea of a new ghostbusters film but part of the fun was the way they all interacted (well, Aykroyd, Murray and Ramis anyway). I've yet to see how CG versions of them could contain the same element of humour that these three did during the best dead-pan performances of there life. i mean even in GB2 after the "Doh, Ray, Me, Egon" they have this connection. I love ghostbusters and am sure i'll love this just as much but as of now i feel something will missing. damn you michael bay. damn you..
As long as it is set in the 80s by gotta eat	Feb 3rd, 2007 07:44:00 AM
fine by me. And keep the music
Zemi's CGI photoreal character mouths need improvements by sentient	Feb 3rd, 2007 08:52:39 AM
The Mouth Animations need to be improved and the lips need varying levels of stickiness and pursing. They were just as dead in the Polar Express as the Eyes. Watch real people in films when they talk. Try talking for a while until you notice your own lip stickiness, and how that stick occurs on the inner lips edges and not so much the outer edges. CGI still lacks this and it seems like simple fix and maybe something that could be monitored through a humidity device attached to the microphone that the actor says his lines into. There has to be a way to track this accurately and reproduce it.
AHHHHH! I don't know how to deal with this! by benito	Feb 3rd, 2007 08:53:18 AM
For me Ghostbusters is what Star Wars is to a lot of the rest of you. This movie (and BTTF) are my movie bible, and I am now filled with a toxic cocktail of dread and excitement! The idea of a new Ghostbusters movie? ...Incredible! But CGI??? ...I just don't know!!! Ahhhhhhhhh! It's killing me. PS. I've always thought a new trilogy starring Jules and Vern was the way to go too. A new story, but in the same universe. And I too favour the darker, twenty something route as well.
New Back To The Future could work by performingmonkey	Feb 3rd, 2007 08:54:13 AM
Here's what I'd do, set it in present day Hill Valley with three new teens, one of them who's a little like a young Doc Brown and the other two are the usual stereotypes (e.g. popular bitch girl who comes good, boy next door type etc.). The latter two break into Doc Brown's old laboratory (everyone's a criminal these days so why not these characters?) and find plans for the Flux Capacitor. At school (Strickland is somehow still there, despite James Tolkan being old, and going through Hill Valley there are cameos from other BTTF veteran characters like Goldie Wilson, and the street/clock set is just the same (no flying cars)) they take the plans to the Doc Brown-like kid who then demands to go back to the lab and he builds a new time machine from the plans with their help. Anyhow, whatever else happens, and in the end it turns out that the Doc Brown-like kid is actually Jules or Verne and he was stranded somehow in present day Hill Valley and the Doc can't get back to him (the train time machine fucked up). They find him in the end though (as played by Christopher Lloyd) and it leads into a sequel where something they did in the first part resulted in...Judgement Day or something. Oh fuck it.
I just got off the phone to Vigo... by VenkmanBurnInHell	Feb 3rd, 2007 09:00:49 AM
Apparently this idea is like the buzzing of flies to him.
Is this for the movie?? Or The video game?? by dark-knight02	Feb 3rd, 2007 09:02:58 AM
I think someone's got their wires crossed. There's an arcticle on Gamespot (http://www.gamespot.com/news/ 6165346.html?action=convert&cl ick=latestnews&tag=latestnews; title;0 that has Akroyd talking about doing motion capture for a game and who has the rights for it. I think this makes more sense than a CGI Ghostbuster movie, and as happy as I'd be to get both a game and a movie- I'm thinking the game is more likely. And the information there sounds pretty identical as far as Murray beoing on board and what not.
darkknight by benito	Feb 3rd, 2007 09:10:49 AM
Listen to the interview. It's a movie. Holy crap.
preformingmonkey that sounds good by sentient	Feb 3rd, 2007 09:21:16 AM
Why not make the Scientist kid the actual Jules Vern, it might work even better is if. Doing that is basically saying that Doc's machine was supposed to take him back in time. Like the past and the future already exist- Doc's theory of time augmentation gets a new addition. This says that the time machine was no happy accident. That it was destined to exist for a reason, and now it's real purpose is deemed, and while it seems like a quincidence. It's actually meant to happen. That would be a much more rewarding sequel than a revisit with Doc and Marty. The machine sends a kid of the future into the past to tell the past what the future holds, so that it will inspire what the future becomes, but the wrong kid goes back in time and the future goes horribly wrong. Doc finds Jules and together they have to eliminate the existence of this event and yet still find a way to send Jules back in time. Doc of the future should be dead, but in truth he's still alive in the past. He still has a time machine maybe more than one now. He made two more for his kids. His kids are future protectors too. Too insure times current date and going on's, Doc has to bring things from the future into the past, and vice versa, because his machine is what made the future become what it is. That is Doc's greatest revelation.
Well... I'm back by David Lazarus Long	Feb 3rd, 2007 09:33:02 AM
I'm back from the future. While writing the scripts, I actually developed time travel. Who knew? The future kinda sucks. No more toilet paper. Yea... they went with the three shells. But the 50th anniversary remake of "Dude Where's My Car?" in HGI (that's Holographical Generation Interface - You can actually taste the bongrips!) is PHENOMENAL. Oh, and tacos are illegal. I thinkheh, we all know why.
I think it's clear to me now by David Lazarus Long	Feb 3rd, 2007 09:38:03 AM
that my life's purpose is to write the scripts for BttF IV-VI. I'll get back to you all in about five years.
O_O;; by David Lazarus Long	Feb 3rd, 2007 09:46:57 AM
...and apparently about 5 minutes early! Well, a scientist is never late, or early. He gets there whenever the fuck he wants. Because he has a time machine.
well o another site it says dan is doing voice work for by JeanLuc Dickhard	Feb 3rd, 2007 09:48:37 AM
THE VIDEO GAME....... WHICH IS BACK ON .........
Keep it Live Action by lfhlaw	Feb 3rd, 2007 09:57:25 AM
I think these complete CGI films don't do as well at the box office for this type of movie and the audience it's geared for. Yeah, Toy Story and Cars is great for young kids and parents, but young teens and adults want to see explosions and facial expressions and good camaraderie. The only reason for CGI would be that the script calls for the Mellhatten which by Akroyd's description would be difficult to pull off without CGI. The Storyline I'm not yet sold on. would prefer something more devious, but ah well....I'm not a script writer.
Suck in the guts, boys. We're the Ghostbusters. by RogueWarrior65	Feb 3rd, 2007 10:08:31 AM
Prolly why Bill doesn't want to do it in live-action. Anyone see how old/fat these guys have gotten? Not enough "Body by Jake" or Nutrisystem to solve that one. Then again, maybe that's how they're going to use the CG. Hell, they can take out people's legs and all nowadays so why not remove spare tires?
They should totally reboot this. by Barry Egan	Feb 3rd, 2007 11:14:08 AM
I've said it before, Vince Vaughn is the new Bill Murray. He doesn't even have to play Venkman, just reboot the franchise with new characters running the business with some minor link to the original. Will Farrell and Ben Stiller round out the cast. Let Stiller write it and Harold Ramis direct it, or maybe Reitman's son. (After seeing part of My Super Ex-Girlfriend, Ivan Reitman shouldn't be let near another effects comedy -- and man did that movie need a comedian in the Luke Wilson role.)
Fuck Off! by darquelyte	Feb 3rd, 2007 12:00:32 PM
How did this happen?
Why can't Murray + Ackroyd just star in it? by DARTH VOODOO	Feb 3rd, 2007 01:12:28 PM
It's not like the have to be 35 year old guys to be in a ghostbusters film. They aren't that old.
if thats what it takes to have bill murray in it.... by wolvenom	Feb 3rd, 2007 01:29:46 PM
then so be it... but i dont understand why they cant just make a live action one. God i'd give anything to have another ghostbusters movie the second movie was not at all as good as the first one...where the first one was 'raiders of the lost ark', the second one was definately 'temple of doom' mediocre.... the third one really has the potential of 'last crusade'... it bugs me that bill murray's vanity and lust for an oscar is taking over what every child held dear growing up in the 80's. He should be proud of his ghostbusters history, not ashamed of it. If anything he should be ecstatic to get back into his role as pete venkman.... I doubt it would hurt his chances at an oscar afterwards, i really doubt it. Plus i think the amount of fan admiration for doing another ghostbusters movie should trump any shitty little piece of gold and ego humping he gets from other actors.
This scoop is 100% bullshit. by The Ghost of Marcus Brody	Feb 3rd, 2007 01:43:23 PM
fake.
Ok, has anyone seen Murray, Aykroyd and Ramis lately? by BigTuna	Feb 3rd, 2007 01:53:08 PM
My god, what a mess they are. Ramis atleast has a young face, but is like 300 pounds now. They can't play Ghostbusters anymore. A CGI film with their voices is the way to go.
AICN=National Inquirer by Biddlerama	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:04:17 PM
Who the hell gave Harry back full access to the site? Are the real "reporters" out off on some boondoggle?
Release date by DiabeticMan	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:12:05 PM
I know that im looking way way to into the future but wouldnt it be sweet if it came out in 2009, 20 years after the last one? Someone probably already said that too....
Bill Murray is bipolar by emeraldboy	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:12:15 PM
On good days Murray is apparently great fun to work with. On Bad days however everybody stays away from him. As I Recall, The reason that GB3 will never happen is that it was due to go into production in and around 9/11 and that the story was that portal opened in manhatten and it unleashed Hell or that Manhatten was sort of gateway to hell. studios were sensitive to portraying NY in anything other than a bad light so it was shelved and there were other legal reasons. Ramis and ackroyd did try to go ahead with a sequel but Murray brought out an injunction saying that it was his idea while he was working under contract with coloumbia. a number of years ago he was asked about and Murray simply replied that as it was his idea they werent going to do it without him. I really dont think that Murray simply cares anymore. After lost in translation he all but hinted that he was done with acting. Then he made broken flowers. Murray hasnt acted since which is omnious.
As much as I love Ghostbusters by emeraldboy	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:13:10 PM
I dont want to see another GB film. The second one was horrible. My favourite films of the eighties are and will remain Back to the Future. I have the DVD Boxset. In the third film a train destroys the Delorean, there fore making it impossible for the a new one to be built. I cant see The studio Hiring Fox again not with Parkinsons so bad. Unless it was about his uncle Joey. It was never explained what happened to him and why he ended up in the clink. If you dont understand the second one go and by the DVD boxset and it tells the story of how they tried to get everyone back for the sequel and how one actor said no because he wanted more money. CG?
Other than swimming in slime and walking up stairs... by Big Bad Clone	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:26:31 PM
the Ghostbusters never did that much action. They mostly joked, stood around and shot at ghosts. If a 195 year old Sean Connery can be a master theif and bang Catherine Zeta JOnes, why can't fat, old Ghostbusters bust ghosts.
MY TAKE ON IT. by Gilkuliehe	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:30:30 PM
Make the original characters even older. They are in a home. Pretty much bored old farts. Murray hits on the nurses cuz he's still cool though. Ernie Hudson died. (To give emotional impact, you know, he's the Adrian of this movie). They get by pretty much AGING and DYING. Enter the new GB obsessed young nerdy character with a warning. Paranormal activity is going through the roof and he wants to create a team on his own. Egon has the licenses for the old machinery though, so he needs him. Some struggle between young and old, and then, GHOSTBUSTERS RELOADED comes in. Old and young, one team. New monsters and the stay puft marshmallowman. Anyone wants to buy my script?
make GB3 if new ghostbusters if you have to.... by wolvenom	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:36:55 PM
like someone said they should bring on vaughn, stiller, and ferrel...... seriously a cgi ghostbusters would suck. It would be catered down to much to appeal to 5 and 8 year olds who enjoy that kind of 'polar express' crap. The thing we all loved about GB1 and GB2 was its grown up feel, how i enjoyed it as a kid and can still enjoy it as an adult cause i get some of the subtle humour a bit more as i get older. How the fuck are they going to translate venkman's womanizing side of his personality correctly with a cgi 'polar express' feel to it? Seriously not going to work. i could find myself gagging seeing sigourney weaver and bill murray in CGI flirting with each other. Its fucking ridiculous.
WITH NEW GHOSTBUSTERS!! by wolvenom	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:37:23 PM
i meant
DAN DAN YOU'RE OUR MAN....IF YOU CANT DO IT...... by GibsonUSA Returns	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:41:38 PM
NO ONE CAN!!
I'm waiting for.... by shellfishh	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:45:35 PM
...the Videodrome video game. I hear it's great, but you only wind up playing it once. Weird.
GHOSTBUSTERS CGI = FLAMES ON OPTIMAS by shakermakerman	Feb 3rd, 2007 02:51:17 PM
........
Vince Vaugh is NOT the new Bill Murray by shellfishh	Feb 3rd, 2007 03:35:35 PM
And any person that thinks that a Vaughn, Ferrel, Stiller reboot of Ghostbusters is a good idea, either has their tongue firmly in cheek, or their head firmly up their ass.
Why even bother with Bill Murray - get Lorenzo Music! by CarefulBen	Feb 3rd, 2007 03:50:08 PM
the bad news is he's dead - but surely they can do anything with CGI these days. I can't believe this'll be anything other than wank. I saw Ghostbusters 2
If Harrison Ford can do it again, these guys can too. by wackybantha	Feb 3rd, 2007 03:53:44 PM
Although I think all the action should take place in the streets of Manhattan. Not underground.
Ghostbusters doesn't need to be rebooted by IndyCollector	Feb 3rd, 2007 04:34:56 PM
A live-action sequel with Vince Vaughn and whoever else would work fine within the explanation that "Ghostbusters" has become a franchise and the new guys are opening up a shop in Chicago. Since Ackroyd really is the heart of the Ghostbusters he could have a cameo in either helping the new guys set up shop or come in later to help out with the crisis. He and Ramis could write the script and keep the connection to the original going. By doing this you can get around not having Bill Murray in it, as sucky as that is. Ghostbusters is such a great concept it's shame to see it sit dormant. The only thing new bearing that name to come out in recent years was that comic series that was infrequent. I don't even know if it's still in production.
CGI = Cinema Gloating at Idiots by Ray Gamma	Feb 3rd, 2007 04:39:21 PM
taint it the truth
I like IndyCollectors idea above by Ray Gamma	Feb 3rd, 2007 04:41:05 PM
it would make audiences way more excited than a fucking CGI cartoon.
Whoever owns the Ghostbusters rights... by Ray Gamma	Feb 3rd, 2007 04:42:43 PM
You wanna make the movie CGI but you stamp on the cool Ghostbusters Xbox game that was in development? Frankly I'd rather play the fucking game.
I mean... by Ray Gamma	Feb 3rd, 2007 04:47:01 PM
Okay, so admittedly Ghostbusters has a flying green booger and a giant Stay-Puft marshmallow man, but if you're going to come back with an all-CGI third installment, you might as well make the big finale a battle against a giant Fonzie waterskiing over a giant shark.
Ghostbusters: Frat Pack by mparke2	Feb 3rd, 2007 05:28:09 PM
I say reboot the franchise with Vince Vaughn, Ben Stiller, Luke Wilson, and Owen Wilson. You can have cameos by the others, but I would love to see more Ghostbusters. Everyone is right that the originals are too old. It's nice, but not realistic. My god, look Harold Ramis. Winston doesn't look like he aged much though. Just my opinion.
Ghostbusters II wasn't bad. by sp9543	Feb 3rd, 2007 05:54:33 PM
Ghostbusters II wasn't bad. it did shitty because of batman. if you liked the first one theres no reason to dislike the second one, its more of a good thing. Having will ferrel in a gb movie would be stupid, he doesn't have the dry humor thats needed. hes too much of a clown. vaugh wilson and stiller also shouldnt be in this because we want a gb3 not a dodgeball 2 with proton packs.
i trust dan ack-roid... by jig98	Feb 3rd, 2007 06:15:45 PM
the only bad career move he's made was as a neurolgist in the sloppy "50 first dates". and bill murray is GOD. i watched a marathon of "groundhog day" yesterday. funny as hell. but why should there be a completly cgi-ed ghostbusters 3 when we have "evolution"?
Spyguy FTW by ferociousbadger	Feb 3rd, 2007 06:55:14 PM
That would be the most awesome ghostbusters movie EVAR
Re: Stiller, Ferrel, Vaughn nonsense. by benito	Feb 3rd, 2007 07:07:19 PM
People who talk about casting Vince Vaughn, Will Ferrel and Ben Stiller as Ghostbusters don't know their ass from their elbow. What an obvious but completely inappropriate bunch of choices. Ghostbusters was a smart, dry witty comedy. Those guys are a bunch of posturing clowns. And no joke, they would RUIN this franchise. Vince Vaughn the new Bill Murray??? ...No fucking way.
PS. by benito	Feb 3rd, 2007 07:09:41 PM
If you don't think that Ackroyd, Ramis, Murray and Hudson still have what it takes to star in a Ghostbusters movie and make it incredible... then you never understood these movies.
Do Not Want. by buster00	Feb 3rd, 2007 08:04:29 PM
Ghostbusters 3? Why? Part 2 was a rancid pantsload. Quit while you're behind, sez I.
CG doesn't have to mean "kiddy" by David Lazarus Long	Feb 3rd, 2007 08:13:48 PM
Anyone seen Advent Children? Oh. Wait, that's Japan. Where the definition of 'animation' isn't "media for five year olds". Haven't seen Polar Express, but do remember the creepy eyes. Let Squinix do the CGI and I'll be happy, haha.
Seen as its CGI by kingoflight	Feb 3rd, 2007 08:20:18 PM
can they cross the streams ?
HAROLD RAMIS AND ERNIE HUDSON GOTTA EAT! by Flynn Diesel	Feb 3rd, 2007 11:09:53 PM
Where have you seen them in this whole blitz?
Ghostbusters II was GOOD. by GibsonUSA Returns	Feb 3rd, 2007 11:20:51 PM
I don't know what ch'all talking about....but if Dan is reading, this is not the opinion of the general public. Growing up everyone I know loved GB 1 and GB2. Yes, GB2 is indeed not as good as the first...and I can even understand when people say it sucked COMPARED to the first, but on their own each are great. I have been waiting forever for a GB3, and would prefer it not to be in CG. However, I'll take what I can get.
VenkmanBurnInHell by benito	Feb 3rd, 2007 11:36:43 PM
I just want to say that though I somehow missed your post at first, both it and your name are equally my favourite things ever.
BETTER THIS than another aging heroes story..... by YotzVonFrelnik	Feb 4th, 2007 12:16:01 AM
Yeah, I thought that this was a stupid idea because if you want a Ghostbusters movie, you gotta want the guys in the flesh, right? Well, it's been over 20 years since GB2, so what else could we possibly get than two hours of four more of our childhood icons being raped by Father Time's erosion? NAH! The CGI thing, although out of step with the other two movies, will give us the young(ish), vital team we went back to see an obscene amount of times back in the day (Really, SNL had an almost creible sketch of Julia Louis Dreyfuss and Mary Gross playing hosts of a TV talk show dedicated to Ghostbusters fandom!). I'm just glad Murray freed his head from his own rectum to give us all SOMEthing GB-related. That might sound cruel, but after hearing of his reluctance to do another movie because of a feeling that it would be beneath him in some way (...looking backwards? ...a career backslide? .. . I forget what the details were, but I remember it smelled like pretentiousness left out in the sun). But I got royally pissed when he did a movie like Garfield, then. Hey, I still love the guy, and I enjoy his films, but you know... even your favorite friend, hero, idol, parent EVER can make you want to throw them under a bus from time to time. You don't actually DO it of course, but they certainly have you banging your head against the wall until the urge to passes. I just hope this doesn't implode now. Updates! Give us regular updates!!!
BETTER THIS: Part 2: the forgotten point..) by YotzVonFrelnik	Feb 4th, 2007 12:22:31 AM
Oops! Went off on my sermon so much I forgot the exact notion that got my typing in the first place... That is they DID do a live action GB3, you just know that four-fifths of it would be based around a plotline of them all being OLD. And the glory days are BEHIND THEM. And there would probably be a SMART-ASS character played by an equally smart-assed contemporary actor that has no business in our Firehouse HQ! Dear god, it'd be a supernatural Space Cowboys... Seriously, I mean it, aren't we all through with the "aging hero" thing?
... And one more thing! by YotzVonFrelnik	Feb 4th, 2007 12:25:17 AM
Don't friggin' animate them like rubber cartoons. Please. Bad!
Whatwhatwhat!?! by Occupant	Feb 4th, 2007 03:15:26 AM
Stiller...Ferrell...Wilson squared? Will Hell be frozen over?
CGI Ghostbusters = nipples on Rosie O'Donell's fat ass by Motoko Kusanagi	Feb 4th, 2007 08:51:25 AM
ugh
Advent Children Style by sfezfilms	Feb 4th, 2007 11:27:09 AM
I hope they do it in the style of the Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children movie. Not the anime look but the very realistic CGI. I don't really want to see a cartoony pixar ghostbusters movie.
Flames on Ecto-1? by David Lazarus Long	Feb 4th, 2007 11:29:45 AM
BRILLIANT! Let's make it a transformer too, they can do damn near anything with CGI these days. Like rape Dakota Fanning. Sorry, I still can't get over that shit.
If you mean Luigi's mansion... by David Lazarus Long	Feb 4th, 2007 11:33:54 AM
Yea, that's as close to a Ghostbusters game as... Well, I guess it is pretty close. And fun. For about the 20 minutes it takes to finish it. Twice.
WHATEVER HAPPENED by Ray Gamma	Feb 4th, 2007 11:35:39 AM
Whatever happened to that excellent idea that was being thrown around, where Bill Murray apparently suggested that he would be up for doing a third one on the condition that he was in it as a ghost? I would much rather see the original cast with Murray as a ghost than see a CGI Ghostbusters cartoon. Please guys, what a fantastic idea - please do it...!
If you want to play a "Ghostbusters" type game now... by Otter	Feb 4th, 2007 11:41:25 AM
rent or buy (for about 10 bucks) "The Haunted Mansion" game... very entertaining.
ha! last time murray would only do it if he was a ghost by misnomer	Feb 4th, 2007 01:14:22 PM
now he'll only do it if its CGI?! murrays having a laugh I think.....
GB3 should be B.Stiller, O.Wilson, V.Vaughn, J.Bateman! by R.C. the "Wise"	Feb 4th, 2007 01:28:05 PM
First have a great story. Unite them with other comedic actors trying to become ghostbusters but not selected: i.e. Sarah Silverman, Anthony Anderson, Jon Favereau, Ant, John Leguizamo...you get the drift. Plus, Throw in some ghost cameos of Will Ferrel, Luke Wilson, Steve Carell, and
I could see Bruce Campbell as Venkman by hadez	Feb 4th, 2007 01:49:51 PM
But it would be shit anyway to remake GB. And I do not want a kiddie friendly Ghostbusters which will be if it's CGI. Just the same with Live free or Die Hard. If there's no Yippee-ki-yay, motherfucker! I'll be fucking pissed!!
Just got off the phone with Rosie O'Donell's ass... by Motoko Kusanagi	Feb 4th, 2007 02:08:47 PM
...it told me that it looks way better than CGI ghostbusters.
How do Owen Wilson and Ben Stiller fit Ghostbusters? by GibsonUSA Returns	Feb 4th, 2007 07:46:29 PM
Someone explain why they keep being mentioned?
If done using CGI, why not a TV series? by Dr. Stantz	Feb 4th, 2007 08:46:51 PM
Then we could have some sort of weekly "Ghostbusters Case Files" where the current live-action actors reminisce about past cases through 3D stories? This way they could age the 3D character models according to the time of the story within the past 20 years? One episode could be about a case in 1993, the next about 2003, etc. I'm all up for a CG feature film too, but I'm not quite sold on the Hellbent script. As any GB fan knows, Dan's original scripts for the other films were tweaked drastically by Harold Ramis, and I think he was the original's saving grace. Dan knows the science, and Harold knows the comedy.
I believe Conan O'Brien was touted as a new ghostbuster by hooties mcboob	Feb 4th, 2007 10:04:13 PM
but this was when 'Late Night' started. Would be interesting to see, but he looks more like Zool now. It is coincidental that the franchise lays dormant for so long and now a game AND a movie are coming. The game footage, though I know was only early, really seemed fishy to me. I'm gonna hold my breath on this one...
Dang, a repost... by hooties mcboob	Feb 4th, 2007 10:04:52 PM
sorry bout it.
I believe Conan O'Brien was touted as a new ghostbuster by hooties mcboob	Feb 4th, 2007 10:15:47 PM
but this was when 'Late Night' started. Would be interesting to see, but he looks more like Zool now. It is coincidental that the franchise lays dormant for so long and now a game AND a movie are coming. The game footage, though I know was only early, really seemed fishy to me. I'm gonna hold my breath on this one...
Very Cool!! by LeviDTinker	Feb 5th, 2007 02:40:54 AM
I really enjoyed the first 2 films, and although i would love to see the 3rd be live action, a CGI ghost busters movie with the original actors provideing the voices, has a lot of potential. like Akroyd said you can realize what ever the script envisions at a fraction of the cost. what would be really cool is if the movie opened with Live action then segued into all CGI. Iam excited about this.
Listen up people... by Ray Gamma	Feb 5th, 2007 03:03:46 AM
Stiller/Owen etc is not Ghostbusters. Those of us above a certain age will remember that Bill Murray and Dan Aykroyd came out of that alternative/underground/non-po litically-correct 70's comedy scene (think John Candy etc) that ultimately morphed into Saturday Night Live and then a bunch of low-budget cult comedy feature films. Ben Stiller and Owen Wilson and those sorts of guys have no such credentials. Ghostbusters worked because such leftfield comedians were involved. If you get vanilla comedy actors like Wilson and Stiller to do a new Ghostbusters movie, it would be as though the first Ghostbusters movie had starred Kevin Costner and Richard gere.
Live action damn it!!!!!! by Ecto-1	Feb 5th, 2007 03:56:03 AM
A live action Ghostbusters movie would be so much better. I think that the actors could all be easily recast with some quality replacements. As long as they keep Ivan Reitman away from it. The original GB movie was the last good film he made. He's done fuck all since. My Super X Girlfriend? Stick it up yer arse mate!
UNCLE BUCK 2. by THE FOOT THAT KICKED THE CRADLE	Feb 5th, 2007 05:18:37 AM
CGI THE CANDY.
Im up for it if they lay out some ground rules! by boyblue	Feb 5th, 2007 05:48:42 AM
Set it just after the events of the 2nd film keep it peroid late 80's early 90's. Dont introduce any "New Ghostbusters" Have the main characters stick to the same schtick. Go absoloutly crazy on the overworld and spook designs. The originals had great designs that really creeped me out when I was a kid. Have some fun but dont rape the originals. They do this and I will definatley give them a call!
I'm a Huge Ghostbusters Fan by Mentok	Feb 5th, 2007 06:50:42 AM
I even like the second one, for what it is worth. And I have ZERO interest in this. None.
Why Live Action Would Be Better by Mentok	Feb 5th, 2007 07:01:33 AM
The only way another ghostbusters movie would interest me, is if they got the old cast back together. Set it 20 years after the last one, they're all old, broken down...Venkman's marriage with Dana fell apart because of his celebrity status after 2, celebrity that has wained because of a lack of paranormal activity. He's lived this debauched, hollywood lifestyle ever since, and exists now as a sort of c-level celebrity, almost famous for being famous, doing appearances on celebrity big brother. Ray still operates ghostbusters by himself, but there is almost no work and he's going broke. Egon put on a lot of weight and has become an eccentric hermit, working on mysterious experiments in a compound deep in the woods of Maine. Winston is working as a consultant on horror movies in hollywood. Obviously then, there would be an evil bad guy who pops up, and the old team reassembles for one last chance at redemption. It's a bit hackneyed, but if it was done well, with these players that wouldn't matter.
so is Harrison Ford gonna be in this then? by just pillow talk	Feb 5th, 2007 07:40:06 AM
his whip can be in this movie too...
Flames on the Proton packs!!! by boyblue	Feb 5th, 2007 08:22:27 AM
Nipples on Slimer???
I actually think I prefer the CGI idea... by Childe Roland	Feb 5th, 2007 11:11:09 AM
...to an "old guys help the young guys" torch passing, which would douobtless set us up for at least one Ghostbusters movie sans the original cast in any way shape or form. If they were to do a live action third, I'd have it be Ramis, Ackroyd, Hudson and Moranis in gray with Murray just making a cameo (his character was clearly just in it for the chicks, anyway, and he ended the second flick with a gal and a baby, so his character arc is pretty well closed). And I would use the third film to give the rest of the characters some closure. Have Moranis be the hero his character always wanted to be and have him end up with Janine. Have Egon and Stanz come out of the closet and finally settle down together in Vermont. Leave the Ghostbusters legacy in Wilson's hands and close the movie with him hanging a "help wanted" sign in the window of the firehouse. Cue Ray Parker Jr. Roll credits.
Continued from Childe's version... by finky089	Feb 5th, 2007 11:53:50 AM
which provides a great segway for the NEXT sequel, in which Winston recruits some young 'urban" types to pass the torch to. And they'll call it Ghostbusters 4: Stomp the Ghosts
Ghostbusters 4 by David Lazarus Long	Feb 5th, 2007 12:14:57 PM
Big Bustin' (insert cum joke here)
Hear me out.... by davidpeter1000	Feb 5th, 2007 12:21:31 PM
CGI Ghostbusters is an awful idea. I don't want to see a cartoon as the third installment of this franchise. You have to appeal to the fans of the franchise, as well as new fans, which means old meets new should be the way to go. A well scripted summer-opening GB 3 sequel would make MILLIONS. But a CGI cartoon??
For the last time by David Lazarus Long	Feb 5th, 2007 12:47:59 PM
will people stop automatically assuming that anything animated is automatically Saturday morning kids fare? WATCH ADVENT CHILDREN for chrissakes. Note that I'm not pro CGI Ghostbusters, but the script would still be Ackroyd and Ramis', so how 'kiddy' could it possibly be? The subject matter is what really counts, not the medium it's portrayed in.
I know one way Murray will come back for 3... by hooties mcboob	Feb 5th, 2007 04:05:38 PM
Ghostbusters 3: A Wes Anderson Film!
Honestly... by FilmNerdJamie	Feb 5th, 2007 05:27:06 PM
...the time for GHOSTBUSTERS III passed around '93/'94 when Akyroyd wanted Chris Rock, Ben Stiller and Chris Farley to play the "next generation" along with the original cast...to which everyone was game for except for Murray.
re: Wes Anderson by benito	Feb 5th, 2007 09:28:12 PM
No kidding. I have been wanting Wes Anderson to make this film for years. Give it some substance and just really go all out on the character stuff with old school special effects. Would be amazing. ...Of course he'd have to fight me for the gig. Punk ass more talented than me sumbitch.
I really hope this gets made by AllPowerfulWizardOfOz	Feb 6th, 2007 12:18:48 AM
I think it would be quite enjoyable. Not to mention I REALLY hope that video game goes to market. Now that would just kick all kinds of ass!! I've not gotten an XBOX360, yet. However if that game was released only on XBOX360 I would pick one up to do me some ghostbustin. PC gamer. Fuck the consoles.
better sequels to be made... by ZissouIntern	Feb 6th, 2007 01:26:47 AM
i love murray, but there are other great properties waiting to be exploited...er i mean reinvigorated. how about a "spies like us sequel"? no more reds to spy on, but how about aykroyd and chase on the loose seeking osama? both could use the work. and what about a "three amigos" sequel? i mean martin does father of the bride 2, cheaper by the dozen 2, now pink panther 2!?!?! what happened to the funny steve martin of years past. sad. bring back luck, ned and dusty.

Talkbacks

Dan Akyroyd confirms GHOSTBUSTERS movie... apparently CGI!!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks