Ghostbusters: Afterlife | November 19 2021 | Sony | Delayed again

[EmmaPeel]

 

 

[dudalb]

On 11/13/2021 at 1:23 PM, Ronin46 said:

Sales have seemed to stall a bit which is worrying. Maybe this kicks it up a little. I was thinking 5M and 50+ OW a week ago and now thinking 40 OW. Hopefully it picks up. Not really into this movie. I just feel the 1980s movie was lightning in a bottle and cant really be replicated now. But its a big movie and I always like to see movies do well at the box office. 

I could not disagree more. If a movie is bad, it deservest to fail at the box office. Bad Movie suceeding just means more bad movies.

And I see no reason to cheerlead for the sucess of a huge corparation anyway.

[dudalb]

11 hours ago, ViktorLosAngeles said:

I’m still seeing this doing a bit less and debuting in 30’s in the US. 34-6 million $.

I will see it because I love the original so much but I have lowered my expectations.

I am strongly  moving toward the "the 1984 film was lightning in a bottle and has never really been recaptured since" school .

[Ronin46]

8 minutes ago, dudalb said:

I could not disagree more. If a movie is bad, it deservest to fail at the box office. Bad Movie suceeding just means more bad movies.

And I see no reason to cheerlead for the sucess of a huge corparation anyway.

 

Your takes are wrong about 90% of the time. So you disagreeing with me is fine by me. I did not say GB is bad. I said I am not really into this movie but am fine with it doing ok. I loved the original and doubt they can recreate that again. I also was not into Free Guy and was happy that did well. As for bad movies succeeding, where have you been the last 30 years? 2 of the films I enjoyed this year were Stillwater (not so the last 20 min) and the Last Duel and both bombed. I did not really like NTTD but was happy it did well worldwide. I dont really like CB films a lot but wont come on here and vomit all over them and pine for the 1970s filmaking.

 

[TheDude391]

29 minutes ago, EmmaPeel said:

 

 

"Everyone that has seen it says that they cry at the movie, so it should be an extremely successful comedy"

Bill Murray gets it lol

[von Kenni]

13 minutes ago, dudalb said:

I will see it because I love the original so much but I have lowered my expectations.

I am strongly  moving toward the "the 1984 film was lightning in a bottle and has never really been recaptured since" school .

There is the love and respect for the OG and should have the craft behind it all, but comedy is always tricky and following that "lightning in a bottle" is a tall order. Hard to see that I wouldn't enjoy it, but to get to OG level is another thing. I try to keep low expectations and avoid comparing it with the OG when seeing it but just letting it sink in.

[dudalb]

8 minutes ago, Ronin46 said:

 

Your takes are wrong about 90% of the time. So you disagreeing with me is fine by me. I did not say GB is bad. I said I am not really into this movie but am fine with it doing ok. I loved the original and doubt they can recreate that again. I also was not into Free Guy and was happy that did well. As for bad movies succeeding, where have you been the last 30 years? 2 of the films I enjoyed this year were Stillwater (not so the last 20 min) and the Last Duel and both bombed. I did not really like NTTD but was happy it did well worldwide. I dont really like CB films a lot but wont come on here and vomit all over them and pine for the 1970s filmaking.

 

You are damn right I pine for the 1970's, when I had a much greater choice of what kind of film I could go out and see. I hate that if things keep on going the way they are, n a couple of year only a few big franchises  will get released in theaters. I hate the death of serious drama at the movies.

And I hate the  mentality which had led to this.

And I think you are wrong 90% of time. I think your root for everything to suceed just encourages bad movies and mediocrity. I think bad movies deserve to fail.

And I nowhere said that GB 2021 was a bad movie. You read that into what I said. I was disagreeing with your "I hope everything suceeds" opinions on a general level not about a specific film. 

 

[dudalb]

10 minutes ago, von Kenni said:

There is the love and respect for the OG and should have the craft behind it all, but comedy is always tricky and following that "lightning in a bottle" is a tall order. Hard to see that I wouldn't enjoy it, but to get to OG level is another thing. I try to keep low expectations and avoid comparing it with the OG when seeing it but just letting it sink in.

Hell, even the 1989 sequel came nowhere near capturing the lighting i the bottle. Probably because they made the mistake of being to much like the original and brining nothing new to the table. Most of the big jokes were just reccyled versions of the big jokes of the original. They forgot the sucessful formula for a sequel is "The Same Only Different". You have bring something new to the table.

[Ronin46]

24 minutes ago, dudalb said:

You are damn right I pine for the 1970's, when I had a much greater choice of what kind of film I could go out and see. I hate that if things keep on going the way they are, n a couple of year only a few big franchises  will get released in theaters. I hate the death of serious drama at the movies.

And I hate the  mentality which had led to this.

And I think you are wrong 90% of time. I think your root for everything to suceed just encourages bad movies and mediocrity. I think bad movies deserve to fail.

And I nowhere said that GB 2021 was a bad movie. You read that into what I said. I was disagreeing with your "I hope everything suceeds" opinions on a general level not about a specific film. 

 

Bad movies are everywhere. I just want movies to go on in the theatre and not just streaming. That means comic book films, animated films and so on. It means sequels and it means known IP. Once in a while something really good will come out such as Dune which is still based on known IP and they can make sequels and tv shows from it (and are). But its increasingly hard to get a movie that's cant be turned into a theme ride or starting a franchise. Stand alone films that cant be turned into toys, theme ride, franchises, spun off into tv shows and so on are just not going to be made.  

 

That is the world we live in and its not going back. Mediocre movies and an occasional good one all showing in the cinema is what we have now. The next step down is everything streaming. So I will take the current situation over that and hope cinemas can make a profit and stay open. Otherwise its home viewing only. So to avoid that means some pretty poor movies big budget movies making money. Something I have learnt to live with so sometimes I can watch something good once in a while.

Edited November 16, 2021 by Ronin46

[wildphantom]

2 hours ago, dudalb said:

Hell, even the 1989 sequel came nowhere near capturing the lighting i the bottle. Probably because they made the mistake of being to much like the original and brining nothing new to the table. Most of the big jokes were just reccyled versions of the big jokes of the original. They forgot the sucessful formula for a sequel is "The Same Only Different". You have bring something new to the table.

You say that, but I really like Ghostbusters II. It definitely repeats the formula of the first but, as sequels go, I think it’s really underrated. Gives the people what they loved first time out again. No more, no less. 
 

Plus Venkman trying to win Dana back gets an extended chunk of the movie and it’s just gold. I think Murray is as funny in the second as the first. Him and Weaver were dynamite together in both movies. 

[dudalb]

1 hour ago, wildphantom said:

You say that, but I really like Ghostbusters II. It definitely repeats the formula of the first but, as sequels go, I think it’s really underrated. Gives the people what they loved first time out again. No more, no less. 
 

Plus Venkman trying to win Dana back gets an extended chunk of the movie and it’s just gold. I think Murray is as funny in the second as the first. Him and Weaver were dynamite together in both movies. 

I just have to disagree. The greatest fault with GB2 is too many of the jokes fail. They actually thought that the Statue Of Liberty would be a good subsitute for the Sta Puft Marshmellow man?

 

[wildphantom]

10 hours ago, dudalb said:

I just have to disagree. The greatest fault with GB2 is too many of the jokes fail. They actually thought that the Statue Of Liberty would be a good subsitute for the Sta Puft Marshmellow man?

 

yeah, I’m no fan of the Liberty choice. But the sentiment of a city’s joy being whipped up to beat evil is a good one. It plays better now as a symbol of New York spirit than it did in 1989. 
 

I get people are going to have different opinions. I find the film mostly pretty darn good. The court room sequence is up there with anything in the original. 

[Napoleon]

Down to 68% on Rotten Tomatoes, will it go rotten?

[AJG]

15 minutes ago, Napoleon said:

Down to 68% on Rotten Tomatoes, will it go rotten?

 

Hopefully!!!

 

 

 

[CenterMeOnSam]

12 hours ago, dudalb said:

I just have to disagree. The greatest fault with GB2 is too many of the jokes fail. They actually thought that the Statue Of Liberty would be a good subsitute for the Sta Puft Marshmellow man?

 

 

I mean... the Statue of Liberty wasn't really a "joke." 

 

The jokes of the movie, the actual jokes, land rather well:

 

"My parents didn't believe in toys."

"You never even had a slinky?"

"We had part of a slinky, but I straightened it."

 

"You didn't sleep with it, did you?... Oh you dog."
"It's always the quiet ones."

 

"I'd like to a gynecological exam on the mother."

"Well, who wouldn't?"

 

"Your Honor, ladies and gentleman of the audience, I don't think it's fair to call my clients frauds. Sure, the blackout was a big problem for everybody. I was trapped in an elevator for two hours and I had to make the whole time. But I don't blame them. Because one time, I turned into a dog and they helped me. Thank you."

 

"So your alien had a room at the Holiday Inn, Paramus."

"...It might have been a room on the spacecraft made up to look like a room at the Holiday Inn. I can't be sure about that, Peter."

[RRA]

14 hours ago, wildphantom said:

You say that, but I really like Ghostbusters II. It definitely repeats the formula of the first but, as sequels go, I think it’s really underrated. Gives the people what they loved first time out again. No more, no less. 
 

Plus Venkman trying to win Dana back gets an extended chunk of the movie and it’s just gold. I think Murray is as funny in the second as the first. Him and Weaver were dynamite together in both movies. 

They have good chemistry. There are even elements of GB2 I appreciate.

 

But I never understood the plot booking on that sequel. Why have them go bankrupt? I mean one could easily rewrite that film to where like any giant rock band, Venkman left to go "solo" and cash in on their fleeting fame. Business is still running, but the remaining guys gotta do stuff to make ends meet (the GBers having to do birthday parties to pay the bills is humiliatingly amusing.) Make a meta reference to the massive merchandise blitz the first movie had alongside spawning a pretty popular cartoon show*. They could've had a running gag where New Yorkers are stunned to learn they're still a thing. It just feels like GB2 is sandbagged, having to go through needless rigamaroos to creatively justify a sequel. It reeks of overthinking. 

 

Reminds me of Akroyd's original booking for the GB: glorified bug exterminators. Once the idea that ghosts are real is established, supernatural becomes mundane and another accepted fact of life that people don't think twice about. Hitler's ghost goosestepping in your garage? Call these guy up to remove him. I enjoyed the video game from several years back running with this idea (getting William Atherton back to play Peck as their boss? GOLD.)

 

*=Which Sony has slowly been uploading on YouTube and I've been reminded that sure one can nitpick some of the animation (a problem of outsourcing a large bulk-ordered daily syndicated show like that to several Asian studios) and its sandbox formula, it's a well-written clever cartoon from that era which have the stereotype of being (fair or not) mindless toy commercials. Captures that property's humor and sci-fi/supernatural catch-all nature. But more than anything else, they exploit the property's core concept. I guess it helps with that big bulk order, they could have the guys tackle seemingly everything from aliens to werewolves to Lovecraft. RGB is a good sequel to the original movie. 

[efialtes76]

2 hours ago, Napoleon said:

Down to 68% on Rotten Tomatoes, will it go rotten?

Yep but who cares!

The movie looks good imo.

Edited November 17, 2021 by efialtes76

[CenterMeOnSam]

29 minutes ago, RRA said:

They have good chemistry. There are even elements of GB2 I appreciate.

 

But I never understood the plot booking on that sequel. Why have them go bankrupt? I mean one could easily rewrite that film to where like any giant rock band, Venkman left to go "solo" and cash in on their fleeting fame. Business is still running, but the remaining guys gotta do stuff to make ends meet (the GBers having to do birthday parties to pay the bills is humiliatingly amusing.) Make a meta reference to the massive merchandise blitz the first movie had alongside spawning a pretty popular cartoon show*. They could've had a running gag where New Yorkers are stunned to learn they're still a thing. It just feels like GB2 is sandbagged, having to go through needless rigamaroos to creatively justify a sequel. It reeks of overthinking. 

 

Reminds me of Akroyd's original booking for the GB: glorified bug exterminators. Once the idea that ghosts are real is established, supernatural becomes mundane and another accepted fact of life that people don't think twice about. Hitler's ghost goosestepping in your garage? Call these guy up to remove him. I enjoyed the video game from several years back running with this idea (getting William Atherton back to play Peck as their boss? GOLD.)

 

*=Which Sony has slowly been uploading on YouTube and I've been reminded that sure one can nitpick some of the animation (a problem of outsourcing a large bulk-ordered daily syndicated show like that to several Asian studios) and its sandbox formula, it's a well-written clever cartoon from that era which have the stereotype of being (fair or not) mindless toy commercials. Captures that property's humor and sci-fi/supernatural catch-all nature. But more than anything else, they exploit the property's core concept. I guess it helps with that big bulk order, they could have the guys tackle seemingly everything from aliens to werewolves to Lovecraft. RGB is a good sequel to the original movie. 

 

I'm pretty sure it was quickly explained that they were broke because everyone sued them after the Stay Puft incident, which... makes sense. A looooot of property was destroyed.

[CenterMeOnSam]

24 minutes ago, efialtes76 said:

Yep but who cares!

The movie looks good imo.

 

I love critics, but generally the main thing driving most negative reviews of this movie are folks who aren't fans of "nostalgia" driven stories. That's perfectly their right, but personally, I don't understand how nostalgia has become a dirty word. 

 

I'm a professor of theatre and I can tell you the concept of nostalgia has been a major driver of entertainment going back to the Greeks. I think critics like to use it to claim something is "a retread" or "not original," but the idea of "originality" being integral to successful populist entertainment is a rather new concept. Shakespeare made a career of retreads, remakes, and nostalgia.

 

So, if their major issue is that it's too nostalgic for its own good, that doesn't worry me at all.

[filmlover]

Budget of $75M according to Variety.

 

Box Office: 'Ghostbusters: Afterlife,' 'King Richard' Opening Estimate - Variety