It looks like it’ll be a solid movie, but I’m not that hype about the dark tone of the trailer. Like it thought it was the trailer for something grand and epic like TFA. Ghostbusters is fun and lighthearted with some horror tinges. This doesn’t look like it’ll be a horror film or anything but the apeing of Stranger Things is very noticeable.
While I'm half-expecting it to be ignored, the extended canon established by the 2012 videogame and the following IDW comic series paints Ivo Shandor as far more involved than simply GB1's events. Spoiler In the videogame, Shandor was revealed to be a Gozer cultist, paving a way for his patron's return to power (this was implied by the original movie at least, with Egon noting the unorthodox construction of the Shandor Building. The game just confirms it outright). The events of GB2 are shown to be an unwitting result of Shandor's machinations, as the events of GB1 jumpstart the psycho-kinetic leylines that criss-cross New York City, and the River of Slime is revealed to be one of those leylines. Ivo Shandor himself is the villain of the game, his ghost using the re-empowered leylines to turn himself into a being to rival Gozer, having grown disillusioned with the "god" after his humiliating defeat by the Ghostbusters. I don't see anything in this teaser trailer that particularly invalidates the extended canon on Shandor himself, although the agency itself falling into obscurity probably means that the franchising efforts as shown in the game and comics either didn't happen, or were ultimately unsuccessful.
Not a great trailer. It's just not coming alive for me, and I don't see them drawing in many new fans on the basis of what they have on offer here. There's a few sparks of interest, but they're struggling to ignite. I'm still on board for it; it should be noted that Sony do not have a great track record for trailers (WB on the other hand are experts at making shit shine when it's time to drop a trailer). On a separate note, I miss the excitement of the big city. This feels so small scale. Like a Scooby Doo scenario taken way too seriously. I suspect we may be nearing the end of the line for cashing in on 1980s franchise nostalgia. It's been milked dry.
This is something I disagree with. I actually like seeing "big" movies that aren't set in major cities. I just feel like movies set in that type of location are really played out these days. Smaller but more personal stakes are nice every once in a while.
To be fair it's not like the original Ghostbusters were exactly masters at what they did. They were guys who took up "ghost exterminating", and had trouble even getting their own equipment to work and whatnot. The Ghostbustsers aren't really supposed to be superheroes who effortlessly fight crime. I'm sure watching these kids learn to use the tech will be part of the fun.
I'm speechless. But in a good way. I would like to get a good look at the ghost those kids were chasing.
Seriously, they nearly vaporized themselves and half the city of New York (or whatever the blast radius of "total protonic reversal" is) in their first outing because Egon failed to establish proper safety protocols beforehand.
I like the fact that it's concentrated on the new characters without (so far) crapping all over the old. It seems the GB just stopped because the job was done. They moved on, had kids, and didn't become losers to make the personality-robbed new characters look better.
I had no issue with Bumblebee being set in a smaller locale after years of TF movies globe-hopping from one major metropolis to another. I like small movies. I'm just looking at this from the perspective of GB1 and it just seems like a major step down. Just one of the things I miss. I really like all the New York scenes in the first two movies, but I don't know that it can be replicated. Seems like it was a dirtier city, more blue-collar. Not so gentrified and hipsterized. Answer the Call shot their NY scenes on a soundstage in Australia, but even if they'd done more work on location, it wouldn't have been the same.
Definitely a fair point. Despite being a team of scientists (for the most part, or maybe half part) they didn't really communicate that well on important details. But they were (for the most part, or maybe just half part) scientists who could understand the implications and risks of what they were doing (from a "scientific" point of view) and the function/"physics" of their equipment. To be honest, I'd probably be agreeing with you if it was the (remaining) original cast still running the business. New York is definitely in the DNA of the series, but I personally feel that's also heavily tied to the original cast and it being "their city". With a new (or at least mostly/predominantly new) cast of characters, I think the change of scenery is appropriate and refreshing. I can definitely see where you're coming from, though.
I guarantee you that the failure of the last one meant that the budget for this one was cut down. Also, it's the house talked about from the first one, isn't it?
Honestly? I didn't really like 2016 (great cast let down by the writing/editing), but that felt like it stuck more to the spirit of Ghostbusters then this does. Hopefully it's a case of the trailer not doing a great job of selling the movie.
It does show Rudd showing a clip of the ghostbusters pulling up to and walking towards the apartment building from movie 1. It might be part of a larger video clip he shows them with shots of stay puft, the roof explosion, and maybe even the ghostbusters leaving the building.
The scene with the sidecar thing at the end of the trailer did look cool and exciting. I just hope they don’t make Paul Rudd be serious and boring when he’s so damn funny. Can you not drag a thread down with irrelevant Sequel Trilogy hate?
