Red Letter Media

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Favorite recurring character? (Select 4)

  • Jack / AIDSMobdy

    Votes: 257 24.0%
  • Josh / the Wizard

    Votes: 77 7.2%
  • Colin (Canadian #1)

    Votes: 460 42.9%
  • Jim (Canadian #2)

    Votes: 230 21.4%
  • Tim

    Votes: 386 36.0%
  • Len Kabasinski

    Votes: 208 19.4%
  • Freddie Williams

    Votes: 274 25.5%
  • Patton Oswalt

    Votes: 27 2.5%
  • Macaulay Culkin

    Votes: 541 50.4%
  • Max Landis

    Votes: 64 6.0%

  • Total voters
    1,073
I should hate Ghostbusters 2 because it does so many things I hate about some sequels. There are some sequels that basically just make the same exact movie as the first one, but they change one variable (IE the setting) to make it seem different when it really isn't. In the case of Ghostbusters 2, it is almost a beat for beat rehash of the first film...but it has a baby in it! So that makes it different! Think back to Home Alone 2 (Same exact movie as the first, but in New York!) or good God almighty, what about Hangover 2? That one felt like they just played mad libs with the script of the first and then just switched out all the variables and presented as a different movie, even though it plays out exactly the same.

Here, the Ghostbusters have to put the business back together, we see them go through another successful montage of capturing ghosts after a rousing first successful capture, the villain targets Dana Barrett which pulls the Ghostbusters onto the case, Peter tries to win over Dana (again), and there is a giant in the climax (in this case, The Statue of Liberty, used for the side of good this time). Its basically the same movie.

And this always bugged me, but I hated that they romantically paired up Jeanine and Louis when in the first film and the cartoon show, Egon and Jeanine were the budding couple. Yeah, the fucked with my ship and I got miffed. Sue me. There are other elements that don't quite work as well as the first either. Louis' side plot of trying to become a Ghostbuster ultimately doesn't amount to much as he does virtually nothing. And Vigo, while intimidating, never quite feels like the apocalyptic threat that Gozer was.

However, there are elements to it that I appreciated. Peter McNichol is a hoot in the film, and signs of the great chemistry the cast had in the first film are definitely there from time to time. I think the big problem here is that the movie tried to play it safe by making a movie too similar to the first, but maybe softened up a bit. Tub scene aside, 2 was not as scary as the first either which gave this film less of a bite.

Honestly, there is an episode of The Real Ghostbusters cartoon show that would have actually been a better sequel if it was made into a movie. In "Citizen Ghost" the Ghostbusters' suits that were covered in Gozer's marshmallow mess in the climax of the first film come to life as evil spiritual forms of the Ghostbusters and start running amuck throughout the city with their own proton packs and everything. If they had made this into a movie, you would have seen the Ghostbusters confront evil versions of themselves, and even become allies with a ghost (This episode was the one that detailed how Slimer joined the gang). To expand on for a movie, they could have had each Ghostbuster have to deal with some personal issue that the evil version becomes an outward representation of and they'd have to conquer those fears and inadequacies. Lets say Peter has trouble committing to Dana because he likes being a free skirt-chasing bachelor, and the evil version of him represents his greedy and womanizing side, and Egon has fears of intimacy as he can't admit his feelings for Jeanine and buries himself in his work (see I'm still trying to make that ship happen), so the evil Egon is a cold, calculating, intelligent, and heartless monster, and so on and so on. I don't know, I'm just throwing ideas out there.


Something else that annoyed me about Ghostbusters 2 is how at the beginning everyone thinks they're phonies. Did everyone somehow have collected amnesia about the ghosts and giant marshmallow man that rampaged through the city. The final battle completely lacks any tension as well, being pretty obvious they tried to save it in the editing room.

But that said, I still enjoy it. No it isn't as good as the first, but that was a lightning in a bottle masterpiece so it was never realistically going to be. The courthouse scene is well done, there are some great monster and tech designs, and I like the idea of negative energy taking a physical form. And it's a 5 star classic when compared to the utter abomination that was the 2016 version.
 
Since people are still talking about Ghostbusters, friendly reminder that the game's story is actually pretty good and is a worthy sequel.


Also my idea for a proper GB3 was to make it meta movie, where Ghostbusters has become a national franchise, and in doing so they've actually caught all the ghosts in the world, and now the CEO (one of the previous actors) has to figure out what the fuck they're going to do. Natural this ends with the Ghostbusters doing 9/11.



The title could be Ghostbusters 3: I'm afraid of NO ghosts!
 
From reddit, Culkin is filming a BOTW episode (judging by the selection, a Christmas one):
mi7vb34dc9x31.png
Some guy recognised the movie on the right as Santa Claws (1996) and the left one might be Silent Night, Deadly Night 2.
 
I saw Silent Night Deadly Night part 2 back in the day, enjoyed it, and it still blows my mind that it became a meme.
 
Some thoughts on GB: One of the many problems with the Ghostbusters reboot, well it really highlighted the problems with the reliance some filmmakers have with improvisation.

Some touted the improv in GB2016 as one of the movie's strong points but improv and ad-libbing only works great some of the time. It is very obvious when you're watching bad improv in a film, when the dialogue and pacing are completely aimless because nobody's actually in charge of making sure all of the individual lines add up to a movie. When some director decides to go for the "let's come up with something and just throw it in" approach, unnecessary improv just stops a movie dead in its tracks. Which is something because the idea of improv is that you are supposed to find game and get to a point quickly.

Bad improv has a tendency towards self-indulgence and meandering about. The pacing is off and scenes just sort of drift into each other.

If you're going to improv through a whole movie, the scenes are going to miss more often than they hit because in improv chemistry, timing, pacing are even more crucial and it's hard to just edit footage together of a dozen or more actors while maintaining a strong, consistent through line. It takes really skilled actors to hold you through a weak comedic scene where they're trying to come up with stuff on the fly and you can often see them sweat trying. Certainly not the leads of that movie.

Wiig is a mediocre comic talent, her time on SNL was mostly confined to playing characters who were just "Wiig does a really annoying 'funny' voice". She's best reserved for straight man parts, and despite the praise RLM gave to her, Leslie Jones's performances are "public access tv sketch show" quality. Melissa McCarthy is yet another lame C-list sitcom actress who should just not be in movies, much less be the lead.

However, McKinnon was the worst in GB2016.. She just sucked the air out of everything and tried too hard to be 'weird'. It's as if the only direction Feig ever gave her was "Okay Kate, your character's name is Holtzmann, and she's the zany one. She's really 'out there', OK? ACTION!"

---------------------------------------

It was good that it was obvious by the early Aughts, the Ghostbusters 3 movie Ackroyd had been pushing for through the 1990s was not going to come to fruition. The script for that sequel would have been sans Murray (Murray had been adamant for a long time that he would not return as Venkman) and Zeddmore had long since headed for the hills (as fast as Ernie Hudson could run), so Stantz and Spengler would have retired to desk jobs, putting out the call for a new team of recruits - supposedly Chris Farley had been favored for one of these roles, as well as other candidates such as Chris Rock and Janeane Garafalo.

From what I had heard Sony decided to pull the plug on that project after watching the dust settle from "Blues Brothers 2000", another attempt spearheaded by Ackroyd to try to make a film franchise out of a property he was associated with.

It seemed for a while we had the refreshing surprise of the living-in-the-past Ackroyd at last coming to grips with Ghostbusters 3, as he saw it, ever being made.
 
Last edited:
I saw that Extreme Ghostbusters cartoon and it was honestly pretty good and I'm not a nostalgia faggot about things. So, I think a passing of the torch movie could work. It all depends on the cast they get and the script.
 
However, McKinnon was the worst in GB2016.. She just sucked the air out of everything and tried too hard to be 'weird'. It's as if the only direction Feig ever gave her was "Okay Kate, your character's name is Holtzmann, and she's the zany one. She's really 'out there', OK? ACTION!"

Not sure if that was specifically what you were referring to, but that was infamously exactly how Feig "directed" most of the movie. Giving them vague instructions and hoping they would take it from there.
 
Stantz and Spengler would have retired to desk jobs, putting out the call for a new team of recruits - supposedly Chris Farley had been favored for one of these roles, as well as other candidates such as Chris Rock and Janeane Garafalo.
This would have been great, so of course it never happened.
 
Since people are still talking about Ghostbusters, friendly reminder that the game's story is actually pretty good and is a worthy sequel.

I absolutely consider the game canon and one worry I have for the upcoming movie is that they might not acknowledge it and in some way retcon it.

It doesn't have to be anything major but I'd love a line about the "second" time they fought Gozer or something like that, at the very least I hope there's nothing that contradicts it.

It was good that it was obvious by the early Aughts, the Ghostbusters 3 movie Ackroyd had been pushing for through the 1990s was not going to come to fruition. The script for that sequel would have been sans Murray (Murray had been adamant for a long time that he would not return as Venkman) and Zeddmore had long since headed for the hills (as fast as Ernie Hudson could run), so Stantz and Spengler would have retired to desk jobs, putting out the call for a new team of recruits - supposedly Chris Farley had been favored for one of these roles, as well as other candidates such as Chris Rock and Janeane Garafalo.

From what I had heard Sony decided to pull the plug on that project after watching the dust settle from "Blues Brothers 2000", another attempt spearheaded by Ackroyd to try to make a film franchise out of a property he was associated with.

It seemed for a while we had the refreshing surprise of the living-in-the-past Ackroyd at last coming to grips with Ghostbusters 3, as he saw it, ever being made.

Chris Farley as a Ghostbuster would have been the most mind blowing thing ever to me as a kid, it's tragic that never happened.
 
I can't help but feel we dodged a bullet, that the proposed GB3 would have been a misfire, but then again, even if it turned out to be a mostly "eh"-tier film like GBII it would not have been as bad as the Lady Ghostbusters reboot.
 
I saw that Extreme Ghostbusters cartoon and it was honestly pretty good and I'm not a nostalgia faggot about things. So, I think a passing of the torch movie could work. It all depends on the cast they get and the script.
But it had a dude in a fucking wheelchair.

I mean all respect to the disabled but the show made it obvious why first responders need to be fully functional human beings.
 
But it had a dude in a fucking wheelchair.

I mean all respect to the disabled but the show made it obvious why first responders need to be fully functional human beings.

Excluding that of course.
 
I absolutely consider the game canon and one worry I have for the upcoming movie is that they might not acknowledge it and in some way retcon it.

It doesn't have to be anything major but I'd love a line about the "second" time they fought Gozer or something like that, at the very least I hope there's nothing that contradicts it.



Chris Farley as a Ghostbuster would have been the most mind blowing thing ever to me as a kid, it's tragic that never happened.

Only if he busted in a Chippendale's suit.
 
Since we're talking about the Ghostbusters franchise, has anyone ever played the old Chaosium/West End Games tabletop RPG? I haven't, but by all accounts I've ever heard it's not half bad. At the very least, I implicitly trust anything Sandy Petersen was involved in to be at least kinda fun.
 
Something else that annoyed me about Ghostbusters 2 is how at the beginning everyone thinks they're phonies. Did everyone somehow have collected amnesia about the ghosts and giant marshmallow man that rampaged through the city.
Everyone getting slimed with the psychically charged exploded mallow mixed with the pink "make everyone an asshole" sewer slime mixed with kids today not knowing about 9/11, like the prick kids at the birthday party. Not to mention were video and photos able to capture any of that mess or was the film destroyed like the darkroom with vigo?

Don't get me wrong I'm not defending gbII, because honestly as a flick it's meh, I just like the cut stuff like the abandoned train line being connected to cult tunnels that go all the way to europe, pretty sure atlantis was even touched on thanks to Dan Akroid's blessed sperging.

I can't help but feel we dodged a bullet, that the proposed GB3 would have been a misfire, but then again, even if it turned out to be a mostly "eh"-tier film like GBII it would not have been as bad as the Lady Ghostbusters reboot.
I would've preferred to have it, it would've been the absolute low-light of the franchise, but as someone who enjoys Evoluti👽n I had hope it'd be on par with at least that, hell I'd take that plot and cast and just GB it up for something passable. 20 fold better than "answer the call" at minimum.

I have created a monster. This is officially the Ghostbusters thread featuring Red Letter Media.
I just made it worse <3
Split the tread so us idiots can spam somewhere else maybe?
 
Since we're talking about the Ghostbusters franchise, has anyone ever played the old Chaosium/West End Games tabletop RPG? I haven't, but by all accounts I've ever heard it's not half bad. At the very least, I implicitly trust anything Sandy Petersen was involved in to be at least kinda fun.
Cthulhu wars is the shitz!

Sandy also did some reviews for Jabootu so his b-movie creds are solid too.
 
Back
Top Bottom