Ghostbusters III - OFFICIAL THREAD

Features, Shorts, Live-Action and Direct-To-Video
Post Reply
AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 2949
Joined: October 24th, 2004

Post by GeorgeC » December 8th, 2008, 6:33 pm

Trailer up for the Ghostbusters Video Game!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFD8rh2YDyA

This is the latest, official one.

Hopefully, the in-game graphics look as good as the CG cut-scenes.

It looks REALLY good!

This is a game that's going to be way better on the PS3 or XBox 360.

There is no way the Wii and PS2 versions will look anywhere near as good as this!

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 5237
Joined: September 1st, 2006
Location: Nevermore

Post by Daniel » December 8th, 2008, 8:41 pm

Well, yeah... ;)

I must say it does indeed look good. When it was first announced I had zero interest, now with this that has changed. And I would edit your post to include our YouTube feature, but I notice the trailer is in widescreen! Looks much better in YT land.

Animated Views Admin
Animated Views Admin
Posts: 6828
Joined: October 16th, 2004
Contact:

Post by James » December 8th, 2008, 11:51 pm


User avatar
Animated Views Admin
Animated Views Admin
Posts: 18672
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » December 9th, 2008, 7:00 am

Heh-heh.

Wasn't there a Blade Runner game in the mid-90s? I don't remember it being any <I>good</I>, but I thought there was something that rode off the back of the 1992 "Not The Director's Cut At All Cut"...?

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 2949
Joined: October 24th, 2004

Post by GeorgeC » December 9th, 2008, 10:23 am

I follow videogames and frankly I've NEVER heard of a Blade Runner game.

(To be fair, as bad as most games are, licensed-based game properties have an even higher rate of mediocrity. I'd say at least 90% of the movie-based games are among the worst games that get released. I basically avoid movie-based games unless there's good buzz about them. The LEGO-based games have been a fresh breath of air in that they're actually fun but the gameplay's starting to get old and the fact that they play exactly like the preceding game doesn't help. You could call it the "Madden" syndrome but that's true of any game series that has a yearly update.)


If such a thing existed, it just must have been abyssmal and died a very quick deserved death.

Now, on the other hand, there WAS a homebrew game of The Last Starfighter which a fan worked on some years back. He actually patterned it after what was seen in the movie complete with the SAME graphics and the SAME audio clips (which he acquired from persons who worked on the movie), and he put a PC running his game in a recreaion of the movie's "game cabinet"!

That's dedicated fandom! :lol:



And now, for today's obligatory Lucas-bashing joke courtesy of AICN --

Michael Bay's Star Wars
by kwisatzhaderach Dec 9th, 2008
04:34:03 AM

"Vader slaughters the Jedi Temple"

[no entry heading title]
by kwisatzhaderach Dec 9th, 2008
04:34:37 AM

"then turns to camera and says: "My bad.""

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 577
Joined: October 18th, 2007

Ghostbusters 3 and Gremlins 3 to be filmed in 3-D

Post by gaastra » February 2nd, 2010, 5:21 pm

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/16174/ ... -the-works

First the next harry potter gets 3-d and now this. I hate 3-d. My eyes won't let me see it and they never play the 2-d version. I can't see avatar due to no one having a 2d version and had to go an hour to see a 2-d up. I wish 3-d would go away.

Anyways looks like another gremlins. I bet they will be cgi this time.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3213
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Post by EricJ » February 2nd, 2010, 5:30 pm

At least 3-D is getting all those limbo'ed projects out of the dusty closet, made, and forgotten about so we don't have to ask about them anymore. Although the same could be said of "Indy & Crystal Skull", and if it was made today, it probably WOULD be 3-D to hedge its safety-bets.
(The Ghostbusters 3 saga is a long and tragic one, and I didn't even know there was a Gremlins 3 in the works, but the script's clearly been in somebody's closet since the second movie came out in the Bush Sr. era.)
Disney Pirates 4 announcement coming in 3, 2, 1... :roll:

(And I can't be the only one who thinks they're falling back on Memories of 1983, when the sole justification for doing a franchise "3" at all was to be cute about putting the "D" on the end...)

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 338
Joined: October 31st, 2008

Post by Darkblade » February 2nd, 2010, 8:34 pm

What happened to that whole Ghostbusters: Hellbent in CG animation?

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3213
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Post by EricJ » February 3rd, 2010, 3:22 am

EricJ wrote:and I didn't even know there was a Gremlins 3 in the works, but the script's clearly been in somebody's closet since the second movie came out in the Bush Sr. era.)
Actually, come to think of it, Joe Dante had been working on a "family-oriented horror" movie, "The Hole" (whose description bore a suspicious resemblance to 80's-cult "The Gate") in 3-D, which seems to have collapsed--
So, if Dante's on the third Gremlins, he still wants to play with 3-D (and it wasn't even in style yet when he started on the other movie), but may be playing his safer name-franchise cards with the studio...It's not like we'd see a sequel to "The Burbs" or "Small Soldiers", or even another faux-Looney movie.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 415
Joined: October 22nd, 2004

Post by PatrickvD » February 3rd, 2010, 5:34 am

It would be really funny if Alice in Wonderland bombed at the Box Office and it turned out people just pay money for whatever James Cameron comes up with... will everything suddenly.. not be in 3D? :lol:

User avatar
Animated Views Admin
Animated Views Admin
Posts: 18672
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » February 3rd, 2010, 8:52 am

3D is here to stay, but not because of any 1980s nostalgia (nice try Eric).

Basically, as has been said ad infinitum before (yawn), the people who grew up watching the 1980s movies are now the people running the studios. Thus they want to recreate their childhood, making the movies THEY would have made had they had the chance when watching them in the first place.

Hence all the sequels, remakes and reboots of 1980s franchises recently. It just happens that Ghostbusters and Gremlins are on their third time arounds that they'll be able to add the -D to their titles. There was hope of both films getting thirds during their original heyday, but both sequels underperformed and the urge wasn't great enough to bring Bill Murray back for GB3, or Joe Dante back for G3. If those films had taken place, and we were on fourths or reboots now, then the 3 3-D wouldn't even come into it!

As it is, they're now taking shape for various reasons. The hoopla around the GB video game was so much that Sony actually realized that they should really get off their butts and drag the cast and crew back. Ivan Reitman realized that he hasn't had a hit in ages and needs the kudos to get another project off the ground. Harold Ramis was going to direct GB3 at one point, before it became that CG movie that never happened as they couldn't agree on it. So it's clear that it's because Reitman needs a hit that he's coming back, after turning it down before. How this leaves Ramis is unclear, though I assume he'll bury any hatchets and reprise his Egon role without too much grumbling.

On Gremlins, I understood that WB were none too happy with the performance of The New Batch in 1990, or Joe Dante's ultra-control over that film, which caused a rift. He didn't really want to make 2 in the first place, but came back when they said he could do what he wanted. They didn't like it, audiences didn't really come, and a part 3 was put on a shelf. Rumors of a sequel started with those Furbies or Furballs or whatever they were called came out, as everyone said they looked like Gremlins. A script has been around for a while, though WB wanted to get Dante back. He's been resisting but again, a lack of recent hits can quickly change a director's mind, and as an uber 1950s geek he'd be champing at the bit to shoot something in 3D.

I should also point out that a "Small Soldiers II" has actually been announced in the last few months, though its status is unknown right now.

Funny that we're up to 1983/84 in terms of remakes. When we hit 1987, look for a reboot or sequel to InnerSpace (a script was written but never happened as Quaid and Ryan wanted too much money...something they might not balk at now) and maybe that long-rumored Bill & Ted threequel that catches up with them as adults.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1347
Joined: January 23rd, 2006
Location: The Middle of Nowhere

Post by eddievalient » February 3rd, 2010, 11:15 am

Ghostbusters 3? I'm there! Gremlins 3? Bring it on! Bill and Ted 3? I certainly hope not. Bogus Journey is a great comedy film and finished things on just the right note, not to mention the fact that the end credits had a bunch of newspaper headlines to show what happened to B&T after the story. The world and the future was saved and everyone lived happily ever after. A sequel would only ruin a good ending. I would much rather see a Dark Crystal sequel, personally (if Henson Productions would ever drag it out of development hell).
The Official Lugofilm Ltd Youtube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/bartsimpson83

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 7873
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Post by ShyViolet » February 3rd, 2010, 12:18 pm

I think remaking 80s horror (and I guess adding sequels to 20 year old films) is kind of redundant in itself. It's a completely different era now and the same things just aren't that scary anymore. (at least to younger audiences who didn't grow up with those films).

So many teenagers nowadays have already seen films like Hostel and Saw that scenes like Freddy Kruger impaling people in their dreams while making bad jokes seem, well, "lame," (at least from their perspective.) Really, how scary would creatures who "can't be fed after midnight" and who start out cute and cuddly be nowadays? TV has also gotten MUCH more graphic (not just in films they can show at earlier hours but reality shows as well).
The whole remake thing is big now but in five years these stories will seem even more outdated.

I understand that seeing films you grew up with remade can be a thrill, but it seems there's just no new ideas left in Hollywood. :?
“I want it all—the terrifying lows, the dizzying highs, the creamy middles!”

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3213
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Post by EricJ » February 3rd, 2010, 1:02 pm

Ben wrote:3D is here to stay, but not because of any 1980s nostalgia (nice try Eric).
Didn't say it was (what hath Polar Express and Avatar wrought, especially now that studios think they've "figured out" how to get us back into theaters again, and cineplexes now have dedicated 3-D screens for studios to start making them on a regular basis).
But if you'd seen the "Piranha 3-D" trailer with Avatar, don't tell me that wasn't a blast from that glorious Year of the Cheesy Triquels past. 8) You knew once the opportunists got into the new revival, the 3-D market wasn't going to be upscale George Lucas and Pixar forever.
(Of course now, with the Weinsteins running out of money, looks like it'll be Piranha 2-D in summer, but had to admit, you knew what they were aiming for.)
As it is, they're now taking shape for various reasons. The hoopla around the GB video game was so much that Sony actually realized that they should really get off their butts and drag the cast and crew back. Ivan Reitman realized that he hasn't had a hit in ages and needs the kudos to get another project off the ground. Harold Ramis was going to direct GB3 at one point, before it became that CG movie that never happened as they couldn't agree on it. So it's clear that it's because Reitman needs a hit that he's coming back, after turning it down before. How this leaves Ramis is unclear, though I assume he'll bury any hatchets and reprise his Egon role without too much grumbling.
Bill Murray doesn't do onscreen comedy anymore, period (unless it's for Wes Anderson), and Rick Moranis retired from acting years ago and didn't come back for the videogame either.
But Sony literally needs all the name franchises they can get to compete with Warner and Disney, and the game and 25th Anniversary told them that they had One For the Ages in the 'Busters...So, even if it took Ramis and Aykroyd literally twenty years to hash out the one last name-identification hit they had, Sony is just as desperate to give it to us again. Dan & Harold hit a bump with the last screenplay when the "new recruits" story was tooled for the late Chris Farley, but the studio must have convinced them there were other name stars to tailor it for...Just so long as it isn't Seth Rogen this time.
On Gremlins, I understood that WB were none too happy with the performance of The New Batch in 1990, or Joe Dante's ultra-control over that film, which caused a rift. He didn't really want to make 2 in the first place, but came back when they said he could do what he wanted. They didn't like it, audiences didn't really come, and a part 3 was put on a shelf. Rumors of a sequel started with those Furbies or Furballs or whatever they were called came out, as everyone said they looked like Gremlins. A script has been around for a while, though WB wanted to get Dante back. He's been resisting but again, a lack of recent hits can quickly change a director's mind, and as an uber 1950s geek he'd be champing at the bit to shoot something in 3D.
It's not worth pointing out that most critics and audiences thought the New Batch was an arguably better movie (for lack of Chris Columbus), and aged better out of the 90's...We still thought the franchise was dated, though, and wondered why they'd bothered so long to bring the pre-greenlit sequel back.
And yes, whatever DID happen to Joe Dante? He may not have many other name-identification projects to fall back on when the new projects get stalled (there's only one person in the world who wants an InnerSpace followup), but if only he'd owned the Howling series... :(
He's redeemed himself as 50's Geek with the Trailers From Hell.com website, but like Quentin Tarantino, there's talking about your movie-geek past, and there's actually delivering on it as a working director.

User avatar
Animated Views Admin
Animated Views Admin
Posts: 18672
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » February 3rd, 2010, 1:39 pm

Piranha 3-D...didn't see Avatar in 3D, but this sounds like fun, especially since it would have been a fun tie to Avatar's director, who was fired off Piranha 2!

GB3...betcha they get Moranis back for at least a cameo. Brother Bear and its sequel was not long ago and he's been doing some McKenzie Brothers stuff until recently. He's not gone yet, and was the biggest one of the lot adding rumors of a GB TV show in the 1990s. And didn't you hear that Murray IS back? Rumor is he gets killed off and is a ghost himself in it. The new recruits story was hatched well after Farley was a goner, the argument has been on what they wanted to include and how much it was going to cost Sony! They haven't even written the latest script, though I suspect they will add their touch to it.

Gremlins...count me in as a bigger fan of the second film too. Just like Batman Returns, it's one of those times when a director didn't really want to make the film but got control and just ran wild. I still think he's a great director but he didn't want to play the Spielberg game like Zemeckis did, even though Spielberg gave him those chances. Who else would have liked an InnerSpace follow up? Quite a few I'd imagine...and I was one of them. But I wouldn't like a follow up now: if it had been 1989 and we'd seen what happened when they drove off in that limo as a direct sequel, sure. But I don't want to see a wrinkly Tuck and Lydia bumping into Jack as they are now...

Post Reply