bizdog
Ghostbusters III: Hellbent would see the boys going to hell itself, which looks a lot like Manhattan. "We go to the hell side of Manhattan, downtown, Foley Square. It's all where the cops are–they are all blue minotaurs. Central Park is this huge peat mine with green demons there, surrounded by black onyx thousand-foot high apartment buildings with classic red devils, very wealthy. We go and visit a Donald Trump-like character who is Mr. Sifler. Luke Sifler. Lu-cifer. So we meet the devil in it.”

Damn, that sounds rabid. Ramis will need to write a re-do. Couldn't see all that working on a CG movie, would scare the kids to death.

bizdog
And Reitman's career is NOT going strong at all.

Super Ex-, which was a horrible movie:

Domestic: $22,530,295

For what that movie cost, that is atrocious. And the reviews raped it as well. His movie before that? 2001's Evolution, which was also a pretty crappy movie. That brought in 38 mil, but man did everyone dislike it. Either way, even if you liked both movies, they're not signs of a strong career.

oh GOD! I did not know Super Ex did that bad. I never looked up how much it made, I just assumed that it made alot of money. Yeah, Reitman has become a stinker. GB would redeem. But now that I know he ain't got too much more going for him, he'd probably jump at the chance of another GB movie. CG or not.

sandmanfvr
From the CHUD article:

Aykroyd told the DJ that the new film would be a CGI movie, which was the only way they could convince Bill Murray to come back (I guess his Garfield experience has shown him how easy it is to sit in a studio for a day or two and collect a big check).

Hah! My thoughts exactly and some on here want me to be quiet about him. Other think the same way.

Oh no, Dan better not do that. This is why we need Ramis. How could Dan compare this new possible CG film to the old original script he wrote for the first. BUT I do think the second is under rated.

One thing I wouldn't like about a CG movie(or even CG in a normal film) is that we wouldn't get that same old 80s feel. You know, like the stop motion Terror Dogs. May be a little outdated, but I still love them as practical and all. And like how the ghosts in the first two were puppets against the greenscreen instead of CG. You can't get cool moments like that anymore. Hell, they barely even use minitures this day and age. Thank God people like Tim Burton keep them around.

One thing I wouldn't like about a CG movie(or even CG in a normal film) is that we wouldn't get that same old 80s feel. You know, like the stop motion Terror Dogs. May be a little outdated, but I still love them as practical and all. And like how the ghosts in the first two were puppets against the greenscreen instead of CG. You can't get cool moments like that anymore. Hell, they barely even use minitures this day and age. Thank God people like Tim Burton keep them around.

I agree. Until photo realistic CG is around, I'd rather stick to miniatures and models….sometimes.

well there was only one good part about Super-Ex Girlfriend. It was the shot where Peter's apartment was on fire. lol.. kinda ironic maybe it was all because of bill GB3 hasn't been made yet. So somebody set his place on fire. :-)

Like many others here on the board, I would prefer that GBIII would not be too realistic… I'm talking Polar Express-realistic…
I ‘ve been thinking of a stylized way that might work for the movie and remembered a drawing a guy made on Deviantart… His name’s TraditionalDanimatio…

http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/24412856/?qo=2&q=ghostbusters&qh=boost%3Apopular+age_sigma%3A24h+age_scale%3A5

Great, isn't it?

Sure, it's still 2D (good old 2D ), but I think a style like this would be translatable into 3D… A bit like in ‘Madagascar’… It wasn't the best CG movie ever, but it sure showed a degree of stylization never seen before in a 3D animated feature…

Whattaya think?

I'll never understand the attraction of Chud, or Devin Faraci… it's pretty much just a glorified blog trying to prentend to be a serious column.

I think everyone would be better off just ignoring his hate filled posts.

The manhole cover is appropriate, it's synonomous with the filth of human society.

I'll leave it up to you to to decide if ‘Chud’, ‘Devin Faraci’ or the manhole cover represent the filth. :p

That artwork is beautiful but on the verge of RGB. Not a huge problem but going from GB2 to that or somethings similar, would be weird in my opinion.

I think we'll need more info before we can say for certain it's a direct continuation…

Given how much news has been breaking of recent I could've missed something, but as I was discussing with my mate and fellow GBNer Iain, there hasn't been anything to say this will be titled ‘Ghostbusters 3’ that I'm aware of, or that it literally picks up after Ghostbusters II.

sandmanfvr
That artwork is beautiful but on the verge of RGB. Not a huge problem but going from GB2 to that or somethings similar, would be weird in my opinion.

Howerver it turns out, I think it'll be unavoidable that going from GB2 to whatever sort of CG will be weird

But you're absolutely right, there is some RGBnessness in it

I'm sure you guys all saw X3




It's a long shot but… would cost Sony a fortune, a few hundred million to do the entire movie like that…

Nah.

Plus doing X3 like that means doing live action and then do that. I don't see that happening.