Mellie
wow…5 pages and even still most of it is complaining…
Indeed. Some of the narrow-mindedness on this thread is astounding and depressing. Four years ago I heard some of the same whining on the “It's Coming!” thread.
“I'll only like it if it's photo realistic and it shouldn't have anything from the cartoons because otherwise it shouldn't be called Ghostbusters 3 and it shouldn't be aimed at kids blah blah blah…”
Okay…reality checks:
I'll only like it if it's photo realisticWe don't know what it's going to look like yet. Heck, honestly we don't really know if this is even going to happen. Save the complaints, as Mellie also said, for when we have some actual material to critique.
Photo realism takes a lot more time and money. And not being photo realistic does not mean “kiddified”. We agree that making it look like Jimmy Neutron wouldn't work, but there is a middle ground. The best example I can think of is a 2-D one: the Batman cartoon from the 90's. Certainly not photo-realistic, but it didn't look like the Smurfs either.
shouldn't have anything from the cartoonsThe RGB cartoon ran for seven years. It was the most successful cartoon spin-off of a movie
of all time. It was a part of the GB phenomenon in the Eighties second only to the first movie itself, and brought a great many fans to the franchise. Frankly, to this day I think some of the early episodes were better thought out and written than the movie sequel, with it's retread plot and incomprehensibly stupid characterization changes.
(*janine)
–He mostly means writing me like a stoned out whore And to reiterate the above point: we only have the one reference from Aykroyd; the final result may be different. I would be overjoyed if Aykroyd himself says “We're using the cartoon likenesses because it avoids the problems with Bill AND we know lots of kids grew up with that show”. Though I honestly expect that the end result will be actor caricatures like the 88MPH comic.
because otherwise it shouldn't be called Ghostbusters 3 We don't even know if this movie will really be called
Ghostbusters 3. They're clearly going into it with Aykroyd and his GB3 scenario in mind, but the end result may be completely different. I suppose if they release it simply as
Ghostbusters In Hell some of you will start bitching about “But that means it's not the real GB3!!!”
I mean, after all, the new Turtle movie, while it continues the continuity of the three live action films, is NOT called TMNT 4
it shouldn't be aimed at kidsAging fans often forget: the kids were a big part of the phenomenon. It's the exact same thing which happened to
Star Wars. Kids who loved the antics of R2-D2, C-3PO, and the Ewoks in the original trilogy grew up to be adults who bitch and moan about the antics of R2-D2, C-3PO, and Jar Jar Binks in the prequels, even thought they're pretty much the same.
Should it be dumbed down or made harmless? Of course not. Lots of kids saw the first movie, and it wasn't dumbed down or harmless. That being said, it shouldn't be an R-rated gorefest either. The best way to build the fandom is to hook in the next generation: something that isn't “kiddified”, but not something the kids shouldn't be able to see either.
More than anything, though…after the iBooks and 88MPH debacles, be glad that we might be getting
something.
<– still doing the happy dance…..da na na na na na, da na nanana na….da na na na na na….GHOSTBUSTERS!!
