You have a point there.

That's the part that worries me, the bigger and better part. Todays meaning of those terms usally results in “fantasic super special effects” and “awsome directional storyline” made for teenagers who find obscenity and downsized sex jokes as the new comedy cure. Given most of those movies do roll in high at the box office and I'll even go as far as saying I do find them somewhat funny to watch im just worried the movie could take that route. But then again with it being Dan and Harold, would they take the risk of giving the film that type of edge/look to meet todays media standards? Would they give into what now makes people laugh and brings instant cashflow in todays world? No one can really answer that nor can they say they would or wouldn't take that risk and that is what really makes me wonder about this third film. But im not like one of those fans that instantly shout out “No! Do not make this movie, I will not accept it and be apart of this crazy ass comedy fad that's over taken our world and has now made us all alittle dumber for accepting it” To me if they don't make it then that's fine and if they do decide to then that's great! Any other thoughts on if Dan And Harold would consider money over classic comedy? That's my question

I dont think they'd let it stumble into bad easy-joke and money territory. Hell, Dan was the at the design house 24/7 for the game, making sure everything was true to the source. So i doubt he'd let modern standards stand in the way of the vision of making the bookend to his movie franchise.

Slimer Babies!

fangoriaonline.com
Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky (both writers/producers of NBC's THE OFFICE) are currently penning the GHOSTBUSTERS III screenplay, and serving as Producers on the film, along with Aykroyd as Executive Producer. Quelle

Hmmm (*peter)

AJ Quick;135566
Slimer Babies!

hahaha!

—

Anyhow, at earlier poster who was saying it wouldn't be popular in this day and age: you're forgetting that many of the kids who saw the original first time out are now parents, and thus very likely to take their kids to see a sequel to something they love. Also, 80's retro is huge just now - there's definitely an audience, possibly more of a receptive one than this idea could have had previously.

I'm sure sales of the Video Game, Blu-Ray disc & Collectable Action Figures will aid Sony in making it's decision to make Ghostbusters 3 or not.

(Fingures crossed we get at least one more film).

Well according to Judd Apatow he's not involved (yet) which most of us agree is good news:

I ask Apatow whether he thinks the “Ghostbusters” sequel is going to happen, and he stresses he’s not involved but thinks it’s inevitable. “They’re remaking everything. They’re remaking ‘Knocked Up,’” he cracks.

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/entertainment_popmachine/2009/02/ms-and-mr-winslet-and-those-smokin-oscar-parties.html

It's weird. I should be happy they are trying to make a new GB movie. But I'm really not looking forward to a GB movie where the originals are being replaced. Wether it is a logical way to go or not.

CrashOV;135713
It's weird. I should be happy they are trying to make a new GB movie. But I'm really not looking forward to a GB movie where the originals are being replaced. Wether it is a logical way to go or not.

The originals are not being replaced. They will still be in the movie. They'll just be training new recruits. Unless that's what you meant by “being replaced”… That the new recruits would be replacing the original busters. I interpreted your statement to say that original actors are being replaced, which isn't the case.

I also highly doubt if they were to ever make more than just GB3, that they would not have the originals in those as well. Maybe not all of them, but I can't see them making a Ghostbusters movie without Aykroyd in it at least in some capacity.