Peter Venkmen;133596
The way you're saying things, it makes it look like you hate animation and totally against anything animated. Kind of picky. I'd be happy just to get a third film, even if they animate it realistically it'd be cool.

I never said that I'm against anything being animated. I said I was against Ghostbusters III being animated.

Peter Venkmen;133596
You're saying this as if they're still young can lug around all those props, and there is no denying that physical changes are noticeable, so I don't exactly see why it would be a bad idea to make an animated CGI film. Resident Evil Degeneration was CGI, and it was pretty dam good.

I never said anything as if they're still young. I simply said that I think that Ghostbusters III should be a live action movie and not an animated one. I know that the actors are now in their late fifties and early sixties, I recognise that and I think that the third movie should too without trying to disguise their age or making them take a back seat to a younger group of actors. You don't think that they could still “lug around those props”. What do you think they are decrepit or something? They're old but they're not so old that they wouldn't be able to carry proton packs on their backs! Remember that Ghostbusters is a comedy! In my opinion the idea of a group of older men who are close to retirement and still trying to catch ghosts has far more comic value then a group of young or middle age men trying to do the same thing. Plus, it gives us back the characters that we know and love.

Resident evil Degeneration is slightly different because it was based on the game series which is also animated where as the previous Ghostbusters movies were live action.

Nobody said they are decrepit. But time has not been very kind to them. I know Aykroyd and Ramis aren't fitting in their original costumes. I also think its a little silly that almost 20 years after the 2nd movie they wouldn't have hired any new bodies. I imagine the story would have progressed while we weren't watching. It wouldn't have just stopped because it wasn't being filmed.

I think it would be cool if the new team couldn't get it done or got themselves in a pickle they couldn't get out of and it took the original to come in and bail them out. If Hollywood doesn't put any new faces in this film then it'll be a first.

Big Twinkie;133613
Nobody said they are decrepit.

Well it was said that they were too old to carry the equipment. That would be described as decrepit.

Big Twinkie;133613
But time has not been very kind to them. I know Aykroyd and Ramis aren't fitting in their original costumes.

I'm sure that the costume department can come up with some new jumpsuits.

Big Twinkie;133613
I also think its a little silly that almost 20 years after the 2nd movie they wouldn't have hired any new bodies. I imagine the story would have progressed while we weren't watching. It wouldn't have just stopped because it wasn't being filmed.

It depends on how the company was doing I suppose. If they have been exceptionally busy in the intervening years then I'd be suprised if they hadn't hired any extra people. There would also be the question over whether any of the originals left and also how they are doing financially ie whether or not they can afford to employ anyone else. Personally I would like the movie to pick up with Ghostbusters still a small company which has been financially struggling for the past few years, perhaps not able to afford to hire anyone else. I'd like to just have the original four characters. True, I think it's unlikely that they wouldn't have hired anyone else by now but sometimes trying to compensate for reality when writing a script can harm a movie. The most important thing is to be a movie which is as funny and as enjoyable as possible. I think that the four original characters have such a great chemistry and complemented eachother so well that adding even just one more may harm that. It would also mean that either screen time would be taken away from the original characters or that the movie would be overly long.

Big Twinkie;133613
I think it would be cool if the new team couldn't get it done or got themselves in a pickle they couldn't get out of and it took the original to come in and bail them out. If Hollywood doesn't put any new faces in this film then it'll be a first.

I'm all for new faces. I'm just not keen on any new Ghostbusters. I think that adding an entire new team will take too much screen time away from the originals and that there will be too many characters in the movie. It'll be very hard to write a good script for the original characters plus probably what would be an extra four Ghostbusters characters not not mention the other characters which would be in it. To write the right amount of dialogue for that number of characters while keeping the standard would be an incredibly difficult balancing act in my opinion. It would be a significantly more difficult script to write than the first or second movie. There is a big danger in trying to please that many actors and trying to write for that many characters that the story gets diluted and weakened. With movies that have to cater for so many characters more often than not the characters are shallow and the audience doesn't get to know them as well. Personally I think the best thing to do for the overall quality of this script and in particular the dialogue is to just have four Ghostbusters. The original four. The original movie was tight as hell. Every scene was just the right length and had a purpose to the story, the dialogue was spot on and the characters were well written and complemented eachother perfectly. I think that adding a new team it would just harm the overall quality of the movie. I am also against any further movies. I think that it should stop at three. I just think that even a third movie is a stretch for most francises and once you get to the fourth movie it is extremely difficult to maintain the quality while coming up with something which is truly original and the last thing that I want to see happen is for them to make a string of sequels which get progressively worse. I want this francise to go out with a bang not a whimper. In my opinion GHOSTBUSTERS III should star the originals and should be their swan song.

Matthew;133625
Well it was said that they were too old to carry the equipment. That would be described as decrepit.

PHYSICALLY UNABLE. I never said they were too old, but Dan had already said lots of times that they would have to do one soon before any of them weren't able to carry it around. Dan had already said that there age plays a factor on how it would work well, which is why he was all for the game because it shows how they use to look.

Peter Venkmen;133626
PHYSICALLY UNABLE. I never said they were too old, but Dan had already said lots of times that they would have to do one soon before any of them weren't able to carry it around. Dan had already said that there age plays a factor on how it would work well, which is why he was all for the game because it shows how they use to look.

I agree. They certainly cannot wait forever. I doubt they would be able to do it in say 10 years time. I'm referring to their current age and their age in the next coulpe of years. I don't see why the actors with their current age would not be able to carry proton packs on their backs. If they are now “physically unable” then surely it's due to age. To be physically unable to carry out such a simple thing would of course by definition mean that they are decrepit (wasted and weakened by or as if by the infirmities of old age). I also do not see any problem with how they currently look. Yes they're overweight, yes they're greying, yes they have far more sags and wrinkles than they did 20 years ago but let's not forget, this is a comedy not a beauty pageant.

what ever aging they've had, its nothing a few trips to the gym couldnt fix, they could get in shape, it might be a lot of work, but its possible, maybe add a little bit of hair dye, and the make up department to touch up the wrinkles, and they'll be fine, the aging would add more to the humor, anyway.

My two cents about the CGI topic, one person stated that we dont want it because we dont like anything ‘animated’ well, i love animation, in fact i have an Associates in Animation. Its just a CGI film, would completely ruin the running continuity of a live action universe. And it would take away the fun that made the first two so great. For a game? it works. For a sequel to a live action film? no. and those who use TMNT as an example, TMNT was a standalone film that was based off the new series, and was in no way related to the 3 previous films.

hey you know what, i love the ghostbusters so much, but face it ghosbusters 3 WILL NEVER HAPPEN EVER!!!!! but…. what about a new story. yeah recap the events that finish GB2 and the game, and for XGB fans like me, hint at that mentioning the team at the fire house in new york via a prolouge (spelling) to trasiontion a new team startiong up out of a franchise in LA. new team = new fans = more ghostbuster stuff. let me now if what i posted made sense or if you lost me.

Slimer388;133666
and those who use TMNT as an example, TMNT was a standalone film that was based off the new series, and was in no way related to the 3 previous films.

Not entirely true… its a stand alone film, sort of meant to start its own series, but it has references and takes into account the first 3 films. The best example I can give of this is when Splinter is standing in his “trophy” room with all the artifacts and stuff, the septer from the 3rd movie and with a helmet from the 3rd movie are both present, as well as Shredder's helmet and the TGRI cannister (though those are pretty much always a part of any TMNT storyline).

Slimer388;133666
and those who use TMNT as an example, TMNT was a standalone film that was based off the new series, and was in no way related to the 3 previous films.

It is a sequel to the previous. Or at least takes into account of the previous films, because they did mention the defeat of the Shredder (and he was shown as he looked in the comics which was similar to the film look, not the new series).

And as mentioned, the septer from TMNT 3 can be seen, so it's not really a stand alone film.

well, my mistake…well thats just a little tidbit of what i was saying.

the point i was making, is that it would still ruin the continuity of a film series. so the TMNT was indeed a ‘sequel’, most people thought of it as standalone film or a rebirth and less of a sequel, and it was the fact that it was animated which gave away this impression, i didnt think of it as a sequel myself. but anyway, no animation.

its like if Jedi was animated, and Empire and Hope were live action, it just wouldnt feel right.