Crazy Al
Only those who believe in their dreams have the power to change the world. Amen!

You skeptics better start believing, or else I'll (respectfully) introduce you to the magical world of Proctology and the insides of your digestive system. Now, who's with me? Do you see the Light? DO YOU SEE THE LIGHT???

…
…
…

No comment. (*egon)

I'm not even gonna touch that either (*janine) .

I would love to see a third installment of Ghostbusters, but only if it was very good. When I say very good I mean alot better than Ghostbusters 2 and if possible as good as the original, which I seriously doubt could be achieved.

Ghostbusters 2 was a disappointment for many including myself. I think that it damaged the francise and made it just that bit too stupid and childish. I feel that the continuity from the original was damaged due to stupid changes and the story was weak. A third movie would have to improve on the second movie a hell of a lot to get the green light from me.

I would like to see the original Ghostbusters back for one last adventure. It does not matter that they are old and reaching retirement. Its not about looking good. The point is comedy, and if anything their advancing years will only add to the humour. Its not an action movie.

Whatever special effects are used they must of course be completely beleivable. Personally I would like to see a mix of puppetary and CGI. Alot of the time the use of puppetary looks better than CGI. I have always thought that the original Slimer character was much more belivable and the marshmellowman looked completely realistic.

I also feel that the story for the third installment should be fresh and surprising and must not be linked to the first two films. The only characters that should remain are the four Ghostbusters and their secretary whether its janine or someone else).

The original sign, jumpsuits, equipment, car and headquarters should remain the same. There is no need to change any of this. The theme music should also remain the same but I also feel that it is very important to have very good score. I think that it would be interesting to see some new types of Ghostbusting equipment.

The ghosts must be scary and look belivable and the locations should be dark and eerie.

I think that with these ingredients and a great story/script a third Ghostbusters film could be done very well.

1) Should a third movie be made? Sure. Why not? If it's bad, hey, we've still got the first two (or the first one, if you don't like GB2). How can adding another movie take anything away from what is already out there? Batman and Robin didn't cause me to like Batman Returns any less.

2) The four original GBs? No, probably not. Past their time. Get some new, young actors. Maybe a cameo or supporting role for Murray, Aykroyd, et al? Sure.

3) Dark & scary? To a point, but make sure to remember these are comedies. They have to be funny and quotable, or it's some kind of horror/sci-fi thing, not a Ghostbusters movie.

4) Directed by Ivan Reitman? I'd say no. His later work is unimpressive to say the least. Directed by Harold Ramis? Ditto…let's get somone fresh, but they must be a Ghostbusters fan.

5) I do like the classic GB1 and GB2 symbols, cars, etc. But I have a feeling that a new movie would need a new symbol and maybe a new vehicle. It's okay, change is good. Just keep the gray jumpsuits and please, no Extreme Ghostbusters-style equipment. Some things should stay the same.

6) Location? Three words: New York City. Firehouse optional.

7) Budget: at least $90 million. Minimum for the required special effects shots. CGI? Probably, but make it look realistic and good. A mix of models and CGI is best. Look what Starship Troopers was able to accomplish, as opposed to Episode II.

8) Time to make it? Doesn't matter, really. GB is now a cultural phenomenon. Interest seems to wax and wane, so just make sure you make the movie when the crest of one of the waves is coming. And please, have a decent release date. Not one week before Titanic 2 or something! Geez…

Anyone else have some suggestions?

I was just wondering. Do you disagree with the original Ghostbusters returning due to their age because they will no longer look the part or is it because you feel it has something to do with their acting ability? As I have said in a previous post, I see absolutely nothing wrong with the four original actors returning. It is a Comedy after all and I personally feel that their age would only add to the humor. Also, what is the retirement age in America? Wouldn't they still be in the business if it were real life?

Matthew
I was just wondering. Do you disagree with the original Ghostbusters returning due to their age because they will no longer look the part or is it because you feel it has something to do with their acting ability? As I have said in a previous post, I see absolutely nothing wrong with the four original actors returning. It is a Comedy after all and I personally feel that their age would only add to the humor. Also, what is the retirement age in America? Wouldn't they still be in the business if it were real life?

You have a point, there are firefighters, police officers, and emergency workers who are as old and older than Ramis, Murray, Aykroyd, and Hudson (although you usually don't see a whole squad of them!).

My saying it should probably be new actors is only to increase Ghostbusters' appeal to a new generation. The reason the first movie was so popular originally was because Murray and Aykroyd were hot young comedians at the time. Why not bring in some hot young comedians to increase the box office and make the kids show up at the theatres? Most young people today aren't fans of Murray and Aykroyd.

Back when GB3 was looking like it would happen soon I heard rumors about Chris Farley, Chris Rock, and others maybe being involved. I'm sure the reason was to bring in more than just Ghostbusters fans like us, the movie studio wants to appeal to non-GB fans too.

They would just have to pick the right actors/comedians. They have to approach it the right way, or the movie wouldn't work. I think it could be done well.

Ivo Shandor
2) The four original GBs? No, probably not. Past their time. Get some new, young actors.

Then the movie would be nothing more than a stupid imitation of the originals just like how Home Alone 3 was. I remember back before HA3 was made I was hoping they'd make a third movie like how I wanted a third GB. And then in 1999 Home Alone 3 came along and showed how bad an extremely delayed movie can be. If you can't get the original 4 guys in the movie, it should not be made.

Peter Kong

Ivo Shandor
2) The four original GBs? No, probably not. Past their time. Get some new, young actors.

If you can't get the original 4 guys in the movie, it should not be made.

I agree.

Yes, get the originals.

It's sad but true…

Edit: Oops, wrong topic.