Count me in as another firmly against a GB remake. It's definitely another unnecessary remake to add to a long list of them.

RealmMan;172619
Maybe that's why they seem to have been stumbling blindly about with the franchise for several years.

The video game was a stumble? The figures? The comics? The Ecto restoration? They've put a hell of a lot more into the franchise in recent years than they did back in the 90's. The only thing that's really been a stumble is the third film and that's not for their lack of trying. The creative team is what's holding up a new film. Well….Murray, anyway.

I don't really want a remake, but should this third film fall through it's a given that Sony will continue with the brand name in a different way. These days it's kinda silly to NOT expect a remake. It may not be anytime soon, but they're going to milk their proven franchises. It's common practice these days.

Nix;172612
Having said that, I think a good idea would be to shift the focus out of New York, with an all-new team somewhere across the country. Or why not even in another country? Ghosts are, after all, universal in almost every culture.

New York is essential to the characters, and the setting of it. Moving it just wouldn't be right.

Considering how good the 2009 Star Trek reboot was, I think a remake would not necessarily be the worst thing in the world. However I can't think of any contemporary actors that could even begin to fill the shoes of Dan Aykroyd, Harold Ramis or Ernie Hudson. Frankly, I think the best way to continue the series would be with more video games, comics (which they're actually doing!) and, as Zombie said, a TV show.

Peter Venkmen;172626
New York is essential to the characters, and the setting of it. Moving it just wouldn't be right.

Well, my only thought with the “out of NYC” angle was that, having witnessed two abject failures in New York City, someone might want to go somewhere where there isn't a Ghostbusters franchise! Just to try something new for a change. (The video game seems to have cleaned up the Big Apple once and for all.)

Let me put it this way: I'm against a carbon-copy remake. If it's going to refresh the franchise, it has to bring something new to the table while also paying homage (even if only sparingly) to the original.

Here's another idea: Remake the film–New York and all–but put it in a different time. 1884, 2084, whatever. You'd have the same characters, but it'd be just like they always existed within that time period. Some of the characters might change (if late 19th/early 20th Century, for example, Walter Peck would go from EPA bureaucrat to muckraking journalist), and so would the setting, but the essence would stay the same.

If in the future, however, there might be another, hidden menace to contend with: technology. Some fool might get a job as fourth member (before Winston) and find and steal the prototypes. Or someone could just break in while they're on a bust. This way, they'd have to deal with a bunch of knockoff companies…I'm surprised this hasn't happened already (in before Spenser, Tracy, and Kong)! And, of course, when the slime really hits the fan, the other companies go bust and head to greener pastures.

Moving the setting to the future/past sounds like an even worse idea than a straightforward remake + moving it out of New York.

mr pecker;172625
The video game was a stumble? The figures? The comics? The Ecto restoration? They've put a hell of a lot more into the franchise in recent years than they did back in the 90's. The only thing that's really been a stumble is the third film and that's not for their lack of trying. The creative team is what's holding up a new film. Well….Murray, anyway.

I don't really want a remake, but should this third film fall through it's a given that Sony will continue with the brand name in a different way. These days it's kinda silly to NOT expect a remake. It may not be anytime soon, but they're going to milk their proven franchises. It's common practice these days.

I misspoke (mis-wrote?). Yes, Sony's put a lot into the franchise, but not as much as they could. The vast majority of recent GB material has been from licences, which don't require a great deal of day-to-day effort on Sony's part.

It just feels, to me, that Sony doesn't have the licencees' backs. I mean, on a lot of this stuff, I don't think I would have heard about a lot of what's going on with GB if not for the fans; Sony just comes across as indifferent to me.

Of course, this is just my opinion; I could be wrong.

The Zombieland scene was funny, but them doing a remake would be like that only longer.

I don't know. I just don't know. I myself am sick of remakes, but I must say, Star Trek was excellent. One a quick sidenote, Footloose? Really? Anywho.

From what I understand, Sony, along with Akroyd and Ramis, finally got Murray to get into the cast. Also, a HUGE rumor that I have heard is that Bill also signed onto a 4th if this movie does well enough. Of course it would be a minor roll considering the 3rd is supposed to be the changing of the guard.

That being said, with how the plans for the third seem to be, why would you do a remake? They're continuing on will the story. Heck I've heard Jurassic Park is about the have a 4th and even a 5th. It's all about continuing the story if you can, remake if you can't.

I can't say I wouldn't be curious about a remake considering the advance in technology these days.(Books on a string lol) But as a fan of the entire franchise it's just hard to think it would be good. It's a comedy with technology, that almost ALWAYS fails, yet Ghostbusters is one of, if not the best in that category. It still receives a high approval rating today and is consistantly rated in TOP lists of several genres and other ideas.

Ecto1A97;172801
I don't know. I just don't know. I myself am sick of remakes, but I must say, Star Trek was excellent. One a quick sidenote, Footloose? Really? Anywho.

From what I understand, Sony, along with Akroyd and Ramis, finally got Murray to get into the cast. Also, a HUGE rumor that I have heard is that Bill also signed onto a 4th if this movie does well enough.

When did you hear this? Because the whole Murray signed on to do a third and a fourth was a BIG April fools joke that went viral. Even news sites were reporting it. So far Murray has not said anything, and from my understanding he hasn't even looked at the script. Dan has said they want to start next year.