New Ghostbusters movie in OG movie universe Jason Reitman directing 2020

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Leo656

It is a kind of weird discrepancy. Yours is probably the best way to rationalize it.

Going back to the plain-old Ecto-1 feels sort of like a step backwards, though, regardless of reasoning. I mean, that car's iconic. But Ecto-1A had a much greater Cool Factor. Since then, every time I see the "regular" Ecto-1, I'm like "...Oh. Yay." Still cool, BUT once upon a time we got something better, and it's weird that one didn't become the standard going forward.

And in a way, when I first saw it was just the old Ecto-1 in that barn I felt like the kid in me was a little betrayed. At first, because right away I figured it meant GB2 was retconned away... but we know that's not so. But still, even if we now know the Ecto-1 and Ecto-1A were different vehicles... I went my whole childhood thinking around the time GB2 came out and after, "Wow, how cool it was that they souped up the Ecto-1 like that!" and never gave it a second thought. Now, not so? My childhood was a lie!

Though again, and I think I've brought it up earlier in this thread. If the Ecto-1A WAS the same car as the Ecto-1... why would they even bother to change the license plate # at all? Like, for what? Like, they stopped in the middle of the new ghost invasion in GB2 and bothered to tell Janine, "Hey, make sure you go to the DMV and change the license plates to 1A!" Why on earth would they do that? It HAD to be another vehicle, right?

I suspect that GB: Afterlife is not at all like Halloween 2018 but more like "Jurassic World." As in, the old sequels happened but we're not filling/burdening our soft reboot with references to them. We will, however, eventually get around to that (as we see with Jurassic World 3, full of the whole cast of them). Guaranteed if there's a sequel to Afterlife we'll meet adult Oscar, played by a 30s comedian.

[Leo656]

I remember as a kid, I spent hours upon hours drawing the Ecto-1A in crayon. Lots more fun than the "boring" old original version. HAZARD TAPE!

Me and my best friend were f*cking obsessed with Ghostbusters back then, man. We had all the role-play toys, the Proton Packs, the Slime Blowers, literally every single damn thing. I even got a super-awesome official Ghostbusters II jumpsuit uniform, the Christmas after the movie came out... which I outgrew in like less than a year. But it was still awesome for that little while that it fit! But yeah, we played that sh*t hard for a long, long while.

We each had a "junker" car in our respective backyard, so we'd also often clean them up, slap a bunch of homemade decals on them and spiffy 'em up to look like the Ecto-1 (or 1A). As close as old beater station wagons covered in kids' construction projects could get, anyways.

At one point, around '88-ish, we were kinda wondering if we were a little too obsessed, doing all that kinda stuff to that degree. But then we found the NOW Comics "Real Ghostbusters" comic book, and every issue they had a gallery of photos kids sent in of themselves doing all that kinda stuff, and stuff way more elaborate, even. So then we felt okay again. "Okay, we stuck Ghostbusters decals on the old station wagon out back and pretended to drive around busting ghosts, but at least we're not that kid who built a kid-size seatable Ecto-1 out of Legos."

Fun times. I admit, when I go to Wal-Mart and see the new roleplay toys they have out for the new movie, I'm tempted to buy them just because 6-year old me would absolutely have to have them. But so far, I haven't. They do look pretty cool, though. I like the modular Neutrona Wand gimmick.

Also tempted to pick up the new toy Ecto-1, kinda. But I literally just got the "Plasma Series" Ecto-1 that's all deluxe and sh*t, so part of me feels like getting this one would be redundant. It's only like $25, though, so maybe.

[Wildcat]

I know we discussed it awhile back but I just cannot believe it would be a totally separate vehicle.

They were not ghostbusting at the start of 2 but besides that logically you would just add the upgrades not buy a duplicate...which must have been happenstance in the first place being a very specific old model. They needed a car and Ray got what they could afford.

The license plate could have been for fun as a renaming. Like when people use novelty plates. You can easily explain or imagine that Egon removed the 1A stuff for parts and/or liked the original look better.

As for the trailer it looks sooooo good. There’s been debate on Blu Ray boards about whether it’s GB3 or some kind of spinoff. Someone argued that the original characters need to be the focus to count as a sequel but it’s direct continuity with GB2.

How do you explain to someone that Afterlife is NOT the third installment? It’s impossible. It shows what happened to the original team even though it’s told from the new casts perspective. They even show up at some point.

I always refer to it as Ghostbusters 3. Even when I’m alone. I’m fine with the term Afterlife but it’s simpler to say GB3.

[Leo656]

The car in this movie has no hazard tape. Or LED screens. Does it have a dish on top? I forget.

If This Car is the same car from Ghostbusters II... and THAT car was the same as the original Ecto-1... that means that at some point, after the events of Ghostbusters II, someone - Egon, I guess? - would have REMOVED all of that awesome flair from the fabulous Ecto-1A, to turn it back into the boring old "Ecto-1" again. On purpose.

What kind of f*cking monster would do that, I ask you?

Naaaaaaah, Andrew's "this is the old junker and Ecto-1A was another car, Somewhere Else" theory makes way more sense. Turning the Ecto-1A back into the Ecto-1 on purpose is just plain something no sane person would DO.

It'd be like when a hot redhead chick dyes her hair blonde. "I WAS super-hot, but I decided I wanted to be 'only sorta-hot' for a while." And then you immediately know they're an idiot. Same thing!

Unless Ghostbusters II - and in turn, the Ecto-1A - never happened. And again, I refuse to believe anyone would be such a horrible person as to ask me to swallow that. But that WOULD explain why the car looks like the old one, again. Because there never was a "new car".

Eh. Andrew's theory still works best. It's the only one where nobody involved is making bad choices on purpose.

[Wildcat]

For the sake of argument let’s say there was 2 cars.

They made the gunner seat. I guess they were still in business when it happened since someone was meant to sit there and the R/C trap door. They were not going to keep using 1A if they wanted these features while driving.

So either way 1A was demoted wherever it might be.

Still it makes no sense at the time of GB2 to have bought another car just to add more lights and stripes. I’m assuming it’s the same. Someone should ask Jason Reitman and Dan Aykroyd about it.

[Leo656]

Technically, no, it wouldn't have made sense. Logically, they would have just "fancied up" the existing car. Yes. I always, until today, figured Ecto-1A was just Ecto-1 with stickers on it.

...But then if that's true, because of this new movie it means that they would have had to at some point take all of that stuff OFF and that makes even less goddamn sense because all that sh*t was soooo coooooool.

So at this point, either there are two cars - Ecto-1 and Ecto-1A - OR Ghostbusters II didn't happen.

Because otherwise, someone in-universe (Egon?) said "We don't need the hazard tape or the satellite dish" and YES YOU GODDAMN DO, MOTHERF*CKER.

OR, another option emerges. One in which the people making this new movie are idiots, and either forgot to put the hazard tape and other flair back on the car OR figured it was better without it. Which is WRONG.

So again. Technically the two cars being separate and distinct vehicles IS illogical. You're right.

BUT, that's the thing we're saying happened, regardless. Because ALL other alternatives lead to me wanting to beat the sh*t out of SOMEONE for making very bad decisions.

[Wildcat]

Ya I know you really like the 1A look.

I don’t hate it but I definitely prefer the original look. I’m all for upgrades but it’s over the top. You just added more lights and a satellite dish? I guess it’s kinda funny if that’s what they were going for.

[Leo656]

No, no, no. You don't quite get it.

I "liked" George W. Bush. I "like" Snapple. I "like" to smoke pot and watch lesbian strap-on porn at 5am.

...Scratch that. I really love that last one. A lot.

But I don't "like" the Ecto-1A design.

No, no, the Ecto-1A is not a "like". What it IS, is the Top Winner of the All-Time "I've Never F*cked A Goddamn CAR Before But I Guess There's A First Time For Everything And I'm Not Getting Into Heaven Anyway So Let's Go Ahead And Get This Sh*t On Video While We're At It" Contest. GET IT RIGHT.

[Autbot_Benz]

Ivan Rietman's response to why fans hated feigbusters and he says its not sexism. Wish this had come out when the movie did.

“I don’t think it’s sexism that’s been the major problem,” Reitman told Inverse, “I think it’s more people of your age [30-somethings] who watched the movie when they were 8 or 9 and it became this formative cinematic experience for kids. And fortunately and as a tribute, I take it as a compliment, the film has held on for these 30-odd years since [old fans] have seen it. So, there’s some trepidation in remaking a film like this. You don’t want to remake The Wizard of Oz. And there’s something about Ghostbusters that felt that way.”

https://www.inverse.com/article/1773...h-isn-t-sexist

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by Autbot_Benz

Ivan Rietman's response to why fans hated feigbusters and he says its not sexism. Wish this had come out when the movie did.



https://www.inverse.com/article/1773...h-isn-t-sexist

It wouldn't have helped. Feminism and agenda fueled that movie. They were pretty much expecting backlash for it so they could go ahead and label anyone that hated or didn't watch the movie to be a misogynist.

IMO Black Panther did great but I wouldn't be surprised if there was a SJW squad waiting to see if the movie would bomb just so they could call anyone who didn't like it or watch it a racist.

[ZariusTwo]

Originally Posted by Autbot_Benz

Ivan Rietman's response to why fans hated feigbusters and he says its not sexism. Wish this had come out when the movie did.



https://www.inverse.com/article/1773...h-isn-t-sexist

It did. Check the date on the article.

[Leo656]

That whole Chickbusters fiasco was one of the single most unpleasant things about movies I can remember in all my life. Not just the movie - which was terrible - but the entire cultural "conversation" around it.

Like YES, it's completely disrespectful to the original movie(s) and its fans, and openly goes out of its way to make the entire premise look stupid and mock anyone who ever liked it for doing so. They completely misfired in not taking a second to realize that the ONLY people in this day and age who care about a Ghostbusters movie, are people who idealized the originals and see them as a fundamental part of growing up during a very specific time.

I mean, it's been established: You show the original Ghostbusters movie, or the cartoons, to anyone who wasn't around in the 80s, they just don't "get it". They might like it, but they never, ever understand why it was a big deal. You really, really had to be there.

So you make a movie about a thing, which openly mocks That Thing. And you forget that the people watching it are mostly only going to be people who had watched the originals a hundred times... had all the action figures... most of them probably even had their own toy proton packs and ran around the house as little kids "busting ghosts", as me and my friends often did...

And then your new movie openly and loudly declares, "You are such a stupid goober for ever having cared so much about this stupid, stupid thing."

...And they REALLY didn't see any backlash coming from that?! JESUS.

But you "weren't allowed" to discuss that out loud, despite it being the only thing worth discussing. It was all "NOPE! You just hate women!" It's like NO, motherf*cker, you just did a sh*t reboot that was made for every single bad reason.

And then, the movie's apologists. "Well, I never cared about Ghostbusters, but I LOVE that this movie makes people so mad, so it's great by default." And of course, "Well c'mon, Ghostbusters is stupid, anyway, don't take it so seriously. It DESERVES to be made fun of." Dumb people who no longer post here were banging that drum loud and often. You 'member.

You couldn't just tell the truth. "This 'comedy movie' isn't even funny. 'They forgot my wontons' isn't a 'joke', and it's not any funnier when you repeat it a dozen times. It's poorly-scripted, over-saturated with too much color, it's made by people who openly hate the franchise, AND it mocks the only people who'd even care to watch it, those people being Ghostbusters fans." It's a perfect storm of just everything bad about remakes, a complete Worst-Case Scenario. I knew it'd be bad... then I watched it, and it was WORSE.

I mean, the f*cking SPITE. The f*cking SPITE with which that movie was made drips through in every goddamn frame. I can't remember the last time I saw a movie that was so intentionally mean-spirited. If you like Ghostbusters, the people who made that movie openly hate you, and they really, really want you to know that.

But you couldn't have that conversation. "Nah, you just hate women."

Nah. What I hate is when a piece of entertainment goes out of its way to mock me for being a fan of what I like. And when people tell me I "deserve" that kind of abuse for even being a fan in the first place.

The whole experience was ugly, and the movie itself was the least of it. And considering it's one of the worst movies I've ever seen, that's saying a lot.

[ZariusTwo]

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Leo656

That whole Chickbusters fiasco was one of the single most unpleasant things about movies I can remember in all my life. Not just the movie - which was terrible - but the entire cultural "conversation" around it.

Like YES, it's completely disrespectful to the original movie(s) and its fans, and openly goes out of its way to make the entire premise look stupid and mock anyone who ever liked it for doing so. They completely misfired in not taking a second to realize that the ONLY people in this day and age who care about a Ghostbusters movie, are people who idealized the originals and see them as a fundamental part of growing up during a very specific time.

I mean, it's been established: You show the original Ghostbusters movie, or the cartoons, to anyone who wasn't around in the 80s, they just don't "get it". They might like it, but they never, ever understand why it was a big deal. You really, really had to be there.

So you make a movie about a thing, which openly mocks That Thing. And you forget that the people watching it are mostly only going to be people who had watched the originals a hundred times... had all the action figures... most of them probably even had their own toy proton packs and ran around the house as little kids "busting ghosts", as me and my friends often did...

And then your new movie openly and loudly declares, "You are such a stupid goober for ever having cared so much about this stupid, stupid thing."

...And they REALLY didn't see any backlash coming from that?! JESUS.

But you "weren't allowed" to discuss that out loud, despite it being the only thing worth discussing. It was all "NOPE! You just hate women!" It's like NO, motherf*cker, you just did a sh*t reboot that was made for every single bad reason.

And then, the movie's apologists. "Well, I never cared about Ghostbusters, but I LOVE that this movie makes people so mad, so it's great by default." And of course, "Well c'mon, Ghostbusters is stupid, anyway, don't take it so seriously. It DESERVES to be made fun of." Dumb people who no longer post here were banging that drum loud and often. You 'member.

You couldn't just tell the truth. "This 'comedy movie' isn't even funny. 'They forgot my wontons' isn't a 'joke', and it's not any funnier when you repeat it a dozen times. It's poorly-scripted, over-saturated with too much color, it's made by people who openly hate the franchise, AND it mocks the only people who'd even care to watch it, those people being Ghostbusters fans." It's a perfect storm of just everything bad about remakes, a complete Worst-Case Scenario. I knew it'd be bad... then I watched it, and it was WORSE.

I mean, the f*cking SPITE. The f*cking SPITE with which that movie was made drips through in every goddamn frame. I can't remember the last time I saw a movie that was so intentionally mean-spirited. If you like Ghostbusters, the people who made that movie openly hate you, and they really, really want you to know that.

But you couldn't have that conversation. "Nah, you just hate women."

Nah. What I hate is when a piece of entertainment goes out of its way to mock me for being a fan of what I like. And when people tell me I "deserve" that kind of abuse for even being a fan in the first place.

The whole experience was ugly, and the movie itself was the least of it. And considering it's one of the worst movies I've ever seen, that's saying a lot.

And Ghostbusters 2016 is also the singular reason that IMDB took down its message boards. Though they probably would have done it when Captain Marvel came out anyway.

[Vegita-San]

yep. it was my introduction to woke wankery.

and I wish it was my last, but the nonsense keeps on going....non stop.
sigh.

[ZariusTwo]

[IMJ]

I'm getting the impression that the actual Ghostbusters "trilogy" would be Ghostbusters, Ghostbusters: The Video Game (PS3 era) and then this movie.

I've had similar discussions with Indiana Jones fandom, most of which on the various groups can't wrap their heads around how a "trilogy narrative" works. And Indy trilogy would be Raiders, Crusade and a third thematically similar movie with connecting tissue that hasn't been made yet.

That's what I see in Ghostbusters. It's like how the "real" Halloween trilogy is Halloween, Halloween II and then H20. Or how the real Star Trek Trilogy was TWOK, TSFS and then TVH.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by IMJ

I'm getting the impression that the actual Ghostbusters "trilogy" would be Ghostbusters, Ghostbusters: The Video Game (PS3 era) and then this movie.

I've had similar discussions with Indiana Jones fandom, most of which on the various groups can't wrap their heads around how a "trilogy narrative" works. And Indy trilogy would be Raiders, Crusade and a third thematically similar movie with connecting tissue that hasn't been made yet.

That's what I see in Ghostbusters. It's like how the "real" Halloween trilogy is Halloween, Halloween II and then H20. Or how the real Star Trek Trilogy was TWOK, TSFS and then TVH.

I'll be surprised and a little impressed if they reference anything that happened in the video game in Afterlife. My suspicion is that Jason Reitman isn't oblivious to the game, probably really digs it, and wouldn't want to trample on Ramis' actual last contribution to the franchise so he won't contradict it... but I just don't see him doing much more than that. And it'd be a little bit more strange NOT to reference the video game, as that deals heavily with Shandor/Gozer and all of that as opposed to not referencing, say, Ghostbusters II, which has nothing to do with any of that (though I think they found some way to connect the river of slime to Shandor/Gozer, if I recall).

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

I'll be surprised and a little impressed if they reference anything that happened in the video game in Afterlife. My suspicion is that Jason Reitman isn't oblivious to the game, probably really digs it, and wouldn't want to trample on Ramis' actual last contribution to the franchise so he won't contradict it... but I just don't see him doing much more than that. And it'd be a little bit more strange NOT to reference the video game, as that deals heavily with Shandor/Gozer and all of that as opposed to not referencing, say, Ghostbusters II, which has nothing to do with any of that (though I think they found some way to connect the river of slime to Shandor/Gozer, if I recall).

They probably won't reference it at all, but what you said about Shandor/Gozer is spot on to my point about "trilogies"! That's the thematic undertone that carries the Ghostbusters story beats.

Ghostbusters 2 was awesome - I loved it. But I loved it like I love Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. It's not part of the trilogy narrative, but it is just another cool adventure they go on.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by IMJ

Ghostbusters 2 was awesome - I loved it. But I loved it like I love Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. It's not part of the trilogy narrative, but it is just another cool adventure they go on.

Yeah, that's a good comparison. Ghostbusters 2 is to Ghostbusters at large what Temple of Doom is to Indiana Jones at large.

Here's the "final trailer":



And wow... they actually show a split second of "the moment"!

Spoiler:

That's a wedding ring on what probably is Venkman's hand there. So he did marry Dana, I'm sure it'll be.