Bridesmaids Director "In Talks" For Female-Led Reboot of Ghostbusters

[Nurb]

It doesn't need a reboot, dammit! Not one of the best movies of all time! You wouldn't remake Casablanca!

And I wouldn't trust anyone to make a good ghostbusters movie regardless of cast with Remis dead, and I just don't get this trend of claiming existing character identities and turning them into something else, which won't make any fan of the originals happy because no one will match the quality of the originals. You'd have less resistance just making new characters from the start.

Though there's nothing confirming it's going to be made, so we have that.

 

[Thyunda]

I don't see how something like the new Dredd film is somehow comparable to this situation. Judge Dredd was already a well established non-movie franchise before the original movie came out and those kinds of franchises tend to have numerous different adaptions so they're not exactly reboots. Also, the original Dredd was far from a classic and was seen as an abomination by most of the fans of Judge Dredd. The 2012 film was better because it was a faithful adaption while the original was anything but. Ghostbusters on the other hand is a different entity. The original film was the thing that started the whole thing and it rarely got any more popular beyond that because of a shitty sequel. That single film pretty much is the franchise. Without it, it means nothing.

As for the whole deal with a reboot, let me ask you a question. Can you honestly tell me a single reboot or remake of a film (not a film part of a larger franchise, I'm talking about a film that created a franchise in itself) that has ever come even close to being as good or better than the original? I think you'll find that by the vast majority reboots and remakes end up paling in comparison to the originals save for a few rare examples. You have to ask why Hollywood insists on churning them out every year if their entire existence is pointless. It doesn't ruin the original in any way but it just comes across as cheap and money-grubbing when the only reason they're made is to make money rather than actually try to be a good film. There's other ways to attract new viewers to the original, especially when some of these reboots can actually deter new viewers from the source material if its bad enough.

I see your point, and it would be a fair point if there was ever a golden era where movies weren't made to make money. So already, the existence of an original is as deplorable as the concept of a reboot, at least going by your logic.

Transformers is reinvented constantly. Over and over again. Generation One possessed barely any artistic merit, but it IS the original, whereas the direct sequel, Beast Wars told a deep story and told it excellently. One of the most recent incarnations, Animated, gave a new perspective and did it very well despite expectations. And, like you'd expect of reboots, they were all the exact same characters. Always an Optimus. Always a Megatron. Always a Bumblebee. Rarely did anything new show up.

And only dicks compare everything back to G1. That's when you can't move on.

Remakes often pale in comparison to the original because they try to use the original's universe to drive a different movie and it simply doesn't work. They, for whatever misguided reason, believe that if you use the title, you have to use the protagonist and the villain, otherwise it's somehow dishonest. And I agree, that's a stupid thing to do, but it doesn't automatically guarantee a remake's failure.

Then there's comedy idol, Airplane!, derived heavily from Zero Hour. And which one have you heard of? It's probably the one I preceded with 'comedy idol'. Oh, and how about Little Shop of Horrors? Also a damned remake. Ocean's Eleven and The Departed were also much better received than their original counterparts.

Honestly mate, you should've just done a little Google search and saved us both the effort. My point still stands - Remakes are not automatically failures.

 

[Nazulu]

*sigh* I hate Hollywood. They are so shit now. They used to amaze me with the original idea's and concepts and just general high quality films I saw every month. Now it just seems they only rely on remaking everything.

When exactly do you think was that mythical Golden Age?

Looking back at history, it would seem to me that developing pre-existing narratives further, has been the most common form of creativity.

Oh it's always been around, but not to this extent, and there used to be other great films to choose from. Like actually great. Stuff we can hold in high regard.

 

[Frostbyte666]

*sigh* I hate Hollywood. They are so shit now. They used to amaze me with the original idea's and concepts and just general high quality films I saw every month. Now it just seems they only rely on remaking everything.

When exactly do you think was that mythical Golden Age?

Looking back at history, it would seem to me that developing pre-existing narratives further, has been the most common form of creativity.

Ok so they want to reboot it...why? others have said why not have different branches. Another question though why must it be an all female cast, what's wrong with having the group as mixed genders.

You want a spinoff instead of a reboots... why? You want a mixed cast instead of a female one... what's so wrong with a female one?

There are an infinite number of "why nots" regarding a show's decided premise, we could keeep questioning them forever. But do we?The original Ghostbusters itself had a single gender main cast. Did you ever question why that one can't be more mixed?

Are you sure that you aren't motivated by the same belief as an alarming but not shocking number of other posters around here, according to whom, quite simply, "women aren't funny"?

Saying woman aren't funny is quite frankly silly. There are good comedians and bad comedians. Now their are probably brands of humour that may not appeal to certain types of people. But that is true of any type of comedian or act.

I feel that rebooting as female only means they don't really understand the lesson of equality since it will still be only a single sex team, just female instead of male and they're missing out on interactions between the different genders that you would find in real life now.

Out of curiosity is bridesmaids the female equivalent of the hangover series of films (which I find dire), because if it is I expect the comedy to be really really terrible.

 

[Groxnax]

Hmmm, this should be interesting to see but not as a reboot but them working in the Ghostbuster franchise.

Now why do I see them making that jerk environmentalist from the first movie wish he was never born?

 

[Chimpzy_v1legacy]

Needs more Bill Murray. It's IMO not really Ghostbusters without Bill Murray. Somebody give that man a sex change.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

Prioritize acting ability and group chemistry above all else, please... I'm fine with an all female team, just make them interesting and work together well, and keep the uniforms as close as they can to the originals.

 

[Something Amyss]

Well Egon is not with us anymore, isn't he?

Which really is irrelevant. But yes, Harold Ramis is dead.

And since you quoted my larger point that they really shouldn't bother in the first place, I'm sure you are aware of it. "Best of what's left" in no way makes it a good idea.

 

[Joseph Alexander]

movie being marketed as both a reboot and with a gimmick of having an all-female main cast.
those are dooming marks for anything.

if that is their best foot forward, then do us all a favor and chop the leg off.

 

[soren7550]

While having 4 female leads could work, there's about a 0% chance that it'd be good with how it's likely to be made.

- If it were to be done, it'd likely be done as a gimmick
- The humor will likely revolve around 'women humor' and 'women problems'
- From what I've heard, this director's films have not been funny
- My understanding is that McCarthy just keeps playing the same role of 'hur-dur, I'm a fat dumb woman laugh dammit'
- The likelihood of making the female Ghostbusters uniforms form fitting/zipped low to reveal cleavage/this [http://www.scavengeinc.com/images/Product/medium/rubies/girl-ghostbusters-costume.jpg]/pink [http://www.crit-hit.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/gb-sanctum.png] is too damn high
- With several of the people that made the other Ghostbusters films classics bowing out of the project, the likelihood of the movie being good is already really low

I want there to be more Ghostbusters, but the track for there being good continuations (so far, the only wholly enjoyable one I've seen is the game that was supposed to work as the third film) is just too low for me to really get my hopes up.

 

[AgedGrunt]

I could see a Tina Fey/ Amy Pohler/ Melissa McCarthy/ Kirsten Wiig Ghostbusters working out pretty well.

Straight-to-DVD + Blu-Ray.

Personally I think the problem is less "can women be funny?" and more "who can be the female Bill Murray?"

There aren't even male leads that could touch the Ghostbusters. Even the minor roles are timeless. It's like the Blues Brothers: the actors are those characters; they own the roles. There can only be imitators.

But something like this gets the green light, it will be lucky to make any money and some people will still reason that women are just not being accepted as lead roles.

The problem isn't only casting. It's more this continued falsehood that women should look at the screen and see themselves in whatever they're watching. Art should not be rebooted in order to reproduce its image for a sense of diversity. If people are insecure that there were no girl ghostbusters in a movie that's likely older than they are, they need to accept it and move forward, making their own films with original ideas rather than inserting women into existing art.

 

[Thyunda]

snip

Let's take that 'one in five' statistic you ended on and hazard a guess as to the success rates of original films and adaptations from other sources. I would say something closer to one in ten. If you took all of the remakes ever made and separated them by quality, you'd have a large pile of crap and a small one of good stuff. But if you took all the films that were either original creations or adaptations from other sources, and separated those into two piles, you'd have a large pile and a frankly incomprehensible pile.

There are a lot of shit films, and being a remake or reboot is not an indicator in any sense on whether or not a film will be shit. Personally I think you're more likely to attract a talented director on a remake, and more likely to bring decent actors in. If they know the name, they'll be more prepared to stake their reputation on it, and while this can suffocate new talent, it can guarantee some degree of reliability.

So. In essence. What I'm trying to outline is that the premise of a reboot requires only that there is a group of people who catch ghosts while wearing the same outfits, and that there's a bigger, global threat at the end. No matter how unique your idea, you'll be continually compared to Ghostbusters with that summary, so why not make it an official entry into the series?

 

[Baddamobs]

How about you make an original movie with an all female team of what-have-you's?

Hey, the voice of reason has decided to arrive! You, my friend, have earned my thumbs up.

To topic overall: I more part of the 'if you're going to do it, make a spin off' group then anything else, but I agree that if this is being done for more representation (which it's not: Hollywood does this kind of re-boot for them phat feminist bucks, let's not lie to ourselves here), there are better places to go and better ideas to be used then this.

I'm not saying the movie is definitely going to be bad (don't put words in my mouth now), I'm just saying that I think I would prefer to the see an original idea that used the Ghost-busters formula of four friends going against the legions of hell/ Ghost buster inspired sort of thing.

"But Baddamobs, won't people say they're just coping-"

I DID say 'original.' Tropes can be used in whatever way you deem and will continue to be so till the end of time, but there's still room for originality, even in something that's heavily inspired.

Will I go see it? No.
Does that mean it's bad/has failed? No.
Would I like to see more big Hollywood movies that have a more diverse cast without getting dragged down by it? Yes.
This is thread quickly derailing because of the arguments in it? Definitely.

 

[Baddamobs]

If this came from a place where "Hey, I have a creative and inspired idea that I hope to make work surrounding 4 talented female actresses", maybe I'd be even slightly optimistic about this.

But of course that's not going to be the case, because whether we want to admit it or not, we all know this is just some studio executive going "Well, everyone keeps whining about wanting more female protagonists or whatever, so to shut those losers up for a minute let's just snatch up 4 currently popular chicks in Hollywood right now and chuck em in a movie. Now, which one of the 100000s of reboot scripts we have lying around should we put em in....hmmm...A-HA! GHOSTBUSTERS! Getting Melissa McCarthy bumble around with a big ass ghostpack on her back will bring alllllllll the hip young kids in, yo! We're brilliant! BRILLIANT!!!"

Melissa McCarthy: "Actually guys, I've kinda been thinking about moving on to the next phase of my career instead of doing more bumbling fat woman roles. I've been working on this really moving script about an Iranian single mom who inspires her dau..."

Studio Executive: "YOU SHUT THE FUCK UP, YOU ROSIE O'DONNELL CLONE! YOU KNEW WHAT YOU WERE GETTING INTO WHEN WE BOUGHT YOU OFF FOR BRIDEMAIDS!

Melissa McCarthy: "B-b-but I don't wanna no more..."

Studio Executive: TOO LATE, MCCARTHY! YOU'RE OURS NOW! NOW DAAAAAAAAAANCE!!!" [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUe_Pi8NfT4]

Melissa McCarthy: *shamefully bumbles around* "Herp derp Look at me, I'm so wacky and quicky, herp derp! *cries on the inside*

Studio Executive: MUUUHAHAHAHA!!!

Oh to be a fly on the wall for those meetings...

We need more people like you in these threads. Points made clearly and eloquently, and some top notch humor.

Instead, I shy away from a good 90% of the threads on this website...

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I just think reboots are usually a lame "idea".

 

[ChristopherT]

If they were going to do a new Ghostbusters movie a cast that might make me very happy would be

Shemar Moore - he has charm, and I think when given fun roles he looks a bit like he's having fun, I think that's a good thing. For instance him in Birds of Prey, he has a presence that draws the eye.

Ksenia Solo - I adore her in Lost Girl, able to bring comedic moments and expressive faces.

Regina Hall - as long as they allow her to channel more of an Ally McBeal side of her acting and not so much the dozens of Scary Movie stuff. I'm pretty sure she can do it, in Ally I found she could do subtle, and another actor I just enjoy watching. And again expressive faces.

Jensen Ackles - Now if you only know him as Mr. Serious face from clips or a few episodes of Supernatural you may not understand. However, in those few on screen moments in Supernatural where he's allowed to be fun, goofy, and in extra scenes at the end of credits, he has a fun likeability factor.

Also, Michael Rooker, they can put him in there. Maybe as a fifth, or maybe as a rival ghostbusting business like a Ron Alexander.