Kibeth41 said:
Is it really a remake, though? It's labelled as a remake, but at no point does it ever claim that it's attempting to replace the source material in any way. It's quite clearly making its own effort to be an original movie.
The originals aren't going anywhere, the new movie doesn't impact the quality of the old in any way, it isn't mindless pandering to try and score nostalgia points, and shit, they're even making the movie accessible to people who never saw the original Ghostbuster movies.
Frankly, this is just a new installation into the Ghostbusters franchise.
Categorically, this is incorrect. Taking from the trailer, while the film has some original material such as that knuckle duster thing and I'll assume the ghosts since the band one looked fairly interesting, this is very close to a beat for beat remake in a lot of ways.
Two scientists with different but similar values
Third quirky one who helped finalise invention
Messed up first encounter
Joined by average joe (which Paul Feig apparently read as 'Black person joins', not even going to get INTO that)
In a fire-house
Where they buy a Hearse to be their company car
Large scale ghost invasion.
Now, I haven't seen it yet, but so far that is a beat for beat remake, not Ghostbuster III.
This very much IS geared towards pandering, it's Rule 63 Ghostbusters. A quick look at the plot synopsis on Wikipedia mentions a demon called Rowan (who is played by Neil Casey. Which makes me sad because I hoped they'd commit and do a FULL gender swap because then at least it'd have novelty but it seems after the Ghostbusters the rest of the cast is male including any antagonists), but that does imply there'll be some original material in there which might be funny.
But you can't just wash it under the rug with "It's not a remake, it's too original" because I'll bet you $5 the 'EPA' turns up in some capacity. Or some adjusted version.
