Board 8 > Ghostbusters: Afterlife trailer

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahZFCF--uRY

I never got around to the last one, but looks like that might not matter.

---

Looks pretty good!

---

Looks good, but I probably won't be seeing it until it comes to DVD, Ghostbusters is not a franchise that puts my butt in a seat.

---

Damn that Stranger Things kid is in everything these days

A lot less of the original cast than I expected

---

Do people actually like Ghostbusters as a franchise? It always felt like they liked the first movie and the concept, but nothing else about it has ever been good. Do we really need this?

---

Yeah the only thing I ever liked was the first movie.

---

pjbasis posted...

Yeah the only thing I ever liked was the first movie.

Me too

This trailer is not good. Tonally it feels all wrong. Like it's a Ghostbusters movie...taking itself very seriously? Why?

---

XIII_rocks posted...

This trailer is not good. Tonally it feels all wrong. Like it's a Ghostbusters movie...taking itself very seriously? Why?

Yeah it reminds me of the first Force Awakens trailer where all of our heroes are gone and it's very emotional and somber but the Ghostbusters being gone does not exactly justify the same emotions.


---

what

this looks TERRIBLE in a completely different way than the 2016 one was terrible

like, you do know that ghostbusters is supposed to be funny right?

I don't blame them for pulling back and reversing course and making this trailer (movie?) "serious"

After people had fucking meltdowns that the trailer for Ghostbusters 2016 referred to Zeddemore as a "scientist" and treated the franchise like it was the bible I can imagine Sony doesn't want to ruffle any more feathers

However you guys do have a point that there needs to be more humor in a Ghostbusters movie, I mean the original was a sendup to old comedy/horror movies from the 40s and 50s, and that's kinda the entire point. Also, why cast Paul Rudd if you're not making a comedy?

but we'll see if that was just how the trailer was cut or if the whole movie is like this

---

So to add on to my post

ARE the main cast supposed to be in this?

I know this is the first trailer, but the direction was in such a different way that I can't even tell

---

This looks amazing, Day 1 for me

---

Actually I'm really interested in seeing this. Making Ghostbusters all dark and somber and IT/Stranger Things-ish is something new at least.

---

Raka_Putra posted...

Actually I'm really interested in seeing this. Making Ghostbusters all dark and somber and IT/Stranger Things-ish is something new at least.

Then why bother calling it Ghostbusters?

The whole point of the first movie was taking the supernatural and turning it mundane. Stranger Things is about doing the opposite.

---

Not what I expected at all.

Guess it's better than a remake. Not really sure what to think of it yet though.

This actually looks good, which I am extremely reluctant to admit after the last one was so bad.

---

TheRock1525 posted...

Then why bother calling it Ghostbusters?

The whole point of the first movie was taking the supernatural and turning it mundane. Stranger Things is about doing the opposite.

Cause the name sells, perhaps.

I'd rather watch this to see what it'll be like than a sequel to the 2018 (?) Ghostbusters, at least.

---

XIII_rocks posted...

Me too

This trailer is not good. Tonally it feels all wrong. Like it's a Ghostbusters movie...taking itself very seriously? Why?

posts like this are weird though

did you see ghostbusters? it does take itself seriously.

---

The original Ghostbusters is a comedy. This was an incredibly serious trailer with almost no jokes.

And let's be honest, original Ghostbusters ended with them fighting a giant Marshmallow man. Surely there's a limit on how seriously it can take itself.

---

Movie seems ok I guess, not great but fine. Don't know if I like the idea of a more serious take on Ghostbusters though. Feels like this would be better off having nothing to do with Ghostbusters but then I guess less people would want to see it

---

People loving this trailer when it looks equally as terrible as the 2016 movie (for different reasons) shows how much of the 2016 movie's backlash was just flat out misogyny.

You can't look me in the eye and say "now THIS is Ghostbusters."

---

TheRock1525 posted...

People loving this trailer when it looks equally as terrible as the 2016 movie (for different reasons) shows how much of the 2016 movie's backlash was just flat out misogyny.

You can't look me in the eye and say "now THIS is Ghostbusters."

It shows how much hate was for it being a remake.

This one still has a female main character.

We're talking about freaking Ghostbusters.

It's not like this is Terminator or something

---

Yeah not gonna lie it looks pretty uninteresting. Anyone who actually wants a good follow up to the first two just needs to play the 2009 video game.

---

My stance on this is as follows. I am willing to give it a chance simply because it doesn't look like a retelling of the first film. The last Ghostbusters movie's trailers made it look like exactly that and that is what I do not want, I already have the first Ghostbusters film.

---

If your Ghostbusters trailer doesnt utilize the theme song, youre doing it wrong
---

TheRock1525 posted...

People loving this trailer when it looks equally as terrible as the 2016 movie (for different reasons) shows how much of the 2016 movie's backlash was just flat out misogyny.

You can't look me in the eye and say "now THIS is Ghostbusters."

now THIS is a bad post

the 2016 movie is a terrible movie in every conceivable way and that's entirely independent of the (completely dumb) controversy.

this looks like an interesting movie. Paul Rudd seems okay, and the kid seems like a workable main character to hinge the movie around. Does it look like an interesting GHOSTBUSTERS movie? I dunno, who cares. The only thing that ever matters is if the movie is good on its own merits, not whether it lives up to its franchise. If the 2016 movie had actually been funny, then it would have been good, even if it didn't take its premises seriously whatsoever. Even if this movie "super serious" (a pretty dumb complaint, because this movie doesn't look super serious, it just looks like it takes its characters seriously, which the original ghostbusters also did), it can be a good movie even if it's not as lighthearted as the original ghost busters.

---

The tone doesnt match the old Ghostbusters movies, but this still looks way better than the last movie.

I dunno, I dont see what makes this premise interesting

Id actually be more interested in a Ghostbusters movie set 30 years after ghosts where everyone now REMEMBERS they exist and that theres an afterlife
---

Ghostbusters 2016 at the very least was Ghostbusters adjacent. They got the surface level idea right while completely fucking up the core (GB's strength was great writing and brilliant acting, GB16 tried ad-libbing with awkward acting).

This, though, is yet another "kids battle supernatural entities while adults remain largely oblivious/unhelpful save one or two" which we've had enough of lately with movies like IT/Super 8/Stranger Things, etc. And it sure as hell isn't a Ghostbusters movie.

An interesting premise would have been the integration of ghost catching into society expanding beyond the original 4. You saw how quickly NYC forgot about them in the sequel, it would make a lot more sense that society not only would be more accepting of the idea of catching ghosts, but eventually how easy it would become that it would be considered an every day profession like a mechanic. An unglamorous position for college dropouts, and maybe have a ghostbuster dealing with a society that sees them as less integral because you can buy your own proton packs and ghost traps off Amazon. Hell, you could have Venkman be the one who sold off their patents, and Ray could be pissed about the commercialization of what they're doing.

The point largely being that we don't need "SPOOKY GHOSTS/CLOWNS/ALIENS/WHATEVER SCARE KIDS UNTIL THEY FIGHT BACK" again. Ghostbusters was literally a movie about exterminators that happened to target ghosts. Replace it with rats and you'd still likely have just as brilliant a movie.

---

also, i think the point therock was making was with ghostbusters '16 tons of people were like "THIS IS NOT MY GHOSTBUSTERS" and now with this trailer people are like "oh wow this looks awesome who cares if it doesn't look like ghostbusters i just want a good movie!! "

personally, i'd assume it's actually different people saying those things but maybe i'm giving people too much credit.

---

As someone that loves Ghostbusters and didn't hate 2016, this does look much better for a sequel 30 years later.

---

Nice that it seems this film is doing something different and helps assuage my fears that this is another Blues Brothers 2000, but the trailer doesn't really hook me. And these franchise revivals really need to stop.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

also, i think the point therock was making was with ghostbusters '16 tons of people were like "THIS IS NOT MY GHOSTBUSTERS" and now with this trailer people are like "oh wow this looks awesome who cares if it doesn't look like ghostbusters i just want a good movie!! "

personally, i'd assume it's actually different people saying those things but maybe i'm giving people too much credit.

I agree, the general tone of the backlash towards the Ghostbusters reboot did become pretty darn sexist in the end, at least compared to other recent reboots/remakes that didn't get anywhere near the same amount of vitriol thrown their way like the Ben-Hur remake announced shortly AFTER. Surely Ghostbusters isn't THAT big of a deal, right?

---

there's more people on the internet who have seen the original ghostbusters than people who have seen the original ben-hur, probably.

---