New Ghostbusters Afterlife trailer

[Imaculata]

No one was maliciously misleading anyone, and I can't imagine what sort of person would walk into that movie expecting anything different than what the movie turned out to be.

Walking into it? Probably not. Buying it, or watching it on Netflix? Absolutely. Just watched a young reactor on YT be confused about which Ghostbusters people were so excited about. I totally understand that, when the reboot is at the top of the page.

You don't name your movie exactly as the first movie by accident. I think in this case it is definitely misleading and malicious.

It was so when Robocop did it, or The Thing, or Total Recall. It is a shady practice imo. Just call it something different.

 

[Gradine]

Walking into it? Probably not. Buying it, or watching it on Netflix? Absolutely.

You don't name your movie exactly as the first movie by accident. I think in this case it is definitely misleading and malicious.

It was so when Robocop did it, or The Thing, or Total Recall. It is a shady practice imo. Just call it something different.

I mean... that's... basically how reboots work? I guess that there's a case to be made that this places the bar higher for them, but also, you get the name recognition and some of the fun IP to play with, so it's a tossup. But the process of film reboots is not some mysterious scheme perpetrated by the worst of Hollywood's sundry villains. Nobody is walking into the Judge Dredd reboot asking where Stallone is. Likewise, nobody's walking into theatres in the summer of 2016 wondering "Oh boy, I wonder how often Bill Murray is going to commit sexual harassment in this one!" If you've seen even just one commercial or trailer, you're pretty much going to get exactly what you saw in this film. Nothing more and nothing less. We're not exactly talking about The Rock's Hercules here

Like, rail against reboots as a concept all the live long day, but it's incredibly weird to nefarious motivations to what is a pretty typical process.

 

[Imaculata]

I'm obviously not railing against reboots. I think that much should be clear by now.

You can make a reboot and not call it the exact same. Hollywood does it all the time.

 

[Gradine]

You can also make a reboot and call it the exact same. Hollywood does that all the time, as well

 

[MGibster]

I mean... that's... basically how reboots work? I guess that there's a case to be made that this places the bar higher for them, but also, you get the name recognition and some of the fun IP to play with, so it's a tossup. But the process of film reboots is not some mysterious scheme perpetrated by the worst of Hollywood's sundry villains. Nobody is walking into the Judge Dredd reboot asking where Stallone is.

Did they reboot Dredd? I saw two different adaptions of the same source material not a reboot.

 

[Undrave]

I just recalled that the Ghostbusters reboot, at the very least, gave us this:
Hehehehe. Better than the actual remake of the song from the movie too...

 

[Bohandas]

I can see more problems with it than just the weak first act. With a sequel, you often hope that they either advance the story in some interesting way, or go bigger than the first movie. GBII did neither. They reset the business as if they hadn't saved the world, and then repeat much of the same plot, but with a weaker villain and Dana miraculously being in the middle of it all again. And I can see how the ending is a bit cringe too.

I think if they ever do a reboot reboot they should switch the endings. They'd face Vigo first and then in the next one be shut down not because people have stopped believing but because they've damaged the Statue of Liberty (and maybe also the river of slime's been drained so everyone thinks there's nothing left to be attracting ghosts)

 

[Imaculata]

You can also make a reboot and call it the exact same. Hollywood does that all the time, as well

I think you are still missing the point of what I was saying.

In 2008 they released a 4th Rambo film, and instead of just calling it Rambo IV, they called it Rambo. That is so frustrating.

 

[Undrave]

I think if they ever do a reboot reboot they should switch the endings. They'd face Vigo first and then in the next one be shut down not because people have stopped believing but because they've damaged the Statue of Liberty (and maybe also the river of slime's been drained so everyone thinks there's nothing left to be attracting ghosts)

That would make SO much more sense...

I think you are still missing the point of what I was saying.

In 2008 they released a 4th Rambo film, and instead of just calling it Rambo IV, they called it Rambo. That is so frustrating.

To be fair, the first 'Rambo' movie wasn't titled 'Rambo' but 'First Blood', and it's only when 'Rambo II' came out that it retroactively became 'Rambo I'.

 

[Imaculata]

To be fair, the first 'Rambo' movie wasn't titled 'Rambo' but 'First Blood', and it's only when 'Rambo II' came out that it retroactively became 'Rambo I'.

Oh yeah, I'm well aware. The naming conventions of all of the Rambo movies are a giant mess:

First Blood
Rambo: First Blood Part II
Rambo III
Rambo
Rambo: Last Blood

Especially that last one gets me. I thought we'd gotten rid of "First Blood" in the title?

I think if they ever do a reboot reboot they should switch the endings. They'd face Vigo first and then in the next one be shut down not because people have stopped believing but because they've damaged the Statue of Liberty (and maybe also the river of slime's been drained so everyone thinks there's nothing left to be attracting ghosts)

I agree, that would make so much more sense. Because once you have had them face off against what is essentially a god, everything else looks weak in comparison.