Friday Five: Ways to Make a Cool 'Ghostbusters' Sequel
Filed under: Action, Sci-Fi & Fantasy, RumorMonger, Fandom, Remakes and Sequels, Lists
.jpg)
Look, I'm thinking the same thing you are: Here comes Hollywood to screw up another one of our beloved franchises by re-imagining it for this new, hip generation. Whenever they try to mess with nostalgia, it always comes back to bite them in the ass -- but could things be different with a franchise like Ghostbusters, which gave us two films ... and, let's admit it, only one real classic? Here are five ways to make a cool Ghostbusters sequel ...
1. Get the Apatow crew involved
When you look back at the original Ghostbusters, you see names like Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Harold Ramis, Rick Moranis and Ivan Reitman. Back in 1984, these were the folks who made us really laugh. These were the young-ish voices of the time; the guys you wanted to pay money to see because you knew they'd be worth it. Today, the same can be said for guys like Seth Rogen, Paul Rudd, Jason Segel, Steve Carell, Jay Baruchel, Jonah Hill, Michael Cera and Craig Robinson. At least a few of those names should show up in the sequel in order for it to have a really good shot of succeeding with fans.
2. Get a director who understands the franchise (ie: Harold Ramis or Ivan Reitman)
While there's a very good chance we'll end up seeing Judd Apatow's name tossed around as producer (no way he's directing this), the best way to hold on to what we love about Ghostbusters is to bring on a man who was there for the first two and knows what, exactly, makes this franchise work. Ramis has been working with the Apatow clan a lot lately (directing Year One, appeared in both Knocked Up and Walk Hard), and is perfectly capable of directing and acting in a film (Hello Egon cameo!). He'd by my choice for this, and, I'm sure, will also lend his voice to the script.
3. Aim for a HARD PG-13
Look, when you involve the Apatow crew, it's always best to let them go off, uncensored. But the original Ghostbusters was rated PG (PG-13, if it was released today), and the studio will not shell out millions to revive a franchise only to watch it get slapped with an R rating. But if you're going to hire some of today's top comedic talent to star and chase around ghosts, then we're going to need the studio to allow a hard PG-13. Let these guys have some fun, let them be a little dirty without dropping a slew of unnecessary F-bombs. As much as I'd argue for an R-rated Ghostbusters sequel, I'd want kids to be able to watch the film without having to take a shower to wash off the filth afterward. It's only right.
4. Don't go absolutely nuts with the CGI
Since these rumors first began, I've seen tons upon tons of people complain about a potential sequel because they were afraid it would overdose on CGI. And while I understand the argument, we're also talking about a flick that follows a bunch of guys who chase ghosts around. There will be CGI ... but there's no need to take it over the top. Toss in some practical effects, start small and slowly build to a contained finale where we care more about the characters than the visuals.
5. Limit the involvement of the original cast
I know, I know ... here's where you tell me that no Ghostbusters sequel would be complete without EVERYONE showing up for some big, grand reunion. While I'm certainly hip to inviting a couple of the guys back for cameos (no more than 10 minutes screen time), I really feel the film will flow better if you focus solely on a new crop of Ghostbusters. Definitely pull Aykroyd and Ramis in to hand off the torch, and I could see Murray stealing a scene, but don't go overboard. Don't ask these old dudes to strap on proton packs and head off to battle. It'll look weird and forced and we don't want that. Last thing we need is an old-looking Murray standing next to an overweight Rogen with their packs out, coughing up lines like, "We came, we saw, we kicked its ass ... again! Ow, my back, my back ..."
What are some other ways to make a cool Ghostbusters sequel?
Related Headlines
Reader Comments
(Page 1)2. I could see some young guys wanting to restart the business after it went defunct for a while, getting equipment and advice from Ramis and Akroyds characters (the ones who invented the stuff)
Posted at 5:46PM on Sep 5th 2008 by CJ
3. Sorry Erik, your formula might result in a "cool" Ghostbusters sequel, but it would be one that I absolutely wouldn't want to see. I have no interest in Apatow and his gang and I don't see any reason for the movie to need to push the boundaries of the PG-13 rating (though I wouldn't particularly want or expect it to be PG either). You're right that the director should be someone who was involved with at least the original movie, if not both of the first two, and certainly I agree that cgi is inevitable but should not be taken overboard. But as to limiting the involvement of the original cast . . . the only reason I can see for watching a new Ghostbusters movie is to see the original cast.
Posted at 6:31PM on Sep 5th 2008 by Saavik
4. Really dude? Have you seen Harold Ramis lately? Guy is overweight, old and looks like my Rabbi. Have you seen Murray and Aykroyd? These guys are getting up there in age, and I'm sorry, but fact is they don't appeal to today's youth (ie: the target audience for this sequel). They'd do great with cameos, but a full length movie featuring these four fiftysomethings is not something I want to see.
And you think it's what you want to see, but trust me it ain't.
Posted at 12:57AM on Sep 6th 2008 by Erik Davis
5. And I think the original cast would also agree that they are just too old to do it. If the new film were to be done with the orginal cast it would be funny only because of what the old guys are doing. We aren't talking Bruce Willis and Sean Conney, they would look ridiculous. I think that a sequel, with a new cast directed by Ramis would be perfect, it would still be Ghost Busters.
6. i agree with Saavik.
i want to see the original cast on the screen. of course, bring in some newbies, but i want to see Egon, Venkman, Ray and Winston. as for who the newbies should be... the Apatow gang isn't incredibly talented. they always go for the easy laugh. if you're going to bring in newcomers, let it be from the "Old School"/"Wedding Crashers" gang of Vince Vaughn, Owen Wilson, Will Farrell and friends. they're closer to the kind of funny that the Ghostbusters were.
the rest of what you said is right on.
Posted at 6:58PM on Sep 5th 2008 by acrobat
7. Sorry, but Farrell, the Wilsons, and Vaughn were the first to work with Apatow, so I don't know what you're talking about. Also, Apatow's movies appear to go for the easy laughs, but nailing those "easy" lines requires a good sense of comedic timing, which you'll discover is quite difficult if you ever do stand-up comedy.
Posted at 9:11PM on Sep 5th 2008 by Eric
8. Eric, I like your take, clearly Apatow, et al will be involved and unlike Saavik, I love those guys and would love to see what they'd do. And I agree it needs to be PG-13, and I'm fine with a hard PG-13.
I also think they should have the guys pass the torch to a new crew, and I think it should be Seth Rogen, Jason Segel, James Franco, (since we know they all work great with each other thanks to F&G) and I'd add in Craig Robinson.
As much as I'd love to see Cera in this, I just don't think he could be a GB as he's too young. In the first one they were all older college profs so this crew should be at least mid to late 20s.
If I could have my wish they'd bring in Samhain from the cartoon series but make him scary as hell.
Posted at 12:03AM on Sep 6th 2008 by Travis Tidmore
9. Wow you got to be joking you want people like Jonah Hill in the movie. Heck I am 21 and to this day still love the Ghostbusters they are classics. Out of your list of people you want in the movie I can only see one Steve Carell and I really do not want him in it either. I would take a CGI movie with the original cast over what you want for a new film. May be GB3 can revisit the idea of the GB going to hell.
I even love the idea of the new GB game that might be canceled or not over you ideas. I want the old cast. I think they could still be up to the job.
As for your PG-13 rating yeah it will be that but really no need for any F words how many were in the original. I know if a new GB movie gets made you have to make it for the kids of this day and age but I really do not want the movie to not be ghostbusters. With your ideas you seem like you want to take every thing that was great about the first two and change it.
So if the movie will be changed why not just call this new film Ghost Destroyer. Seeing as it will not be the same.
Also I want to let you know I am not trying to attack you. Just when you watched these films as a kid you do not want to see a series you loved turn out bad.
The films may not hold up to the test of time just like another classic I like Back to the Future. But they are still great movies and I do not want to see the series turn out bad.
As for CGI ghosts are all you need nothing else. You may think there should be more then just ghosts but it only was the ghost for the past two GB movies. If there is to be a GB3 just make it cheesy like the other ones and don't try to get new people to like the series. Because the GB movies never were big money makers so just make the new film for the fans and if you need to make it for new people make it so they can like it too but not at the cost that the fans get mad.
Posted at 12:06AM on Sep 6th 2008 by Joe
10. Paul Rudd and Seth Rogen would be pretty sweet as new GBs. No Jonah Hill, no Cera (eventhough i love him)
Posted at 2:09AM on Sep 6th 2008 by patrick
11. why go as young as cera or hill.. they should at least be older than 26.. ramis was like 40 during ghostbusters.. and hudson was 39.. murray and akroyd we early thirties.. i can maybe see romany malco paul rudd owen wilson and hank azaria
Posted at 3:58AM on Sep 6th 2008 by Gilligan
12. im sorry but whomever made this list is a moron. the apatow crew (paul rudd aside) are NOT funny. they're not, they're all a bunch of overrated untalented actors who will have their 15 minutes, and then end up washed up. why would u bring them into a ghostbusters film??? to ruin it???? u could never recreate the magic of the original ghostbusters films, u cant. and the key ingrediants lie with 5 people (murrary, ramis, aykroyd, hudson, and reitman). u take away one piece of the puzzle and you've got nothing. anyone remember ghostbusters extreme?
no ghostbusters 3, i'll boycott it, especially if they use fat idiots like jonah hill and seth rogan.
Posted at 3:46PM on Sep 6th 2008 by J.O.
14. Jonah Hill? You kidding me? Isn't this the guy who had the bright idea to tattoo a mustache on his finger because he thinks it's hilarious?
What a tool.
Posted at 6:59PM on Sep 6th 2008 by Randall
15. I can see the "Old School" gang doing this but not Seth Rogan, though he has the "nerdy" look that could pull off being a professor like the original three.
I love the idea of adding Hank Azaria to the mix. He was hilarious in "Mystery Men" and would be hilarious in a GB movie. To take the original cast out, though, would ruin it for this 40-something mom who's kids love the first two more than you can imagine.
Posted at 9:04PM on Sep 6th 2008 by Nancy
16. I think Eric has set up a pretty solid formula. Let's look at the latest indy: Mutt was prolly the best thing about it. Indy was a liiiiitle too old, and it showed. If you take a movie seriously on it's own as a genuine chapter in a franchise rather than riding the coat tles of its prequels while winking to the audience the whole time it's just lazy.
One point though, it's not easy guarenteeing the bankability of the apatow crew by the time it's released... they're everywhere right now, and run the risk of over exposure. Keep the brains and hire some new brawn. Maybe Danny Mcbride...!!!
Posted at 12:04AM on Sep 7th 2008 by mojination
17. Sorry but the Apatow crew is completely wrong for the Ghostbusters. Just a rehash of a previously mentioned idea brought up on here for the lack of a better one. Point at the young comedy team presently in the spotlight and there's no thought required. The problem is that most of the members are funny and/or believable only in a very narrow scope of roles. Ghostbusters falls outside of that scope.
Plenty more fun could potentially be had in the Ghostbusters universe, but those attempting a revival must tread lightly. If it's not going to be done with a deep respect and understanding for the originals, then it shouldn't be done at all. The successful formula has already been derived. It doesn't need to be adjusted for "hipness" as so frequently happens with Hollywood remakes. If you convey a compelling story successfully then it doesn't need to be tailored or dumbed down.
Posted at 12:36AM on Sep 7th 2008 by skapig
18. Good read. I personally would still like the movie to focus on the original cast. The only real appeal of having a third film is to soak in the nostalgia of the Ghostbusters on screen again.
Regardless of how they've aged, I don't see how that comes into play. Ghostbusters weren't known for their sex appeal but for the humor and charm they all brought to the table. As for the physicality of the films,...I don't really remember anything too challenging.
As much as I like the crew of step 1 (Freaks and Geeks will always be my favorite show)...let them make their own movie. Ghostbusters is mine.
Posted at 6:19PM on Sep 15th 2008 by Sucker for my childhood
19. I actually think bringing back the old team would work really well in a Space Cowboys/Rocky Balboa sort of way...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whS_lTan8Ik
Posted at 5:00PM on Sep 16th 2008 by whoiseyevan
20. I think that having some young guns get trained by the original GB's. Then have the new GB's get in over their heads on a call. Then the original GB's have to strap on their old stuff and rescue them! Then the Original GB's can pass them the torch...
Posted at 4:57PM on Sep 18th 2008 by Shagger
Add your comments
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.
1. The ghostbusters actors are in their mid to late 50's.
They are pefectly capable of running around with proton packs.
Besides if you look at the original movies it's not like they were that physically challenging.
Heck the way you make it sound they may as well make the Ghostbusters movie a teen movie with 15-18yr olds.....then they'd have no problem running around with Proton packs right? Actually that wouldn't be too bad of an idea......
Posted at 5:42PM on Sep 5th 2008 by DosFreak