Take our user survey and make your voice heard.

Who you gonna call? 'Ghostbusters' is back in business


The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

Can't they make anything anymore?

Do they have to remake every good movie ever made?

The avoidance of any financial risk by the studios is putting out non-stop regurgitation. Come on.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Why would I pay to watch this when the originals are available for free for Amazon Prime members?

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

I'm guessing this movie will top out around $80 million at the most. Likely less than $50 million. It looks horrible.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Can't stand the new Ecto-1. Seeing the trailer... the humour looked rubbish. Don't hate the fact it is an all female team, but hate the way it was promoted like "an all female team nya nya nya nya nya nyaaaaa"

I guess it can't be as bad as my expectations... I should probably go see it. It might surprise me.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I'm one of the dislikes on the YouTube video, and it's because it looks like unfunny minimum effort garbage.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

They couldn't pay me to watch this. Come on, Hollywood. Get creative and stop trying to run on the fumes of great classic comedies!

4 ( +5 / -1 )

I'd like to see Leslie Jones make some more movies actually. She is one of the funniest members of SNL and McCarthy and Wiig are both getting quite corny.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I'll probably waste money to see this anyways. But I'm not expecting much. I think the one thing I'm going to stick to the idiot writers for this screenplay is they didn't seem to comprehend that Ghostbusters 1&2 weren't just about comedy, but about WITTY comedy!

Two of my favorite lines in the previous film.

"Oh, no thank you, I think you have at least two people inside you already...."


"Next time someone asks you if you're a god Ray, say YES!"

I'd be shocked if they had something even close to that.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

If you don't find it funny, you're a sexist. You're implying women can't be funny, and supporting the sexist and un-PC nature of the first generation.

Not funny= sexist? That's a huge step. One could almost say a giant leap for mankind- Oh no, I'm sexist.

How about it's not funny because it's not funny.

Aside from the all female cast, it's completely unoriginal.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

I was happily surprised when I saw Battleship 2012 a few nights ago. Never even heard of it before. I'm not saying it's great, but it was an original idea and funny/quirky/witty/sincere enough to really enjoy it.

I might be writing the same thing about this GB's movie in 3 or 4 years. I'll give it a try, but I won't pay for it.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Nope. No, no, nope, nope, no.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Just watched the Ghostbusters:Video game "movie". It had everything one could ask for. It is supposedly the Ghostbusters 3, just interactive. It also had that witty humour that we know and love. Worth watching if you have the chance!

Watching Walter Peck get possessed is hilarious! And the in game dialogue is really worth hearing as Ramis was still alive to do voice overs for the game.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Speed: "Do they have to remake every good movie ever made?"

While I agree that remakes and reboots are become ridiculous, there ARE some that work and make the movies/shows better. I don't think this will be one of them, but I also don't think it can be disregarded as just "another remake" or lacking in creativity because it is an interesting spin using all women.

Again, I don't think it'll be worth watching if you're going to compare it to the original, which everyone will, but it might be interesting in and of itself. I'm going to pass, I think.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I dressed up as a Ghostbuster for halloween in 1984, my mom made the costume for me. So I am pretty old school about these movies and was not super psyched with the idea of rebooting them. This was especially the case when Dan Akroyd was the one pushing for it. He was in a lot of good stuff in the 80s, but Ghostbusters did not need the treatment he gave to the Blues Brothers sequel.

I am going to hold off judgment on this one until I have seen it though. The trailer didn't have me laughing much, but there are a lot of great comedies whose trailers didn't do them justice. I like the fact that it is a female cast mainly because it automatically differentiates it from the originals and allows them to cast people based on their comedic talents rather than on how much they look like Harold Ramis, Bill Murray, etc. Also gives them avenues for giving the film its own charecter in a way an all male cast might have had difficulty with. In the end though its basically a question of whether it is funto watch or not, which will be seen in due time...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Remaking a movie that does not need remaking. Why?

If the trailer is anything to go by, this will bomb at the box office. It will probably be on Netflix by Christmas.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

THe original "Ghostbusters" came out in 1975... had a "talking monkey"... Columbia Pictures did pay Filmation for a license to use the name). This is the "fourth" movie~

0 ( +0 / -0 )

THe original "Ghostbusters" came out in 1975... had a "talking monkey"... Columbia Pictures did pay Filmation for a license to use the name). This is the "fourth" movie~

This is the third movie. "The Ghost Busters" (1975) was a TV show.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

shh quiet, do you smell that? -- one of the many jokes in the original that had wit and intelligence that sadly hasn't been repeated since 1984.

he slimed me -- got such a howl of laughter in the theatres. Added to the whole funky success to the movie and Bill Murray's rise to fandom

Given the panning of the remake I'll not even bother watching trailers or see it. Humour by committee yikes

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The trailer so far looks so sad it's just a shame. I wouldn't have cared if they had an all female cast, but the way they wrote it looks like stoopid comedy. Doesn't require brain cells to function to get the "jokes". 3 of them are cast as goofs and geeks instead of smart intelligent scientists with humor. Egon was monotone super intelligent but could drop a joke with a dead serious face. Ray was more like the curious scientist and would run headlong into danger with a smile on his face just because it was exciting. Venkman rarely showed his collegiate education, And although Winston wasn't a scientist, he was just an average Joe that happened to need a job and ended up being a ghost buster, he brough the more "street smart" personal belief perspective.

Some other nuggets of gold from the video game "movie":

Winston: Ray, if there are any possessor ghosts around you, you'd better not get possessed again...

Ray over radio: Brogga hwroaga wargarga!

Museum Curator: Will he be ok after all that?

Winston: Sure he'll be fine, won't you Ray?

Ray in slurred speech: Ahhh thank ahlll beer all rawhawhu..

Venkman to woman: Your eyes are quite lovely when they're not the color of burning coal embers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No, I think I will call somebody else!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites