Ghostbusters Reboot/3

I've always liked the idea of a Ghostbuster who took the job because he's a con artist and was under the belief that the entire business was fraudulent from the get-go, and is genuinely surprised to discover at the worst possible moment that what he assumed to be a far-fetched scam operation has very real job expectations of him.

IIRC, most of this save the con artist part applies to Eduardo in Extreme.

Some more/clearer pics.

Neil Casey will be playing the film's Big Bad. A shame, I was really pulling for those Peter Dinklage rumors!

So...

Is anyone even remotely hoping this will be good?

Extreme Ghostbusters, EXTREME though it may have been, was one of my favorite shows as a kid.

If this movie does not equal or surpass it in every way possible I will consider the movie an utter failure in every sense of the word.

Here's the car.

Why wouldn't we?

edited 7th Jul '15 11:44:09 PM by comicwriter

Yes. Why?

A look at the costumes and Proton Packs.

The team assembled.

This is going to bomb but it will be worth it for this movie to exist.

#whoyougonnacall

Anyone else like how... non-sexy they look?

Makes sense. The originals weren't sexy unless you like Hollywood Geeks in janitorial outfits. There's no sense just making this a genderswap if you're going to completely change the tone of the movie and make it something else entirely.

I'm not bothered by them looking fairly unsexy (we're not talking about a Rule 34 version or a porn parody, after all ), but the two to the left on that hashtagged image seem a bit too much on the chunky side to me.

I mean, the originals were hardly modern incarnations of Adonis, but I just can't picture them running around after ghosts, unless there's going to be something like the stairway scene towards the end of the original, with the guys wheezing and such, acknowledging the fact that they're not athletes.

Not that I expect anything like that in the reboot. Can't make being overweight seem like it's actually unhealthy or anything like that, because it'd be "fat shaming".

(And as for the new Ecto-1, I'm fine with it. Using a 1959 car in 2015 is doable, but not easily so; a used 80s land yacht is much more plausible for me. Cheap to pick up, and not so old that you need to have a heavy auto mechanic background and the ability to scrounge up or outright manufacture parts that no longer exist or are otherwise too expensive to buy due to rarity.)

The Ghostbusters were always scientists first. Becoming Ghostbusters is probably the most exercise they ever got in their lives.

I'm just saying it is good to see a Hollywood film that avoids the Hot Scientist trope. Successful comedians, even female comedians, don't need to be good looking, only funny.

I mean, I disagree with phrasing it that they're not good looking, but I do agree that it's good that we're getting more clearly-nonsexualized female characters in movies.

Not being sexualized and not being attractive are not the same thing.

edited 10th Jul '15 3:17:57 PM by Zarek

Good point.

There's a fetish for everything, so it's better to just say they're not conventionally attractive while wearing those uniforms.

I would like to say I don't t really dig the uniforms. They seemed to have been desgined by a dime store concept artist to me.

They're scientists, not fashion artists. Probably the cheapest they could get. In-universe.

Is it me, or Kate Mc Kinnon really, really looks like a Genderswapped Cartoon!Egon?

edited 10th Jul '15 6:27:48 PM by NapoleonDeCheese

Mythology Gag perhaps?

People have already been comparing the looks on Twitter and the like, from what I've seen.

Is Leslie Jones really tall or are the others really short?