• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Ghostbusters (2016) Trailer #1 (Feig, Wiig, McCarthy, McKinnon, Jones)

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's okay. Leslie Jones' character is all kinds of cringe (it's 2016, and the sassy black woman is still the go-to black female archetype?), but at least the effects look great and the other leads seem fine.
 
Trying to introduce parity between the two casts is silly

McKinnon is Egon? Except whoops she has an entirely different personality. Oh, she's Ray? Except she approaches science in a completely different way.
 
Is this a serious adaptation of Ghostbusters? The originals were great movies, however I'm unsure if they can successfully pull off having the same concept with a different style of humor.
 
Phil0sophy said:
This looks so bland and dialed in, the way it's shot isn't really fitting with the "ghostbusters" vibe and the CG looks utterly awful quite frankly. I am sure it will get a few laughs and pull on a few nostalgia strings but quite frankly I think the director is way out of his depth and it shows.

The way it is shot reminds me of any other bland Hollywood half funny motion picture, it does not give me the sort of "amazing" vibe I would expect from a reboot of such a great franchise.

To it's credit all the ladies seem very funny and a good fit but the actual movie itself just seems dialed in and forced and in some sort of weird hammy comfort zone, I can't put my finger on it but it seems "fake" where as the originals just had a more realistic look to them (despite it being about ghosts)
Click to expand...

Feel pretty much the same about it.
 
It's been ages since I've sat down and actually rewatched the OG - too long, as a matter of fact. I'll watch it again and then revisit the trailer, but in the meantime, I liked what I saw.

I get the complaints, but i like the cast and am gonna keep being optimistic. Usually very wary about remakes.
 
Messypandas said:
So the "ooze" is regressing the buildings back to the 1970's
Click to expand...

Mid/ late 60's era Ford sedan and ghost dressed like a 60's- 70's era pedestrian with suit, tie and hat:

KZ0tL2P.png
 
PeterVenkman said:
It's been ages since I've sat down and actually rewatched the OG - too long, as a matter of fact. I'll watch it again and then revisit the trailer, but in the meantime, I liked what I saw.

I get the complaints, but i like the cast and am gonna keep being optimistic. Usually very wary about remakes.
Click to expand...

Whoa, didn't know you were in the neighborhood
 
CLEANIN' UP THE TOWN: Remembering Ghostbusters

Sony Pictures have graciously given us THREE PAIRS of tickets for the WORLD PREMIERE of GHOSTBUSTERS in NEW YORK CITY on July 11th 2016!

Directed by Paul Feig and staring Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig, Michael Kenneth Williams, Kate McKinnon and Chris Hemsworth. You and your guest will be able to walk the red carpet with the stars of the new movie and watch the film before it release on July 15. You need to make your only travel and accommodation arrangements but at least you can go there and say your an Executive Producer of the Ghostbusters Documentary! As we have also added the EXECUTIVE PRODUCER credit as an extra incentive.

The price is $5,000 (USD) or £3,550 (GBP) so please help spread the word.
Click to expand...

GHOSTHEADS - A documentary about Ghostbusters and their fans

Regardless what you think of the reboot or the trailer, I honestly feel that both of these Kickstarter projects are very amazing undertakings and worth funding by Ghostbuster fans!
 
MrCunningham said:
Mid/ late 60's era Ford sedan and ghost dressed like a 60's- 70's era pedestrian with suit, tie and hat:

KZ0tL2P.png
Click to expand...

Ok, so they're -definitely- doing some timey wimey shit. It wouldn't surprise me if that's the big hook of the movie.

That might explain why the trailer is so...shite. Anything tied to that part of the movie might've been marked as off limits beyond the small bits we saw
 
BronsonLee said:
Ok, so they're -definitely- doing some timey wimey shit. It wouldn't surprise me if that's the big hook of the movie.

That might explain why the trailer is so...shite. Anything tied to that part of the movie might've been marked as off limits beyond the small bits we saw
Click to expand...

The ghosts of 70s New York trying to take over 2016 New York would actually be kind of awesome.
 
openrob said:
I have a problem with it, and the problem is that the tone is soo vastly different from the originals, and not in a good way.

The originals were subtle and mature (I mean as much as any film about ghost fighting can be!). This new film, it's a kids flick.

It's all guns blazing, slapstick and awkward comedy. It's too self aware and the characters seem to typecast with no real personality other than a funnel for the comedy.

I can't even think of examples properly from the originals, but them mentioning how they made ray remortgage to get them going, or the talk they have in the car about religion whilst having a smoke. Not every scene was cartoonish.
Click to expand...

And how much of that came through in the original trailer for it? There's one joke that kind of lands ("Is this a trick a question?") but for the most part you don't see any of the camaraderie or humor that helped make the original a classic. And you also don't see any of the "subtlety" either - it's a flat, largely expository trailer that says nothing about the quality of writing in the actual film.

Some people in here - and even more so in the YouTube comments - are looking at a 2 minute trailer and thinking they know the intricacies of the film. What it lacks, what it has too much of, why it's going to fail, etc. They're not looking at it for what it is - a trailer.

There have been a ton of great films that came out with poor trailers (Scott Pilgrim vs. The World was a big one for me) for anyone to be certain that they know how good or bad this one will be. Re-watching the trailer, I actually find it funnier and more endearing than the first time. I see the chemistry between the characters and I like the bits of dialogue at play. Don't treat it as Deadpool - a film whose humor is focused on a bunch of giffable, memeable insult humor, but something more akin to, well, Feig's other films like Bridesmaids. It'll be a film that likely lives and breathes when all the parts are watched back to back.

I'm looking forward to all the whiny YouTube commenters that are so certain this film will be bad and/or flop. There are those that genuinely don't think it looks very funny and, hey, more power to them. But there are just as many who oppose it because "It's not the Ghostbosters I know" or some variation of that well-worn argument.
 
Phil0sophy said:
This looks so bland and dialed in, the way it's shot isn't really fitting with the "ghostbusters" vibe and the CG looks utterly awful quite frankly. I am sure it will get a few laughs and pull on a few nostalgia strings but personally I think the director is way out of his depth and it shows.

The way it is shot reminds me of any other bland Hollywood half funny motion picture, it does not give me the sort of "amazing" vibe I would expect from a reboot of such a great franchise.

To it's credit all the ladies seem very funny and a good fit but the actual movie itself just seems dialed in and forced and in some sort of weird hammy comfort zone, I can't put my finger on it but it seems "fake" where as the originals just had a more realistic look to them (despite it being about ghosts)
Click to expand...

Ghostbusters (the original) has a fairly uncommon look for a comedy, in that it's not really shot like a comedy. The palette is muted and the lighting is naturalistic and not afraid to use shadows.
 
Beefy said:
When they call it a reboot yet then have "30yrs ago" in the opening credits, that is misleading.
Click to expand...

We're nitpicking here, and I might buy your argument if the trailer didn't consist of roughly 75 percent callbacks to a film that played 30 years ago.
 
Phil0sophy said:
That's what made it so great though, the comedy spoke for itself, it didn't rely on cheap gags and reference humor and it wasn't shot like some modern day cop buddy movie, that's how this feels, like a comedy parody or a skit of some sort.

Maybe it's just personal preference but I think it looks cheap.
Click to expand...

Oh I'm not saying it's a problem with the original--it's just the difference you were picking up on.
 
Alex_Mexico said:
1) it was Kung-Fu, not Karate. It offended me that they still called it Karate Kid as if we're all dumb and wouldn't know otherwise.

2) A good movie? You bet? Better than the original? No goddamn way.
Click to expand...

Nah. I stand all the way behind that reboot. It was great. Rewatching both back to back? Pat Morita carries the original film entirely. New Karate Kid works much better.
 
MC Safety said:
We're nitpicking here, and I might buy your argument if the trailer didn't consist of roughly 75 percent callbacks to a film that played 30 years ago.
Click to expand...

How am I nitpicking? It's meant to be a reboot, why even say "30yrs ago" etc. I have nothing against it really apart from it being stupid marketing. But can see why people would get confused. The trailer has far more issues (for me) then the marketing.
 
Phil0sophy said:
Also I don't know why people keep trying to make this about people not liking the movie just because they are women as leads, that's a small percentage of ignorant people.
Click to expand...

Me either. It's especially funny that people are blaming the usual trolls for the trailer's poor reception in the same comments where they're saying it was bad. "When I don't like a thing, it's okay. When others don't, it's probably because of ulterior motives." Yes, yes, tiresome argumentative types, people who hate women do exist. But thinking a trailer still using "the power of X compels you jokes" and super tired stereotypes is aggressively unfunny isn't some super secret sexist dog whistle.
 
DoctorWho said:
I liked it but I do recall the trailers leading up to it getting a lot of hate on here. I don't recall its dislike numbers though.
Click to expand...

It got a decent about of hate but I think a lot of people just gave up after a while because 1) the movie didn't look that hot and 2) the trailers made it look like they very clearly missed the point of RoboCop (which they did)
 
I love the original movie. It's one of my favorite movies of all time. The sequel wasn't bad but I didn't like it anywhere near as much as the original. From the trailer of the 2016 movie I think I'm going to like it. It looks like fun, I like the cast and nothing stood out as "ayy this is pure shit". Hopefully it'll sit between the original and part 2 in my personal ranking. I already know in my heart it would be impossible to top the original as I'm too attached to it lol.
 
MC Safety said:
We're nitpicking here, and I might buy your argument if the trailer didn't consist of roughly 75 percent callbacks to a film that played 30 years ago.
Click to expand...


I don't know if that is really nitpicking. Some of the larger youtube channels that did reaction videos for the trailer (like Screenjunkies and AngryJoe) were confused and calling this a sequel. One of my friends at work thought it was a sequel based on the opening. I could only image that there has been a lot of confusion based on the poorly worded introduction. That is misleading advertising.


17 Seconds said:
or maybe he has more info than just a trailer, and he knows the movie actually is good.
Click to expand...

Well, Dan Aykroyd is an executive producer on the movie (I'm not sure if that really means anything?), so I have a feeling that he may have at least seen one early test screening. But I don't think his involvement goes much deeper than having a cameo and getting a producer credit.
 
Dick Justice said:
Even shitty remakes like Robocop 2014 didn't get this much vitriol.
Click to expand...

RoboCop is liked well enough, hell even Total Recall, but Ghostbusters was a cultural phenomenon. I was a big part of a lot of people's childhood in the late 80s and early 90s.

I would imagine the same thing would have happened had Disney bought Star Wars and said, "We don't want to beholden ourselves to the prior 6 films, so we are starting fresh and recasting all roles and reimagining the entire universe." Expanded Universes getting shelved was fine, since most casual fans don't read the books, comics, or watch the shows. Nothing important was lost. Hell, we know Lucas got plenty of push back from fans for the prequels.

As has said before, this current situation likely wouldn't have come up had the series remained in the public sphere for much of the last 30 years. There was 5 years between the two films. There was 6 years between the two cartoon series. There is nearly 20 years between the last cartoon and this film and 27 years between GB2 and this reboot. Its all the fandom has known for decades, and even the recent video game made huge efforts to stay loyal to the series-- even setting this game in 1991. The IDW comics are even set in the early 1990s.

Had they been making cartoons, films and games all these years, the franchise wouldn't have been viewed as completely untouchable.
 
Holy crap, that was fucking terrible. Oh Sony, you've always been a shitty movie studio but you've been going the extra mile with your incompetence the last 3-4 years.
 
MrCunningham said:
I don't know if that is really nitpicking. Some of the larger youtube channels that did reaction videos for the trailer (like Screenjunkies and AngryJoe) were confused and calling this a sequel. One of my friends at work thought it was a sequel based on the opening. I could only image that there has been a lot of confusion based on the poorly worded introduction. That is misleading advertising.




Well, Dan Aykroyd is an executive producer on the movie (I'm not sure if that really means anything?), so I have a feeling that he may have at least seen one early test screening. But I don't think his involvement goes much deeper than having a cameo and getting a producer credit.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure Bill Murray has been positive about the film, and he's never seemed like the kind of person to bullshit.
 
A Link to the Past said:
I'm pretty sure Bill Murray has been positive about the film, and he's never seemed like the kind of person to bullshit.
Click to expand...


I could only imagine that Bill Murray has a pretty good rapport with most of the people on this project. He did co-star with Melissa McCarthy in the movie St. Vincent. He also once said that he would only return for a third Ghostbusters movie if the script/ players were good or if they killed his character off.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A Magnificent Life Trailer #1 (2026)
4
160
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt replied
Train Dreams | Official Trailer | Joel Edgerton, Felicity Jones
7
501
DKehoe replied
Jennifer Runyon, ‘Ghostbusters’ and ‘Charles in Charge’ Actress, Dies at 65
8
236
Chuck Berry replied
Train Dreams (2025, Joel Edgerton, William H. Macy, Felicity Jones)
7
226
Miyazaki’s Slave replied
King & Conqueror - Series 1 | Trailer - BBC
4
329
AJUMP23 replied
Top Bottom