• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Dan Aykroyd blasts Paul Feig, says he's not welcome at Sony after Ghostbusters

In context of Aykroyd's comments, I think it is comparable since he explicitly says that Ghostbusters made a lot of money around the world.

Like I said in my previous post, it grossed ~$230m worldwide. Rogue One, for a budget of 1.4x of Ghostbusters, grossed over 4x the amount it did. Granted it was a part of a major franchise so that would've probably always been the case, but the budget for Ghostbusters was way larger than it had to be.
 

-shadow-

Member
Both Fieg and Pascal ruined a potential good film. The one had a terrible vision and made it clear in the leaked emails that he'd only do it with complete freedom and Pascal for some reason gave that to him (which undoubtedly skyrocketed the budget). The movie could've done just fine without the ridiculous budget it had, but ~144 million (plus 100 million marketing) for a silly ghost comedy is insane. It's a shame that the series is probably dead due to Fieg for another twenty years before it gets a new shot. Would honestly like a sequel to the reboot with a much better script and director at the helm.


Like I said in my previous post, it grossed ~$230m worldwide. Rogue One, for a budget of 1.4x of Ghostbusters, grossed over 4x the amount it did. Granted it was a part of a major franchise so that would've probably always been the case, but the budget for Ghostbusters was way larger than it had to be.
I honestly think it could've faired a lot better if they didn't go with the whole misogyny aspect with regards to the pre-release. Man what a mess that was and I've heard from so many they haven't yet and never will watch it just because of that stunt.
 
Aykroyd’s comments are contradictory to his praise for the film when it initially released in 2016.

This is completely inaccurate. He praised the movie itself. What he's criticising here is Feig overspending and not shooting scenes that needed to be shot.
 
I was also disappointed with Feig's direction of Ghostbusters, but Dan Aykroyd, the writer/producer/director of Nothing But Trouble, should probably temper his directorial criticisms​.

And that film went over budget too, back in the 90's, lol. I like Akyroyd, and while I absolutely agree with him regarding that budget thing, keep in mind he hasn't been in a huge amount of the quality in the past two decades either, and instead has been relying on claiming that he wants to reboot a franchise like Ghostbusters for example.
 

Abounder

Banned
Getting banned in China was also a kick in the balls. Might as well have made it rated-R ala Deadpool if you're going to go all-in on Feig

Sounds like shitty producers getting a pass as usual in this industry.

Most GB producers are still chugging along in the industry but worth noting that producer Amy Pascal was basically fired before release (also thanks to other flops + North Korea).
 

Foggy

Member
Some of the best movies by some of the best directors spurned suggestions from producers and suits and went way over budget and are all the better for it. Unfortunately it sounds like Feig rolled the dice and lost out big time.
 
I am arguably the biggest supporter of this thing but even 110 million pre 40 million reshoots was ridiculous. It was doomed by budget before anything else happened.


It's too bad Feig fucked up the financials because I'd have liked to see him around still.

Oh well such is life.

It's too bad Feig was such an uncompromising asshole.

He did nothing to deserve the amount of rope that he was given on that picture.
 

Fury451

Banned
To be fair his performance probably would have felt the same even if it was a real ghostbusters movie.

True. He gave up a long time ago on anything that isn't a passion project it seems.

But when your performance as Garfield has more effort....
 
It's too bad Feig was such an uncompromising asshole.

He did nothing to deserve the amount of rope that he was given on that picture.

Don't know that I'd call him an asshole mind you.


Studio should never have ok'd 110 million. That's on them for giving it to him.

Feig had done great work for a lot less
 
The film's issues are all down to the director I think.

The writing is pretty bad as well.

They had enough acting talent that even a mediocre script should have made for a decent movie.

Instead the writing was Sandler-esque.

Honestly the movie would have been much better with the exact same main cast but as it's own action comedy instead of being weighed down by an overrated movie franchise from 30 years ago, but that wouldn't get a huge budget because Hollywood hates original shit.

No nostalgia for the franchise + bad trailers made me avoid it for awhile but I finally bit a couple weeks ago when I was bored. Wish I hadn't bothered tbh.
 

btrboyev

Member
Paul Feig, the cast, and Katie Dippold have all done incredible work elsewhere. I think that sometimes movies just fail to come together.

OR like a lot of people have said and is very important. It should have never been made.

Nobody wanted this version of the ghostbusters. Has nothing to do with being female or the CG or it being a reboot. Ghostbusters fans wanted closure to the series they knew.
 

Chococat

Member
Good. The Ghostbuster reboot should have been easy film.

The actors and general plot was all there, but it was edited into a terrible disjointed mess. I wish there was studio edition put together by someone other than Feig that would put back in the complete character arcs.
 

Trokil

Banned
The movie was terrible on the most essential level. This movie was a total disaster when it came to the pure craft and probably any film student could do better. This includes the editing, the cinematography and the plot (the script)

Feig is a director without any real talent, because he has no idea how to make a good and interesting movie. He is the king of generic comedy pretty much on the same level as Adam Sandler. He used the same lazy "don't care for a good script let's improvise" attitude which also gave us abominations like Pixels, his generic comedies or the Adam Sandler crap of the last few years. Those movies are pretty much the same, when you boil it all down. Yes of course, Feig casts women so they are better than Adam Sandler movies I get it.

And the most laughable thing, you could not talk about the obvious lack of any creativity or art or skill because this movie was so important, even film critics did not dare talking about, because the one who did was getting death threats.
 
The writing is pretty bad as well.

They had enough acting talent that even a mediocre script should have made for a decent movie.

Instead the writing was Sandler-esque.

Honestly the movie would have been much better with the exact same main cast but as it's own action comedy instead of being weighed down by an overrated movie franchise from 30 years ago, but that wouldn't get a huge budget because Hollywood hates original shit.

No nostalgia for the franchise + bad trailers made me avoid it for awhile but I finally bit a couple weeks ago when I was bored. Wish I hadn't bothered tbh.

Woah, lets not say things we cant take back.
 
I enjoyed the film but I'm still mystified as to why Sony gave this movie such a high budget in the first place. You can easily make a Ghostbusters movie for like $70 mil and it would be much easier to turn a profit. No need for it to be as special-effects-heavy as a superhero movie.

Feig is a good director but I think he ventured too far out of his element on this one.
 

Kevin

Member
I enjoyed the film but I'm still mystified as to why Sony gave this movie such a high budget in the first place. You can easily make a Ghostbusters movie for like $70 mil and it would be much easier to turn a profit. No need for it to be as special-effects-heavy as a superhero movie.

Feig is a good director but I think he ventured too far out of his element on this one.

I completely agree with you. They should have gone with new actors, more practical effects and something a little more gritty in tone with the original films. Could have done it on like a $70 million dollar budget and would have been a huge success if the writing was there.
 
OR like a lot of people have said and is very important. It should have never been made.

Nobody wanted this version of the ghostbusters. Has nothing to do with being female or the CG or it being a reboot. Ghostbusters fans wanted closure to the series they knew.

Which we can never have because Harold Ramis is dead. So, you either want to the franchise to die or for it to be rebooted.
 
The original four Ghostbusters?

For a LOT of people, Ghostbusters = Peter, Ray, Egon, Winston, and those characters are synonymous with their actors. Like in the brains of many, if those people are not involved, even as cartoon characters, then it's just not Ghostbusters. Ghostbusters can only be Ghostbusters if it includes those characters.

Ha, my bad. I read that as movies and not characters.

Wtf are ya'll talking about with this "closure on the original Ghostbusters" nonsense? It's a goofy action comedy, not The Sopranos.

We're emotion animals and nostalgia is a hell of a drug. I love it, I respect it.
 

FyreWulff

Member
OR like a lot of people have said and is very important. It should have never been made.

Nobody wanted this version of the ghostbusters. Has nothing to do with being female or the CG or it being a reboot. Ghostbusters fans wanted closure to the series they knew.

.. what needed closure in the GB universe?

bustin' makes them feel good
 
Oof. So Akroyd still thinks it was a good movie....Feige ended up reshooting and adding scenes that Sony and Akroyd suggested should be there, he just didn't do it when first told. So yeah. Shame. I wish Akroyd would just admit the movie was hot garbage. Too bad it was, since the cast really is great.
 

noquarter

Member
Except for Melissa McCarthy, she was awful in this movie IMO.
I think this is my favorite role of hers (guess her Sean Spicer is also pretty good). Don't think the movie is that great, but think she and the rest of the cast was decent.
 

-Gozer-

Member
Should've made a Nothing But Trouble remake instead.

No need.

That movie is perfection itself.

bad-makeup-nothing-buttrouble.jpg

a2-RH4.gif
 

Timu

Member
I think this is my favorite role of hers (guess her Sean Spicer is also pretty good). Don't think the movie is that great, but think she and the rest of the cast was decent.
I just didn't find her funny at all and found her annoying. At least the others tried and gave me a few laughs(very few though).
 

ElRenoRaven

Member
Except for Melissa McCarthy, she was awful in this movie IMO.

She is awful in everything she is in. The only exception is her as Spicey. She is one of the most unfunny people I've seen. Doesn't help that a lot of her movies have had Feig in the directors chair. Speaking of which he was another bad choice. He hasn't made a movie I found funny yet.

No need.

That movie is perfection itself.

bad-makeup-nothing-buttrouble.jpg

a2-RH4.gif
That movie really is underrated.
 

Busty

Banned
Aykroyd's been yabbering on about Ghostbusters for the best part of the last twenty years, even going as far as to develop sequels scripts on spec, and nothing happened.

The last Ghostbusters film wasn't just a failure at the box office, it was a failure in terms of merchandising too. Sony thought there was potential in a Ghostbusters cineverse, they found out that there is now and are not doubling down on a weird knock-off Spidey cineverse instead.
 

DeathyBoy

Banned
The writing is pretty bad as well.

They had enough acting talent that even a mediocre script should have made for a decent movie.

Instead the writing was Sandler-esque.

Honestly the movie would have been much better with the exact same main cast but as it's own action comedy instead of being weighed down by an overrated movie franchise from 30 years ago, but that wouldn't get a huge budget because Hollywood hates original shit.

No nostalgia for the franchise + bad trailers made me avoid it for awhile but I finally bit a couple weeks ago when I was bored. Wish I hadn't bothered tbh.

If it was Sandler style people would have gone to see it.
 
Wtf are ya'll talking about with this "closure on the original Ghostbusters" nonsense? It's a goofy action comedy, not The Sopranos.

It probably comes more from comments that Aykroyd has made about where he wanted to take the franchise, than anything in the movies themselves feeling like a dangling plot line.

Like, he wanted to do a story where Ghostbusters was franchised out across the US, envisioning a fleet of Ecto-1s crossing the Golden Gate Bridge. He also wanted to send the Ghostbusters to hell. Fans probably would have liked to see those ideas.

He also spoke of wanting to do a girl Ghostbuster, and while we did just get a movie with four of them, I'm sure fans would have liked to see not only how Aykroyd would have done it, but also to see a woman Ghostbuster interacting with the established characters.

Additionally he talked about his vision for a "passing the torch" movie, where the GBs are old and at the ends of their lives and careers, and they bring in new recruits. A necessary evil for the continuation of the franchise but I feel like people would have been more accepting of it if it came from the creator of the series.

So "closure" might just mean wanting to see the stuff talked about for the past 30 years finally get made?
 
Honestly it's amazing to me how when it comes to the new Ghostbusters (Which I thought was pretty okay. Not great, but perfectly serviceable), people are so quick to fill in what's actually being said with their own opinions on the matter, ignoring what's actually being said. I don't understand how it's such a firey subject.
 
He was going to at first. Ivan & Dan had been trying for years (even before Ramis died) to get GBIII to exist but Sony continually dragged their feet and purposefully scuttled it.

Uhhhh no not really, every story I've heard is that Murray didn't want to do it (he complained endlessly about GBII and also only made it to get another movie made) and he was the constant holdout, always moving the goalpoast for what would get him to be in it.

Before Feig came on and convinced Sony to let him do a reboot, Sony was reportedly looking for a way to sue Bill Murray to force him to sign off on a GB III since they could only ever make a sequel with his approval because of the way the contract was set up (everyone had to be in on it for it to be made).

Now Sony finally bought out the rights so they can do whatever they want with the IP without needing the original people to sign off on everything. They set up GhostCorps to oversee the GB franchise and put Aykroyd and Reitman in charge of it and even though Answer the Call failed they're still gonna pump out more stuff, like the animated GB film, the Ecto Force animated series, supposedly a live action show and undoubtedly more to announce with the anniversary coming up in a week or two.

I mean Ghostbusters as a concept is one of the most easily franchisable things you can think of, I find it hard to believe Sony would drag their feet over making countless sequels and spinoffs especially since they were the ones that demanded GBII after they saw the success the first movie and TV show had.
 

blastprocessor

The Amiga Brotherhood
What l heard the movie was bad l thought it couldn't be that bad. When l saw it conclusion was it was bad. How they made the script worse than the original is unforgivable,
 
And you know Murray didn't want to.

Except one of the many aborted scripts planned around that by having Venkman dead (the Venkman is a ghost script). Whether that would have worked remains to be seen, but Sony continually used that as a crutch to keep from doing it until Remakes became a big thing in Hollywood and by then it was too late.
 

sn00zer

Member
Im always worried Sony Pictures is going to take down the rest of Sony. But from what i understand it is a totally aepwrate business? Can anyone explain
 
Top Bottom