Dreamcasting #11 - GHOSTBUSTERS (closes 4th November)

I really like Ourchair's cast, but two things bugged me.

One is the lack of Dana Barrett. She was the damsal in distress in both movies and I find it a bit unfair to leave her out.

Second is, even though you said it was a combination of the two movies, it just sounds like an updated version of II with Walter Peck thrown in.

Regardless, you have my vote.
 
Lynx said:
I really like Ourchair's cast, but two things bugged me.

One is the lack of Dana Barrett. She was the damsal in distress in both movies and I find it a bit unfair to leave her out.
Click to expand...
I was trying to figure out a way to shoe-horn her in, but I couldn't figure it out. I originally didn't have any ideas for Tully and Peck, but only came up with them yesterday.

Lynx said:
Second is, even though you said it was a combination of the two movies, it just sounds like an updated version of II with Walter Peck thrown in.
Click to expand...
Hmmm you're right. But I never said it was a 'combination' though, I said it was taking a cue from those films. And thus it was to follow in the footsteps of how modern aspects of 20th century culture such as high concept architecture and human behavior are directly responsible for bringing ectoplasmic evil into the world.

Lynx said:
Regardless, you have my vote.
Click to expand...
Why, thank you.

*beams*
 
Justin Long as Louis Tully is a ******* home run. Inspired decision.

I however, am a little... first things first - how did you do those quote boxes for the actors, because I want to do it forever.

Right, onto my 'critique'.

Ourchair will most likely win because he didn't give us a cast - he gave us a movie.

And a bloody good one. Seriously - it's wonderfully funny, original, and very well conceptualised. Like Langsta who got bonus points from me for casting Dracula as the villain (a bloody awesome idea), I loved the idea that the internet is the villain and that the major non-spiritual antagonist is not an environmental agent, but the head of a massmorg. These are the kinds of decisions which make me giddy with delight. You two created GREAT villains.

But Ourchair doesn't stop - no, he gives us a plot line (a pretty funny one) and some great characters: Winston Zeddemore made me laugh out loud as I imagined him suddenly panicking in the face of a 'ghost'. I think it's a brilliant improvement over the original.

So - by all rights, Ourchair should be total winatron. However - I like Ourchair's FILM. I'm not sure I like his cast. I don't really care for the Fantastic 4 guy, nor do I know his choice for Venkman well enough. I like Giamatti a lot, but I don't see him as a Ray Stanz. Not only that, I don't know his Winston, Janine - in fact, the only guy I properly know is Justin Long and I think it's a brilliant bit of casting.

So as a cast - I'm not impressed.

As a film - Ourchair, I would gladly give you $10 and 2 hours of my life for that film, that cast or a different one, I don't care. Hand on heart.
 
Last edited:
Bass said:
Justin Long as Louis Tully is a ******* home run. Inspired decision.

I however, am a little... first things first - how did you do those quote boxes for the actors, because I want to do it forever.

Right, onto my 'critique'.

Ourchair will most likely win because he didn't give us a cast - he gave us a movie.

And a bloody good one. Seriously - it's wonderfully funny, original, and very well conceptualised. Like Langsta who got bonus points from me for casting Dracula as the villain (a bloody awesome idea), I loved the idea that the internet is the villain and that the major non-spiritual antagonist is not an environmental agent, but the head of a massmorg. These are the kinds of decisions which make me giddy with delight. You two created GREAT villains.

But Ourchair doesn't stop - no, he gives us a plot line (a pretty funny one) and some great characters: Winston Zeddemore made me laugh out loud as I imagined him suddenly panicking in the face of a 'ghost'. I think it's a brilliant improvement over the original.

So - by all rights, Ourchair should be total winatron. However - I like Ourchair's FILM. I'm not sure I like his cast. I don't really care for the Fantastic 4 guy, nor do I know his choice for Venkman well enough. I like Giamatti a lot, but I don't see him as a Ray Stanz. Not only that, I don't know his Winston, Janine - in fact, the only guy I properly know is Justin Long and I think it's a brilliant bit of casting.

So as a cast - I'm not impressed.

As a film - Ourchair, I would gladly give you $10 and 2 hours of my life for that film, that cast or a different one, I don't care. Hand on heart.
Click to expand...

Completely agree, Ourchair has proven the whole "I'M THE ******* HOLLYWOOD GENIUSES!" thing
 
Ourchair has knocked it out of the park, but I need to see a Dana and I think Gruffudd is a really bad choice for Egon. I liked him in the F4 movies, but I still didn't buy him as a know-it-all genius and I don't buy it here. Also, I firmly believe he should be the oldest member of the group so he can feel like more of a reliable tentpole.

Still, knocked it out of the park. You've shown us that not only is this a fun concept and everything but that this movie could actually be made and be good.
 
damn, didnt realize we needed to have a plot for dreamcasting anymore.


note to self: when you come back next time (if you do) make sure to put a plot in with your cast.
 
Bass said:
You don't, but Ourchair went crazy and wrecked the grade curve.
Click to expand...

idk, maybe im just cranky cuz of my love life, but his seems to be a rehash of ghostbuster's 2, updated for the modern age, with a slightly above-average cast.

no offense, but thats the vibe ive pulled.
 
I love your cast and movie plot ourchair and you've got my vote unless someone can top it before the 4th.

I only have two tiny problems , like someone else mentioned it's more ghostbusters II (which I didn't really like) and no stay puft.
 
Ice said:
We all know you don't really get impressed unless the cast has Nathan Fillion and Famke Janssen. :p
Click to expand...

Ice, for your own personal safety, I would ask that you never put Nathan Fillion and Famke Janssen within SEVEN words of each other.

Better yet would be not to mention Nathan Fillion in the same sentence with any actor/actress who has done a decent film in modern history.

As an example, you could say "I hate Nathan Fillion but Charle Chaplin was an innovator", because Charlie Chaplin was doing movies back in the silent days before "talkies".

However, you couldn't say "Why the hell do people in Hollywood hire Nathan Fillion? WOW, that George Clooney is knockin' 'em dead in Ocean's 13!" Because that's less than seven words between "Fillion" and "George", and George is a great actor of modern history (let's just forget his turn at playing Batman, though, shall we?).

Dig?
 
Willverine said:
George is a great actor of modern history (let's just forget his turn at playing Batman, though, shall we?).

Dig?
Click to expand...
I disagree with the suggestion that we should 'forget' Clooney's portrayal of Batman.

Clooney is on record for saying that he played Batman as gay.

Which I think is great.

Because that's why I loved his Batman.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top