Or he could hate it as much as Alan Moore hates adaptations of his comics.

Well, Alan Moore hasn't seen them, so that's a bit different. He just dislikes adaptations, and the shit that he got pulled into (lawsuit with League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, the V for Vendetta false endorsement by Joel Silver). He did read the script for V for Vendetta if I remember right, but that's about it.

Well, yeah, that's because there is no incentive to criticize the movie. There is a big incentive to praise the movie though so people are going to be more reluctant to believe it.

If the movie is the soul-crushing humiliation that internet nerds would have you believe then the affect it would have on his reputation would be plenty incentive. Aykroyd wouldn't be the first person to sit back and cash the checks they get from project they didn't approve of.

I think all of your posts in this thread are basically the same.

That's complete hogwash and you know it. The affect on his reputation? How much money does that make him? Meanwhile, if he panned the movie, not only would he lose out on the bottom line but he'd likely also be shunned by Sony on future projects.

The ones that disapprove of their own movies are directors that complain about studio involvement. That's not even close to the case here. As has been mentioned many times before in this thread, Akroyd has gone full carny. Coming out to say the movie is good helps sells tickets plus it puts an approving face on the movie that GB fans know, a much needed one considering the backlash.

It would be "hogwash" if we lived in a world where nobody ever disowned or disavowed an entertainment property in which they have a financial stake. Obviously that isn't the case.

What is "hogwash" is the motion that Dan "Nothing But Trouble" Aykroyd has anything against McCarthy, Feig etc. If that's where you're coming from them the burden is on you to find something that even suggests it.

I don't put much stock in what Akroyd has to say about anything these days, but it's pretty obvious that the people who want to hate the movie will justify this as another reason to hate the movie.

No, I think the burden is on you to point out where I even suggested that. Otherwise, maybe you should accept that you're making it up in your head.

And I believed him.

I agree with you. I mentioned before that he was on the talk show I produced a number of years ago and spent 20 minutes talking about aliens and vodka.

Yet Akroyd is continually held up as someone who would have made a "great" Ghostbusters 3 if given the chance. When evidence like Ghostbusters 2 already exists to counter that notion.

Aykroyd said he liked it. Considering the fact that he has no beef with anyone involved in the new movie and as well as the fact that it's not unprecedented for someone in his position to criticize the remake/adaptation etc. it's reasonable to take him at his word.

You, on the other hand, subscribe to a scenario in which Aykroyd disapproves of the movie and has been pressured to lie about it. Based on nothing but your imagination.

Those two scenarios aren't on even footing, kinda like how a conspiracy theorist's ridiculous claims aren't inherently equal to the "accepted" view by merely existing.

This is about ethics in game trailers!!!

Why anybody is still responding to that guy when he is so obviously trolling is the question of the day. Perhaps they like reading the same nonsense over and over?

I bought one case.

You mean the fact that Dan Akroyd has a 25% ownership of the franchise, is an executive producer, and will make lots of money if it's a hit is an unbiased source? Just like Bob Kane was an unbiased source when he said that Batman and Robin "Was how he always envisioned Batman to be from the beginning". Or how about when Stan Lee said of the first Captain America movie "It's a great movie. People were so excited by it that at the end they were cheering for more. That's why the movies delayed and going through reshoots". Also according to the Sony leak, Sony was not above pursuing legal acts against any original cast members who spoke against it.

On another note when I saw XM:A over the weekend, the trailer for this played and not a single person laughed and it was booed after it was done. I will confess though the special effects looked pretty impressive on the big screen. Minus Slimer who just looks off.

Aykroyd's stake in the movie might be a valid reason to doubt his endorsement of the movie if there was even the tiniest shred of evidence that he disapproved of it.

You won't find it. The haters would have been running with it for months by now if there was as much as hint that Aykroyd was against this movie. This is a case of people projecting their own disapproval onto Aykroyd. Being suspicious of a rabid hater changing his tune after he realizes he's a Sony shareholder? Valid. Playing mental gymnastics to the point where someone's positive report of a movie somehow proves he hated it? Invalid.

I almost feel like it would've been better for Aykroyd to either not say anything or downplay his remarks. He sounded desperate, doing damage control.

You seem pretty biased. People have already provided examples of professionals having ulterior motives when endorsing/praising certain films. The fact that Aykroyd has a financial stake in the film's success is reason enough for some to cast doubt on the sincerity of his statements.

That said, seeing the international trailer, combined witih Aykroyd's endorsement makes me believe this new Ghostbusters film is going to be a worthy reboot/sequel. The humor seems pretty inline with the original.

Yates: Why am I operating the untested nuclear laser?

Hotlzmann: Because you have the longest arms.

I read your comment before reading his statement, otherwise I wouldn't have really paid that much attention to this part: "As one of millions of man-fans and Ray Stantz, I'm paying to see that and bringing all my friends!"

It does sound a little desperate, but the producers have to deal with the unprecedented hate this reboot has received in the form of most dislikes for a YouTube trailer ever, and negative videos like the one from the AVGN.

However, he can't not endorse it because if the original Ghostbusters don't endorse it, then it looks bad.

I gave you three days over the weekend to not talk about this topic and yet when I reopen it, the same negativity and same banter continues, I know who is stirring the pot, and yet the conversation spirals downwards. As much as I don't want to punish who are trying to have a civil conversation, it's not working... again.

closed again, til further notice.