The two explanations used for the ride and the game are that Doc founded a time institute and built more, and a "time duplicate."

Really enjoyed the teaser... folks have mentioned how it feels different being in the country vs NY...I agree, but it is cost prohibitive to shoot in NY now... this film was greenlit with what I'm assuming is an 80-90million production budget. And frankly, most likely in addition some studio good-will with Jason Reitman being the director. What we have is filmmakers who actually give a damn about the franchise, and are giving it the best love letter they can. Yes, it's Stranger Things, 80's nostalgia ...but that's what got the film greenlit to begin with.

I hope the (surviving) OG Ghostbusters have more than cameo appearances.

Otherwise, I think it will be rejected similar to tjhe way Ghostbusters 2016 was.

I think the remake was rejected more because of the attitude of the filmmakers and the fact they had these cameos, yet they ignored the history of the Ghostbusters and had them playing different characters...which is ironic since they're bitching about being ignored now. That, and it was a political statement more than a movie. And it was bad.

That said, I think the trailer looks superb. It's different enough from the Original Ghostbusters movies, yet pays homage to the history, which is all I really wanted from the first movie. Paul Rudd is always a good choice. there was a lack of comedy in the trailer, but I think it'll be there, especially with Rudd in the cast. I'm glad that Harold Ramis's contribution won't simply be a throwaway line about him having died. I'm wondering how Sigourney Weaver will be involved. But, as a Ghostbusters fan, I'm hyped after watching the trailer.

I thought the trailer was excellent. It hit all the right notes for me. I loved the slight teases of Slimer, Zuul & Vinz Clortho . Obviously more than anything I wish Harold Ramis was still around to participate in this, but having Egon gone really works for the narrative. He was always the most reserved, most secretive member of the squad. You could never really get a proper read on Egon. Having the kids and Paul Rudd centered around the sort of mystery of Egon Spengler's life and work is the a great way to approach this film.

From day one when it was revealed that this new film would take place in small town America I thought New York was too important of a character to leave out, but the more I've thought about it, I've sort of come to the conclusion that the New York that I loved so much in 1 & 2, doesn't really exist anymore anyhow. The dark, gritty, dirty, grimy New York has been replaced by hipster Disneyland New York. So I'm okay with this new take. I'm pretty optimistic. More than I thought I could ever be about a new Ghostbusters film.

I'm still holding out hope that they managed to completely keep under wraps that Rick filmed an appearence in this film, even if its just a small one.

Sorry guys, this was probably my most-anticipated film for 2020, but that trailer makes it look like it's going to be a HUGE letdown - unless all we saw happens within the first 30 minutes of the movie.

Someone forgot to tell Jason Reitman that this is supposed to be a COMEDY. There's not a single laugh in that trailer...not one. One of my fellow friends/movie critics told me that it looks like Reitman is ripping off JJ Abrams's Super 8 (who, in turn, was ripping off Spielberg).

Sure, it looks reverent to 1984's Ghostbusters, but it doesn't look like it's going to be fun.

This was just a tease. Don't worry. Sony usually ruins the entire movie with their trailers. Just wait for the full one that gives the plot.

You're right, no human being would stack donut holes like this.

The shooting locations list at IMDb includes New York City, so perhaps they're going to "go there" after all. The list also includes Calgary, but they'd have a hard time passing that off as NYC from any angle. And presumably they knew there would be some expectation for things to come full circle.

You're right, there wasn't a single laugh in the 45 seconds of dialogue that showed none of the original cast members and gave away virtually nothing about the movie. Time to write it off completely.

I made a promise to not post anything else about this movie until I've seen it. But here's the original Ghostbusters teaser. It's 1:38 and includes one of the greatest comedy lines of all time. Because that movie was a comedy. And it also doesn't give away any plot.

Looks a hell of a lot better than the travesty they called Ghostbusters a few years ago.

Having said that, though, it didn't really excite me at all.

I will say there should have been at least some comedy in this trailer I agree. It’s played off pretty serious without even hints at comedy. I think it looks good still and it’s only the first trailer, but kind of a weird way to market the film in my opinion.

No ghost BJs, no sale.

Other things that the teaser of the original has that the teaser for part 3 doesn't have: a second of screen time from Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Sigourney Weaver or Ernie Hudson. Would they really go through all the trouble of bringing back nearly the entire original cast just strip away the humor? Also, the first teaser didn't have the weight of 2 previous films to consider and all of the implications attached to the first onscreen appearence of Venkman/Stantz , including how or why they first appear. I mean you might be right, I don't know, but my point is, no one else does either. I just think its a little early in the game to be saying what this film will be or won't be. Not based on the small amount of information we have.

I think comparing a trailer from 1984 with one from 2019 is just a tad bit disingenuous. Especially when the trailer from 1984 was for a new movie no one knew anything about and the 2019 one is for a loooong awaited sequel with more than its fair share of baggage. The fact that they are both trailers advertising a movie is pretty much the only bit of relevant commonality.

P1: "Should we make the trailer funny?"
P2: "No, they want to make sure we're connected to the original movies, that's the priority!"
P1: "Including Egon?"
P2: "ESPECIALLY Egon!"
P1: "Okay, we'll focus on that."
P2: "Good, NOW they won't complain!"

The Internet:

Agree. Trying to replicate the formula of the original is what got us with Ghostbusters 2016. You have to bring something different to the table

The idea that their children will take over the helm works for me.

Hey, I don't have a problem with them keeping the "good stuff" under wraps, but if Sony is looking to get butts in the seats, they need to do better than that.

I've said this before, but every time this comes up I have to say that I've never seen this film as a "comedy". It's always been a scifi adventure that leaned into the funny side of things. It's dealing with absurd situations, so the characters deal with it with humor. This is just a short tease, I think I would trust that Reitman is more concerned with fitting in the mythology than making this a yuk-fest. There will be humor, but it will flow from the situations, not define them (which was a problem with ATC).

Yeah, same here. I always viewed Ghostbusters as more as supernatural/scary with comedy added in. In the first film and the animated series there were parts that were legitimately scary or creepy.

And because this is just a teaser trailer, I don't expect any outright jokes in it. Like you said, it's more about fitting in with the mythology and establishing a connection to the original. Also, they want to distance it from the reboot which was just goofy humor, not really scary.

independent of the actual content, the overall "look" of it is gorgeous.

I don't think I've seen anybody mention this, but the one shot of the run down mine shows that it's owned by the Shandor Mining Co.

And just to add, I never thought of the original as a comedy either. GB2016 is a comedy, and that's one of it's problems.