Another terrible movie and will flop.
Please stop rebooting this franchise.
shareSequels are not the same as reboots.
That's why they're called sequels.
If it was a sequel then the movie would have been about the 4 original ghostbusters. It was rebooted with new characters.
shareNo. Still in the same universe. Original characters appear and references to the first two throughout.
Your made-up arbitrary rules about what a reboot is... made up.
There was only 3 original characters and the movie wasn't even about them. It was about Egons granddaughter. The only reference to the original Ghostbusters was Zuul. Its a reboot no matter how you slice it.
shareThree?
The characters of Peter, Ray, Winston, Egon, Janine, Zuul, and even Dana all appear in Afterlife.
Where did you learn to count?
And since when do they have to be the main characters to be considered a sequel?
They reference the New York Incident several times, as well as show the original ad. Did you pay attention at all?
My god, you're an idiot.
Harold Ramis was not in this movie.
Born
November 21, 1944
Died
February 24, 2014
The likeness of Ramis was in the film.
https://screenrant.com/ghostbusters-afterlife-harold-ramis-egon-return-ghost-explained/
I didn't say Ramis. I said the character of Egon.
Not only can you not count, you can't read either.
And I said the 4 original characters. Harold Ramis was not in this movie.
shareBut Egon Spengler was.
shareTrue, but it was ghost Egon and he didn't even talk. It was more of a cameo actually. The other 3 original characters also made cameos at the end of the movie. This movie was not about the 4 original characters. It was a reboot with new younger actors so they can continue the franchise.
Dan Aykroyd ... (based on "Ghostbusters" written by) &
Ivan Reitman ... (based on the 1984 film by) and
Harold Ramis ... (based on "Ghostbusters" written by)
Its based on the Ghostbusters movie and is in the same universe but its still a reboot.
features Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Ernie Hudson, Annie Potts, and Sigourney Weaver reprising their characters from the earlier films.
They all reprised their character which means a reboot of some sort is created, and instead of recasting the role they keep the same actor despite that.
Also this movie is not even listed as Ghostbusters 3 or III. They dropped 3 and rebooted the franchise calling in Afterlife so people would know its a reboot and not about the 4 original characters.
They even casted 4 new actors to replace the originals.
Phoebe is Egon
Trevor is Peter
Podcast is Ray
Lucky is Winston
Since the four originals appeared, they were not replaced.
shareHarold Ramis didn't appear.
I just used logic and facts to prove this movie was a reboot and all my research was ignored as always.
Other people have different opinions than yours.
shareTrue, but I also have an opinion and used facts to back up my opinion. No one has proven yet that this movie is not a reboot.
No one has proved yet that Harold Ramis was in the Afterlife movie.
I think your facts show Ghostbusters: Afterlife is a direct sequel.
shareNot really, its a reboot as the franchise was revived with new characters.
shareGhostbusters 2 had new characters, did this make it a reboot instead of a sequel?
shareIt was about the same original characters that was in the first movie. The plot was mostly about them. New characters can be introduced in a sequel to further the plot but at the core the movie has to be about the original characters.
Ghostbusters 2 is a sequel.
Afterlife is a soft reboot with new characters as the primary plot source.
Still doesn't count though. There was supposed to be a Ghostbusters 3 but the feud between Bill and Harold prevented that. As I said in a earlier post, this movie was not about the 4 original ghostbusters. It was basically a spinoff or reboot of the 1984/1989 movies.
shareDoesnt matter that it wasnt about the original 4. Its set in the same universe and its a continuation of the story.
Luke was not in the Star Wars prequels. But theyre still prequels. It's not a reboot.
Afterlife It's a direct sequel by everyone's standards, including the filmmakers. Everyone except you.
Just face it, you have no idea what you're talking about
It was ghost Egon and he didn't even talk. It was more of a cameo actually. The other 3 original characters also made cameos at the end of the movie. This movie was not about the 4 original characters. It was a reboot with new younger actors so they can continue the franchise.
Dan Aykroyd ... (based on "Ghostbusters" written by) &
Ivan Reitman ... (based on the 1984 film by) and
Harold Ramis ... (based on "Ghostbusters" written by)
Its based on the Ghostbusters movie and is in the same universe but its still a reboot.
features Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Ernie Hudson, Annie Potts, and Sigourney Weaver reprising their characters from the earlier films.
They all reprised their character which means a reboot of some sort is created, and instead of recasting the role they keep the same actor despite that.
Also this movie is not even listed as Ghostbusters 3 or III. They dropped 3 and rebooted the franchise calling in Afterlife so people would know its a reboot and not about the 4 original characters.
They even casted 4 new actors to replace the originals.
Phoebe is Egon
Trevor is Peter
Podcast is Ray
Lucky is Winston
Star Wars is a poor comparison. That was a 9 part Saga.
You're wrong. Justify it all you want with your flawed logic, but you're on an island. 🤣
shareI used logic and facts to prove my point. Where is yours?
shareNo you didn't all you did was say the four characters are not the main characters. That's flawed logic, not proof of shit.
shareAnd then you insisted only 3 characters from the original made appearances. Proved you wrong. Then you said Egon wasn't in it. Proved you wrong again.
Stupid as fuck.
Name me a filmmaker that agrees with you. Name me a movie fan that agrees with you.
Fuck it, find me a human that agrees with you
So you are saying a dead Egon that is portrayed by another actor is the same thing as an alive Egon portrayed by Ramis?
shareThr character of Egon appears, no matter who or what portrays him.
Much like Rachel Daws is portrayed by Katie Holms and Maggie Gyllenhaal. Much like how Jennier Parker is both Caludia Wells and Elizabeth Shue. Much like Princess Leah appears as both Carrie Fisher and CGI.
Or how Gozer is both Olivia Wilde and whoever that 80s chick was.
God you're dumb. I can't believe I have to explain this.
Using your logic. The same characters that were in Dune 1984 are also in Dune 2021. By your definition, Dune 2021 is a sequel to Dune 1984.
Also the character of Peter Parker was in 8 movies. Are you saying all these movies are sequels of each other?
Those were set in different universes until Marvel brought them together. That's the key. SAME UNIVERSE. Do t know how much I have to explain this.
share"The character of Egon appears, no matter who or what portrays him."
You said the character.
The character of Paul Atreides appears in both movies. So you your definition. Dune 2021 is a sequel.
If they are in the same Universe now then that means that Dune 2021 is a sequel.
This is your definition. Not mine.
No, it's everyone's definition except for yours. That makes you an idiot. I rest my case.
shareSo you are saying a dead Egon that is portrayed by another actor is the same thing as an alive Egon portrayed by Ramis?
hell to the yeah
A reboot is a complete restart to a franchise, examples being Batman Begins, Casino Royale, Man of Steel, The Amazing Spider-Man, etc where all actors are replaced. If this was a reboot none of the original actors would have returned for their original parts.
Soft reboot is the right term that you just recently used. Although I have heard the term "legacy sequel" thrown around recently in regards to distant sequels to old films.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SoftReboot
I guess I should revise and say it was a soft reboot then.
It could take place after a lengthy Time Skip, allowing you to make a Same Plot Sequel with a new generation of characters and a few old favorites popping in for The Cameo.