Discuss Ghostbusters: Afterlife, released on November 19, 2021 and directed by Jason Reitman.
#4932662
Looks like drive-in theaters may be the future if this whole shutdown situation continues. Then ghostheads can watch the film in their ectomobiles, as well as in their flightsuits...
Last edited by ghoulishfright on March 19th, 2020, 6:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Davideverona, Ecto-1 fan, timeware and 1 others liked this
#4932686
This is 99% guaranteed to be delayed now. Western society is going to be under lockdown and many places will still be riding the peak of deaths in July and nobody will be going to the cinema. Lockdown may last most of the year.

Sony aren't going to want to put a movie out when there's no audience.
#4932689
Chicken, He Clucked wrote: March 20th, 2020, 11:25 am This is 99% guaranteed to be delayed now. Western society is going to be under lockdown and many places will still be riding the peak of deaths in July and nobody will be going to the cinema. Lockdown may last most of the year.

Sony aren't going to want to put a movie out when there's no audience.

Image

I mean, I think you're right that it will be delayed. I hope you're wrong about how long people will be locked down.
#4932690
Kingpin wrote: March 20th, 2020, 2:12 am
modern homie wrote: March 19th, 2020, 4:09 pmit wouldn't shock me if civilization crumbles just before we get this movie.
This is not the precursor to a Mad Max-style society.
Ah man, you could have told me before I sewed all these shoulder pads on my leather jackets!
JamesB922, Kingpin, Sav C liked this
#4932692
I agree with chicken. I'm going to predict the lockdown will be at least until July and people are going to be to scared to come out for another month afterwards.

The more antibodies we get from people recovering will lead to a fast track on the vaccine. Then there are the drugs being tested right now.

But with the checks most Americans will get and I'm probably guessing there will have to be more then two rounds but that cash is for the most part going straight back into the economy.

Let's say people's lives get back to normal by August. A ton of us are going to want to travel and I hope that's not going to spread the virus once again. We're all being couped up and I know I'm going to want to stretch my legs for a bit.
#4932696
robbritton wrote: March 20th, 2020, 11:55 am Ah man, you could have told me before I sewed all these shoulder pads on my leather jackets!
Hey, don't complain, those will still be haute couture once we emerge from isolation. :) Just pitch them to the cyberpunk crowd. :)
groschopf, robbritton liked this
#4932697
It's likely Sony is just playing wait and see.

If Afterlife holds it's release date...and theaters re-open around then...Ghostbusters could go gangbusters.
groschopf liked this
#4932713
RedSpecial wrote: March 20th, 2020, 6:11 pmImage

"You don't think it's too subtle, Marty? You don't think people are going to drive down and not see the sign? Image
deadderek, Sav C, Glenn Frederick and 11 others liked this
#4932716
I went back and forth with RichardLess in the box office threads months ago, but Sony is being smart with the marketing. As many have mentioned, not buying a Superbowl spot was a smart move money-wise. It's expensive and people have the internet. My recollection (every month feels like a year these days) is that barely any studio advertised during the game except for Disney and its bottomless pockets. The Superbowl used to be a slam-dunk, but I'm sure the global release of the trailer on YouTube scored them 10x as many views as the Superbowl, and cost them nothing. (The unexpected coronavirus outbreak would've only made it a worse investment, since it seems hard to believe society will be all the way back into normal swing by July even if the virus is under some form of control by then -- it's hard to imagine studio marketing for stuff that was coming this summer looking to do anything but essentially start over once it's clear that the theaters are re-opening.)

Since Bloodshot actually managed to open for a weekend before hardcore shutdowns started rolling in, and there was no second trailer attached, either Sony was already pushing pause behind the scenes, or (I think slightly more likely) they were going to attach the second trailer to Peter Rabbit 2. To me, this says they're doing the opposite of what RichardLess is arguing for, which is selling the movie broadly to families (even if I think this will skew more like Jumanji, demographic-wise, than Peter Rabbit).

I just can't say it enough times: that's the right call. Fans can say up and down that Ghostbusters (2016) was harmed by being a reboot, but (aside from Feig being cursed with awful trailers throughout his career) it could also be that the movie was seen as a giant neon sign advertising nostalgia for the hallmarks of the series. The first Afterlife trailer goes so far as to omit Ray Parker Jr.! Hard to read that as anything but "sell the movie as itself first, and to fans second."

The Vanity Fair Murray article was basically for us, the devoted, to pick through for little details. Much like the story from Facebook where a fan was allowed to take close-up shots of the car in detail during filming, it feels like the big callback stuff like the car and the original cast is being willingly given up (to an extent) to protect the rest of the film's surprises. And yet that's the type of material we're salivating for particularly.

Also, yeah: Sony will absolutely not put this on streaming. Bloodshot cost under $50m and was already tracking low. It managed to scrape up $25m of the $45m budget before theaters closed; it might actually be more of a success now that there are limited entertainment options and it's presumably going online globally when it comes out next week. Ghostbusters: Afterlife is a summer tentpole that cost at least $90m, and it's also supposed to sell toys, and food, and Blu-rays of the other three, and more. For reference, a movie like Moana, based on limited data, made something like $145m through 2019 on physical media. I imagine digital media stats are even lower. It'd be a big loss for them. Studios with $10m, $20m, $30m movies are probably going to risk going out online, but Bloodshot is probably the roof, and even that movie was mostly a concession based on how much it was ever going to make.
Kingpin, robbritton, Alphagaia and 1 others liked this
#4932719
droidguy1119 wrote: March 21st, 2020, 2:16 am I went back and forth with RichardLess in the box office threads months ago, but Sony is being smart with the marketing. As many have mentioned, not buying a Superbowl spot was a smart move money-wise. It's expensive and people have the internet. My recollection (every month feels like a year these days) is that barely any studio advertised during the game except for Disney and its bottomless pockets. The Superbowl used to be a slam-dunk, but I'm sure the global release of the trailer on YouTube scored them 10x as many views as the Superbowl, and cost them nothing. (The unexpected coronavirus outbreak would've only made it a worse investment, since it seems hard to believe society will be all the way back into normal swing by July even if the virus is under some form of control by then -- it's hard to imagine studio marketing for stuff that was coming this summer looking to do anything but essentially start over once it's clear that the theaters are re-opening.)

Since Bloodshot actually managed to open for a weekend before hardcore shutdowns started rolling in, and there was no second trailer attached, either Sony was already pushing pause behind the scenes, or (I think slightly more likely) they were going to attach the second trailer to Peter Rabbit 2. To me, this says they're doing the opposite of what RichardLess is arguing for, which is selling the movie broadly to families (even if I think this will skew more like Jumanji, demographic-wise, than Peter Rabbit).

I just can't say it enough times: that's the right call. Fans can say up and down that Ghostbusters (2016) was harmed by being a reboot, but (aside from Feig being cursed with awful trailers throughout his career) it could also be that the movie was seen as a giant neon sign advertising nostalgia for the hallmarks of the series. The first Afterlife trailer goes so far as to omit Ray Parker Jr.! Hard to read that as anything but "sell the movie as itself first, and to fans second."

The Vanity Fair Murray article was basically for us, the devoted, to pick through for little details. Much like the story from Facebook where a fan was allowed to take close-up shots of the car in detail during filming, it feels like the big callback stuff like the car and the original cast is being willingly given up (to an extent) to protect the rest of the film's surprises. And yet that's the type of material we're salivating for particularly.

Also, yeah: Sony will absolutely not put this on streaming. Bloodshot cost under $50m and was already tracking low. It managed to scrape up $25m of the $45m budget before theaters closed; it might actually be more of a success now that there are limited entertainment options and it's presumably going online globally when it comes out next week. Ghostbusters: Afterlife is a summer tentpole that cost at least $90m, and it's also supposed to sell toys, and food, and Blu-rays of the other three, and more. For reference, a movie like Moana, based on limited data, made something like $145m through 2019 on physical media. I imagine digital media stats are even lower. It'd be a big loss for them. Studios with $10m, $20m, $30m movies are probably going to risk going out online, but Bloodshot is probably the roof, and even that movie was mostly a concession based on how much it was ever going to make.
Hey Droidguy. Longtime. Without rehashing that entire debate we had, which was awesome and fun and something I recommend people check out, I have to disagree & challenge your assessment about the Super Bowl not being a slam dunk and the misconception that it’s better to just throw it up on the internet.

As I’ve mentioned numerous times(not sure why this isnt getting thru). The Super Bowl is the single largest audience on network TV in the calendar year that reaches almost every single demographic. 100 million viewers(These are facts). Look up the view count on the trailer for YouTube. It was released in November. How close is it to 100 million?(that YouTube figure is a global number by the way) Now add those views PLUS the super bowl audience. That’s why you pay for the Super Bowl spot. Releasing a Super Bowl spot is not smart for every movie. But with the state of the Ghostbusters franchise? It’s a no brainer. Also, more than Disney released Super Bowl spots...


Now, just because you release a Super Bowl trailer doesn’t mean your movie is going to be a hit. But Ghostbusters is at a cross roads. The public needs to know this is on the way and coming and sooner that happens the better. This is about getting the word out.

Also, Ghostbusters is going to primarily be an North American, UK driven movie box office wise. It’s a comedy, comedies tend not to travel. The last Ghostbusters movie added all the whiz bang effects for those foreign markets and ended up with a big dud. This movie will not have that, unless same major changes are being made(doubt it).

As for the Vanity Fair article being “for us”. Hogwash. Complete and utter hogwash. I don’t know why you would think that since everyone already knew. This was not for us. You don’t release an article for Ghostbusters fans on Vanity freaking Fair. You are making an assumption based on nothing. Christ Star Wars Vanity Fair articles gets pictures! By Annie Leibovitz! Ghostbusters got....nothing. Because it was for the fans? If it was for the fans we would’ve read about it first on Collider or one of those sites. It would’ve been a set visit/junket. Vanity Fair is a premiere magazine/website. You don’t do a Vanity Fair article, an outlet known for its freaking pictures, and not include a Bill Murray as Venkman shot. I’ll go to my deathbed on this. That was a botched attempt. A wasted opportunity.


It’s at this point where I need to stress what a joke Sony’s marketing team is considered. They haven’t had a noteworthy campaign since...The Social Network?(no that’s not true. Even I’ll give them Kudos for the work they did on Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. But that was a prestige product. If you screw up Tarantino...). Sony’s film marketing is baaad. Use to be great, talk of the town. But then certain people were stolen, sorry, “headhunted” by other studios. You reap what you sow, and no one knows this less than Tom Rothman.



As for Streaming. Ghostbusters Afterlife will be seen in theatres. Will it be July? I hope so. But it will go to theatres.

On final thing. Sony will spend a fortune marketing Ghostbusters Afterlife. A fortune. 80-100 million easily. (Maybe less if sports don’t come back), taking 5.6 million of that and putting it into a Super Bowl spot is nothing. it’s the easiest and safest bet there is. It doesn’t matter if you are Disney, Warner Bros, Universal, or Sony. In the end, for movies like this, 4 Quad summer tent poles, they all usually spend around the same. It’s how they spend it that makes the difference. If Super Bowl spots weren’t worth it, they wouldn’t do it.
#4932720
I'm not a fan of football, never got into it. I used to just watch the Superbowl just for the commercials but now that YouTube's been here for a while I just watch them there.

If Sony wants to begin an all out marketing campaign they need to upload some toy commercials, and a new trailer.

Maybe they could give 1 up arcade the license to reproduce the real Ghostbusters cabinet.

They've been advertising the hell out of those subscription build kits. Every single video I click on that's the first advert. Even putting up small afterlife banners would get peoples attention.
#4932724
RichardLess wrote: March 21st, 2020, 4:38 amI have to disagree & challenge your assessment about the Super Bowl not being a slam dunk and the misconception that it’s better to just throw it up on the internet.

As I’ve mentioned numerous times (not sure why this isnt getting thru). The Super Bowl is the single largest audience on network TV in the calendar year that reaches almost every single demographic. 100 million viewers(These are facts). Look up the view count on the trailer for YouTube. It was released in November. How close is it to 100 million?(that YouTube figure is a global number by the way) Now add those views PLUS the super bowl audience. That’s why you pay for the Super Bowl spot. Releasing a Super Bowl spot is not smart for every movie. But with the state of the Ghostbusters franchise? It’s a no brainer. Also, more than Disney released Super Bowl spots...
Okay, I will concede this one to an extent. While what you actually have to do is tally up every view from every upload of the trailer across social media worldwide (not just Sony's official YouTube channel, but all of their global channels, MovieClips, JoBlo, KinoCheck, etc., but also Facebook, Twitter, Instagram...), I will admit that's gonna be less than the 100 million Superbowl viewers.

Looking it up, there were nine movies advertised during the Superbowl. Again, I'll concede to an extent: two were Disney (Black Widow and Mulan, plus a spot for "Falcon and the Winter Soldier"). Three were Universal (F9, Minions, and Universal is now the US distributor for Bond, so No Time to Die falls under them too). The biggest spender was ailing Paramount, which shelled out for the remaining four: Sonic, A Quiet Place Part II, SpongeBob, and Top Gun: Maverick).

The thing is, this is a split between slam dunks and desperate measures. Paramount has suffered bomb after bomb the last few years, and they were probably extremely confident about AQP2 (following up a rare recent success) and Top Gun (Cruise is a big earner and it's their tentpole). The move paid off for Sonic. Everything else on the list was sure to be one of the year's biggest grossers whether they played the Superbowl or not. Sony isn't as desperate as Paramount, nor is Ghostbusters a surefire success.
RichardLess wrote: March 21st, 2020, 4:38 amGhostbusters is at a cross roads. The public needs to know this is on the way and coming and sooner that happens the better. This is about getting the word out.
I was gonna bring this up in the previous post and I forgot to, but once again we have to consider, whether we want to or not, that there's a ceiling on how much the audience wants to have Ghostbusters back. I think the public actually knows that there's a new movie coming, and it's possible they're just not as excited about it as you want to believe they would be (and I think a big part of that is the idea that casual viewers cared as much as you think they did that the last one was a reboot).
RichardLess wrote: March 21st, 2020, 4:38 amAs for the Vanity Fair article being “for us”. Hogwash. Complete and utter hogwash. Christ Star Wars Vanity Fair articles gets pictures! By Annie Leibovitz! Ghostbusters got....nothing.
You don't think your latter point here is an indication that the former is correct?

Honestly, I think the real reason that this stuff is in Vanity Fair is because Anthony Breznican moved from EW to VF. It seems pretty evident that Jason trusts Anthony and the studio is comfortable with him as a way to put content out.
RichardLess wrote: March 21st, 2020, 4:38 amSony’s film marketing is baaad.
I'm not going to fight you as hard on this one. Although there were clearly behind-the-scenes battles between the creatives, the debut trailer for the 2016 movie was not ideal, and while it doesn't deserve to be one of the worst trailers of all time on YouTube, it definitely left a black mark on the movie's ad campaign. And while we loved the first trailer for Afterlife, outside of the fanbase, it seems to be that the widespread consensus is that it should have been funnier.
RichardLess wrote: March 21st, 2020, 4:38 amOn final thing. Sony will spend a fortune marketing Ghostbusters Afterlife. A fortune. 80-100 million easily. (Maybe less if sports don’t come back), taking 5.6 million of that and putting it into a Super Bowl spot is nothing. it’s the easiest and safest bet there is. It doesn’t matter if you are Disney, Warner Bros, Universal, or Sony. In the end, for movies like this, 4 Quad summer tent poles, they all usually spend around the same.
We'll see. I don't doubt they'll spend a lot of money, but I expected it to be more frugal than 2016.
RichardLess wrote: March 21st, 2020, 4:38 amIt’s how they spend it that makes the difference. If Super Bowl spots weren’t worth it, they wouldn’t do it.
Again, you essentially uphold my point: they didn't! And haven't for years!
#4932729
A special fx guy who worked on the movie shared the Bill Murray sculpture, which could mean theres an fx shot with venkman somewhere.

https://ghostbustersnews.com/2020/03/21 ... sculpture/
#4932730
droidguy1119 wrote: March 21st, 2020, 10:10 am
RichardLess wrote: March 21st, 2020, 4:38 amI have to disagree & challenge your assessment about the Super Bowl not being a slam dunk and the misconception that it’s better to just throw it up on the internet.

As I’ve mentioned numerous times (not sure why this isnt getting thru). The Super Bowl is the single largest audience on network TV in the calendar year that reaches almost every single demographic. 100 million viewers(These are facts). Look up the view count on the trailer for YouTube. It was released in November. How close is it to 100 million?(that YouTube figure is a global number by the way) Now add those views PLUS the super bowl audience. That’s why you pay for the Super Bowl spot. Releasing a Super Bowl spot is not smart for every movie. But with the state of the Ghostbusters franchise? It’s a no brainer. Also, more than Disney released Super Bowl spots...
Okay, I will concede this one to an extent. While what you actually have to do is tally up every view from every upload of the trailer across social media worldwide (not just Sony's official YouTube channel, but all of their global channels, MovieClips, JoBlo, KinoCheck, etc., but also Facebook, Twitter, Instagram...), I will admit that's gonna be less than the 100 million Superbowl viewers.

Looking it up, there were nine movies advertised during the Superbowl. Again, I'll concede to an extent: two were Disney (Black Widow and Mulan, plus a spot for "Falcon and the Winter Soldier"). Three were Universal (F9, Minions, and Universal is now the US distributor for Bond, so No Time to Die falls under them too). The biggest spender was ailing Paramount, which shelled out for the remaining four: Sonic, A Quiet Place Part II, SpongeBob, and Top Gun: Maverick).

The thing is, this is a split between slam dunks and desperate measures. Paramount has suffered bomb after bomb the last few years, and they were probably extremely confident about AQP2 (following up a rare recent success) and Top Gun (Cruise is a big earner and it's their tentpole). The move paid off for Sonic. Everything else on the list was sure to be one of the year's biggest grossers whether they played the Superbowl or not. Sony isn't as desperate as Paramount, nor is Ghostbusters a surefire success.
RichardLess wrote: March 21st, 2020, 4:38 amGhostbusters is at a cross roads. The public needs to know this is on the way and coming and sooner that happens the better. This is about getting the word out.
I was gonna bring this up in the previous post and I forgot to, but once again we have to consider, whether we want to or not, that there's a ceiling on how much the audience wants to have Ghostbusters back. I think the public actually knows that there's a new movie coming, and it's possible they're just not as excited about it as you want to believe they would be (and I think a big part of that is the idea that casual viewers cared as much as you think they did that the last one was a reboot).
RichardLess wrote: March 21st, 2020, 4:38 amAs for the Vanity Fair article being “for us”. Hogwash. Complete and utter hogwash. Christ Star Wars Vanity Fair articles gets pictures! By Annie Leibovitz! Ghostbusters got....nothing.
You don't think your latter point here is an indication that the former is correct?

Honestly, I think the real reason that this stuff is in Vanity Fair is because Anthony Breznican moved from EW to VF. It seems pretty evident that Jason trusts Anthony and the studio is comfortable with him as a way to put content out.
RichardLess wrote: March 21st, 2020, 4:38 amSony’s film marketing is baaad.
I'm not going to fight you as hard on this one. Although there were clearly behind-the-scenes battles between the creatives, the debut trailer for the 2016 movie was not ideal, and while it doesn't deserve to be one of the worst trailers of all time on YouTube, it definitely left a black mark on the movie's ad campaign. And while we loved the first trailer for Afterlife, outside of the fanbase, it seems to be that the widespread consensus is that it should have been funnier.
RichardLess wrote: March 21st, 2020, 4:38 amOn final thing. Sony will spend a fortune marketing Ghostbusters Afterlife. A fortune. 80-100 million easily. (Maybe less if sports don’t come back), taking 5.6 million of that and putting it into a Super Bowl spot is nothing. it’s the easiest and safest bet there is. It doesn’t matter if you are Disney, Warner Bros, Universal, or Sony. In the end, for movies like this, 4 Quad summer tent poles, they all usually spend around the same.
We'll see. I don't doubt they'll spend a lot of money, but I expected it to be more frugal than 2016.
RichardLess wrote: March 21st, 2020, 4:38 amIt’s how they spend it that makes the difference. If Super Bowl spots weren’t worth it, they wouldn’t do it.
Again, you essentially uphold my point: they didn't! And haven't for years!
Top Gun having a Super Bowl spot is exactly what I’m talking about. That’s what Ghostbusters needed. I find it odd anyone would defend the choice of NOT having a super bowl spot. More marketing, especially this early, during a massive audience, is NEVER a bad thing(unless the trailer sucks).

We all want Ghostbusters to be successful? Right? Well if you do, defending Sony for not using the years biggest marketing opportunity isn’t the way to go. It’s that simple.

How do I uphold your point?? You just named numerous studios that paid for Super Bowl spots. Are you talking about Sony? When I said “they” I mean the industry as a whole. “They” wouldn’t spend the money if it didn’t work.

Also, Sony will probably spend about the same on marketing as in 2016. It’s unavoidable. (I should point out this is under normal non Corona virus circumstances. The Corona virus throws a wrench into most of this. So all of this is if it were business as usual). When you look at marketing spend for summer movies, they line up pretty well. Even cheaper movies get 80 million dollar campaigns. Why? You’ve got NBA, NHL, sweeps, season finales and ad rates are what they are. Don’t forget in the summer season marketing is also about real estate. Mental and physical. You’ve got to make sure your movie gets noticed. That gets expensive in the summer. Everyone is fighting for the same physical real estate. Signage, time slots, magazine front covers. All of it. That’s why a summer season release date is a big deal. It means the studio is confident that the money required to market a film during the summer will pay off.

Sony has high hopes for GB2020. They filmed a special trailer announcement. Got a trailer out before Christmas. At this point in the GB2016 cycle there wasn’t a frame of footage shown to the public until March. March!
pizzarat liked this
#4932732
Am I the only one who thought it was a full size head until the end of the video?
mrmichaelt, groschopf liked this
#4932734
RichardLess wrote: March 21st, 2020, 3:23 pm
SpaceBallz wrote: March 21st, 2020, 1:47 pm A special fx guy who worked on the movie shared the Bill Murray sculpture, which could mean theres an fx shot with venkman somewhere.

https://ghostbustersnews.com/2020/03/21 ... sculpture/
Wow. Perhaps a de aging sequence? Interesting
Freddy Krueger-esque Murray's silicone mask coming?
  • 1
  • 309
  • 310
  • 311
  • 312
  • 313
  • 677
Positron Props GB1 Pack Build

Awesome!! Good luck on your build! Tom's shell i[…]

Trailer posted for release for the Frozen Empire u[…]

Trivia, callbacks etc I noticed so far *Cover A *[…]

Matty Trap - Replace Pedal?

Has anyone successfully transferred the pedal elec[…]