Discuss all things Ghostbusters here, unless they would be better suited in one of the few forums below.
#4974691
mrmichaelt wrote: November 25th, 2022, 10:34 pm Greene posted a 35% code if you buy a copy direct from the publisher.
22JOYSALE
https://twitter.com/HoneyIShrunkJG2/sta ... 3952572416

He also did an interview.
https://twitter.com/AaronBossig/status/ ... 8991260673
https://linktr.ee/HungryTrilobyte
I've actually done two interviews so far! Here's the other one:
https://peoplearetheenemy.libsyn.com/pe ... pisode-253
deadderek liked this
#4975520
RichardLess wrote: November 7th, 2022, 10:54 pm The book offers no answer to the Slimer GB2 ending. It is brought up and examined. That whole section is kinda funny. Why? This forum is used as a source. The author mentions the city of Calgary maybe getting a different cut of GB2. I was like…umm…what? You click the source notation and..it’s a GBfans forum page lol(I got this book digitally). How weird is that? Why would the city of Calgary of all places get a different cut of GB2? Lol. It’s ridiculous.
Sometimes there is no answer, it's still a mystery to be solved, but when you're trying to write something comprehensive about a subject, you include the known and the unknown, if only so others learn about the unknown and continue to investigate.

I can shed some light on the Calgary reference, because it's from me. I saw GB2 when it came out - I was living in Calgary then. I saw it once, maybe twice in theaters and I remember seeing Sherman.

Now, why would Calgary of all places get a different cut? The best theory is that a cut was sent to print and distribution, and replaced, but rather than lose money and re-do the ones they got done already, they send them out - the small bit of Sherman I remember seeing is not a lot of footage, so who'd even notice when the final cut was released onto VHS without it? Other than a Ghostbusters webmaster in Calgary.

And that's the trick, that theory could have been true with only one early print that randomly ended up in Calgary or maybe there were more, but only the city with one of a small number of people that would remember got one. That Alex remembers a different montage supports the theory, but until say a 35mm collector acquires a print and goes "hey, this one has extra footage", we'll never know for sure. Or it's possible none of those prints still survive. (shrug)

What bends my brain is that what if I'd gone to a different theater - would I have seen it?

Anyhow, hope that helps. The reference note in the book doesn't really explain it, but that's where the whole Calgary print thing comes from.
#4975535
castewar wrote: December 21st, 2022, 4:25 pm Sometimes there is no answer, it's still a mystery to be solved, but when you're trying to write something comprehensive about a subject, you include the known and the unknown, if only so others learn about the unknown and continue to investigate.
Exactly. Thank you for summarizing my approach so succinctly.
#4975539
castewar wrote: December 21st, 2022, 4:25 pm
RichardLess wrote: November 7th, 2022, 10:54 pm The book offers no answer to the Slimer GB2 ending. It is brought up and examined. That whole section is kinda funny. Why? This forum is used as a source. The author mentions the city of Calgary maybe getting a different cut of GB2. I was like…umm…what? You click the source notation and..it’s a GBfans forum page lol(I got this book digitally). How weird is that? Why would the city of Calgary of all places get a different cut of GB2? Lol. It’s ridiculous.
Sometimes there is no answer, it's still a mystery to be solved, but when you're trying to write something comprehensive about a subject, you include the known and the unknown, if only so others learn about the unknown and continue to investigate.

I can shed some light on the Calgary reference, because it's from me. I saw GB2 when it came out - I was living in Calgary then. I saw it once, maybe twice in theaters and I remember seeing Sherman.

Now, why would Calgary of all places get a different cut? The best theory is that a cut was sent to print and distribution, and replaced, but rather than lose money and re-do the ones they got done already, they send them out - the small bit of Sherman I remember seeing is not a lot of footage, so who'd even notice when the final cut was released onto VHS without it? Other than a Ghostbusters webmaster in Calgary.

And that's the trick, that theory could have been true with only one early print that randomly ended up in Calgary or maybe there were more, but only the city with one of a small number of people that would remember got one. That Alex remembers a different montage supports the theory, but until say a 35mm collector acquires a print and goes "hey, this one has extra footage", we'll never know for sure. Or it's possible none of those prints still survive. (shrug)

What bends my brain is that what if I'd gone to a different theater - would I have seen it?

Anyhow, hope that helps. The reference note in the book doesn't really explain it, but that's where the whole Calgary print thing comes from.
Fascinating! What’s interesting is a looong time ago I thought I saw a video interview with one of the producers, (maybe Michael Gross or Joe Medjuck?)where he talked about a cut of the movie getting out that wasn’t suppose to be out. But I think I dreamed it or imagined it because I’ve never been able to track it down. I thought maybe it was one of the first teasers to “Cleaning Up the Town” back in 2007 but I guess not.

But Let’s examine this. Mind if i ask a bunch of questions? Let’s see what we can solve or narrow down.

Do you remember what theatre you saw it at? How old were you? Can you tell us everything you remember about the scene? Did Slimer come out of the Statue of Liberty at the end of the movie?

Was is just the Sherman scene or were there more scenes? Did you know his name was Sherman at the time? Did you see the movie alone? With your parents? Or friends? Did they ever talk about it being different when it comes out on VHS?

Do you remember if everything else was the same? Anything else stick out in your mind that doesn’t jive with the movie as you know it now?



I mean no disrespect in asking this but…we have to make sure…could this be a Mandela affect? Is there any possibility? At all? Don’t be embarrassed if that’s the case. It happens ALL the time.

Could Calgary of all places just happen to get a special print of Ghostbusters 2? It’s unlikely. Not impossible tho. If anyplace that was to happen you’d think it would be LA or New York, maybe Chicago, right? But…the 4th or 5th biggest city in Canada? Interesting…The way release prints happen it’s *almost* impossible(without other theatres getting it). The only way I can see is if somehow they decided to maybe test the film and either you saw that test screening(in Calgary) or somehow a test screening print was duped and sent out to this specific theatre. But who knows?


I’m going to be honest, my initial temptation is to say this didn’t happen. You’ve maybe conflated memories. But. It just so happens…something similar has happened to me. Well…kinda. Except mine is a known thing that George Lucas admitted to changing but what’s weird is how my random ass city in Canada got this print when it was only suppose to be the LA Hollywood premiere print. But! when I saw Star Wars Episode 1 after the scene where(Spoiler Alert) Obi Wan kills Darth Maul I expected to see Maul fall down the shaft and be split in two. But he wasnt. He was intact and in one piece. The girl I saw it with(my first date!) was beside herself. She had seen the film on opening day. He was cut in two on that print. She was adamant. But not here. Finally on VHS I saw it again and…sure enough, Maul was cut in two. Weird. Yet that’s a simple VFX fix. And we know Lucas fixed it. This GB2 thing is different.

This is an entire scene.

We’ve had a lot of people over the years claim they’ve seen things in Ghostbusters 2 prints. Mostly it seems they saw it as kids and read the comic or book which includes deleted bits and scenes. A lot of Mandela effects.

But it’s interesting to think that somewhere…out there, maybe waiting in a vault, is an alternate version of Ghostbusters 2. Complete with Sherman Tully.

Who knows? Stranger things have happened.
#4975542
jg2 wrote: December 21st, 2022, 7:25 pm
castewar wrote: December 21st, 2022, 4:25 pm Sometimes there is no answer, it's still a mystery to be solved, but when you're trying to write something comprehensive about a subject, you include the known and the unknown, if only so others learn about the unknown and continue to investigate.
Exactly. Thank you for summarizing my approach so succinctly.
EDIT: I’ve deleted what I originally wrote here. I don’t do that lightly but what I wrote was mean spirit & wrong. There was a million different ways I could’ve gotten my post across and I chose the wrong one. I wrote it in an extremely sarcastic manner and didn’t mean for it to be a 1:1 comparison to the JG2’s reporting on his book. It came across as an attack on him Vs me making fun of the idea that there “are no answers”. That was wrong.

I was going to leave it up as a reminder but i see no reason to as it failed in both its attempt as being humorous and as a sarcastic reply. Apologies to all.
Last edited by RichardLess on December 27th, 2022, 11:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#4975548
RichardLess wrote: December 22nd, 2022, 12:28 am
jg2 wrote: December 21st, 2022, 7:25 pm

Exactly. Thank you for summarizing my approach so succinctly.

Woodward and Bernstein while writing “All The Presidents Men”:

Damn Woodward, do you think Richard Nixon had anything to do with this watergate break in?

I don’t know Bernstein. But here’s something a friend of mine use to say: “Sometimes there is no answer”

That’s an excellent point Woodward. Screw it. Instead of making phone calls and investigating…let someone else figure it out. Let’s go do something 1972ish like see The Godfather instead. No one will care about this Watergate business anyhow.
Let me stop you right there, because whether or not Richard Nixon knew anything about the burglary beforehand is still one of Watergate's great mysteries. Based on his reaction on the tapes, people assume he knew nothing and that CREEP was acting of their own volition. Who can say for sure? Only Nixon, and he died in 1994. But it doesn't matter because that wasn't the crux of the scandal. Nixon tried to stonewall the investigations into the Watergate burglary. That's obstruction of justice. That's what forced him to resign in disgrace. So I guess my point is you have tried to clown me and you have only clowned yourself. Also, "All The President's Men" wasn't published until 1974, so they'd probably be seeing "Godfather II." Except the book came out in June and "Godfather II" wasn't released until December.
#4975555
castewar wrote: December 22nd, 2022, 12:38 am Well, it's been fun.
Thanks for reminding me why I'm never on here.
See you all in another five years.
Peace.

If you can’t handle someone making a stupid ass joke about “there are no answers” and asking you questions about your supposed GB2 experience…than yeah. I can see why you don’t come around here anymore.
#4975557
jg2 wrote: December 22nd, 2022, 2:20 am
RichardLess wrote: December 22nd, 2022, 12:28 am


Woodward and Bernstein while writing “All The Presidents Men”:

Damn Woodward, do you think Richard Nixon had anything to do with this watergate break in?

I don’t know Bernstein. But here’s something a friend of mine use to say: “Sometimes there is no answer”

That’s an excellent point Woodward. Screw it. Instead of making phone calls and investigating…let someone else figure it out. Let’s go do something 1972ish like see The Godfather instead. No one will care about this Watergate business anyhow.
Let me stop you right there, because whether or not Richard Nixon knew anything about the burglary beforehand is still one of Watergate's great mysteries. Based on his reaction on the tapes, people assume he knew nothing and that CREEP was acting of their own volition. Who can say for sure? Only Nixon, and he died in 1994. But it doesn't matter because that wasn't the crux of the scandal. Nixon tried to stonewall the investigations into the Watergate burglary. That's obstruction of justice. That's what forced him to resign in disgrace. So I guess my point is you have tried to clown me and you have only clowned yourself. Also, "All The President's Men" wasn't published until 1974, so they'd probably be seeing "Godfather II." Except the book came out in June and "Godfather II" wasn't released until December.
Well watergate happened in 1972 so the crux of the joke is that it’s, ya know, 1972. And even tho they were working at the Washington Post and not technically writing All the Presidents Men at this point, I figure it was a better fit since your an author and well, they wrote a book. Tho I guess one could say they were writing All The Presidents Men at that point since that book was a summation of their experience working on the scandal. So they saw Godfather 1. Keep in mind movies played a lot longer then. So yeah. Godfather 1.

And. I never said Richard Nixon 100% knew anything about watergate. I had, in this completely imaginary scenario that didn’t happen, I had them just ask the question. For the sake of brevity. I didn’t want to recap the entire thing ya know? But sure. You clowned me good. I’m a regular bozo over here.

Look. In all seriousness, I enjoyed your book. But I’m not going to lie and say I think it’s a good idea to include a random story about a Calgary screening of Ghostbusters 2 containing footage never before seen without doing some fact checking. Even if its part of a “Mystery”. It’s your book you can write what you want. But, personally, I’d have checked that out a bit more. And if you can’t well, maybe dont include it? And one of the issues I had with your book is that I think it was a mistake to not take Ghostcorps offer of co operation. I know you had your reasons and I respect that. I just think you lost more than you gained.

Again. As I said. You made something and put it out there. It takes nothing for me to criticize it. That’s easy. What you did is hard. It took guts to say no to Ghostcorp and stick to your guns knowing how much it impacted the book. Real guts. Me? I’m just some asshole who risked nothing but an opinion. And made a joke about comparing your book to watergate. (Eh maybe not my best work. It was harsh. But worse. It wasn’t funny. I apologize for both)

But I do think “Sometimes there are no answers” isn’t a good philosophy to abide by. As the X-Files use to say…The Truth is Out There.
But you do you.
#4975561
RichardLess wrote: December 22nd, 2022, 5:19 am
jg2 wrote: December 22nd, 2022, 2:20 am

Let me stop you right there, because whether or not Richard Nixon knew anything about the burglary beforehand is still one of Watergate's great mysteries. Based on his reaction on the tapes, people assume he knew nothing and that CREEP was acting of their own volition. Who can say for sure? Only Nixon, and he died in 1994. But it doesn't matter because that wasn't the crux of the scandal. Nixon tried to stonewall the investigations into the Watergate burglary. That's obstruction of justice. That's what forced him to resign in disgrace. So I guess my point is you have tried to clown me and you have only clowned yourself. Also, "All The President's Men" wasn't published until 1974, so they'd probably be seeing "Godfather II." Except the book came out in June and "Godfather II" wasn't released until December.
Well watergate happened in 1972 so the crux of the joke is that it’s, ya know, 1972. And even tho they were working at the Washington Post and not technically writing All the Presidents Men at this point, I figure it was a better fit since your an author and well, they wrote a book. Tho I guess one could say they were writing All The Presidents Men at that point since that book was a summation of their experience working on the scandal. So they saw Godfather 1. Keep in mind movies played a lot longer then. So yeah. Godfather 1.

And. I never said Richard Nixon 100% knew anything about watergate. I had, in this completely imaginary scenario that didn’t happen, I had them just ask the question. For the sake of brevity. I didn’t want to recap the entire thing ya know? But sure. You clowned me good. I’m a regular bozo over here.

Look. In all seriousness, I enjoyed your book. But I’m not going to lie and say I think it’s a good idea to include a random story about a Calgary screening of Ghostbusters 2 containing footage never before seen without doing some fact checking. Even if its part of a “Mystery”. It’s your book you can write what you want. But, personally, I’d have checked that out a bit more. And if you can’t well, maybe dont include it? And one of the issues I had with your book is that I think it was a mistake to not take Ghostcorps offer of co operation. I know you had your reasons and I respect that. I just think you lost more than you gained.

Again. As I said. You made something and put it out there. It takes nothing for me to criticize it. That’s easy. What you did is hard. It took guts to say no to Ghostcorp and stick to your guns knowing how much it impacted the book. Real guts. Me? I’m just some asshole who risked nothing but an opinion. And made a joke about comparing your book to watergate. (Eh maybe not my best work. It was harsh. But worse. It wasn’t funny. I apologize for both)

But I do think “Sometimes there are no answers” isn’t a good philosophy to abide by. As the X-Files use to say…The Truth is Out There.
But you do you.
I don't know what makes you think I didn't do any fact checking. I went through Calgary newspaper archives. I asked Ned Gorman about it. I asked the editors. Nobody had a definitive explanation, just like nobody had a definitive explanation as to why so many people swear up and down that they saw the Slimer Statue of Liberty ending. All I was trying to do was provide interesting anecdotal evidence that perhaps earlier cuts of the movie accidentally went out in place of the final cut. It's been known to happen. In 1989 or 19990 Warner Bros accidentally sent a revival theater a work print copy of "Blade Runner" that no one knew existed. They thought it was the theatrical version. No one bothered to check. I know, I should have put that in the book.

Maybe I would have gotten more concrete answers if I'd agreed to get onboard with Sony. Then again, maybe I wouldn't have. Did that officially licensed "Ghostbusters: The Inside Story" book from 2020 get into any of this at all? Sometimes there are no answers because people are withholding the answers and you're just doing to best to fill in the blanks.

And I accept your apology. Namaste.
#4975567
RichardLess wrote: December 21st, 2022, 8:37 pm But it’s interesting to think that somewhere…out there, maybe waiting in a vault, is an alternate version of Ghostbusters 2. Complete with Sherman Tully.
There totally is! We just saw it with GB1 and the preview cut. I like to think a copy of the GB2 preview cut still exists. It's one of my most sought-after pieces of GB media.

Regarding the Calgary print, I can totally see it happening. Call it fate, call it luck, call it karma. Perhaps it was a film lab tech with a hang over, half-assed paying attention?

How many thousands of release prints were struck for GB2? Can you imagine how much physical space that must take up? There are 6 reels in each print, and I highly doubt they're all ready at the same time. The last chunk of GB2 was reshot at the LAST minute (with FX!), so more than likely, there were thousands of big tin film cans sitting in a warehouse, waiting for the last reel. I'm guessing there's a LOT of organization involved, last-minute stress to ship in order to hit release day-- and what's that? Someone found a GB2 print sitting in the corner? It must have been misplaced, throw it with the others.

...and Calgary randomly has a test screening print of GB2.

Perhaps the creative gods were creating the perfect storm. Marking their territory for Afterlife in a few decades, planting seeds for Proton Charging in a young casetwar's mind.
#4975606
d_osborn wrote: December 22nd, 2022, 10:04 am ...and Calgary randomly has a test screening print of GB2.
Richard was talking like it was a special cut of the film sent special to Calgary, and he's right, that would make no sense. But that's not what I'm saying I saw.

Just to walk through it, I did not see a test screening, those are held close to LA (sometimes in far-flung cities, but in the States). I also didn't see a preview screening - I'm not even sure there was one for Ghostbusters 2, as they're usually reserved for movies where they want to create some word of mouth and a second Ghostbusters didn't need that. I guess it's not impossible a test screening print ended up in the wild, but we'd have to find out things like, do test prints go back to the lab or distribution where they might get mixed in with release prints? I'd imagine that test prints, just to avoid cockups, go to the studio, but that's just an assumption on my part.

What I saw was the first / early showing on opening Friday at Northhill Mall in Calgary.
Image
That's it, right there, the one I went to. 16, drove myself and some friends, waited in line outside, saw movie.

Did I see a different print? Mandela Effect and conflated memories aren't impossible, but they're not the easy answer in this case - I didn't buy the novelization until years later, and the NOW comic didn't come out until months later. And honestly, I didn't read the novelization, just collected it, and what I remember visually bears no resemblance to what was in the NOW comics adaptation.

I don't recall seeing the Slimer ending, but as the first movie has a Slimer ending, it's easy to believe I may have saw it and in hindsight I think I'm thinking of the first movie. I don't remember differences in the montage, but again, would I remember small changes to a montage when I finally see the movie again on VHS? Probably not.

I also don't remember seeing Sherman outside the building, which is what eventually got published in a few places as stills - it might have been in the cut, but I don't remember it.

What I remember is just after the guys hustle down the hallway at the hospital, they head through a door - in the cut we have now, it jumps away from the hospital - and into another stretch of hallway that leads outside and it's here that they meet Sherman, Louis introduces him. That's it.

Could I be wrong? Yup. And I'm not too worried about it - I can't prove it either way. I can clarify that it's not as simple as I was a kid and I read the comic and that's how I came to "remember" it.

As for how Calgary got the print, Derek, you and I are on similar pages. My preferred theory is that as they wrestled with cuts right up to release, they had to meet a print deadline and sent in a cut, and a few prints were made - then another, final cut was sent in to replace the first, but physical prints being expensive, why waste the first ones that got made? The changes we're talking about are minor, and who will remember them once it goes to VHS?

I don't think Calgary was singled out - I doubt the prints of that cut were even city-wide. I think a few were made, that one cinema got one (an argument could be made that these early prints, however many there were, were specifically sent to non-major markets, like a theater in Calgary Alberta so they weren't showing in major markets where the big reviewers), and unless we eventually find evidence to clear up whether I'm misremembering, I got to see a cut with deleted footage.
seekandannoy liked this

Has anyone tried some matte light smoke cling non-[…]

If anyone is lost, RichardLess is referring to t[…]

The only other polyphonic boards that I know are t[…]

Hey Eric i wanted to ask you in your code am i abl[…]