Thread: Ghostbusters 3 Depends on Bill Murray and Might Have Ashton Kutcher
View Single Post
Old 03-01-2011, 12:57 AM   #19
Kane Knight
Ron Paul 4 EVA
 
Kane Knight's Avatar
 
Posts: 152,467
Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eklipse View Post
Here's a good example:
Terminator 2. Movie should have ended right there. But no. And what did we get? Fucking Terminator 3.

Maybe I personally don't want to see Ghostbusters get the same shit-treatment?
By the same stretch, Terminator. Movie should have ended right there. What did we get? Terminator 2.

Maybe operating from the assumption of "shit treatment" is stupid?

Especially considering the people involved had a lot to do with the original, completely unlike Terminator 3?

Or Ghostbusters 2 was hardly Terminator 2?

Or the game that took its cues from a prior proposed script was well received?

Go on. Explain how your example bears out yoru concerns at all, and isn't stupid as all fuck.
Kane Knight is offline   Reply With Quote