Page 2 of 2

Re: Ghostbusters III ..... This doesn't look good.

Posted: February 15, 2012 • 1:45 am
by Joel
I wouldn't be laughing. Remember Bluesbrothers 2000? John Goodman as the brother of the Late Jake Blues. No offence to Goodman as he's a terrific actor and did the best he could with the material provided, but Jim Belushi (assuming he wasn't actually offered and turned down the role) would have been a smarter choice.

Actually, tearing the script up would have been smarter.

Re: Ghostbusters III ..... This doesn't look good.

Posted: February 15, 2012 • 1:56 am
by mr_cyberpunk
blues brothers 2000 is a very good comparison.

In all fairness though, the Ghostbusters game was pretty great, if they could do another as "Ghostbusters 3" that would be the best, everyone agreed and was happy with Ghostbusters the game, it got great response from the press. I wonder why Murray was fine with a game but not a movie..

Heck I'd love to see a blues brothers game come out.

Re: Ghostbusters III ..... This doesn't look good.

Posted: February 15, 2012 • 3:29 am
by Joel
For Murray, in doing a GB game, he wouldn't have had to endure the things he didn't like about making GB2. Apparently he didn't want to have to wear the GB uniform, he didn't like the story and the overuse of special effects. I think he was also disappointed that his character didn't get more development.

Whereas, with a video game, all of that goes away because most of that doesn't matter. The story isn't expected to be as engaging, he doesn't have to dress up and it's computer drawn so he can't accuse it for overuse of special effects because there's no live photography. He reflects very positively on the game too from what I read. Working on the game would have felt less like work since it was just voice work. It would have been great to see some studio footage with them sitting and goofing around between takes.

Re: Ghostbusters III ..... This doesn't look good.

Posted: February 15, 2012 • 7:05 pm
by lestat666
The Ghostbusters game was great.

And I thought the story was very engaging. It did an excellent job of explaining just why there was so much paranormal activity in the New York area and it even explained why there was a river of slime.

The gameplay was decent and it had its flaws, but as the use of a movie license, i have to say it is one of the best game out there using one.

Re: Ghostbusters III ..... This doesn't look good.

Posted: February 17, 2012 • 7:39 pm
by lestat666
I was thinking about this thread again and I wanted to say that there is on other movie license that was put to good use and that is Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings license.

Look at all the great games that came out of this.
Battle for Middle Earth 1 and 2.
LOR The Third Age
War In the North
LOR Online
All the beat em ups for the PS2
War of the Ring
Aragorn's Quest,
etc.

Not too many movie licenses that make great video games, but this was one of them and Ghostbusters.

Re: Ghostbusters III ..... This doesn't look good.

Posted: February 17, 2012 • 8:06 pm
by Joel
This really deserves it's own thread, but while we're discussing decent movie-license games:

- Blade Runner

- Goldeneye 64

- Tintin

- Batman Arkham Asylum/City

- Batman (NES)

- The X-Files (well, TV series anyway)

- Terminator: Future Shock

- Chuck Norris' Roundhouse Madness

Re: Ghostbusters III ..... This doesn't look good.

Posted: February 17, 2012 • 8:20 pm
by lestat666
Started a new thread.
http://www.unofficialtexmurphy.com/mess ... f=1&t=3669

I guess this can go back to topic. :lol: