What the Hell Happened to Ivan Reitman?

Ivan Reitman
Ivan Reitman

Ivan Reitman began humbly, from the very earliest outset. His refugee family moved to Canada, which is where he received a degree in music. Having been introduced to filmmaking in college, he moved to Hollywood, comfortably moving into the director’s chair, where he fairly quickly rose to direct the top comedies being released. He was on top of the comedic world, working with Hollywood’s biggest stars churning out hits one after the other. Very gradually, his career tapered off. Although he still directs, Reitman has now seen his movies dumped into the bleak valleys of the early winter. We must ask:

What the hell happened?

Reitman was born to Jewish parents in Czechoslovakia on October 27th, 1946. Yes, being born into Judaism in Central Europe in the forties made for a rough upbringing. Reitman’s mother survived Auschwitz, while his father was fighting in the resistance. His parents fled as refugees to Canada in 1950, little Ivan was four.

McMaster University
McMaster University

Reitman set out down a musical path at a young age. He was a member of an a cappella quartet in secondary school, and attended Hamilton’s McMaster University, receiving a degree in music in 1969. While at university, Reitman experimented with directing, overseeing a number of student short films.

Ivan Reitman and Dan Aykroyd - Canadian comic icons
Ivan Reitman and Dan Aykroyd – Canadian comic icons

Reitman began as an assistant producer at a Toronto TV station, but was quickly dismissed. CITY-TV was also the home of Dan Aykroyd’s first job as an announcer. Aykroyd and Reitman both later became Canadian icons in Hollywood (as you are soon to see), and even collaborated.

Foxy Lady Poster - 1971
Foxy Lady Poster – 1971

In 1971, Reitman directed his first feature, the comedy Foxy Lady. Alan Gordon, who would again team up with Reitman in the future, played the lead. The film is aggressively non-notable, aside from being Reitman and Eugene Levy’s first.

Cannibal Girls - 1973
Cannibal Girls – 1973

Reitman made the jump to Hollywood in 1973. After setting some scores to minor films (putting his degree to use), Reitman made his Hollywood directorial debut with the low-budget horror comedy Cannibal Girls. Though the movie was shot entirely in Canada, the release was officiated by Californian entities. Eugene Levy played the lead. He is a traveling salesman accosted by a town dominated by a cannibalistic cult.

The film had a very minor release, but has enjoyed a (non-cannibalistic) cult following over the years as the stars of the director and lead grew.

AnimalHouse
Animal House – 1978

After this, Reitman honed his skills as an executive producer and a music supervisor. Though Reitman no longer sets sound to pictures, he is active as a producer, and has been since he hit his stride as a director. In 1978, Reitman acted as producer on the classic buffoonery comedy Animal House.

Reitman originally wanted to direct Animal House himself.  But Universal didn’t feel like he had enough experience to direct the picture.  They approached Richard Lester and Bob Rafelson before hiring John Landis.   Landis had directed two movies at that point; Schlock in 1973 and The Kentucky Fried Movie in 1977.  Reitman reclled his frustration:

I had worked on it three years, brought Belushi into it, and ended up producing the film, but my original intention was always to direct it. But because I had really only directed this small $12,000 improvised comedy called Cannibal Girls, the studio wouldn’t let me do it, and so we hired John Landis who did a great job. But I really wanted to direct,

Reitman’s original idea for casting was basically to steal the cast of Saturday Night Live.  John Belushi was always intended to play Bluto.  But Reitman also wanted Bill Murray for Boone, Chevy Chase for Otter and Dan Aykroyd for D-Day.  Director John Landis didn’t like the idea of making Animal House into the de facto  SNL movie.  So when he met with Chase he subtly persuaded him to turn down the part by appealing to Chase’s ego.  The tactic worked.  Chase chose to star in Foul Play instead of appear as part of an ensemble in Animal House.  With that, the idea of loading the cast with the Not Ready for Primetime Players fell by the wayside.

Reitman has over 60 credits to his name as a producer, but we won’t be covering them all here.  For the purposes of this article, we’ll be focusing on Reitman’s work as a director.

Delta House - 1979
Delta House – 1979

Reitman produced a TV adaptation of Animal House called Delta House.  The show recast some roles while maintaining original cast members Stephen Furst, Bruce McGill, James Widdoes and John Vernon.  Michelle Pfieffer made an early appearance as a character credited as “The Bombshell.”

Meatballs - 1979
Meatballs – 1979

1979 brought Reitman’s first high-profile gig as a director, Meatballs. Starring Bill Murray (for the first time ever) as a counselor running a shoestring summer camp beside a lake.

Murray was not yet a star when Reitman approached him about starring in Meatballs.  He had only recently replaced Chevy Chase on Saturday Night Live.  But even then, getting Murray to agree to make a movie was a difficult task.  Reitman had an advantage in that he knew Murray from his days on the National Lampoon Show which Reitman produced off-Broadway.  According to Reitman:

I called him up and said, “Come on, Bill, this is a funny script. It’s a great idea, we’ll have a great time, we’ll be at a real camp. And you’re not doing anything.” And he just wouldn’t say yes. It’s not like he was a big star or anything. He had never been in a movie. He had barely been on television. But he’s always kind of been iconoclastically difficult about agreeing to be in things. And also hard to reach. But I refused to take no for an answer and I refused to hire anyone else as the star of the movie, because I couldn’t think of anyone else who could kind of fill those shoes. He agreed finally to do it, I think, on the eve of the first day of shooting, and he showed up on set on the second day of shooting. It was really touch and go all the way. But when he got there, he was absolutely committed. He was brilliant.

When Murray showed up, he began contributing to the script.  The focus of the movie shifted from the teenage camp counselors to Murray’s relationship with a shy camper played by Chris Makepeace.  Reitman recalled the changes:

It was slightly more of an ensemble, concentrating on the group he was taking care of. His role was always the most important, but the group of older teenagers, the so-called CITs, were the center of most of the subplots. What we learned as we were doing it and as we watched it in editing was the relationship between Bill and Chris Makepeace, the young kid who was sort of sad, seemed much more powerful and was a better balance for his abilities. For him to play that sort of ironic bombastic character against the sweetness of Makepeace turned out to make some really delicious sceneplay.

The film blends slapstick with sentiment, a prickly divide Reitman has spanned quite nicely throughout his career. Though again the movie uses the Great White (though more so green here) North as a backdrop, Paramount oversaw the release. The movie made back its budget–27 times over. In addition to the status as a “hit” movie, the film garnered positive reviews. They really liked Murray. Some things never change.

Stripes - 1981
Stripes – 1981

Reitman had his foot in the door. He was now being considered for major comedy projects. Reitman decided to reunite with a previous collaborator, something he does far more often than not. 1981 brought Stripes, a war comedy starring Bill Murray, Harold Ramis, Warren Oates of Western fame, John Candy, and Bill Paxton. Sean Young also appears.

Reitman says he thought of the idea on the way to the Meatballspremiere. “Cheech and Chong join the Army”! Originally, the plan was for Richard “Cheech” Marin and Tommy Chong to star, but the idea was dropped after they demanded creative control. Reitman was already flexing his muscular clout given he was able to oust two of comedy’s most prominent from his movie.

After the stoners were driven away, Murray was sought out by Reitman.  Once again, Reitman had trouble getting Murray to commit.  He finally agreed two weeks before shooting started and didn’t arrive on the set until the third day of filming.  According to Reitman, “We were hoping he’d show up. He was following a baseball team around the country.”

For the role of Reitman’s sidekick, Dennis Quaid was nearly cast.  Murray, who was friends with Harold Ramis, insisted on having Ramis in the movie partially to help him rewrite his dialogue.  When first approached, Ramis politely declined. At this time, Ramis was a prominent writer, but had no acting credentials. Eventually Ramis accepted the part after being prodded by Reitman and Murray.

Reitman and Murray both had a great deal of respect for veteran actor Warren Oates who played the drill sergeant.  Reitman decided one day to try to surprise Oates by having the other actors jump him and throw him in the mud.  It did  not work as out as hoped.  Oates broke a tooth.  The actor was not amused and he let the novice director know it:

He was furious and came up to me and said, ‘Look, I’ve been doing this for a long time, I’m a professional. You want to throw me down–that’s fine, just tell me. But don’t you fucking surprise me.’ He was really, really mad and his tooth hurt for a long time.

The movie, budgeted at $10 million, was littered with stars, present and future. This propelled the movie to a major profit. Critics also responded positively to Reitman and Murray’s second collaboration. Roger Ebert called it an “anarchic slob, a celebration of all that is irreverent”, and “alot of fun”. Ramis was also praised, buoying his confidence to pursue more roles in front of the lens.

Heavy Metal - 1981
Heavy Metal – 1981

In between, Reitman produced, and really made possible, the bizarre science fiction fantasy anthology Heavy Metal. The movie is based on the magazine that shares the title. It features very graphic violence, sex, and nudity. It consists of ten segments, all directed by Gerald Potterton. Frequent Reitman collaborators Harold Ramis, John Candy, and Eugene Levy all provide voice work. Here, just have a look:

Pretty dated if you ask me. Maybe Roger Ebert should have reserved the word “anarchic” for this one. Critics were greatly confused, but they praised the score (thank McMaster U for that).  The movie was mildly successful at the box office despite critical indifference.  It has since become a staple of midnight movies and spawned a sequel.

Reitman’s next effort may feature dated special effects, but is heralded as timeless and indispensable. Very few films are so beloved.

Ghostbusters - 1984
Ghostbusters – 1984

Ghostbusters was not a seed planted by Reitman, he was brought in to water.  Dan Aykroyd, noted paranormal fanatic, conceived of the idea. He thought he would costar with SNL mate John Belushi. Although the notion of the “Ghostbusters” remained true, most other aspects of the final film were different from Aykroyd’s vision. According to Reitman, Aykroyd’s magnum opus was set in the future and would have cost “at least $300 million in 1984 dollars”.  Reitman brought in Harold Ramis to rewrite the script and bring down the budget.

Belushi had already passed away, and John Candy declined. Belushi’s role was given to Bill Murray, and Candy’s role was retooled in order to befit Harold Ramis. Key supporting roles went to Sigourney Weaver as an early client-turned-Babylonian-demon, and Rick Moranis as Weaver’s neighbor-also-turned-possessed. Ernie Hudson joins later as the fourth Ghosbuster. At this juncture, they need all the help they can get to save NYC.

Reitman didn’t just produce and direct Ghostbusters.  He also provided the demonic voice of Zuul,

Ghostbusters was released to great fanfare, setting a Columbia opening weekend record at $13.6 million. It was only knocked of its pedestal in its seventh week by Prince’s Purple Rain. The next week Ghostbusters regained the top spot. Six weeks later, it was on top again. Pretty remarkable longevity. After a 1985 re-release, the movie dethroned Beverly Hills Cop with Eddie Murphy as the top comedic movie of the 80s.

Ghostbusters - 1984
Ghostbusters – 1984

Murphy had originally been offered Ernie Hudson’s role.  The part as written was larger given Murphy’s star status.  When Murphy passed and Hudson was cast, the part of Winston was greatly reduced much to Hudson’s dismay.  Hudson had taken a paycut because he was confident Ghostbusters was going to make his career.  According to Hudson:

The night before filming begins, however, I get this new script and it was shocking.  The character was gone. Instead of coming in at the very beginning of the movie, like page 8, the character came in on page 68 after the Ghostbusters were established. His elaborate background was all gone, replaced by me walking in and saying, “If there’s a steady paycheck in it, I’ll believe anything you say.” So that was pretty devastating.

I’m panicked. I don’t sleep that night. It was like my worst nightmare is happening. The next morning, I rush to the set and plead my case. And Ivan basically says, “The studio felt that they had Bill Murray, so they wanted to give him more stuff to do.” I go, “Okay, I understand that, but can I even be there when they’re established?” And of course, he said no, there’s nothing to do about it. It was kind of awkward, and it became sort of the elephant in the room.

Hudson expressed his regrets about what might have been.  But ultimately, he says he’s still grateful for his involvement in Ghostbusters even if it wasn’t what he signed up for:

I love the movie, I love the guys. I’m very thankful to Ivan for casting me. I’m very thankful that fans appreciate the Winston character. But it’s always been very frustrating—kind of a love/hate thing, I guess.

Critics were universal in their praise of Ghostbusters. The film christened the CGI-driven comedy film, and essentially ordained the notion of the comedy blockbuster. If it itself didn’t, one can argue the (forthcoming) sequel did.

The supernatural ensemble established Reitman as an unquestionable powerhouse. He was the biggest comedic director around. His followup to his biggest hit yet was the legal crime comedy Legal Eagles.

Debra Winger – Legal Eagles – 1986
Debra Winger – Legal Eagles – 1986

Starring Robert Redford, Debra Winger, Daryl Hannah, and Terence Stamp, the comedy sees the first three get swept up in an arson fraud case surrounding valuable pieces of art. The movie’s ending was entirely switched after as test audiences uniformly identified the outcome of the verdict as the most hated part of the film. By the time it reached TV screens, the ending was reversed. No spoilers here!

Originally, Bill Murray was slated to star alongside a male lead buddy-style, but backed out. Robert Redford sought a Tracy-Hepburn-esque romantic caper, so Reitman toyed with the script to suit Redford’s wishes.  Winger clashed with both her co-star and her director.  When the movie was released, she trashed it to the press.

“I’m glad that some people are enjoying it,” Winger said. ”But I was horrified to see it edited with a chainsaw.  Legal Eagles is the kind of film that takes audiences and shakes them up until $6 falls out of their pockets.”

She went on to describe how the movie changed from a comedy into a thriller during filming, “I had a lot of disagreements with Ivan as the film changed character. But he’s a very strong personality, and he made the movie he wanted to make.”

Reitman, for his part, labelled Winger as “difficult”: ”She’s historically been a difficult actress to work with. Talk to her other directors. Debra works out of a nervous tension, and she thrives on that tension.”

Hefty upfront paydays for its director and stars, in concert with elaborate set pieces made Legal Eagles one of the most expensive films ever made at that point. Despite this hurdle, the movie made a modest profit, but divided critics.

1988 ushered in the next blockbuster comedy for Reitman. For this effort, Reitman recruited the world’s biggest movie star and a man half his size.

arnie - twins
Twins – 1988

Arnold Schwarzenegger and Danny DeVito play fraternal twins conceived in a eugenics experiment, and separated at birth. They are reunited; DeVito’s street-smart Vincent contrasts with Schwarzenegger’s intellectual and urbane Julius. Kelly Preston and Chloe Webb play love interests. Jason Reitman, Ivan’s son, plays a small role as a little child, and Heather Graham appears in a flashback as the birth-mother of DeVito and Schwarzenegger.

The film was a titan at the box office. Both DeVito and Schwarzenegger deferred their salaries in exchange for 20% of the film’s gross. This turned out to be a wise, extremely lucrative move. The movie represents each actor’s largest ever payday. Critics were mixed to negative about the film. Rumors have swirled of a sequel, to be called Triplets, with Eddie Murphy playing the third member of the brood.

Reitman was on a roll, an absolute torrent. Three movies, three financial successes, two of them dynamite. Up next was a sequel to one of them.

Ghostbusters 2 - 1989
Ghostbusters II – 1989

Ghostbusters II saw all cast members from the first film return. The Ghosbusters are forced out of business due to extensive property damage from the original film’s climax. Good on the writers for addressing that rarely mentioned aspect of movies with action. Soon, however, the squad is battling another existential threat for the Big Apple, in the form of a Romanian warlord from the Dark Ages.

Reitman, Murray, and Ramis were reluctant to revist Ghostbusters, something they had intended to be a standalone project. Eventually, they were lured back in for more rollicking and ghost-hunting.

The long-awaited sequel set a new record for highest-ever opening weekend, with $29.5 million. The record was broken the next week by Batman. Despite audiences reacting favorably, critics didn’t think so highly of the second adventure, saddling the movie with mixed reviews. As addressed before, the movie really set in motion the notion of the preordained, effects driven blockbuster. The movie that nailed home this concept was, in many ways, the film that came 5 days later.

Kindergarten Cop - 1990
Kindergarten Cop – 1990

The next year, Reitman continued his flaming streak of success by re-teaming with the Styrian Oak, Arnold Schwarzenegger.

The tough guy who shreds guys who would shred you softens in order to play an instructor to toddlers. He does this in order to apprehend a drug dealer played by Richard Tyson, then a moderate TV star. Penelope Ann Miller plays a teacher Schwarzenegger falls for, who happens to be Tyson’s ex. Linda Hunt of NCIS: LA plays the principal who eventually warms to the Austrian-accented California cop.

The movie, I feel, provides some genuinely humorous moments. Though it is a little contrived, and forces itself with the romantic subplots, I think it to be quite good. Critics agreed to a limited degree, reviewing the movie as broadly favorable. The film passed $200 million, a rare feat back then, notching the fifth consecutive success for Reitman.

Stop or My Mom Will Shoot - 1992
Stop or My Mom Will Shoot – 1992

In 1992, Reitman tried to guide Schwarzenegger’s more mustachioed (though not above) rival, Sylvester Stallone to similar success, though in the producer’s role. Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot. Estelle Getty plays Sly’s mother, the mare to the Stallion.

Although the film ran a narrow profit, critics slammed the movie. Even Stallone slammed it. Read on:

Washington Post- “your worst nightmare”, yet “better” than previous Stallone stabs at comedy

Roger Ebert- “stared at the screen in utter disbelief”. “Moronic beyond comprehension”. “One of the worst movies I have ever seen.”

Sylvester Stallone (once again, the movie’s star)-“Maybe one of the worst films in the entire solar system, including alien productions we’ve never seen”. “A flatworm could write a better script”. “In some countries – China, I believe – running [the movie] once a week on government television has lowered the birth rate to zero. If they ran it twice a week, I believe in twenty years China would be extinct”.

It’s bad, but Reitman only produced. Streak continues.

Dave - 1993
Dave – 1993

1993 gave us Dave, a political comedy film starring Kevin Kline, and Sigourney Weaver. Frank Langella, Kevin Dunn, Ving Rhames, and Ben Kinglsey appear in supporting roles.

The movie is loaded with cameos from politicians (Christopher Dodd, Tom Harkin, Tip O’Neill, Paul Simon, and Alan K. Simpson), and Hollywood personalities (Arnie, Larry King, Jay Leno, Chris Matthews, Oliver Stone, Helen Thomas, and Ben Stein) alike. Kline was the first choice for the POTUS role for his possession of both a “president look” and “dramatically strong” presence. The film’s Oval Office set went on the be reused many times, becoming the go-to for recreations of the president’s primary desk.

Dave was met with great critical acclaim. Audiences allowed the film to open at second place behind Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story. In the movie’s second weekend, it topped the leaderboard however. The movie tripled its budget, keeping Reitman’s now eight-long streak firm as a persimmon on the tree.

arnie junior
Junior – 1994

Reitman reteamed with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Danny DeVito for the male pregnancy comedy, Junior.  For this effort, Emma Thompson was added to the mix. Arnie played a research geneticist (Austrian this time, finally no accent explanation needed), while Thompson played a fellow geneticist. DeVito played an OB/GYN who has invented a fertility drug that causes Dr. Arnie to become pregnant.

Critics mostly dispproved of the film, with a notable exception in Roger Ebert, who lauded Schwarzenegger for his acting skills. Yes, he did. Schwarzenegger was even nominated for a Golden Globe!  Domestically, Junior bombed.  It opened in fourth place behind Interview With a Vampire which had been in theaters for three weeks.  It grossed under $40 million dollars in the US – even less than Schwarzenegger’s previous flop, Last Action Hero.  Fortunately, Junior fared much better overseas where it grossed nearly twice as much in the US.

Father's Day - 1997
Father’s Day – 1997

In this family comedy, a young man run away from home. His mother, Natassja Kinski, visits two of her former paramours (Billy Crystal and Robin Williams) and tells each he is the father, in order to spur them into action. Eventually they meet, and, instead of exacting revenge against Kinski, they try to track down both the boy and the real father (Bruce Greenwood).

The film bombed, quite honestly. Its star power could not lift its weak material into the black. Critics pounded on the film, but audiences certainly weren’t pounding down cinema doors. At an $85 million budget, the movie grossed less than half of that.

Six Days, Seven Nights – 1998
Six Days, Seven Nights – 1998

The streak was busted, 9 films into an extraordinary run of success, Reitman flopped spectacularly. Reitman was still on top of comedy, though. Next he teamed up with Harrison Ford (not known for comedy) and Anne “Queen Celestia” Heche for the romantic adventure comedy Six Days Seven Nights.

The escapade takes place on a Polynesian island where Ford and Heche, along with David Schwimmer and Jacqueline Obradors, escape pirates and fall in love. Harrison Ford, whom by now everyone knows is a pilot, did his own aviation stunts for this film.

One day after being cast as Ford’s romantic interest, Heche came out as gay.  The media pounced on it.  Would audiences accept a gay actress as a leading lady in a romantic comedy?  When Reitman was asked about the headlines, he admitted to being worried.  He was quoted as saying, ” “I think it will do the movie some harm, and that makes me nervous.”

Critics gave the movie mixed to negative reviews. Though they recognized Ford imported his stoic hero from other, more famous roles, they praised his guiding of the chemistry between he and Heche. The movie played well in the US, and exceedingly well internationally for a romantic comedy, testament to Ford’s star power more than Reitman’s. It still indicated though that Reitman could deliver crowd-pleasing hits.

Evolution - 2001
Evolution – 2001

One year into the new millennium, Reitman went a little of the beaten path, though he didn’t even approach the nearly two-decades prior Heavy Metal.

Starring David Duchovny, Julianne Moore, Orlando Jones, Ted Levine (Buffalo Bill from Silence of the Lambs), and the ever-annoying Sean William Scott, the movie sees an asteroid crash on Earth. Once on the Blue Planet (you know, not Neptune or Uranus), the asteroid spawns alien-life forms into the Arizonan desert that resemble Ricky Gervais’ Flanimals, though these are all menacing and must be stopped.

Evolution was originally written as a straight science-fiction thriller.  Reitman hired David Diamond and David Weissman to re-write the project as a comedy. The original writer, Don Jakoby, actually enjoyed the changes so much, he continued working on the film alongside the other writers.

Critics termed the movie a lesser retooling of Ghostbusters’ central idea. Though the movie made just shy of $100 million, its $80 million budget prohibited profit. Another misfire from Reitman critics and audiences agreed.

Five years passed before Reitman returned to the director’s chair.

My Super Ex-Girlfriend – 2006
My Super Ex-Girlfriend – 2006

Reitman was directing Luke Wilson and Uma Thurman in the superhero romantic comedy My Super Ex-Girlfriend. Wilson plays the lover of a superhero-in-diguise Uma Thurman, a.k.a. G-Girl. The fact that she could crush him like a walnut unsettles Wilson, who breaks up with him. She exacts revenge in outlandish ways all baed off her superpowers. Anna Faris plays G-Girl’s rival for Wilson. Rainn Wilson plays Wilson’s brotastic and appropriately bizarre coworker friend, while Wanda Sykes plays G-Girl’s uptight boss.

Writer Don Payne of The Simpsons really did strike upon an original idea, a superhero romantic comedy. Critics though that although the premise offered some laughs, the plot was cliché-ridden and even sexist. American audiences were super turned off.  My Super Ex-Girlfriend opened in an embarrassing 7th place behind Monster House, Lady in the Water and Clerks 2.  It fared better overseas where it managed to get into the black.

Another five years passed before Reitman returned to the director’s chair with another rom-com.

Friends With Benefits - 2011
Friends With Benefits – 2011

Oh wait, here we are (they’re just so similar; in fact, early on, they had the same title):

No Strings Attached - 2011
No Strings Attached – 2011

Actor and aspiring tech mogul Ashton Kutcher teams up alongside Oscar-winner Natalie Portman for No Strings Attached. They play two friends who create an understanding that they will, uh, partake in the carnal pleasures of life without actually dating. Kevin Kline plays Kutcher’s father, while Cary “Dread Pirate Roberts” Elwes plays Portman’s father figure (boss). Mindy Kaling is her sassy friend, while Ludacris fills the “co-bro” role for Kutcher.

Portman was the first choice for the female lead, she accepted, hoping to follow Black Swan with an entirely dissimilar character. Kutcher, almost exclusively appearing in rom-coms, was sought initially as well.

No Strings Attached served as a much-needed financial success for Reitman, remaking its budget six times over. Audiences enjoyed the movie greatly according to exit polls.

Of Reitman’s first R-rated effort since Stripes, critics thought highly–of Reitman and Portman. They praised Reitman’s “steady hand” and Portman’s presence, but Kutcher seemed subject to scorn. Ah well, some things never change.

Ashton Kutcher after reading reviews of his performance.
Ashton Kutcher after reading reviews of his performance.

Ivan Reitman’s latest directorial effort came in early 2014, in the form of a sports dramedy regarding NFL football.

Draft Day - 2014
Draft Day – 2014

Kevin Costner plays the general manager of the Cleveland Browns, determining how to utilize his team’s number one pick in the draft. Adding drama is the fact that he recently fired his father as the team’s head coach; subsequently, he died. His secret paramour Jennifer Garner is pregnant with his child. Given this, he is NOT ready for some football. Sorry, Bocephus.

Initially, the production was to be centered on the Buffalo Bills, they didn’t really want to be immortalized in film as a team bad enough to receive the first pick. Given the lesser production costs in Ohio, and the Browns’ acceptance, Cleveland became Costner’s new employer.

In the film, the Browns passed on the heralded Heisman winner. In the real-life 2014 NFL Draft the Browns (without The Mariner, Crash Davis, Robin Hood, Kevin Costner) selected the hyped Heisman winner, Johnny “Rehab, err Football” Manziel. Interesting little footnote.

While the film sought to tap into the lack of NFL football at the time of its release (early April), this evidently did not occur. The movie barely recouped its production budget. Critically, it performed better, being ranked as “Fresh” on Rotten Tomatoes. Critics, though not audiences, responded well to Reitman’s purest approach to drama yet, despite their labeling of the picture as being a by-the-numbers effort in many places (ironic as Costner plays a GM).

Who ya gonna call? Not Bill Murray.
Who ya gonna call? Not Bill Murray.

For those of you wondering about Reitman and the continuation of Ghostbusters, know that he may still be involved as a director. Reitman has always been a producer, and will produce the forthcoming Paul Feig-directed female Ghostbusters reboot. Throughout the 90s, aughts, and 2010s, rumors swirled about Ghostbusters III. Reitman was said to be involved as director, as mandated by his contract.

Ivan Reitman on the set of Ghostbusters with the cast
Ivan Reitman on the set of Ghostbusters with the cast

People also told of Murray furiously rejecting proposals to return, remembering the critical disappointment of the second in the series. Rick Moranis was rumored to make his long-awaited return to live-action. With Ramis’ death in 2014, plans for a reboot with the original cast were dashed. An all-female (by Feig) and an all-male Ghostbusters are now in the works, with Reitman working as producer on both. There is also discussion of a prequel of some sort to be directed by Reitman. Other than the prospective Triplets, nothing else is in the pipeline for Reitman. He has three children with his wife of thirty years, one a college student, another Catherine Reitman, an actress, and the third fellow director Jason Reitman. Reitman found some early success as a critical and faux-indie darling, but had now reached a point where he is eligible for this series.

So, what the hell happened?

Ivan Reitman, first of all, was lucky. Not just to have become one of the world’s most sought-after director, and the premier director in the realm of comedy, but simply to have made it to age four. Thankfully, his refugee parents were able to depart the persecuting environment of Central Europe, and make a life in Canada. Young Ivan excelled in the creative department, though in music. In college, he was introduced to filmmaking, and decided to pursue this.

Ivan Reitman crafted a legacy with one iconic film franchise, Ghostbusters. But if you peruse through his filmography, he is much more than that. He worked with Arnold Schwarzenegger three times, succeeding very bountifully two of those three times. He worked, and succeeded with Bill Murray twice even before Ghostbusters. Although always remaining in comedy, he bounced within that genre to various sub genres, be it political comedy, slapstick comedy, slacker comedy, sci-fi comedy, dramedy, or, most often, action comedy, He found the most success there.

As a director, you can’t hope for a better career. In his fifth decade as director, Reitman is still making big movies. He frequently produces films as well. It might seem that Ivan Reitman is unmatched to this series, but a fall from Hollywood’s pinnacle to the mere working class is something worth documenting, given that the career in question is filled with so many memorable and even iconic films.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

93 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
lebeau
Admin
8 years ago

Another terrific entry from oakleya77! You’re cranking them out, man! Reitman is undoubtedly one of the most successful directors in comedy. And, from what I have read, he’s a really easy guy to get laughing. His Midas touch seemed to fade in the 90s and then disappear completely at the turn of the century. At least in terms of working as a director. As a producer, he’s been extremely prolific. I was surprised to see how many existing WTHH articles this one tied into. Almost all of Reitman’s movies as a director featured at least one WTHH subject in its… Read more »

Leo
Leo
8 years ago

Other stuff that Ivan Reitman has produced or executive produced besides Animal House, Heavy Metal and Stop! or My Mom Will Shoot include:

1983: Spacehunter: Adventures in the Forbidden Zone with WTHH alumni Molly Ringwald
1987: Big Shots
1988: Casual Sex? starring WTHH alumni Lea Thompson
1988: Feds starring WTHH alumni Rebecca De Mornay
1992: Beethoven
1993: Beethoven’s 2nd
1996: Space Jam
1997: Private Parts
2000: Road Trip
2003: Old School
2004: Eurotrip
2007: Disturbia
2009: Up in the Air

RB
RB
8 years ago

Reitman is an innovator, and this quality seems even more pronounced in his son Jason, whose work is compelling.

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

I think Ivan Reitman’s greatest talent is that he recognizes talent in others. He saw that Bill Murray was every bit as funny as Belushi and Chase even though he was initially passed over for SNL. He saw that Schwarzenegger could be funny too when most people saw him as a cyborg. And he learned early on that if you’re working with funny talented people you should stay out of their way and let them be brilliant.

RB
RB
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

Totally agreed. I first approached “Dave” thinking hmmm, Kevin Kline as the President? But he captured the comedy and the seriousness in the role to a T. In all his pictures he does seem to let his actors and actresses do what they do best.

admin
Admin
admin
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

I viewed “Dave” in the theater back in the day and really liked it, but I viewed it again a few years ago (after my sensibilities matured) and realized that it’s a smart, heartwarming gem.

admin
Admin
admin
8 years ago

Really good info here: the “Heavy Metal” series intrigues me, I didn’t know that Ernie Hudson’s role in “Ghostbusters” was marginalized so (too bad, I like Winston), and I wasn’t aware that “Draft Day” was originally going to be centered around the Buffalo Bills (I’m glad they declined to participate, since I don’t care for the Bills at all). I’ve always felt Ivan Reitman’s career has been pretty quiet this millennium, although I actually liked “My Super Ex-Girlfriend” (it could’ve been better though). One final note on “Ghostbusters”: I heard that the 2009 video was essentially the 3rd installment to… Read more »

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  admin

I first saw Heavy Metal at a midnight show. There was a Rocky Horror-esque element. Thankfully, no one showed up in costume, but the audience was saying lines right along with the movie. It’s cheap, immature, violent and largely sexist (the final segment does feature a strong female protagonist but she’s also naked a lot of the time). But I must confess it is a guilty pleasure. I rewatched it relatively recently and was surprised by just how juvenile it really is. And yet, as a geeky dude, it still entertained the hell out of me.

admin
Admin
admin
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

Yeah, what I read about “heavy Metal” on Wikipedia mentioned that it has a Rocky Horror type following. Ha, considering that there’s scantily clad (and beyond) animation, that would be pretty wild to see if people showed up in costume.

RB
RB
8 years ago

I’m also impressed with how well Oakleya writes in the true WTHH style. While not a carbon copy – there is only one Lebeau after all – the writing style meshes nicely with the series.
One minor point: “Up In the Air” was actually directed by son Jason, with the elder Reitman producing.

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

Totally agree on the Oakster’s writing style. It is very different from my own. I’ve wrestled a bit with the idea of how to edit other people’s WTHH articles. On the one hand, I want to allow contributors to have their own voices. On the other, we have seen instances where too much deviation from the “house style” has resulted in an angry mob mentality. I think I’m finding the rhythms with Oakley’s writing style. I made a few tweaks and additions as I always do. (I’d been wanting to tell that Ernie Hudson story for a while now, so… Read more »

RB
RB
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

oh that is my bad – I thought it being within the article and I see it was actually included, and accurately, in Leo’s comment, where he listed Ivan Reitman’s credits as producer. I had read this late last night and made a mental note on that “correction.” Sorry about that!

Steelbolt
Steelbolt
8 years ago

I think it jight be worth mentioning that while Evolution wasn’t that much of a success, it did spin off a short-lived animated cartoon series called Alienators: Evolution Continues.

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  Steelbolt

Interesting. I had no idea that was related to the movie. I did see that Reitman has produced a lot of animation.

admin
Admin
admin
8 years ago

I thought “Ghostbusters 2” was okay, but I don’t think it had the same magic as the first film, not never close. However, I like the scene in which the Ghostbusters control The Statue of Liberty with an NES Advantage controller, and I also dug the Bobby Brown song, “On Our Own” at the end credits (is it Ray Parker Jr.? No, but the film isn’t nearly as good as the first, so it’s kind of fitting).
Honestly, I like “Ghostbusters: The Video Game” more, mostly because I too can now bust ghosts, and that makes me feel good.

jeffthewildman
8 years ago

I re-watched Ghostbusters 2 not too long ago and I was surprised to find that in reality it isn’t that bad at all. No, it’s not a forgotten masterpiece and it’s not on the level of full-fledged classic like the first one was. But it’s a better than average sequel that isn’t deserving of its reputation as a disaster of biblical proportions. The story does try to legitimately continue where it left off, rather than simply regurgitating the first. The tone of this one is actually a tad darker. But the one-liners are funny and a few stand out. Harold… Read more »

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  jeffthewildman

I find 2 1/2 stars to be generous. Ghostbusters 2, for me, is a sequel I try to pretend doesn’t exist. No, it’s not a complete train wreck. But it feels like everyone involved was phoning it in. I’m pretty sure they borrowed the script from the Saturday morning cartoon. Comedy is subjective, but if there were funny bits in Ghostbusters 2, I missed them.

admin
Admin
admin
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

It will be a slimey day in New York City before I give Ghostbusters 2″ ***stars though; I’m sure most of those involved with the production wouldn’t even consider so high a rating. I’m sticking with **, as I think it’s average fare, and the busting didn’t make me feel as good.

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  admin

** seems about right to me. Ghostbusters 2 is watchable, but not worth watching.

RB
RB
8 years ago

Now that football season is upon us, must confess that I’ve seen “Draft Day” 3 times and have enjoyed it more with each viewing. There is just something special about the talent that crafted this movie.
Also, I’m quite impressed with the directorial talent of his son Jason.

daffystardust
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

I wonder if Aaron Sorkin cares about football? It would be interesting to see him take a swing at this kind of material. It wouldn’t necessarily be any more realistic, but the dialogue would sure pop.

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  daffystardust

This is where my selfish side kicks in. I like Sorkin and hate football. Football used to just bore me, but in light of the last few years of bad headlines I’d be in favor of getting rid of it entirely. Given Sorkin’s liberal leanings, if I had to guess I would guess he’s no fan. If he decided to eviscerate the sport, I guess I might be interested. But otherwise I’d prefer he stick to making movies where we have overlapping interests. Yes, it’s selfish of me, I know.

daffystardust
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

I love football, but would love to see Sorkin eviscerate it anyway. Some of those guys could use being taken down a few pegs. While I often agree with Sorkin’s point of view on issues I find that it is when his motives are most clear that his writing is at its worst. On the other hand, when he chews on something like A Few Good Men and gives everyone a strong voice you end up with good work. I feel like if somebody else wrote the story and let Sorkin write the dialogue the audience would usually get better… Read more »

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  daffystardust

A good Sorkin evisceration is always worth watching. Although Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip stands out as a case of what you’re probably talking about. Instead of getting a look at what it takes to put on a show like Saturday Night Live, we got one lecture after another and the opposing point of view was just there to look foolish.

admin
Admin
admin
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

I like Pro Football (and what is considered the four major sports in general), but I have soured on it lately due to the bad headlines dealing with deflated balls, bruised people, wrongful death suits, district court judges, and train wrecks who flee the scene of car accidents. I’m present to watch a sport, not to hear about the seedy underbelly of their personal lives. I find that type of coverage exhausting.

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  admin

See, I think people should be paying more attention to that coverage. But people just want to enjoy their favorite sport. The ugly truth about how the sausage gets made, they would rather not be bothered with all that. I think everyone knows that the NFL is terrible. But they’d rather turn a blind eye to that and enjoy the closest thing we have in the 21st century to the coliseum games.

But I’m a realist. I know that no amount of bad press is going to harm the NFL.

admin
Admin
admin
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

I think it does muffle the enjoyment for some such as myself though. I’m not saying to hide the truth or anything, but using a sport to negatively carry certain social issues isn’t the way to go either, as those issues (such as domestic violence and cheating) should always be addressed and reinforced, and not just to polish an image of a sports league. I don’t know, there’s this Pro Hockey player from my region that is being investigated for rape (he actually met her at a beach bar that’s just down the road from me) and I already know… Read more »

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  admin

I like how you brought that around and tied up some loose threads there. Well done. Thumbs up for you.

admin
Admin
admin
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

Yeah, that wasn’t too bad; sometimes I do alright:-)

RB
RB
8 years ago
Reply to  daffystardust

You literally could not pay me to see Sorkin’s treatment of any sports. Didn’t he give us the crap screenplay that was “The Social Network”? He has a long way to go to redeem himself after that. Every woman character in that movie, except for Eisenberg’s date in the opening scene, exists for one purpose: to service the men, either orally in the restroom or by just serving up the cocaine on their stomachs. Horrible movie. At least Reitman gave us the Jennifer Garner character as a somewhat complex and definitely intelligent attorney, in Draft Day. A Sorkin movie about… Read more »

daffystardust
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

I’m not sure if you interpreted the message of The Social Network appropriately. While I wasn’t a particular fan of the film, I think it was pretty clear that you weren’t supposed to admire any of the primary characters for their ethics. I also seem to remember a female attorney in the closing scenes who was a professional and reasonable person. My interpretation of the closing scene was that it reinforced the bad things his date at the beginning of the film was saying about him.

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  daffystardust

As usual, you made my point more concisely than I did. Grrr.

jeffthewildman
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

Actually that description about women existing solely to service the men sounds more like The Wolf of Wall Street. However, look at how the movie (as well as The Wolf Of Wall Street) shows the men, With the exception of Eduardo Salverin, all of the men in it are assholes more or less. Not crying foul about that because it’s true. The majority of them are, at least as depicted there, assholes (and in the case of the Scorsese film, far worse). Both films are about men who long so desperately for status/money that they will do anything, no matter… Read more »

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  jeffthewildman

I too thought of The Wolf of Wall Street. They are similar films in that respect. And I enjoy them both. The Wolf of Wall Street is just more over-the-top. You’re supposed to be laughing at what incredibly terrible people they are. Their sexist behavior is held up for ridicule, not endorsed.

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

Disclaimer: I realize after writing the following comment that I am voicing a rather strong opposition to your views here. So let me say up front that while I strongly disagree with your point of view, I do so with the utmost respect. Read with a sense of humor. I am goofing around. Yes, Sorkin wrote the Academy-Award winning screenplay for The Social Network. Most people consider that a crowning achievement. I will agree with you that the movie presented women in a poor light. But I don’t think that is a reflection of Sorkin who is about as left-wing… Read more »

jeffthewildman
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

The upcoming Will Smith movie “Comncussion” paints a none-too-flattering picture of the NFL albeit not for its troglodyte sexism. I wouldn’t mind seeing a movie about that at all. Perhaps I should write it myself.

RB
RB
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

I forgot about the scene at the end, Daffy, so I’ll give you that. But I am not confused in the slightest about how you’re supposed to see the primary characters in Social Network. Reading your comment I have to wonder if you think I’m mentally challenged. I don’t think I’m quite that senile, yet.
The fact that the primary characters are arrogant opportunists, doesn’t make it any better that the female characters only exist to service them in one way or another. It makes it worse!

RB
RB
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

Sorry for the delay in responding, I was actually at a football game 🙂 1) I’d love to see Jeff’s screenplay on this topic. In fact let me know if you want a collaborator! 2) I hated Wolf of Wall Street even more than Social Network 3) Looking forward to seeing the latest Jobs movie because of Wozniak likes it, that’s a powerful recommendation 4) I’m not at all perturbed if you disagree, Lebeau. You make some good points. But we’ve disagreed over movie quality before, and I will always think Draft Day is a hands down better movie than… Read more »

daffystardust
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

OK, so if you understood that the characters were supposed to be immature and unlikable, how would you feel about a supposedly smart and strong woman who hung out with them? For better or for worse the film was about people we should feel uneasy about having success and renown. That is part of what kept me at an emotional distance from the movie. It makes complete sense to me that these douchebags would surround themselves with enablers of both sexes. If that is not something you want to see a movie about, I totally understand. It is kind of… Read more »

RB
RB
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

Hi Daffy, I wouldn’t do this for just anyone…. OK, so if you understood that the characters were supposed to be immature and unlikable, how would you feel about a supposedly smart and strong woman who hung out with them? –She wouldn’t, or if she did, her role would be something other than a sidekick or a sex slave. For better or for worse the film was about people we should feel uneasy about having success and renown. That is part of what kept me at an emotional distance from the movie. — I also didn’t have any emotional connection… Read more »

jeffthewildman
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

Yeah I wouldn’t mind us collaborating. One book I recommend reading as research material is “Pros And Cons. The Criminals Who Play In The NFL”. Very good and disturbing.

daffystardust
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

I also didn’t have any emotional connection to the film. I do think, however, that the message of exploitation in the name of getting rich, resonates with more people than who are turned off by it. The glorification of greed and arrogance is part of what repulsed me about the film. Sure, these people are assholes, but what do most audiences conclude when only the assholes get rich? Corrupted values and Stockholm syndrome. Okay, here’s where it looks like we differ most substantially. I am pretty much only concerned with what message an artist actually intended to communicate. There will… Read more »

daffystardust
Editor
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

Lebeau- From what I could bring myself to watch, the problem with Studio 60 was that none of the comedy sketches were funny. They apparently didn’t realize how hard sketch comedy is and ended up creating dissonance for their audience. They would have been better off just never showing any of it and telling us it was good or not good. That’s not what we’re there to see anyway. The workplace politics were pretty strong, but the Sarah Paulson character was a serious misstep. It’s too bad, because I like her a lot as an actress.

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  daffystardust

I stuck with Studio 60 because I really wanted it to be good. Yeah, the sketches were bad. That was a glaring problem. But even when they didn’t show the sketches, they had to discus them. And the sketches as described could not have possibly been funny. The show that the characters were debating could not possibly have been popular. The show was just a train wreck from start to finish. Which is a shame because I really would have liked a smart drama about the making of SNL. There’s lots of material there. Instead, 30 Rock did a much… Read more »

jeffthewildman
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

Indeed. A lot of people misinterpreted Oliver Stone’s Wall Street as a celebration of greed. But just because some people don’t get it doesn’t make it any less good.

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  jeffthewildman

The people who don’t get the message are the ones who already bought into the message anyway.

A movie that says that assholes get rich is just telling the truth.

admin
Admin
admin
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

The message I took from “Wall Street” is that sure, someone could get rich that way, but they also leave many hardworking people holding the bag. Some people just aren’t wired to cause that much upheaval in the lives of others (like Gordon Gekko said when asked by Bud Fox why he wrecked the airline, “because it was wreckable allright!”). The other message I learned is that Sean Young is crazy (kidding, Sean Young).

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  admin

She really hates when people say that. 😉

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

Jason started off strong. But he has really stumbled badly on his last couple of movies. He’s got an uphill climb coming back from Labor Day and especially Men, Women and Children. I think he’s headed into Neil LaBute territory where no matter what he does he will be dismissed as a promising director who didn’t pan out.

jeffthewildman
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

Jason’s first 4 were pretty good (both Thank You For Smoking and Up In The Air were on my top ten list for their respective years). But if he continues on the path he’s been on the for past couple, I could see a WTHH article on him. Hope it doesn’t happen. But it wouldn’t surprise me if he ends up joining the aforementioned Labute and John Singleton in the category of directors who are more than one film wonders but less than the major filmmakers they promised to be at one time. There’ve been a few who’ve been able… Read more »

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  jeffthewildman

Time will tell. Reitman was so heavily ridiculed for Men, Women and Children, it’s going to take some great work to reverse the downward trend.

RB
RB
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

See I really liked Labor Day, a lot. While I could see his dad’s influence in Up In the Air, a FANTASTIC film in all ways, I thought Labor Day was more Jason’s own voice, rich in subtle interweaved communications. The critics were so heavily focused on the admittedly improbably plot elements that I think they missed out on the beauty of the art. That scene where the escaped prisoner gives the boy in the wheelchair the one free afternoon he ever had… so subtly done you almost miss the message… sheer genius. What do I know though. That was… Read more »

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

I have only watched bits of Labor Day. So, not a fair viewing at all. What I saw felt far from subtle. It was heavy-handed, over-the-top melodrama like a Lifetime movie. There was some beautiful cinematography. And again, I haven’t watched the whole movie so I’m in no position to render a verdict. But I can see how critics would be willing to write it off as a TV movie that somehow got feature treatment. Hopefully, that’s not Jason Reitman’s voice. If it is, he’ll end up like LaBute for sure. He’s an indie film-maker. Indie film-makers who loose the… Read more »

RB
RB
8 years ago

To Daffy’s point, I agree that whatever the artist is intending to communicate, is of the most importance. And I sure as heck don’t want us all to end up with boring art with no nuances. It’s just that I think a lot of times, we don’t know. The artist may or may not choose to clarify. It isn’t always obvious what the message is, and not often but sometimes, even the artist is undecided or purposely ambiguous. For my purposes, if the onscreen imagery is offensive to me personally, there is a threshold where it just won’t matter what… Read more »

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

I am surprised that you are surprised about Wall Street. It’s extremely common for people to pull out the “greed is good” speech without a hint of irony. To me, Stone’s intent is as clear as Sorkin’s in The Social Network or Scorsese’s in Wolf of Wall Street. But Gordon Gecko has been hailed as a hero by many of the decades regardless of the fact the movie and film-maker obviously don’t approve of his actions. What I’m getting from your first paragraph is that movies that feature unlikable characters behaving in abhorrent ways don’t appeal to you. That’s basically… Read more »

RB
RB
8 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

I have to heed your cautionary note, and you are right on, I did love the AP.
Unlikable characters behaving in abhorrent ways, I don’t know about the umbrella characterization there. It really all depends on all the factors and the circumstances that make up any given project.
You have to admit this has all made for some great discussion anyway 🙂 You have no idea what you guys have accomplished here, that my attention has been diverted from my favorite football blog.

lebeau
Admin
8 years ago
Reply to  RB

Lol. Mission accomplished. I find it amusing we have a debate going on the merits of The Social Network in the comments section of an article about Ivan Reitman. Y’all know how to keep things lively. There’s definitely a combination of factors. I don’t think that you or Daffy are necessarily averse to anti-heroes. But clearly the unsympathetic characters in TSN and WoWS didn’t appeal to either of you. Personally I enjoyed the crisp dialog in TSN and laughed hysterically at the satire in WoWS. But I don’t expect my tastes to be universal. One thing I have learned from… Read more »

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

(Podcast Special) Kindergarten Cop Commentary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no7kyRL4l-c

Oliver is joined with Richard Jackson and actor Duncan Casey to discuss Kindergarten Cop.

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

Ivan Reitman and @DanAykroyd examine past and future of #Ghostbusters: http://ow.ly/TYg7M

Leo
Leo
8 years ago

Good Bad Flicks: Ghostbusters II (1989)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGIgXK4ubWM

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

WHY GHOSTBUSTERS 3 NEVER HAPPENED http://www.looper.com/9594/ghostbusters-3-never-happened/ At the time of this writing, the female-led Ghostbusters reboot is in the can and slotted for a coveted summer blockbuster release date. With a built-in audience of diehard fans and a comedically proven cast, this new incarnation of everyone’s favorite supernatural sleuths is poised for great success. But it’s a real departure from the original Ghostbusters concept, and it comes nearly three decades after Ghostbusters II debuted. Why did this new project replace the original characters and universe of the first two movies? Are we really never going to see Venkman, Stantz, Spengler,… Read more »

admin
Admin
admin
8 years ago

I’m fine with how this all transpired; I just don’t know how a third “Ghostbusters” film would work. I mean, I think the sequel was okay, but if a third installment was to happen and prominently feature the original cast, it needed to happen within a certain time limit. It’s rare to see a sequel released twentysome years after the fact (1990’s “Texasville”, which is the sequel to “The Last Picture Show” is an example, but that didn’t really work out).

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnLzz_hxzxo

Ghostbusters 3 was a highly anticipated sequel. Let’s take a look at it’s history, of all it’s trouble and false starts, and how it was ultimately cancelled forever, only to be sadly rebooted instead.

admin
Admin
admin
7 years ago

Yeah, I viewed this video the other day due to my YouTube subscription to Cinemassacre & The Angry Video Game Nerd. At any rate, since there were so many allegations and proclamations made about when “Ghostbusters III” would happen, I don’t know what to believe, other than it didn’t seem likely to me that it would ever happen, since there was no proof. However, I consider “Ghostbusters: The Game” the sequel to the first two films.

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPAklIlov-A

This video details how the Ghostbusters reboot actually started out as the Ghostbusters 3 everyone would have preferred, but how Sony executives effectively froze out director Ivan Reitman, and rebooted the property with director Paul Feig and his female centric Ghostbusters instead.

lebeau
Admin
7 years ago

I would not have preferred Ghostbusters 3. I’m glad that disaster didn’t happen. We’ll see about the reboot, but I’m definitely glad GB3 got scrapped. There is no way that would have been good.

admin
Admin
admin
7 years ago
Reply to  lebeau

To me, it always seemed liked the concept for it lacked an identity and purpose; it was like high school rumors or something. Besides, it’s hard to miss something that never happened. However, I wouldn’t have high expectations for “Ghostbusters III” either.

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GixfiDGhSlk

The second Ghostbusters trailer has been released, and not received any better than the first. Sony, director Paul Feig and select news outlets are in full damage control mode, accusing detractors of misogyny left and right. But can the fan rage be dismissed as just that?

lebeau
Admin
7 years ago

The trailers haven’t been good. But they really aren’t worse than the trailers for most movies. The trailer for Spy didn’t make me want to run out and see it. But when it got good reviews I checked it out and was pleasantly surprised. I’m expecting the same thing to happen here. And if it doesn’t, that’s fine. Because GB3 would have been far, far worse. While some of the detractors are criticizing the trailers, most of the complaints I have seen are tinged with misogyny if not outright sexist. For now, everyone should just shut up about the GB… Read more »

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

Ghostbusters 3 Resurrected – The Controversy Continues

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wl0KuS_hfXA

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

Long story short, the original cast and director wanted to make a sequel, where the original Ghostbusters pass the torch to a new younger group. Most of the fans also wanted this. The original director (Ivan Reitman) wanted to direct the third film, and his original contract from the ’80s said he’d get the right of first refusal for any sequel. However the Sony exec in charge of the project, Amy Pascal, wanted a younger director instead of Reitman and basically did everything possible to push him out. Once Reitman stepped out, Pascal offered the project to a few directors… Read more »

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kPGkyxWj9s

The extended version of Ghostbusters has now been released on video on demand, so after long last, here is the official Midnight’s Edge review of «Ghostbusters: Answer the call – Extended Cut»!

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

How They Should Have Made Ghostbusters III

http://whatculture.com/film/how-they-should-have-made-ghostbusters-iii?rf=homepage

We ain’t afraid of no sequel.

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

‘Ghostbusters’ Director Ivan Reitman on Killing Bill Murray in the Ghostbusters III That Wasn’t http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/16/ghostbusters-director-ivan-reitman-on-killing-bill-murray-in-the-ghostbusters-iii-that-wasn-t.html Ivan Reitman spent decades entertaining the ethereal dream of getting his Ghostbusters team back together for a third film that, a few years ago, finally seemed to be on the brink of happening. “For 20 years we did nothing because there was always one or two of us who didn’t feel like doing anything,” he told The Daily Beast on the campaign trail for Sony’s new Ghostbusters, the sci-fi comedy reboot he helped guide as producer. “It’s like a rock group: one of them doesn’t… Read more »

Leo
Leo
8 years ago

Cinefix: Should You Give Evolution a Second Chance?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DX3_zgwPuhk

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)
Reply to  Leo

Evolution (2001)

http://officialfan.proboards.com/thread/545431/evolution-2001

Post by dav on Jul 3, 2016 at 1:49pm
After several years, popped this movie back on to watch and really rather enjoyed it. Is overlooked all things considered, but it’s an enjoyable, if not exactly memorable, comedy film. Duchovny and Orlando Jones had some nice back and forth and a fair number of the jokes were good. Also, Randy from My Name is Earl lost a lot of weight between this movie and that series.

Anyone else remember this movie and have thoughts on it?

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

Ivan Reitman vs. Barry Sonnenfeld https://dejareviewer.com/2015/04/29/ivan-reitman-vs-barry-sonnenfeld/ Meteoric Rise Ghostbusters is part of a great string of hits by Ivan Reitman. Ivan Reitman did a couple of little-seen comedies with Eugene Levy in the early ‘70s, but he really turned heads with 1979’s Meatballs, a fun summer camp movie starring an incredibly young Bill Murray. He worked with Murray again on his next two films, as well: the R-rated Stripes and the PG-rated Ghostbusters. He continued his astonishing string of hits with the underrated Legal Eagles, the charming Twins, the decent sequel Ghostbusters II, and then the wonderful Kindergarten Cop and… Read more »

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

What’s Next For The Ghostbusters Series? Ivan Reitman Has An Update https://www.yahoo.com/movies/m/2d35a85b-e972-3a9d-8dd1-8d8f25ccb26e/ss_what%E2%80%99s-next-for-the.html This summer saw the release of Ghostbusters, a film that was “controversial” right out the gate because it was opposed by an intense group of online fans. The reboot wasn’t the hit that Sony was betting on and the mixed critical response have left plans for a sequel incredibly unclear. Ivan Reitman, director of the original 1984 film and a producer on the reboot, recently weighed in on Sony’s game plan for the franchise, but those hoping for a direct sequel might be disappointed. In an interview with… Read more »

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

New Ghostbusters Movie (2019) http://officialfan.proboards.com/thread/561210/new-ghostbusters-movie-2019?page=1 The 2016 Ghostbusters reboot may not have been the jumpstart to the franchise that Sony hoped it wold be, but fans may only have to wait until 2019 for another Ghostbusters feature. That’s according to Ivan Reitman, director of the original two movies and producer of the recent all-female reboot, who clarifies that the future of the series is still moving forward at a healthy pace. He may have raised some eyebrows when he promised a ‘Ghostbusters shared universe’ of films despite the disappointing box office of the reboot, but his claim that a new… Read more »

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

Ivan Reitman Wants a Ghostbusters Crossover Movie

http://www.denofgeek.com/us/movies/ghostbusters/266471/ivan-reitman-wants-a-ghostbusters-crossover-movie

Ivan Reitman says going forward, he’d like to see a Ghostbusters crossover movie between casts like IDW’s Ghostbusters 101.

Leo
Leo
6 years ago

Good Bad Flicks: Meatballs (1979)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0BS-K3K_vE

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

15 Amazing Batman Movies That Were Canceled Before Getting Made, Ranked http://screenrant.com/batman-canceled-movies-amazing-ranked/ IVAN REITMAN’S BATMAN (STARRING BILL MURRAY) Tom Mankiewicz’s early ’80s Batman script eventually made it’s way to Ivan Reitman, director of the enormously successful Ghostbusters. Reitman wanted to take the film in a more comic direction, casting Bill Murray as Bruce Wayne/Batman and either Eddie Murphy or Michael J. Fox as Robin. Even in the mid-’80s, mainstream audiences still associated Batman with the 1960’s Adam West TV series, so it wouldn’t have been a huge stretch to continue the comic tradition and make a Ghosbusters-esque, special effects-heavy comedy… Read more »

Terrence Clay (@TMC1982)

CBS is adapting the Bill Murray military comedy film Stripes into a TV series

http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/stripes-series-cbs-1202617011/

Ivan Reitman, who directed the original 1981 film, is attached to direct and executive produce the remake that will also “follow a perennial rebellious outsider who finally finds his purpose in life when he joins the US military and must unite a group of ragtag eccentrics.”

93
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x