| Author
|
RGB Truly Canon with the Movies?
|
Kingpin
Ghosthead
Joined: Aug 17, 2001
|
 Posted: May 29, 2003 7:57 PM
Oh well, just a theory I wanted to get out of my head. Hope it didn't cause any problems.
Oh and Veedramon, we now have a sorta time idea for Partners in Slime October 23rd, 1989.
_____________
"We have the tools, we have the talent"
The sun never sets on the British Empire...because God can't trust us in the dark! evil grin
Nightsquad gets chatting
Egon and Janine forever! Everything else is wrong
|
|
|
    |
 
|
Veedramon
Ghosthead
Joined: Feb 03, 2003
|
Posted: May 29, 2003 10:10 PM
Problems?! Never!!! One thing I respect about you is that you aren't afraid to express yourself. You, Doc Ry...Matthew, Dr. Spectrum, Brian_Reilly, and Sinister have kept this discussion stimulating.
And, yeah...I can put a specific date on "Partners In Slime" (Oct 28, 1989) as well as "Slimer Come Home" (May 2, 1984): it was on Winston's birthday (and will thus probably be shuffled some in the chronology). I'll probably get those corrections done tomorrow night--it's just about my bedtime...
_____________
--Dr. Fritz V. Baugh, Mad Scientist and Official Historian of Ghostbusters: West Coast Division
Also known as GBCentral's Doc Fritz
Visit The Digibusters Ectozone, home of the Ghostbusters Omnibus Timeline!!!!! and the New Ghostbusters Timeline!. The Ectozone is a member of the GB Community Board
Also visit The Ghostbusters Fact List!
And read one of my Fan Fictions Pretty Please?
Egon and Janine Forever!!!
|
|
|
|
|
ProtonDefender
Ghosthead
Joined: Feb 10, 2002
|
Posted: May 30, 2003 12:29 AM
With the new comic fast approaching, I am beginning to think of the question I posted months ago, and here's how I'm going about things. The cartoons are seperate from the movies, and therefore not canon with them; much like the newer Ultimate Marvel comics. The new comics, depending on how it's done, could be canon with the movies because it's based on them and not the cheesy cartoon. I loved the cartoons as a kid, but now I completely ignore them, to me they completely fudge around with the clever humor and spirit of the first movie, something I hope the new comics will recapture.
|
|
|
|
|
Kingpin
Ghosthead
Joined: Aug 17, 2001
|
Posted: May 30, 2003 9:27 AM
Another little factor in film vs cartoon, if the cartoon was based in the film universe, why was it never mentioned?
Peter: You know, maybe it's time I called in that favour at DIC and use some of the cash to restart the company
Egon: Peter is that wise? The company account is bone dry after the legal proceedings and even the money paid to us by the cartoon compnay was used in paying our bills and compensation, I'd be surprised if there was any left at this juncture.
Peter: Oh well, do they still pay for organs?
_____________
"We have the tools, we have the talent"
The sun never sets on the British Empire...because God can't trust us in the dark! evil grin
Nightsquad gets chatting
Egon and Janine forever! Everything else is wrong
|
|
|
|
|
ProtonDefender
Ghosthead
Joined: Feb 10, 2002
|
Posted: May 30, 2003 11:04 AM
Well IF the cartoons exist in the film world, they would exist after GB1, after they became popular. However, they are back in business in GB2, and therefore may be "relaunching" the cartoon as well. Keep in mind we only have two films to draw from, so there's no need to mention the cartoon; it's a seperate entity, plain and simple. All the work people have done has been AWESOME, but a moot point because things in the film world aren't considered canon unless they are actually seen in the movie, and vice versa, much like Star Wars/Trek movies and the hundreds of books/comics that are out there; if a cartoon/story comes along and doesn't interfere with film canon, fine. But if film says something that disagrees with cartoons, the film wins out. My major beef has always been that the target audience of GB changed after the cartoon came out, and therefore affected GB2 slightly. To me, they didn't need to change the movie to appeal to kids, because the first movie appealed to them anyway, along WITH the cartoon. My follow-up question is this, and please forgive me if you've already stated your opinion on the matter. Regardless of what you count as canon, why do so many of you/us count the cartoons and movies as one huge reality, or even worse see RGB as truth over GB1/GB2? Also, why do you/us-if anyone-like RGB more than the movies? I completely understand loving it as a kid, as I did, but now as teenagers/adults, why do you like RGB more than the films? Age will probably play a factor into this, I know it does for me.
|
|
|
|
|
Veedramon
Ghosthead
Joined: Feb 03, 2003
|
Posted: May 31, 2003 11:10 AM
Okay...last night I was ready to spout off something angry, and maybe start a flame war, but no...
Take a deep breath, everybody. The Ghostbusters aren't real. None of it ever really happened.
Egon Spengler isnt' a real scientist who either looks like Harold Ramis or a tall guy with wierd blond hair. He's made up.
Like any fandom, we all create our own personal version of the concept. My concept just happens to include a lot of RGB. It was one of the most successful Movie to TV translations of all time. In it's earlier days it was absolutely groundbreaking in the quality of it's writing and animation. I was 15 in 1986, so I'm not talking as someone who saw it as a hyperactive eight year old. RGB took characters and concepts that were already top-notch from GB1 and, by developing and exploring them in a way an hour and a half of cinema never could, made the characters more fully realized.
But some people don't look at it that way, and they are just as right about that. This is all fantasy, people!!! If your own Ghostbusters universe is only comprised of the two movies, you are entitled to think so!!! If, to you, the Ghostbusters are Four Guys In Tan Who Look Like Murray, Aykroyd, Ramis, and Hudson, that is absolutely fine!!!
We're all Ghostheads here, people. We can agree to disagree on this. After all, in the end we all agree on the important thing: The Ghostbusters Rule.
_____________
--Dr. Fritz V. Baugh, Mad Scientist and Official Historian of Ghostbusters: West Coast Division
Also known as GBCentral's Doc Fritz
Visit The Digibusters Ectozone, home of the Ghostbusters Omnibus Timeline!!!!! and the New Ghostbusters Timeline!. The Ectozone is a member of the GB Community Board
Also visit The Ghostbusters Fact List!
And read one of my Fan Fictions Pretty Please?
Egon and Janine Forever!!!
|
|
|
|
|
ProtonDefender
Ghosthead
Joined: Feb 10, 2002
|
Posted: May 31, 2003 11:54 AM
Well said V, after posting my last message I read it and realized how jerky it sounded, and it never meant to be that way. Of course we know it's all a story, and my opinion on the matter is just that, my opinion. I went about saying it the wrong way, so here we go. I personally picture GB's as the way we see them in the movies. The cartoons has MANY great things, so I see those more as "stories of the GB's/urban legends/etc"; kind of like tall tales about George Washington, he never cut down a cherry tree, but the story stands in order to show his character and send a message. I prefer to think that the comics and cartoons are exaggerated stories based on "real busts"; real of course within the fantasy world. This is the way I connect the two, because if you take literally what happens in them, you come up with more questions than answers, and argue about something that should be fun for us, that is why we're all here afterall, to share our common delight in Ghostbusters.
|
|
|
|
|
Doc Ryedale
Ghosthead
Joined: Nov 02, 2002
|
Posted: Jun 13, 2003 1:27 AM
Alright Ben, I'm subjecting the following theories to my skill:
"Concerning the nametags
Ignoring Elementary, My Dear Winston We only ever saw the nametags in the movie, an idea I had was that Dan and Harold could of implemented the nametags as part of their vision of how GBI would have been, though having said this, then if they were basing it totally off GBI then there would be no nametags."
This I'm going to have to go against. I'm still 100% absolutely positively sure that they had the Nametags in RGB. I'm sticking with Fritz's Theory on this.
"Concerning the uniforms
It is possible that the uniforms were made tan instead of coloured, because they were cheaper for the costume department at the studio to make them tan, instead of coloured, thus to help establish a equal status in the company."
I'm assuming that this is for GB II. This is a great theory. In fact, it's now a Fact!   It makes sense. And very few people could imagine Murray, Aykroyd, Ramis, and Hudson in Multicolored Jumpsuits. Maybe Fritz can add this the Ghostbusters Omnibus Timeline.   
Another thing that makes RGB Canon would be the many references we see in various Movies and T.V. Shows - Not to RGB, but to the Movies, themselves! Most GB references are to the Movies, and not RGB. There have been vary few, if any references to RGB. Which once again proves that the Movies were just Dan Aykroyd's/Harold Ramis/Hollywood's interpretation of the adventures of the Ghostbusters in film form. Hence, making RGB the adventures of The Real Ghostbusters!
_____________
"We're on a mission from God!"
"Hey, do you believe in God? Well I do. Praise the Lord and pass the Particle Throwers! I love Jesus' style. . . "
"Back off, man, I'ma Genealogist!"
They don’t just call them The Real Ghostbusters for no reason! Take a look at Take Two, Citizen Ghost, The Ghostbusters Omnibus Timeline, THE GHOSTBUSTERS FACT LIST, and RGB Truly Canon with the Movies?, and you’ll see why!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User Info
|
|
|
|
|
|
