Discuss the upcoming 4th movie, Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire to be released in March 2024.
#4983484
Soooo are we not allowed to talk about the leaked concept art either?
Until A.J. or Kingpin says otherwise we should be okay to talk about the art as long as we remember to use spoiler tags. If they feel it's necessary to delete our previous posts about it I guess we don't talk about Ghost Club? I guess we wait on their word on this one.
#4983485
Do we really need to have this discussion?
Sony doesn't want it shared.
Sites and established fangroups want to keep a good relationship with Sony so ofcourse they abide by this rule.
Normal fans cannot be stopped sharing the leaked info if they don't care, but they cannot use this site for it in any way as that will hurt the established relationship.

That's it. Let's move along here people. Nothing to see!
#4983486
timeware wrote: June 10th, 2023, 12:24 am
Soooo are we not allowed to talk about the leaked concept art either?
Until A.J. or Kingpin says otherwise we should be okay to talk about the art as long as we remember to use spoiler tags. If they feel it's necessary to delete our previous posts about it I guess we don't talk about Ghost Club? I guess we wait on their word on this one.
Why are we using spoiler tags? The thread itself is labelled for potential spoilers and recently this specific thread is only visible to those who specifically look for it.
#4983487
deadderek wrote: June 10th, 2023, 12:33 am
Why are we using spoiler tags? The thread itself is labelled for potential spoilers and recently this specific thread is only visible to those who specifically look for it.
Because they’re spoilers for the movie. Self-explanatory. Even if the movie was out in theatres we wouldn’t have open spoilers.
Alphagaia liked this
#4983489
timeware wrote: June 10th, 2023, 12:24 am
Soooo are we not allowed to talk about the leaked concept art either?
Until A.J. or Kingpin says otherwise we should be okay to talk about the art as long as we remember to use spoiler tags. If they feel it's necessary to delete our previous posts about it I guess we don't talk about Ghost Club? I guess we wait on their word on this one.
As frustrating as this request will be, I'd suggest we put a temporary pause until the Mods get a reply from AJ.
deadderek wrote: June 10th, 2023, 12:33 am Why are we using spoiler tags? The thread itself is labelled for potential spoilers and recently this specific thread is only visible to those who specifically look for it.
It's a bit late in the day to be asking this now. :whatever:
Alphagaia liked this
#4983490
Bit late in the day? Just asking why the tags in a thread that specifically says spoilers.

Speculating without bringing up concept art is going to be difficult, especially as more time passes. Hopefully we can still talk about it here.
#4983491
deadderek wrote: June 10th, 2023, 1:22 am Bit late in the day? Just asking why the tags in a thread that specifically says spoilers.

Speculating without bringing up concept art is going to be difficult, especially as more time passes. Hopefully we can still talk about it here.
Thread title says “Afterlife Spoilers”.

You’re not seriously suggesting this thread should contain open spoilers for the new movie 6 months from release?
Alphagaia liked this
#4983492
Well, I don't want to sound like a Walter here but we are kind of having our discussions in a topic that has POTENTIAL AFTERLIFE SPOILERS, with Afterlife Sequel News Thread all in one header. We all take the risk of getting the movie spoiled by reading and conversing here. I think its safe to say everyone of us looses the right to complain about being spoiled by reading this topic. Just saying.
deadderek liked this
#4983493
timeware wrote:Well, I don't want to sound like a Walter here but we are kind of having our discussions in a topic that has POTENTIAL AFTERLIFE SPOILERS, with Afterlife Sequel News Thread all in one header. We all take the risk of getting the movie spoiled by reading and conversing here. I think its safe to say everyone of us looses the right to complain about being spoiled by reading this topic. Just saying.
Well when an entire page consists of "click to reveal text" it's a bit silly.
#4983494
I hope they don’t come down too hard on the concept art guy. While I understand and respect the position of secrecy and certainly don’t plan to go against that, that posting has done nothing but make people here much more excited to see the film. In terms of generating hype and excitement, it was brilliant.
Chicken, He Clucked, timeware and 4 others liked this
#4983495
Agreed. It was Ghostbusters day and they did jump the Proton Gun so to say. They shouldn't lose their job over a harmless leak. Now if it were something like releasing the early footage that would be a whole other can of worms. Sony would have every right to let someone go. If anything the CA gave us something to look forward to and an idea of what mechandising could look like if they start that soon.
robbritton, deadderek liked this
#4983496
Looks like my comment disappeared where I replied to AJ telling him that no, there is no slight difference. Copyright infringement is copyright infringement. It’s illegal and wrong. It is now and it was then.

Was the reply deleted?

If so, come on GBfans. You’re better than that. Unless there was a site rule “don’t point out the website owner for saying one thing whilst in the past doing another”. If that’s the case then my bad.

Maybe I’ll get banned for this. Not sure. I hope not. But if so? It’s be fun everyone. See ya on the other side.
deadderek liked this
#4983498
2 thoughts I had after gb day and I didn’t see the concept art.

If we take it for it’s literal meaning from the production notes

1) How does one kill or eliminate a ghost in our male gb universe? I think the 2016 version they did with their new equipment.

2) Does the ghost have to be killed, not only for it not to come back but more of a necessity since the containment unit is destroyed.
#4983499
robbritton wrote: June 10th, 2023, 4:20 am I hope they don’t come down too hard on the concept art guy. While I understand and respect the position of secrecy and certainly don’t plan to go against that, that posting has done nothing but make people here much more excited to see the film. In terms of generating hype and excitement, it was brilliant.
Playing devil's advocate here (and robbritton, I'm just using your post as a jumping-off point, not busting your chops)...

I work on design stuff all the time that I know not to put online. And that's for projects where I haven't been given an NDA or I'm required to be "tented." I've literally had to work in what is essentially a SCIF just to make in-store graphics for big brand companies because leaks give competitors an edge in a cut-throat business. And that's just for somple shelf displays advertising a new product. I would assume that an artist assigned to a project of this nature and financial scope would be explicitly instructed not to share content from the film.

The potential downsides could cause delays, rewrites, budgets over runs as they retool to ensure what goes on the screen is a surprise, and a hell of a lot of second-guessing. And we know that because it happened when information leaked while ATC was being put together. All of that had a definite impact on the final product, and I'm sure no one here wants the same for Firehouse.

That concept artist could have at least password-protected his portfolio. That still wouldn't ameliorate the fact that he should never have posted that content online (especially with file names that reveal so much). I really don't mean to be a jerk here or pile on the guy, because I'm sure he's not having a good time right now... but the whole thing was pretty careless.

And I say all of that as someone that clamored to see the renderings, asked a member here to share, and wound up finding the images through one simple trick anyway. I understand the draw. Problem is once this stuff is out in the world, it's hard if not impossible to pull it back and prevent it from falling in the wrong hands. And that could really hurt something a hell of a lot of people care about.
gbraider82, RedSpecial, Kingpin and 1 others liked this
#4983500
gbraider82 wrote: June 10th, 2023, 6:37 am 2 thoughts I had after gb day and I didn’t see the concept art.

If we take it for it’s literal meaning from the production notes

1) How does one kill or eliminate a ghost in our male gb universe? I think the 2016 version they did with their new equipment.

2) Does the ghost have to be killed, not only for it not to come back but more of a necessity since the containment unit is destroyed.
You can't kill ghosts, they're already dead (one of my issues with 2016 when they were knocking out ghosts and chopping them up). Hence the ghost traps and containment unit.
#4983501
groschopf wrote: The potential downsides could cause delays, rewrites, budgets over runs as they retool to ensure what goes on the screen is a surprise, and a hell of a lot of second-guessing. And we know that because it happened when information leaked while ATC was being put together. All of that had a definite impact on the final product, and I'm sure no one here wants the same for Firehouse.
...
Problem is once this stuff is out in the world, it's hard if not impossible to pull it back and prevent it from falling in the wrong hands. And that could really hurt something a hell of a lot of people care about.
^^^ All the more reason why fans here should just stop debating it and move on, act like it didn’t happen, don’t talk about it. If someone didn’t catch it, you’re not missing out, don’t go searching. The mere mention of a workaround in your post invites members to DM you for it.
#4983503
Chicken, He Clucked wrote: June 10th, 2023, 7:55 am
^^^ All the more reason why fans here should just stop debating it and move on, act like it didn’t happen, don’t talk about it. If someone didn’t catch it, you’re not missing out, don’t go searching. The mere mention of a workaround in your post invites members to DM you for it.
You’re right (and also why I didn’t elaborate on the now-defunct work around).
#4983504
timeware wrote:Agreed. It was Ghostbusters day and they did jump the Proton Gun so to say. They shouldn't lose their job over a harmless leak. Now if it were something like releasing the early footage that would be a whole other can of worms. Sony would have every right to let someone go. If anything the CA gave us something to look forward to and an idea of what mechandising could look like if they start that soon.
Agreed. Should they have password protected it? Sure. But this person probably never thought someone would stumble upon their personal webpage. I actually think this art being discovered helped gin up excitement for the upcoming movie. And the fact that it was discovered on Ghostbusters Day is a tad suspicious if you ask me. Almost as if it was meant to be discovered.

Also, while I can understand the admins/mods wanting to keep a good relationship with Sony/Ghost Corp., I disagree with the assertion that sharing or discussing the art is "illegal." The fair use doctrine would apply here. Nobody is slapping the art on t-shirts and trying to turn a profit. Sharing and discussing it isn't impacting the market for the original art either. It's not even harming the upcoming movie. The only people who care about this art are hardcore fans, and if anything, it's making us more excited to see the upcoming film.
#4983508
Richard,

You were not a party to any agreement we had at the time to host those episodes, and I am not required to divulge that to you now. If you do want to continue to press this issue, I will remove you from the site.
Kingpin wrote:As frustrating as this request will be, I'd suggest we put a temporary pause until the Mods get a reply from AJ.
I believe discussion of the content of the art is OK while using the spoiler tag. There will be of course more things shown prior to the release of the movie in trailers for example and to be prevented from discussing the art won't make sense forever.

What we cannot allow is providing links of where to get it, obtain it or otherwise solicit that you have it and will send it to others. This is no different than sharing for example where to obtain illegal drugs or to solicit them through private messages. As this is heavily moderated content, the site becomes liable for the actions of the users in this particular situation.
RedSpecial, Kingpin, deadderek and 1 others liked this
#4983509
Corey91 wrote: June 10th, 2023, 10:39 am dang, a day after GB day and everyone is in here fighting! lol

Blast some Howard Huntsberry, remove your negatively charged pink slime covered clothes, and hug it out, people!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieQeL6q ... ists-Topic
I think it's because there was a lack of GB stuff on the once-a-year GB Day (aside from the poster) and the leak that we did get is under lock and key now, so everyone's on edge.
#4983511
deadderek wrote: June 10th, 2023, 12:33 amWhy are we using spoiler tags? The thread itself is labelled for potential spoilers and recently this specific thread is only visible to those who specifically look for it.
Derek,

I am somewhat in agreement with you, but since we are already using the spoilers tag, lets continue.

To make things easier, I have made it so that when you click to reveal spoilers, it will now reveal all spoilers on the page.
deadderek, groschopf liked this
#4983514
groschopf wrote: June 10th, 2023, 6:48 am
robbritton wrote: June 10th, 2023, 4:20 am I hope they don’t come down too hard on the concept art guy. While I understand and respect the position of secrecy and certainly don’t plan to go against that, that posting has done nothing but make people here much more excited to see the film. In terms of generating hype and excitement, it was brilliant.
Playing devil's advocate here (and robbritton, I'm just using your post as a jumping-off point, not busting your chops)...

I work on design stuff all the time that I know not to put online. And that's for projects where I haven't been given an NDA or I'm required to be "tented." I've literally had to work in what is essentially a SCIF just to make in-store graphics for big brand companies because leaks give competitors an edge in a cut-throat business. And that's just for somple shelf displays advertising a new product. I would assume that an artist assigned to a project of this nature and financial scope would be explicitly instructed not to share content from the film.

The potential downsides could cause delays, rewrites, budgets over runs as they retool to ensure what goes on the screen is a surprise, and a hell of a lot of second-guessing. And we know that because it happened when information leaked while ATC was being put together. All of that had a definite impact on the final product, and I'm sure no one here wants the same for Firehouse.

That concept artist could have at least password-protected his portfolio. That still wouldn't ameliorate the fact that he should never have posted that content online (especially with file names that reveal so much). I really don't mean to be a jerk here or pile on the guy, because I'm sure he's not having a good time right now... but the whole thing was pretty careless.

And I say all of that as someone that clamored to see the renderings, asked a member here to share, and wound up finding the images through one simple trick anyway. I understand the draw. Problem is once this stuff is out in the world, it's hard if not impossible to pull it back and prevent it from falling in the wrong hands. And that could really hurt something a hell of a lot of people care about.
Oh totally - I'm an animator for TV by trade so I understand how badly he screwed up. It just generated such positivity here it's emotionally sad how the hammer will come down, that's all.

Anyway, in similar news the drummer in my band met someone working on Firehouse today - he wasn't told much, but we can expect
This Post Contains Spoilers
. Like I say, not much, but something!
RedSpecial, Alphagaia, groschopf and 1 others liked this
#4983515
Anyway, in similar news the drummer in my band met someone working on Firehouse today - he wasn't told much, but we can expect
This Post Contains Spoilers
. Like I say, not much, but something!
Hmmm
This Post Contains Spoilers
#4983517
AJ Quick wrote: June 10th, 2023, 12:17 pm
deadderek wrote: June 10th, 2023, 12:33 amWhy are we using spoiler tags? The thread itself is labelled for potential spoilers and recently this specific thread is only visible to those who specifically look for it.
Derek,

I am somewhat in agreement with you, but since we are already using the spoilers tag, lets continue.

To make things easier, I have made it so that when you click to reveal spoilers, it will now reveal all spoilers on the page.
MUCH appreciated. That'll come in handy. It was annoying clicking reveal text...on an ENTIRE page of conversation.

As far as the concept art goes, I'd bet Egon's farm it wasn't leaked on purpose. They take that shit REALLY serious, sometimes more than you'd imagine. When Afterlife was being filmed my team posted some behind the scenes footage that was sent to us. Absolutely nothing exciting about it at all. Just someone in a vehicle driving from point a to point b.

Ghost Corps blew up our inbox and it's my understanding the person was either let go or legal action was taken against them for breaking their NDA. Sony takes that shit seriously, I just plain don't buy the concept art being leaked on purpose.
#4983522
Found a FB reel of the crew setting up at Broome and Eldridge. (looks to be just background actors doing a reaction shot to an entity like in past shoots like at Canary Wharf)
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1280234389563434


https://twitter.com/ArthurGenre/status/ ... 7271974913

gbraider82 wrote: June 10th, 2023, 6:37 am If we take it for it’s literal meaning from the production notes

1) How does one kill or eliminate a ghost in our male gb universe? I think the 2016 version they did with their new equipment.

2) Does the ghost have to be killed, not only for it not to come back but more of a necessity since the containment unit is destroyed.
I never noticed it before but it's funny how this logline is being slowly revealed by Production Weekly little by little. Or I'm questioning if it's even right to consider it a legit logline that Sony provided or are they making it up as they go? "Kill a ghost" was a red flag, lol. You can't kill or destroy a ghost, you can at best neutralize them and trap them in a state of rigid stasis by stripping a majority of its P.K.E. with positively charged ions then trapping or in the more unique cases, i.e. using a Trap Field on Gozer or trapping Zuul (huhn, wonder what would have happened if Vinz got trapped, too, would Gozer have dissipated or have been thrown into an even weaker transitional state that could be easily trapped). Though there was the one-in-million case of Vigo, a spirit anchored to a painting existing in a pocket dimension then being blown into the afterlife by a combination of positively charged psychomagnotheric ectoplasm and positively charged ions.
SpaceBallz, Kingpin, deadderek and 1 others liked this
  • 1
  • 116
  • 117
  • 118
  • 119
  • 120
  • 290

Someone on FB found it. NARDA ELECTROMAGNETIC RADI[…]

It appears that some time today someone who […]

Correct, it grants several in fact the Melody's […]

Are they just newspaper clippings or something? […]