ShockTillYouDrop.com

Posted by: Not the Real Ghostbusters on November 1, 2009 at 21:53:05

No, no, no...Venkman, Stantz, Spengler and Zeddemore are the REAL Ghostbusters, these guys are no talent hacks.

Posted by: Man on November 2, 2009 at 00:00:01

(Applauds)
Congratulations! You are the winner of dumbest post of the year. Your prize is a noose, please proceed to use it to rid the world of one more untolerable douche.
(Applauds)

Posted by: COBRA on November 2, 2009 at 00:38:23

i agree with NOT THE REAL GHOSTBUSTERS Because that is true personaly if these no talents want to keep using that name i feel someone should do something about it just because that name is copyrighted and attaching something as cool as the name real ghostbusters to something so dumb is just rediculous

Posted by: Hilda on November 2, 2009 at 01:56:51

Oh god I LOVE Jared in that t-shirt! Shallow I know but SFW Jared and Jensen are me weekly eye candy and I love this show! This episode is going to be hysterical!

Posted by: Azazel on November 2, 2009 at 02:08:22

@ Cobra and Not the Real Ghost Busters

What you and your predecessor Not the Real Ghostbusters failed to see or get, is the fact that the episode title is in quotes first of all indicating a play on words. The fact that they are at a convention which is about them (for those who don't watch the show obviously) because a man in the show named Chuck, is a prophet and had been writting novels about the Winchester brothers exploits because he didn't understand he was witnessing the truth via his prophecy. Now there is a huge fan base, and online comunity that love the supernatural novels he has written, within the actual show it self. It was a nod to the fans of the show, to show how rabid they are about their series from creator Eric Kripke. And also if you watched the preview, it shows that the supernatural being in this episode is a ghost, HENCE THE SHOW TITLE. So before pronouncing it as dumb, and rediculous, do a little research and you'll understand why they chose what they did. Also, here is a little known fact, Ghostbusters (1984) is actually not the first movie to have that title. There was one way back in the 40's, which had a duo of Ghostbusters and a Gorilla teammate. They redid it as a cartoon which came out right before the Real Ghostbusters cartoon, which is why the Real Ghostbusters cartoon was named such. So your so called "copyright" theory is debunked. Good job genius.

Posted by: cinemascribe on November 2, 2009 at 03:37:39

Azazel wrote:

"Also, here is a little known fact, Ghostbusters (1984) is actually not the first movie to have that title. There was one way back in the 40's, which had a duo of Ghostbusters and a Gorilla teammate. They redid it as a cartoon which came out right before the Real Ghostbusters cartoon, which is why the Real Ghostbusters cartoon was named such. So your so called "copyright" theory is debunked. Good job genius."

You're correct about the copyright. However, the live action program ran in the early to mid 70's -not the 40's- and was known as "The Ghost Busters". In it two men and a gorilla would stop by a different location each week, pick up a tape (ala Mission:Impossible) and find out where their next adventure would be. They would invariably end up at an old, dark castle and after a lot of slapstick and goofiness, would confront the ghost and sent it to the other side with a "ghost de-materializer".

Columbia failed to secure the rights to the title and were indeed sued (This may explain why we see a credit at the end of The Karate Kid films- also from Columbia- that states "the title the Karate Kid is used by permission of DC comics", who had an existing comic character by the same name as part of their Legion of Superheroes line up), settling out of court.

When the time came to develop an animated series based on the 1984 film, Columbia titled it "The Real Ghostbusters" to separate it from the 1970's live action tv series, per the settlement.

In a blatant act of hypocrisy, the animated series "Filmation's Ghostbusters" was created to cash in on the name after the success of the feature film, changing the title so that instead of "The Ghost Busters" , it was now one word - "Ghostbusters" - despite the fact that it was based on the 1970's live action tv show and not the Ivan Reitman films. They avoided any legal complications by prefixing the title with the word "Filmation".

So, in essence, Columbia Pictures developed a concept that had nothing to do with the original tv series aside from the title (and the idea of humans going toe to toe with ghosts for comedic effect,but that's been done since before either property existed),got sued because of the title, paid to use it and then Filmation tried to cash in on Columbia's success by altering their own title card and deceiving unsuspecting kids into thinking they were about to see an extension of the boys with the proton packs, when in fact they would be watching a couple of dipsticks and a gorilla. Happily, the animated "Filmation's Ghostbusters" (which was as bad as the source 70's tv series) only ran for one season.

Specifically, the title "The Real Ghostbusters" is the sole property of Columbia Pictures and relates only to the Venkman, Zeddemore, Stantz and Spengler characters since it did not exist until the settlement legally dictated it would be created to separate Columbia's property from the other one. So, technically, the people who posted prior to you are correct.

On the flip side of that, you are correct about the in-joke.

Posted by: Superbatmon on November 2, 2009 at 04:50:33

I don't understand why you guys take things so seriously. Why so serious? Supernatural is an amazing series and, in my opinion, it's getting better by the minute. And what's all that crap on "no talents"? These guys are brilliant versatile actors. Have you watched any episode at all?

I must say it was about time we had some fun episodes too inside this apocalyptic universe. That's the irony of life: you can get some laughs while you suffer. About the polemics, it's quite common to name some classic productions that characters are suppose to know. What is more,if Sam and Dean are supposed to be fighting a ghost in front of their fans, who else do you expect they should be compared to by them but the awesome Ghostbusters? I mean, I'd love to find them watching even Buffy the Vampire Slayer one night. But copyrights some times go too far. It seems characters must live in a parallel universe with music, books, series and movies we've never heard of, just in case somebody gets hurt or banckrupt. Naming the Ghostbusters already gives some free publicity to the original franchise, particularly to those of us who forgot about it and might want to watch it again. So what's the big issue? Relax, I'm sure you'll enjoy the episode if you leave your prejudice aside.

Posted by: Wand on November 4, 2009 at 10:21:04

regardless of the posts above, (which I choose to ignore), I'm excited! this episode is going to show us for what we truly are, and I'm thankful for that. Only kripke could give his fans a gift like this, and know how much we truly appriciate it. Kripke, you're my hero!!

Posted by: Kristen on November 5, 2009 at 12:47:07

I am so excited about this episode! I bet it's going to be so funny and I can't wait to see the looks on Sam and Dean's faces when they realize they've been tricked and they're at a convention where everyone is dressed like them! lol I'm laughing already! Kudos to the show for coming up with such great ideas!