Ghostbusters: Afterlife

[MOVIELORD101]

Everybody in that film are constantly talking. Its obnoxious. The men in it are the same way, there is hardly a silent moment in that film. RLM did a hillarious video on that. I think its a horrible film.

There's no use arguing with DarthSkywalker. He's a contrarian and a jerk at times.

 

[Doctor Jones]

If this can't continue without name calling let's just move on. You can debate about the 2016 film since it's Ghostbusters but if it just devolves to 2016 "discourse" I'm gonna have to ask you guys to move on before it gets worse.

Now that this new movie is coming out, discussion of the 2016 film will be inevitable. But if it escalates to the point of getting out of control, I'll ban talk of the 2016 film like we did to Snyder talk in The Batman thread last year for a period. Up to you guys.

 

[rocco2216]

Agreed Doctor Jones, this condescending, gas lighting, and militant attitude over a movie like this doesn’t accomplish anything. It shuts down intelligent, in depth, nuanced discussion. As someone that identifies as an egalitarian I understand the defense for the film and wanting it to succeed. This criticism goes to both sides. The people that made the film, progressive and feminist alike, made a movie that failed to connect with most women and men. It didn’t do feminism and women any favors with its horrible writing. That matters. Own the mistake and mess up like adults and move on. We’re human we can make mistakes too. As for the angry fans that made ****ty comments and what not towards the actors and movie, all you had to do was quietly, calmly, and maturely vote with your wallets. That’s it. It’s not a hill worth dying on in my opinion.

For now let’s look forward to that itch we fans can finally scratch, Ghostbusters 3 in the form of Ghostbusters Afterlife.

 

[Captain Tired]

If this can't continue without name calling let's just move on. You can debate about the 2016 film since it's Ghostbusters but if it just devolves to 2016 "discourse" I'm gonna have to ask you guys to move on before it gets worse.

Now that this new movie is coming out, discussion of the 2016 film will be inevitable. But if it escalates to the point of getting out of control, I'll ban talk of the 2016 film like we did to Snyder talk in The Batman thread last year for a period. Up to you guys.

Hey I'm a registered user. Aren't you supposed to lie to me and kiss my butt?!

 

[Dr. Evil]

This movie intrigues me because I want to see what most of the original characters are doing today. We know Egon has passed away, but what about Ray, Peter and Winston? Or Janine or even Dana? Will Dana's son be mentioned? Or will he be retconned out of history as if he never existed?

 

[thangaran]

This movie intrigues me because I want to see what most of the original characters are doing today. We know Egon has passed away, but what about Ray, Peter and Winston? Or Janine or even Dana? Will Dana's son be mentioned? Or will he be retconned out of history as if he never existed?

Yes it will be so interest to see how they tie story. I always be sad that main team cannot be here but oh well this look good new continuing film

 

[GREEN =w= DAY]

If this can't continue without name calling let's just move on. You can debate about the 2016 film since it's Ghostbusters but if it just devolves to 2016 "discourse" I'm gonna have to ask you guys to move on before it gets worse.

Now that this new movie is coming out, discussion of the 2016 film will be inevitable. But if it escalates to the point of getting out of control, I'll ban talk of the 2016 film like we did to Snyder talk in The Batman thread last year for a period. Up to you guys.

Please do. Let’s just forget about the 2016 movie and move on. Hell, I’ve pretended it doesn’t exist since 2016

 

[AndrewGilkison]

People complain about this movie being overly reliant on nostalgia, but its the only Ghostbusters movie that is actually set outside of New York, and has new characters set in the same world, which feels like an expansion of the universe. Honestly, it looks like a more original take on the material than the Thing That We Are Pretending Doesn't Exist.

 

[Sithborg]

People complain about this movie being overly reliant on nostalgia, but its the only Ghostbusters movie that is actually set outside of New York, and has new characters set in the same world, which feels like an expansion of the universe. Honestly, it looks like a more original take on the material than the Thing That We Are Pretending Doesn't Exist.

It may be for your.

But as much as I truly love The Force Awakens, I have come to realize that it being a rehash of ANH is a valid take on the movie.

So enjoy that.

 

[henzINNIT]

I find it kind of early to talk about this film being too nostalgic and the tone being too reverential. The marketing is designed to be full of member berries in order to sell the film. The film itself is a different animal. I think some added whimsy makes sense in the context of the children leading the story, and while Paul Rudd's character seems to be a fan of the Ghostbusters, I don't get the feeling the world at large regards them much at all.

TFA comparisons are sure to come. There are definitely similarities in approach. It'll be interesting to see how GBA handles things, I think there a number of factors that will distinguish them in the end. It certainly won't share the criticism of 'wasting' a full cast reunion. With Ramis' passing, that opportunity is gone, and so this film is leaning into that loss. Not a bad angle. GBA is also a more traditional 'soft reboot' that can dust off old stories and equipment, whereas TFA was a numbered chapter in a long story where its determination to reset the status quo was ultimately destructive to the overall story.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

It may be for your.

But as much as I truly love The Force Awakens, I have come to realize that it being a rehash of ANH is a valid take on the movie.

So enjoy that.

But the movie that you say you like is a rehash of Ghostbusters 1984, and you like that better then most here do. So I am... confused?

 

[BatLobster]

It may be for your.

But as much as I truly love The Force Awakens, I have come to realize that it being a rehash of ANH is a valid take on the movie.

So enjoy that.

I think this movie will feel more different from the original than TFA did from ANH. TFA couldn't even let go of the desert planet setting. At least this movie has two clear differences with a drastic change of scenery and shifting the perspective to young kids in the country from middle-aged dudes in the city.

Ok, it's going to be a Gozer story. Look I would've honestly preferred Vigo make a return because I love GB 2 and would love to see it acknowledged, but I can live with it. The specifics of the ghost "big bad" are way less important to me than just getting a fun movie with the right tone, good character dynamics and cool scenes of busting ghosts.

Contrary to how some of the critics are trying to portray this, I do not have mythological-sized expectations that I'm looking to have fulfilled here. Ghostbusters is not Star Wars. But it's also not Caddyshack. I just want a good movie that feels in keeping with the tone of the original. And if there's some earned emotion along the way, great.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

"The G word"

Jesus Christ...

"We must never speak of this film again or give it the honor of it's own legal title."

Also...

"We are totally NOT weirdos taking this **** too seriously."


Guys... It was a lackluster comedy film the copyright holders tried to make a buck off of.

If the idea is that the all female GHOSTBUSTERS from 2016 was the equivalent of a religious heresy to the point ya'll wanna, even in jest, act like this is some forbidden magic awakened by calling it GHOSTBUSTERS...


Well we are having a discussion about the silliness of being overly reverential about this franchise and... Thanks for proving a point.


I say this as someone that was in the theaters in 1984 as a kid watching the original and who thought the 2016 film was pretty lame as a comedy and as a new attempt.

 

[TheVileOne]

I've already moved on from that film. It was a weak attempt at a franchise reboot that no one bought into. I don't think it's deserving of that much hate, but whatevs. Tons of movies both good and bad don't strike a chord with audiences. It is what it is.

 

[Tcmjuk87]

Feel like i know the answer already, but has there been any further suggestion that Rick Moranis might cameo in this? The last i read was that he was approached and said no, but was hoping (like the whole Garfield/Maguire situation with Spider-Man), there still might be some hope of him making an appearance.

 

[BeserkerHilf]

Let me backtrack a little bit on my comments about GBII "not working", because that seems to have struck a nerve:

I will not pretend, as a 34 year old male, that I didn't as a kid (and still continue to) watch the **** out of both movies. It's still just as quotable and memorable in its retreads of the first movie's plot while still doing a lot to expand the characters. Where I think it falters though is what Men in Black would repeat a decade later: take a movie that was wildly successful across all age demographics and make a sequel that skews younger after toys and cartoons flooded the market. GBII trades that grit and grime of the first's cinematography and production design for something more glossy and refined, and the score is just miles behind ever touching Elmer Bernstein's. A lot of it feels phoned in by comparison, but it's still propped up by the strength that is the cast and ghosts.

 

[BatLobster]

Let me backtrack a little bit on my comments about GBII "not working", because that seems to have struck a nerve:

I will not pretend, as a 34 year old male, that I didn't as a kid (and still continue to) watch the **** out of both movies. It's still just as quotable and memorable in its retreads of the first movie's plot while still doing a lot to expand the characters. Where I think it falters though is what Men in Black would repeat a decade later: take a movie that was wildly successful across all age demographics and make a sequel that skews younger after toys and cartoons flooded the market. GBII trades that grit and grime of the first's cinematography and production design for something more glossy and refined, and the score is just miles behind ever touching Elmer Bernstein's. A lot of it feels phoned in by comparison, but it's still propped up by the strength that is the cast and ghosts.

As a fan of Ghostbusters 2, I completely agree with you and know what you mean.

But as a kid, the second film was definitely my go-to. I watched the cartoon, I had the toys, so I was in the prime demographic for that film.

I still find it to be really funny though as an adult. The construction worker bit always gets me. "YO!"

 

[BeserkerHilf]

As a fan of Ghostbusters 2, I completely agree with you and know what you mean.

But as a kid, the second film was definitely my go-to. I watched the cartoon, I had the toys, so I was in the prime demographic for that film.

I still find it to be really funny though as an adult. The construction worker bit always gets me. "YO!"

The Joe-Schmoe chuckle they do as the cops drive off is forever engrained in my head and is my inner monologue's "get of a load of these guys" response.

 

[Drizzle]

Ghostbusters II also has one of the most memorable jokes in the series that never fails to make me laugh:

 

[GREEN =w= DAY]

Let me backtrack a little bit on my comments about GBII "not working", because that seems to have struck a nerve:

I will not pretend, as a 34 year old male, that I didn't as a kid (and still continue to) watch the **** out of both movies. It's still just as quotable and memorable in its retreads of the first movie's plot while still doing a lot to expand the characters. Where I think it falters though is what Men in Black would repeat a decade later: take a movie that was wildly successful across all age demographics and make a sequel that skews younger after toys and cartoons flooded the market. GBII trades that grit and grime of the first's cinematography and production design for something more glossy and refined, and the score is just miles behind ever touching Elmer Bernstein's. A lot of it feels phoned in by comparison, but it's still propped up by the strength that is the cast and ghosts.

Totally agree

Ghostbusters 2 is still an enjoyable film but it is no Ghostbusters. I remember having read that due to the popularity of The Real Ghostbusters series, Sony wanted a more “family friendly” movie which explains why a lot of the comedy is a bit more watered down. And apparently a lot of the original story elements were cut out or re-written which didn’t sit well with a lot of the actors, especially Bill Murray. I’ve always wondered what the GB2 original screenplay was like

 

[JubJub86]

Ghostbusters II also has one of the most memorable jokes in the series that never fails to make me laugh:

Heh. Egon's such a doofus.

 

[Dave McFly]

Ghostbusters II also has one of the most memorable jokes in the series that never fails to make me laugh:

that ALWAYS makes me giggle Ramis was so awesome as Egon

 

[henzINNIT]

I have always loved GB2 and still enjoy it. It was one of those films I watched religiously as a kid and still watch today, and I remember first encountering criticism for it online and being quite shocked. They had always been interchangeable to me, they were just the Ghostbusters films. Looking at GB2 with adult eyes, yeah it is a lesser film that falls into a lot of the traps that sequels do.

Egon is actually one of my bigger issues with the film. Some of his funny bits feel quite out of character to me, and he's smiling a bit too often. Egon's humour in the first comes from him being a completely humourless person. Ramis loosens him up a bit too much in GB2 in my opinion. Still has some of the best lines though. "Let's see what happens when we take away the puppy"

 

[BatLobster]

I have always loved GB2 and still enjoy it. It was one of those films I watched religiously as a kid and still watch today, and I remember first encountering criticism for it online and being quite shocked. They had always been interchangeable to me, they were just the Ghostbusters films. Looking at GB2 with adult eyes, yeah it is a lesser film that falls into a lot of the traps that sequels do.

Egon is actually one of my bigger issues with the film. Some of his funny bits feel quite out of character to me, and he's smiling a bit too often. Egon's humour in the first comes from him being a completely humourless person. Ramis loosens him up a bit too much in GB2 in my opinion. Still has some of the best lines though. "Let's see what happens when we take away the puppy"

I have always loved...

"My parents didn't believe in toys...we had part of a slinky. But I straightened it."

 

[Dave McFly]

the only thing I was not a fan of in GB2 was the score I adored Bernstien's score for part 1 and was glad they used it in the video game and parts of it in afterlife. Don't get me wrong I don't HATE it, it grew on me over the years but I still prefer the older score more.