Ghostbusters: Afterlife

Rate the Movie

  • Total voters
    59
I gotta say, this looks really good. This isn't some cynical con job remake like the last movie was. It's not a pathetic rehash that the second movie is. I like how the characters look but I gotta ask what does this have to do with Ghostbusters? I get the way in is through the Spengler family and there's a nice emotional core, but they're treating this with some wide eyed Spielbergian wonder that just doesn't fit what the first movie is. This would fit for another franchise but not this. ****, the Goonies sequel would work for this!

Ghostbusters was about four schlubbs starting an exterminator business. It's about the spirit of entrepenurship. They weren't anyone special and they weren't heroes. The core of the movie was those four average guys having no choice but to save the day. Not the ghosts and not the mythology. This just reads as once again, someone not understanding the point of something and having a superficial understanding.

Once again we're getting another revival film that ascribes importance on what a franchise means to a fan rather than honestly examining what it is. They're treating what happened in the first movie like this sacred thing. Over reverence by ascribing how important something is not the solution. It's like if Blade Runner 2049 was entirely about Rick being a replicant and what the last movie meant to him.

I feel like if Venkman saw this he'd be baffled.

Look, if they really wanted to go with this angle, at least make it about these kids trying to start their own Ghostbusters business. It'd be the equivalent of a lemonade stand. Kids starting a business. Sure that idea sucks but at least it would stay true to the central idea.
 
Last edited:
Doctor Jones said:
I gotta say, this looks really good. This isn't some cynical con job remake like the last movie was. It's not a uninspired shameful rehash that the second movie is. I like how the characters look but I gotta ask what does this have to do with Ghostbusters? I get the way in is through the Spengler family and there's a nice emotional core, but they're treating this with some wide eyed Spielbergian wonder that just doesn't fit what the first movie is. This would fit for another franchise but not this. ****, the Goonies sequel would work for this!

Ghostbusters was about four schlubbs starting an exterminator business. It's about the spirit of entrepenurship. They weren't anyone special and they weren't heroes. The core of the movie was those four average guys having no choice but to save the day. Not the ghosts and not the mythology. This just reads as once again, someone not understanding the point of something and having a superficial understanding.
Click to expand...

Is it though? Is that the core idea that made it successful at this point. I mean, on a superficial level maybe. They followed that same concept for the sequel which was a disappointment at the time and the 2016 reboot which was a disappointment.

Can’t the Ghostbusters concept be stretched? After over 30 years, it’s not that simple anymore. It does mean more to people, and that first film has taken on a life of its own, along with the personal lives of its stars.

Was Aliens a betrayal because it wasn’t about truckers in space in a small confined space?
 
Galactus123 said:
They should make more scary Ghostbusters movie at some point. Like the Extreme Ghostbusters cartoon:

1547702165766.jpg
Click to expand...
Man Extreme Ghostbusters was underated. Had some dark moments and the remix of the theme tune was on point. Im quite surprised we haven't had a live action version.The SJW's would be all over it lool Anyway im looking forward to how this reinvention turns out. They have the right players this time. I hope they pull it off. Paul Rudd is the perfect dude to suit up( If he does). If he was acting in 1984. He would of been in the original lineup. The comedic tone is right up his street.
 
Last edited:
clip from GB 84 with the Venkman quote it sure sounds like the original one to me maybe paced a different but the same voice
 
References to the first film and Real Ghostbusters(gunning seat)is cool but II better not be ignored.

Paul Rudd's character should show the kids footage the walking Statue of Liberty or Egon's(presumably) place should at least also have the darker uniforms.
 
Yeah I love the second movie. In a lot of ways I prefer it to the first tbh. I think Vigo's a far more threatening adversary than Gozer, for one.
 
Daywalker89 said:
Man Extreme Ghostbusters was underated. Had some dark moments and the remix of the theme tune was on point. Im quite surprised we haven't had a live action version.The SJW's would be all over it lool Anyway im looking forward to how this reinvention turns out. They have the right players this time. I hope they pull it off. Paul Rudd is the perfect dude to suit up. If he was acting in 1984. He would of been in the original lineup. The comedic tone is right up his street.
Click to expand...

I truly want less of opinions like yours. It feels too rooted in the worst parts about the GB16 discourse. You people made it impossible to make an objective criticism three years ago. Nobody would be up in arms about a live action Extreme Ghostbusters film; the woke-factor people would project onto it would be bull****, because at the nature of the EG's diversity wasn't a gimmick to the story. It was four people of varying demographics (that kids could see themselves in) coming together to do the job. It was earnest in its approach, as opposed to what GB16 became with the gimmick selling the movie rather than a purpose/story.

As is always the case, nobody took the originals away. If you want to erase GB16 from history, the easiest way to do it is to not talk about or take these boring/tired cheap shots. If you want to shake the GhostBro narrative, look in the mirror and reflect on the tone you take.

And to speak to a plot point: not that I have any inside information, but I think you're all in for a rude awakening if you think Rudd is suiting up here. You all seem to forget that a human vessel for possession is a pretty common plot point in all of the movies, and if he's not already a Gozer worshiper in hiding, he's likely to be possessed with that Terror Dog hoping on the hood of his car.
 
Doctor Jones said:
I gotta say, this looks really good. This isn't some cynical con job remake like the last movie was. It's not a uninspired shameful rehash that the second movie is. I like how the characters look but I gotta ask what does this have to do with Ghostbusters? I get the way in is through the Spengler family and there's a nice emotional core, but they're treating this with some wide eyed Spielbergian wonder that just doesn't fit what the first movie is. This would fit for another franchise but not this. ****, the Goonies sequel would work for this!

Ghostbusters was about four schlubbs starting an exterminator business. It's about the spirit of entrepenurship. They weren't anyone special and they weren't heroes. The core of the movie was those four average guys having no choice but to save the day. Not the ghosts and not the mythology. This just reads as once again, someone not understanding the point of something and having a superficial understanding.

Once again we're getting another revival film that ascribes importance on what a franchise means to a fan rather than honestly examining what it is. They're treating what happened in the first movie like this sacred thing. Over reverence by ascribing how important something is not the solution. It's like if Blade Runner 2049 was entirely about Rick being a replicant and what the last movie meant to him.

I feel like if Venkman saw this he'd be baffled.

Look, if they really wanted to go with this angle, at least make it about these kids trying to start their own Ghostbusters business. It'd be the equivalent of a lemonade stand. Kids starting a business. Sure that idea sucks but at least it would stay true to the central idea.
Click to expand...

After seeing what became of GB2 (I enjoyed it for what it was) - the franchise is one of those that was always in danger of retreading itself, in the same way a franchise like Men In Black did and not even the chemistry of the cast could save it. Having a new group of guys start up a Ghost busting business just feels stale.

The legacy route works for me this time around, provided that they don't follow the exact same beats like Star Wars:The Force Awakens where they're just re-making the original with younger characters. That being said I still want to feel some nostalgia and by all appearances we're getting that. If they battle the Small Town Stay Puft Marshmellow Man (or any other over-sized junk food) I will riot though.
 
Last edited:
BeserkerHilf said:
I truly want less of opinions like yours. It feels too rooted in the worst parts about the GB16 discourse. You people made it impossible to make an objective criticism three years ago. Nobody would be up in arms about a live action Extreme Ghostbusters film; the woke-factor people would project onto it would be bull****, because at the nature of the EG's diversity wasn't a gimmick to the story. It was four people of varying demographics (that kids could see themselves in) coming together to do the job. It was earnest in its approach, as opposed to what GB16 became with the gimmick selling the movie rather than a purpose/story.

As is always the case, nobody took the originals away. If you want to erase GB16 from history, the easiest way to do it is to not talk about or take these boring/tired cheap shots. If you want to shake the GhostBro narrative, look in the mirror and reflect on the tone you take.

And to speak to a plot point: not that I have any inside information, but I think you're all in for a rude awakening if you think Rudd is suiting up here. You all seem to forget that a human vessel for possession is a pretty common plot point in all of the movies, and if he's not already a Gozer worshiper in hiding, he's likely to be possessed with that Terror Dog hoping on the hood of his car.
Click to expand...
GB16 is done and forgotten. There's no where in my post i even mentioned that film. If you get triggered and generally like GB16 then talk about it with people that LIKED the film. I DO NOT want to talk about it. This film totally wipes it from existence. Furthermore you have no idea how Paul Rudd's character plays out in this. I hope he busts some ghosts but even if he doesn't im glad he's in this film .
 
Can we talk about how there seems to be a Shandor Mining Company outside the town, which would suggest some creepy tunnels and underground networks full of Gozerian temples and such, and an entire town that's a conduit for the paranormal?

Probably why Egon relocated there in the first place. To study Shandor.

Also, it's going to be a huge missed opportunity if no one says "real Ghostbusters" during this movie.
 
Underground exploration of the mine would be cool. It would be similar to the scene in II but different if closer to or related to Gozer
 
What I want to know is, who did Egon marry or have a relationship with to have children and grandchildren? Because they paired Jeanine off with Lewis in GBII (which ticked me off because I thought she and Egon were great together).
 
Before the business, they were all paranormal researchers so it makes sense that Egon would keep and try to perfect and research tech.

That doesn't mean Egon has everything though. Given that the kids have Ecto 1. I'm kind of hoping that when or if Ray, Winston and Pete show up it's in 1A so 1A isn't ignored either.
 
sueb1863 said:
What I want to know is, who did Egon marry or have a relationship with to have children and grandchildren? Because they paired Jeanine off with Lewis in GBII (which ticked me off because I thought she and Egon were great together).
Click to expand...

Maybe he donated sperm while a broke student or researcher? And was later tracked down by his biological daughter?
 
Last edited:
Well, this quickly jumped to my most anticipated movie of 2020! Great trailer!!
 
Does it really matter who Egon’s lover was and why she wasn’t shown in the films? Egon was never a sentimental guy.

It reminds me of Star Trek Generations where Kirk meets Sulu’s daughter and is in shock saying, “When did Sulu find time to have a family?”.
 
I want to know what happened to the containment unit. The first film establishes the hell that breaks loose when you shut that thing down.
 
Really liked the trailer. I didn’t have a lot of interest in this before and now I do, so it worked. I especially enjoy how much it seems like a departure from the previous outings. The original film was lighting in a bottle and the two subsequent films both suffered by trying to recreate the first film and not being their own thing. This feels real in a way the first film did. Two thumbs up.
 
All these questions I assume Reitman will answer if he feels they're of relevance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
  • Poll Poll
Resident Evil: Afterlife - Part 1
2
Replies
26
Views
3K
Matt Mortem
Matt Mortem
T
  • Locked
Ghostbusters 3 - Part 4
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
62K
Thread Manager
T
T
  • Locked
Ghostbusters 3 - Part 3
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
81K
Thread Manager
T
T
  • Locked
Ghostbusters 3 - Part 2
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
40K
Thread Manager
T
T
  • Locked
Ghostbusters 3 - Part 1
39 40 41
Replies
1K
Views
99K
Thread Manager
T

Staff online

Members online

Total: 5,428 (members: 18, guests: 5,410)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,411
Messages
22,098,914
Members
45,895
Latest member
3Nieces

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"