Comedy Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire

[KillerMcQueen]

Still dumbfounded by the "you shouldn't cast SNL alums" takes.

That will never not confound me, not only are Murray and Aykroyd two of the biggest names to come out of SNL, but they'd initially wanted Eddie Murphy to be involved as well.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I still haven't seen the 2016 movie. Not because it's all women, just because I am pretty certain I wouldn't like it.

 

[BatLobster]

I think we just have to be okay accepting that maybe depending on your age or point of exposure to it, Ghostbusters might mean something a little different to you.

For most of my life around just assuming that anyone remotely close to me in age saw Ghostbusters similar to the way I did. A one of a kind genre-bending film/franchise. The past several years have thought me that it's very YMMV and to some people it's just a comedy. I will never, ever agree with that, but I accept that it's just how some people see it apparently.

Still dumbfounded by the "you shouldn't cast SNL alums" takes.

Casting SNL alums made sense. The movie feeling like one big SNL sketch on the other hand was where it missed the mark IMO. I think one way to articulate what made the original Ghostbusters special is that it was bringing SNL comedians into the world of genre/blockbuster film. The 2016 movie felt like it was bringing Ghostbusters into the world of modern SNL comedy. That may seem like splitting hairs, but I think it's a massive difference in approach.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

It's also important to remember that people heavily emphasizing that it is first and foremost a comedy are not belittling it or denigrating it. A comedy can also have good characters, emotional stuff (Ghostbusters very much does not have emotional stuff, imo, but I'd be interested to hear what other people find emotional in it), interesting themes etc.

What is coming to mind for me, although I do think Ghostbusters is a little bit more of a gag overall, as a point of comparison rather than Star Wars, Indiana Jones or for that matter other 80s comedies like Caddyshack is Back To The Future. Fundamentally a comedy but with a very high concept, well thought out plot with a clever internal mythology and strong characters. But you'd still never, ever make an ultra sincere nostalgic legacy sequel to BTTF that played the core concept almost entirely straight and featured a dubiously ethical CGI Golem of an original cast member. Directed by Zemeckis's son working out his Daddy Issues.

 

[SJD]

At the end of the day, Ghostbusters 2016 was more of a remake than a reboot. It retold the origin story of the Ghostbusters, but failed to leave a lasting impression. Despite being a fan of the original 1984 film and having respect for Paul Feig as a filmmaker, I left the theater on opening night feeling very disappointed. The characters in the remake lacked memorability and didn't stand out in any significant way. It's no surprise that the planned sequel never materialized, as the film simply didn't have that special something.

On the other hand, Ghostbusters: Afterlife managed to strike a balance between nostalgia and fresh storytelling. The film brought everything back to form and left me thoroughly entertained. The new characters, particularly Paul Rudd's Gary Grooberson, added a refreshing dynamic. I appreciated how Jason Reitman and his team handled the Egon Spengler character, providing a sense of closure. The setup for the future of the Ghostbusters franchise was great, and I found myself wanting to revisit the film for another feel-good experience that left a smile on this fan's face.

 

[DyeLorean]

I think one way to articulate what made the original Ghostbusters special is that it was bringing SNL comedians into the world of genre/blockbuster film. The 2016 movie felt like it was bringing Ghostbusters into the world of modern SNL comedy. That may seem like splitting hairs, but I think it's a massive difference in approach.

That's a very clever way of putting it, yes.

 

[BoredGuy]

Is Afterlife streaming on anything yet?

 

[Drizzle]

Yeah, which is why I dig it so much. It's very much The Force Awakens meets the Goonies, for Ghostbusters.

I actually like the 2016 film, though I don't think it's great or anything. I also don't find it very "Ghostbusters". That said, I am blown away by how many men take it as some sort of personal affront, proving that any theoretical "anti-man" might be valid.

In regards to Afterlife feeling like The Force Awakens, I can very much look past recycling certain plot aspects or villains as long as it's done with the best intentions. I wasn't a fan of Gozer being the villain again but if you throw in some interesting new characters and a good emotional ending, a recycled villain isn't a dealbreaker for me.

As for the backlash to Ghostbusters 2016, that reached an incredibly stupid level of hatred. I felt especially bad for Leslie Jones who got the worst of it. As a movie itself, I saw most of it way back when it was making the rounds on cable and the most offensive thing about it is the horrible CGI.

That will never not confound me, not only are Murray and Aykroyd two of the biggest names to come out of SNL, but they'd initially wanted Eddie Murphy to be involved as well.

I often wonder how different it would have been if Murphy had played Winston apart from the obvious larger part he'd be given. I also firmly believe that had he not died, John Belushi would have certainly been involved as well. In an alternate reality Ghostbusters would feel more like an SNL movie than Blues Brothers or Wayne's World.

 

[DyeLorean]

Afterlife also gave me one of the most "Oh my God!" moments with this shot because I had been spoiler-free up to that point and I had absolutely no idea they were gonna have Egon appear, less alone having him firing the proton packs with the rest of the guys. For me this type of image was a long distant wish that I was certain it was never going to happen. For some of the misses that movie has, it hit too many high points for me.

 

[BatLobster]

It's also important to remember that people heavily emphasizing that it is first and foremost a comedy are not belittling it or denigrating it. A comedy can also have good characters, emotional stuff (Ghostbusters very much does not have emotional stuff, imo, but I'd be interested to hear what other people find emotional in it), interesting themes etc.

Again, this is where my Ghostbusters II love really comes into play. I think the Peter/Dana storyline in there is actually very sweet. You see a softer dimension of Venkman come into play with how he is with Oscar, and his regrets for messing things up with Dana. Everything with Dana and Oscar feels real to me. You have a single mother who is absolutely distraught when her baby is threatened, and Sigourney sells that. It gives the climax some nice personal stakes. There's this familial aspect to it where Dana, Jeanine and Louis are all a part of the Ghostbusters family in a way that I find very endearing. Vigo is also a legitimately menacing presence. All of this combines to create a fleshed out, dimensional world where the Ghostbusters stand out as unlikely, but needed heroes. I even think the film's theme about love for your fellow man is delivered in a way that is somehow corny, hilarious and heartwarming all at the same time.

I f***ing love it. It's my favorite Ghostbusters movie.

 

[henzINNIT]

I'm happy for anyone who got warm and fuzzies from the image above. I absolutely cannot relate though. It's terribly depressing to me.

 

[BatLobster]

I'm happy for anyone who got warm and fuzzies from the image above. I absolutely cannot relate though. It's terribly depressing to me.

It wasn't really that specific moment that really made me emotional. It was when Ray apologized to Egon that got me.

That to me just really hits on that human, emotional level of wishing you could've said or unsaid something to someone who's no longer here. The use of icons from our childhood and movie magic heightens all of that, but for me it's still rooted in something that I think people can resonate with their own lives. It's not just "I remember that thing!", for me. It was something more cathartic.

 

[Sithborg]

Is Afterlife streaming on anything yet?

No, though it is doing the basic cable rounds at the moment, so may be picked up soonish.

It wasn't really that specific moment that really made me emotional. It was when Ray apologized to Egon that got me.

That to me just really hits on that human, emotional level of wishing you could've said or unsaid something to someone who's no longer here. The use of icons from our childhood and movie magic heightens all of that, but for me it's still rooted in something that I think people can resonate with their own lives. It's not just "I remember that thing!", for me. It was something more cathartic.

And that I guess is where I differ from the vast majority of the thread. The cartoon and the toys were my main source of Ghostbusters fandom as a kid. Yeah, my dad showed me and my brother the movies all the time, and yeah, they were good, but again, the cartoon and toys. Which is probably why I the nostalgic bait falls flat, and I do not have the emotional goggles blinding me to the **** job they did with Egon in Afterlife. And why Murray still being here frustrates me.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Afterlife also gave me one of the most "Oh my God!" moments with this shot because I had been spoiler-free up to that point and I had absolutely no idea they were gonna have Egon appear, less alone having him firing the proton packs with the rest of the guys. For me this type of image was a long distant wish that I was certain it was never going to happen. For some of the misses that movie has, it hit too many high points for me.

View attachment 79044

Yeah this moment, the apology from Ray even the looks on the faces of Venkman and Winston. That bit got me good.

 

[henzINNIT]

Too contrived for me; relies on the meta-narrative and a real life death, and not the story itself. The OG characters only pop up for a cameo, and aren't characters. Ray delivers a brief and unconvincing info dump about Egon leaving. It all hinged on Ray not believing his genius friend for no reason. It's a deeply unsatisfying story, but it is a quick route to that group shot and then cut to credits.

 

[DyeLorean]

Too contrived for me; relies on the meta-narrative and a real life death, and not the story itself. The OG characters only pop up for a cameo, and aren't characters. Ray delivers a brief and unconvincing info dump about Egon leaving. It all hinged on Ray not believing his genius friend for no reason. It's a deeply unsatisfying story, but it is a quick route to that group shot and then cut to credits.

I don't disagree with any of that.
But at the same time there are many things in the original film that are contrived, unconvincing too yet nobody talks about it. Like, how they got all their equipment?? They went from being fired to having these spectacular neutrona wands, a containment unit for ghosts we don't know how it works or how was it made, where did they get all the materials to create the ghost traps... etc etc. We don't mind because it's a quick route to them becoming Ghostbusters, we just accept it as it is.
That's exactly what I did with Afterlife too. There's a huge gap in time without Ghostbusters, there had to be a reason why they were not doing that anymore. And with a main character gone, there wasn't much left for them to do than to explain it some way. I'm willing to accept the contrivances because in the end there's an emotional resolution.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I don't disagree with any of that.
But at the same time there are many things in the original film that are contrived, unconvincing too yet nobody talks about it. Like, how they got all their equipment?? They went from being fired to having these spectacular neutrona wands, a containment unit for ghosts we don't know how it works or how was it made, where did they get all the materials to create the ghost traps... etc etc. We don't mind because it's a quick route to them becoming Ghostbusters, we just accept it as it is.
That's exactly what I did with Afterlife too. There's a huge gap in time without Ghostbusters, there had to be a reason why they were not doing that anymore. And with a main character gone, there wasn't much left for them to do than to explain it some way. I'm willing to accept the contrivances because in the end there's an emotional resolution.

Yep this. It applied a real life tragedy to the story in a compelling and emotional way. For me at least.

 

[BatLobster]

Too contrived for me; relies on the meta-narrative and a real life death, and not the story itself. The OG characters only pop up for a cameo, and aren't characters. Ray delivers a brief and unconvincing info dump about Egon leaving. It all hinged on Ray not believing his genius friend for no reason. It's a deeply unsatisfying story, but it is a quick route to that group shot and then cut to credits.

I mean, to be fair...things falling apart and characters acting differently in a long gap between movies was pretty much normalized by the Star Wars sequel trilogy's treatment of Luke Skywalker, for better or worse. Granted, Ray's info dump wasn't very good and it could've been handled better, but I still think if you're comparing it to what Star Wars did to Luke, it's kind of small potatoes. I accepted both with the same "30 years is a long time and people/relationships change" sort of justification.

I have critiques of Afterlife, it's not perfect. But I still think the central conceit works, which is more about the Spengler family and reconciling their broken relationship with Egon and the 'family business'. Yes, it does rely on the meta-narrative of Ramis' passing, but I think making the story very much about Egon/The Spenglers was the appropriately respectful way to move that continuity forward while highlighting the undeniable importance of Egon to Ghostbusters. And it gave us McKenna Grace's Phoebe Spengler, which I think was ultimately worth it.

 

[DarkKnight]

It always interests me to see fandom from different perspectives of various franchises that we discuss on these forums.

While I'm definitely not a fan of the 2016 remake/reboot or whatever you want to call it. I can respect those that did enjoy it and understand the feeling of not getting more of what you enjoyed from it going forward. I've been in that position a few times as well with a few different franchises that tried something different or tried a certain reboot arc etc. over the years.

However, for me, I'm on countdown mode and REALLY looking forward to this.

 

[Sithborg]

I'm sorry, but Egon being a stalker of his daughter does not translate to him being a caring father, no matter how much the movie tries.

 

[DyeLorean]

Joking aside, I think the movie explained how he lost touch with reality and became obsessed and a hermit. Nobody in town even knew him.

 

[DarkKnight88]

Stalker!? Wtf lol

 

[Arachnerd]

*enters thread*

Oh my god, not this old tired as hell discussion again.

If you liked Ghostbusters 2016 and disliked Afterlife, cool. If you disliked Ghostbusters 2016 and liked Afterlife, also cool. I don't think there's any need to bring this argument back up when nothing new is being added.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to Frozen Empire.

 

[Sithborg]

Stalker!? Wtf lol

What do you call someone who tracks someone else's life from afar, yet, does not have the ability to pick up a damn phone. Or hell, even write a letter.

 

[DarkKnight88]

What do you call someone who tracks someone else's life from afar, yet, does not have the ability to pick up a damn phone. Or hell, even write a letter.

A bad father. But I wouldn’t call him a stalker by any stretch. It’s his daughter, his blood. He’s not after something nefarious nor harassing. Wouldn’t it be way weirder he didn’t keep any photos or accomplishments of her at all?

I don’t think any grown adult would think of their parent as a “stalker” in the way it’s presented here.