Cory Levy wrote: ↑January 18th, 2022, 8:22 pmRichardLess wrote: ↑January 18th, 2022, 10:18 am I get that many of you want to see the franchise go beyond the OGB’s. But like seeing an Indiana Jones movie without Harrison Ford or, ya know, Indiana Jones, I’m just not interested. Ghostbusters is those characters to me. If you can work it like Extreme Ghostbusters? Ok. Maybe. But I think the moment this franchise leaves the 84 stuff behind, and it will(it already tried), that’ll be it for me unless the new movie manages to do the impossible.
You're hoping for something you're never going to get and, personally, I think you're holding it unfairly against GB:A. You were never going to get a movie that was chock full of the original crew once we got past... probably the early 2000s? The original is a revered classic and I fully understand why but you are absolutely kidding yourself if you think they'd ever be able to re-capture that magnificent lightening in a bottle moment ever again, especially nearly 40 years later now. The same exact group of core minds tried only five years after that original and couldn't come close!
GB:A is an amazingly heartfelt, passionate project that tells a new story set in a world that's already been developed. It doesn't have to be a comedy and quite frankly I'm glad it doesn't strive to be a laugh-a-minute riot. It has its funnier lines and most of the cast bring tremendous comedic timing and chops to the film. This film is about a young person finding themselves, discovering their legacy and forging their own future. It wasn't about making sure we got scenes with Ray tinkering with the proton packs while Winston smokes a cigarette and they talk about a new Bible verse or Peter getting whisked away from his teaching job in a scene that has virtually no plot ties. They're complimentary pieces of the plot who get their set up with the jail call scene and then get paid off with doing their part of helping to save the day at the end of the film. I grew up adoring these characters and wanting to be them so seeing them return in full protonic power gave me goosebumps and I think their parts were absolutely nailed but they are totally just the cherry on top of this film's sundae.
If anything Afterlife leaned too much into the 84 stuff. Enough time has passed that I don't fully hate the re-inclusion of Gozer or the repeating of the Keymaster/Gatekeeper set up but it would shine so much brighter if it was just wholly more original while still tipping its hat to the originals in more subtle ways. I think of the excitement and originality on full display during the Muncher chase and how I believe that's one of the greatest moments in this franchise's entire history and I want an entire movie brimming with that originality!
I feel like I'm rambling but I feel like I need to defend this film somewhat. I have the logo tattooed on my shoulder, I've waited just as long as anyone has to see a continuation of this world that I love so much on a deeply moralistic and philosophical level and once I got it I absolutely loved it. It's not perfect and I wouldn't claim it is but I seriously get bummed out when I come on here hoping to share in that joy but read negative reviews about how this film suffers because we didn't cram the OGs in to a story they really don't have that much stake in. The story would work just as well with the Spengler family saving the day by themselves but I'm stoked we got to see Ray, Peter and Winston help save the day one final time.
That's not to say everyone has to love the film, far from it. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, obviously. Just doing my best to grapple with my own emotions and those of some of the posters here. At the end of the day I'm not going to be losing anything when I love Afterlife.
I’m not holding anything against GBA other than it’s own story problems. The OGB’s are shoehorned into this movie. Having them show up the way they do kinda messes with the films MOJO. Did I love seeing them again? Of course. So you have two options. Either give them meaningful supporting roles, which I think would IMPROVE this film immensely, or don’t have them at all(which is a bad idea).
Yes this film is about the Spengler family. And it would’ve been very interesting if it had commented on the Spengler family he left behind and the one we know more about(the Ghostbusters). I don’t think we need another half hour of OGB scenes. But we need to see Ray going to Peter and Winston. We need to see them suiting up and making that choice. Showing up the way they do? It’s bad. It’s poor storytelling. The filmmakers were thinking the audience would be so preoccupied with “oh my god it’s the OGB’s! Awesome” that they wouldn’t think “uh wait a minute. Didn’t Ray say Egon took all the equipment?”. I can write 3 or 4 versions of that scene where the OGB’s show up and it’s a major improvement over what we got. I shouldn’t be able to say that with any sense of confidence what so ever.
“Egon Spengler can rot in hell” is not Ray Stanz. The film fundamentally gets the character relationship of Egon and Ray wrong. Ray didn’t believe Egon? What? Come on. Ray would be there chasing after Egon in a heartbeat. Which is why I think having Ray in the Grooberson role could fix ALOT of issues I have with the movie.
Here’s the thing. I really like the new characters. I enjoy the film. The problems with the film are all in it’s need to be slavishly devoted to the 1984 film. Having Gozer come back is a mistake, having the OGB’s in the film as it exists now is a mistake. The mini pufts are adorable and I like them but I also know they make no sense as presented in the film. And the fix would be been so effing easy that it hurts to think about. Egon kept some of the Marshmellow goo/Ecto plasm. When Gozer comes back? They reform into mini pufts. Boom. Problem solved. Instead they have them as a cheap call back when we know the only reason why…ugh. Never mind. I’m tired of talking about the same points over and over.
I have a major problem with how this movie is being framed by Jason Reitman. Saying things like “it’s the greatest Easter egg hunt ever made”. No. Just..no. Screw the Easter eggs. Focus on the script. Or the “The first movie ends in an explosion, this one ends in a hug” made me throw up in my mouth. It’s so saccharine, so…not Ghostbusters.
As for you saying the film doesn’t have to be a comedy, well, I disagree. Ghostbusters is a comedic franchise. Yes it has sci fi and gadgets but…it’s a comedy. Not making Ghostbusters a comedy is, again, so not Ghostbusters. And yes I get not everyone here sees this franchise as a comedy. They are in it for the packs, tools, mythology and Ghostbusting. I get it. That’s cool. But thats not the intent of the film.
And you saying that we don’t need a scene where Peter is whisked away for a scene that has no plot ties. Did we watch the same movie? You realize the OGB’s are part of the plot. They show up. They do stuff. And frankly, the idea that “plot” is the only reason for a scene to exist is always something that’s driven me crazy. Plot is the superficial part of the movie. It’s ok to have scenes that don’t move the plot forward. They can reveal character, establish tone, or work on a thematic level. Having Peter whisked away from his teaching job does move the plot tho. Or it could. That’s where being an academy award nominated screenwriter couldve come into play.
There’s a million ways to tell any given story. The way they told this one? Is extremely flawed and it didn’t have to be. Ghostbusters is an irreverent comedy franchise. Making it a serious drama where the audience should be in tears at the end? I think as a tribute to Harold Ramis it’s pretty thoughtless. Ramis would’ve gone for the laugh. Everytime. Having the movie end like E.T. it doesn’t work for me. I’m glad it worked for you.