rocket1312

I'm kind of stunned at the positive reaction here. I thought this was a mediocre kids movie (and for the record I have no problem with it being a kids movie) propped up by some of the laziest, most obscene fan service I can ever remember. The kids were mostly good, especially Grace and Kim, and Paul Rudd on a bad day is enough to mostly keep my attention, even if his character was mostly useless. I thought it was perfectly watchable for the first half, but then almost completely fell apart.

I get why people are excited by Egon, but if you take away the real life stuff and our childhood memories, was there any real weight behind his appearance? All we know about Egon's breakup with the other guys came from one of the worst 2 minute info dumps I've ever seen. (And did anyone really buy that Ray would've bailed on Egon?) We have no investment in his relationship with his daughter and she didn't even know who he was. He abandoned her (if my timeline is correct) sometime before the events of the first movie to be a professor at Columbia? What a misunderstood genius! I guess the fact that he had pictures of her in his lab makes up for that? The stuff with the granddaughter was sweet, I guess, but I thought her "outsider-ness" was unfortunately underdeveloped. I would have been fine with them jettisoning the brother and keeping the focus on her.

As for the fan service (which I guess Egon sort of falls under, but at least that was central to the premise), stuff like the old Stay Puft ad on the building and Egon's spaghetti strainer head-set thing are nice little Easter eggs. The Crunch bar or the Twinkie make no sense outside of "hey, remember this?", but whatever. They're harmless. The marshmallow men were completely inexplicable. Seriously, someone explain the logic behind them besides being cute. But by far the worst was the need to completely regurgitate the Gozer stuff. Was anyone really pining for more backstory for Ivor Shandor? Did we need Carrie Coon doing a Sigourney Weaver impression? How about the Stranger Things kid's girlfriend getting turned into one of the dogs for like 2 seconds just so we could reenact the scene of Venkman pulling the statue apart? Or the funny kid wearing Ray's goggles getting covered in marshmallow just like that time Ray got covered in marshmallow! Ha ha! That's a thing I remember! Is this really what people want? Really?

Shannon Nutt

Rocket1312 - I sympathize (don't agree with, but sympathize) with your position...but while all those things you mention were indeed IN the movie, they weren't THE movie - which I think why people love it...yes, a lot of fun winks and nods toward the original, but still a brand-new setting with brand-new characters (aside from a lot of the same ghosts we've seen before). And why is fan service a bad thing? You give the audience what it (or a large majority of it) wants while still treading new ground. I mean, if you thought fan service was bad in this film, wait until you see Spider-man: No Way Home. It's going to be even worse.

Mondo Kane

You already saw it!?!

rocket1312

Take away the fan service and there's hardly anything there. The characters were thin sketches and there wasn't any of the joy and wonder associated with the best of these sorts of movies. These kids discover all this equipment and lore and they just sort of dutifully accept that they are now Ghostbusters and don't seem even the least bit excited/overwhelmed/etc. Everything just kind of happens. There's no real conflict. Other than being locked up for a minute, the rest of the town barely seems to know anything is even happening.

But whatever, it's fine. Like I said it's a mediocre kids movie. That they slather it in all this fan service to make it seem like something it's not is what really bugs me. And I'm sorry, but lifting just about every element from the original and dropping it into the new one almost whole cloth is not just a thing IN the movie. It's pretty much the only reason for this movie's existence. I'm actually stunned beyond belief that they replaced Slimer with bootleg Slimer, but I guess Slimer is too beloved to make him malicious at this point? And let's be honest, you could delete the Ray phone call and not have the originals show up at the end and the movie would not be functionally any different. It literally would change nothing about the story being told. But would people still be praising this? I actually think I might have liked that movie better, especially if they fleshed out the new characters more instead of just relying on nostalgia.

I saw one review that said the movie was like the equivalent of 2 hours of the Leo Dicaprio pointing at the tv meme. I'd say that was an overstatement except I watched this movie with my friend who considers the original to be his favorite movie and that's literally what he did for 2 hours. I think Jason Reitman meant well with all of this. I really do. But as the movie going audience I just think we need to demand more.

Giantrobo

If people love a film/show....Fan Service is good
When people don't like a film/show...Fan Service sticks out and not in a good way.

rocket1312

When you say "love a film/show" are you referring to the original? Because I love the original. I don't love whatever this is. And I'd argue it goes way beyond simply fan service. They literally borrowed the entire last act of the original and plopped it into this completely different movie. Even just the way they fetishized the Ghostbusters equipment rubbed me the wrong way. They're slowly panning over the proton pack in closeup as if to say "see, we got all the little details right!" when I have no idea what the details are because the original movie didn't even care enough to show them.

If people like it, more power to them, but I feel like I'm living in bizarro world.

Giantrobo

I'm speaking in general. It's just an observation about how people either give passes to things when they are into something, or how they nit pick things when they aren't impressed.

Granted, though i look forward to it, I've yet to see the film. But i feel like almost all the positive reviews I've been seeing are heavily based in the Nostalgia/Fan Service in it. It's like that's the only thing holding this film up. People love their Nostalgia...

Mike86

It’s hard to explain but I find fan service very hit or miss. To me in this it didn’t bother me completely, but the film itself didn’t do a lot for me.

It almost felt like this could have been a different kids movie but just had elements of Ghostbusters thrown in.

Josh-da-man

Oh yeah, "fan service" is a pejorative that gets thrown around a lot, but doesn't have a lot of meaning. If you liked the movie, then you either ignore the fan service or enjoy it. If you don't like a movie, then you hate any fan service or see it in places where it really isn't.

On another board, there's a guy who hates The Mandalorian, and complains about the fan service in it. Like, if there's any droid, alien, or vehicle in the background that appeared in the OT, it's fan service and it sucks. "Oh, god, there was a gonk droid in the background for a half a second! This series sucks! Disney is just making it to satisfy the manchildren who never grew up! They don't want new things! Waahhhh!"

But then he loves Star Trek Lower Decks...

DJariya

One of my friends from work went to a Q&A and screening of the movie a week ago with Jason Reitman. He said Reitman said Bob Gunton played Egon in the opening sequence and in the climatic scene. They digitally inserted Ramis likeness over Gunton.

B.A.

Took my kids and my dad to see Ghostbusters - Afterlife last night.

it was a good, but a bit long-winded.

the kids were well cast, and held their own with Rudd.

my kids really enjoyed it.

Draven

Finally sat through this thing.

It’s exactly what the trailer indicated it would be - Kid Ghostbusters in a non-comedy. I chuckled at exactly one joke (the kung pao chicken and date line).

I don’t know how you make a sequel to one of the best comedies of all time that isn’t funny at all, but they did it. Oh wait, the dad jokes

And are all those ghosts just…sitting in traps under the farm? And why don’t the traps smoke anymore? Ugh. There was too much of this kind of stuff.

The only cool part was seeing the terror dogs with modern special effects. And I liked the ghost tunnel trap.

And holy shit could the “who ya gonna call?” been more groan-inducing?

Ah well.

windom

If they had really wanted to get the nostalgia right for the original Ghostbusters, they should have shown most of the characters smoking.

dex14

Yea... they did it with Ghostbusters II too.

Draven

Well, GHII at least had Janosz.

"Why am I drippings with goo?" is a funnier line than anything in Afterlife. There are a lot of those in GHII. "I had a slinky once, but I straightened it" and "Only a Carpathian would come back to life now and choose New York".

Actually now I want to go watch Ghostbusters II again.

BrewCrew

Saw this over the weekend with my kids who really like the original and one dressed as a Ghostbuster for Halloween. I enjoyed it more than I thought I would as I figured there would be a lot more things like the Mini Marshmallow Men but didn't really think they went too over the top with that type of stuff. I like how they incorporated Egon into the storyline and having him together with the other guys was certainly the highlight for me as I somehow avoided that spoiler. My only negative and mentioned previously but still hard to imagine that he would be such a bad father. I would be on board with Ernie Hudson having a bigger role in the sequel, is 75 and older than Murray and Aykroyd but is looking good.

Draven

Yeah Ernie looks great. I've been used to watching Bill Murray age but seeing him back in the gear with the proton pack was just...yikes. I was worried he broke a hip getting flung back into the car.

Shannon Nutt

Ironically, Ernie is the oldest (76 on Dec. 17th) living Ghostbuster (Murray is 71; Aykroyd is 69). I think they set up specifically for Ernie to be in a sequel. Dan will be too, probably, as I guess NO Ghostbusters movie can be made without him signing off on it. I know Dan wants one last film with the old gang - I think he's mentioned that in interviews (meaning interviews AFTER shooting this current film).

Rodney2187

Ghostbusters


Ghostbusters 2


Ghostbusters: Afterlife

devilshalo

Not sure why you give GBII a pass and not Afterlife?

What does GBII have that Afterlife doesn't? It's not laughs... oh, right, it's the original team of Murray, Aykroyd, and Ramis.

In Afterlife, I was expecting something more along the lines of Super 8, Goonies, or Stranger Things with references to the past, resolving issues or where have they been all this time. Maybe if they had Murray and Aykroyd in it more than the last 20 mins and a story that centered around them, you'd get what you were looking for. But since there were some not well known kids, maybe you set the bar too high.

Or you can go back to GB2016 and have jokes explained to you that so often Feig had the girls do onscreen.

E Unit

Finally watched this. This was a really fun movie. Yeah so another retread, but it was well done and the kids did a great job on it. I chuckle at the comments that without the fan service/nostalgia that it’s a mediocre kids movie. So what? It’s meant to be the next Ghostbusters movie with kids. I wanted to see a lot more of the guys at the end, but it was nice for what it was. I guess sequels are coming? They certainly opened it up for that.

Draven

Because it’s funnier.

Jokes. GBII has jokes. Afterlife has mild amusements.

I was expecting a sequel to one of the greatest comedies ever and I got kids driving a car through a cornfield and back and forth to a mine.

I would have been fine with no appearances from the original cast if it had been funny, quotable or made any sort of sense.

Happily. At least that movie was funny.

Lipid

Should have been called "Ghostbusters, the revenge of gozer" or "Ghostbusters, Gozer's revenge"

Solid movie, but the fact it was just rehashing the same villains from the first one was disappointing. The OG Ghosbusters were great to see but the fact it's such a short cameo felt like pandering. This movie would have been better if they trimmed it down by like 20 minutes. After awhile, it's too damn easy to predict what's going to happen which harms the overall quality.

rocket1312

So what? I don't know, is it too much too ask for a good kids movie? People's tolerance for mediocrity as long as it's spackled over with a bunch of stuff they remember from older, better movies continues to astound me.

Daytripper

I thought this movie was cute and I had a lot of fun watching it. It was also a million times better than the dreadful "Ghostbusters II". One of the laziest sequels ever made. And not funny at all. I remember Siskel and Ebert's spot on review.