- Joined
- Dec 3, 2013
Maybe major plot points still happened but not in the same way 2 protrayed them.
The Ghostbusters Thread (Old, New, Animated, Whatever)
- Thread starter _blank_
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2021
Damn okay, that has me curious, I know it's out already so I'll try to watch it over the weekend. I know akryoid still wants to make "Ghost Corps" a thing but aside from vidya I don't really see multimedia shit like say another ghostbusters cartoon working out.
Also get the distinct vibe that a cgi Herold ramis shows up in this film from what I have heard from dog walker and other media outlets, has me worried but if the nostalgic man is to be believed the effects are "impressive" and he "wants to know how they pulled it off" about something so it probably is better then tarkin or livia soprano at least.
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2020
Juno fucking sucked. The only yardstick Juno should be used as is, "How much will this movie suck comparatively to Juno?"
Serious film, my ass. Did you take a community college film course or something?
Travoltron
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2018
At my local Half-Price Books, they have had dozens of used copies of Juno for years now. One time they even had a whole shelf of them. I find it fascinating to see physical evidence of sheeple consumers waking up from hype.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2020
Travoltron
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2018
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2013
Well, apparently it was really well done.
She’s the younger that does the Batwoman reactions and mocks the shit out of trash movies, so for her to have this reaction is rather impressive.
EDIT:
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2015
I just saw it. It was pretty good. 8/10. There's some memberberries but they're not very obnoxious. I hated the Wal-Mart scene. The black chick/love interest is there, she's pretty much a non-character just there for woke points. The kid character, Podcast, was very obnoxious. The kid seemed to be channeling the fat kid from Ace Ventura JR.
It really is the same kind of performance. And the kid is a brony too @y2kbaby .
The scene where the kids enter the mine is very much an ode to the river of slime scene from part 2.
It does retread the original to an extent but adds enough to make it stand out. And yes, Egon comes back as a CGI ghost. I found that tacky but the hearts of the filmmakers was in the right place so... Eh. I had a big dumb grin when the 3 guys came back in the Ghostbusters suits.
Overall, pretty good. Better than the remake but I think that goes without saying. Better than part 2 as well.
It really is the same kind of performance. And the kid is a brony too @y2kbaby .
The scene where the kids enter the mine is very much an ode to the river of slime scene from part 2.
It does retread the original to an extent but adds enough to make it stand out. And yes, Egon comes back as a CGI ghost. I found that tacky but the hearts of the filmmakers was in the right place so... Eh. I had a big dumb grin when the 3 guys came back in the Ghostbusters suits.
Overall, pretty good. Better than the remake but I think that goes without saying. Better than part 2 as well.
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2013
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2018
I also thought it was a 7/10 or 8/10. I thought they did Egon dirty for most of the movie, but the last 20 minutes or so made up for it greatly.
As an aside (not really a spoiler), I know single moms have been a thing in TV/movies for a while, but I feel like it's really getting noticeable now. It's not just that they are single moms, but apparently men are just assholes who abandon their children. I don't know; it's been really bothering me more lately for some reason.
As an aside (not really a spoiler), I know single moms have been a thing in TV/movies for a while, but I feel like it's really getting noticeable now. It's not just that they are single moms, but apparently men are just assholes who abandon their children. I don't know; it's been really bothering me more lately for some reason.
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2020
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2019
Saw it this afternoon.
Solid, cute adventure movie. None of the teeth from the OG movie but it was fine. Got the Steven Spielberg vibes, but without the insencere "we're trying to be just like Steve" feels like say J.J.'s films have. More it got that right feel of family and home.
My only issue is retreading old ground like Star Wars 7 but it at least used old stuff to tie everything together rather than whatever the fuck that movie did. Maybe also wish there was perhaps one more ghost busting scene. Dunno if they'd need to tighten the opening act or what for such a thing.
3 stars out of 4.
Solid, cute adventure movie. None of the teeth from the OG movie but it was fine. Got the Steven Spielberg vibes, but without the insencere "we're trying to be just like Steve" feels like say J.J.'s films have. More it got that right feel of family and home.
My only issue is retreading old ground like Star Wars 7 but it at least used old stuff to tie everything together rather than whatever the fuck that movie did. Maybe also wish there was perhaps one more ghost busting scene. Dunno if they'd need to tighten the opening act or what for such a thing.
3 stars out of 4.
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2015
He's there too. But there's a CGI ghost of Ramis. I did wonder if they used the model from the Ghostbusters game as a base.
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2013
The single dads are all in video games.
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2020
Ah, I took it as you meant there was just Ray, Egon, and Venkman.
I'm still undecided if I want to see this or not.
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2017
On one hand its nice seeing 2016 Cisbusters fans seethe, and the movie is okay, but on the other hand I dislike that they brought back Gozer and the Terror Dogs again as the main villains instead of using a new villain like Tiamat who was mentioned in the 2009game and other media or even Cathulu or any new Sumerian or Lovecraftian-style horrors. They also introduce a donut steal Slimer for some reason named Muncher despite that Slimer would've been the one returning ghost from the first film I wouldn't have minded seeing again.
And I know they used Tiamat for some comic book event in 2018, but honestly I couldn't stomach the comic's multiverse crossover format (I'm not big on crossovers in general unless its something vague or subtle) or having the 2016 Busters mixed in and trying to force fans to love them, much like how they did with Lego Dimensions.
Also I called it ages ago.
It was nice seeing them together again and respected unlike in 2016, but considering all they ever achieved is basically non-existent now and that they had to finish the job after all this time feels a bit hollow, like most of the memberberries. I guess the film was competent, the visuals were great and the respect for the original film and its actors were good, but the kid characters really didn't do much for me and reminded me too much of that Stranger Things show (and two of them don't have much going for them in terms of personality) and again the memberberries, while nice for someone who hasn't watched Ghosbusters in a long time, feel like they were made for people who never watched Ghostbusters before or solely for the most diehard puritans who hated everything about Ghostbusters except for the first film at the cost of any real growth or world building and don't really feel all that emotional for someone who watches the original Ghostbusters semi-regularly. I mean I didn't like Part 2 either, but the Ghostbusters game showed there was fun to be salvaged from the second film (especially with some retcons) and the pre-Q5 version of the cartoon was the tits along with the game which was the real last time all the Ghostbusters actors were together.
Anyway I guess I'll give it a 6/10 or 7/10. Its passable. I mean I guess its amazing when compared to the 2016 abomination but that's not exactly a high bar to compare it to, like comparing a baloney sandwich to a turd on a plate. I think if the 2016 version had never existed alongside so many terrible woke films and reboots, the new film would probably be generating less hype imo, so if not for that I'd probably give it a 5/10. I mean yeah its not terrible, just very very repetitive and a bit too much like Stranger Things, and too much like The Force Awakens garbage except its more respectful to the setting and characters. The best thing it does is visuals, giving them some form of legacy even if not as great as it could be, and respecting the actors and the first film (and some kenner toys) but that's about it.
And I know they used Tiamat for some comic book event in 2018, but honestly I couldn't stomach the comic's multiverse crossover format (I'm not big on crossovers in general unless its something vague or subtle) or having the 2016 Busters mixed in and trying to force fans to love them, much like how they did with Lego Dimensions.
Also I called it ages ago.
This is what Gozer looks like now.
It was nice seeing them together again and respected unlike in 2016, but considering all they ever achieved is basically non-existent now and that they had to finish the job after all this time feels a bit hollow, like most of the memberberries. I guess the film was competent, the visuals were great and the respect for the original film and its actors were good, but the kid characters really didn't do much for me and reminded me too much of that Stranger Things show (and two of them don't have much going for them in terms of personality) and again the memberberries, while nice for someone who hasn't watched Ghosbusters in a long time, feel like they were made for people who never watched Ghostbusters before or solely for the most diehard puritans who hated everything about Ghostbusters except for the first film at the cost of any real growth or world building and don't really feel all that emotional for someone who watches the original Ghostbusters semi-regularly. I mean I didn't like Part 2 either, but the Ghostbusters game showed there was fun to be salvaged from the second film (especially with some retcons) and the pre-Q5 version of the cartoon was the tits along with the game which was the real last time all the Ghostbusters actors were together.
Anyway I guess I'll give it a 6/10 or 7/10. Its passable. I mean I guess its amazing when compared to the 2016 abomination but that's not exactly a high bar to compare it to, like comparing a baloney sandwich to a turd on a plate. I think if the 2016 version had never existed alongside so many terrible woke films and reboots, the new film would probably be generating less hype imo, so if not for that I'd probably give it a 5/10. I mean yeah its not terrible, just very very repetitive and a bit too much like Stranger Things, and too much like The Force Awakens garbage except its more respectful to the setting and characters. The best thing it does is visuals, giving them some form of legacy even if not as great as it could be, and respecting the actors and the first film (and some kenner toys) but that's about it.
Same here although I like to treat the Ghostbusters game as semi-canon too. A shame the movie didn't do the same and just had the first one being the only one that mattered and having absolutely nothing happen in 30 years as if to further invalidate them just to make it easier for a lazy audience to stomach. And even the events of the first film seem like a passing memory in history just so they can have it reflect the real world for some reason.
Anyway have some more salt.
Ghostbusters: Afterlife is a manipulative, ethically dubious nostalgia trip – review
Dripping in unearned gravitas, this belated sequel turns the original film’s downtrodden dorks into superheroes
‘Ghostbusters: Afterlife’ Review: A Play for Nostalgia and Merch
Jason Reitman, son of the original “Ghostbusters” director, delivers a toothless film with Paul Rudd as a love interest and plenty of cutesy ghosts.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2015
I felt like the scene where the kids ride around in the Ecto-1 and some water splashes against the logo, removing the dirt and grime from it, was a veiled dig at the remake.
Travoltron
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2018
The MSM wants this to fail so badly for whatever reason. I guess Paul Fag and Amy Pascal have powerful friends.Anyway have some more salt.
Ghostbusters: Afterlife is a manipulative, ethically dubious nostalgia trip – review
Dripping in unearned gravitas, this belated sequel turns the original film’s downtrodden dorks into superheroeswww.independent.co.uk
‘Ghostbusters: Afterlife’ Review: A Play for Nostalgia and Merch
Jason Reitman, son of the original “Ghostbusters” director, delivers a toothless film with Paul Rudd as a love interest and plenty of cutesy ghosts.www.nytimes.com
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2014
So... they made an even more repetitive and more crass Ghostbusters 2 who tries to spam other horror series to be hip with the kids then? Because despite two being mediocre, it sounds more original than this fucking thing. Also the fact they put Ramis' corpse in there is fucking disgusting.On one hand its nice seeing 2016 Cisbusters fans seethe, and the movie is okay, but on the other hand I dislike that they brought back Gozer and the Terror Dogs again as the main villains instead of using a new villain like Tiamat who was mentioned in the first movie and other media or even Cathulu or any new Sumerian or Lovecraftian-style horrors. They also introduce a donut steal Slimer for some reason named Muncher despite that Slimer would've been the one returning ghost from the first film I wouldn't have minded seeing again.
And I know they used Tiamat for some comic book event in 2018, but honestly I couldn't stomach the comic's multiverse crossover format (I'm not big on crossovers in general unless its something vague or subtle) or having the 2016 Busters mixed in and trying to force fans to love them, much like how they did with Lego Dimensions.
Also I called it ages ago.
This is what Gozer looks like now.
View attachment 2729924
View attachment 2729926
It was nice seeing them together again and respected unlike in 2016, but considering all they ever achieved is basically non-existent now and that they had to finish the job after all this time feels a bit hollow, like most of the memberberries. I guess the film was competent, the visuals were great and the respect for the original film and its actors were good, but the kid characters really didn't do much for me and reminded me too much of that Stranger Things show (and two of them don't have much going for them in terms of personality) and again the memberberries, while nice for someone who hasn't watched Ghosbusters in a long time, feel like they were made solely for the most diehard puritans who hated everything about Ghostbusters except for the first film at the cost of any real growth or world building and don't really feel all that emotional for someone who watches the original Ghostbusters semi-regularly. I mean I didn't like Part 2 either, but the Ghostbusters game showed there was fun to be salvaged from the second film (especially with some retcons) and the pre-Q5 version of the cartoon was the tits along with the game which was the real last time all the Ghostbusters actors were together.
Anyway I guess I'll give it a 6/10 or 7/10. Its alright. I mean I guess its amazing when compared to the 2016 abomination but that's not exactly a high bar to compare it to, like comparing a baloney sandwich to a turd on a plate. I think if the 2016 version had never existed alongside so many terrible woke films and reboots, the new film would probably be generating less hype imo but its not bad. The best thing it does is visuals, giving them some form of legacy even if not as great as it could be, and respecting the actors and the first film (and some kenner toys) but that's about it. At best its like a non-awful and non-soulless version of The Force Awakens that was done well I guess and if nothing else I hope the film does well enough that it blows Disney's shitty Star Wars films, GB2016 Terminator Dark Fate out of the water and even makes the fags who liked them seethe more.
Unless of course Sony decides to fuck it up again and make a crossover between GB2016 and whatever sequel this film gets like they've been trying to poorly do with the recent Ghostbusters comics and Lego Dimensions.
Same here although I like to treat the Ghostbusters game as semi-canon too. A shame the movie didn't do the same and just had the first one being the only one that mattered and having absolutely nothing happen in 30 years as if to further invalidate them just to make it easier for a lazy audience to stomach. And even the events of the first film seem like a passing memory in history just so they can have it reflect the real world for some reason.
Anyway have some more salt.
Ghostbusters: Afterlife is a manipulative, ethically dubious nostalgia trip – review
Dripping in unearned gravitas, this belated sequel turns the original film’s downtrodden dorks into superheroes‘Ghostbusters: Afterlife’ Review: A Play for Nostalgia and Merch
Jason Reitman, son of the original “Ghostbusters” director, delivers a toothless film with Paul Rudd as a love interest and plenty of cutesy ghosts.
I mean, sure it sounds a lot better than Answer the Call, but it's not hard. Pass, but not a hard pass for me.
Mongo0o
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2019
I saw it last night. It's a once in a lifetime kind of bad. There are almost no redeeming qualities. The cast is either incredibly bland or obnoxious beyond belief. The ghost designs are completely generic, with most being reused from the original. Most of the audio from the original is also reused. It also holds every single minuscule reference to the first movie shown in a glowing light, Every time an item is shown like the proton pack, Ecto-1, PKE meter etc. there is a 10 second pan like it's some holy artifact. The plot is almost the exact same as the original with a stupid Stranger Things overlay, This doesn't work because whenever adult humor is involved, a staple of the original, it comes across as creepy because kids are involved.
The fact that the Ghostbusters are in the movie actually detract from the film.
Ghostbusters II is still better than this. Even though it has a completely infantile plot, the original cast is all there and their chemistry works.
The 2016 movie has more soul. There was an original plot and at least some jokes hit. It realistically understands the tone of the original better than Afterlife. At the very least it can be made fun of.
Every time I rewatch the original and II I will be thinking about this film. That's its worst offense.
The fact that the Ghostbusters are in the movie actually detract from the film.
Their cameo is incredibly shoehorned in at exactly the time you expect and they get their asses kicked. The final battle also takes place in a backyard, a far cry from the epic Shandor building in the original and the Statue of Liberty in II. In the end it's the little girl and a Ghost CGI Harold Ramis that save the day. It comes of as disrespectful of course, but that's another discussion entirely. Bill Murray cracking jokes and Dan Akyrod's performance are the only redeemable parts of this film.
Ghostbusters II is still better than this. Even though it has a completely infantile plot, the original cast is all there and their chemistry works.
The 2016 movie has more soul. There was an original plot and at least some jokes hit. It realistically understands the tone of the original better than Afterlife. At the very least it can be made fun of.
Every time I rewatch the original and II I will be thinking about this film. That's its worst offense.
Last edited: