Posted by Homeless family cause damage to a small town and blame it on ghosts
I watched Ghostbusters: Afterlife well over a week ago now. It’s been quite a busy time at work and at home, so I didn’t get round to doing the review immediately. In a way that gave me a chance to reflect on the movie and watch the original 1984 movie again too. Was that a good thing? I’m not sure – this is the first time in a while where I’ve been overthinking a movie. Even Dune didn’t get this treatment from me!
For the record, this review is going to go into spoilers. It’s hard to talk about the theme of the movie without doing so. So, if you haven’t seen the movie and don’t want it spoilt – run… run as fast as you can!
Ghostbusters: Afterlife follows the grandkids of Egon Spengler. Upon the death of their grandfather, and with the money troubles their mum is facing, they move to a property in a small town where Egon saw out the latter part of his life living as a hermit. All is not as appears in this small town, and soon enough there are ghosts appearing all over the place that send Egon’s grandkids into ghostbusting mode.
There’s this whole part of the story where Egon’s daughter Callie (Carrie Coon) and her two kids, clever geek Phoebe (Mckenna Grace) and typical teen Trevor (Finn Wolfhard), slowly reconnect with Egon’s legacy after years of being estranged. On the way Phoebe, who is the lead in this movie, befriends Podcast (Logan Kim) and science teacher Gary Grooberson (Paul Rudd being the most Paul Ruddest he’s ever been – that’s a good thing). Trevor, meanwhile, does what teenage boys do best – he chases after his co-worker, Lucky Domingo (Celeste O’Connor). Together, these kids make up the “new” Ghostbusters, albeit not officially.
There’s a LOT of plot-holes in this movie. And most of this review is going to be me pointing some of them out – in fact I’ll put them into quick-fire bullet points. Brace yourselves…
- The legacy of the Ghostbusters is the key theme in this movie. How have all these kids not heard of the Ghostbusters? The 80s wasn’t that long ago, and the appearance of ghosts is a big enough deal for the world not to forget.
- One of the kids even mentions the Manhattan incident from the first movie, but then doesn’t recognise the Ghostbusters car. Surely the two things go hand in hand?
- Trevor’s character (included only for his appearance in Stranger Things it seems) shows no signs of being good at mechanics, yet suddenly, we see him fixing the car. I’m 25 (give or take 10 years) – to this day I have no idea where the phalange goes!
- At one point in the movie the Ghostbusters trap appears on remote controlled wheels – how or when did the kids do this? Not to mention the skills controlling it alongside the car.
- The disbanding of the Ghostbusters, with Egon going solo and not getting in touch with the other Ghostbusters doesn’t seem consistent with the character. Why would the other Ghostbusters not have believed his theory after everything they saw in the 80s, and even then, all Egon would have had to have done is send a photo via camera phone to them for them to believe him about the return of Gozer. I do understand that this plot point had to occur due to Harold Ramis’ death – but STILL!
- The mini Stay-Puft Marshmallow men reminded me a lot of the Gremlins, a winner in my book. But why do they even come to life? The first movie explains this due to the thoughts of Ray – but it makes absolutely no sense here.
And breathe.
I know what you’re thinking – “The OddFather really hates this movie. Prepare for the worst rated movie here since Space Jam 2.” Nope. I thoroughly enjoyed this.
A lot has been said about the above plot-holes in other reviews/breakdowns. But when it comes down to it, I walked out the cinema with a smile on my face.
The last act seems to divide people. In case you’re living under a rock, Harold Ramis, who played Egon, sadly passed away back in 2014. Opinions differed when it came to whether his appearance in this movie was done tastefully or not. I liked the way it was handled. The fact he didn’t speak worked well. It avoids the awkwardness that we had with the likes of Carrie Fisher’s appearance in The Rise of Skywalker. And because he appears in ghost form, it takes away the need for pixel perfection and accurate representation – despite it looking very close. It’s an emotional part of the movie and I understand why many people shed tears.
That is the biggest differentiator in a movie that is basically a rehash of the first Ghostbusters. Even though the plot points are the same, the feeling is completely different. The comedy of the first movie is a lot more sarcastic and zanier – thanks mainly to Bill Murray. But here it’s more of a sweet, family-friendly type of comedy. It still works though.
This movie feels more of a tribute to the Ghostbusters, rather than an outright sequel. Maybe a better title would have been Ghostbusters Legacy or something.
I loved seeing the old crew suit up again, even though Bill Murray looks SO old. He really hasn’t aged all that well compared to the others. I also felt the movie finishes somewhat quickly without necessarily concluding the arcs of the new characters.
A final note on JK Simmons’ role in this movie as Ivo Shandor. He’s in this for all of what seemed like seconds – to the point I had doubts it was him until I googled it when I got home. What was all that about? A talent such as Simmons’ being handled in such a way seems criminal! And not the smooth kind either.
Verdict
Ghostbusters: Afterlife is basically a rehash of the first movie with many similar plot points. The comedy feels different this time round, but the nostalgia makes this a fitting tribute to the original.