Apspriediet Ghostbusters: Afterlife
Apspriest → Filmas → Ghostbusters: Afterlife → Vispārējs
The whole mood of the movie is off
posted by aholejonesSTAFFMOD on janvāris 5, 2022 at 12:34 PM
Let me preface by saying that this movie is (marginally) better than the absolutely dreadful 2016 Ghostbusters movie. Does it mean that Afterlife is a good movie? Hell no : it sucks! We somehow went from chick ghostbusters into kid ghostbusters. Somehow I don't think the people behind these movies quite understood what the issue was with the previous Ghostbusters crapfest. If you are awkwardly injecting some sort of forced fan service* into your movie every five to ten minutes to remind everyone that it is supposed to be a sequel of sorts to the previous Ghostbusters movies maybe it isn't such a good idea to abandon everything that made those movies what they were. I mean the whole time I was watching this turd it felt like the whole atmosphere and mood was way off. I seem to remember that the original Ghostbusters were something of a mix between light horror and comedy and remember that even the so called Ghostbusters in those movies showed some fear and anxiety around the ghosts. Now in contrast in this here stinker all these people are so nonchalant and bored around fiery demon dogs, rapid firing ghosts, levitating objects and demon possessed people (just to mention some) like it's some inconsequential every day occurrence for them. It all kind of begs the question of why would the viewer give a crap what happens in the movie and to the characters if the characters themselves don't seem to be at all invested in anything that is going on. Who is this movie even made for? With all those stupid references you'd think they are trying to appeal to the generation who grew up with the Ghostbusters toys, comics and movies, but with the kids and whole tone of the movie it seems like they wanted to make some kind of a childrens movie, but that also seems unlikely with the violence like Gozer ripping the guy in half so I guess they made a movie for no one. By the way JK Simmons' role and character in the movie talk about a pointless addition to the movie.
*I should also mention that it is kind of ironic and idiotic that even though they added all this fan service and references to the original movie they did not think to use one of the most iconic movie themes ever made in the whole movie. I mean it is in the closing credits, but surely it might've been a better idea to actually use it in the movie.
Atbildēt no Ask Me Anything
on janvāris 5, 2022 at 10:00 PM
I liked the original two movies but I was never the hugest Ghostbusters fan. I actually gave the 2016 movie a chance because they could have easily made a good movie with the daughters of the original four guys but making a good movie clearly wasn't their intention.
Afterlife was way better than the 2016 movie IMO. I actually cared about most of the main characters (the brother and his girlfriend were mostly dead weight). This reminded me less of Ghostbusters and more of movies like Goonies or Monster Squad, which I don't have a problem with. I think this was made for adults of the originals who now have families. The father/child/grandchild relationship seemed to be the through-line to the film and passing the torch to the new generation that might want to buy some toys (I've seen way more toy commercials for this film than commercials for the actual film).
The worst thing about the movie is it relies too much on references to the first movie and the villain from the first movie. We saw that character already and she/he/it lost. Why not have this be the boss of that villain? And then JK Simmons shows up for literally 3 seconds only to be immediately killed.
I also hate how this once again plays into the "deadbeat dad" trope we've seen a dozen times. I hated it when they did it to Han Solo and John McClane and even though I never loved Ghostbusters I hate seeing it here as well. Like, for once can we have a good dad that was present and in their kid's lives? Jesus Christ. The name of the dad of the little girl and her brother wasn't even mentioned. Why not make Paul Rudd the son of Egon and Carrie Coon the nerdy teacher?
And if Egon didn't knock up the secretary who was Carrie Coon's mom?
Atbildēt no cpheonix
on aprīlis 17, 2024 at 7:15 PM
The post credit "cut" scene from the original did seem to hint that the secretary was the mother. But in the beginning when they meet, there's not hint of that from her.
It would've been good to have a bit of backstory on the family, who was the dad of the kids (like you said) etc. The introduction of the family at the beginning seemed very rushed.
I liked the film, I get the issues, but it was miles better than the female version.