Ghostbusters: Afterlife

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.


Inquisitor Peregrinus

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
To paraphrase realtors since time immemorial: Context, context, context. It can be one of Egon's experiments they find while going through his hidden lab. It can be a deliberate experiment of Paul Rudd's to see if he can "haunt" Mr. Stay-Puft. It can be an accidental possession when he misuses some piece of Egon's equipment. It can be one of the first -- tiny -- signs of something waking up in the Shandor mine. It can be a daydream Rudd has while sitting in his classroom after the ghost trap the kids bring in reminds him of what went down in New York so many years ago. I can keep spinning different contexts for that scene, some of which work organically and are cool, some of which are ridiculous and cringe. Since we have zero indication of when this is in the film, what's going on around it, what causes it, where things go from where we're left... I think it is absurdly premature to cry foul at this point.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Egon Spengler

Master Member
To paraphrase realtors since time immemorial: Context, context, context. It can be one of Egon's experiments they find while going through his hidden lab. It can be a deliberate experiment of Paul Rudd's to see if he can "haunt" Mr. Stay-Puft. It can be an accidental possession when he misuses some piece of Egon's equipment. It can be one of the first -- tiny -- signs of something waking up in the Shandor mine. It can be a daydream Rudd has while sitting in his classroom after the ghost trap the kids bring in reminds him of what went down in New York so many years ago. I can keep spinning different contexts for that scene, some of which work organically and are cool, some of which are ridiculous and cringe. Since we have zero indication of when this is in the film, what's going on around it, what causes it, where things go from where we're left... I think it is absurdly premature to cry foul at this point.
I'd rather it just be a goofy dream he's having. Anything else is just too much.
 

HMSwolfe

Sr Member
To paraphrase realtors since time immemorial: Context, context, context. It can be one of Egon's experiments they find while going through his hidden lab. It can be a deliberate experiment of Paul Rudd's to see if he can "haunt" Mr. Stay-Puft. It can be an accidental possession when he misuses some piece of Egon's equipment. It can be one of the first -- tiny -- signs of something waking up in the Shandor mine. It can be a daydream Rudd has while sitting in his classroom after the ghost trap the kids bring in reminds him of what went down in New York so many years ago. I can keep spinning different contexts for that scene, some of which work organically and are cool, some of which are ridiculous and cringe. Since we have zero indication of when this is in the film, what's going on around it, what causes it, where things go from where we're left... I think it is absurdly premature to cry foul at this point.
Agreed, but at the same time…you know how people say there’s no such thing as a bad story, just bad storytelling? Sometimes the amount of effort to make a less-than-stellar concept play out in a great way is more than these big studios are willing to use. I agree about context and execution, and I actually am really pulling for a dream/possession sequence because, like you said, that’s not a bad way to work in the ‘stalgia reference, but we are wary nonetheless.
 

Inquisitor Peregrinus

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Agreed, but at the same time…you know how people say there’s no such thing as a bad story, just bad storytelling? Sometimes the amount of effort to make a less-than-stellar concept play out in a great way is more than these big studios are willing to use. I agree about context and execution, and I actually am really pulling for a dream/possession sequence because, like you said, that’s not a bad way to work in the ‘stalgia reference, but we are wary nonetheless.
Oh, absolutely. Wariness is more than justified. I am cautiously hopeful, because I have gotten far more of a vibe of respect for the source material from this film than I did from Sony and Feig with GB'16. I know the old crack about how there are only seven stories in the world, and all that changes are the details. I remember the first time I met Peter David back in '93 and I told him Imzadi was one of the best books I'd ever read. He said I must not have read much. I countered that I had over a thousand books and had read many more than that (yay libraries), not counting comics. He said, "I'm just a hack!" And I said, "Yes, but you're a good one!" That he could appreciate. *heh*

I would much rather someone do a very good job with a formulaic story than a mediocre job with something more original (or, worse, a sub-par pass at a formulaic story). Just because it's formulaic doesn't mean it's bad. The formulas exist because they work. We know from the history of storytelling, though, that there's "safe" and "daring". These day's we'd consider safe to be "rated G". Nobody gets hurt, they all live happily ever after. At the opposite end is stuff that's excessively dark. Everybody dies, or the hero gets the girl only to have her die, or the main characters have to pick between two awful outcomes... A lot of non-American storytelling hews to this. Especially East Asian. So many stories of noble sacrifice and self-abnegation and such. I think the better stories lie somewhere in between -- there are stakes, there are unintended consequences... It's neither bleak nor rosy.

I won't know until I see this 1) What Jason & Co. set out to make (serious homage? camp fest? half-assed cash grab?)... and 2) whether the end result was that, more than that, or less than that.
 

ZeroSum

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
As much as I'd like to analyse all this down to the nano particles, this is why I think there are mini-pufts. The studio is like "Hey we've given you a lot of money to make this movie so we need more merch opportunities. Whaddya got?"
"We got ghosts?"
"No we need more than that, everyone's got ghosts. Whoopi Goldberg's got ghosts."
"Stay Puft marshmallow man?"
"Kids don't want a big angry marshmallow man toy, it's scary"
"I mean it's supposed to be scary, but ok, the first Stay Puft was BIG right? This time he'll be SMALL! And there'll be lots of them! And they'll be cute like Grogu!"
"Yeah and they'll all have their own fun personalities so you can collect them all!"
"Uh yeah I guess."
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Getoninja

Sr Member
not a fan of obvious product placement
but this trailer seemed more like a Basket Robbins and Stay Pufft marshmallow commercial.

But its just a trailer and hopefully the film is great
 

Kylash

Master Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
LET IT BEGIN

E9547UT60_nc_F_20_Online_2000SQ__scaled_600.jpg

547UT62_nc_Group_Shot_20_Online_2000SQ__scaled_600.jpg
547UT60_nc_Group_Shot_20_Online_2000SQ__scaled_600.jpg


Also i find it funny that no one has noticed the puff thats on fire in that clip is doing the Arnold thumbs up from Terminator.
 

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Don't want to see this ad? Sign up for anRPF Premium Membershiptoday. Support the community. Stop the ads.

Top