Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire

[Ron]

But starting with Afterlife, this is the first time that kids/teenagers have been brought into the fold. So that's a whole new dynamic to the comedy.

Red Letter Media talked about how the original 1984 film involved these guys who were kind of "schlubs" but fell into the Ghost Busting business as a way to make money... and that was a big part of the comedy. And of course, 40 years ago the comedic and political environment was VERY different than now, so you're gonna' lose that 80s style of comedy (you know, loveable misogynist Peter Venkman, who really has a heart of gold, etc).

This is why I had no interest in Afterlife. The soul of Ghostbusters isn't the "ghostbusting". It's the dynamic of Murray, Ramis, and Akroyd along with Ernie Hudson. Once that was over, Ghostbusters for me was over. But like Psab keel said, I appreciate that it respects the legacy characters. No one got the Jake Skywalker treatment.

 

[Astyanax]

This is why I had no interest in Afterlife. The soul of Ghostbusters isn't the "ghostbusting". It's the dynamic of Murray, Ramis, and Akroyd along with Ernie Hudson. Once that was over, Ghostbusters for me was over. But like Psab keel said, I appreciate that it respects the legacy characters. No one got the Jake Skywalker treatment.

Agreed. For Afterlife to work for me, I had to dissociate it a bit. Maybe not as drastically as I did for 2004's Battlestar Galactica, but once I saw it as kind of the "new crew" in the same way as BG, I enjoyed it.

(Maybe TOS to TNG is a more apt comparison.)

 

[Psab keel]

To its credit they retained respect for the original film, but that was also it's weakness because everything was structured on referencing it, down to the final act where they fought off Gozer. Repetition of antagonists can work, but that felt very hollow. It was much like The Force Awakens, banking on recognition of the past instead of better developing the new cast.

This sequel looks like they'll make up for that shortcoming, so I'm curious.

 

[Astyanax]

To its credit they retained respect for the original film, but that was also it's weakness because everything was structured on referencing it, down to the final act where they fought off Gozer. Repetition of antagonists can work, but that felt very hollow. It was much like The Force Awakens, banking on recognition of the past instead of better developing the new cast.

This sequel looks like they'll make up for that shortcoming, so I'm curious.

Except that The Force Awakens tore down its legacy, from deadbeat Han Solo with no Millennium Falcon (and someone who knows the ship better than he), to a Death Star clone (complete with single "weak point") that's bigger and better. TFA basically screamed "this movie is like Episode 4, only bigger and better."

Afterlife honored its legacy, and the single "weak point" (crossing the streams) didn't work the second time.

 

[Psab keel]

Except that The Force Awakens tore down its legacy, from deadbeat Han Solo with no Millennium Falcon (and someone who knows the ship better than he), to a Death Star clone (complete with single "weak point") that's bigger and better. TFA basically screamed "this movie is like Episode 4, only bigger and better."

Afterlife honored its legacy, and the single "weak point" (crossing the streams) didn't work the second time.

That's the paradox of Afterlife. It respected the original film and kept the integrity of the characters intact, but they also leaned too heavily into nostalgia instead of better defining the new characters. Seriously though, if you go back and rewatch it, you'll see the seams. That's not to say it's a bad movie, but there was a lot of praise heaped on it because by that point fans were so tired of seeing their childhood heroes from other franchises being dunked on that to see a blockbuster come along that treated these guys with an ounce of respect felt like a breath of fresh air. The only way Afterlife compares to Force Awakens was the reliance on nostalgia because both movies used it to "reintroduce" the franchises to a new generation, while also hooking in fans of the originals, but the comparison ends there.

I don't think Afterlife really warranted such accolades, but given it's contemporaries I understand why it was so positively received. I do feel it did some things right and depending on how Frozen Empire carries the story with the new characters, it has the potential to be a nice addition to the series, and could be a worthy story in it's own right as they make more. It's apparent that Hollywood is starting to catch on that nostalgia has a shelf-life and that's a good thing. It doesn't mean that they won't continue to build out existing brands, but my hope is that they're aware that you can only keep doing the trick for so long before audiences see through the illusion.

Let's hope that like it's predecessor, it's another confident step in the right direction.

 

[Astyanax]

That's not to say it's a bad movie, but there was a lot of praise heaped on it because by that point fans were so tired of seeing their childhood heroes from other franchises being dunked on that to see a blockbuster come along that treated these guys with an ounce of respect felt like a breath of fresh air.

That right there is exactly the thing.

I was so starved for honored nostalgia after Star Wars was butchered (and Star Trek by JJ and Kurtzman before that), that I gave Afterlife a pass on almost everything because it cared about its past.

 

[Psab keel]

That right there is exactly the thing.

I was so starved for honored nostalgia after Star Wars was butchered (and Star Trek by JJ and Kurtzman before that), that I gave Afterlife a pass on almost everything because it cared about its past.

I can see why. Seriously. It's a gut punch to see your favorites characters reduced to pathetic imitations of themselves. I'm not someone who requires more of everything, but if you are going to tell stories with these icons, at least leave their dignity intact. You'd think that from a monetary perspective alone that would be obvious, because you can't mock the very thing that people love about these stories and still expect to make money off of it.

I don't think age should diminish a person's integrity, nor should heroes be celebrated for becoming apathetic. Whether in fiction or in reality, I think we should aspire to be better and believe in hope because there's not a lot in this world. We need all we can get.

 

[batguy]

A lot of it is still the tone and nuances of how stuff is handled.


There is an alternate universe out there somewhere, where George Lucas made the prequels in 1977-83 and then made the OT in 1999-2005.

Imagine what those prequel fans must have thought of ANH. They waited a generation see how Obi-Wan & Bail Organa & friends would deal with Anakin, and . . . Alderann gets deleted on monitor. The whole stupid planet, just gone. Like in a 'Simpsons' episode where somebody runs offscreen and then you hear doors slamming & tires screeching.

Okay but at least we have Obi-Wan. So . . . it turns out he F'd off to the desert and lived in some adobe hut for 20 years. Then he finally confronts Anakin on the Death star, aaaaaand . . . he commits suicide for no friggin reason just to "inspire" Anakin's whiny son. Geez, the studio must have really wanted to get rid of that actor's salary.

So the fans wait for ESB and hope Yoda will pick up the pieces. Aaaaand . . . it turns out Yoda F'd off to a Louisiana bayou or something. He's been living in a mud hut for 20 years too. He never did anything about Palpatine & Anakin either. In fact the kid Luke has to do everything for everybody in these stupid sequels. The studio couldn't even give the old heroes dignified endings, coud they? Geez, they must REALLY wanna push that Luke & Han & Leia & Lando merchandise.

 

[CB2001]

Afterlife honored its legacy, and the single "weak point" (crossing the streams) didn't work the second time.

There's reason why the crossing of the streams didn't work in Afterlife: when you look back at the first film, you realize that not only are they one person short for the crossing the streams (there was four of them if you recall). But they also used it on the gateway on Gozer's temple that allowed access into our world, not on Gozer itself, which they were intending to close (and worked). This time around, they were using it on Gozer and not the gate. In the first film, it showed the proton streams don't work on Gozer (remember? "Aim at the flattop!"). So, it makes sense that the crossing the streams wouldn't work on it because the OG crew didn't take these two factors into account.

 

[Lightning]

There's reason why the crossing of the streams didn't work in Afterlife: when you look back at the first film, you realize that not only are they one person short for the crossing the streams (there was four of them if you recall). But they also used it on the gateway on Gozer's temple that allowed access into our world, not on Gozer itself, which they were intending to close (and worked). This time around, they were using it on Gozer and not the gate. In the first film, it showed the proton streams don't work on Gozer (remember? "Aim at the flattop!"). So, it makes sense that the crossing the streams wouldn't work on it because the OG crew didn't take these two factors into account.

exactly, I've explained that more than once in various places. And its not even unrealistic for them to try. its been 30 years, and the guy who would immediately logic out that it wouldn't work the same is dead. Plus while it wouldn't do the same thing as in 84, there was a small chance they could catch Gozer the old fashioned way, as Gozer may have simply moved before the proton beams hit back in 84, and thus we didn't know that lassoing directly wouldn't work.

 

[Astyanax]

There's reason why the crossing of the streams didn't work in Afterlife: when you look back at the first film, you realize that not only are they one person short for the crossing the streams (there was four of them if you recall). But they also used it on the gateway on Gozer's temple that allowed access into our world, not on Gozer itself, which they were intending to close (and worked). This time around, they were using it on Gozer and not the gate. In the first film, it showed the proton streams don't work on Gozer (remember? "Aim at the flattop!"). So, it makes sense that the crossing the streams wouldn't work on it because the OG crew didn't take these two factors into account.

Absolutely, totally agreed. My point was that they had to defeat Gozer a different way, as opposed to The Force Awakens, where they exploited a small weakness again.

 

[ghostryder]

 

[CB2001]

This is giving me a lot of hope that this may be a decent follow-up.

 

[JediMichael]

Well, that probably ruins the twisted ending.....

 

[TazMan2000]

Let it go....

TazMan2000

 

[JediMichael]

Let it go....

TazMan2000

But.... I don't....want to.
Hey, I got an idea, how about we go build a snowman.

 

[Halliwax]

lol I can see where this thread is going

 

[JediMichael]

lol I can see where this thread is going

Where Disney is probably not so happy about...lol.

 

[TazMan2000]

But.... I don't....want to.
Hey, I got an idea, how about we go build a snowman.

Let 'r rip?

TazMan2000

 

[JediMichael]

Let 'r rip?

TazMan2000

3 weeks ago it snowed 3 inches. So at 4 am, right before going to bed, I quickly made this....but now, its only been raining. Thats boring.