blueraptor15
New Member
Dang. Elsa looks angry!
Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire
- Thread starter Ned Figglehorn
- Start date
CB2001
Master Member
I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a Frozen joke made in the film. XD
Let's just hope the writers don't get " lost in the woods"
As long as the comedy is well-placed, they shouldn't need a lot of it.
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).
And something about Patton Oswalt in the film is making me cringe. He pulls me out of the film.
No ill will toward the film, I'm actually surprised it got made considering GB: Afterlife did NOT do well in theaters at all. It ONLY made $204.4 million worldwide in theaters, which means the studio got about $100 million of that in profit. Do we think the film was produced and advertised for less than $100 million? There must have been a TON of extra $$$ on DVD, Blu-ray, and digital media for them to make a sequel.
As a comparison: Tron: Legacy in 2010/2011 made $400 million worldwide box office (~$564, million adjusted for inflation) and never had a film sequel, even though they strongly teased one with additional DVD footage).
I agree: as I said, the comedy should be well placed. But it also doesn't need to be the same kind as the originals either; rather, it should be comedy that works with this generation of Ghostbusters. I just don't want them to go overboard and ruin it with too many jokes at the expense of the movie.
Strikerkc
Sr Member
Money made is money made. Hard numbers can't be argued with. But what I think may be an additional thing to take into account is money made vs reception. Especially during covid. I want to say Afterlife still came out during the "day 1 streaming" period, where it would hit Amazon or even HBO the same day it hit theaters. Even if it didn't get that treatment, it was still solidly in a time where a lot of people were not going to go hit the theaters to see any film.
That said, it still seemed to be a very well received film; and the fact it got a sequel without a huge box office success, may just be the studio understanding that they can "recapture" some of that mild under performance with a follow up that just needs to mildly overperform.
Do we know what the solid budget differences are between 3 & 4? 4 looks like it lends itself a lot more towards CGI effects, which should be cheaper than a lot of overseas on location outdoor filming that happened in 3, (under covid protocols, which made everything more costly and take longer).
GB:A probably got a sequel based on the positive reception rather than the box office.
Sony must have been thrilled to see their franchise regain some decent standing in the eyes of the public. I think they (correctly) see GB as having multi-prong potential. Theater movies, maybe a spinoff show or a reboot of the cartoon, etc. But it was hanging on the ropes when GBA came out. Harold Ramis had died. The rest of the cast was too old for action. Bill Murray is unreliable. The 2016 reboot had misfired badly. There was no other clear obvious path forward.
GBA's new teenage cast also went over reasonably well. Like, with young viewers and existing fans alike. That can be difficult to pull off.
And yeah, Covid. Top Gun #2 was the movie that brought people back to theaters. GBA was released 6 months before that.
Sony must have been thrilled to see their franchise regain some decent standing in the eyes of the public. I think they (correctly) see GB as having multi-prong potential. Theater movies, maybe a spinoff show or a reboot of the cartoon, etc. But it was hanging on the ropes when GBA came out. Harold Ramis had died. The rest of the cast was too old for action. Bill Murray is unreliable. The 2016 reboot had misfired badly. There was no other clear obvious path forward.
GBA's new teenage cast also went over reasonably well. Like, with young viewers and existing fans alike. That can be difficult to pull off.
And yeah, Covid. Top Gun #2 was the movie that brought people back to theaters. GBA was released 6 months before that.
Last edited:
Afterlife was just about the only modern sequel of a beloved classic that actually treated the original story and cast with any respect. That's why it was so well received by fans. As flawed as that movie is, and it's flawed, one of the things it did absolutely right was to not undermine or diminish the previous stories beyond recognition. It over-corrected with nostalgia in my book, and the missed opportunity to use Ivo Shandor as the antagonist would have been a better choice to link the original film with their story, without having to face off with Gozer again. Ivo would tie in better, but also offer something fresh where they could have delved into his origin more, but still, I think you see my point.
Afterlife reunited the original gang, introduced the new core characters and established them enough to set Frozen Empire in motion. Now that we had our introduction to them, I want to see them grow. I didn't think I would be all to interested in a sequel but I'm cautiously optimistic about this one. It looks like fun and as I said earlier I hope they can deepen the new cast's roles because there's potential there. Like real potential. As long as they remember the cardinal rule to keep the villains as a genuine threat, I think it should do well. If they play the antagonist entirely for laughs, then it'll fall apart.
As much as the original Ghostbusters film is a comedy they treated the threat of the supernatural with gravitas, which kept the story grounded enough that you could suspend your disbelief that a couple of struggling working class scientists were out capturing ghosts for a living. They rode that line perfectly and this was the greatest failing of that unbearably awful 2016 movie.
Unless I see anything questionable in new footage, I'm going to try my best to remain open minded to this one. It feels nice to be interested in big budget movie again. It's been a long, long time.
Afterlife reunited the original gang, introduced the new core characters and established them enough to set Frozen Empire in motion. Now that we had our introduction to them, I want to see them grow. I didn't think I would be all to interested in a sequel but I'm cautiously optimistic about this one. It looks like fun and as I said earlier I hope they can deepen the new cast's roles because there's potential there. Like real potential. As long as they remember the cardinal rule to keep the villains as a genuine threat, I think it should do well. If they play the antagonist entirely for laughs, then it'll fall apart.
As much as the original Ghostbusters film is a comedy they treated the threat of the supernatural with gravitas, which kept the story grounded enough that you could suspend your disbelief that a couple of struggling working class scientists were out capturing ghosts for a living. They rode that line perfectly and this was the greatest failing of that unbearably awful 2016 movie.
Unless I see anything questionable in new footage, I'm going to try my best to remain open minded to this one. It feels nice to be interested in big budget movie again. It's been a long, long time.
JediMichael
Master Member
Another thing that really hurt the 2016 movie, besides a lot of the issues with film itself....was the trailers reminded you of the original team and acted like the girls might know them, or one be even related to one of them.....only for the movie then to act like that original, never existed at all. That was very deceptive of the marking team to do that
I think it was much smarter for Afterlife to have a relation with Egon and tie it together better. Its tricky then, story wise, to balance between having the feel of the original, enough nostalgia, but not too much copying. I think the ending with Gozer treaded a bit on the copying part a tad, but the aim was for nostalgia. Somethings they could have surely done different. I haven't seen it since it was in theaters now, so I do forget a lot.
Now that they have established these characters along with the old, really hoping this story with the freezing thing will feel fresh and unique, but still familiar.
I always liked Egon's very dry sense of humor, both the movies and 2009 game.
My parents didn't believe in toys.
You mean you never even had a slinky?
We had part of a Slinkey,.......but I straightened it.
I think it was much smarter for Afterlife to have a relation with Egon and tie it together better. Its tricky then, story wise, to balance between having the feel of the original, enough nostalgia, but not too much copying. I think the ending with Gozer treaded a bit on the copying part a tad, but the aim was for nostalgia. Somethings they could have surely done different. I haven't seen it since it was in theaters now, so I do forget a lot.
Now that they have established these characters along with the old, really hoping this story with the freezing thing will feel fresh and unique, but still familiar.
I always liked Egon's very dry sense of humor, both the movies and 2009 game.
My parents didn't believe in toys.
You mean you never even had a slinky?
We had part of a Slinkey,.......but I straightened it.
CB2001
Master Member
I always interpreted the original as being a horror movie with a small dash of comedy, while the 2016 was more parody with zero horror (and not good at either).
Lightning
Master Member
There are a couple things that help make the parallels on Afterlife make sense to me. The first is that the Ghostbusters don't defeat Gozer in the first movie, they just put everything back in the other dimension. So Gozer returning is a natural and expected development.
Secondly, Gozer's return is a religious ritual, and one thing religious are not known for is creativity. No one complains that Catholic mass is the same every week.
JediMichael
Master Member
Did you ever play the 2009 game?
I thought that that ended the Gozer thing in a much better way than Afterlife, but they sadly ignored that, since not everyone played it.
Have most of the original cast really helped the game a lot. It really did feel like a 3rd movie, with plenty game elements as well.
CB2001
Master Member
Gozer ended by Ivo killing them and taking their abilities. Hardly the same as what was presented in the films. And even for the games, it's not even certain that Gozer is dead (in Afterlife, it's dead because in other parts of the franchise, it's explain the best way to "kill" a powerful ghost is to rip it to shreds, much like what happens with Gozer in Afterlife. However, in the parts of the other franchise, it's not fully "killed", and if the parts were ever reassembled, a new being would become instead of the powerful ghost returning back to it's normal form).
JediMichael
Master Member
I really do not remember how Afterlife ended. I like how the game brings back the Staypuff, and mentions that once it picked that form, it was stuck as that form. Interesting way to bring it back for the game. Probably wouldn't work as well for a movie. I liked it.
CB2001
Master Member
Gozer was destroyed by Egon's Ghost Trap field, with the help of the OG Ghostbusters, his ghost and his family. For the game, Ivo is seen holding their skull (which you know it's theirs because it still had the flatop haircut).
JediMichael
Master Member
Ok, thats right. I do need to see Afterlife again.
CB2001
Master Member
Nothing wrong with now, or any time before Frozen Empire's release.
Similar threads
