Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire
- Thread starter Ned Figglehorn
- Start date
Hmmm... same themes as the last film. Not going into the "off-color comedic shlubs trying to run a paranormal business in New York" like the 1984/89 films. Different tone now... they are trying to make an EPIC adventure film!
It that the wrong approach? TBD.
Is it 1980s Ghostbusters? No.
It that the wrong approach? TBD.
Is it 1980s Ghostbusters? No.
LeoCor Replicas
Sr Member
I like Afterlife and I think this one will be also a really fun movie.
The 2 real movies are a product of their time and cannot be copyed.
When this movie is good like afterlife I´m fine with it.
Agreed on both counts. Afterlife took a risk by making a more dramatically-themed GB film, something it had to do to tackle the issue of the loss of both Egon Spengler and Harold Ramis, and it paid off. This film seems to take those aspects into consideration, but appears to have a lot more comedy, especially when considering the casting of Patton Oswalt, Kumail Nanjiani, and James Acaster, all of whom are comedians. Trailers now seem to have wildly different tones compared to the final product, so I think these are just taking the most bombastic aspects of FE, and using them to draw in the interest of both old and new fans.
Speaking of, Bill's line of "Tall, dark and horny at 12 O'Clock!" had me chuckling quite a bit.
IMO it looks good.
I agree, they probably can't do the 1980s movies again and it would be pretty risky to try. That only worked at the time because of the perfect cast. It's hard to pull off being so lovable despite having so much reckless incompetence (and unprofessional flirting boundaries). If it doesn't work just right then you get the 2016 reboot.
Going bigger is the inevitable direction of Hollywood franchises as they progress.
I agree, they probably can't do the 1980s movies again and it would be pretty risky to try. That only worked at the time because of the perfect cast. It's hard to pull off being so lovable despite having so much reckless incompetence (and unprofessional flirting boundaries). If it doesn't work just right then you get the 2016 reboot.
Going bigger is the inevitable direction of Hollywood franchises as they progress.
Agreed on both counts. Afterlife took a risk by making a more dramatically-themed GB film, something it had to do to tackle the issue of the loss of both Egon Spengler and Harold Ramis, and it paid off. This film seems to take those aspects into consideration, but appears to have a lot more comedy, especially when considering the casting of Patton Oswalt, Kumail Nanjiani, and James Acaster, all of whom are comedians. Trailers now seem to have wildly different tones compared to the final product, so I think these are just taking the most bombastic aspects of FE, and using them to draw in the interest of both old and new fans.
Speaking of, Bill's line of "Tall, dark and horny at 12 O'Clock!" had me chuckling quite a bit.
Ghostbusters had always a lot of Comedy...I think its not a big problem that they have 3 new comedians.They need all 3 to replace Rick Moranis.
These kids are working with masters of comedy, please god, devil or sun... may they have learned.
Well, I saw Frozen Empire opening night. I spent about $60 for the AMC trap bucket and two icee's and sat down to watch the movie. Did I like it? Yeah! Did I love it? Eh... Not so much.
For a movie called Frozen Empire, New York wasn't frozen for very long. Also, I was bummed that every piece of promotional material had everyone in the red parka but in the final product only two characters wore them... Thought that was kinda lame.
Bloop
Sr Member
Just saw it. I haven't read any reviews or ratings, including any reviews in this thread yet, so I have no idea how it's been recieved. I liked GB: Afterlife and was looking forward to this, especially the return to New York City and more from the original actors (as shown in trailers).
Spoiler-free review: I was bored for most of the film. Good pacing is the hallmark of good movies, and this didn't have it. The story didn't seem focused, and meandered throughout the course of the nearly two hour runtime. The main story focused on Phoebe, but wasn't very compelling, especially not enough for an entire film, which may be why they had multiple story elements. Even though they were all connected, they all dragged.
I'd say there wasn't enough humor, but the original wasn't heavy on jokes either, so it's not like this film needed to be as well. The jokes that were there were hit-and-miss, probably more miss than hit, though the actors did their best with the material.
I feel like the story started abruptly, yet it didn't really get into anything that made it worth dumping the viewer into the NY location. I think they could've had a better transition from the previous film.
When the story finally gets to the climax, it resolved too quickly and without a lot of excitement. The action should've been amped up, but it ended with a thud.
So I'm fairly disappointed with the movie. It could've been a great follow-up to Afterlife. Other than Ray, the original characters - even though they saw more screen time than in Afterlife - felt underused. The characters of Lucky and Podcast felt underused too, as well as feeling out of place with the story. Actually, the entire Spengler family (Grooberson included) felt out of place in NY, in the firehouse. I didn't really understand why they were there and why they were doing what they were doing, as it didn't really make sense in light of Winston's business.
Spoiler-free review: I was bored for most of the film. Good pacing is the hallmark of good movies, and this didn't have it. The story didn't seem focused, and meandered throughout the course of the nearly two hour runtime. The main story focused on Phoebe, but wasn't very compelling, especially not enough for an entire film, which may be why they had multiple story elements. Even though they were all connected, they all dragged.
I'd say there wasn't enough humor, but the original wasn't heavy on jokes either, so it's not like this film needed to be as well. The jokes that were there were hit-and-miss, probably more miss than hit, though the actors did their best with the material.
I feel like the story started abruptly, yet it didn't really get into anything that made it worth dumping the viewer into the NY location. I think they could've had a better transition from the previous film.
When the story finally gets to the climax, it resolved too quickly and without a lot of excitement. The action should've been amped up, but it ended with a thud.
So I'm fairly disappointed with the movie. It could've been a great follow-up to Afterlife. Other than Ray, the original characters - even though they saw more screen time than in Afterlife - felt underused. The characters of Lucky and Podcast felt underused too, as well as feeling out of place with the story. Actually, the entire Spengler family (Grooberson included) felt out of place in NY, in the firehouse. I didn't really understand why they were there and why they were doing what they were doing, as it didn't really make sense in light of Winston's business.
I'm out of sync I guess, not the train wreck I was expecting, my wife and I liked it, certainly more than the last one. Plenty of fair criticisms made though. No need to repeat.
Similar threads
