Ghostbusters: Afterlife

This review contains spoilers!

“The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.”

I am going to start this review much like Ghostbusters: Afterlife begins, by lulling you, the, most likely, schlubby, over 40, movie fan like me into a false sense of security. 

I shall begin positively by talking about how the Spielbergian nature of the first half of the film was charming and almost won me over, by saying how excellent the child actors were, mentioning how dryly witty the script initially was, praising the cinematography, the look of the ghosts, the special effects and the score and by explaining the child like, building excitement and anticipation I had for the original Ghostbusters to appear.

Then one of them did, Ray Stantz, the venerable Dan Aykroyd, a little late into the film I thought but, ok, here we go… 

And then in 95 seconds and some of the worst, off hand, lazy, exposition ever offered on film, he completely explains where the Ghostbusters are now, what they’re up to, how they got there, and how, despite in the previous two films being a completely true believer and Egon’s best friend, he failed to believe him about the end of the world and then harshly shits all over his character. Something people do throughout this film for no good reason.

He then gets cut off the phone and we don’t see him again for well over an hour.

It was then that I got the horrible sinking feeling that this film is not what I believed it to be and what they sold it as - a true sequel - but rather that most sneaky and fucking abysmal of Hollywood trends the remake disguised as a reboot disguised as a sequel filled with endless, hollow fan service. Or at least who they think are the fans. 

Now before all of you throw up your hands and say “well of course grumpy old Jon Cross didn’t like the movie, he doesn’t like anything!” can I please explain that I am not grumpy, most of the time I am actually doing pretty well and am pretty happy - despite the grumpy bastard I might play on the podcast occasionally for comic effect - I also come to film with a ton of true love, I come to this franchise with a ton of love and I would really, dearly love to be doing nothing but relentlessly praising this film but there are enough fans out there pushing up the Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB ratings that I thought you would maybe appreciate a little honesty.

Anyway, just hear me out - please.

Everybody, pretty much unanimously, loves the first movie but I, personally, also really love the second movie! You know, the hilarious Ghostbusters 2? The film this movie wants to weirdly and conveniently forget happened? (1984 is on the wall of the temple but not 1989?!?!) - Oh yeah, that’s right the REAL “fans” don’t like that one. Market research and social media shows this. They’re fans, apparently and they loooooooove the Ghostbusters, they love them soooooo much that four decades later they still want more sequels and will go gaga over this badly paced and obvious, slavish “fan recognition” fuelled remake but they don’t like Ghostbusters 2?! The actual sequel. The one with the same cast. Being brilliant. The one with a new, interesting and different idea at its core.

They can’t really explain why.

They just don’t like it. Even though it’s just as weird, wonderful, inventive and funny as the first.

These are, presumably the same “fans” who shit their britches when some females decided to do their own version. 

Now that version was also bad but for many different reasons and it nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that the Ghostbusters were all now female. If anything, the four female comedians were the best thing about that film - the ideas, the script, the direction and the CGI were not.

But I digress.

So while we can all agree on the first and original movie, I think I often forget that since then, the Ghostbusters, just like all the good American, iconic, ideas that weren’t really aimed at kids to begin with, have been infantilised and, more importantly, merchandised which, in a way, completely explains Afterlife, which, at times, feels like a walking advert to sell more toys. It even tells us where to buy those toys: Walmart of course! and while you’re there, don’t forget to pick up some Baskin Robbins and some Hershey bars because that’s who you really have to thank for making this film possible, ok? And don’t you forget it.

I don’t get any of this by the way. Like a lot of sequel/remakes these days they want to make a movie that appeals to everyone.

How do we make a movie that means that kids don’t have to watch or know about the other movies but a movie that appeals to the adults who have seen them? 

All the people that I know with kids made it a bonding moment to sit them down and show them the original films but if you don’t want to rely on that happening you could’ve very easily told the “where are they now” and “getting the band back together” story of the original Ghostbusters in tandem with the “Egon’s grandkids move to Oklahoma” story. Sitcoms sometimes manage three separate stories that even join up at the end and have related jokes in them and do it all in 22 minutes. You couldn’t manage that in a two hour plus running time?

Also you could’ve just made a sequel and not decided that EVERY movie made now needs to appeal to the 6-16 age group. 40+ year olds are the ones keeping all these geeky, pop culture franchises alive after all. We live in an ageing society and we all grew up watching the kids films of the 80s and 90s that never spoke down to kids, featured difficult adult scenes, scary scenes, humour we didn’t get etc. So who is the real audience? and why don’t you want to give children their own childhood instead of forcing their parents childhood on them? 

But, honestly, what it also looked like is that the original three, remaining Ghostbusters didn’t want to turn up for more than a day or two of filming.

Well you know Ernie Hudson would’ve done it - “Ah, if there's a steady paycheck in it, I'll believe anything you say” - and I bet they could’ve convinced Dan Aykroyd to work on the film for maybe two weeks? - maybe give him a scene where he embarrassingly sings an old blues song like your drunk uncle at a wedding while drinking Crystal Head vodka.

Maybe it was the Bill Murray conundrum. 

But considering, from a pure story point of view, Venkmen is the least important character for all the ghost stuff and investigative, ancient, scientific mumbo jumbo, that they maybe could’ve got away with just having Murray in one or two more scenes than he currently appears.

The irony being, of course, he is sort of the reason this franchise has any legs anyway.

The cruelest thing this movie does is show you glimmers of the movie you kinda wish you were watching during the ending credits. Including a very-sadly-missing-from-the-rest-of-the-movie, Sigourney Weaver.

What the fuck?!

But even in these short Easter eggs - which, what? Are setting up another sequel but with the real Ghostbusters this time? Or are they just ways to further frustrate and shit on the over 40s in the audience? - they can’t help but simply just rehash stuff we’ve seen from the original movie. Maybe we have the endlessly awful Big Bang Theory for this “references of stuff you know about already” is funny comedy. Who knows. 

I mean this is a film that even references the cartoon The Real Ghostbusters and one of the Ghostbusters toys but refuses to acknowledge the sequel or the all female reboot.

I do wonder, are the same social media manufactured “fans” who were up in arms about Leslie Jones and Kate McKinnon wielding a proton pack also upset about Mckenna Grace and Celeste O'Connor doing the same in this movie or does all the “fan” service here dilute your misogynistic rage? I hope not because while this film may not have been made for me, I certainly hope beyond all hope that it wasn’t made for you.

Looking at the rest of the film:

• The first half is a little slow and could’ve had scenes shortened or cut to allow for scenes of the original GBs doing something and getting back together. That being said, the scenes with the kids and Paul Rudd are very charming, pretty funny and well acted. So much so that, as my wife said to me, the thing that made her really sad and disappointed was the promise the first half of the film had.

• Throughout the movie nobody is even surprised by ghosts at all, they have zero reaction. Even Phoebe claims she doesn’t believe in them but goes along with it when one is clearly in her house.

• The second half is too fast, and by the time Paul Rudd and Carrie Coon are re-enacting beat for beat the key master and gate keeper scenes from the original (including the indication - more implicit than the original film even and surely shocking by today’s fragile standards - of non consensual sex), I had realised I was knee deep in remake reboot territory and felt well and truly ripped off.

• Also, here’s a thing - if Egon is the father, who is the mother? Why when there’s endless scenes establishing these new characters is there no exposition of what really happened. Egon is just shit all over repeatedly for being an absent father. But do we really believe that is Egon’s character? and who is the mother? Is Carrie Coon’s “Callie” an orphan? If so why is she so pissed at just her Dad? How is Janine Melnitz not the mother?

• The ending scene with the OG Ghostbusters is a tad lacklustre and obvious but at its best just makes you sad that they didn’t figure out a way to put them in more of the film. Each one of them, Aykroyd, Hudson and Murray just made me miss their characters. Not them as just token cameos but Stantz, Zedmore and Venkmen. Man I need a whole movie with them, even more so now after this debacle.

• Why are J.K. Simmons and Olivia Wilde in this movie? If anything is going to take you out of a movie it’s cameos that make little to no sense within the context of the film.

• Now to the sensitive area and an area which, of all franchises in the history of franchises, Ghostbusters was pre-equipped to deal with - the death of a cast member and Egon’s ghost.
  When Egon’s spirit first makes himself known to Phoebe and then, later, Callie, it is sweet, subtle and creative - utilising a chess board and lights. A neat and delicate way to show Egon helping without the need to push it further.
  Ultimately, however, in the last scene and in what becomes fan service pushed to egregious levels, Egon’s apparition returning is over done and milked. When you first realise it’s him helping Phoebe against Gozer it’s truly heartbreakingly beautiful and gives you the old lump in the throat, but then it goes on and on as everyone who shit on him throughout the movie has to realise he is a good guy really and gets closure. urgh. Then Egon “goes to heaven” at the end which just made me angry. 

Maybe some of this is just nitpicking but far from having an experience where with each passing minute I felt better and better while watching the movie, I just felt worse and worse. Call me all the names you want, misunderstand what I am trying to say here, I don’t care but if you honestly watched this film as someone who grew up with the originals and didn’t feel any of this, then I don’t know what to say - lucky, lucky you, I guess.

Also, please don’t get me wrong. Overall this is an ok movie, probably better than we deserved in 2021 and there were moments in the second half that I loved - Phoebe telling Gozer bad jokes, the OG GBs showing up, Podcast fighting off mini marshmallows men in Ecto 1, some of Venkmen’s quips, Egon’s ghost initially showing up and others but they all felt like momentary positive heart flutters amongst a growing sense of disappointment. The first half was so charming. 

Heigh ho.

I have to remember that films aren’t made for me anymore they’re made for the “fans” and kids of the “fans”.

Same thing happened with Evil Dead when it was assumed that Evil Dead fans only liked it for the gore. It’s all about the gore right guys? So if we make the remake and Ash Vs Evil Dead really gross, gore filled and hardcore, you’ll give us all your money right? Despite the movie which kickstarted the Evil Dead and Ash fandom was Army of Darkness, the one movie out of the franchise that doesn’t have any gore… but don’t let anything resembling facts dissuade you from your extensive market research and social media trends. 

I’m middle aged and getting older. I have three choices of where to put my movie fandom (which hasn’t diminished but only grown more hungry the older I’ve got):

• One is the off chance of the occasional great, new, non-franchise movie coming out.

• Two is independent and underground film.

• Three is watching films made before 1998.

It used to be “I don’t understand kid’s music it’s too loud and dirty”

Now it’s “I don’t understand this corporate kid’s music, ours used to be so loud and dirty”

At least Slimer’s agent talked him out of appearing. His reputation’s intact.