Jump to content

Ghostbusters -Afterlife


papalazarou
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Fierce Poodle said:

There were some young kids in the screening I was in. They didn’t seem bothered by it, mind you they were probably bored shitless, the first hour really drags.

 

1 hour ago, Ork1927 said:


Being as vague as possible - there are 3 or 4 loud jump scares.

 

The end gets quite intense.

 

There aren’t that many scary ghosts as such.  
 

Id say nothing as outwardly scary as the library ghost in the original, but a lot louder and some horror imagery. 
 

Mild spoiler for returning ghosts.

 

It’s hard to gauge for kids - I’d say 8 year old is probably my okay if they are used to cinema, but probably too intense on the big screen for a 5 year old.

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

If you are scared of dogs then the Terror Dogs aren’t a barrel of fun.

 

 

Thanks. I'll have a think. The 5 year old has been to the cinema plenty and seen a couple scary kids films at home and been OK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Stigweard said:

 

 

Thanks. I'll have a think. The 5 year old has been to the cinema plenty and seen a couple scary kids films at home and been OK.

 

Obviously, it's had to know without knowing your kid, but I can't see anything in it that is going to mean he doesn't sleep for the next year or anything.

 

And also the impact of the loud jump scares are going to depend on cinema screen size, etc. The super screen showing I watched was super loud.

 

I'd also say the jump scares are fairly well signposted so you can probably work out when to hold his hand or something.

 

If I take my two tomorrow 9 and 11 - I'll report back as the 9 year old is historically wary of horror type stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ork1927 said:

Id say nothing as outwardly scary as the library ghost in the original, but a lot louder and some horror imagery. 


It’s weird isn’t it? The first film is a PG, and that shot is probably one of the scariest things I’ve ever seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Fierce Poodle said:

There were some young kids in the screening I was in. They didn’t seem bothered by it, mind you they were probably bored shitless, the first hour really drags.

 

This isn't a dig, just curious- were you alive when the original came out in 1984?

 

At work I'm noticing a significant lack of awareness of the existence of Afterlife amongst those in their 20s (who would otherwise have nerdy credentials), contrasted with a lot of excitement from those in their 40s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, drmick said:

 

This isn't a dig, just curious- were you alive when the original came out in 1984?

 

At work I'm noticing a significant lack of awareness of the existence of Afterlife amongst those in their 20s (who would otherwise have nerdy credentials), contrasted with a lot of excitement from those in their 40s.


Not just alive, I remember watching it in the cinema on release and having a great time, and watching it several times on video/TV since. This new film is a pale turd in comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Fierce Poodle said:


Not just alive, I remember watching it in the cinema on release and having a great time, and watching it several times on video/TV since. This new film is a pale turd in comparison.

 

Oddly I'm in the opposite camp- that the major criticism I would make of Afterlife is that it follows the plot beats and emotional beats of the 1984 too closely. The 1984 film is a classic and all but if watched through a completely objective 2021 lens then it is a bit dated and slowly paced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, drmick said:

 

Oddly I'm in the opposite camp- that the major criticism I would make of Afterlife is that it follows the plot beats and emotional beats of the 1984 too closely. The 1984 film is a classic and all but if watched through a completely objective 2021 lens then it is a bit dated and slowly paced.

 

My friend watched it for the first time ever cause he's going to see Afterlife tonight and said it was enjoyable but a 3/5 at best and the stuff he brought up are completely due to looking at it through the lens of today.

 

ANYWAY onto Afterlife.

 

We risked it with the girls and went to see it today (they were both fine with the jump scares) and I loved it. I had such a great time with this film. I know that its just a bit of a retread of the first film (it pretty much does what The Force Awakens did) but I really didn't mind that at all. I loved it's Stranger Things/Goonies feel with the added nostalgia of Ghostbusters. I got goosebumps several time and I cried 

Spoiler

at the Egon moment at that end and then again for "for Harold"

 

I thought the cast were all great, especially McKenna Grace and Paul Rudd. None of the children annoyed me, I liked them all. The action and comedy all hit for me too.

 

Do I care that they just did another 

Spoiler

Gozer as the big bad?

Not one bit cause it tied in well with the first film.

 

So yeah, really enjoyable and a proper way of doing a fan service film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, drmick said:

 

Oddly I'm in the opposite camp- that the major criticism I would make of Afterlife is that it follows the plot beats and emotional beats of the 1984 too closely. The 1984 film is a classic and all but if watched through a completely objective 2021 lens then it is a bit dated and slowly paced.

 

It definitely follows the beats of the original in a Force Awakensy sort of a way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We saw this yesterday at the BFI Imax and I felt it was a very mixed bag. The film looks great, so many exceptionally brilliant looking moments, the score is fantastic and nails the feel of the original, but doesn't sound like too much of a retread, the sound design is also great. The general aesthetics of the film are brilliant. There are scenes that could exist outside a film and make fans of the series happy merely by existing to look at. Just seeing Ecto-1 haring around the place is wonderful and some shots are clearly made just to make you feel good.

 

I felt there were some quite boring bits some really unfunny bits, felt like some of the characters' scenes didn't really serve a purpose. Some characters didn't really serve much of  a purpose. I think you could shave off quite a lot of the film and not miss it, that the film would be better for it in fact.  I thought something like 40%  of the film was great and the rest was of varying quality. 

 

I mentioned that we saw it at the BFI IMAX (which is, I believe, the biggest screen in the country) because the spectacle of some moments was phenomenal blown up so big. With the power of the sound system underlining what was happening with music and excellent sound design I think the film shines at certain moments. I would say that if you're interested, give it the best chance you can to make it a sensory experience, I would expect this film to be much less interesting at home.  I have been avoiding trailers, teasers and interviews for months (a year?) and watched an interview with Paul Rudd today which included a scene from the movie. In the context of the movie, on the giant screen and with the jump scare in full effect, I remember thinking it was so exhilarating and absolutely loved it.  The same scene was shown in the interview and I was interested to see how it would play out on my tv, and basically felt really glad I had been avoiding spoilers, it just did not come across in the same way. Obviously, I'd had the build up in the cinema and didn't know what was coming, but I think the point stands, that this film benefits from being loud and on a big screen. 

 

 

spoilers

Spoiler

I felt the final scenes

Spoiler

were both a giant let-down and affecting. Just in case you'ce automatically clicked through two spoiler tags without thinking and don't want the film spoilt, what's coming is a giant spoiler. If you don't know what I'm about to write about already, I guarantee you're better off not knowing about it if and when you end up watching the film.

Spoiler

The arrival of the Ghostbusters themselves was quite anti climactic, the final battle in general wasn't any match for the 1984 iteration (by this point the film so closely follows and directly references the original that it's impossible not to compare) and the acting felt quite phoned in, the script, not so great either. 

CGI shots of departed actors are normally quite poor IMO but this is the best of the ones I've seen. I found myself wondering what Harold Ramis' family might think and feel while seeing it. How I would feel seeing my Dad one more time. Though I've seen people say that it was exploitative or in poor taste, I didn't think that there was much there aside from affection. Knowing the story of Ramis and Murray's estrangement until near Ramis' death and having Ernie Hudson say "we should have called" was quite a punch. 
 

 

 


I'm glad that I'd heard the terrible buzz from critic reviews in advance as it had given me very low expectations, and that the film was even ok made it seem like a blessing.  I think they could have probably re-edited the film into something that would have satisfied more critics and ultimately made for a genuinely better film.  What's there isn't bad, but hard to recommend to people who aren't already interested.

 

I wonder if people who don't care about Ghostbusters can be converted with this movie. Not that you should really care, you probably already know who you are in this conversation because you're reading this, and like me, you were probably always either going to go see the film.  OR no matter what anyone writes, you aren't going to. 

 

So, I hope you like it if you do go see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Wahwah* said:

We saw this yesterday at the BFI Imax and I felt it was a very mixed bag. The film looks great, so many exceptionally brilliant looking moments, the score is fantastic and nails the feel of the original, but doesn't sound like too much of a retread, the sound design is also great. The general aesthetics of the film are brilliant. There are scenes that could just exist outside the film and make fans of the series happy to look at. Just seeing Ecto-1 haring around the place is wonderful and some shots are clearly made just to make you feel good.

 

I felt there were some quite boring bits some really unfunny bits, felt like some of the characters' scenes didn't really serve a purpose. Some characters didn't really serve much of  a purpose. I think you could shave off quite a lot of the film and not miss it, that the film would be better for it in fact.  I thought something like 40%  of the film was great and the rest was of varying quality. 

 

I mentioned that we saw it at the BFI IMAX (which is, I believe, the biggest screen in the country) because the spectacle of some moments was phenomenal blown up so big. With the power of the sound system underlining what was happening with music and excellent sound design I think the film shines at certain moments. I would say that if you're interested, give it the best chance you can to make it a sensory experience, I would expect this film to be much less interesting at home.  I have been avoiding trailers, teasers and interviews for months (a year?) and watched an interview with Paul Rudd today which included a scene from the movie. In the context of the movie, on the giant screen and with the jump scare in full effect, I remember thinking it was so exhilarating and absolutely loved it.  The same scene was shown in the interview and I was interested to see how it would play out on my tv, and basically felt really glad I had been avoiding spoilers, it just did not come across in the same way. Obviously, I'd had the build up in the cinema and didn't know what was coming, but I think the point stands, that this film benefits from being loud and on a big screen. 

 

 

spoilers

  Hide contents

I felt the final scenes

  Hide contents

were both a giant let-down and affecting. Just in case you'ce automatically clicked through two spoiler tags without thinking and don't want the film spoilt, what's coming is a giant spoiler. If you don't know what I'm about to write about already, I guarantee you're better off not knowing about it if and when you end up watching the film.

  Hide contents

The arrival of the Ghostbusters themselves was quite anti climactic, the final battle in general wasn't any match for the 1984 iteration (by this point the film so closely follows and directly references the original that it's impossible not to compare) and the acting felt quite phoned in, the script, not so great either. 

CGI shots of departed actors are normally quite poor IMO and this is the best of the ones I've seen. I found myself wondering what Harold Ramis' family might think and feel while seeing it. How I would feel seeing my Dad one more time. Though I've seen people say that it was exploitative or in poor taste, I didn't think that there was much there aside from affection. Knowing the story of Ramis and Murray's estrangement until near Ramis' death and having Ernie Hudson say "we should have called" was quite a punch. 
 

 

 


I'm glad that I'd heard the terrible buzz from critic reviews in advance as it had given me very low expectations, and that the film was even ok made it seem like a blessing.  I think they could have probably re-edited the film into something that would have satisfied more critics and ultimately made for a genuinely better film.  What's there isn't bad, but hard to recommend to people who aren't already interested.

 

I wonder if people who don't care about Ghostbusters can be converted with this movie. Not that you should really care, you probably already know who you are in this conversation because you're reading this, and like me, you were probably always either going to go see the film.  OR no matter what anyone writes, you aren't going to. 

 

So, I hope you like it if you do go see it.


Regarding one of your spoilered points, 

Spoiler

Ramis’ daughter Violet has been liking a lot of positive Afterlife stuff on Twitter, including this article: 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re the two above spoilers

 

Spoiler

I presumed the estate would have had to sign off on it anyway. I thought it was a lovely tribute and I'm tearing up again just thinking about it. Tbh, just seeing the tracker flicker at the beginning made me smile enough that he ghost was around (that would have been enough) and even though I expect his physical form to appear in that moment it didn't lesser the impact.

 

I think in terms of bringing back passed actors this was the most respect I've seen (albeit there's only a few instances). They didn't have anyone try to imitate his voice or act like him which I was happy to see.

 

I'd forgotten about the falling out so being reminded of that and Winstons line does make it hit even harder.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, NickC said:

This thread has been a bit of a rollercoaster. Really intrigued now by these reactions from those who have seen it. Cool to see people so buzzed 🙂


I’ve been sitting waiting for the reactions for nearly two months, and now feel really happy the feedback is mostly positive.

 

I think Afterlife is similar to Super 8, in that it captures the feeling of 80s films while adding a bit of modernity. 
 

I’m torn on the idea of a feature sequel though. While there is room for such, this would be a great way to round off the films. Perhaps a spin-off series, but maybe even that would be excessive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, glb said:


I’ve been sitting waiting for the reactions for nearly two months, and now feel really happy the feedback is mostly positive.

 

I think Afterlife is similar to Super 8, in that it captures the feeling of 80s films while adding a bit of modernity. 
 

I’m torn on the idea of a feature sequel though. While there is room for such, this would be a great way to round off the films. Perhaps a spin-off series, but maybe even that would be excessive.

I think another movie is a hard sell for me. It would need to be a different story than 'a big baddie is coming to end the world'. I liked the bits of Afterlife that were essentially in a haunted house. I think that could be an interesting thing they could explore. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/11/2021 at 13:09, MikeBeaver said:

Well, that was fantastic fun, lovede every minute of this film, Mark Kermode can fuck off, and then fuck off a bit further, utter shithead fool, how anyone cannot see this as anything but a nice, feel good film, I don't know :wub:


Yep, this. I love the original and Afterlife was a great continuation of the story with nothing to dislike. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/11/2021 at 08:36, Festoon said:

Well written review (SPOILERS). "A dungeon of necrophilia" is a hell of a phrase.

 

https://northshoremovies.wpcomstaging.com/2021/11/19/review-ghostbusters-afterlife/


Whilst I found this film enjoyable enough in a 3/5 kind of way, I also simultaneously think this review is bang on. The plot is nonsense and stuffed full of things that are only there for the audience’s sake rather than any sort of internal logic.

 

The mini-marshmallow men, for example. Dan Ackroyd accidentally summoned the original Stay Puft monster by purposefully thinking of a harmless character when asked to choose his destroyer. In this they’re just there, because it’s a thing people recognise from the last film and that’s the extent of it. There’s no explanation, no plot justification. 
 

The thing is, as a film it’s much better at doing it’s own thing than emulating the original. The Speilberg/Gremlins/Stranger Things x Ghostbusters vibe works for the most part, but it completely falls flat in the last act as it takes a hard turn into literal sequel/fan service territory. It’s a lot like BR2049 in that regard, another belated sequel that was much more successful at doing its own thing than it was at revisiting the past. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CarloOos said:

The mini-marshmallow men, for example. Dan Ackroyd accidentally summoned the original Stay Puft monster by purposefully thinking of a harmless character when asked to choose his destroyer. In this they’re just there, because it’s a thing people recognise from the last film and that’s the extent of it. There’s no explanation, no plot justification. 

I agree,  and though they don't get a lot of screen time,  it feels like too much, I hated it when they 

Spoiler

Came back at the end too. As an indicator of spooky energy increasing, it felt like there should have been more time for other random sightings (like the miner getting coffee in the diner) instead the Marshmallows scene overran, despite actually being a bit boring to watch. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, scottcr said:

Maybe Gozer reckoned that humans were terrified of Stay Puft… who *actually* cares. They were funny.

 

Completely agree. I love the original Ghostbusters films (yes, even Ghostbusters 2) and I had no problem with anything in here. If anything I felt it's plot held together through it's own internal logic pretty well...

 

Spoiler

I mean, Gozer was only ever sent back in the first movie, never defeated, so it makes sense Egon would want to concoct a plan to trap her/him/it indefinitely

 

...and things like the mini Marshmallow Men were so charming and funny that I couldn't really care less if they weren't fully logically consistent. I quite enjoyed it leaning into Gremlins a bit. It kind of makes the whole thing a celebration of 80's genre movies in the mould of Ghostbusters, which is probably how Finn Wolfhard got cast, since that's kinda what Stranger Things does too.

 

Spoiler

And, I mean, the big bad is Gozer. They're a form Gozer once took. Also, really who does care about this?

 

Anyway, I'm definitely up for seeing it again. I only caught one of the post-credit sequences last time too, so looking forward to seeing the little bits I missed the first time around.

Edited by Zio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.