I like Ghostbusters. It's a movie I've seen a couple of times and really enjoy. It's not an all time favourite, but I do tend to revere it in the same regard as other 1980s franchises that I have a bigger soft spot for like Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and Back to the Future, because, like those movies, not only is it really iconic, but it's an easy watch and something you just can't seem to go wrong with. But, the fact remains, I'm not an enormous fan. I haven't seen Ghostbusters II nor the 2016 remake that angered many people, and so I never initially planned to catch the upcoming new installment, Ghostbusters: Afterlife. But, because it's a new movie and could be a decent way to spend two hours, I went to see it anyway, not really expecting much.
In the film, a single mother along her two children move to a small town where her recently deceased father left a house behind. Shortly after arriving, the two children realise that they are descendants of a Ghostbuster, and with ghosts starting to show up again, they need to keep the legacy afloat and save the world.
Ghostbusters: Afterlife was actually really good fun. It offers many set pieces that are thoroughly exciting, enjoyable, and funny. There's a chase scene around the middle that serves as the first proper action scene and it's very well executed, offering some neat variations on the Ghostbuster gadgets we all know. There's also a really funny scene in a supermarket with Paul Rudd's character encountering little Stay Puft marshmallow men as they cause chaos, and also getting chased by one of those demonic dogs from the first movie. The climax is a little uninteresting by comparison but has its own charm, which I won't get into as it involves spoilers. The visuals were also very memorable throughout most of these scenes too.
I liked a lot of the characters as well. As mentioned, Paul Rudd is in the film and he's as good as ever; such an effortlessly charming and likeable presence and he fit in perfectly here. I wish he had a little more to do overall as he does get sidelined from the end of the second act onwards, but he still makes the most of what he's given and I enjoyed him very much. The two children are also really good, as are some of the others they meet throughout the film. There are also appearances from some more familiar faces, which you can probably guess, and they were all very welcome and put a smile on my face.
I suppose my main issue with Ghostbusters: Afterlife is that it just felt repetitive. It doesn't have the same plot but with a new coat of paint like other movies of this calibre such as Star Wars: The Force Awakens or Jurassic World, but it does overall feel very familiar. It ultimately just feels like more Ghostbusters, and while that isn't inherently a bad thing, it does mean that the film comes off as kind of superfluous. It is fairly different from a narrative perspective, but many of the plot beats are predictable and have been done countless times elsewhere, so it doesn't really offer anything special or unique outside of, well, giving these elements a Ghostbusters twist. I suppose this is probably an issue for me because I'm not head over heels for this franchise, so if you are a massive Ghostbusters fan, you may well enjoy seeing this kind of story as well as more of the same. But, as for me, it didn't do an awful lot besides servicing some decently entertaining stuff.
One thing that did tick me off a fair bit was the fan service in the movie. This is nothing novel for sequels to a culturally popular film made over a decade or two after the last installment, but Ghostbusters: Afterlife uses it in some of the most contrived ways I've seen. The iconic "Who you gonna call?" line is shoehorned in very unnaturally, and various recognisable props (which I only recognised having rewatched the original the day before seeing this) also pop up in ways that don't feel particularly organic, but rather just because there was probably a checklist of recognisable props from Ghostbusters that the filmmakers were running through while writing the script, and needed to find ways to incorporate no matter what. I won't say this really irritated me, because it didn't, but it did stick out as instances of really lazy writing to capitalise on nostalgia. Fan service isn't something I'm against as I know how nice it is to see a little (or big) nod to something you know and love, but integrating it with such forced means takes away a lot of the charm.
All in all, Ghostbusters: Afterlife was jolly good. While it relies too much on nostalgic novelties and overall feels superfluous, it has enough going for it with some charming performances and well crafted set pieces. Will I ever see it again? Probably not, as most of what it offers can be found in the original, a highly superior film that I do anticipate continuing to revisit from time to time. But, should I ever come across it again, I know I'll be in for a bit of fun.
I'm going to give Ghostbusters: Afterlife a 7.0/10
No comments:
Post a Comment