Stranger Than Fiction: Ghostbusters: Afterlife Review (with Spoilers)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 сен 2024
- "Stranger Than Fiction" is a podcast that continues to explore the true stories behind all things spooky and supernatural. In this special episode, we review the new film, Ghostbusters: Afterlife and share our thoughts. Spoiler warning for anyone who hasn't seen the film, we do detail the plot.
Cohosted and Edited by Devin Dion
Cohosted by Heidi Dion
Music composed by Jason Wheeler @Wheelers Tutorials
Support us on Patreon: / channeling_spirits
Merchandise available at: www.etsy.com/s...
Follow us on Twitter: / channelinspirit
Follow us on Instagram: / channeling.spirits
Dedicated to Red.
You have a wonderful channel!
I’ve seen this movie three times. At first I thought Egon had a heart attack on the way into his house, so he couldn’t run anymore and had to sit in the chair and await his fate. Then, I thought Zuul killed him by inducing his heart attack. But, that didn’t make sense for Zuul’s purpose. It would have needed to possess him first so it could read his mind to discover the location of the trap with Vinz Clortho in it. After seeing it the third time, I now think that Egon used his PKE meter to induce cardiac arrest and give himself a fatal heart attack so that Zuul couldn’t possess him to find Vinz and bring back Gozer before anyone could stop it.
That does make sense seeing the PKE meter turn into a taser.
Kids in the theater were scared In some scenes, it's because we are ghostbusters we ain't afraid.
The car chase after muncher was an amazing moment that showed us that they had what it takes to be ghostbusters. I remember saying yes out loud when they caught him.
Muncher is silly and knowing that Josh Gad played him made it a little funnier for me.
why do people complain about fan service its supposed to be fan service i loved this movie 100%
Because it didn't want to be its own movie, a lot of going back into the past, things that have already happened. There wasn't anything new really that should've been told. This movie was supposed to go into the world of the Afterlife, as originally planned, it didn't do that
@@amazonfire8145 Disagree with the last part of your comment - the Afterlife side of things referred to Egon Spengler, who is communicating with his family *from* the afterlife.
@@cherrypickle8332 Dan Akroyd originally intended on this sequel to be based on the world of the afterlife. The Ghostbusters were supposed to actually physically visit the world of the afterlife. It was based off The Real Ghostbusters episode "Flip Side". Dan Akroyd had a good script, but you know, it would've been very big budget and they didn't want to spend, so this mediocre slop is what we all get instead.
@@amazonfire8145 I still don't get the criticism afterlife means after the originals it's a continuation of that story but with the Spengler family like in some countries it's called Ghostbusters legacy like the legacy continues with the Spengler family so I think it did that perfectly people just see things differently I personally love it 100% and glad the original universe is continuing and most fans were like me they wanted a continued broadening of the original universe we got it you know they tried something new in 2016 it failed miserably this one is winning at the box office
@@shanemcguire6428 It's okay, I'm just saying it could've been better. I want a story that peeks my imagination. I want to see something that makes me go "wow. Although it was brief, the way Gozer came out at the end of the first movie, she didn't quite have such the same dominating presence in Afterlife. I was satisfied safely assuming ahe was killed at the end of the first movie. But just to bring her back as an insignificant sideshow in the movie just to see her get so easily defeated was a waste of time, the original script called Hellbent was so much better
its a good film if you dont ask too many questions like why Gozer didnt ask the kids to chose a form of the destroyer. loved pod cast but his parents suck lol. how does the rc car move faster than a regular car..the suits fitting kids.
nitpicky aside i think they missed opportunity about message of teamwork it takes a team to catch a ghost. also they missed the ghostbusters trademark issue with law enforcement realizing they need ghostbusters. like the sherif fighting an failing to ward off ghosts an realizing the kids with their packs are the ones to call
Or like if Egons daughter is in her early 40s then he already had her in the first films😶
Imperfect? What is perfect? And why does it have to be?
Okay, let me try to explain the ghosts in universe. This is a basic "for dummies" breakdown, and does not include gods and whatnot. It goes far deeper than this, but this is a good starting point. We are going to focus on three types.
Humanoid specters (full torso apparitions): Human shape, see through. These are people that died with unfinished business. Egon and the Librarian from from the first movie (who seemingly could not move on until she had all the books in NYC's busiest library properly sorted and put away. Possibly also rebelled against the Dewey Decimal system). By far the most dangerous of the three, and can turn nasty if prevented from their purpose.
Poltergeists (roaming vapors): Slimer or Muncher. People that died having give their life over to a deadly sin, and wish to continue with their consumption, no matter the cost to the living world. They are seen as trouble makers, but are really uncaring towards the aftermath. Muncher most likely started obsessed with food, but moved on to metal when food was just no longer satisfying to his ghostly form. They take on an inhuman form as they give up their humanity in pursuit of satisfying their desires. These are more of a nuisance than a threat.
Zombies: Taxi Driver and miner in the diner. These are people that died and just not realized they can move on. Their life was a drudgery, and they felt little purpose. So, they go to work, go to their hangouts, and go about their business in the same soulless manner they did in life. Oddly enough, if just left to their routine, these ghosts are the least dangerous.
That's a good explanation, I thought Afterlife was going to go into deepdive into the world of the afterlife. Should've brought in the mystery elements of Joker and reallife elements of an origin story like a Batman Begins mixed in with big budget CGI effects for telling the ultimate tale of what's in the world of the Afterlife
One day we will learn who Callie's mother is.
Podcast is one of my favorite comic relief characters ever.
I finally saw the movie and so can finally watch all the spoilery vids. I liked that you both have different perspectives. I enjoyed it but if they do a sequel they definitely need to move past Gozer.
I have a theory on Ghostbusters (2016) and all the anger toward that film. In my estimation, there is no movie in the history of modern Hollywood with a more lengthy or more public development history than Ghostbusters 3. It had the unique and only-somewhat-enviable position of being both highly anticipated by the public and openly mused upon by the cast.
Most long-gestating sequels are acknowledged at most in passing by the wouldbe cast and creatives, but GB3 had entire story treatments (Ghostbusters Go to Hell) not just leaked but promoted through official channels! And this went on for like… a decade. Maybe more.
Ghostbusters 3 felt like a foregone conclusion to many. It was always a matter of not IF but WHEN. As a result, the core fan base felt robbed of a movie by the existence of _Answer the Call._ there was so much public awareness and open speculation that the remake carried with it an unusually high level of opportunity cost in the minds of fans. Normally, the equation is “Remake vs no movie at all” but here, it was THIS ghostbusters movie vs the hypothetical “perfect” ghostbusters movie that fans had daydreamed about for 10-15 years. And the potential energy of the daydream movie was weighed against the limitations of a real, existent movie. And there is no way for a real thing to match up to the potential of a daydream. In the daydream the movie is somehow _perfect._ no real version would ever live up to this hype. And a full-on reboot made in a mew style felt even more insulting as a result.
The real cherry on top is this: the ghostbusters 3 that fans seemed to want wasn’t even a sequel to the original films. Rather, it was a hybrid of the first film and the cartoon series, (which ran for TEN YEARS!) mixed together and coated with a thick veneer of nostalgia. So even if the “preferred” Ghostbusters 3 had come to pass, fans would likely have been underwhelmed if not completely disappointed. What they wanted was impossible to achieve. A laugh a minute comedy, like the original film, that is also a big, badass action spectacle, like the _memory_ of the cartoon. And also, watching it turns you back into a 12 year old who is naive to tropes and can thus be blown away by basic plot mechanics.
Needless to say, that kind of film doesn’t really exist. I feel like Men In Black is probably the closest thing the world ever got. But then, MiB came out when I was about 12. So…
The problem with GB 2016 is that the 2016 cast and crew came in arrogant with greedy intentions. They wanted to make the movie all about being a feminist statement, rather than being about ghostbusing. Thats not cool. I mean it was a movie literally made out of hate, hate for men an conservatives that right there get things on the wrong start. And then the movie never took itself seriously was the main reason why it failed is why people don't like it
@@amazonfire8145 there wasn’t even the slightest of feminist statements to be found within the text of GB16. Maybe in the discourse, surrounding the film or in the comments of the creatives. But not in the film itself.
@@amazonfire8145 and… were they greedy? Or was it about making a Feminist statement? Because those two motivations are mutually exclusive. If _anyone_ is greedy, it’s the original guys and the hilariously brazen business-first mentality of Ghostcorps; an entire production company dedicated to guiding a hypothetical transmedia Ghostbusters empire, (and maximizing the ability to leverage intellectual property vial tie-ins, product integrations, sequels, spin-offs, adaptations, and - of course - merchandising). The contract negotiations around everything ghostbusters and the need for all parties to sign off on everything is… well, it’s befitting of the initial motivations of the protagonists in the first film. _”the franchising rights alone will make us wealthy beyond our wildest dreams!”_ seems to have been taken as a challenge.
@@amazonfire8145 but to be totally clear - I hated that movie too.
@@tawdryhepburn4686 The film's major problem is that it had no realism to it. Ghostbusters is supposed to be a story about what if ghosts were real, that's what made the franchise so successful. GB2016 totally missed any element of realism. That's what makes Ghostbusters so good, the element of realism mixed in with imagination. GB2016 was too over the top fake. I mean, its just so fake, it's just considered as just nothing to people because of the fakeness
I liked the movie. I felt like they relied on a lot of nostalgia but there were some new elements that worked. It reminded me of Force Awakens in terms of following the same outline as the movies before it. I’m not against fan service, but if it relies on that too much, it takes away from the novelty
Love the science behind the gear...the production and dan akryod took the entirety seriously...like if you watch...its a somewhat serious film....everything is played super straight....except the LOOK of the ghosts ....even the "science" behind the ghosts is treated with a respect its not some goofy thing like 2016 alot dont get it ....what makes ghostbusters a comedy is the characters its somewhat wacky characters in a real world....aka real life...oh and i am literally john Belushis illegitimate son.....not a goof either ...but yea Ghostbusters....is an amazing example of movie making
2016 is not great however I do think it is much more funny than Ghostbusters 2 even if it's not a better Ghostbusters movie. I am not sure that it's not a better Ghostbusters movie than 2.
I won't deny that GB 2016 has some big flaws, but overall I would watch it before Afterlife. It has tons of new ghosts, there are some good funny moments, and Leslie Jones and Kate McKinnon are wonderful. I fell asleep twice trying to watch Afterlife. I rank 2 as my personal favorite, Vigo is an incredible villain and I love Peter McNicol as his henchman.
@@CinnamonGrrlErin1 my main issue with 2016 is McCarthy, her style of humor didnt mesh well with the others, to my taste. i really liked afterlife and the main reason I have to reply at all is to say both of those movies are more fun to watch than 2.
@@harrypothead42024 I think if they hadn't bothered with making a backstory for McCarthy and Wiig and just jumped into things, it would have saved the movie. The editing in general was just terrible, way too many quick cuts, but I don't think anyone knows how to film comedy anymore.
@@CinnamonGrrlErin1 I actually think I'm left agreeing with you 100%. The Quick Cuts is getting old everywhere.
@@harrypothead42024 it's also why I hate modern animation. But as a good example, look at the scene in Stranger Things where they're arguing over who's Venkman. There's no sharp, jarring cuts, just a smooth back and forth between the kids, and it's one of the funniest scenes in the whole series. Comedy needs breathing room.
You don’t have to call it the female version. It’s just a movie.
It was fine. A solid B .