|
|
Post by ck100 on Mar 24, 2024 22:34:19 GMT
Agree to disagree because I don't understand why anyone would do that. "The critics were right, I actually don't like what they've done with this property that I 'love so much.' But I'm going to give it a high score so the studio keeps making trash I don't like, because I don't want the critics to be right." That sounds fucking crazy. As we both mentioned earlier in the thread, they need to move on from legacy characters in these old IPs. If anything, I thought the original cast was used too much in this film as it is. The fans I talked about aren't saying the critics are right. Or that they don't like what the filmmakers have done with the movie. Or that they have some grudge against the studio. If someone is big fan of Ghostbusters and like this movie, and these are the fans I'm talking about, then they might feel compelled to go against critics simply for attacking a movie they like, and especially for attacking it for being so connected to a movie and cast they love so much. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 24, 2024 22:37:30 GMT
The thing with Phoebe, it's not like she was dead. Her spirit was extracted from her body, but her body was still alive and functioning the whole time. I liked Afterlife well enough, but I prefer this one. I said coming out of the theater that it felt like they were juggling ideas for a season of a streaming show and decided to put them all into one movie, but I thought they tied them all together reasonably well. What the producers/studio needs to decide, if they want to continue pumping these things out (and it seems like they do), is finding a better balance between the new characters and the legacy characters. You can still involve the old crew in the film, but if you give them too much screen time, they're going to constantly overpower the new group to the point of making the audience why they should invest in these characters in the first place. I didn't mind them suiting up in this one, but the movie didn't need it. They gave that to us last time out. Just keep them around as consultants and benefactors in supporting roles. What the audience needs to decide (at least the ones complaining, who seem to be in the minority) is what they want out of a Ghostbusters movie. These movies have kind of morphed into an oddball family comedy, but the overall tone of the movies hasn't changed all that much. It's still a silly take on the supernatural with a few jump scares but mostly fluff; while the most mature content of the movie is some of the dialog and sexual references. That's straight out of the original Ghostbusters playbook, lest we forget how hard Venkman is trying to get into Dana's pants, or the scene where Stantz dreams about getting a BJ from a ghost. We can all agree Afterlife and FE are nowhere near as great as the original film, but once you acknowledge that, it's time to accept these movies for what they are. Ghostbusters for a new generation, with some winks to the good old days for longtime fans. They aren't going to recapture the magic of the original, but they can still be goofy fun in their own right, and I think they succeed in doing so. If there's a place where I think they're trying too hard, it's the mini Stay Puft guys. They don't bother me per se, but they scream merchandising while not really affecting the plot at all. I hope they do end up making more; I genuinely like the new characters and wouldn't mind seeing where their story goes. But I completely agree with you about finding a better balance. I think there needs to be some fine-tuning and focus on the new core characters, it almost feels like the filmmakers don't completely trust them to carry a movie, and if that's the case, then it doesn't say very much that they have so little faith in their own characters. If they do want to keep bringing back the old characters, I think that's fine but some compromise needs to be found so that they don't steal the new group's thunder like you said. Also one thing that was kind of missing from this was the way NYC was used. Obviously this doesn't apply to Afterlife, but in the original and II and even in the cartoon series to a lesser degree, NYC felt like a character itself; it felt so colorful and alive. Here the city just felt very generic and sterile to me. I'm not saying the movie did anything wrong per se, and I'm not sure what the answer is, but I'd just like the city to have more character if future installments are set there. It felt like this movie was a test drive for new blood, to see how the audience would respond. They should maybe start looking at the 'Ghost Corps' like MI6, with Winston in the M role, that British guy from Frozen Empire as Q, and so on. Maybe each movie could have connected A & B plots featuring various teams like the Grooberson/Spenglers, the Kumail Nanjiani character teamed up with Patton Oswalt, etc. Good call about the city as a character. If they intend to stay in NYC, I hope they start to incorporate it into the story the way it felt in the first two movies. Of course it's another fine line they're walking, with much of the criticism being about how this movie was too similar to previous installments. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 24, 2024 23:01:32 GMT
Agree to disagree because I don't understand why anyone would do that. "The critics were right, I actually don't like what they've done with this property that I 'love so much.' But I'm going to give it a high score so the studio keeps making trash I don't like, because I don't want the critics to be right." That sounds fucking crazy. As we both mentioned earlier in the thread, they need to move on from legacy characters in these old IPs. If anything, I thought the original cast was used too much in this film as it is. The fans I talked about aren't saying the critics are right. Or that they don't like what the filmmakers have done to the movie. Or that they have some grudge against the studio. If someone is big fan of Ghostbusters and like this movie, and these are the fans I'm talking about, then they might feel compelled to go against critics simply for attacking a movie they like, and especially for attacking it for being so connected to a movie and cast they love so much. If they liked the movie, they aren't pumping up their rating to spite the critics, they're giving their honest opinion. How are they 'compelled to go against critics' if they actually liked the movie?! Listen to yourself, it makes no sense. And if you're trying to say I'm who you're talking about, just come out and say it. I'm already on record in the thread saying they used the original cast too much. I'm not going to defend Frozen Empire simply because I loved the original, no matter what the critics have to say. Like most of the audience, I liked the movie. There are complaints about it being overcrowded or derivative or features too many callbacks that I can understand, even if I don't necessarily agree. It's the, "Man, this isn't as good as the original," stuff that I find tedious, and the fact that a comedy franchise is somehow held to a higher standard than Blade Runner. |
|
|
|
Post by Spike Del Rey on Mar 24, 2024 23:26:20 GMT
I liked it quite a bit, and I was surprised (pleasantly) by how much Aykroyd was a part of it. As far as the new team, it really does seem like they're pushing Phoebe front and center...I don't know if that will continue should the franchise go on, but she does seem to be the major focus in both this and Afterlife. Not that I mind, I think McKenna Grace is a wonderful young actress with a bright future (if Hollywood doesn't fuck it up). I'm actually a little shocked that after the generally positive reception Afterlife had that Sigourney Weaver and maybe even Rick Moranis didn't show up in this even just if in cameos. I also think it's a positive the writers for both these movies didn't try to re-capture the "zany comedy" aspect of the 80s movies, and instead went for a more subtle serio-comedic approach. Hard to replicate the "SNL" type humor that the first ones had, and would be a mistake to try (Answer the Call, anyone?). I'd give this 3.5 Slimers out of 5.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 25, 2024 1:57:19 GMT
I liked it quite a bit, and I was surprised (pleasantly) by how much Aykroyd was a part of it. As far as the new team, it really does seem like they're pushing Phoebe front and center...I don't know if that will continue should the franchise go on, but she does seem to be the major focus in both this and Afterlife. Not that I mind, I think McKenna Grace is a wonderful young actress with a bright future (if Hollywood doesn't fuck it up). I'm actually a little shocked that after the generally positive reception Afterlife had that Sigourney Weaver and maybe even Rick Moranis didn't show up in this even just if in cameos. I also think it's a positive the writers for both these movies didn't try to re-capture the "zany comedy" aspect of the 80s movies, and instead went for a more subtle serio-comedic approach. Hard to replicate the "SNL" type humor that the first ones had, and would be a mistake to try (Answer the Call, anyone?). I'd give this 3.5 Slimers out of 5. In the end it's probably better that they left Weaver and Moranis out. They already had a ton of characters who needed to find something to do, with varying levels of success. Two more legacy characters would've been a bridge too far. I finally saw Answer the Call last year and it was as bad as the trailers made it look. I don't know how a cast that talented could make such an unfunny movie, but it happened. |
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Mar 25, 2024 3:19:46 GMT
While in no rush to see it, I'm glad it's got glass half-full reviews.
|
|
|
|
Post by CrepedCrusader on Mar 25, 2024 20:19:13 GMT
I don't get all the negativity I've seen. It ain't winning Oscars, but I thought it was a perfectly fine movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Mar 25, 2024 20:29:26 GMT
This thread reminds me why I'm happy I haven't had anything to do with Ghostbusters since 1989. It's exhausting enough talking about Star Wars without bringing supernatural exterminators into the mix.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 25, 2024 22:52:28 GMT
This thread reminds me why I'm happy I haven't had anything to do with Ghostbusters since 1989. It's exhausting enough talking about Star Wars without bringing supernatural exterminators into the mix. Now they have a guy who can control fire. |
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Mar 25, 2024 23:10:37 GMT
This thread reminds me why I'm happy I haven't had anything to do with Ghostbusters since 1989. It's exhausting enough talking about Star Wars without bringing supernatural exterminators into the mix. Now they have a guy who can control fire. They need to stop just making up new powers. |
|
