Ghostbusters: Afterlife | November 19 2021 | Sony | Delayed again

[SpiderByte]

On 11/1/2021 at 8:26 PM, RRA said:

GB is a comedy-driven property. I think it’s a given this is a comedy. 

Well, the first one is, but a lot of these reviews indicate that it's much more of a secondary element. At least compared to the last 3 movies anyway.

[Macleod]

12 hours ago, John Marston said:

Main problem I have with this movie is that it seems to be using the exact same monsters/creatures the first movie did. The cartoons created a variety of new  antagonists for the Ghostbusters to fight, why can’t a big budget Hollywood movie?

I know this is not quite your point, but... it seems as if it's *not* that big of a budget on this one -- it was estimated early on to be only half -- possibly even just a third -- of what they spent on the last one...  Let them get the nostalgia out of the way and get the franchise "back on track," and if this thing's successful...they'll go hog wild with the next one, you can be SONY-sure...  

Edited November 3, 2021 by Macleod

[dudalb]

19 hours ago, SpiderByte said:

Well, the first one is, but a lot of these reviews indicate that it's much more of a secondary element. At least compared to the last 3 movies anyway.

That's the problem. GHostbusters is a comedy franchise. Trying to make it more serious is a big mistake.

And the original had so many great lines which this film will find hard to equal:

 

"And if you save the city, you will have saved the lives of millions and millions of registered voters..."

[Eric Furiosa]

 

[von Kenni]

On 11/2/2021 at 3:13 PM, EmpireCity said:

I don't know how many times I can repeat this, but the movie is filled with comedy.  It's funny, heartwarming, thrilling, nostalgic and will appeal to young and old.  

 

This is not a movie that jaded film twitter top critics will like, it was made to be seen in a theater with an audience.  It plays fantastic in that format.  It was not made for a critics screening at 10am screening with 5 other local critics in the theater.  

 

Trust me on this one, the WOM is going to be huge.  

After seeing the newest trailer and Empire putting rest to the biggest worries here, I'm getting really excited about this. There's a shot to get the adults and kids of 80s & 90s to go watch this as well as kids today. When done right you can serve nostalgia for fans of OG that doesn't feel nostalgia for the new audiences. They might just miss a layer there. It's like watching Monty Python or Simpsons as a kid. You can laugh at them without understanding all the cultural, societal, and other context that you will learn when growing up which then serve the older audience who notice them.

 

And I'm excited to see all those OG monsters and ghosts. I don't see why it would be a downer for new audiences who don't know that they are old. The biggest worry was that Bill Murray and the chemistry of the trio were key elements in the OG to create that unique comedy atmosphere. At least Paul Rudd is a subtle actor that fits the tone of OG as well as the Stranger Thing kids. Imagine (don't) having some ADHD snarky, one-liner, slapstick actors instead (chills...). That said, those who wait for that kind of humour/comedy will be disappointed but I'm happy if this has the OG type of comedy vibe. The trailer gives me also 80's The Goonies type of chills of mystery adventure when looking those kids exploring and following clues.

 

Yeah, this is definitely going to have a great WOM...

 

Btw, go read the RT's rotten reviews on this. Talking about hilariously biased reviews. I wonder when we are going to take movies as movies, focus on the story, characters, tensions, payoffs, etc., you know the elements that make good storytelling, instead of bringing external agendas, narratives, and politics in the picture.

 

Edited November 9, 2021 by von Kenni
Ron Swanson

[Hatebox]

2 minutes ago, von Kenni said:

Btw, go read the RT's rotten reviews on this. Talking about hilariously biased reviews.

 

All reviews are biased. An objective review is a contradiction in terms.

[von Kenni]

11 minutes ago, Hatebox said:

 

All reviews are biased. An objective review is a contradiction in terms.

Of course, but without being too anal about it, there's a difference of having the biases that we used to have in reviews some years back and then the checking boxes of inclusion, representation, identity politics narratives, etc. kind of biases/agendas/narratives that those reviews have. E.g. if you start reviewing Afterlife by saying first that this is useless and unwelcomed movie undoing the 2016 progressive reboot, that pretty much sums it up.

[Spidey Freak]

14 hours ago, von Kenni said:

Of course, but without being too anal about it, there's a difference of having the biases that we used to have in reviews some years back and then the checking boxes of inclusion, representation, identity politics narratives, etc. kind of biases/agendas/narratives that those reviews have. E.g. if you start reviewing Afterlife by saying first that this is useless and unwelcomed movie undoing the 2016 progressive reboot, that pretty much sums it up.

 

We back on this bullshit after just days of Eternals being torpedo-ed on RT despite it being a movie that "ticked all the boxes"?

Edited November 9, 2021 by Spidey Freak

[Eric Furiosa]

 

BTW this whole "grr woke cwitics bad UwU" schtick is super lame. Get some new material.

[von Kenni]

14 minutes ago, Eric the Big Red Dog said:

 

BTW this whole "grr woke cwitics bad UwU" schtick is super lame. Get some new material.

I really tried to understand your schtick reference but sorry, I'm a bit lost there.

 

I don't want to start an Eternals thread type of flood of RT posts. I honestly there wanted to just point out the Afterlife rotten reviews that are something that I haven't seen before. I'm sure there are similar cases and from different angles and perspectives (and anti-woke), and furthermost I don't generally read any RT reviews but now that I did, I was genuinely surprised how there were so many reviews reviewing the movie openly in a way that were not so much focused on the movie itself but the context around it.

 

I myself am a liberal progressive and always have been, but I hope that I can still express where I see that sort of "hilarious biases" that I referred to. In hindsight, I would choose better wordings to express what I meant because this subject is most likely quite loaded and prone to misinterpretations for anyone discussing about it. However, I would rather try to express it still than to just avoid talking about it completely.

 

I'm sorry if I offended you or anyone else here. That was not my intention.

 

[junkshop36]

Highly looking forward to this. Love love love the  first movie and this gives me those same vibes mixed with stranger things, which I really enjoy as well(can’t wait for season 4!). I’m actually looking more forward to this than Spidey. 

[von Kenni]

Ok, no need to guess if it's good or not. It's settled:

 

 

[DAJK]

This is actually selling pretty decently here. Wouldn’t be surprised at a 40M+ weekend anymore.

[von Kenni]

12 hours ago, DAJK said:

This is actually selling pretty decently here. Wouldn’t be surprised at a 40M+ weekend anymore.

I hope that the OW is at least decent like that and if the signs that it's a movie worth of WOM for its target audiences are true, it's going to have great legs. The potential is there but it's a fine line to get them click.

[Ozymandias]

On 11/9/2021 at 6:08 AM, Spidey Freak said:

 

We back on this bullshit after just days of Eternals being torpedo-ed on RT despite it being a movie that "ticked all the boxes"?

 

The difference is that Ghostbusters 2016 got absolutely ripped apart on the internet(perhaps more than any other movie I know of) after the first trailer came out.  A lot of the criticism was warranted(the really low brow Adam Sandler-like Pixels vibes the trailers were giving off), but the cast and crew did get bombarded with a bunch of fucked up shit by bearded reactionaries(a lot of which was definitely sexist/racist).  Eternals didn't have to deal with months and months of intense negativity prior to release, its a well intentioned stumble by the dominant and most powerful brand in Hollywood whereas Ghostbusters was a really lazy movie.   The critics are human, and I do think a fair amount of them went easy on Ghostbusters 2016 because by the time it came out, in their minds, any more criticism would've just felt like a pile-on and giving validation to the sexism, personal attacks, and dark corners of the internet.  I can absolutely see some of those same critics viewing Aftermath as a mean "repudiation" of the 2016 version and as a movie thats nothing more than nostalgia made for "those toxic manbabies/fandom".

[dudalb]

On 11/9/2021 at 4:08 AM, Spidey Freak said:

 

We back on this bullshit after just days of Eternals being torpedo-ed on RT despite it being a movie that "ticked all the boxes"?

Making a sucessful movie,,,,both in artistic and box office terms...involves a lot more then checking a lot of boxes.

 A lot of films that have all the ingrediants for a hit film still bombed.

[dudalb]

2 minutes ago, Ozymandias said:

 

The difference is that Ghostbusters 2016 got absolutely ripped apart on the internet(perhaps more than any other movie I know of) after the first trailer came out.  A lot of the criticism was warranted(the really low brow Adam Sandler-like Pixels vibes the trailers were giving off), but the cast and crew did get bombarded with a bunch of fucked up shit by bearded reactionaries(a lot of which was definitely sexist/racist).  Eternals didn't have to deal with months and months of intense negativity prior to release, its a well intentioned stumble by the dominant and most powerful brand in Hollywood whereas Ghostbusters was a really lazy movie.   The critics are human, and I do think a fair amount of them went easy on Ghostbusters 2016 because by the time it came out, in their minds, any more criticism would've just felt like a pile-on and giving validation to the sexism, personal attacks, and dark corners of the internet.  I can absolutely see some of those same critics viewing Aftermath as a mean "repudiation" of the 2016 version and as a movie thats nothing more than nostalgia made for "those toxic manbabies/fandom".

GHostbusters 2016 was a film where both the supporters and the critics made fools of themselves, frankly.

A lot of sexism in tsome of the coments, yes, but then the film supporters played the "only reason you don;t like the film  is because you are a sexist " line which alientated a lot of people to whom the film just did not look very funny.

And the way the supporters..and some of the people involved with the film..seem to go out of their way to alienate fans of the orignal was pretty dumb.

[von Kenni]

1 hour ago, Ozymandias said:

 

The difference is that Ghostbusters 2016 got absolutely ripped apart on the internet(perhaps more than any other movie I know of) after the first trailer came out.  A lot of the criticism was warranted(the really low brow Adam Sandler-like Pixels vibes the trailers were giving off), but the cast and crew did get bombarded with a bunch of fucked up shit by bearded reactionaries(a lot of which was definitely sexist/racist).  Eternals didn't have to deal with months and months of intense negativity prior to release, its a well intentioned stumble by the dominant and most powerful brand in Hollywood whereas Ghostbusters was a really lazy movie.   The critics are human, and I do think a fair amount of them went easy on Ghostbusters 2016 because by the time it came out, in their minds, any more criticism would've just felt like a pile-on and giving validation to the sexism, personal attacks, and dark corners of the internet.  I can absolutely see some of those same critics viewing Aftermath as a mean "repudiation" of the 2016 version and as a movie thats nothing more than nostalgia made for "those toxic manbabies/fandom".

Thanks for opening this up. I missed the details on the 2016 storm around this (just saw the trailer and didn't go see it in the theaters as well as my friends who were OG fans) but helps to understand better those reviews that I was referring to.

 

As probably all here know, the Afterlife isn't most likely done with bad intentions or in a mean spirited way. To my understanding it's following the ideas and themes that Dan Aykroyd and Ivan Reitman had already long before the 2016 version and before the troubles between Reitman and Sony that came out in Sony email leaks (which I've recently come to know about...eye-widening stuff).

Edited November 10, 2021 by von Kenni

[Taylor]

 

[Krissykins]

Well advertising is everywhere here in the UK. Billboards, ads on busses and huge standee’s in the cinema last night, with all the foyer screens playing the trailer on a loop.