The “Ghostbusters” movie franchise has always been one of my favorites.
The first two movies and canon video game were some outrageously fun bits of entertainment that have stuck with me to this day.
Then came along the 2016 reboot, “Ghostbusters,” and I almost lost all my luster for future installments.
The 2016 reboot was a lifeless attempt at creating something new in the franchise. The jokes were not funny, and the film was not connected to previous installments.
I was hesitant for “Ghostbusters: Afterlife,” but I went in with an open mind to see if the once beloved franchise could be revived for the modern age.
I am happy to report that this film was immensely fun, and I could see it being a kid’s favorite movie for a long time.
Some of my favorite actors in this new installment were Paul Rudd as Gary Grooberson, Finn Wolfhard as Trevor Spengler and, of course the star of the show, Mckenna Grace as Phoebe Spengler.
People are also reading…
The film is set 32 years after the events of “Ghostbusters 2,” where a single mother and her two children move to a small town in Oklahoma and they discover their connection to the original Ghostbusters and their grandfather’s secret legacy.
Harold Ramis, famous for his portrayal of Egon Spengler, died in 2014 and I am sad that I will never see him recite any new lines with the original Ghostbusters crew.
This film serves as an excellent tribute to Ramis and a great launching point for future installments in the series.
Grace did a great job of portraying a young kid fascinated with science who is 100% not deterred by the naysayers. This way of carrying oneself is admirable considering in today’s world people act a certain way just to fit in.
When Grace first fired off the proton pack, I had flashbacks to the first film.
Rudd does what Rudd does best — create moments of unexpected humor. He steals every scene that he is in and is a welcomed presence in the franchise.
Wolfhard, known for his part in the Netflix series “Stranger Things,” also had his moments where I had to cringe at the teenage awkwardness he was involved with in the movie.
The ghosts themselves in the movie look great and for sure benefitted from advancements in movie technology.
While I did appreciate the callbacks to the previous films, I could see people not liking the movie for being too nostalgic.
“Ghostbuster’s: Afterlife,” does not necessarily do anything new so much as it recycles things from previous installments but with a fresh coat of CGI.
I liked the all the nostalgic things in the film and the surprise cameos, and I think the everyday moviegoer will, too.
There are genuine heartwarming moments between characters that make audience care about what is happening on screen.
I review movies on a scale of one bucket of popcorn to five buckets of popcorn. One bucket of popcorn would be the worst film of the year and five buckets of popcorn is a masterpiece or at the very least a film that will make the rounds at award shows.
“Ghostbusters: Afterlife” earns a four out of five buckets popcorn for being a fun film that entertains but falls short of five for not bringing enough new elements to the silver screen.
Oh, and stay after the credits. There is something I think fans of the franchise would like to see.