Review of Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021) by Butterballer1 — 28 Nov 2021

Well, it is certainly much better than the 2016 reboot. And it pays respect to the original. However, the character writing is bad and the film does not seem to understand the elements that made the original so great. To top it off, the movie takes place in BFE Oklahoma, but somehow has a diverse cast you might expect to find in San Francisco and (SPOILER) the real ghostbusters who you probably came to see barely show up for a few minutes at the end, having nothing to do with the development of the plot or story until that point. Diversity quotients above story ruin everything, but they don't totally ruin this film. It does have a heart to it, even if they beat you over the head with it at the end and don't really earn it since the opening scene ends up making very little sense as the film goes on.

Mostly, the problem arises in the script and the poorly developed characters and mary-sue 12-year-old protagonist. The entire premise of Ghostbusters is humor, middle-aged cynicism, happenstance, and qwerkyness. Instead, we get knowitall 12yearolds who can pretty much do anything and inexplicable (SPOILER) corporeal ghosts of Harold Ramis that are never really explained except to tug at your emotions--and they probably will by the end, to their credit. But if Egon can do pretty much anything anyway, why does it matter that he is dead? Couldn't he have just fixed everything as a ghost without anyone's help?

And, why does (SPOILER) Paul Rudd open a ghost trap when he knows exactly what would be inside of it? He is a scientist, not a total dumbass.

This is not a bad film, but it isn't a great one and probably isn't really a good one. But, at least the script isn't woke, even if the casting clearly was. They truly just need better writers and perhaps a more slap-stick director. Worth seeing only to support non-woke cinema and to see ghostbusters on the screen one last time.