Ghostbusters: Afterlife

"Who you gonna call?" Ignoring female version from five years ago, this is a return to the world of Ghostbusters after quite a some time. The original films from the 1980s can still appeal to me today, with their cast, the decent effects or the catchy theme song. Afterlife visibly mixes the old with the new, with obvious references and the original cast that feel very nostalgic, while on the other hand there is a clear effort to appeal to a younger audience. More than once during the screening I thought of Stranger Things - and no, it wasn't because of Finn Wolfhard – and by the end I couldn't even help thinking of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. On the one hand, it was good to see the old guard together again, but on the other hand, they were there more just for the nostalgia effect. I found the new cast, apart from Paul Rudd and Logan Kim, very bland. Better three stars! (06/01/2022)

I’m as satisfied as I was in 2015 with Jurassic World. Once again, it was a fantastic follow-up to a film that everyone loves, introducing brand new characters, not just relying on nostalgia, entertaining for two hours old-timers and newcomers alike, having people in the cinema smiling from ear to ear. I really wasn’t expecting Afterlife to be so good, it’s such a joy. I was pleasantly surprised that the film doesn't have a main male character, but a heroine (Finn Wolfhard sorry, Mckenna Grace really rules here), and such a great heroine at that. But actually all the characters are funny, never awkward, and Jason Reitman cares as much about them as he does about the special effects, which beautifully combine the digital and the practical and, like everything else, are a joy to behold. If you are not moved by the opening, you will be moved by the ending. I would really love another sequel to fully close the circle. (07/01/2022)

The first Ghostbusters crossed with an Amblin-like children's summer adventure in a small town. Yes, it's undeniably an instant double load of 1980s nostalgia, but it's so sensitive compared to many others who've tried their hand at something similar and overused it in recent years. In fact, it works for the most part on its own (perhaps only the final quarter is too shot-by-shot and the same film). When you add in that "Legacy" (even in a creative father-son Ivan/Jason way), it can conjure a smile as much as it can grab your heart. Much better than one would dare hope for a sequel that comes a decade or so later than it should. What's more, it's a successful sequel that doesn't try anything groundbreaking, but fills its box solidly and entertainingly. (20/03/2022)

The first half isn't bad at all, as Reitman keeps managing to portray those teenage characters and the ethos of youth quite nicely. Even though the character of fifteen-year-old Trevor is written totally like the character of Morty in the first season of Rick & Morty, and the whole setting is actually an insanely moronic attempt to sell us "80s nostalgia" in the present day. All it takes is a sleepy, undeveloped town in Oklahoma with no cell service and we can have a drive-in diner on roller skates and a substitute Ryan Reynol... sorry Paul Rudd playing 80s horror movies on VHS for the kids. I mean, what do you expect from a movie where memberberries are actually incorporated into the story. But okay, I'll be nice, the film is surprisingly patient at first, a little wordy and relatively on its feet. Except I kept wondering why I wasn't enjoying it so much. The problem is that the original theme, which served to get a bunch of funny people together, dress them in funny costumes, and create situations for them and the effects people (and, by extension, the viewer) to have fun in, is suddenly turned into some completely nonsensical lore that fetishizes every nut and bolt from the original films. Then, in the clueless conclusion, it's downright obvious how this material isn't at all suited to expanding its universe, so in a panicked reaction, it overreacts by finishing with digitally rejuvenated actors or outright holograms of dead people, all in a way that makes you think damn, is it truly possible that I won't be at peace even after death? Anyway, I'm more generous towards the film than I normally would be thanks to its first half, though this fake "nostalgia for the 80s that never was" doesn't deserve it. It is, after all, a genre created by 40-somethings to sell the memories of their childhood to younger generations who, when they've shaken off their youthful openness to change, will only retain the information about how great America was under Reagan. (05/04/2022)

I enjoyed the first half more, balancing nicely on the edge of nostalgia, where it was still bearable. But then the digital crap kicked in (there's no substitute for practical 80s effects), and Finn Wolfhard made me feel like I was watching a weaker episode of Stranger Things. And as much as I love the old crew from the 80's classic, they unfortunately – and surprisingly to me – weren't the element that lifted the film up at the end. A brief reminiscence is not enough for me. And when the post-credit scene is the only fun thing in a film, there’s something wrong. (12/01/2022)