Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire

Tonight, on Netflix, my brother and I saw “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire,” which was released theatrically in March but on Netflix a few days ago. From what everyone has been saying about it, is it really as bad as everyone says it is? Let’s find out.

MontiLee Stormer started her review by saying, “Had I written this within hours of seeing Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire (2024), this review may have been more favorable. Given time to marinate and process, this sequel to the 2021 reboot doesn’t have the razzle-dazzle, given the star power behind it.”

The Spengler family, Callie (Carrie Coon), Trevor (Finn Wolfhard), and Phoebe (Mckenna Grace), as well as Gary Grooberson (Paul Rudd) have moved into the old Firehouse and have taken the title of the Official Ghostbusters of New York. While good at giving a solid public service, there comes so much collateral damage, angering Mayor William Peck, reprised by William Atherton, last seen in the original “Ghostbusters” as the EPA inspector that ordered the Ecto-Containment Unit to be shut down. Phoebe, while a smart kid and fearless, is sidelined, and legally unable to handle the proton packs or help capture ghosts because he is 15. She makes a friend, Melody, played by Emily Alyn Lind, a lonely teen ghost and wants to be with her own deceased family. Meanwhile, a strange man named Radeem (Kumail Nanjiani) brings so much of his grandmother’s stuff to Dr. Ray Stantz (Dan Ackyrod), still running Ray’s Occult. One of the objects is a powerful orb, solid and able to bring so much cold and seismic activity. As you might have guessed, all of this connected and brings about great danger unless certain stuff happens from a lot of loose storylines.

Stormer admitted, “The trailers for Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire look profoundly unsettling but that may not be the movie you’re expecting. Instead of going for thrills, it settles for family-friendly scares and pulls a lot of punches, going instead for light-hearted fun, some pseudo-science, and a darling little teen crush (and not the one you’re expecting).” Because it’s targeting for a younger audience, included in the sequel are two children from “Ghostbusters: Afterlife,” Podcast (Logan Kim) and Lucky (Celest O’Conner) mysteriously brought from Summerville, OK. Podcast works for Ray and Lucky works for Winston, reprised by Ernie Hudson. Necessary? Not really. Wouldn’t Trevor and Phoebe make new friends in New York? Stormer answered, “No one wanted to think that hard and they needed to pad the situational dramedy with young faces.”

Stormer continued, “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire is front-loaded with family drama and teen angst, and is very, very light on the actual ghosts, at least ghosts we haven’t already seen. Aside from Melody, who appears as a wispy teen in her own wispy blue tendrils of flame, there are at least two callbacks to the original Ghostbusters, one a Non-Terminal Repeating Phantasm (Class V Full Roaming Vapor) and the other is a Class IV Semi-Anchored Entity. To avoid spoilers, I won’t name them, but they’re recognizable enough. At 115 minutes, there was room for more encounters with new ghosts.”

There is less storytelling than worldbuilding, probably for another sequel, depending on what happens. Unfortunately, it feels familiar and in a city like New York, the story should be bigger and carry and heavier cost. Stormer noted, “Plus, the place is still crawling with mini Sta-Puft Marshmallow men that are the size of Hasbro Trolls, but suspiciously reminiscent of the Adipose in Doctor Who. They aren’t very menacing, just psychotically curious and blissfully unaware of their own self-preservation.”

The plot isn’t complicated, but it feels a lot with multiple storylines included to fill in the last 20 minutes. “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire” brings back the old team – again, including Janine (Annie Potts) and Peter Venkman (Bill Murray) who aren’t given a lot to do, along with Patton Oswalt who plays a version of Patton Oswalt (but the character’s name is Dr. Hubert Wartzki) who works out of a library basement and knows things. This is all very simple stuff.

Mckenna Grace’s Phoebe continues to carry on the legacy of Egon Spengler, both intelligently curious and logical to a fault. Stormer said, “Setting aside the original crew for all of their complaints about their sunset years, she’s a solid bridge to the past, and could likely carry a film on her own. It would have been nice to see Finn Wolfgard’s Trevor develop a personality and do more than sigh heavily and make puppy-dog eyes at Celest O’Conner’s Lucky, but Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire was just too busy with the 13 other characters.”

Stormer continued, “Director Gil Kenan, responsible for another paranormal retread, Poltergeist (2015) is given a lot of ideas to work with, but not a lot of dramatic capital. There’s no way to keep emotional investment and tension with comedic pratfalls, mis-timed sight gags, and unrealistic deus ex machina. You’re trying to tell me a state-of-the-art containment unit holding an unknown number of paranormal entities relies upon only a single generator that takes 10 seconds to reboot?”

Stormer went on, “While Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire is a fine enough film to take the kids to, and the merchandising is already in full swing, I was expecting something more modern.” Instead, we get another ancient evil spirit who’s waited thousands of years to destroy everyone. If we get another “Ghostbusters” sequel, hopefully it gives us something to really be scared of.

I don’t think this is as bad as everyone says it is. Yes, there are a lot of characters with different storylines thrown in here, which makes it convoluted and a mess. However, there is still humor and the visual effects are still great. Overall, I find this to be ok and better than the 2016 film, but the least of the ones in the original storyline. Check it out if you like on Netflix.

Thank you for joining in on this review tonight. Stay tuned to see what excitement I have next month.

Ghostbusters: Afterlife

After decades of being in development on another “Ghostbusters” sequel, director Ivan Reitman’s son, Jason Reitman, finally gave longtime fans “Ghostbusters: Afterlife,” which came out last month. Seeing how the last film installment was the troublesome 2016 reboot from director Paul Feig, many were curious, but worried to see if this new film would take the series in the right direction. Melissa Hannon said in her review, “Although a bit skeptical myself, as a lifetime Ghostbusters fan, I walked out of the theater with tears and a smile.”

Callie (Carrie Coon) moves with her two children, Trevor (Finn Wolfhard) and Phoebe (Mckeena Grace), to Summerville, Oklahoma, after the passing of Callie’s estranged father. Being completely sunk, especially with income, the family of three settles into a farmhouse located on a “dirt farm” left behind, which is also where Trevor and Phoebe’s grandfather met with a sudden passing. As something wicked is coming nearby, it will be left to the family, and a few familiar faces, to finish what was started years ago.

The film has a strong cast, with much of the story being carried by Mckeena Grace. The child actress, who has previously shown audiences what she’s capable of with roles in “Captain Marvel,” “Annabelle Comes Home,” “The Haunting of Hill House,” and many other films (while still setting time aside to live as a child), was really wanting a challenge. Here, Grace does another great entertaining role as the awkward, boring, and smart Phoebe. There is a lot of humor, and heart, to be found while she is on screen with her new friend Podcast (Logan Kim) and Gary Grooberson (Paul Rudd). Obviously, it is not a surprise that Rudd is the comedic relief in about every scene he’s in, but there is also plenty of joking and fun from the entire cast. Hannon noted, “There are scenes that take it too far in sheer goofiness, with Rudd and Coon’s Terror Dog scene at the top of the list, coming off more like a parody or sketch comedy.”

Changing the setting from New York City to a country landscape was tricky, as the original films behave like love letters to the city and its residents. The town of Summerville actually worked in the film’s favor, letting more focus on family and adventure while also being covered in mystery. This is a family-friendly film, but there are also moments of horror, with Gozer’s possessed, current update being the winner. Like the original, fear is outweighed by comedy and silly moments, as the cute, yet evilly insane Stay Puft marshmallows steal the film.

Saying this is a sequel to one of the most celebrated franchises ever created, fan service is expected. Even though there are a few Easter eggs that appear too forced, many feel right for fans. Hannon said, “The film takes place within the same universe, so seeing familiar brands and references to the most famous ghostly take-down in history wouldn’t be unrealistic. It also serves as backstory for new viewers, and gives nods to longtime fans.” Everything ends with the best cameos, and one that is sure to make a lot of fans cry.

“Ghostbusters: Afterlife” gives fans another entertaining movie in the franchise, while successfully ending the first. However, it doesn’t just look to the past and present, with the post-credit scene giving viewers what could be possible for the future. Just like “Ghostbusters” was a entry for many when they were children, we can think “Ghostbusters: Afterlife” will act the same for this generation.

For a film that was in talks for years, especially since Bill Murray was not interested in it for the longest time, especially with his fallout with Harold Ramis, no one thought that there would be a third film. The last film I wasn’t very fond of, but this film really delivered. As someone who only saw glimpses of the films as a child and the cartoon, “Extreme Ghostbusters” (since I wasn’t around when “The Real Ghostbusters” was on TV), and getting into the films after seeing them in my 20s, I was really wanting a third movie. Now that we finally got it, and this one ignores the second and the 2016 film, I thought it did a job well done. See it in theaters if you love Ghostbusters because you will love it, I promise. Especially if you’re a Ghostbusters fan, you will thoroughly enjoy it.

Thank you for joining in on my review tonight. Look out tomorrow to see what I will review next in “Disney Month 2021.”

Ghostbusters: Answer the Call

Poor writing exceeds every larger discussion or theme in film: sociology, politics, satire, escapism, form, style. Also is gender, as the 2016 “Ghostbusters: Answer the Call” remake clearly showcases. Director Paul Fieg’s attempt on the ghost comedy is theoretically perceptive, a feminist take on a beloved classic, casting Kristen Wiig, Melissa McCarthy, Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones as the ones with the proton packs used to shoot and capture all kinds of ghosts.

John Serba stated in his review, “But Feig and Katie Dippold's screenplay is a slipshod mess of forgettable gags tossed into a generic plot puffed up with unremarkable special effects. It's also besieged with references to the 1984 film, which backfire, because including them doesn't stoke nostalgia as much as it begs unfavorable comparison. To be clear, nobody watches the original for its depth of character - Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis were little more than charismatic, goofball conduits for witty and quotable catchphrases. Wiig, McCarthy, McKinnon and Jones look like they're making up the characters on the fly as they recite weary cliches. "Say hello to my little friend!" Wiig half-heartedly yells as she blasts the bejeezus out of a CGI ghost, in a scene I remember only because I was taking notes.”

Wiig plays Erin Gilbert, a physicist insulted in the University for her Research in the supernatural. She gets back together with her old friend Abby Yates, played by McCarthy, after they see a complete ghostly occurrence. Erin, somewhat doubtful except when she isn’t, finds physical proof of the psychic, as she gets it, when a ghost in New York City’s Aldridge Mansion purges green slime in her face. If that’s not enough, the slime is repeated twice more in the first act, which is like the movie’s slim budget went over the salaries of its writers.

Serba said, “McCarthy and Wiig's bland turns as literally buttoned-up eggheads are eclipsed by current "Saturday Night Live" cast member McKinnon, whose Jillian Holtzmann is a spunky, punk-haired inventress in omnipresent goggles. Rejected by institutions both legit and rinky-dink, the trio pass on an old Manhattan firehouse - it's $21,000 per month to rent! - and set up their gear above a Chinese restaurant, fielding calls for unearthly activity.” They recruit a completely sociable fourth member in Jones’ former subway clerk Patty Tolan, as well as some disgrace, which creates jokes about stupid internet commenters – a reference to the backlash Feig got when announcing an all-female “Ghostbusters” cast.

Feig has a reputation for making strong female comedies with firm narratives and effective jokes – Wigg in “Bridesmades,” McCarthy’s “The Heat” and “Spy,” more right comparisons than the ’84 “Ghostbusters.” Maybe I should say that the director’s weakest attempt isn’t his original idea. This remake – not a sequel or a prequel, it’s a complete copy, set in its own time where Bill Murray plays a completely different character – hesitates when it should effervesce. Serba said, “The direction is sloppy: Scenes dawdle and dilly-dally when they should poke and jab; there's little narrative flow or suspense as the Ghostbusters zap glowing Satanic gargoyles and evil-spirit-possessed parade balloons while pursuing the disaffected dweeb, played by Neil Casey, behind the mayhem.”

Chris Hemsworth shows up as the Ghostbusters’ completely oblivious secretary, another example of a spark of inspiration that looks underdeveloped, and never works the right way. You can see the layers in the film’s calculation, gives its desire to inspire girls and women with strong role models. Sadly, it fails to capture the talent, the charm strangely restricted. Serba ended his review by saying, “It also stumbles in its subjective objective to be funny - I laughed twice, when I should be losing count - recycling old jokes from the first "Ghostbusters" and from other movies, instead of creating new ones.”

I’m sorry to say that I didn’t enjoy this movie entirely. I know that people love this movie, but I was underwhelmed when I saw this. No, I didn’t go to the theaters to see this, but I saw it as a rental from the library, and I felt like it was a good idea that I didn’t waste money by going to the theaters to see it. If you want to see it, you can, but I don’t recommend it at all. Not to say that I hated this movie, but I thought it was just average. I felt like they should have made a “Ghostbusters 3,” but they never did because of Bill Murray not wanting to be involved, even though he makes a cameo in here. If he said he would make a cameo in this remake, why not make him do a cameo if they made a third movie? Make the movie without him, but let him come in as a cameo. But no, we got this average remake, which is a shame because I felt like this movie could have had potential for being a good remake, if not for the jokes that really felt flat. The only characters I enjoyed were Hemsworth’s and Jones’s character. They were the only ones that I felt were funny.

Alright everyone, now we have come to the conclusion of this year’s “Halloween Month.” I know I said originally that I had 31 movies picked out, but I ended up doing more. Just some things came up so I decided to do a little more than I thought I would. However, like I have already stated, I will be discontinuing “Halloween Month” as a month long marathon. Now I will be shortening it to either a franchise that will be spread out throughout the month or the usual Friday reviews. I feel this is right because I want to open my doors up for more time and effort into my reviews. Be sure to check out all my past “Halloween Month” reviews on my blog to see what other horror movies I recommended and didn’t. I never thought that I would be doing a month long marathon for five years in a row, but now I feel is a good time to stop that.

Happy Halloween to all my online readers! Make sure to go out tonight in your favorite costumes, get a lot of candy, snack on them while watching some horror films. Just be careful of getting cavities and gingivitis from all that sugar, which is bad for you. Don’t even go into a diabetic shock from eating too much of those, but even the rations out. The night is young, and now is the right time to come to that great celebration that comes around every year at this time, which is a transition from the fall into the winter.

In the meantime, I’m going to take a few days off before starting back on my usual Friday reviews, which is what I need after overworking myself this month again. See you guys in November.

Ghostbusters 2

Five years after the groundbreaking comedy, “Ghostbusters,” the sequel came out in 1989, “Ghostbusters 2.” This one a lot of people seem to dismiss, but I think that this film is still good and a good sequel to the first one. It is the not impossible basis of “Ghostbusters 2” that Manhattan, as one of the characters say, “is about to blow, like a frog on a hot plate.”

Everything that is channeling the people’s anger is a river of slime running in the sewer line. Obviously it’s not easy to tell since the people of New York are already rude to begin with. They knock someone off of their crutches and laugh when a baby’s carriage rolls out into the middle of First Avenue and is almost run over. Most of the locals will tell you that it’s just another day at the Big Apple.

That’s not what Dana Barrett, played by Sigourney Weaver, thinks, who is an art restorer. At the end of the first film, we get an idea that her and Peter Venkman, played by Bill Murray, would get together. In the five years between these two comedies, they break up, Dana marries someone else, has a son, and is now divorced, leaving her for Peter to get back together with. That’s just a sub-plot to the film though.

When Dana realizes that there is something going horribly wrong after her baby was almost run over, she goes to the Ghostbusters for help. Working together, they see what is going on in Manhattan and how an evil is out to get Dana’s baby, Oscar, played by William T. Deutschendorf and Henry J. Deutschendorf II.

I know that this doesn’t make a lot of sense, but Dana does get the chance to say this line: “Oh, Peter, the most awful thing has happened. The bathtub tried to eat Oscar.” Any movie with a line like that can’t be entirely bad.

“Ghostbusters 2” isn’t all that bad. Vincent Canby says, “In truth, the movie, strikes me as being far easier to take, funnier even, than the first film, which seemed overproduced and sloppy. ''Ghostbusters II'' seems more modest, less aggressive, not so oppressively extravagant.” I know that this film isn’t as good as the first one, but I think they are both just as good.

Harold Ramis and Dan Aykroyd handle the screenplay, who both know how Manhattan is like after spending just a few short minutes in the city: It’s the angriest place on Earth. Vincent Canby says when they recognize this, “Mr. Ramis, Mr. Aykroyd and Ivan Reitman, the director, have made a remarkably cheerful film. It has the weight and stylishness of designer toilet tissue, but it doesn't offend.”

Now the supporting cast is all just as good, since they are familiar faces from the first film. Most of them are really good friends, including Murray who plays Venkman as a really laid-back type of a guy, and, as his partners, Ramis, Aykroyd, and Ernie Hudson. Sigourney Weaver looks great as always and is in control even in the silliest moments, and Rick Moranis is just as funny as the Ghostbusters lawyer.

Vincent Canby says, “It is probably heresy to say to ''Ghostbusters'' fans, but the funniest performance in this film is given by Peter MacNicol, as Dr. Janosz Poha, a prissy but lecherous Carpathian art historian, the conduit by which the Evil One hopes to take over Manhattan (not having heard that it's already his).” This Evil One is a painting of Vigo the Carpathian, a seventeenth-century magician trapped in the painting, played by Wilhelm von Homburg and voiced by Max von Sydow.

Canby also says, “Even the special effects are more to the point of the comedy than they were in the first film.” I take it he loved this one over the first film, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Very oddly, this let’s our main heroes give their funny lines that we all know and love them to do, or how they react with most ease.

So if you like the first film, you should definitely check the sequel out, and at least give it a chance. I would also give this film a 10.

One final note: Ghostbusters 3. I have been hearing rumors on that movie for the past couple of years, but Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis seem to be having a tough time trying to get Bill Murray to sign on for the movie. However, I hear that they will be making the movie without Murray, so if that is the case, then I hope that it will come out soon.

Alright, I have done the two Ghostbusters films, what film do you think I will end “Halloween Month” off with? I think it would be appropriate to bring up a famous monster that everyone associates Halloween with.

Ghostbusters

Since Halloween is close by, I thought that we should look at one of my all-time favorite comedies from 1984, “Ghostbusters.” This is a good film to watch around Halloween, but isn’t really scary for today’s standards. Still, those of you who grew up with this film and were scared by it when you saw it as children may not be scared by it today with an adult perspective.

This film is a head-on collision of two comic approaches that only work in that once in a blue moon lifetime. In this film, it did work. It’s a special-effects blockbuster and has a clever dialogue, where everyone talks to one another like graduate students who are a part of the joke. In the climax, a Sumerian shape-shifting god is raising havoc in Manhattan, "and our main heroes talk like Bob and Ray," according to Roger Ebert.

“Ghostbusters” is one of those rare movies that rebuttals the rule of special effects ruining a comedy. Special effects are hard work and those people have to put a lot of detail to make them look good. Comedy is all about impulse and improvisation, or what it should feel like regardless of how much effort is put in. When you watch Spielberg’s “1941,” look at the vast beauty of the special effects in that film which was the main driving force over everything else. You won’t laugh at that film because you have no reason to, but in this film, there is.

When you look at the effects in this movie, a lot of them are neat. Some of them mess with your head; others look like they were recycled. For example, look at when Slimmer (played by Mark Bryan Wilson, and voiced by the director, Ivan Reitman) eats away at the hot dogs. No matter what effects are used, they are there to help the actors out. Instead of us thinking that the characters have been placed in front of the effects, we feel that they are just improvising this as they shoot the film.

Our stars of this film are Bill Murray, Harold Ramis, and Dan Aykroyd, three comedy graduates either known from National Lampoon, SNL, or Second City. They are hilarious in this, but they also show how quick-witty and intelligent they are. Ebert comments that their dialogue “puts nice little spins on American clichés, and it uses understatement, irony, in-jokes, vast cynicism, and cheerful goofiness.” This is one of the most quotable films ever made, which comes around once in a while.

Now the plot involves a series of psychic reports all around Manhattan. Murray, Aykroyd, and Ramis have lost their jobs as college parapsychologists, after their reports have been called bogus by the dean, played by Jordan Charney, so they open up their own business called “Ghostbusters.” They say that if people are haunted by ghosts, then they will be there to rescue them from the ghosts. However, business hasn’t been picking up until the attractive Sigourney Weaver calls in to say that her eggs were frying on her kitchen counter and her fridge has some sort of demon castle inside it. Her neighbor, played by the funny Rick Moranis, also notices demonic beasts in the apartment hallway. Apparently the apartment both of them live in is a gateway to another world. The Ghostbusters go down to the apartment suited with their Proton Packs, and having Ernie Hudson along as the new member. This is the highlight of the movie since a lot of the psychic knowledge in the dialogue is made up before they have a showdown with the Sumerian god, Gozer (Slavitza Jovan and voiced by Paddi Edwards), and his minions, Vinz Clortho, “The Keymaster,” and Zuul, “The Gatekeeper” (also voiced by Reitman). Around that time, the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man arrives, and I will leave it there or else I will give away too much of the plot.

As I have already stated, this is a film where the comedy works well along with the big budget production. It is not proof for big-budget comedies, since the rule still applies that the more you spend, the less you get the audience to laugh. But the money is spent the right way, and when the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man stomps all over Manhattan and climbs the skyscraper, you can see where they spent the money since this is one of the funniest scenes in the entire movie.

Just a heads up: expect a cameo appearance of adult movie actor Ron Jeremy and Reginald VelJohnson.

For this film, I have to give it a solid 10, it’s one of my all-time favorite comedies, and I just adore it. Sure it’s right for Halloween since the effects in this film could scare children today, but not the adults who watched the movie when they were once their children’s age. It might still scare them, but that depends on who it is.

What can be said for the sequel that came out 5 years later? Find out tomorrow when I talk about the equally good sequel, in my opinion.