Ghostbusters: Afterlife review: Resting without peace | Entertainment

Sometimes it can be best to put the past behind us.

The second attempt in five years, Ghostbusters: Afterlife is a sequel to the original Ghostbuster films. It was directed by Jason Reitman, known for Juno and Tully as well as the son of Ghostbusters director Ivan Reitman. It was written by Jason Reitman and Gil Kenan.

Set in Summerville, Oklahoma, the film follows Callie, Trevor and Phoebe, a poor family who move to the small town after the death of their grandfather. Once there, they begin to uncover the secrets of their grandfathers’ past as strange earthquakes rock the city, causing ghosts to reemerge after 30 years.

Ghostbusters: Afterlife is the kind of movie that’s done decently but serves such a specific audience that it’s hard to get in from outside that fandom. Solid performances and filmmaking don’t help this film drag itself behind its nostalgic blind glasses.

For starters, all but one of the actors do a great job in the movie. Mckenna Grace as Phoebe delivers the best performance in the film. She is emotionless and science driven in the best possible way, giving a dry and sometimes funny performance. She captures what made Harold Ramis’ performance in the original film work so well.

Along with her is Finn Wolfhard as Trevor, Carrie Coon as Callie, Paul Rudd as Professor Gary and Logan Kim as the podcast. Everyone brings their characters to life while making them stand out, like mismanaged Callie, cranky teenager Trevor and nerdy hunk Gary. The only performance, let alone the character, that didn’t work out at all was Podcast, which is meant to be boring and cranky. It doesn’t really work, but it’s not Kim’s fault.

As for the story, it’s fine, especially during some of the more sentimental parts. It presents the characters, storylines, and drama well, but it gets lost in its over-reliance on past films. There are so many references to the smaller line reads or substantive jokes of the original in this movie that it hardly makes sense to someone who hasn’t seen the original movie.

It seems like a silly thing to say. Of course, a sequel made decades after the original film would capitalize on the nostalgia of the previous films. But this movie almost takes it to a new extreme. This isn’t for fans of the first or second movie: this movie is for the super fans who have based their entire lives on this property.

It’s a stretch how many little jokes from the first movie are given new sentimentality in this movie. It’s a little boring in a way. It depends so much on this nostalgia that it obscures the rest of the film. The pink glasses are excessively strong in this film.

Blinding nostalgia blinds the viewer to some of the film’s other issues. The pace is unfortunately slow. I felt like he was getting to the third act halfway through, with a deep, silent moan as he realized there was an hour left. It’s not abysmal, but it’s slow, and not in the best possible way.

On top of that, it’s not very funny. There are several endearing jokes that work well over the course of the movie, but a good handful of them don’t land at all. Some landed strong and produced some good laughs, but for a movie that is the sequel to one of the best comedies ever made, it really falls short.

As for certain technical aspects, everything is well done. The special effects are all stunning and there is a real sense of the weight given to a lot of props and ghosts. The camera work in the film is solid with excellent lighting in spots. The edit is solid as well, with the one major gripe directed at the aforementioned beat.

However, there is one last thing that has become annoying. This aspect is the score. Getting back to that nostalgia, it pulls a lot of the score or at least the sound of the original films. It doesn’t work well, mostly because the tones don’t match this movie.

The film tries to be more serious and sentimental, which does not fit the fun and wacky score of the original fun and wacky film. It looks like they didn’t have a good score to start with so they added it at the last minute which makes sense as the new score is totally forgettable.

Ghostbuster: Afterlife is a nostalgic bait exercise. He’s so focused on serving the fans of the original films that he loses his identity in the process. As a result, what was supposed to be a sentimental return to form sometimes feels more like a grabbing of empty money.

That doesn’t mean this movie is bad. It is for the most part well done. But the superabundant nostalgia for insignificant parts of the original film keeps it from being anything more than a shell of the old films.

This movie is only for those who not only love Ghostbusters, but name their children after the characters in the movie. They’re sure to walk out of the theater with a smile on their face as they plan the next five times they see him. Other than that, it’s a really good movie with heavy weights keeping it to the ground.

At the very least, it still works as a watchable movie. Some of those nostalgic bait movies can’t even claim half the time.

Note: 3 out of 5.