• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Sony Gives 'Ghostbusters: Afterlife' Writers an Overall Deal (Good Sign for a Sequel)

ManaByte

Gold Member

Sony Pictures Entertainment has signed Jason Reitman and Gil Kenan, the Ghostbusters: Afterlife co-writing partners and Oscar nominees, to an overall producing deal with the studio as they launch their own production banner.

Ghostbusters: Afterlife, the sequel to the 1984 Ghostbusters film, is also directed by Reitman, son of franchise creator Ivan Reitman, and executive produced by Kenan. The movie opened to $44 million at the box office and, through its second week of release, has earned $87.8 million domestically and $115.8 million worldwide.

This means they'll be making other movies than Ghostbusters, but it's a good sign that they're going to get to make the sequel too.

GIF by Ghostbusters
 

Warnen

Can he swing from a thread? Take a look overhead / Hey, there, there goes the Spider-Man
Nice, looking forward to where it goes.
 

Ailynn

Faith - Hope - Love
I want to see where a successful Winston can take things in a sequel where the writers love and respect the original film and the Real Ghostbusters series. We don't really need to bring back old film enemies any longer (such as Vigo the Carpathian) when there are so many characters they could use from the cartoon (such as Sam Hain), or even better...fully original ideas.
 

AJUMP23

Gold Member
They can now just have the Egon grandkids hunt ghost with their new stepdad, but set it in New Orleans. They also meet Winston's grandkids and they join in too.
 
I want to see where a successful Winston can take things in a sequel where the writers love and respect the original film and the Real Ghostbusters series. We don't really need to bring back old film enemies any longer (such as Vigo the Carpathian) when there are so many characters they could use from the cartoon (such as Sam Hain), or even better...fully original ideas.
I want to see the giant sloar, large and moving torb, shubs, zulls, and meketrex supplicants take over NYC!
 

Umbasaborne

Member
I dont think it needs a sequel. It was a great, touching send off….a sony developed ps5 exclusive game though…..?
 
Last edited:
I almost feel like this franchise just needs to end on the pretty good note that Afterlife left on. I really have no interest in seeing teens/grandkids playing Ghostbusters. It worked ok for Afterlife but I can't take a Ghostbusters business seriously if its not adults doing the busting. If they are able to keep this going with adult leads this next movie hopefully has better leads and writing than the 2016 abomination.
 

jason10mm

Member
I dunno, if they just focus on GHOSTBUSTING a bunch of fun and inventive ghosts then they have an evergreen kids series on their hands. My son and his friends LOVED Chomper and spent all night coming up with a human backstory for him and slimer. So they don't really need a plot or big bad other than maybe grumpy parents.
 

GeorgPrime

Banned
I want to see where a successful Winston can take things in a sequel where the writers love and respect the original film and the Real Ghostbusters series. We don't really need to bring back old film enemies any longer (such as Vigo the Carpathian) when there are so many characters they could use from the cartoon (such as Sam Hain), or even better...fully original ideas.

This was literally a funeral for the 2016 version and a better way to continue the franchise. Iam sure the next part will be more something on its own if they do a sequel
 
Last edited:

ManaByte

Gold Member
This was literally a funeral for the 2016 version and a better way to continue the franchise. Iam sure the next part will be more something on its own if they do a sequel

I mean the second credits scene in this sets up what that will be.
 

The Skull

Member
Would love to see a sequel deal with some of the villains from the Real Ghostbusterts like the Boogeyman or Samhain.
 

Spukc

Member
What? It was almost a carbon copy of the original including the 3 white, 1 "uneductated" black person as busters.
there is no point arguing between two shades of shit. :pie_roffles:
the 2016 felt more creative then this 2 hour "MEMBERBERRY" slog of a flick.

just a reminder, i am in NO WAY stating the 2016 movie was good at ALL
 
Last edited:

poppabk

Member
Afterlife was obviously a bridging movie, a send off for the old guard and introducing a new cast. I'm interested to see where they go from here without having the baggage of the original movies holding them back. It's likely going to be more of a teen/kids movie which might ruffle some feathers, but whatever.
 
Afterlife was obviously a bridging movie, a send off for the old guard and introducing a new cast. I'm interested to see where they go from here without having the baggage of the original movies holding them back. It's likely going to be more of a teen/kids movie which might ruffle some feathers, but whatever.

If this is true count me out and done with the franchise. At least with 2016, as big as a steaming pile it is, didn't jump the shark that much.
 

Doom85

Member
What? It was almost a carbon copy of the original including the 3 white, 1 "uneductated" black person as busters.

To be fair, Ghostbusters 2 copied a lot from the original (I think Honest Trailers did a run down on all the similar plot structure IIRC). Which is why I don’t really care for it because what was new mostly ticked me off (the nonsense of anyone believing these four guys faked all the insane events of movie 1 including Stay Puft, WTF, and Peter and Dana having split and Dana having had a kid with some rando) as well as it toning down the more adult elements (reminds me of removing the weapons from Ninja Turtles 2, bleh) and being more cheesy. It’s not a bad movie, but I just don’t find much rewatch value in it. Afterlife I could definitely rewatch, and of course the original film.
 

The Skull

Member
there is no point arguing between two shades of shit. :pie_roffles:
the 2016 felt more creative then this 2 hour "MEMBERBERRY" slog of a flick.

just a reminder, i am in NO WAY stating the 2016 movie was good at ALL
I'm genuinely interested in what way you think 2016 was creative.
 

Ozarkx

Banned
I want to see where a successful Winston can take things in a sequel where the writers love and respect the original film and the Real Ghostbusters series. We don't really need to bring back old film enemies any longer (such as Vigo the Carpathian) when there are so many characters they could use from the cartoon (such as Sam Hain), or even better...fully original ideas.
Hollywood’s creativity sucks now because they’re afraid they will offend someone if they try something new.

It’s the same terror that has birthed “The Washington Football Team.”
 
Last edited:

nkarafo

Member
I just watched Afterlife and it was bad... I had low expectations and i assumed it was just a fan service/nostalgia driven movie. But it's really not even that. It's a children's movie. There is little to no comedy and it tries to be like Goonies but without the likable characters and fun settings and villains. The children and teens in this movie are just annoying.

All the references and fan service exist so the parents who take their kids to see the movie can also be distracted. Because only kids young enough to need parental escort will enjoy this.

I haven't watched the 2016 reboot but is it really worse than this?
 

Ionian

Member
I just watched Afterlife and it was bad... I had low expectations and i assumed it was just a fan service/nostalgia driven movie. But it's really not even that. It's a children's movie. There is little to no comedy and it tries to be like Goonies but without the likable characters and fun settings and villains. The children and teens in this movie are just annoying.

All the references and fan service exist so the parents who take their kids to see the movie can also be distracted. Because only kids young enough to need parental escort will enjoy this.

I haven't watched the 2016 reboot but is it really worse than this?

I liked it and yes the 2016 is a completely different film. They aren't comparable in the slightest.

As for it it be being a children's movie?

Duh, Ghostbusters always was. haha. When did you first watch Ghostbusters? As an adult?
 

nkarafo

Member
Duh, Ghostbusters always was. haha. When did you first watch Ghostbusters? As an adult?
Un no? Original is not a children's movie, at all.

Yes, i watched it as a child the first time but didn't get most of it, i was just looking at the ghosts. As an adult i appreciate the humor and chemistry of the characters. You know, the actual film.

Afterlife, as a child i would probably like it as much. But as an adult, i couldn't even finish it. I wanted to skip scenes so it ends faster but i was curious to see all the fan service stuff so i endured. I could barely hold the cringe though.
 
Last edited:
I just watched Afterlife and it was bad... I had low expectations and i assumed it was just a fan service/nostalgia driven movie. But it's really not even that. It's a children's movie. There is little to no comedy and it tries to be like Goonies but without the likable characters and fun settings and villains. The children and teens in this movie are just annoying.

All the references and fan service exist so the parents who take their kids to see the movie can also be distracted. Because only kids young enough to need parental escort will enjoy this.

I haven't watched the 2016 reboot but is it really worse than this?
I agree with everything you wrote. I ended up turning it off about 45 mins in. And I rarely ever just turn off a movie.

And yeah, 2016 was somehow worse. Only made it about 20 mins into that one.

I can count the number of movies I’ve simply turned off during a viewing on both hands. Yes, they’re both that bad.
 

Ionian

Member
Un no? Original is not a children's movie, at all.

Yes, i watched it as a child the first time but didn't get most of it, i was just looking at the ghosts. As an adult i appreciate the humor and chemistry of the characters. You know, the actual film.

Afterlife, as a child i would probably like it as much. But as an adult, i couldn't even finish it. I wanted to skip scenes so it ends faster but i was curious to see all the fan service stuff so i endured. I could barely hold the cringe though.

The original was marketed to kids. Hence the numerous toys and cartoons. It was a kids film. Then again so was Gremlins and Indiana Jones, Star Wars etc.

Afterlife is more for adults really who remember the film from childhood to be honest. I didn't mind it although remember little of it but I thought it was pretty decent and did Egon justice which was great as it was done respectfully.
 

Ionian

Member
Oh, i guess Robocop is a kid's movie too since they also made toys and cartoons out of it.

Most kids watched Robocop but that's a dumb comparison. The ones marketed to kids were kid friendly. I had loads of them.

Ghostbusters was on EVERYTHING from day 1. From pencils to food to toys to clothes, it was impossible to escape.

Robocop was marketed later to kids after it took off. Could be the fact if was classed as 18's so harder to see in the cinema/rent the video.

I had the Robocop voice changer and felt like the coolest kid on the planet buying things in shops.
 

mcjmetroid

Member
The original was marketed to kids. Hence the numerous toys and cartoons. It was a kids film. Then again so was Gremlins and Indiana Jones, Star Wars etc.

Afterlife is more for adults really who remember the film from childhood to be honest. I didn't mind it although remember little of it but I thought it was pretty decent and did Egon justice which was great as it was done respectfully.
No..
Like I wouldn't go as far as to say afterlife is a kids film but the original certainly wasn't.

To this day people forget Ghostbusters was a piss-take comedy and not a fantasy action film. Kids saw it that way by accident yes and then they grew up and still see it that way.
 

nkarafo

Member
Most kids watched Robocop but that's a dumb comparison. The ones marketed to kids were kid friendly. I had loads of them.

Ghostbusters was on EVERYTHING from day 1. From pencils to food to toys to clothes, it was impossible to escape.

Robocop was marketed later to kids after it took off. Could be the fact if was classed as 18's so harder to see in the cinema/rent the video.

I had the Robocop voice changer and felt like the coolest kid on the planet buying things in shops.
I don't remember Ghostbusters being on everything from day 1. I remember them trying to milk it after it became a box office success. Then again, i'm from Europe so i don't know how it went in US.

There is a difference between a movie being made for kids and a movie that can also be watched by kids. Ghostbusters is a movie that can be watched by kids because there isn't anything too inappropriate for them in it, but that doesn't make it a movie made for kids. Marketing also doesn't tell you anything since they can market anything to kids, even Robocop and Mortal Kombat.

It's the content of a movie or game that tells you what it is. All you need to figure out how Ghostbusters certainly wasn't made with kids in mind is to watch it as an adult. Same with other movies that might look like kids movies such as Who Framed Roger Rabbit. There is a ton of comedy and subtleties in these movies that only adults would appreciate.

The only thing adults can get from Afterlife is the references. And boy, some of those, especially near the end of the movie, felt so forced and awkward... Like the "who you are going to call" or "are you a god" lines. REMEMBER THAT?

Other than that, the actual story and characters seemed too childish to me. Children finding out Ghostbusters equipment and busting ghosts day one seems like a children movie concept to me. And there was almost no comedy at all, which is the biggest red flag since the original was a very funny movie. And the kids were unlikable. Oh look, it's Podcast, the quirky kid who knows internet stuff and has subscribers, am i right fellow kids? He even carries his streaming gear with him, come on. Oh look, it's the snobbish black girl who is too cool, too perfect and too smart to be impressed... Does our awkward, skinny boy have any chances with this goddess? And sure, Paul Rudd is a funny guy in other movies but here he is just... the likeable fella.

I just couldn't be invested in this at all.
 
Last edited:

Ionian

Member
I don't remember Ghostbusters being on everything from day 1. I remember them trying to milk it after it became a box office success. Then again, i'm from Europe so i don't know how it went in US.

There is a difference between a movie being made for kids and a movie that can also be watched by kids. Ghostbusters is a movie that can be watched by kids because there isn't anything too inappropriate for them in it, but that doesn't make it a movie made for kids. Marketing also doesn't tell you anything since they can market anything to kids, even Robocop and Mortal Kombat.

It's the content of a movie or game that tells you what it is. All you need to figure out how Ghostbusters certainly wasn't made with kids in mind is to watch it as an adult. Same with other movies that might look like kids movies such as Who Framed Roger Rabbit. There is a ton of comedy and subtleties in these movies that only adults would appreciate.

The only thing adults can get from Afterlife is the references. And boy, some of those, especially near the end of the movie, felt so forced and awkward... Like the "who you are going to call" or "are you a god" lines. REMEMBER THAT?

Other than that, the actual story and characters seemed too childish to me. Children finding out Ghostbusters equipment and busting ghosts day one seems like a children movie concept to me. And there was almost no comedy at all, which is the biggest red flag since the original was a very funny movie. And the kids were unlikable. Oh look, it's Podcast, the quirky kid who knows internet stuff and has subscribers, am i right fellow kids? He even carries his streaming gear with him, come on. Oh look, it's the snobbish black girl who is too cool, too perfect and too smart to be impressed... Does our awkward, skinny boy have any chances with this goddess? And sure, Paul Rudd is a funny guy in other movies but here he is just... the likeable fella.

I just couldn't be invested in this at all.

Could be it was released later in Europe and we got the song first which was massive as well. Every kid knew about the film and knew the song as it was constantly on the TV and radio. I can't find exact release dates but it could well be the case. The Wiki does mention it being intentionally aimed at kids and adults.

I just remember at the time everyone knew about the film in my class and would sing the theme tune. It was everywhere.
 

jason10mm

Member
I'd say films like Ghostbusters and Indiana Jones are FAMILY films, not children's movies. They can be enjoyed at any age but really shine for everyone when there is a kid watching to highlight the wonder and an adult there to explain why that nice ghost lady is helping Dan Akeroyd get into his pajamas or shield from some Ark powered face melting.

GBA was tamer than the original and had the rougher edges smoothed off. Still a family film.
 

Lord Panda

Gold Member
I’m disheartened by the folks who didn’t enjoy the movie, because I really enjoyed it.

The criticisms however are fair, because even I could see how uninspired and safe Afterlife was. However despite the retread, and the limited screen time of the original actors, I still had a fun time and it felt still connected to the original movie. However it would have been interesting if they did explore the social and religious impact of spirits and ghosts actually existing, and what such a society and world would look like.

Also if the moviemakers where going to seriously just rip-off the story from the first movie, then at least do it properly and use the ‘Magic’ music piece from the first movie, that plays when the ghosts are all released from containment.

 
I want to see where a successful Winston can take things in a sequel where the writers love and respect the original film and the Real Ghostbusters series. We don't really need to bring back old film enemies any longer (such as Vigo the Carpathian) when there are so many characters they could use from the cartoon (such as Sam Hain), or even better...fully original ideas.
Give me Sam Hain and the Boogie man in one movie please
 
I just watched Afterlife and it was bad... I had low expectations and i assumed it was just a fan service/nostalgia driven movie. But it's really not even that. It's a children's movie. There is little to no comedy and it tries to be like Goonies but without the likable characters and fun settings and villains. The children and teens in this movie are just annoying.

All the references and fan service exist so the parents who take their kids to see the movie can also be distracted. Because only kids young enough to need parental escort will enjoy this.

I haven't watched the 2016 reboot but is it really worse than this?
I haven't seen Afterlife yet but I did watch half of the 2016 movie and I turned it off mid way.

I never do that even for bad movies.

The Eternals was a masterpiece compared to the 2016 Ghostbusters film.

I cannot imagine Afterlife being as bad or worse than that complete atrocity.

I want to add that the Ghostbusters video game from about ten years ago that recently got a remaster was freaking great.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom