The early reviews for Ghostbusters: Afterlife are split on whether or not the sequel takes the right approach to breathe new life into the franchise. Directed by Jason Reitman (Thank You for Smoking, Juno), the son of original Ghostbusters director Ivan Reitman, Afterlife is a sequel to 1989's Ghostbusters 2. Unlike Paul Feig's 2016 reboot, this Ghostbusters movie connects directly back to the original movies by featuring Egon Spengler's daughter and grandkids.
Playing the Spengler family are Carrie Coon as his daughter, Callie; Finn Wolfhard as her son Trevor; and McKenna Grace as her daughter, Phoebe. Ghostbusters: Afterlife finds them moving back to the Spengler family's farmhouse in Summerville, Oklahoma where unexplained earthquakes are threatening to destroy the town. The Spengler kids along with their teacher, Mr. Gooberson (Paul Rudd), are on the case, and their investigation will have them crossing paths with the original ghost-busting team of Peter Venkman (Bill Murray), Raymond "Ray" Stantz (Dan Aykroyd), and Winston Zeddemore (Ernie Hudson). Afterlife is also bringing back original movie stars Sigourney Weaver and Annie Potts as Dana Barrett and Janine Melnitz, respectively.
There's still more than a month to go before Ghostbusters: Afterlife hits theaters, but following a surprise screening of the movie at New York Comic Con, early reviews are trickling in. Read what critics are saying about Ghostbusters: Afterlife, below:
Peter Debruge, Variety
Between “Stranger Things” and the upcoming “Top Gun” sequel, ’80s pop culture nostalgia seems to be at an all-time high, but “Afterlife” tries not to lean too heavily on that sentiment alone. It’s designed to work for those who’ve never seen any of the franchise’s earlier incarnations, and though the film adopts an unmistakably Amblin-esque vibe — there’s an obvious “what if the Goonies were Ghostbusters?” sensibility at work here, reinforced by Spielbergian magic-hour shots of kids assembling around a Devils Tower-shaped rock formation — you needn’t have grown up on such movies to appreciate how they elevate adolescent rejects to hero status.
Pete Hammond, Deadline
Perhaps the real star here is Jason Reitman who, like Phoebe, rediscovers and reinvents his own family cinematic legacy and in doing so provides a warm, funny, exciting, nostalgic, emotional, and altogether winning return to the pure joy of that 1984 classic by making something that also seems very new in all the right ways.
Kaitlyn Booth, Bleeding Cool
Ghostbusters: Afterlife could have been an easy cash-in for everyone involved and relied entirely on the fans of the original to get a decent box office. They didn't know, they put in the work, and they put in the effort, and it all pretty much works. It's one of the best movies of the year and is going to bring in a whole slew of new Ghostbusters fans to the party while leaving old fans satisfied. The ending is a gut punch that will not be spoiled here, and fans more so than anyone should make sure they stay through the credits.
Eric Francisco, Inverse
Stripped down, Ghostbusters is an adult comedy about running start-ups before the dot-com bubble burst. I was never mad about Paul Feig’s 2016 reboot because Ghostbusters was never sacred ground. But Ghostbusters: Afterlife pushes back on any genre misconceptions and becomes a resonant, moving picture atop the very foundations the franchise had built.
Outrageously funny characters, superb filmmaking, and heartfelt sentimentality outweigh any flaws in Ghostbusters: Afterlife. It’s a beautiful picture, one fueled by the universal feelings of grief and resentment towards those you loved the most.
Rosie Knight, IGN
Director Jason Reitman does his father and fans proud with a funny, sweet, and spooky family movie that proudly takes on the legacy of Ghostbusters, while also introducing something exciting and new. It helps that Mckenna Grace is the kind of talent that only comes around once in a generation: charming, authentic, and the beating heart of this already heartfelt movie. Get ready to fall in love with the Ghostbusters all over again.
William Bibbiani, The Wrap
The most noteworthy aspect of “Ghostbusters: Afterlife” is that, by the time the lights go up, one gets the distinct impression that all the really mattered was clearing the slate and setting this franchise up for future exploitation. That Reitman made a heartfelt film about how great the first “Ghost Busters” was (and suspiciously ignoring almost all the rest of the franchise) is nice, in a way, but incidental to the film’s ultimate suggestion that, in the end, all that matters is that the “Ghostbusters” business must go on. Not because ghosts need to be busted, but because rich people simply refuse to let it die.
Scott Mendelson, Forbes
Ghostbusters: Afterlife is good when it’s just being a movie. Despite my copious complaints about what it represents, the thumb still tilts up (and the tomato remains fresh). It looks lovely and Grace and Coons are terrific. It introduces winning new protagonists and offers strong dialogue when it’s not rehashing Ghostbusters exposition. Yes, the movie is funny and light, a reminder that announcement teasers are often darker and grimmer than the movie. Reitman and Kenan tell a straightforward fantasy with funny characters saying funny things. I will happily see it again if my kids still want to when the time comes, and I will very much champion a follow-up with this new cast, one hopefully less tied down by chasing fan approval and less focused on a Force Awakens-style redo. I hate that Ghostbusters: Afterlife exists as it does. But it’s also a mostly well-made movie with just enough singular successes to work for those who don’t care about Ghostbusters.
Sheri Linden, THR
In its climactic sequence, the movie gives in to a more than a bit of self-congratulatory schmaltz — catnip for fans. And though it winks at some of the jabs and critiques that place the original film within the Reagan-era culture of privatization, it also doubles down on the American dream of entrepreneurial destiny. In this Afterlife, nostalgia is a double-edged sword and little has changed: The ghosts are elaborately fantastical MacGuffins that have nothing to do with life and death. But they require vanquishing, and this time there’s more of a rooting interest, delightfully so, in the people called to do the job.
Courtney Howard, IndieWire
What threatens to undermine much of our goodwill takes place in the film’s nostalgia-fueled finale, where nothing is sacred and the spectacle culminates in all-too familiar patterns. All the risks taken up until that point to deepen character drive and further thematic profundity on forgiveness, friendship and familial strife are given an entirely expected safe landing. Add to this a run time of two-hours plus, where every minute is felt, and this new journey feels a bit more busted than one would hope.
Jesse Hassenger, The AV Club
In some ways, it’s a harmless night out for the faithful—the equivalent of a quote-along/egg hunt at a local rep house, with some likable new performances thrown in. Yet seeing Reitman inherit this particular mantle is still discomfiting. His hit-and-miss filmography of comedies and dramas includes a couple of incisive ones about the pleasures and perils of nostalgia. Now he’s made a franchise-starter about how great his wealthy father’s movie is. That movie is also framed as a tribute to someone who often seemed like he could take or leave the prospect of another Ghostbusters sequel, reducing Harold Ramis to an absence from a franchise without paying any attention to his comic sensibility. Afterlife wants desperately to summon the spirit of watching the first movie back in 1984. It winds up ghoulish in the wrong way.
Germain Lussier, Gizmodo
Ghostbusters: Afterlife comes so close so many times to being that perfect sequel fans have wanted for years. But when it becomes too obsessed with its past instead of its future, it loses much of that power. It’s one of those films that works and feels great while you’re watching it because it’s doing so many things you like to see, but when you take a minute to think about how it was all put together, the lack of cohesion becomes a major hindrance. Lots of people are going to love Ghostbusters: Afterlife and boy did I try to. I’m such a fan of the originals that I even made a point to see it a second time before this review just to make sure I felt the same way. On second viewing, some of my complaints did soften because I knew they were coming, but they’re still there and, in the end, Ghostbusters: Afterlife feels like a film scared to be its own thing. You could almost say, it is afraid of a ghost. The ghost of a 1984 film called Ghostbusters.
Christian Holub, EW
Anyone looking for connections to the original '80s blockbusters will find what they're looking for, but it's hard to imagine Ghostbusters: Afterlife minting a new generation of fans.
Unsurprisingly, how Ghostbusters: Afterlife pays homage to the original movies is the biggest talking point. And interestingly, critics appears to be split on how much they enjoyed the film's approach to Easter eggs and fan service. Those who enjoyed the flick's many nods and references appear to be in the majority, but it's by a slim margin. Many of these more positive reviews call Afterlife a heartfelt sequel, and note that Reitman has largely done right by his father and the many Ghostbusters fans. McKenna Grace's performance is also praised on more than one occasion, even by the less-than favorable reviews, meaning she's the real standout of the picture.
For those reviewers that weren't entirely won over by Ghostbusters: Afterlife, the issue does appear to be how the movie handles its place within the wider Ghostbusters franchise. These more negative reviews consider Afterlife a movie made only with diehard fans in mind, with too much reverence paid to the past and not enough time spent on setting up the future. While this nostalgia-laden sequel isn't a hit with every critic, it's hard to imagine the majority of Ghostbusters fans will see it the same way.
Source: Various (see above)
