Anyone who was born between the years of 1976 and 1982 grew up with it, give or take a few years, as well. “Who you gonna call? Ghostbusters!” How do you really define the generations for specific film franchises? Do you have to be of a certain age when the film was released or is it enough to have been born in time for that fateful moment? Does it still count if you only saw it later on, once it was out on VHS or Laserdisc? If you were able to view it on the big screen during a special, commemorative year, does that, then, absolve you of missing it when it was first released in theaters? One thing is for sure, regardless of how you choose to answer those questions: “Ghostbusters” was a quintessential staple of the 1980s and people of all ages enjoyed it then, as well as today.

The push for a third installment to the franchise was talked about for years upon years. Who knows why it took so long to reach actual development? However, the biggest setback, at least in more recent years, was the passing of one Harold Ramis. A few years ago, we received a follow-up, of sorts. For whatever the reason, it was considered controversial by many prospective audience members, but did well at the box office, globally, and received relatively positive reviews from most critics. I will let you each be the judge as to why it seemed to be so polarizing, from the very outset.

Moving onward, this year, we have something of a more direct sequel, as opposed to a reboot. It is directed by the son of the man who brought us the original film, all the way back in 1984, Jason Reitman (“Tully”). He, also, co-wrote the screenplay with Gil Kenan (“A Boy Called Christmas”), as well as produced. The idea was to provide something fresh and witty, but also nostalgic. This is a very common approach for these types of films, but could it be done successfully this time around?…

The story begins with an homage to the late Harold Ramis. It was filmed in a way that was clever and respectful. It sets up the story without a single word being uttered and we know exactly who this is and what is about to occur. To me, that is how to pay tribute to a character than can no longer be portrayed by the only actor who ever played him on the big screen. Right away, the cinematography takes center stage, as well. Credit Eric Steelberg (“Dolemite Is My Name”) for his fine work on that note.

The real story begins when Callie Spengler, played by Carrie Coon (“The Nest”) receives word of her father’s passing, all in the midst of being evicted from her apartment with her two children: Phoebe, played by McKenna Grace (“Malignant”) and Trevor, played by Finn Wolfhard (“The Goldfinch”). They pack up and set forth to a small town in Oklahoma. Once they arrive, they begin to settle in to their new surroundings, which are odd, to say the least.

The major fixtures of the town include: Gary Gooberson, played by Paul Rudd (“Avengers: End Game”); Podcast, played by Logan Kim; and Lucky Domingo, played by Celeste O’Connor (“Freaky”). They, basically, round out the respective love interests of the characters across from them, who were mentioned here in the above paragraph, although Phoebe and Podcast are a little bit too young to be considered “lovey.” While everyone has their moments to shine with nifty one-liners and superficial jokes, probably around half of the jokes, or less, actually land, effectively. What I could hear from the audience, which was mostly comprised of fans and critics, was forced laughter, scattered about. Sometimes the anticipation that comes with nostalgia is enough to make that happen, but is it truly enough?

I spent the majority of the first half of the movie feeling perplexed by what I was watching. Was I watching a kids movie or a real sequel to the original franchise from 32 years ago? Could it be that so much time has gone by that it is no longer appealing to keep this franchise going any further? I was liking to overall look of the film, as I mentioned before, but I was largely dissatisfied with the writing. To sum it up, there was not much of a story.

By the time the meat of the plot unfolded, I was out of patience and uninterested with any of the characters on screen. Even the late arrival of the original Ghostbusters, who are still alive, was not enough to save me from the sensation of boredom I was feeling at the time. They even brought back the original monsters rom the first film. The makeup and effects looked solid, but was it anything special? No, not really. If you like the Marshmallow Man, he even got a couple of scenes, which were so out-of-place and inexplicable that I hardly found any of it amusing because I was distracted by the sheer inclusion of it all. In other words, it was there just to be there, but maybe you will enjoy that more than I did.

Having said all this, I did enjoy the ending. The posthumous inclusion of Egon Spengler was, both, effective and sweet and did not feel overly cheesy. Perhaps there should have been more of him, as limited as he could really have been. I will say this, there is plenty of reason to expect another sequel. My only thought to that notion is that, hopefully, they are planning to bring us something better when that installment arrives.

“Ghostbusters: Afterlife” is not a horrible movie, but it was not decent enough to warrant a recommendation on my part. In the end, it fell flat and felt pretty average and forgettable. I would say that you just stick to the original movies from the 1980s and, perhaps, even rewatch the reboot, if you are so inclined, before watching this one. My final question: did this movie really need to be made?

Director: Jason Reitman

Screenwriters: Reitman and Gil Kenan

Cinematography: Eric Steelberg

Starring: Carrie Coon, Finn Wolfhard, McKenna Grace, Paul Rudd, Logan Kim, Celeste O’Connor, Bill Murray, Dan Akroyd, Ernie Hudson, Sigourney Weaver, Annie Potts, Oliver Cooper, Bokeem Woodbine, Tracy Letts, Olivia Wilde, J.K. Simmons, and Josh Gad as Muncher (voice)

Distributor: Sony Pictures Releasing

Release: November 19^th, 2021 (United States)