Ghostbusters: Afterlife Tries and Fails to Go Full Nostalgia Mode

Ghostbusters: Afterlife is the fourth Ghostbusters film and the one with the least to add to the series. It’s heavily reliant on just about everything from the original film, but rather than building on it, Afterlife merely banks so hard on nostalgia you can almost hear it shouting, “Remember the Twinkie scene?!”

Trevor (Finn Wolfhard), Phoebe (Mckenna Grace) and Podcast (Logan Kim) in Ghostbusters: Afterlife. Columbia Pictures/Sony Pictures Entertainment

What makes this film all the more depressing is that it had a golden opportunity to be so much more. It’s the first installment to take the ghosts out of the city and track them in a wide-open rural town. Summerville becomes the setting for some mysterious supernatural force that lurks in the abandoned mine; it could just be a collection of ghosts or it could be a bigger threat that may bring about the end of time.

New in town are single mother Callie (Carrie Coon) and her two teen kids, Phoebe (Mckenna Grace) and Trevor (Finn Wolfhard). They’re down on their luck and find it hard to settle down in a new town—or at least, they would be having issues if the film weren’t speeding along with their discoveries as they are actively pushed into a supernatural mystery. Phoebe seems to practically stroll into discovering that a Ghostbuster once resided in Summerville and that their mission may not be complete. With some guidance, the youth are tasked with keeping ghostly forces at bay with the tech left behind for them.

That’s a decent premise for a Ghostbusters movie, especially for one that wants to become more of a small-town adventure than an urban comedy, but there are two major things holding it back. The first is the pacing. So much of the picture feels so laser-focused on unearthing the Ghostbuster lore and the looming threat that there’s little time to let any of the characters breathe. It’d be great to get to know Phoebe and root for her, but she feels so passive about everything, from her Ghostbusters-unearthing to her friendship with the quirky Podcast (Logan Kim). Trevor could also be an underdog who impresses the girl he fancies but spends nearly all of his screen time fumbling hard around her. Even Carrie, whose problems with money, drinks, and romance could make her a compelling character, feels distant.

Discovering history. Columbia Pictures/Sony Pictures Entertainment

The second issue is that this film relies on Ghostbusters nostalgia to such a heavy extent it’s nauseating. There are so many scenes and shots where the punchline is the placement of a thing you recognize. If you remember the Ecto-1, the film expects you to laugh at Trevor calling it a piece of junk the moment he finds it in the garage. If you remember the scene of Egon explaining the threat to New York using a Twinkie, the film wants you to smile that the Ecto-1 has a Twinkie in the glove compartment. There’s no joke to accompany the Twinkie; it’s just there.

The whole film operates on this almost mandated inclusion of familiar elements. The Stay-Puft marshmallow man appears in the form of small clones that wander about a Walmart and kill each other. Why are the Stay-Puft creatures present? Did somebody think about them? Was this Ray’s doing? There is not even a minor explanation for why they are presented in the film. It’s that kind of placement that immediately removes one from the film—the merchandising notes are more visible than the script.

Paul Rudd as teacher Gary Grooberson and Carrie Coon as Callie. Columbia Pictures/Sony Pictures Entertainment

The problem isn’t so much that Afterlife banks on nostalgia but that it does nothing interesting with any of it. Case in point: Paul Rudd plays the teacher Gary Grooberson, who is a big Ghostbusters fan. One would think when he comes into contact with proton packs and ghost traps that he’d be buzzing with excitement and geeking out about such famous ghost-fighting tech. Instead, Gary’s reactions are a mere “Whoa!” or “Cool!” It feels as though he’s trying to contain himself inside a Ghostbusters museum, carefully making sure he doesn’t touch the wrong thing or say the wrong punchline.

The whole film feels like that. It draws on so many familiar scenes, reenactments, and a host of cameos that explore nothing interesting. The kid gloves have been put on for handling this story, to the extent that the third act pretty much resorts to remaking the first film right down to the dialogue.

There will be no spoilers in this review, but it’s tough to talk about the film’s biggest sin without addressing the climactic surprise. All I can say is that there’s a heartfelt moment of appreciation for the Ghostbusters, but it comes off as shallow and rather tasteless. So much of this film feels as though it’s trying to be a tribute to the originals but can really only deliver a tepid and uninspired nostalgia trip.

Summerville local Lucky (Celeste O’Connor) with the rest of the team. Columbia Pictures/Sony Pictures Entertainment

Ghostbusters: Afterlife not only tries to repeat past Ghostbusters movies but actively disrespects them in its positioning as a tacky soft reboot. There are some mild thrills here and there that give us glimpses of a better film, as when Phoebe chases a ghost by car while firing a proton pack from the gunner seat. That’s a neat sequence, and it’s enough to make me wish there had been a better story present to make such a merchandise-worthy scene a pleasing one. Instead, it’s a huge disappointment.