Jump to content
Welcome to the new Earwolf Forums! Read more... ×
DaltonMaltz

Episode 98 - Ghostbusters

Is Ghostbusters Canon?  

164 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Ghostbusters be in the Canon?



Recommended Posts

Comedian and host of the podcast "How Did This Get Made?" Paul Scheer joins Amy this week to discuss the classic 1984 comedy "Ghostbusters." They cover everything from Peter Venkman's Trumpiness to the coolness Sigourney Weaver brought to the film. Plus, Paul gives his take on why this is a film that lends itself to rebooting, Amy gives new context to the inconsistencies of Winston's character, and the pair does their best to categorize all the different kinds of ghosts.

Share this post


Link to post

I missed you, The Canon! Also I don't know if it was done just to show us that this is still the same Canon we know and love, but I loved the disagreement. :)

 

I think Ghostbusters is unique in concept, and gives us peak Murray, Raimis and Morranis. Totally Canon!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

The inclusion of Ghostbusters into The Canon should be a no-brainer. And this is coming from a person who, after the controversy over the 2016 version, found himself thinking, "Y'know, I think I might be burnt out on Ghostbusters. I kind of don't want to hear about it ever again in any form, including the original."

 

At the end of the day, though, its status as a classic can't be denied.

 

(For the record, I liked but didn't love the reboot. It's definitely better than Ghostbusters 2.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Welcome back into my life, Canon!

 

Ghostbusters is fine, but it's for me really not that much of an essential film. I really think Amy hit on something with her criticism. As pointed out in the homework section in the forum, there are some fine lines and deliveries in the film, but I think that film is surprisingly weak for such a beloved film, maybe just a bit like Sound of Music way back in the beginnings of the show. I get the cultural impact argument, but really, I don't think in 30 years somebody will still talk about this film in the same high regards as about different films from that era. I'm a soft no.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Welcome back into my life, Canon!

 

Ghostbusters is fine, but it's for me really not that much of an essential film. I really think Amy hit on something with her criticism. As pointed out in the homework section in the forum, there are with some fine lines and deliveries in the film, but I think that film was surprisingly weak for such a beloved film, maybe just a bit like Sound of Music way back in the beginnings of the show. I get the cultural impact argument, but really, I don't think in 30 years somebody will still talk about this film in high regards as about different films from that era. I'm a soft no.

This, exactly. For me, the film kinda falls apart after the hotel scene. Also, yeah. Too much Bill Murray, Bill Murray-ing for way too long.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I vote no. Yeah, it's better than The Neverending Story, but it's still not as good as The Blues Brothers.

Share this post


Link to post

rewatched it this morning, for the first time since i was 8 years old.

 

 

good, not great. definitely not Canon. Of the other '84 movies that Amy mentioned, I'd say yes to most of them. Here are some more Canon-worthy films from 1984, better than Ghostbusters:

 

Paris, Texas

Stop Making Sense

Blood Simple

REPO MAN

Stranger Than Paradise

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Easy yes based on cultural impact alone.

 

I agree with some of the criticisms of the writing. As functional characters, there isn't a ton of difference between Ray and Egon, Venkman and Winston. But here's where the actual movie comes in: the performances by the actors raise above the material and give them more personality than they probably "deserve" to have. It's because of this that I find Amy's closing argument nonsense, in that there is clearly a world of difference between how Aykroyd and Ramis play their characters. On the page they are very similar, in the finished movie not at all.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Welcome back! Great episode. I'm glad there was disagreement.

 

I am going with a no here. It's good, but one of those movies I liked more as a kid that doesn't seem essential after watching it as an adult. I also never really loved it, even as a kid. I was a fan of the performers, but I was more into the theme song and the "no ghost" symbol than the movie itself.

 

 

Not that it matters, but I was formerly using the name Rob Molecule on here. For whatever reason, it says the user name doesn't exist when I try to recover the password, but says it is already taken when I tried to use the name for a new account.

Share this post


Link to post

I've spoken before about how this movie hasn't held up perfectly for me as I went from eighties kid to 2017 adult, but unlike a lot of other movies I still really enjoy Ghostbusters. I agree with Paul in that it's way up there in the comedy pantheon, and has such a wonderfully realized world with it's own fictional ghosty rules that to this day people still really want this to take off as a Sci-Fi /horror franchise. I feel like that just won't work with the movies, but I'd love to see The Real Ghostbusters cartoon get some kind of Netflix reboot or something. There was less emphasis on comedy there, and every now and then they'd put out a really fucking creepy episode that almost didn't seem like it belonged in a Saturday morning cartoon.

 

Honestly I think when people rabidly want Ghostbusters to turn into a bigger franchise they're really thinking about the cartoon which was it's own similar-yet-very-different flavor. The movie was kind of a one-and-done special set of circumstances that didn't even work twice. I was never on board with an original cast Ghostbusters 3, and I'm kind of thankful Billy Murray effectively blocked it.

 

Anyway, I debated this one a little bit, but it's a yes. There's something about this movie that stuck in the public consciousness and I think it deserves a spot in the canon.

Share this post


Link to post

The inclusion of Ghostbusters into The Canon should be a no-brainer. And this is coming from a person who, after the controversy over the 2016 version, found himself thinking, "Y'know, I think I might be burnt out on Ghostbusters. I kind of don't want to hear about it ever again in any form, including the original."

 

At the end of the day, though, its status as a classic can't be denied.

 

(For the record, I liked but didn't love the reboot. It's definitely better than Ghostbusters 2.)

 

I'd argue that the controversy over the reboot, while it happened for stupid and sexist reasons, was indeed proof that the original film is worthy of Canonization. A movie that fails to stand the test of time doesn't inspire that kind of reaction.

Share this post


Link to post

Amy I'm so glad you are back thanks for keeping this going.

Also Ghostbusters is obnoxious. Can't help thinking of the Goonies episode. Huge following of a certain generation but if you were born any later you don't have the rose glasses and you see it for the loud, offensive, insufferable mess that it is.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Amy I'm so glad you are back thanks for keeping this going.

Also Ghostbusters is obnoxious. Can't help thinking of the Goonies episode. Huge following of a certain generation but if you were born any later you don't have the rose glasses and you see it for the loud, offensive, insufferable mess that it is.

 

It honestly shocks me that this is such a prevalent opinion here. I did see the movie as a kid, but wasn't a big fan of it and didn't watch it multiple times. It's only as an adult that I've seen it multiple times in different settings and have found it a remarkably easy watch every time. Even knowing all the jokes and knowing what's going to happen, it's still entertaining from start to finish.

Share this post


Link to post

Soft no. There's a cultural impact but not ultimately a large enough one to make this film essential viewing. There's great performances here but I really wish they were more balanced, Murray gets so much to do and it ends up hurting the internal structure of the film, if he's our way in as a non-believer then that arc should be better fleshed out and/or he should be more relatable rather than just an eye-rolling joke machine (and I'd say on a joke-by-joke level Egon lands more of his than Murray does). Compare Murray's performance here to the ones he gives in Groundhog Day or Rushmore and his work in Ghostbusters feels almost phoned-in.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Amy I'm so glad you are back thanks for keeping this going.

Also Ghostbusters is obnoxious. Can't help thinking of the Goonies episode. Huge following of a certain generation but if you were born any later you don't have the rose glasses and you see it for the loud, offensive, insufferable mess that it is.

 

Agreed. This movie is very similar to The Goonies for me. It's a worshipped movie from before my time that I think only really appeals to the people that grew up with it. I don't hate it, I just don't get it that much. Bill Murray is one of my absolute favorites, with Stripes and Groundhog Day and Lost In Translation and all his Wes Anderson movies being some of my favorites. And yet this is way way way too much Bill Murray. I used to skip school to watch Stripes on VHS back in elementary school (yeah it's weird, I don't know), but I've never liked this one and I don't know that it has really had that significant of an impact on culture beyond the fact that everyone knows the song and the symbol. Back To The Future has that too except its actually a great movie that has stood the test of time. So it's a No vote from me. Completely agree with Amy's closing argument.

 

I don't know if anyone has a better idea, but I assume Devin would have voted Yes on this?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
I don't know if anyone has a better idea, but I assume Devin would have voted Yes on this?

 

Based on what he's written about the movie before, I'd think so.

Share this post


Link to post

Ghostbusters yes. My screen name used to be Judas Priestly, but I lost my login [for anyone keeping track]. I don't think I need to explain why it should be in the Canon, the least of which is its cultural impact. I completely see the validity of all of Amy's points though, which sort of made me want to vote no. I do feel like there are probably too many movies that we remember fondly from when we were kids in the Canon. I have to say though, Neverending Story 100% holds up. I just turned 36 and my kids love it, and I still cry at two points in the movie: when Artax dies [obviously], but also at the end when the Empress is pleading directly into camera for Bastian to save them. P.S. Amy, I recently read that he screams "Moon Child," into the storm, and I've gone back and listened and it sounds right, but I was always under the impression that he gave her his mother's name; so maybe it's just something they had the actor say so that he was saying SOMEthing even though we're not supposed to be able to hear what it is.

Share this post


Link to post

I decided to take Amy's advice and make my decision based solely on this movie and not my overall fondness for the franchise, but you know what...my love of this franchise IS solely based on this movie. I haven't seen either the sequel or the cartoon in decades and yet i still watch the original on a near annual basis. It features one of Bill Murray's top two performances (Groundhog Day being the other) and I disagree that he overshadows Aykroyd and Ramis, who are also good. And the special effects are ten times more charming than most of the computer effects we are getting today. Definitely a movie that deserves to be in the Canon of great films.

Share this post


Link to post

I think if you showed Ghostbusters to a group of people aged 13-30 who had never seen it before, the responses would range from shoulder shrugs to disgust. I don't think Bill Murray's character's arrogance holds up as "charming". I do think the movie does a fantastic job of combining action, light horror and comedy, though, and Sigourney Weaver is fantastic.

 

Side note: very surprised by Amy's celebration of Revenge of the Nerds. This is a movie where the underdog "wins" by straight up raping the hot, blonde cheerleader, (after illicitly taking nude photos of her and her friends), and she falls in love with him for it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I think if you showed Ghostbusters to a group of people aged 13-30 who had never seen it before, the responses would range from shoulder shrugs to disgust. I don't think Bill Murray's character's arrogance holds up as "charming". I do think the movie does a fantastic job of combining action, light horror and comedy, though, and Sigourney Weaver is fantastic.

 

Side note: very surprised by Amy's celebration of Revenge of the Nerds. This is a movie where the underdog "wins" by straight up raping the hot, blonde cheerleader, (after illicitly taking nude photos of her and her friends), and she falls in love with him for it.

 

Re: Revenge of the Nerds, this was definitely brought up by Devin when they did that episode.

Share this post


Link to post

Psyched that the show is back, and will add my voice to the "Yes" side of the chorus when it comes to Ghostbusters. Not only because it's top shelf Bill Murray, but also for doing a great tightrope walk between the slightly edgy and mainstream sides of comedy. With even a passing glance of "list of 80's comedies" returned by Google, it's head and shoulders above a ton of other films of the era/genre. Plus you almost have to give it a thumbs up in response to Amy's comments on The...cough, hack...gag..."Neverending Story." :)

Share this post


Link to post

Ghostbusters yes. My screen name used to be Judas Priestly, but I lost my login [for anyone keeping track]. I don't think I need to explain why it should be in the Canon, the least of which is its cultural impact. I completely see the validity of all of Amy's points though, which sort of made me want to vote no. I do feel like there are probably too many movies that we remember fondly from when we were kids in the Canon. I have to say though, Neverending Story 100% holds up. I just turned 36 and my kids love it, and I still cry at two points in the movie: when Artax dies [obviously], but also at the end when the Empress is pleading directly into camera for Bastian to save them. P.S. Amy, I recently read that he screams "Moon Child," into the storm, and I've gone back and listened and it sounds right, but I was always under the impression that he gave her his mother's name; so maybe it's just something they had the actor say so that he was saying SOMEthing even though we're not supposed to be able to hear what it is.

 

I'd consider voting Neverending Story in as well. That movie holds up better than I thought.

 

Some people bring up the Goonies example, but I don't think Ghostbusters is in that ballpark. Goonies was only ever popular with kid audiences. Ghostbusters was popular with adults too. Maybe not to the same level of worship as the kids who grew up with it, but it was well-received across the board at the time.

Share this post


Link to post

Goonies has always been a mystery to me, but I have friends that will never give up on it. I can definitely see someone being indifferent to Ghostbusters, but some of the vitriol is a little surprising. The Great Ghostbusters War of 2016 probably didn't help. Which, honestly, as someone that voted "yes" I definitely feel like none of the controversy last year was worth it and I didn't totally feel like revisiting anything Ghostbusters this soon.

Share this post


Link to post

First time listening to this entire show! I don't know if I will ever agree with Amy based on her defense of Neverending Story and (barf) Revenge of the Nerds lol But I really loved hearing them debate. Also, Amy is OUT OF HER MIND if she thinks that Ghostbusters is not in the top 5 of "movies people think about when they hear the name Bill Murray".

 

I liked this movie as a kid, HATED the cartoon show, but absolutely love this movie as an adult and find the set up, pacing, comedy writing, and tone to be wonderful. Despite so much of it being shot on a LA set, Reitman really captured the tone and feel of a "classic" New York movie in the vein of Woody Allen which I found so effective against a standard buddy horror-comedy set up.

 

That said, I definitely get why people would not consider this canon. I think there are many great lines, unforgettable and influential scenes, and it did expand the role of comedy in horror, but 'American Werewolf in London' did all of this 3 years earlier with even stronger horror themes.

To me, 'Ghostbusters' is canon as the pinnacle of Reitman's work with Nat'l Lampoon/Second City alums, building from 'Cannibal Girls' through 'Animal House' and 'Stripes' to what would be the most successful of those collaborations.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×