7 Reasons Ghostbusters: Afterlife Won't Revive The Franchise

Will the franchise have life Afterlife?

Ghostbusters Afterlife
Sony Pictures

Ghostbusters: Afterlife is on a mission to breathe new life into a franchise that only recently underwent the reboot treatment in 2016. Though Paul Feig’s attempt at remoulding the movie for modern audiences had its moments, it failed to connect with fans of the original, relying too heavily on slapstick humour and employing a tone more synonymous with the Scooby Doo movies that with the dark, edgier original.

It seemed that all hope for the franchise was well and truly dead.

Then, in a surprise that no one saw coming, it was announced that Oscar nominated director (and son of Ivan Reitman - the original’s director) Jason Reitman was making a direct sequel to the 1984 version, all but erasing the reboot from memory.

The announcement was accompanied by a wickedly nostalgic teaser. And with that, excitement, and anticipation for what this would mean for the Ghostbusters franchise went into overdrive.

Unfortunately, since the original teaser, more details, including the full trailer have been released, and have raised some concerns about whether this is the movie that will bring the franchise back from the dead.

Here are 7 reasons why Ghostbusters: Afterlife will fail at doing just that.​

7. Location, Location, Location

Ghostbusters Afterlife
Columbia Pictures

Few scenes in cinematic history are quite as iconic as the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man stomping through the streets of New York. And though less iconic, the visual of the Statue of Liberty plodding through those same streets in Ghostbusters 2 was another breathtaking moment. Both scenes highlight what is an integral part of the original two movies: New York.

In many ways, the New York spirit is the backbone of the original. The capitalist and opportunistic venture of the Ghostbusters, the grouchy mean major, the defiance of New Yorkers in the face of a supernatural apocalypse, and the cynical edge to much of the humour throughout.

It’s quite surprising then that the movie which hopes to reignite the franchise and conjure up nostalgia would relocate to the rather generic sounding Summerville. Furthermore, Summerville is portrayed as just another anywhere-America town, lacking the iconic sights and architecture that packed the original so full of character.

It’s difficult to imagine any set piece having quite the same impact on a farm than it would in the likes of Manhattan, in which the bizarre juxtaposition of having ghosts roam a heavily populated, recognisable city was part of what made Ghostbusters so unique. After all, how frequently in cinema do we already see scenes of ghosts in creepy derelict buildings in the middle of nowhere?​


I'm pretty good at writing screenplays, news articles, film & TV lists, short stories and reviews. Terrible at writing bios.