There are many 80s classics in the book “1,001 Movies You Must See Before You Die” by Steven Jay Schneider. While I like or love so many of them, there is one in particular that I still do not understand why people love it so much. In light of the release of its second sequel this weekend, Ghostbusters: Afterlife, what better time than now to reflect on my lackluster response to Ivan Reitman’s 1984 sci-fi classic Ghostbusters?
[NOTE: This blog will contain spoilers for “Ghostbusters.” You have been warned.] The History Canadian native, SNL alum, and comedic actor Dan Aykroyd (The Blues Brothers, Trading Places, Driving Miss Daisy) has been fascinated with the paranormal his whole life. His father wrote about ghosts, his mother claimed to have seen ghosts, and his grandfather experimented with radios to contact spirits. After reading a 1981 article about quantum physics in The Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, he was inspired to modernize the comedic ghost movies of the mid-1900s (i.e. Abbott and Costello’s Hold That Ghost, Bob Hope’s The Ghost Breakers). Aykroyd wrote a screenplay with the assumption that he would star alongside fellow SNL alumni Eddie Murphy (Beverly Hills Cop, Coming to America, Dolemite Is My Name) and John Belushi (Animal House, The Blues Brothers). Unfortunately, Belushi’s untimely death in March of 1982 prevented this from happening. Instead, Aykroyd convinced another SNL cast member, Bill Murray (Groundhog Day, Rushmore, Lost in Translation), to fill in. In his original pitch of the film to producer Bernie Brillstein (The Blues Brothers, Happy Gilmore), Aykroyd emphasized his intention to normalize the act of catching ghosts in the story by likening them to pest control personnel. However, his original script had a more serious tone and horror vibe than the final product. Aykroyd’s first choice for director was Ivan Reitman (Stripes, Kindergarten Cop), who he first met with in Los Angeles to discuss the film. Reitman, who first heard of the pitch when Belushi was still attached to the project, was under the impression that Aykroyd’s script took place in the future and involved people catching ghosts in space and across galaxies. Thus, he was convinced that the film would be impossible to make and told Aykroyd to set the film entirely on Earth. Furthermore, he injected the “upstart business” angle for the three main characters. As Reitman put it, “everyone was going into business” at the start of the 1980s. Out of fear that Aykroyd was in over his head in terms of executing the tone that he wanted for the film, Reitman met with Chicago native Harold Ramis (Caddyshack, National Lampoon’s Vacation, Groundhog Day). Per Reitman’s wishes, Ramis agreed to both write and star in the film after reading Aykroyd’s screenplay. About one year after Belushi’s death, Reitman pitched the film to Columbia Pictures who felt that comedies like this lacked the needed potential for profit. To put the studio at ease, Reitman offered to make the film on a maximum budget of $30 million (a made-up estimate from Reitman who simply tripled the number for the budget of his previous film Stripes). After agreeing to finish in time for a June 1984 release date, the studio greenlit the project. Frank Price, the Columbia executive who agreed to Reitman’s pitch despite having no finished script or filming start date, ended up moving to Universal Pictures early in the film’s production. This ended up working out in the project’s favor as Price, while the head at Universal, was able to sell the rights to the phrase “Ghostbusters” to Columbia Pictures without Universal ever technically getting paid for the name being used as the film’s title. While on vacation in Martha’s Vineyard, Reitman, Aykroyd, and Ramis spent hours every day over the course of two weeks reworking the script in the basement of Aykroyd’s home there. Rather than being possessive about his original draft, Aykroyd understood the importance of Ramis’s role reworking the jokes and refining the dialogue. By August, they had completed a final draft that ended up having virtually no input from Murray about his character (having written for Murray in the past, Ramis was confident in his ability to capture Murray’s talent in his character’s voice). Furthermore, this drafting process solidified the trio of Ghostbusters in terms of their distinctive personalities: Aykroyd’s heart as the enthusiastic technician, Ramis’s brains as the stoic intellectual, and Murray’s sarcasm as the slick salesman-type. Several notable actors were considered for the parts of Peter Venkman and Egon Spengler: Michael Keaton, Tom Hanks, Robin Williams, and Richard Pryor for the former, and Christopher Walken, John Lithgow, and Jeff Goldblum for the latter. The partial uncertainty surrounding Murray’s casting as Peter Venkman was due to Murray’s notorious habit of not committing to a role until very late in the pre-production process. Furthermore, Ernie Hudson (The Crow, Miss Congeniality) went through five auditions for the part of Winston Zeddemore under the impression that he would have a large role. However, the final script he was given before principal photography began had scaled back his role because, according to Reitman, the studio wanted to bolster Murray’s presence in the film. Regarding the supporting roles, the studio resisted casting Sigourney Weaver (Aliens, Gorillas in the Mist, Avatar) due to her association with more serious and dramatic roles. However, she revealed her comedic background from her time at the Yale School of Drama by walking on all fours and howling like a dog in her audition. Weaver played an active role in developing the character of Dana Barrett, such as suggesting that she become possessed by Zuul and changing her career from a model to a musician to give her more of a soul deep down. Initially offered to John Candy, the role of Dana’s nosy neighbor Louis Tully went to Rick Moranis who agreed to take it one hour after receiving the screenplay from Reitman. Principal photography took place from October of 1983 to January of 1984. Reitman’s primary concern regarding using New York City as a location was to finish filming those scenes before they would face the Christmastime weather of the area. Some of the NYC locations used in the film are the Rockefeller Center, Central Park, the New York Public Library, and the Irving Trust Bank on Fifth Avenue. After wrapping up the NYC scenes just before Christmas, filming resumed in Los Angeles for another month which involved finding buildings that could fill in for the interiors of the various New York locations. Based on accounts from the post-production crew, Reitman was very frustrated by the editing process. Due to the film’s heavy reliance on special effects-laden scenes, filming itself involved limiting the crew and cast to only a few takes for each scene. Furthermore, he was perturbed by the need to storyboard these scenes which effectively made it very easy to cut footage but virtually impossible to add any new footage. However, much of his stress was relieved after showing a rough cut of the film to a test audience who connected with its sense of humor and ghostly scares. Released in June of 1984, Ghostbusters earned over 280 million dollars during its initial theatrical run. Not only did it become the second-highest-grossing domestic film that year (behind Beverly Hills Cop), but it was also the highest-grossing comedy film ever made (until Beverly Hills Cop). Despite grossing what amounts these days to small change for a sci-fi film, Ghostbusters competed alongside the likes of other iconic films of the decade (from The Terminator and A Nightmare on Elm Street to The Karate Kid and Temple of Doom). Critics at the time were generally pleased with the film, many of whom cited Bill Murray’s performance as one of its best attributes. It was nominated for two Oscars (including Best Original Song for Ray Parker, Jr.’s iconic theme song), but won neither. However, it established a distinct cultural legacy that has retained a rabidly loyal fanbase as well as cemented itself in film history by being selected for preservation in the National Film Registry in 2015. The Cons I distinctly remember the first time I saw Ghostbusters. I was in high school, and my father brought home a copy of the film on DVD that he borrowed from his co-worker for us to watch. I was under the impression that it’d be a fun―albeit cheesy―80s comedy. Instead, what I watched was a tonally disjointed ensemble movie with outdated special effects with virtually nothing that made me laugh. Now I have watched Ghostbusters since then, and there were some things I appreciated about it. But I’ll talk about that stuff later. That being said, much of what I disliked about the film during my initial viewing held true. While the special effects (primarily the ghosts themselves) look cheap through a modern lens, they aren’t as distracting as I thought they would be. In fact, my major complaints with the movie have to do with the storytelling and tone. Regarding the former, I was quite frustrated by the lack of forward momentum in the story that had me longing for the filmmaker to give some sort of reason for me to care about the lives of the ghostbusters themselves. While there is a build-up and climax in each act (from the team catching their first ghost to them defeating the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man), none of it feels emotionally connected in a way that is satisfying to watch. Regarding the latter, Ghostbusters does not have enough effective scares to be a great horror movie nor enough consistent laughs to be a great comedy. I understand that this is a controversial statement, but I just think there are plenty of other films that blend comedy and horror together more effectively than this one. The Pros Fortunately, this movie is not fully irredeemable for me. There are two performances that, in my humble opinion, save Ghostbusters from being utterly boring or unworthy of my time: Bill Murray and Rick Moranis. For one, both actors have offered up a plethora of exceptionally comedic performances over the course of their careers (Groundhog Day and Rushmore for Murray and Spaceballs and Parenthood for Moranis, just to name a few). But I firmly side with those fans of this movie that put their respective performances here higher up in the echelon of their comedic turns in cinema from the last several decades. While Murray offers up some great one-liners and deadpan delivery throughout the runtime as Peter Venkman, Moranis steals every scene he is in as Louis Tully. If anything, other actors in the film (like Sigourney Weaver) may have stood out more if not for Murray and Moranis practically making this movie worth the watch despite its significant drawbacks. So, what are my final impressions of Ghostbusters? At the end of the day, I by no means think that this is a bad movie. In fact, it has such a potential to be great but it just doesn’t come together for me. Its confused tonal shifts and “frozen-in-time” production values diminish that potential significantly. However, I can appreciate peoples’ love and admiration for Ghostbusters as one of the iconic films of the 1980s. I guess I had to be there at the time to truly understand its greatness. 😊 What do you think about Ghostbusters? Do you think I am being too harsh on it? What opinions of mine do you find absolutely ridiculous? Let me know in the comments below. Until next time, this has been… Yours Truly, Amateur Analyst
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Austin McManusI have no academic or professional background in film production or criticism; I simply love watching and talking about movies. Archives
May 2024
Categories
All
|