There is no Dana, only Zuul.

Ghostbusters is yet another of those seminal movies that everyone has to have seen at some point. I guess that’s why it ended up making the list. Highly filmed against the backdrop of New York City, the film deals with a group of science teachers who lose their jobs and become paranormal exterminators, for anyone who has been living under a series of rocks the past 25-30 years.

The star of this movie is both the cast and the special effects. The cast includes Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Rick Moranis, Sigourney Weaver, and Harold Ramis, and each man (and woman) has superb comedic presence and their own niche to fill. Murray, in particular, is a complete scene-stealer every time he appears on screen; he just has that manic comedy fire that fuels the entire film. The comedy may be hokey at times, but it is still amusing. The special effects, meanwhile, still hold up surprisingly well after all these years, and must’ve been mindblowing upon first release.

This is a perfect 80s movie if there ever was one, and there happen to be many. This is just another great example of crowd-pleasing cinema to come out of the era, and if you haven’t seen it, you really do need to just for the cultural impact alone. Because so many have seen it, it’s a hard recommendation (and a hard review, which is why this is a bit shorter than normal); this really is a must-see, plain and simple. It may be formulaic, but it’s a formula that works, and is definitely worth a revisit.

Arbitrary Rating: 7/10


3 thoughts on “Ghostbusters

  1. Ghostbusters is great if only because it’s not trying to do anything but entertain. There’s no message here, no deeper meaning, no clues to something about the human spirit. It’s just goofy and fun, and sometimes that’s enough.

  2. I liked this movie well enough, but I never understood the absolute love so many people had for it when it came out. At the time I believe it became the highest grossing comedy in history.

    • Having seen it, I don’t really get the universal love for it either; it’s good, but it is obviously appealing, and most of the time I can get by that, but with this it was a little too obvious, and it’s why I opted for the rating I did. Like Steve said, the film is just trying to entertain, and that’s really all it’s doing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s