![]() ![]() ![]() The conservative read on the film is based on its main plot tension, in which a meddling EPA inspector - played to a sneering hilt by the character actor William Atherton - attempts to shut down the Ghostbusters’ operations, accusing them of conning New Yorkers and storing hazardous waste without the proper permits. If you need a refresher: the film follows a trio of Columbia University parapsychologists who, after being ejected from the school for their lack of rigor, strike out on their own as paranormal exterminators, using proprietary technology to snare the various spooks haunting the five boroughs. ![]() As much as “Annie Hall,” or “Mean Streets” or “Do the Right Thing” did, “Ghostbusters” perfectly evokes its own little slice of New York culture: here, the yuppie environs of 1980s Manhattan, with its workout tapes by day, black-tie dining by night, and the Ivy League strivers at the film’s center. And as retro-minded as the film is - or in this case, because of it - just like the original there’s still something to be learned from it about the animating cultural and political forces of our time.įor all the genre-bending of the original “Ghostbusters,” it’s noted less often than it should be that there’s one cinematic category into which it fits neatly: the New York movie. But “Juno” and “Young Adult” director Jason Reitman gives the film a solid emotional foundation that elevates it above mere nostalgia-bait. Paul Skallas, the popular Substack writer and cultural critic, refers to our condition as, simply, “ stuck.” Which makes “Ghostbusters: Afterlife” a perfect match for our era, in the same way its predecessors were for theirs: For all the film’s actual merits, what it reflects most about American culture today is our terminally backward gaze.Ĭonsciously or unconsciously, “Afterlife” evokes its fellow nostalgia-culture phenomenon “Stranger Things” through its wheat-field Americana setting, central conceit regarding a group of precocious kids who solve a supernatural mystery, and even the casting of “Stranger Things” star Finn Wolfhard in a major role. In his 2020 book of the same name, New York Times columnist Ross Douthat wrote about our “ decadent society,” an American culture where creature comforts and political deadlock rob us of our ability to imagine or realize anything truly new. ![]() So what cultural portent does “Ghostbusters: Afterlife” bring? The answer that immediately comes to mind is… fatigue. The cultural comparison is neat, if depressing: In 1984, America’s biggest blockbuster inspired a round of conversation about entrepreneurship and the relative merits of deregulation in 2016, its revival became a particularly noxious flashpoint in the early-Trump-era culture wars. (The campaign was especially personal and hateful toward Leslie Jones, the only black member of the principal cast.) That’s who I’m gonna call,” it triggered a Gamergate-style backlash from angry trolls who accused Feig and Sony Pictures of social-justice propagandizing for their decision. I’m making a new Ghostbusters &… it will star hilarious women. When its director, Paul Feig, tweeted in 2014 that “It’s official. The film’s fluffier, mostly superfluous 1989 sequel didn’t quite have as much for critics to latch on to, but the 2016 “Ghostbusters” sparked a political discourse that was just as deeply of its time. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |