Lee Brown Barrow

I saw the 2016 reboot yesterday and decided it was time to return to the original. Many people have slated the new film - it cant' match the original - it can't work with women - blah blah blah - etc. Guess what, the 1984 movie is not perfect. Its very much of its time, the special effects are variable, it isn't as funny as you remember. Return to the film and you might agree - we remember the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man, the demon dogs, the library ghost - all with affection. But it is rose-tinted and not as good as remembered. For its time though, it is a good film, but it does not warrant the classic status that the 2016 Ghostbuster haters are making it out to be. There is room in the world for both movies and for the record... I kinda prefer the new film.

WitWolfy

Awesome movie... I dont think I'll ever a see a movie again that amused me so much as a kid growing up1

CaPtaiN_eYeSaNo

One of my first favorite movies ever! I am happy to stay that I like it as much now as i did when this came out during my early childhood.

SkinnyFilmBuff

I was sitting down to watch the new _Ghostbusters: Afterlife_ when I realized that I hadn't seen the original in probably 15 years and had in fact never bothered to see the sequel. So, I changed plans and decided I'd do something of a marathon and watch all three (perhaps even four, as I also haven't seen the reboot from 2016). This movie is a classic for a reason and it remains worthy of its reputation. Yes, the effects are incredibly dated, and yes, the ending doesn't quite stick the landing, but neither of those things really matter when Bill Murray is on screen delivering some of the most hilarious and iconic one liners of all time. I also want to complement the brilliantly snappy pacing, from hilarious cold open all the way to marshmallow covered finale, there isn't a wasted moment.

The_Argentinian

It's not one of my childhood favorite movies so I have no nostalgic feelings for it. It's not that funny and it gets too silly. But there are still some really good moments on it.

DarkKn1ght

After watching it for the first time, I expected much more out of the movie. I understand it is a 'classic' but it did not click with me enough. It felt slow at times and the overall writing was below average.

condesoto

The main support of the film is the interpretation of Bill Murray. As the film progresses, his character remains anecdotal and becomes repetitive.

aldy

Ghostbusters was pretty good. Bill Murray's characterisation, while funny, seemed inconsistent and everybody's line deliveries were really awkward and unnatural to me. While I realise it wasn't a horror film, tension was almost solely achieved through music and the EPA 'villain' was very contrived. All that unnecessary distruction was uncool and the movie featured the quietest and meekest prisoners ever. Having said that, it was still fun and there were definitely some funny moments. Louis and Stay Puft were the best characters.

The_Argentinian

Also, to say the special effects are dated is so obvious and stupid. Of course they are. It was made in the early 80s, ffs!

NotoriousX

Part of my 2022 Ghostbuster FunTime - 1 of 3 _"You don't know what it's like out there. I've worked in the private sector. They expect results."_ Dr. Raymond Stantz Ghostbusters was one of my favorite movies as a kid, and that hasn't changed much. Except for a little dated effects, Ghostbusters is just as I remember it. Loud, fun, and exciting. Just about perfect!!_

manicure

First of all, I understand the financial success behind the original “Ghostbusters” idea: their weird equipment and traps, the firehouse base, the Ectomobile, the good chemistry of the leads, the colorful and inventive design of the creatures, the soundtrack…so many elements of this film are potentially iconic, but everything gets spoiled by the underwhelming writing. The relaxed tone they chose is perfect, but the jokes are not nearly as witty as they were meant to be, the plot is contrived to say the least, characters have no development, sometimes new people are introduced and just left hanging there without purpose (Winston, Dana’s hinted “boyfriend”). Verkman’s character outshines the others at first, but his humor gets repetitive quickly. It’s weird when a film that finds its climax with one-liners like “This man has no dick” or situations like Dan Aykroyd getting a ghost blowjob is regarded as a timeless comedy masterpiece. Again, the film is not terrible, it has more than a few nice ideas and funny situations indeed, but overall is nothing more than your average ‘80s mainstream comedy.

ArielRodriguez

I found it entertaining but with lack of power in its plot. I felt it like a TV episode, not so much like a movie. Evidently the visual effects didn't age well but I think that makes tbis movie feel very 80's and that is a plus.

Don Potter

Am I the only one who doesn't like this movie at all? i find it very boring and with a very weak dialogue. I respect the ones that like it. But if there is enyone who agrees with me please let me know.

Mr. Sackamano

I occasionally take the quietest moment of the evening to turn to who ever I am with and belt out SOO Be GOOD!!! for GOODNESS SAKES! Woah-Ohhhhhhh!!!!