Harold Ramis’ daughter really liked Ghostbusters: Afterlife at least
Violet Ramis Stiel was apparently very touched by the way the film honors the Ghostbusters legacy
Aux News Ghostbusters
[The following contains spoilers for Ghostbusters: Afterlife]
Ghostbusters: Afterlife seems like it’s going to end up being a bit divisive, at least partially depending on your stomach for the “we’re doing it for the fans!” thing that every big franchise revival has to try these days, but at least one viewer was really impressed by the film and the way it honored the Ghostbusters legacy.
That viewer is Violet Ramis Stiel, the oldest daughter of late Ghostbusters star Harold Ramis, who recently talked to The Hollywood Reporter about Jason Reitman’s film and what it has to say about remembering the people we’ve lost. THR doesn’t spoil it, but we will (that’s your final warning): Egon Spengler, the character played Ramis in the first two Ghostbusters, appears in Afterlife as a ghost—having died in his attempt to prevent some bad ghost stuff from happening.
Stiel told THR that Reitman was smart to focus on “capturing the Egon character” and “not necessarily” Ramis himself, which is either a reference to the fact that this Egon doesn’t speak or that they made a point to make the character look specifically like “nice and trim” Egon. Stiel also highlighted that Reitman made the movie “about loss and grief” with “surreal” parallels to real life even though it’s still a comedy. “Ultimately,” she says, Ghostbusters: Afterlife is about how “the people we love are always with us. They don’t go away.”
Reitman got approval from all of Ramis’ children before he put his plan for Egon in motion, with Stiel initially thinking it was a “weird” idea, but she ultimately had at least some say in the development of the CG character, saying that it was “so generous” of the director to let her feel like she was part of the movie.
Ghostbusters: Afterlife is in theaters now.
72 Comments
“the people we love are always with us. They don’t go away.”
Well, that’s not true.
No one’s ever really gone.
Just your people. No one blames them.
Shut up Sam.
made the movie “about loss and grief” Just what I want in my comedies
There’s a Korean comedy where the boyfriend of the lead character gets shot in the head and killed during a botched police sting at around the halfway mark (they do this sort of thing a lot in their comedies) and she spends the rest of the film trying to commit suicide in increasingly bizarre and you’d think impossible to survive fashion. It’s surprisingly funny but I would understand your scepticism at all of the above.
It was all the rage not too long ago:
“What’s the deal with that aching void in your heart due to the loss of a loved one that never truly leaves you?”
Mark Twain has been quoted that “Humor is tragedy plus time.”
“Ghostbusters isn’t a comedy, its a horror movie with “some” comedy elements!!!!” – Some asshole on Twitter who clearly has not watched Ghostbusters in few decades and only really remembers the cartoon he watched when he was still in short pants
God I’ve had so many stupid arguments about this lol. Ghostbusters is one of my favorite movies but there is a remarkably large contingent of its fanbase that apparently has never understood that it’s supposed to be funny and that the “mythology” in it is purposefully stupid and ridiculous because that’s the damn joke.
Yep. It’s why all this reverence in Afterlife seems so silly. They aren’t suppose to be heroes they are exterminators. Sure you appreciate them when they are doing their job but you get pissed when the bill is high and forget about them the next day. For all it’s faults, Ghostbuster 2 basically having them sued out of existence and mostly forgotten fits the theme of the whole thing. Plus the idea that it’s anything but a high concept comedy is insane. I think it scared a lot of people when they were kids so they tell themselves it was a horror movie. But kids are scared of all sorts of silly things. I was scared of the Emperor in Return of the Jedi but Star Wars isn’t a horror movie.
Yeah, the joke was always that they’re basically just slightly sleazy exterminators but they end up accidentally having to save the world. And Murray is the sleaziest one but ends up being kind of the primary “hero” of the film. They talk on the commentary about it was an intentional joke to have him be the one guy at the end who isn’t totally covered in marshmallow, because he needs to appear heroic per the usual cliches, but of course it’s just this sleazy (though lovable) asshole.
Yeah, I think people growing up with it as kids is a large part of the problem. It’s really a comedy for adults at the end of the day, but kids grew up watching it and had a different conception in their head of what it actually is. Hell, I grew up with it, but I think seeing it at age 11 or so I was at least old enough to internalize that it was a comedy; it basically was one of those films that taught me what good comedy was. Apparently not so true for people who saw it at age 6 and really thought it was an intense film.
It can be…two things.
…comedies featuring teenagers.
The money also helped.
I thought it earned the emotional ending but I did like how when the OG 3 Ghostbusters first looked over and saw Egon helping his granddaughter with the proton pack it wasn’t particularly a warm fuzzies moment but all three of them looking like “what the hell is going on?!”
Yeah, I don’t know. On one hand, I thought the movie was fine–certainly better than its toxic reception would have suggested. Still, the Ramis of it is kind of the worst part in more ways than one.
AV Club seems to be pushing the narrative that nobody liked Ghostbusters or Cowboy Bebop this weekend, but that just doesn’t line up with my own experience.
Sometimes the public just wants mcdonalds and not experimental fusion.The critics do their thing but to me, I enjoyed the movie a lot. It was fun and didn’t require much brain power.
The movie also held well from its Friday take through Sunday, besting not only industry projections, but Sony’s internal ones as well. Word of mouth would have muted that, but it feels like people *do* like it (it got an ovation from my Friday screening).
I went with my six year old son who I introduced to Ghostbusters last month and he loved it, getting excited (in a sweet way, not a yelling obnoxious kid way) at seeing Ecto-1 and hearing the name Gozer, loving the Muncher chase and really enjoying the finale. And he giggled like a maniac during the mini Stay Puft scene (until then his franchise highlight was the idea that someone would give Slimer a bus license). At the very end of the film an obviously lifelong Ghostbusters fan who’d been sat a seat away from him came up to us and thanked him, saying how brilliant it had been watching a new Ghostbusters film next to a child who was enjoying it at least much as he was. It was a really sweet thing for him to do and a really nice thought that a film caused this connection between two strangers about 40 years apart in age. I don’t think the film is perfect and I have friends who have both loved it and hated it. But there’s clearly an audience out there who’s having a great experience with it.
but it feels like people *do* like it Hush. That doesn’t fit the AV Club narrative. The only people who “liked” it were a tiny, tiny minority of people consisting entirely and exclusively of toxic basement-dwelling fanboys who didn’t actually like it and only saw it because they were still mad that the 2016 film exists. Nobody could possibly enjoy this film on its own merits or its merits as a follow-on to the original film, just as nobody could possibly dislike the 2016 film for any reason other misogyny.
I like both Afterlife and the 2016 remake. Neither were great movies, but they were entertaining in their own way. The 2016 remake is gorgeous to look at, the effects and cinematography were outstanding. Afterlife was a pure popcorn movie that took it’s time to establish it’s characters and stuck the landing.
I enjoyed it. If it’s possible to hold these two thoughts about it in my head at the same time, I thought it was fun but not very good. I’ll have forgotten about it a month from now.
I have not seen Ghostbusters and I am still skeptical of it being anything more then a nostalgia wank fest but I did watch some of Cowboy Bebop and it was fun. I think most the hate there goes to anime super fans who seem to want a 100% shot for shot remake
Reitman got approval from all of Ramis’ children before he put his plan for Egon in motionHonestly, in the end only their approval matters on a legal sense. Whether audiences/reviewers personally like it or not is their choice. But it seems like they went through the proper channels respectfully to make it happen. The movie has succeeded financially so far. Personally it doesn’t bother me whether Harold Ramis’ Egon character is in there or not. As long as his family gave the greenlight, more power to them. I even think Harold Ramis wouldn’t care so much. But in any case I guess a conversation should be started on if actors today should include in their will if they wish for their likeness to be resurrected in any movie/TV/video game production. I mean I wouldn’t be surprised if Nicolas Cage dies, you’re going to see him in a hundred more movies after his death.
I’m glad she liked it. For me it felt like, do you like Egon? Okay, so here’s what we’re going to do, you’re going to see him murdered off the top. Does that work for you? Okay, also he’s a deadbeat dad who traumatized his daughter Carrie with his apathy. Also since they make a point to lock in the dates this movie happens, Ghostbusters 2 taking place in 1989 and Egon’s daughter having a 14 year old son, that means unless I’m getting the math wrong, which is very possible, the latest she could have had the baby was when she was 15 or 16. So Egon abandoned his pregnant teen daughter. And he leaves her with huge debts she has no way to pay. But his ghost gives his daughter a hug at the end so… it’s all good. He did have stuff to do, trying to save the world but phones don’t exist? After he dies everything seems to work automatically so why does he have to always have be away? The message from Jason Reitman seems to be it’s okay if your dad ignores you as long as he’s doing something important. Like busting ghosts or making movies. There are deadbeat dads in my family and honestly the idea that you can ignore your kids and still be a hero stinks.
The mother is the biggest hole in the whole film. Was Egon a deadbeat dad? Or did the mother take the daughter away and trash talk him? Given that Winston was keeping Ray afloat, it seems pretty likely that the mother took Callie away during the rough times when everyone was getting grouchy before Egon even moved out west. Come to think of it, that sounds like the kind of thing that might’ve been the final straw that could of driven him to go do it all alone…
Well now I’m wondering if there’s a novelization that includes script stuff that was left on the cutting room floor. lol
Carrie Coon, who plays Egon’s daughter Caliie was born in 1981, pretty safe to say they were having her born in the early half of the 80s around that, before he even became a Ghostbuster. Not sure of his custody situation, no mention was made by any of the 4 leads about their family or such in the other 2 films. She said she didn’t “know” her father. Doesn’t mean she never met him.
So Egon had a family, then abandoned them to go back to college, then became one of the most famous people on Earth (twice) and still never sent back any money or had any real contact with his daughter or later his grand daughter. This married time would also have been around when Peter had to talk him out of drilling a hole in his head.
Maybe the woman never told him she was pregnant. Maybe he didn’t find out about the kid until shortly before he died. Maybe he planned on getting in touch with her, but he died before he could.
Rachel McAdams was 25 when she played a high school student. Carrie Coon’s real-life age has absolutely nothing to do with when the character was born.
That would have worked if Venkman hadn’t stopped him.
It would have been better if that was how Egon died. Drill lying next to him.
I enjoyed it, too! Yay for me!Did CG Egon feel awkward? Yes, and I don’t know if there’s any way around that. Possibly in 10-15 years it’ll be so common that it doesn’t feel weird any more. I did realize that if these things had happened in a book, his ghost visibly manifesting at that point would have made perfect sense. It’s only the real-world knowledge that he’s basically a deepfake of someone no longer with us that makes it weird.
I didn’t read the article because I haven’t seen the film, but I wonder if those offspring included Mollie Israel.
I always figured that the ghosts in ‘Ghostbusters’ were not literal spirits of the departed, but more psychic manifestations of some of their traits, and that’s why they looked so weird. Guess that’s not the case.
The people we love are always with us, so long as you ensnare them with particle beams, suck them into ghost traps, and shove them into the containment unit… of your heart.
I went to high school with Violet Ramis. She was a pretty nice person, generally speaking, although had a bit of that “artsy weirdness for weirdness’s sake” that a lot of teenagers (myself included) would adopt from time to time. So there was this one time that we were coming back to school on a bus from some field trip of some kind, and I’m standing there in the aisle waiting for the kids ahead of me to exit the bus.Suddenly the person behind me reaches around and starts fondling my chest. I’m like, wtf, I turn around, and it’s Violet. I’m like, what the hell were you doing? She’s like, what are you talking about? I’m like, you just started fondling my chest! She kept denying it. Eventually I just shook my head and got off the bus. I never did find out what that was about. Kids those days!
TMZ on line 1US Magazine on line 2 People Magazine on line 3. Jezebel on line 4. (always last to the party).
I once got a purple nurple from David Tennant. You can’t prove I didn’t.
He did play Purple Man on Jessica Jones, so it checks out.
I think that means she liked you. Teenagers are awkward in their displays of affection.
Harold Ramis’ daughter really liked Ghostbusters: Afterlife at leastI did too!
Me three!
At Least? This movie has the heart of Ghostbusters which is something the 2016 movie did not have. Are you kidding me? Every fan on the internet who grew up loving Ghostbusters , loves this film. Trying to push this narrative that the movie is hated is a joke. This site is a joke. “At least so and so liked Ghostbusters” is what everyone was saying back in 2016. Get over yourself.
A- on Cinemascore.95% audience score and 65% Fresh on RT.
Looks like lots of people liked it.
But the AVClub literati hated it, and you’re an idiot if you disagree!
I laughed a helluvah lot during the movie. I really enjoyed it. That’s all I wanted to happen when I went to see it. It’s a fun movie.
I saw it twice and audiences are weird…the first time was on Thursday with a half full theater and people were laughing at everything. The second time was on Saturday in a full theater and you could hear a pin drop.
This article is ridiculously mean-spirited. That’s not a pun. I can’t believe the way you latch on to something you hate, and then when people don’t hate it the same way the daughter of someone who made the movie is fair game to be told she’s “wrong” because she doesn’t have 100% the opinions of you.This is sickening.
Over time I’ve abandoned most of the Gawker Media sites. This one is next. They’re just so negative here now.
They’re going through their teenage goth phase. #everythingsucksandthenyoudie
Yeah it is pretty sickening to make a CGI double of a star who died years ago, age him up to make him the ideal hollywood-style old man (papering over how he actually looked in real life) film some grotesque cameo sequence with his still-living co-stars emoting against a tennis ball on a stick as some sound-alike puts meaningless words in the corpse’s mouth, and then make a plastic toy of the dead man and then pretend that, because you gave enough money to the dead man’s family to assuage your guilt, you have created some sort of meaningful art worth defending
Remember how trolls went after Robin Williams’ daughter? Same spirit here.
You could be writing about the tragedy in Waukesha, offering a unique perspective from a lived experience. Instead, you’re producing this? I don’t even know what this is – a catty re-telling of someone else’s journalism? You’re still young, it’s not too late to reassess, make adjustments and live a life that you can one day look back on and be proud of.
Where do you think you are?
Arby’s?
Sir, this is an Olive Garden.
Trust me, you do not want Barsanti writing about anything real world.
“… at least.”On the smug, pointlessly snarky, self-satisfied douche scale, this headline gets 9 out of a possible 10 Barsantis.
It just seems so odd to me that a cynical, satirical film about a group of chain-smoking opportunist slobs, where one hits on both a student and a client, and which goes out of its way to make the EPA the bad guy, is repainted into a touchy-feely treatise on “family”. Ugh.
“Ghostbusters: Afterlife seems like it’s going to end up being a bit divisive, at least partially depending on your stomach for the “we’re doing it for the fans!” thing that every big franchise revival has to try these days…” If you aren’t making a film for the fans, who are you making it for exactly?
saying that it was “so generous” of the director to let her feel like she was part of the movie.I’m sure the money didn’t hurt either
I started coming here because it seemed to be a place where people liked movies, tv, music, etc. Now it’s really just a place that writes about how it dislikes those things. And writes it over. And over. And over. What a shitty wet blanket.
We get it already. You AV Club “elitists” don’t like the new Ghostbusters. And you hate that the public didn’t like the 2016 reboot. Get over it already. Jeez.
Very disheartening to see how cynical AVclub is toward this movie that a lot of people seem to be enjoying.
“apparently”
Just… stop guys.
I saw it twice; once with a friend and then a second time with my son. I’ll admit, the first time I saw it, the Ghost Ramis scene kind of made me feel icky although I really liked the movie. It “worked” with the story but it just didn’t feel right. But the second time I saw it, (granted, the surprise was not there and I had had time to think about it) it really felt much more appropriate and it worked a lot better for me. I assumed the family had to be on board with this for it to even happen.
Also…the fx was really well done. I assumed it was either CGI or some sort of AI wizardry and apparently it was CGI (not that AI isn’t but you know what I mean). It probably helped that the character was kind of ghosty and ethereal but this wasn’t fake Leia, it was really, really good fx. Not to mention they really nailed the fx in the whole movie; connecting it to the original and yet updating it so it looked modern. That was a nice touch and an obvious nod to the original without it looking dated.
I think at this point, it’s pretty clear that Ghostbusters means different things to different people, and if what you want (and this is what I want) is a shaggy, slightly grimy, blue-collar comedy with early 80s SNL energy that happens to have a subplot about Elder Gods, then… this isn’t it.
But the majority of the franchise, not just the two movies since 1984, but the comics and cartoons and video games and toys and soft drinks, have been about the Proton Packs and Ecto-1 and Stay Puft and Slimer, and to most people, including people pushing 40 and beyond who first experienced the franchise as The Real Ghostbusters, that’s what it’s about.
And that’s not for me, and that’s okay. But it’s also kind of a bummer to a certain kind of fan to see Ghostbusters thrown in the GEEWHIZTHE 80S WERE AAAAAWESOME bin with Star Wars, Transformers, BTTF and a million other franchises that seem to exist for men with permanent soy-faces to bore their kids named after Game of Thrones characters with on a rainy Sunday.