- October 26th, 2022, 1:57 am#4973857
“Somehow Palpatine Returned”
This an infamous meme/quote from Star Wars Episode 9 when the movie brushes off all the audiences questions about how The Emperor is still alive since he was blown up in the Death Star after being chucked down a well & exploding in a blue torrent of energy in Episode 6. It’s poor storytelling, it’s lazy and it’s the one thing everyone wants to know and is interested in. They just kinda skip over it. They give us a few crumbs but not the whole meal.
In Afterlife we have a similar issue. No one outright says “Somehow Gozer returned”(at least I don’t think they do) but it’s a huge issue that isn’t addressed. One of the things I’ve always appreciated & enjoyed about the first two Ghostbusters movies is the exposition. I think this is one of Dan Aykroyd’s most underrated talents as a writer and performer. When we get the information dump in the jail cell in the first film? It’s super interesting. It doesn’t feel lazy or haphazard. I compare it another master exposition scene in “Raiders of the Lost Ark” where Indiana Jones explains the ark of the covenant to the government men. What makes Ghostbusters cool is that it’s all made up. Indiana Jones gets an extra level of cool because…well…the Ark is a real artefact. But I digress…
Exposition is one of the hardest things to do in movies. You don’t want it to sound boring, you don’t want it to come off like you are talking directly to the audience. If you want to see an example of exposition at its worst, watch the live action adaptation of “Avatar the Last Airbender”. Ooph. It hurts.
But it’s always helps when you have someone like Dan Aykroyd delivering your exposition. Even in bad movies, like Pearl Harbor, he’s super skilled at it. He’s just has this voice and a cadence that makes things sound interesting and important. Harold Ramis is also a super important part of this equation. Because Egon is always the smartest guy in the room we the audience really want to listen and hear to what he has to say because it’s usually interesting & important. In the script when they describe Egon as a “new age Spock” it was a perfect description. Why? Because I consider Spock to be one of the best exposition characters ever invented. Think about it. Spock’s role is to explain things to the crew and captain(and thus the audience). Egon has a similar dynamic.
One of my issues that I’ve mentioned elsewhere on this forum is how Gozer is able to return after being destroyed in the first film. The terror dogs, Vinz and Zuul, and Gozer in his/her(they?) destructor form are all blown up and destroyed after the temple is destroyed. Yes I know some of you have theories on how that can happen, the same way Star Wars fans have theories on how Palp’s came back in Episode 9. But when I think about “why is it so hard to get a Ghostbusters movie done right?” exposition is really an important and often overlooked factor. The movie just doesn’t address it. And it’s an issue that kinda pops it’s head up a few times. Some might say those things don’t need addressing & that’s ok. But to me well delivered and interesting exposition is an important part of what makes Ghostbusters Ghostbusters & when I think of the GB movies that don’t work as well for me as the originals, the lack of well written and delivered exposition is a common denominator.
Just for fun I’m going to list some movies that I think have some awesome exposition. This is by no means a definitive list. Just some that jump out at me.
Star Wars
The Terminator
Ghostbusters
The Matrix
Raiders of the Lost Ark
Pirates of the Caribbean 1-3
Back to the Future
Lord of the Rings Fellowship of the Ring
The Incredibles
All the Presidents Men
JFK
This an infamous meme/quote from Star Wars Episode 9 when the movie brushes off all the audiences questions about how The Emperor is still alive since he was blown up in the Death Star after being chucked down a well & exploding in a blue torrent of energy in Episode 6. It’s poor storytelling, it’s lazy and it’s the one thing everyone wants to know and is interested in. They just kinda skip over it. They give us a few crumbs but not the whole meal.
In Afterlife we have a similar issue. No one outright says “Somehow Gozer returned”(at least I don’t think they do) but it’s a huge issue that isn’t addressed. One of the things I’ve always appreciated & enjoyed about the first two Ghostbusters movies is the exposition. I think this is one of Dan Aykroyd’s most underrated talents as a writer and performer. When we get the information dump in the jail cell in the first film? It’s super interesting. It doesn’t feel lazy or haphazard. I compare it another master exposition scene in “Raiders of the Lost Ark” where Indiana Jones explains the ark of the covenant to the government men. What makes Ghostbusters cool is that it’s all made up. Indiana Jones gets an extra level of cool because…well…the Ark is a real artefact. But I digress…
Exposition is one of the hardest things to do in movies. You don’t want it to sound boring, you don’t want it to come off like you are talking directly to the audience. If you want to see an example of exposition at its worst, watch the live action adaptation of “Avatar the Last Airbender”. Ooph. It hurts.
But it’s always helps when you have someone like Dan Aykroyd delivering your exposition. Even in bad movies, like Pearl Harbor, he’s super skilled at it. He’s just has this voice and a cadence that makes things sound interesting and important. Harold Ramis is also a super important part of this equation. Because Egon is always the smartest guy in the room we the audience really want to listen and hear to what he has to say because it’s usually interesting & important. In the script when they describe Egon as a “new age Spock” it was a perfect description. Why? Because I consider Spock to be one of the best exposition characters ever invented. Think about it. Spock’s role is to explain things to the crew and captain(and thus the audience). Egon has a similar dynamic.
One of my issues that I’ve mentioned elsewhere on this forum is how Gozer is able to return after being destroyed in the first film. The terror dogs, Vinz and Zuul, and Gozer in his/her(they?) destructor form are all blown up and destroyed after the temple is destroyed. Yes I know some of you have theories on how that can happen, the same way Star Wars fans have theories on how Palp’s came back in Episode 9. But when I think about “why is it so hard to get a Ghostbusters movie done right?” exposition is really an important and often overlooked factor. The movie just doesn’t address it. And it’s an issue that kinda pops it’s head up a few times. Some might say those things don’t need addressing & that’s ok. But to me well delivered and interesting exposition is an important part of what makes Ghostbusters Ghostbusters & when I think of the GB movies that don’t work as well for me as the originals, the lack of well written and delivered exposition is a common denominator.
Just for fun I’m going to list some movies that I think have some awesome exposition. This is by no means a definitive list. Just some that jump out at me.
Star Wars
The Terminator
Ghostbusters
The Matrix
Raiders of the Lost Ark
Pirates of the Caribbean 1-3
Back to the Future
Lord of the Rings Fellowship of the Ring
The Incredibles
All the Presidents Men
JFK