[PukieDoug]

I did not do any design for him. I was given a life size piece of card with his mage printed on it and I made a 3d puppet for the actors to react to , so sorry I have no idea

[tylergfoster]

None of this is to say that genuine criticism doesn't have its place—it just feels a bit like some sites downvoted the film... so they could report on the film getting downvotes... and then report on the surprise success of the film. All of which makes some of the surprisingly negative reviews seem like a means of garnering clicks rather than assessing the film on its faults or merits.

One obvious reason this kind of common theory doesn't hold any water is this: people already mistakenly believe there is some sort of meaningful ideological gap between film critics and audiences. Audiences are also the ones film critics want to click on their reviews. If there's a disparity between how the public perceives a movie and the critics, that's going to lead to less clicks, not more. As we can see, many in this forum are doubling down on the idea that there's a battle between critics and fans. Yeah, hate clicks are a thing, but are they so certain to drive traffic that it's worth a scheme?

That's before you get into the logistics of such a scheme. I would be surprised if there are a notable number of outlets that hired a new critic to review Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire. Where does this "write a negative review for clicks" edict come from, the top brass? What if the critic in question doesn't want to game clicks with a specific type of review? You could argue there are one or two outlets that do this with every movie, and then that critic has long since agreed to be part of the scheme, but it'd be hard to make a case that's very many outlets.

I'm one of the people who's kinda scratching my head at the reception, but on some level I think the truth is -- get ready for another ice age because Hell is freezing over here -- RichardLess is right. The war of 2016 still looms large in many critics' minds, and the way these new movies are, intentionally or unintentionally, giving the worst-behaved fans what they wanted is a demerit, especially if they then feel the finished movies are not up to snuff. I would also add, as one of those who was far less impressed with Afterlife than I'd hoped to be, that they may also have a bad taste in their mouth lingering from that movie, which appeared to be doing something different only to retreat very far into the familiar in the end. For this one to continue that journey into the familiar, I can see why that would also be disappointing to them. And then, of course, they just may not have thought it was very well-made, which to be fair, it has real problems on that front, which even those of us on this board can see in the choppy editing and incongruous story points.

If you don't like the critical reception, that's fine. Conspiracy theories are not necessary: they just didn't like the movie.

[timeware]

My experience with reading reviews is there is most certainly an idological gap between critics and the general audiance. Since before 2016 how many times have I read a review where the critic has to vent about their political ideology before they tell me whether or not they liked the movie they watched?

I remember a review about TMNT 2007 where critics complained about sterotypes and how evil capitolism was before getting to their point. This repeated style became so common I lost my desire to pursue an education of becoming a professional critic.

Getting back to 2016 there were thousands of click bait articles, and professional reviews that all read with the same formula. If the news feed on the main page had an archive I could easily prove my point. it does give off the appearence that there is a conspiracy when the culture of these journalists share the same one sided ideology which is often enough.

I don't fault the critic for not liking Afterlife, or Frozen Empire I do take issue with them downvoting when theyv'e openly admitted to liking the movie and doing it out of spite.

[13th Floor]

None of this is to say that genuine criticism doesn't have its place—it just feels a bit like some sites downvoted the film... so they could report on the film getting downvotes... and then report on the surprise success of the film. All of which makes some of the surprisingly negative reviews seem like a means of garnering clicks rather than assessing the film on its faults or merits.

One obvious reason this kind of common theory doesn't hold any water is this: people already mistakenly believe there is some sort of meaningful ideological gap between film critics and audiences. Audiences are also the ones film critics want to click on their reviews. If there's a disparity between how the public perceives a movie and the critics, that's going to lead to less clicks, not more. As we can see, many in this forum are doubling down on the idea that there's a battle between critics and fans. Yeah, hate clicks are a thing, but are they so certain to drive traffic that it's worth a scheme?

That's before you get into the logistics of such a scheme. I would be surprised if there are a notable number of outlets that hired a new critic to review Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire. Where does this "write a negative review for clicks" edict come from, the top brass? What if the critic in question doesn't want to game clicks with a specific type of review? You could argue there are one or two outlets that do this with every movie, and then that critic has long since agreed to be part of the scheme, but it'd be hard to make a case that's very many outlets.

I'm one of the people who's kinda scratching my head at the reception, but on some level I think the truth is -- get ready for another ice age because Hell is freezing over here -- RichardLess is right. The war of 2016 still looms large in many critics' minds, and the way these new movies are, intentionally or unintentionally, giving the worst-behaved fans what they wanted is a demerit, especially if they then feel the finished movies are not up to snuff. I would also add, as one of those who was far less impressed with Afterlife than I'd hoped to be, that they may also have a bad taste in their mouth lingering from that movie, which appeared to be doing something different only to retreat very far into the familiar in the end. For this one to continue that journey into the familiar, I can see why that would also be disappointing to them. And then, of course, they just may not have thought it was very well-made, which to be fair, it has real problems on that front, which even those of us on this board can see in the choppy editing and incongruous story points.

If you don't like the critical reception, that's fine. Conspiracy theories are not necessary: they just didn't like the movie.

Frozen Empire has some baffling storytelling issues that Afterlife never had.For all the nostalgia Afterlife is a solid journey with a good emotional payoff.
FE is all over the place feeling like a stitched clip show,the major positive is that each individual moment is enjoyable

[deadderek]

If they haven't seen Afterlife by now they shouldn't be here.

Ok, got the talkback thread started for people who attended the screening and the ones to come but also if anyone stumbles on bigger spoilers/descriptions and want to talk about them can do so in the talkback thread. Spoiler tags are optional in the talkback thread. Any unnecessary posting will get deleted.
viewtopic.php?t=51601

Reviews, spoiler descriptions, big spoilers etc. get talked about over at the talkback thread. People who want that can go there, just don't repost those types of spoilers in this thread.

Yes I'm sure about that. If you're in a Frozen Empire thread trying to avoid Afterlife spoilers you shouldn't even be in this thread.

[tylergfoster]

Frozen Empire has some baffling storytelling issues that Afterlife never had.For all the nostalgia Afterlife is a solid journey with a good emotional payoff.
FE is all over the place feeling like a stitched clip show,the major positive is that each individual moment is enjoyable

I think both movies have the same stitchy feeling, like structure had to be meaningfully altered or rearranged in post-production. Personally, I found that quality to be less prominent in Frozen Empire than Afterlife. Not sure what it is, but that's the most prominent element that all three 21st century Ghostbusters movies have in common: the editing is a noticeable weak spot.

[13th Floor]

Frozen Empire has some baffling storytelling issues that Afterlife never had.For all the nostalgia Afterlife is a solid journey with a good emotional payoff.
FE is all over the place feeling like a stitched clip show,the major positive is that each individual moment is enjoyable

I think both movies have the same stitchy feeling, like structure had to be meaningfully altered or rearranged in post-production. Personally, I found that quality to be less prominent in Frozen Empire than Afterlife. Not sure what it is, but that's the most prominent element that all three 21st century Ghostbusters movies have in common: the editing is a noticeable weak spot.

I disagree on afterlife,i found the calm first half really enjoyable,movie starts going off track when Keymaster/Gatekeeper come into play but the movie could breathe and characters look and ponder.
Phoebe reacting to what she sees and interacting with people is one of the best parts and by doing that i started caring about Podcast,Gary and Callie as well.Meanwhile Frozen Empire is in a hurry to reach the end. Not to be specific because spoilers but there's even a moment with the OGs where they cut from one shot to another and the characters are already in a different place.Like someone hit the "skip 10 seconds button"

[tylergfoster]

I disagree on afterlife,i found the calm first half really enjoyable,movie starts going off track when Keymaster/Gatekeeper come into play but the movie could breathe and characters look and ponder.
Phoebe reacting to what she sees and interacting with people is one of the best parts and by doing that i started caring about Podcast,Gary and Callie as well.Meanwhile Frozen Empire is in a hurry to reach the end. Not to be specific because spoilers but there's even a moment with the OGs where they cut from one shot to another and the characters are already in a different place.Like someone hit the "skip 10 seconds button"

To be fair, part of the reason I felt Afterlife was choppy is that we all know from the trailers that material was cut out of the film. Main thing that I think the movie is missing is a better development of the relationship between Phoebe and Callie. We know there were two parts to a bit that remains that were lost: Callie wishing for popcorn, Phoebe lighting up the proton pack in the cornfield and creating some, and then (as seen in the final movie), Callie commenting on Phoebe having some when she's watching the Ghostbusters commercial on YouTube.

Some of the other stuff is not necessarily choppiness in the movie but things the movie presents but doesn't develop. It is very odd that Podcast asks if Phoebe believes in ghosts, and she says no, but is hardly fazed by it when the chess pieces start moving on their own (with the bad ADR "So this is happening..."). Feels like something that ought to be expanded on a bit more. Later, when Gary drops Phoebe and Podcast off at the farm after they open the trap, the movie fudges a scene transition where Podcast is there reading about Gozer, but then we arbitrarily jump to a bit later. Gary is still there, but Podcast is gone, and Phoebe finds Egon's lab.

Some of the choppiest material comes after they catch Muncher. Whether it's the script, the editing, or a mixture of both in post-production, the phone call with Ray was contentious even here because the grudge just doesn't really make much sense. It feels like the phone call could easily be rearranged to eliminate it and simply make Ray perplexed by Egon's behavior. The scene with the kids the next day at Spinners is then, IMO, the most unnecessary bit in the movie, a shameless bit of exposition that basically just repeats information we already know. The same thing could've easily been accomplished by a scene of Phoebe and Trevor at home, after Phoebe has her fight with Callie, where she sneaks to Trevor and says, "tomorrow we're going back up that mountain to see what's in the mine." Last but not least, Callie's possession scene seems like a total handwave, in part because the effect of the ghost dog coming at the camera feels pretty cheesy.

[gbraider82]

Loved Afterlife, but in my opinion, Jason and Gil played it safe by hitting most of the same notes that were hit from GB 1984 almost verbatim in the 2nd half of the movie...predictable...but that's fine. I'm not faulting it, and we got Frozen Empire after it.

[Threadender]

I was able to watch Frozen Empire twice. Once by myself Thursday evening, and again with my daughter Saturday afternoon.

She loved it! And she was honest about how she felt about it. Of course, she ate the jump scares right up.
It was great to see more of Ernie Hudson, but still wanted even more. I was hoping he would talk to Phoebe in private about her family issues (in particular with Callie) but whatever.

On a side note, going through my usual subreddits and found one on people being amazed at how good Ernie Hudson looks for damn near 80:

[MovieFacts]

The main difference between critics and the audience boils down to how they approach films. Critics have seen thousands of movies and go into a film with more of an analytical eye. They understand the nuts and bolts of filmmaking, and they judge films based on that deep insight.

Then there's your average cinema-goer, who's more about getting lost in the movie and letting it wash over them. Also, if you're a hardcore Ghostbusters fan, for example, you're likely to let things slide in exchange for nods to the things you love, like appearances from Slimer or the library ghost.

But critics, who might not be as invested in Ghostbusters lore, won't give such moments a free pass. They're likely to question why Slimer's there in the first place or what was the purpose in adding the library ghost.

I don't think it has anything to do with 2016's Ghostbusters. There was some serious distasteful stuff from the 'Snyder cut' community that went on for the best part of four years, and when they finally got their way, and Snyder released his version, it received a strong score on Rotten Tomatoes. That film was bang average, too.

[K_Centric0001]

Ok im back from seeing Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire. Sadly my theater sitting was empty. just 4 people there.

Ok so I'm gonna say it. I'm disappointed. I do think the film had a lot of issues.

There was WAY to many characters. Some really needed to go. There was just way to much going on. I don't think you needed ALL of the characters from Afterlife back. I think going back to a team of 4 might be the best option here.

I don't fully buy the premise of the ghostbusters family of a mother, step-father and children. Seems irresponsible and requires ignoring how dangerous the equipment is said to be. But I think this is what they were left with after doing the kid ghostbusters film last go and wanting to ride that wave.

Ernie Hudson should have been more involved. And with Bill Murray... yeah, in his first scene in the firehouse I realise why this guy is often the stand out in these movies. He brings a fun energy just by his presence. But then after that he had nothing to do. Bill Murray showed up for a quick pay cheque. Its like they wrote the script not knowing if they could get him. He gave his all in the scenes he had but it really wasn't enough. I do think Bill desires to reduce as much screentime as possible for himself.

I do think there is also a tonal issue. Since afterlife they want to bring more heart into these movies aswell as comedy and i think that might need some tweaking to get a better balance there.

Some of the humour from Paul Rudds character doesn't work IMO. Sorry Paul but you ain't Bill Murray.

Also the Trailer is pretty misleading. Scenes taken out and others you sorta expected more from. The original team getting back together felt like a rush to the finish line rather than a plot point. Which I suspect we all thought there was going to be more to that right?

Now the things i did like. I like the idea of exploring different lore in the ghostbusters universe and having fun with that and this film did do that. That was the part i think i was most interested in and i like the villain and ghost ideas. And I'm glad the original cast came back. This I think is the key to future ghostbusters success.

[robbritton]

Unused practical effects for the sewer dragon: https://www.instagram.com/reel/C5BfoRqx ... dlcG5wemx1

Sad this didn't make the cut, although I dug the dragon as was.

[tylergfoster]

I don't think it has anything to do with 2016's Ghostbusters. There was some serious distasteful stuff from the 'Snyder cut' community that went on for the best part of four years, and when they finally got their way, and Snyder released his version, it received a strong score on Rotten Tomatoes. That film was bang average, too.

The difference there would be that Snyder had to leave due to a family tragedy, and then the results of his departure were obviously quite bad, so it was easier to look good by comparison, and even if Snyder is far from the world's most popular filmmaker, both critics and audiences appreciate the idea of someone who didn't get to finish the movie as they'd intended coming back to fulfill their original vision.

Ghostbusters is at a disadvantage because those same critics liked the 2016 movie, and the controversy already had people thinking "is anyone demanding more Ghostbusters movies or is this a cash grab?" Add in the reverent nature of Afterlife, which rubbed people the wrong way either because they felt Ghostbusters should be funnier or because they just didn't think the franchise deserved it, and you have a recipe for a mild amount of bitterness. Nothing too extreme, I think, but more like the franchise elicits a groan or a sigh or an eye-roll with many people these days.

[GuyX]

I said this in a previous post but

This movie demands 2 be seen twice. I was maybe a lil disappointed just a bit on 1st watch cuz Afterlife was such a banger for me. I saw FE again last night & it played sooo much better knowing what to expect.

I thought coming into the movie the 1st time it would be a Ghostbusting extravaganza. Epic in its tone, really big. The marketing really pushed the movie as something it wasn’t. So on 2nd watch, WOW. Now that I kno it was more chill() in tone, the movie played much better.

I love this movie. I think McKenna Grace is so great as Phoebe she should be getting award attention. I kno that sounds like hype but even the 1st film. She NAILS that Egon vibe. Sometimes I swear she looks like him if u squint. + when u see McKenna’s natural self? She is NOTHING like this character & I really don’t think critics r giving her a fair shake.

I hope the box office picks up cuz by god I need more with these characters!

[mrmichaelt]

If you want some Firehouse set bts, lookup these accounts: Luke Whitelock of Whitelock Design designed the Firehouse set using lidar scans take of both the LA and NY firehouses and made a composite set design. He's posted a couple times this month already. BGI Supplies Ltd made the No Ghost sign.

https://www.instagram.com/bgisuppliesltd/
https://www.instagram.com/whitelock_design_limited/

Logan Kim and Paul Rudd's assistant Steven Knight also posted some
https://www.instagram.com/p/C5BYrwFiwP7/
https://www.instagram.com/p/C5CL_HIAFMF/

[MovieFacts]

Ghostbusters is at a disadvantage because those same critics liked the 2016 movie, and the controversy already had people thinking "is anyone demanding more Ghostbusters movies or is this a cash grab?" Add in the reverent nature of Afterlife, which rubbed people the wrong way either because they felt Ghostbusters should be funnier or because they just didn't think the franchise deserved it, and you have a recipe for a mild amount of bitterness. Nothing too extreme, I think, but more like the franchise elicits a groan or a sigh or an eye-roll with many people these days.

There might be something to your point about critics having less patience with franchise/IP movies (in general) that capitalise on their built-in audience, but I return to my original argument: it's because they have a deeper insight into how the "sausage" is made, like the example I mentioned above.

A critic will see the library ghost in FE, sneer, and think it was a completely meaningless and cynical choice that added nothing to the overall narrative, while a hardcore GB fan is likely to cheer at the moment because they got that nostalgia hit. That doesn't mean critics have any sort of agenda.

I'm paraphrasing, but I saw someone on here say they hadn't seen the movie but they'll give it a 10 out of 10 if it includes one aspect from The Real Ghostbusters lore. That was the bar for them. That's totally fair enough, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but those people will contribute to the audience score. A critic simply won't approach a film that way and will have a higher bar in order to give it a 10.

Like I said before, there are some really good elements in FE, there is one particular sequence that I think is absolutely fantastic from start to finish, but as a movie enthusiast, I acknowledge it is a film with its problems. Some decisions seem like they were even made by committee.

While I'm here, I'll rank my Ghostbusters movies because why not.

Ghostbusters - 5 out of 5
Ghostbusters II - 4.5 out of 5
Ghostbusters: Afterlife - 3.5 out of 5
Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire - 3 out of 5.

[BrianReilly]

A critic will see the library ghost in FE, sneer, and think it was a completely meaningless and cynical choice that added nothing to the overall narrative, while a hardcore GB fan is likely to cheer at the moment because they got that nostalgia hit. That doesn't mean critics have any sort of agenda.

I'm paraphrasing, but I saw someone on here say they hadn't seen the movie but they'll give it a 10 out of 10 if it includes one aspect from The Real Ghostbusters lore. That was the bar for them. That's totally fair enough, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but those people will contribute to the audience score. A critic simply won't approach a film that way and will have a higher bar in order to give it a 10.

Like I said before, there are some really good elements in FE, there is one particular sequence that I think is absolutely fantastic from start to finish, but as a movie enthusiast, I acknowledge it is a film with its problems. Some decisions seem like they were even made by committee.

^ This person movies.

[Alphagaia]

Keep in mind I haven't seen the movie yet, but so far it feels like the original movie idea was much smaller, focussing just on the Spenglers, and somewhere down the line someone added more and more characters because they want to include the OG but also add new characters to use for when the OG finally retire. And we need fanservice, so cram in some ghosts from older movies.

In a way cool to make this a springboard for different stories, which makes me extra excited for the Netflix series, but I can see how that flattens the overal depth of the characters as they are given less time to develop.

Believe it or not I am happy to already know this before seeing it for myself, so I know what to expect and can enjoy it for what it is, not what I thought it would be.

[13th Floor]

Keep in mind I haven't seen the movie yet, but so far it feels like the original movie idea was much smaller, focussing just on the Spenglers, and somewhere down the line someone added more and more characters because they want to include the OG but also add new characters to use for when the OG finally retire. And we need fanservice, so cram in some ghosts from older movies.

In a way cool to make this a springboard for different stories, which makes me extra excited for the Netflix series, but I can see how that flattens the overal depth of the characters as they are given less time to develop.

Believe it or not I am happy to already know this before seeing it for myself, so I know what to expect and can enjoy it for what it is, not what I thought it would be.

I think Gil and Jason just couldn't handle all the characters and the story they came up with was good enough for some of the characters but not everyone.
Again,this movie would have been way more cohesive in what it was trying to do if none of the OGs were in it.Or if the story was only about the OGs.It's like two movies clashing

[BatDan]

I dunno, i feel like the movie worked the best and was the strongest when it was the Ogs and the new busters together on screen.

all the Ray with Podcast and Pheeb scenes were superb because most of that was having to uncover the Garakka backstory. So it was on track and wasnt taking any detours. If all the movie was was this. Id be happy.

Winston showing them around the PRC? Gold.

It made me want the movie to be MORE of that. I really wanted to see the OGs go on a bust with the new recruits. Winston, Janine, or Venkman out with Gary and Callie while Ray was uncovering stuff with the kids.

It was the subplots that dragged stuff down. Again, going back to Melody. If melody didnt exist, the movie would feel so much more less burdened.

[Alphagaia]

To me the Melody drama sounds like the best idea in the script
I see the parallels between Trevor and Phoebe while they are both handling their ghost problem in a different way.
Them befriending that what they actually have to capture gives layers to the ghosts and don't just make them hazards to overcome.

I would like to see a series where it turns out ghosts can be given rights, or helped to finish their unfinished business, instead of just busting the baddy.
It doesn't sound the movie will tackle or adress this, though.

But It's probably better for me to reserve judgement after I seen it play out.

[mrmichaelt]

But It's probably better for me to reserve judgement after I seen it play out.

Yep.

[BatDan]

To me the Melody drama sounds like the best idea in the script

Trust me. Its not. It wouldve worked better in the next movie when they have a clear canvas to juggle.

Here? Youll see. Their scenes stop the movie dead in its tracks and they play out so flat.

[Alphagaia]

Oh, I'm prepared for it to be bad. I like the idea, but probably not the execution.

[tylergfoster]

There might be something to your point about critics having less patience with franchise/IP movies (in general) that capitalise on their built-in audience, but I return to my original argument: it's because they have a deeper insight into how the "sausage" is made, like the example I mentioned above.

A critic will see the library ghost in FE, sneer, and think it was a completely meaningless and cynical choice that added nothing to the overall narrative, while a hardcore GB fan is likely to cheer at the moment because they got that nostalgia hit. That doesn't mean critics have any sort of agenda.

Worth reiterating here that I'm pro-critic. I was a critic. I'm on your side with the idea that we don't need to come up with a whole conspiracy theory as to why they don't like the movie, and the stuff I'm describing about a grudge is meant to sound like a normal reaction to seeing something trotted out too many times, not an elaborate vendetta. I'm sure many people rolled their eyes when Terminator: Dark Fate popped up, on the heels of Genisys, Salvation, and Rise of the Machines, and there will probably be some who are still groaning if Terminator goes away for ten years but then comes back in yet another iteration.

(Also, FWIW, I'm with the critics on the library ghost. I don't find it cynical -- if anything, it's too earnest -- but it is definitely a meaningless wink, the kind that the movie mostly avoids, which is a relief given the 2016 movie and Afterlife wink like this constantly.)

[JonXCTrack]

To me the Melody drama sounds like the best idea in the script
I see the parallels between Trevor and Phoebe while they are both handling their ghost problem in a different way.
Them befriending that what they actually have to capture gives layers to the ghosts and don't just make them hazards to overcome.

I would like to see a series where it turns out ghosts can be given rights, or helped to finish their unfinished business, instead of just busting the baddy.
It doesn't sound the movie will tackle or adress this, though.

But It's probably better for me to reserve judgement after I seen it play out.

You'll see that it really isn't that deep, and there really aren't any parallels. They needed something for Trevor to do, and they wanted to bring Slimer back for the nostalgia, so they worked this into the script. It wasn't terrible, but it wasn't great, either. And the Melody ghost friend/girlfriend for Phoebe is just so different in tone from the rest of the movie, it just grinds everything to a halt. Not to mention, it feels like a complete Casper rip-off.

[PukieDoug]

Wow , tough crowd here

[DancingToaster]

You'll see that it really isn't that deep, and there really aren't any parallels. They needed something for Trevor to do, and they wanted to bring Slimer back for the nostalgia, so they worked this into the script. It wasn't terrible, but it wasn't great, either. And the Melody ghost friend/girlfriend for Phoebe is just so different in tone from the rest of the movie, it just grinds everything to a halt. Not to mention, it feels like a complete Casper rip-off.

Generally agreed; the idea behind the Melody plotline is interesting, but it feels like it doesn't completely belong in this movie. The tone and style of the scenes also feels different from the rest; maybe part of it is that she doesn't really act, talk, or sound ghostly, which is a bit jarring. In GBA, Egon looked very human but didn't talk, so there was still that sense of ghostly detachment that Melody could have used more of (she's "ghostly" but very bright... maybe kind of cartoonish? It's hard to exactly explain). She speaks very clearly like she's alive.
I wonder if there was a sense of "we don't know 100% if we'll get another movie, and Phoebe is still an angsty teenager, so let's try to get all of these ideas in now while we still can!" For me, it was the weakest part of the film and there were other great parts that I wish had more time. For example, the thing/object that the library scene revolved around seemed like a big deal and ended up not really going anywhere.

However, there are others that really liked it, so definitely go to see the movie and see how you feel about it!

Ray was fantastic in this and had a decent amount of screentime and his own subplot; I wish he was in the movie even more, especially relating to Phoebe and both of their age-related sidelining.

[MovieFacts]

There might be something to your point about critics having less patience with franchise/IP movies (in general) that capitalise on their built-in audience, but I return to my original argument: it's because they have a deeper insight into how the "sausage" is made, like the example I mentioned above.

A critic will see the library ghost in FE, sneer, and think it was a completely meaningless and cynical choice that added nothing to the overall narrative, while a hardcore GB fan is likely to cheer at the moment because they got that nostalgia hit. That doesn't mean critics have any sort of agenda.

Worth reiterating here that I'm pro-critic. I was a critic. I'm on your side with the idea that we don't need to come up with a whole conspiracy theory as to why they don't like the movie, and the stuff I'm describing about a grudge is meant to sound like a normal reaction to seeing something trotted out too many times, not an elaborate vendetta. I'm sure many people rolled their eyes when Terminator: Dark Fate popped up, on the heels of Genisys, Salvation, and Rise of the Machines, and there will probably be some who are still groaning if Terminator goes away for ten years but then comes back in yet another iteration.

(Also, FWIW, I'm with the critics on the library ghost. I don't find it cynical -- if anything, it's too earnest -- but it is definitely a meaningless wink, the kind that the movie mostly avoids, which is a relief given the 2016 movie and Afterlife wink like this constantly.)

Ah, gotcha.

You know, I haven't seen 2016 movie in a while, I may revisit it. If my memory serves correctly it felt like they utilised NY better in that movie in comparison to FE. Other than the intro sequence, and some skyline shots, I felt like 90% of it was shot on a set.