Review

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire Review - Ghostbusters 3 In 2024, For Better Or Worse

  • First Released Mar 22, 2024
    released
  • movie
Phil Owen on Google+

Though not as actively irritating as Afterlife was, this Ghostbusters flick never figures out what it wants to be.

There are two things that are simultaneously true about Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire. First: It tells a new and original Ghostbusters story, in the vein of the original two, that functions like a true Ghostbusters 3, unlike 2021's Ghostbusters: Afterlife. That's a good thing, in a vacuum. But the second thing is a big caveat: The Ghostbusters formula has been used by so many blockbusters in the past couple decades that Frozen Empire just cannot make a real impression.

In other words, we've got a legitimate new Ghostbusters movie on our hands, but what the franchise actually needs is to reinvent itself. Not the way Afterlife did it, by doing an '80s-style kid adventure, but by actually finding a new direction. Instead, we've got essentially a Ghostbusters-themed Marvel movie that's got several movies' worth of plot and only occasionally made me laugh. Bummer.

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire opens with the Spengler family (Carrie Coon, Mckenna Grace, Finn Wolfhard) and Gary (Paul Rudd) acting as full-fledged Ghostbusters, in uniform, in the Ecto-1, chasing an ethereal sewer dragon through the streets of New York City. They catch the dragon, cause some not-insignificant collateral damage, and the mayor (the EPA guy from the original movie, Walter Peck, for some reason) decides to try to shut them down and condemn the old fire station over it. Yes, the Spenglers and Gary live in the old Ghostbusters firehouse now, just because.

No Caption Provided

Unfortunately, there's then a new threat in the form of an old orb that ends up in the hands of Ray Stantz (Dan Aykroyd). This ancient artifact is a prison for a really bad ghost, of course, but our protagonists don't know that. And it turns out that the dork who gave Ray the orb, Nadeem (Kumail Nanjiani), may have a connection to the ancient group of Ghostbusters that created the orb.

That's plenty enough plot for a single movie. But on top of that, Frozen Empire crams in several major B plots you'll have to deal with, like the containment unit at Ghostbusters HQ reaching its capacity, young Phoebe developing a bit of an infatuation with a teen ghost girl, and the older Ghostbusters wrestling with the fact that they're actually elderly now.

Those aren't bad subplot ideas, but in Frozen Empire they exist next to each other instead of working together to form a coherent narrative. Phoebe's ghost crush is a neat idea, but the main plot cuts it off before it can develop any substance. The ghost containment unit hitting its capacity is also a neat idea, but it's completely incidental to the main story--it's just a thing that's also happening. And aside from Ray, who actually is important to the story all the way through, Winston (Ernie Hudson), Venkman (Bill Murray), and Janine (Annie Potts) are more like human Easter eggs there to remind you that there were previous Ghostbusters movies.

No Caption Provided

Despite all that, Frozen Empire does work for a while. It's an easy movie to watch, thanks in large part to how fun the core group of Phoebe, Gary, Callie and Trevor is. But instead of keeping the focus on that group as they try to deal with this new threat, it also piles on tons of obligatory franchise baggage. Some of it's fun (Aykroyd, Hudson, and Murray don't know how to not be entertaining) but all of it is noise, distracting from the main point and preventing us from ever being comfortable.

By the time we approached the film's MCU-style CGI climax in a frozen-over NYC, I was numb from all that stuff. It wasn't unpleasant, per se, and it's not poorly made or anything like that--new director Gil Kenan certainly is no Denis Villeneuve, but he knows how to make a movie that doesn't grate. But that's all that this movie can offer, really.

And that's the story of Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire in a nutshell. It may not be actively annoying (unlike Afterlife), but the weight of the Ghostbusters franchise seems to have prevented this one from truly being able to be itself. And that's just too bad.

Phil Owen on Google+
Back To Top

The Good

  • Much more of a real Ghostbusters 3 than Afterlife was, thanks to a new, original story
  • The new Ghostbusters family is a blast and has great chemistry
  • Manages to include some of the older characters in a much more substantial way this time

The Bad

  • The needs of the franchise outweigh the needs of the movie
  • Too scatterbrained to stay focused on anything
  • Devolves into standard big-budget CGI nonsense by the end

About the Author

Phil Owen is a freelance writer. Sony provided a screening of Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire for the purposes of this review.
20 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for deactivated-67d9b4d176198
deactivated-67d9b4d176198

324

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Why do Gamespot critics feel the need to conduct unwarranted deep dives in to the structure of movies and shows to uncover themes and narratives that aren't even there in the 1st place and only exist in the realms of their own opinions? If I were to sit and question the authenticity and reasoning behind every action of every character in media, I wouldn't enjoy anything. Just watch the movie and say yes or no if you enjoyed it.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for illegal_peanut
illegal_peanut

4223

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

So what you're saying is that Ghostbusters films is pretty much like "Home Alone" films.

One really good classic movie. and a whole bunch of terrible attempts for a sequel.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for faithxvoid
faithxvoid

943

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Damn. I thought afterlife was the second best film. Two and the remake were nonsense. The only thing that kept me from hard-core hating 2 as a kid was the scene where they control the statue of liberty with an nes advantage controller. I was and still am a sucker for video game references

2 • 
Avatar image for doubtless1
doubtless1

377

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

This was never a franchise in the first place, it's had ONE good film, a decent game, some okay animated shows and a ton of merch. Every film after the first has been drastically worse, stop giving these cash grabs your money and maybe we'll stop getting this garbage.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for mogan
mogan

20005

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

Edited By mogan  Moderator

@doubtless1: Ghostbusters 2 was OK. Definitely a step down from the original, but I'd take it over any of the movies or games since.

2 • 
Avatar image for doubtless1
doubtless1

377

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@mogan: I agree that it's better than everything that came after, but I don't think it's a very good film. No one wanted to be there and it really showed.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for BigPrimeNumbers
BigPrimeNumbers

367

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

There was already a sort of "official" Ghostbusters 3 in 2009, in the underrated Ghostbusters: The Video Game (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostbusters:_The_Video_Game#Development) :P

3 • 
Avatar image for robocoprocks
RobocopRocks

46

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Another example of a delusional critic using popular media to try to rise above their own mediocrity.

Fortunately, in this modern era, the critics negative or positive reviews are largely ignored by the masses, as the reader experience of them often reveals a hidden agenda or thinly veiled personal gripe against the media being reviewed.

Thankfully, these so called professional critics have absolutely no impact on the success or failure of the reviewed media, and as such these mundane reviews are rendered unequivocally pointless and meaningless.

I'm sure that aspect really does frustrate those authors who had likely hoped their words would result in a box office flop and so rarely get to see that transpire. Long may that continue!

4 • 
Avatar image for probable
Probable

398

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@robocoprocks: I think the masses do care about critic's reviews, actually. My reason being is because most games, music and movies with low review scores don't sell very well. Usually.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for robocoprocks
RobocopRocks

46

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@probable: You may not be at all surprised but I'm inclined to vehemently disagree with your introductory sentence.

Your initial reasoning is apt and valid but also fundamentally flawed, albeit, you are not really considering that games, music and movies success factor has much more to do with actual consumer reviews (such as Steam or other consumer forums).

The consumers perception of whether the product has flaws also stems from its initial sales forecast, as well as the post launch profitability.

Any one with any semblance of common sense would read between the lines of the oft amateurish penmanship presented at gaming sites and decipher the author's negativity, as not being earnest but an attempt at being controversial, just for the sake of being controversial, in the vain hope they are individually elevated in a professional scribes world.

Keep in mind, most the authors here are writing about games, not movies, hence their judgement has no professional merit and so it just comes down to their personal opinion, and therein lies the problem, that opinion is often bereft of constructive and useful information, which only reveals an individual who has a thinly veiled disdain for the media they are providing their skewed analysis of.

Only those with a significant level of naivety, akin to a teenager or younger. would be indoctrinated by such small minded and redundant prose.

If that is you, maybe, in time, as you become accustomed and attuned to the critic façade, then you will truly comprehend my rhetoric.

When Ghostbusters Frozen Empire is released, the truest examination of whether it is a movie that is admired and apropos, a box office success, will be based solely on how many people spend their hard earned funds to watch it, and certainly not the completely irrelevant personal ranting of any egoistical game site reviewer.

2 • 
Avatar image for lokar82
lokar82

498

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Amazing how many passes and reboots this franchise gets. There was one good movie 40 years ago. Let it die.

2 • 
Avatar image for mogan
mogan

20005

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

Edited By mogan  Moderator

Bummer. But I didn't like Afterlife, so hopes weren't super high for Frozen Empire anyway.

Streaming service later this year it is!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for davillain
DaVillain

59292

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

DaVillain  Moderator

Don't often care what the critics say about a movie. I'm still going to go see it and form my own opinion as everyone should. Regardless of that, I'm shocked that it's this low on Rotten Tomatoes! The previous film was liked and was seen as a first step in the right direction, so hopefully, Frozen Empire won't flop this weekend.

2 • 
Avatar image for dabear
dabear

9540

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

You'd think after GS dropped the ball so hard on Afterlife, they would think twice before bombing Frozen Empire. Yet here we are, and yet again Game Spot is probably making itself look like a fool again.

Perhaps it is not woke enough for Game Spot?

4 • 
Avatar image for itsnota2mer
ItsNotA2Mer

1105

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By ItsNotA2Mer

@dabear: Talks about Gamespot making a fool out of themselves, then proceeds to throw out the word "woke".

Uh-huh.

3 • 
Avatar image for dabear
dabear

9540

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By dabear

@itsnota2mer said:

@dabear: Talks about Gamespot making a fool out of themselves, then proceeds to throw out the word "woke".

Uh-huh.

"Woke" bothers you, huh? How woke.

4 • 
Avatar image for zelda37
Zelda37

195

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@itsnota2mer: Why does that word offend you?

It did seem one of the few things the reviewer "liked" or thought may be interesting kind of skewed that way.

4 • 
Avatar image for mogan
mogan

20005

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

mogan  Moderator

@dabear: GameSpot gave Afterlife an 8 to the Rotten Tomatoes scores of 64 critic and 94 audience. Is that dropping the ball? Seems like they kind of split the difference there.

4 • 
Avatar image for alex33x
alex33x

1923

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

If Phil Owen is giving it a 5, then that means the fil is not awake enough. Which means it's good. After all, Afterlife has a 94% audience rating for rotten tomatoes.

3 •