Comments on: Ghostbusters: New York and Self-Involvement http://blog.spout.com/2008/07/15/ghostbusters-new-york-and-self-involvement/ Daily coverage of what is truly interesting in the film world Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:20:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Jeremy Smith http://blog.spout.com/2008/07/15/ghostbusters-new-york-and-self-involvement/#comment-108454 Jeremy Smith Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:59:34 +0000 http://blog.spout.com/?p=3362#comment-108454 Also wonderful is Ray's flabbergasted retort to the third mortgage line: "I know, but at 19%? You didn't even bargain with the guy!" Also wonderful is Ray’s flabbergasted retort to the third mortgage line: “I know, but at 19%? You didn’t even bargain with the guy!”

]]> By: Kois http://blog.spout.com/2008/07/15/ghostbusters-new-york-and-self-involvement/#comment-108330 Kois Thu, 17 Jul 2008 16:46:25 +0000 http://blog.spout.com/?p=3362#comment-108330 This is awesome. This is awesome.

]]> By: Anon http://blog.spout.com/2008/07/15/ghostbusters-new-york-and-self-involvement/#comment-108280 Anon Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:22:07 +0000 http://blog.spout.com/?p=3362#comment-108280 John, A) You probably don't want to read <a href="http://www.suck.com/daily/2000/11/14/" rel="nofollow">this</a>. B) Any movie in which the one character every audience member is supposed to hate <i>represents the EPA</i>...Well, that's probably going to lend itself to a libertarian reading. Anon John,

A) You probably don’t want to read this.

B) Any movie in which the one character every audience member is supposed to hate represents the EPA…Well, that’s probably going to lend itself to a libertarian reading.

Anon

]]> By: John http://blog.spout.com/2008/07/15/ghostbusters-new-york-and-self-involvement/#comment-108257 John Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:58:20 +0000 http://blog.spout.com/?p=3362#comment-108257 Possibly cruising for a bruising or a huge misunderstanding, I'm going to call Karina out on some things: This is a libertarian reading of Ghostbusters, I presume? If that's correct, than I take issue with you interpreting the movie only through the character of Peter Venkman, as played by Bill Murray. Because the movie is essentially about a group of individuals who interdependently join forces to 'trap' supernatural threats, the title of the movie is GHOSTBUSTERS, not GHOSTBUSTER. To even ignore Harold Ramis's performance as Egon is just downright criminal, and I would probably hate GHOSTBUSTERS if it was actually just about Venkman. And the threats are not just mere spectres that symbolize former zeitgeists that should be ignored-- for instance, Slimer, the second ghost that they encounter, actually physically destroys things. Same with Zuul, and same with The Stay-Puff Marshmellow Man. Frankly, that point would work better in the context of Ghostbusters II, but not in the first one. I take issue with these readings because A) I admittedly have a fair amount of contempt for libertarians and B) NOBODY sullies one of my childhood favorites with a political ideology I don't agree with, just like how NOBODY steps on a church in my town! Possibly cruising for a bruising or a huge misunderstanding, I’m going to call Karina out on some things:

This is a libertarian reading of Ghostbusters, I presume? If that’s correct, than I take issue with you interpreting the movie only through the character of Peter Venkman, as played by Bill Murray. Because the movie is essentially about a group of individuals who interdependently join forces to ‘trap’ supernatural threats, the title of the movie is GHOSTBUSTERS, not GHOSTBUSTER. To even ignore Harold Ramis’s performance as Egon is just downright criminal, and I would probably hate GHOSTBUSTERS if it was actually just about Venkman.

And the threats are not just mere spectres that symbolize former zeitgeists that should be ignored– for instance, Slimer, the second ghost that they encounter, actually physically destroys things. Same with Zuul, and same with The Stay-Puff Marshmellow Man. Frankly, that point would work better in the context of Ghostbusters II, but not in the first one.

I take issue with these readings because A) I admittedly have a fair amount of contempt for libertarians and B) NOBODY sullies one of my childhood favorites with a political ideology I don’t agree with, just like how NOBODY steps on a church in my town!

]]> By: Prof. Toru Tanaka http://blog.spout.com/2008/07/15/ghostbusters-new-york-and-self-involvement/#comment-108252 Prof. Toru Tanaka Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:02:43 +0000 http://blog.spout.com/?p=3362#comment-108252 It's Zuul, not Zoul. Obviously, you are not a god. It’s Zuul, not Zoul.

Obviously, you are not a god.

]]> By: kevin http://blog.spout.com/2008/07/15/ghostbusters-new-york-and-self-involvement/#comment-108250 kevin Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:57:08 +0000 http://blog.spout.com/?p=3362#comment-108250 Very nicely done. I'm still not able to fully unpack how Venkman's electrocution of the test subject effected me as a child. He may have been the first protagonist I both loved and hated. Very nicely done. I’m still not able to fully unpack how Venkman’s electrocution of the test subject effected me as a child. He may have been the first protagonist I both loved and hated.

]]>