Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rain Dog 
...are we honestly classing Ghostbusters as being in ANY way a horror film tho? Really?
An American Werewolf In London, I'll go with, but Ghostbusters is pure comedy.
Having ghosts in it doesn't make it a horror-comedy any more than shoving feathers up my butt makes me a chicken.
|
Well, say what you will, but I'd classify it as a horror comedy because the ghosts don't get played for laughs (with the exception of Stay Puft, which is probably the best executed visual gag of the 80s). They're real, they're dangerous, and in the case of the Terror Dogs, yeah, pretty effin' creepy. The chair scene, for example, is more Poltergeist, less Stripes, if you get my drift. I'd say Ghostbusters is a comedy first, sci-fi/horror film second, while American Werewolf is the vice versa.
Even though it's not a scary as American Werewolf, the first film managed to feel as big as Star Wars and still be a no-shit comedy, something American Werewolf didn't do. Add on top of that one of the best comedic ensembles ever assembled, a crackerjack mix of both scripted and ad-libbed one liners, perfect pacing, and some really gorgeous cinematography (go back and really pay attention; Lazlo Kovacs really did a number on it), and the result is something we'd never seen before. Last time someone tried to blend comedy and huge effects we got 1941; the characters inevitably get lost in the mayhem. Ghostbusters managed to focus the effects in such a way that they service the story and the characters. No one had pulled that off in the new Hollywood system, and no one's really pulled it off the same way since (and I say that as a fan of the first Men in Black).
So, yeah, when it comes down to brass tacks, I'd say Ghostbusters is a more remarkable film than American Werewolf. And it kicks the shit out of Little Shop, a musical I like and a film I enjoy, but holy boringly shot, Batman!