L
Page 10 - The Michigan Doily - Sunday, June 10, 1984
In search of ghosts...
By Mike Fisch
W HILE I patiently waited in the
ticket line to see Ghostbusters,
a silver chauffeur-driver limo slowly
wheeled it's way up the block to the
ticket booth. Three guys dressed up as
ectoplasmic removal specialists - ghost-
busters - hopped out of a vehicle to the
delight of the crowd. This stunt turned
out to be a good indicator for the film
itself, which was a comedy of epic
proportions. We're talking big, real
big.
Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, and
Harold Ramis portray college
professors, in the offbeat field of
parapsychology. Due to unorthodox,
non-scientific methods of experimen-
tation the three lose their grant, and
are forced to earn the bucks some
other way. That's when Dr. Venkman,
(Bill Murray) comes up with the idea
of setting up a ghost removal ser-
vice-the Ghostbusters.
Ghostbusters matches its big hype
with "believable" ghosts, from
human appartitions, to small greenish
slug-like phantasms, and huge toothy
crawling beasts, along with the ec-
toplasmic removal costumes the
comic stars don each morning to fight
New York's paranormal aberrations.
Each uniform is complete with its own
attached atomic, laser ghost fighting
weapon.
Does all this extravagance detract
from the film? It could have, as it of-
ten does in gadget based or 3D
movies, but Murray, Aykroyd, and
Ramis hold their own. They don't
compete for star status with the
special effectstman-they're just
plain too funny.
In this film Murray plays a charac-
ter much like others he's played in the
past (Stripes, Meatballs). First and
foremost he's a funnyman, then he's a
movie character. This switch didn't
really bother me because Murray
constantly succeeds in the funnyman
role. At times I predicted Murray's
lines but I still found myself laughing
hysterically. I guess a lot of the humor
comes from the way he says what he's
got to say. One of Murray's favorite
0
Harold Ramis, Dan Aykroyd, Bill Murray and Ernie Hudson give poltergeists a few problems in 'Ghostbusters,' a
hilarious comedy written by Ramis and Aykroyd.
comic devices is understatement, and
the bits that involve this device are
classic. Though Aykroyd and Ramis
were good complements for Murray's
role, Murray is largely responsible for
the success of the film.
Aykroyd's humor in the film is a
whole different thing. For the most
part he plays the straight man,
reminiscent of his role in the
Belushi/Aykroyd pair. He gets laughs
from being sublimely serious amidst
the craziness that capturing powerful
apparations entails. Fortunately,
Aykroyd and Murray can contrast in
this way and still maintain a
chemistry instead of a competition for
the spotlight. Murray, the funnyman
stands out more because of his comic
personality, but Aykroyd adds
another dimension.
The most disappointing performan-
ce came from Rick Moranis who por-
trays an ultra-nerdy accountant who
lives in a ghost infested apartment.
His role is so pathetic, so overwrit-
ten,that it's not funny. How much of it
is Moranis' fault is hard to say, but at
least with the lines he was provided
(Aykroyd and Ramis wrote the
script) there was nothing of much
merit.
The predictability of Ghostbusters'
ending may disturb you, but there are
enough great things about the movie
to make it well worth the forty
minute lines you'll likely deal with.
Hell, it's summer, get hyped and go
see Ghostbusters.
0
'Streets of Fire 'fails
to ignite a folio wing
(Continued from Page 7)
The characters, burdened with their
inflexible heroic armor, never show the
least sign of life. A little wit or self
parodying might have loosened things
up enough to make it enjoyable, but
we're supposed to take all this literally.
There's nothing heroic about Cody, or
villainous about Raven because they're
made solely up of the most rudimentary
traits. They never do anything more tan
brood and scowl, respectively. Hill
could have added some novel traits,
shaken up the stereotypes a little, but
he'd rather jazz up the scenery and
Read
and'
Use
Daily
Classifieds
leave the story in its fossilized state.
Mr. Hill's few admirers seem to find
this tendency of myth recycling
endearing, but those looking for a little
novelty in their films will find it quickly
tiring.
For an action-adventure, the action
sequences come far too infrequently.
Individual scenes, as when Cody single
handedly reduces the Bomber's lair to
burning rubble, or when Cody and
Raven have a showdown duel with
sledgehammers, are captured with a
terse, visceral style. But they feel too
obviously plugged into the material, all
of the nuts and bolts show. Worse, the
expected climactic rumble never
materializes, and the film ends on a
falsely sentimental chord.
Actually, Streets of Fire's overt
conventionality is something of a relief.
After the relentless sensory overload of
Indiana Jones and The Temple Of
Doom and the last Star Wars
installment, it's refreshing to find an
adventure that's content in its
straight forwardness. But this is too
straight. After all, myths have to be at
least inspiring, but this one only expires
in its own pretentious language.