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.