Film review

Ghostbusters

1984 · Directed by Ivan Reitman · 1h 45m · MPA PG

In a sentenceBill Murray makes ghostbusting look like a job he took because nobody checks his references

ComedyFantasy

Dr Peter Venkman (Bill Murray), Dr Raymond Stantz (Dan Aykroyd) and Dr Egon Spengler (Harold Ramis) take up ghostbusting in New York. Treating supernatural trouble as a business, they bring a working team’s practical concerns into the city’s more expensive surroundings. Venkman leads the operation with an irreverence that sits awkwardly beside his professional title. The story combines ghostly encounters with the day-to-day demands of the team’s enterprise. Sigourney Weaver plays Dana Barrett, Rick Moranis plays Louis Tully, Ernie Hudson plays Winston Zeddemore and Annie Potts plays Janine Melnitz.

Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.

Fi1m review

Ivan Reitman’s ghost comedy earns its laughs through Bill Murray’s deadpan and the team’s easy conversation. The plotting is slight, and some effects get too much attention, but we recommend it for the company.

Ghostbusters is a funny, assured supernatural comedy with a story that sometimes gets by on the charm of the people telling it. Ivan Reitman understands how much amusement there is in giving a haunting to men who treat it as a line of work. The ghosts can be alarming, but somebody still has a business to run. The film is most enjoyable when it lets the team talk, and occasionally too eager to interrupt them with effects.

Bill Murray’s Dr Peter Venkman is a dubious person to put in charge, which helps considerably. Murray gives him a deadpan assurance that makes professional competence seem almost beside the point. We laughed at the way his casual delivery unsettles the exchanges with Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis; a supernatural emergency cannot quite persuade him to sound impressed. Aykroyd’s Raymond Stantz supplies eager conviction, while Ramis’s Egon Spengler gives his replies a pleasing exactness. Even when the conversation wanders towards the supernatural, they sound like colleagues accustomed to one another.

Ramis and Aykroyd’s screenplay is less attentive to what holds those conversations together. The plotting is thin, and some of the people around the central trio feel useful chiefly because the next stretch requires them. Rick Moranis makes Louis Tully funny enough for this not to matter whenever he is present, but a good supporting performance cannot do all the writing. The weakness is noticeable because the central partnership is so comfortable: it invites an interest in the characters that the script does not consistently reward.

László Kovács’s cinematography gives the ghost story a welcome air of everyday life, so that the people remain interesting even when something unnatural is sharing the image. John DeCuir’s production design makes particular use of the contrast between the team’s working manner and its upscale New York surroundings. These are places where a grubby practical problem is especially unwelcome. That helps the jokes, and gives the effects a setting worth looking at before anything supernatural happens.

Editors David E. Blewitt and Sheldon Kahn keep this mixture moving without rushing the actors. The exchanges have room to find their rhythm, and the action rarely breaks the comic momentum. Elmer Bernstein’s score gives the supernatural material enough weight to make the team’s lack of ceremony amusing. The music helps sustain the ghost story through the comic interruptions.

As a horror comedy, the film gets an important thing right: the jokes do not require the ghosts to be harmless. Reitman allows the supernatural spectacle to hold our attention without insisting on a gag every moment. Occasionally he lets it hold that attention too long. The larger effects passages can crowd out the quieter exchanges, which are where this cast is most enjoyable.

There is a satirical pleasure in watching these men turn supernatural disturbance into paid work, though we would not ask the film to provide a thorough account of capitalism. It is much more interested in keeping the company entertaining, and at 105 minutes it seldom tests our patience. The slight plotting is a real limitation, rather than something affection should oblige us to overlook. See it for the actors, and allow for the occasional stretch when the effects get more attention than they deserve.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

5 of 6
Positive
3
Mixed
0
Negative
2
Radio Times
★★★★ · John Ferguson
80

The often dazzling special effects-driven slapstick tends to overshadow some slyer, more sophisticated laughs in this blockbusting family comedy. Bill Murray is terrifically deadpan and sleazy as the dubious leader, with strong support from the cast and spectacular set pieces from director Ivan Reitman.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
8 June 1984 · Vincent Canby
40*

The premise of unleashing Bill Murray in an Exorcist-like setting is promising but the film stays at the idea stage with wispy jokes, characters, and story. It is another messy near-miss from Murray, kept afloat mainly by his anarchic slob persona.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
8 June 1984 · Roger Ebert

The film succeeds as both a special-effects blockbuster and a sly dialogue comedy where characters banter like smart graduate students in on the joke. It preserves its comic vision amid a big budget, with effects serving the actors rather than overwhelming them.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
· Eric Henderson

The review highlights the film's satire of 1980s New York capitalism and class distinctions through the Ghostbusters' blue-collar hustle amid upscale settings. It notes how the movie captures the era's shift toward commercial optimism while delivering calculated consumer appeal.

Read the full review →
The Hollywood Reporter
8 June 1984 · Arthur Knight

The critic finds the film a relaxed, stylish ghost story mixing comedy, action, and effects from the Meatballs team. He praises the sustained pacing, inventive production design, and score while noting the primitive plotting is carried off with finesse.

Read the full review →
Consequence
9 June 2019 · Michael Roffman and Ben Kaye
90*

The critics hail the film as an essential rewatchable classic whose world-building, sound design, score, and aesthetic details make it the most pleasing movie ever made. They single out its scrappy DIY ethos, memorable characters and names, and enduring immersive atmosphere for praise.

Read the full review →

Cast

Stills

Awards

Academy Awards, 1985

Nominated
Best Visual Effects

If you liked this, try…

Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein poster

Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein

1948 · The monsters keep their dignity while the comedians struggle to keep theirs.

House poster

House

1977 · For stranger haunted-house comedy, with handmade effects allowed to run riot.

The Frighteners poster

The Frighteners

1996 · Another supernatural business venture, with a nastier streak beneath the jokes.

Attack the Block poster

Attack the Block

2011 · A more abrasive British creature comedy, grounded in neighbourhood loyalties and teamwork.

What We Do in the Shadows poster

What We Do in the Shadows

2014 · Supernatural creatures discover that sharing a house requires more patience than immortality.