213: Ghostbusters Marathon

|< < Prev Comic #213 (January 22, 2007) Next > >|

Ghostbusters Marathon

Title text: If you walk out that door you'll be crossing the Rubicon with me, and that's one stream I'm not ready to cross.

Explanation

Ghostbusters is a 1984 supernatural comedy film that spawned a sequel and two animated television series (the latter of which lasted less than a season, didn't feature the same cast of titular Ghostbusters, and therefore is probably being pointedly ignored). The box, connected to a footswitch by a cable, is a device used in the film to capture ghosts. The man trying to leave is about to be pulled into the box and held against his will indefinitely.

The title text refers to Julius Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon, a river (or very large stream) that marked a border Caesar was ordered not to cross. He did so anyway, and the phrase "crossing the Rubicon" now means making a move with gigantic consequences that cannot be undone. In the film Ghostbusters, the protagonists use "proton packs" that fire "streams" of energy. The inventor of the device warns that these streams should not be crossed against each other, as doing so could destroy the world.

Transcript

[Two people are in a room. One is standing up. There is litter around them.]

Cueball: Okay, that's all the Ghostbusters marathon I can handle. Later!

Friend: You can't leave! We just started the animated series!

Cueball: I've had my fill. I'm going home.

Friend: I can't let you do that.

[Cueball walks along a cord, and past a box. The friend clicks a switch.]

Click

[Cueball is bathed in some kind of aura emitted by the box.]

 add a comment! ⋅  add a topic (use sparingly)! ⋅  refresh comments!

Discussion

Should the horrific "reboot" even be mentioned in this context, since the nightmare that was Amy Pascal's paranoid movie-making effort occurred many years after this comic? — Kazvorpal (talk) 01:06, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

It should at least be put into context, if it was not released at the time of this comic, and according to your comment was not well recieved? (I never even heard about it...) --Lupo (talk) 07:06, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I think much of the pushback against it (especially before release, so merely reacting against the idea of it) was just a form of 'anti-woke' frenzy from the kind of people who use "woke" as an insult (who don't deserve my time, I've long since decided).

When it comes to basic reboots it's not really destroying the legacy much at all (*cough*Highlander 2*/cough*), it's just a gender-flipped alternate universe version that feeds on some of the original plot but weaves its own mix of fun in the same general feel. Not a classic in its own right, and probably wouldn't be a classic if created as is but with no history of the original (times have changed, it has '80s humour and 2010s treatment), but remove the pre-judged animosity from the equation (and the kind of prejudice that rolls on from that) and it is a similar style of 'romp' and the original ideas still stand, unlike some basic premises that could be 'borrowed' from the '80s. (Obviously just this editor's opinion, but as an observation of how some people acted at the time, like sharing the initial trailer to try to say that "this is what is wrong in today's world...", and presuming I'd automatically agree with them, rather than realise how far down their own particular rabbit-hole they had fallen.)

For whatever reason, I've never seen the subsequent 'original-timeline sequel' (Afterlife?), because I just never got to the cinema much in 2021 (and, unlike the 2016 one, it hasn't yet noticably reached a TV channel that I have access to), so I have no comment to make about that. YMMV on all of this, of course. 172.70.85.168 13:55, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

I think we missed the joke entirely... The Cueball on the right is "ghosting" the other Cueball. 172.71.158.28 03:37, 22 August 2023 (UTC)