Show-Off: Ghostbusters Real Parts Background Props

thundergod124

Well-Known Member
Hello, all. So, I wanted to share some of my background props from Ghostbusters (and a couple from GBII and Afterlife) that are all real parts. Halliwax turned me onto props replicas that used real parts and one of the things I love about the props from Ghostbusters is that a lot of the background or secondary prop can still be found for a pretty reasonable price. Keep in mind, some of these may not be 100% screen accurate, but they're pretty dang close.
20221120_173021.jpg20221120_172615.jpg20221120_172501.jpg20221120_172422.jpg20221120_172356.jpg20221120_172345.jpg20221120_172331.jpg20221120_172304.jpg20221120_172254.jpg20221120_172244.jpg20221120_172229.jpg

There's also one other one that holds a special place in my heart. If you'd indulge me for just a moment, I'd like to explain and provide some context. In my real life, I work in the field of applied behavior analysis and one of the core tenents of it is reinforcement in the form of both positive and negative. While Ghostbusters is easily my all-time favorite movie, one of the things that bugs the heck out of me is how Peter COMPLETELY butchers "negative reinforcement". I will not go into a full on diatribe about what it a actually is, but I can assure you, he is not even in the ball park. He could not be more wrong. I wrestled with this for a while until I had an "ah-ha!" moment. Venkman's complete fumbeling of this very basic psychological concept and practice goes to show what a total hack he is. He's such a "poor scientist", he gets this totally wrong. So, with that, I present to you, his electroshock machine. 20221120_172214.jpg

I'd love to see if anyone has any cool real parts GB props!
 
There's also one other one that holds a special place in my heart. If you'd indulge me for just a moment, I'd like to explain and provide some context. In my real life, I work in the field of applied behavior analysis and one of the core tenents of it is reinforcement in the form of both positive and negative. While Ghostbusters is easily my all-time favorite movie, one of the things that bugs the heck out of me is how Peter COMPLETELY butchers "negative reinforcement". I will not go into a full on diatribe about what it a actually is, but I can assure you, he is not even in the ball park. He could not be more wrong. I wrestled with this for a while until I had an "ah-ha!" moment. Venkman's complete fumbeling of this very basic psychological concept and practice goes to show what a total hack he is. He's such a "poor scientist", he gets this totally wrong. So, with that, I present to you, his electroshock machine.

I understood it differently. Given the way Peter was lying about the results, I saw it as him deliberately misusing university funds in order to meet hot girls and to be a little sadistic on people he doesn't like. There was no "science" in the first place. This tells the audience that Peter is just a fast-talking hack who has clearly BS'ed his way into getting funds for this "experiment". This makes him the perfect face for the team while Ray and Egon do the real work. He's not getting his experiment "wrong"; he never intended it to be "right" in the first place.

Throughout the movie, we see Peter grow from this character into someone who really does care about people, and serves as a good "real world" interface for Egon and Ray, who are not so socially adjusted.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top