Wednesday, 13 July 2016

Ghostbusters (2016)

The misogynistic bile that has followed this movie ever since it's release has been nothing short of disgusting. Yes, fans always kick off when their favourite movie is remade or rebooted but I can't quite remember anything as bad as the reaction to this film for having the audacity to cast women in the leading in a remake of a popular film.

Thirty years on from the first Ghostbusters, Sony saw fit to bring out a reboot where a sceptic Erin Gilbert (Kristen Wiig) is dragged into a group of ghost hunters after witnessing a paranormal event. It soon transpires that this paranormal event wasn't just a one time thing as New York will soon play host to a paranormal event of apocalyptic proportions.

Paul Feig's latest films have all had women in prominent roles, his best film is Bridesmaids, followed by Spy and then his most recent film Ghostbusters. His latest film works with its gleefully silly humour, even though the stars lack the deadpan wit of Bill Murray (whose does make a cameo appearance) but they all do well in their respective roles, particularity Kate Mckinnon whose eccentric Jillian Holtzman steals the show. The central stars have a good chemistry and they work off each other really well and whilst I don't think the idea of the 'role reversal' male receptionist is a particularity inventive or funny idea, Chris Hemsworth does a good job of it and the film does actually make the most of making the typically female role male.

The central stars performances are good and the film is amusing, but it is let down by its central story. Whilst it has a few creepy scenes in the opening acts, the central story is one that plods along rather inconsistency. It spends a little too much time trying to be familiar with its references to the 1984 film rather than build its own story. Too much wink, wink, nudge, nudge takes away any tension or excitement from the story, especially in the final act where it is a long way short of being thrilling. When the film is more story focused it isn't quite as fun and the forgettable villain only just adds to the unthreatening nature of the story.

The central story is little weak (it certainly wasn't the strong point of the 1984 original either), the performances are fun enough the jokes more hit than miss (there are some that miss, probably because there's a lot of them in the trailer) for the film to be mostly good fun.

3/5

10 comments:

  1. I haven't even seen the original movies, but I will check them all out soon. And I'm especially interested in this one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only worth checking out the first film I've heard.

      Delete
  2. Good to hear that it is entertaining. The trailers didn't do much for me. I grew up with the original movie, and it has to be one of my favorite comedies of the 1980s. So when a trailer for the reboot doesn't get a single laugh out of me, yeah, not a good sign. I was also annoyed that they went with a reboot option instead of a sequel. Why reboot something that is remembered fondly and admired.

    Oh well, it sounds like we got something fun and entertaining. I'm glad. As you mentioned all the harsh criticism before the film even came out was way out of line.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. People can try to say that some of the criticism isn't motivated by the sex of the cast but can you think of any other remake treated with such vileness.

      Delete
  3. Yeah it's a shame that so many people hated on the film even before they saw it. The cast is great and I heard most of the cast was female too, so I think it's a great concept, but I did not like the original Ghostbusters so I don't know if I will see this one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The idea of remaking films with an all female cast is...quite frankly I don't really care to be honest, haha.

      Delete
  4. It definitely has its flaws, but it's still a fun time. Loved the cast.

    Nice review.

    - Zach

    ReplyDelete
  5. This review is pretty accurate. Fun, with lots of flaws. Hemsworth was the best of the movie for me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah. He turned I role I thought wasn't inventive to smart into one of the best roles in the film.

      Delete