The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent
vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums
here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules
document is now in effect.
GhostBusters: Aint Afraid of No Reviews
Posts
Yes; it's important to note that Belushi was a lifelong friend of Ramis & Akroyd, and Slimer is absolutely their comedic homage to him.
Slimer in the new film very much carries on that tradition, IMHO.
That was the joke, McCarthy stage dived no issue, Patty goes for it and they just move away, so she's like "better not have been something about my race or my size as a lady"
pleasepaypreacher.net
The characters aren't direct copies, which is nice, as it isn't the same movie.
Credits scene was amusing. Cameos were all great.
Overall it was a lot less subtle on things than the original, but I don't expect subtle from Feig.
All that said, Fall Out Boy is destined for Very Special Hell for their part.
Like, I don't doubt that Sony would try to make Bill Murray promote the movie against his will, or the fact that's in the leaks.
But I seriously doubt they could ever find leverage on him to actually make him do it if he really didn't want to. Hell, Bill Murray actually forfeited his rights to the series years ago specifically because he wanted no part in another sequel.
"I want you inside me"
"This man has no dick"
is the answer to that
Also, Blowjob Ghost
Nah, this movie is not the original Ghostbusters, and that is its worst sin
Having said that, and having seen the film, I can also say this (drunk review):
This movie had an interesting problem: the scripted jokes were garbage, while the moments that let the actors act were amazing. Compare this to the original, where the actors just got to go nuts all the time, and... well, there's your problem: you have four actors who have the potential to match the OG Ghostbusters, hamstrung by... something, some sort of mandate that they be over-scripted. The golden moments are just the cast working together, while the scripted jokes are weak AF. Paul Feige can cast like a motherfucker, but apparently Ramis has him beat in the writing department.
This movie seems like it's a little more reminiscent of the animated show, than the '84 movie. The effects were kickass, if skewed a little cartoonish, but I happen to know there was practical work. Everybody involved seemed to be having a good time.
I give it 8/10
ALSO: The original movie is my #1 favorite movie of all time. Like... I could probably get into serious beef over it.
If I were a parent, I'd take my kids to this before showing them the originals. Kids would like this a lot, and I think watching it with children would improve a person's experience quite a bit, if they can get over the baggage.
A wonderful movie, vastly better than expected. All the leads were brilliant, funny, charismatic and made intriguing performances - especially McKinnon and McCarthy. McKinnon stole the show, naturally. But what I liked was how none of the cast overshadowed the others, unlike in the OG GB movies. While Jones character wasn't a scientist she proved a valuable addition to the team in formulating ideas and gathering resources.
Wiig's Erin was a relatable audience surrogate, and her relationship with the rest of the team was funny, as well as complex and entertaining. Something "straight man" roles typically don't have, and grew into her own quirkiness as she became an experienced Ghostbuster herself.
McCarthy was a crucial role that kept the team together, providing natural leadership (she seems to get the rank by default unofficially) and a good foil for Wiig to bounce off. Probably my favorite performance of her's I've seen. She wasn't a complete comedy relief, despite having moments like that through the movie, which worked perfectly.
McKinnon was awesome. Every scene she had was amazing. Unlike the others she acts like she's a super-hero/mad scientist who leapt out of a comic book. lol
Jones was a joy to watch. An every man who is funny, not afraid to stand up for herself yet will get out of dodge like a sensible person when the shit hits the fan. Because, why wouldn't anyone in those situations?
The villain was a let down, they could have done more with
A solid reboot/remake to build a franchise from. I want to see what crazy adventures these girls get up to!
The movie is heavily influenced by the OG GB's, but it is it's own thing in its own right rather than repeating what other movies.
To follow up with what I said earlier about it feeling like at least one scene was missing:
I dunno, I could be wrong about this, but I suspect that some scenes were left on the cutting room floor for length purposes, and/or that it didn't fit the intended mood.
You know the song.
By this, do you mean that it has that Tina Fey/Diablo Cody style of comedy writing where literally every line is an overwritten joke?
Please... say it ain't so.
It isn't. It's actually more serious than the trailers imply, I'd compare it to a Marvel film with its tone.
It's a comedy, it's very funny, it is a modern comedy so there is a mix of improv and scripted stuff just like every movie to come out since Apatow hit the scene.
It is 100% in the spirit of the original movie. It meanders a bit in the middle and the end gets a little cgi action heavy but it's still very funny, especially when Kate McKinnon or Chris Hemsworth are on screen.
It is not as good as the original which is still to this day my favorite movie, but it is good.
Well I like Fey and Cody (mostly) so yeah kind of like that. Not every line is a joke, but there are a lot of jokes in the movie. I also wouldn't describe it as overwritten, there were a lot of good physical comedy as well, so it's not a talking heads delivering joke movie. I know Feig allows his actors to improv a lot, so there are scenes that feel very fluid in the improv style that Reitman was able to pull off in the original.
Comedy is really subjective. I think the difference between liking this film and not is wether the humor works for you. I can't assure anyone who hasn't seen the movie that they will like it, because who knows if the jokes will work for you or not. I will say that trailer does a poor job of showcasing not just the humor but the style of humor.
Line would have made more sense as "I don't know if it's a weight thing or a race thing" then. Either way that line didn't really work for me.
Funny because that is almost directly after the funniest part with Patty in the film.
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
Cameo spoilers
and then some of the beats from the original fell flat. The movie is like, 85% new stuff. It could've been such a good sequel. It's super frustrating that it's not just a sequel.
But I loved it anyway. Good job. Hope we get another one.
I think it works as a new thing, and while I liked the references, it did sometime seem like "well, we did it last time" a bit. Although they mostly fit pretty well.
Also cameo spoilers
pleasepaypreacher.net
I had watched all the trailers again a few days ago, and fully believed this movie to terrible. This positivity really lifts my spirits (hur).
Not sure if it's quite as quotable, though. I'll have to see it a couple more times and see what sticks.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Now, I'm not saying the movie is better, but those aspects worked well for me. The humor is right up my alley, with things like the Subway artist and Holtzman everything. It really seemed to front load everything, though. It started off so strong, got me really excited to run back and proclaim that the internet is full of bullshit, but it really coasted for a long stretch through the middle and finale. Well, some of the finale. The random mooks were actually fun and the fight was pretty bangin. The main villain was dull as dishwater, though.
For me the first act was slow moving, then it was slightly better than average. I assumed this was a good as it was going to get for a while, then act 2 the real shit hit the fan and it was awesome - and the final act was amazing.
I liked the scene where Wiig rescued McCarthy, that was intense despite the fact you knew she was going to succeed.
The CGI ghosts were excellent, aside from
This is something the movie was able to completely change my mind about. I thought it would be much more interesting to see a new of GhostBusters because it would avoid them rehashing the same origin story again, give them a opportunity to work in cameos more organically (which give how awkward some cameos are, is still true), and build off existing lore.
However, after seeing the film I actually think they made the right choice, mostly. First of all the script doesn't work at all if it's not a reboot, to make this in existing universe they would have had to have reworked everything, from the plot to individual character motivations, and I'm against this because I think the script was pretty solid. Second, unlike say, the SpiderMan movies, instead of rehashing the same origin story they actually make radically different choices then the first movie. For instance, no longer are the Ghostbusters rugged 80s capitalists, instead they are focused on scientific discovery and legitimacy. I'm not making a value judgement on either approach I just appreciate that for the most part this movie zigged when the 1984 version zagged. Stuff like
What they lose is the awesome gadgetry from the first movies, like I said in my initial review post, I just don't think the tech in this film works. I actually found the big finale scene to be really underwhelming, I don't think Fieg is a good action director and they never establish rules for their scifi nonsense so you never get a sense of stakes because their tech can essentially do whatever they want it to do. The first movie does such a fantastic job of setting up rules for their tech, explaining them to the audience and then uses those rules to dramatic effect ("cross the steams").
But I think they could have solved those problems while still keeping it in a new universe. Fieg defended his decision to keep it a reboot by saying that it was important that these characters are doing something novel, and I think he is right. I think from a basic storytelling 101 perspective, it is far more interesting to have your characters doing something novel then riding on coattails of others.
The new crew starts from scratch, and builds way more advanced equipment in a much smaller timeframe, so it's not like they're riding from coattails so much as rediscovering a lost art, and doing it better.
I agree on the gadgetry though. The subweapons were silly, and it's weird that they seemed to be using the proton packs to 'kill' the ghosts, when it's only ever been established to lasso them. Made for some pretty sparklies tho...
It was a very good movie. If this had been the first "Ghostbusters" script that Hollywood produced, then I doubt that it would be an American classic, but it would definitely warrant the 73% it holds on Rotten Tomatoes. Not everyone in this genre will think that the movie was worth their money, but a solid majority of people will.
Thoughts on the cast:
Where as the original movie breaks characters down by personality, I don't think it ever did a good job of breaking characters down by actual role. Winston was the everyman for the audience to identify with, but on the actual team, he was an extra set of hands. Likewise, there's a huge overlap between the skill sets for Egon and Ray, with the main difference being that Ray is more "heart" and Egon is more "brain." And Peter is just a con man seizing an opportunity.
In the reboot, everyone in the group has clearly defined roles. Erin is their physicist, Jillian is the engineer, and Patty is the history buff. It's unclear what Abby does that's unique, but that might be explored in the sequels. Curiously, there's no real expert on the occult in this movie. So that might be Abby's hidden talent, or it might be something that Patty will take up in the future now that she knows that ghosts are real.
Leslie Jones did an awesome job in this. A lot of people accuse her of playing a stereotype, but based on the interviews, it seems that she's just playing herself. And that's okay. Unlike Winston, she is treated as an actual equal to the rest of the group. One of the interesting character quirks was when she said, "I thought this would be like a book club," implying that she's just looking for friends.
One of the things I loved is how excited Erin is when she realizes that ghosts are real. She finally finds the validation she's been seeking since her early childhood, and she has confirmation of the fact that she isn't crazy. Where as Egon and Ray never really seemed to doubt or question the existence of ghosts. They were excited on their first encounter, but it's the excitement of a kid who finally gets to go to Disneyland. And not, "Holy shit, you mean Harry Potter was real along?"
The side characters are also given their side quirks and mannerisms in this movie, rather than being treated as one-dimensional. I laughed really hard when the Mayor started complaining about being compared to the Mayor in Jaws, because you just know there's a story behind that.
Chris Hemsworth is definitely not male Janine. His character worked fine in this movie, but they'll need to flesh out his character more if they shoot a sequel, because by then the element of surprise will be gone.
General thoughts:
One of the most important themes from the original movie was, "You don't have to be scared of the unknown, because you can always find a solution via science." The problem was, Americans back then had a much more naive understanding of what science actually was, so the science essentially became a form of magic in itself. All of the equipment is built off screen and simply works.
In the reboot, we see science treated as an actual process with methodology that needs to be refined over time. Which is good.
The new power dynamic with the mayor and the general public is complex and really interesting.
Some people wondered whether the villain character was too on-the-nose. Though in all reality, part of the problem with the backlash for this movie is that it was entirely predictable, just like South Park vs. the MPAA. The fact that the villain was basically a character similar to the ghostbusters themselves, rather than just some mythical ancient cult leader, was a nice touch.
Things that could be improved:
Somehow, they get the funding for a shitload of equipment and additional staff, but we don't really see them charging for their services, unless the rock concert guy single-highhandedly funded their entire operation. I suppose one rationale is that their book sales on Amazon went through the roof after the initial sightings, but I shouldn't have to do the job of the writers for them.
The arrest at the hotel made also no sense. At that point, the janitor operated entirely in secret. This wasn't like the rock concert, where there there was a known haunting and the women are called in. Also, why didn't anyone try to break down and analyze the equipment the janitor left behind?
There were a lot of jokes that seemed to fall flatter than they use. Usually, it was just a issue of comedic timing. For instance, at one point, Patty accuses a graffiti artist of using the subway as his art studio. The artist replies, "My studio is somewhere else, this is more like my gallery." There needed to be a beat there between the setup and the punchline.
This was a solid start to a new franchise, ala 21 Jump Street. Hopefully, they'll have a solid plan for the sequel as well.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Now that the reviews are good, and word of mouth goes around, it'll be interesting to see what happens to the box office over the next few weeks. Hopefully, you'll start seeing a lot of holdouts who were expecting the film to be awful to start giving it a chance.
Aside from sequels, it'll also be interesting if Sony uses this as a chance to reach out to girls in other forms of media.
The new action oriented style would lend itself better to a video game than the original style. Honestly, when the Ghostbusters video game came out for 360 and PS3, I just thought the whole thing looked extremely tedious and repetitive.
Also, you imagine if Sony took the team who did "Spectacular Spider-Man" and had them work on a Ghostbusters cartoon.
Extreme Ghostbusters was pretty awful as a cartoon. The main problem was that literally every single episode had the exact same resolution: "Ancient evil is immune to standard equipment, so let's find a way to turn it's power against itself before we trap it."
Lots of behind the scenes clips at 4:30.
For some reason that died, maybe this is a success it'll be restarted? Or something similar.