Murray was my favorite personality/actor in the original. Winston was my favorite Ghostbuster, Ernie Hudson sold that world and character in a huge way.
There exists an alternative dimension where Ghostbusters (1984) stars John Belushi and Eddie Murphy.
With Murphy there were actually storyboards with his version of Winston present with the rest of Ghostbusters at the hotel. I believe he was originally the one that got slimed and not Murray. Once Murphy backed out of the project they recast with Hudson and scaled back the part.
I believe Peter was original written with Belushi in mind, though I might be misremembering that. At the very least on the DVD commentary, Ramis and Reitman refer to Slimer as the "ghost of John Belushi" and say something about his gluttony existing past his death (it sounds really cruel written out but they are joking around on the commentary when they say that).
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's a good set. I don't know about them addressing the initial reaction as pure sexism but honestly the politics surrounding this film bore me.
Kate McKinnon has this thing going on where I think she is goofy looking and attractive at the same time. She was really good in the film. I think there is a good chance this film is what jumpstarts her film career.
Leslie Jones is also really good when she is given good lines to work with. A lot of her lines from the trailer that fell flat fall just as flat in the context of the film.
Her "I don't know if it's a lady thing or a race thing" line straight up doesn't make sense since Melissa McCarthy stage dives successfully right before that happens.
Thankfully there are better lines for her in the film that they didn't highlight in the trailer.
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"
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
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.
One of the things that annoyed me after the Kimmel interview was the conspiracy theory of, "Bill Murray is only promoting the movie against his will because Sony is threatening him, it's in the Sony leaks!"
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.
It's easy to just skip out on that part, and it was very clearly just a studio insert for kids to enjoy.
I mean, Jesus. 99% of the film panders to 20-30+ year old grognards with fond memories of the old films, but oh no 1% of it panders to younger children that have been taken to the theater by their parents. How horrible!
Who would bring their kid to a movie
where the opening joke is about queefs?
"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):
The villain is the weakest part of the narrative, and that's not because he's an inadvertant neckbeard target, but just because he's so cartoonish and without mystique. The pacing is way off and the movie needed another, I'd say... 20 minutes. My BAE Kate McKinnon was my least favorite part, chewing scenery like she's Slimer at a room service cart (and not in the awesome Palpatine way), and that's actually a massive surprise to me- she was what sold the movie to me. Over all though, the other three 'Busters, Kevin and the ghost stuff bought my goodwill until Kate bounced back at the end.
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
Supposedly she was meant to be gay in the script, and you can see it immediately when she first meets Wiig. It's to bad they toned that down.
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
him being an evil version of the Ghostbusters. Rather than making him complex or sympathetic he was too crazy and one dimensional. This did pick up when he possessed Hemsworth - while it wasn't an exact believable consistency with their personalities who are meant to be the same person he's so much fun to watch eating the scenery.
That's the high point of the villain's actions in the movie for me.
A solid reboot/remake to build a franchise from. I want to see what crazy adventures these girls get up to!
I did like how there was a "masquerade" enforced by the government, and ultimately the team ends up working for them when they save the world. As they should be.
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.
That said, they didn't need for the bad guy to do a Marshmallow Man impression in the finale. That's when he became an uninteresting beast, rather than a thinking ghost.
Now if only we can convince Sony to do a ghostbusters cartoon with Craig McCracken and Lauren Faust at the helm...
Schrodinger on
+1
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
edited July 2016
Saw the new Ghostbusters. While it has some flaws in places, it was much better than I expected and mostly well thought out. This is my initial reactions and thoughts.
1. The villain is right out of reddit.
2. Holtzmann is the best character by far.
3. It's not as good as the original but it was, IMO, better than Ghostbusters 2.
4. They should have kept that dance scene in the movie.
5. In terms of reboot, this is at least a decent attempt using the originals as inspiration but not being 100% beholden to what they did. It's not the soulless abomination that say, Total Recall and Robocop were when they got rebooted.
I feel like in terms of a reboot, they tried to hit a middle ground between completely doing their own thing and miming the original, and for the most part did OK until the final act.
The way that the villain had them choose his form, that he looked a little like the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man, that seemed unnecessary - especially given the Stay Puft parade ballon earlier. On the other hand, I kind of missed the crossing of the streams.
To follow up with what I said earlier about it feeling like at least one scene was missing:
It really felt like there was supposed to be a scene or two after Rowan electrocutes himself where Erin breaks with the team. You can see it in how the other three don't seem to try to get Erin before heading out, how Erin is off on her own, and based on how her scene goes where she rescues the other three from Stay Puft. I figure that if it existed, it was along the lines of "OK, we've saved the day, but now I'm almost-arrested? I can't keep doing this. I'm done. I'm out. I want my my life back." And then going back to her apartment with Rowan's book, realizing it wasn't over, not being able to contact the team and assuming that they weren't answering her calls because of what she said (or possessed Abby telling her she's horrible and that they're done) and then going after the mayor herself.
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.
Shadowhope on
Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
+5
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
I absolutely think you're right on that point. It does seem out of character with the rest of the film and I think they clearly edited it heavily for time in places.
For example, I really am curious to know if that particular dance number was a full part of the movie or just them having random fun. It honestly would have been epic trolling of the A++ level if they had done it in the actual movie.
I absolutely think you're right on that point. It does seem out of character with the rest of the film and I think they clearly edited it heavily for time in places.
For example, I really am curious to know if that particular dance number was a full part of the movie or just them having random fun. It honestly would have been epic trolling of the A++ level if they had done it in the actual movie.
I figure that they just couldn't get the rights for the song at a good price and backed off on it.
It had a different style of humor then the originals, it was one of those movies that has a lot of rapid fire jokes and while not every joke hit the ratio was high enough that I thought it was really funny.
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?
It had a different style of humor then the originals, it was one of those movies that has a lot of rapid fire jokes and while not every joke hit the ratio was high enough that I thought it was really funny.
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.
+3
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
I'm not sure I would call it overwritten, but they do like a lot of physical comedy style moments.
It had a different style of humor then the originals, it was one of those movies that has a lot of rapid fire jokes and while not every joke hit the ratio was high enough that I thought it was really funny.
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 had a different style of humor then the originals, it was one of those movies that has a lot of rapid fire jokes and while not every joke hit the ratio was high enough that I thought it was really funny.
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.
Wait, so not a comedy? I'm really confused now.
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.
It had a different style of humor then the originals, it was one of those movies that has a lot of rapid fire jokes and while not every joke hit the ratio was high enough that I thought it was really funny.
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.
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.
That's a good set. I don't know about them addressing the initial reaction as pure sexism but honestly the politics surrounding this film bore me.
Kate McKinnon has this thing going on where I think she is goofy looking and attractive at the same time. She was really good in the film. I think there is a good chance this film is what jumpstarts her film career.
Leslie Jones is also really good when she is given good lines to work with. A lot of her lines from the trailer that fell flat fall just as flat in the context of the film.
Her "I don't know if it's a lady thing or a race thing" line straight up doesn't make sense since Melissa McCarthy stage dives successfully right before that happens.
Thankfully there are better lines for her in the film that they didn't highlight in the trailer.
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"
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.
My god, yeah, that line is amazing. And I love that she's the one to deliver it.
+4
MalReynoldsThe Hunter S Thompson of incredibly mild medicinesRegistered Userregular
Yo, saw it, loved it.
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."
"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!
+3
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
Yeah so this movie was great. Like, fantastic. Perfect Ghostbusters 3, better than the second, and the only parts that bothered me were where it broke from being a reboot instead of a sequel.
Cameo spoilers
Like even the original cast's cameos work with the plot of the government hiding ghost stuff. Venkman's a professional debunker now, Stantz is a cabbie who ain't afraid of ghosts, Zeddemore has a funeral business. Those all works as roles for retired ghostbusters! Only one that broke it was Sigourney showing up as a scientist instead of an artist.
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.
Oh brilliant
+2
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Yeah so this movie was great. Like, fantastic. Perfect Ghostbusters 3, better than the second, and the only parts that bothered me were where it broke from being a reboot instead of a sequel.
Cameo spoilers
Like even the original cast's cameos work with the plot of the government hiding ghost stuff. Venkman's a professional debunker now, Stantz is a cabbie who ain't afraid of ghosts, Zeddemore has a funeral business. Those all works as roles for retired ghostbusters! Only one that broke it was Sigourney showing up as a scientist instead of an artist.
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
to be fair, Weaver's job changed dramatically between 1 and 2.,
So consensus seems to be that the movie is: better than expected, a helluva lot better than the trailers indicated, genuinely funny, with the wonderfully talented main foursome being far and away universally acclaimed.
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).
Just got back. I'm gonna put this up front, I was extremely skeptical from the word go on this movie. Call it latent sexism or overblown cynicism, it looked like a statement rather than a movie. But, I went to see it because I wanted to react to the movie and not the storm around it. And I really, really liked it. In some parts, I think it surpasses the original. Like Jones vs Hudson, she's not the stereotype the trailers portray, AT ALL, and she's a useful member of the Ghostbusters. Winston was so obviously chopped off at the knees when they didn't get Murphy. And I know this is heresy, but Venkman, funny Murray makes him, is such a slimy snake oil salesman, I found the earnest do-gooding of the team refreshing. The complaints about Kevin are odd, when he's no more cartoonish than Lewis. And Erin's infatuation is priceless.
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.
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.
The ghost army was incredibly creative. The battle sequences were too, with Holtzmann being supreme Ghostbusting badass. Do not fuck with Holtzman, she's the deadliest GB of them all.
I liked the scene where Wiig rescued McCarthy, that was intense despite the fact you knew she was going to succeed.
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.
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
Gilbert's obsession with ghosts after seeing one as a child and her drive to make the rest of world believe her
does not work unless this is a reboot.
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.
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
I think the movie has the get out clause for the 'origin' all over again built in already!
Ghosts were public knowledge maybe 30 years ago, but there's been a thorough effort to debunk and make it all seem faked for decades.
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...
So I saw the movie this morning. It's the first movie I've actually paid to see in a theater in a very long time, but I thought that it was important to catch it on opening day weekend to show my support.
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:
The cast of this movie was really strong all around, and you could tell that everyone had a lot of fun doing the movie. The original movie banked a lot on the idea that audiences were already huge fans of the actors and willing to accept whatever the actors presented them with. This movie doesn't have that, so it takes more time to flesh out the characters and give them clear motivations.
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:
The opening scene was really effective. They did a great job of setting Zach Woods up as a person who was actually terrified for his life. Honestly, they should have released that opening seen on it's own to build up hype for the movie.
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:
The biggest plot hole of the movie was the money issue. In the original, Ray takes out a mortgage on his house, the team is next to broke, and then they get their first big break at a hotel. In this movie, they steal a bunch of equipment from the school, look for the cheapest place they can find, and then...? I'm not sure.
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.
Sony is talking sequel, it came in second to the pet movie but made 46 million which is Feig/McCarthy's best opening. Now that the origin story is done, it'll be interesting to see where they go with it.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Sony is talking sequel, it came in second to the pet movie but made 46 million which is Feig/McCarthy's best opening. Now that the origin story is done, it'll be interesting to see where they go with it.
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."
There's been a nagging rumor for a while that there's another GB movie floating around as a vehicle for Channing Tatum and Chris Pratt who wanted to do a flick together. I'm sure if Sony could push out a Ghostbusters flick every couple of years, they'd be all over that. Well, the cash part of it at least.
There's been a nagging rumor for a while that there's another GB movie floating around as a vehicle for Channing Tatum and Chris Pratt who wanted to do a flick together. I'm sure if Sony could push out a Ghostbusters flick every couple of years, they'd be all over that. Well, the cash part of it at least.
For some reason that died, maybe this is a success it'll be restarted? Or something similar.
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.
1. The villain is right out of reddit.
2. Holtzmann is the best character by far.
3. It's not as good as the original but it was, IMO, better than Ghostbusters 2.
4. They should have kept that dance scene in the movie.
5. In terms of reboot, this is at least a decent attempt using the originals as inspiration but not being 100% beholden to what they did. It's not the soulless abomination that say, Total Recall and Robocop were when they got rebooted.
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.
For example, I really am curious to know if that particular dance number was a full part of the movie or just them having random fun. It honestly would have been epic trolling of the A++ level if they had done it in the actual movie.
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.