Ghostbusters (2016)

I have been hearing for years about a third film in this franchise that was an important part of my childhood. The reason why another instalment wasn't made sooner was that not all of the former cast members wanted to be a part of it. Then Harold Ramis passed away and Sony decided to make a reboot instead. When I heard about the decision to have female Ghostbusters, I was intrigued because the idea could provide new comedic possibilities. Once I heard about the cast, I was disappointed but not completely deterred. I just didn't find some of these particular actresses funny. The public has been wrong before however when it comes to their opinion about casting. Some examples among many include Robert Downey Jr. as Sherlock Holmes, Hugh Jackman as Wolverine or Daniel Craig as James Bond. Then the trailers were released for this new "Ghostbusters" film and they made me sad because of how bad they were. Even that wasn't going to stop me from seeing this reboot because I knew that it is possible for a good movie to have a bad trailer. After seeing the movie itself, I have to say that it could have been so much worse. It was funny and its plot became more original as the film wore on. However, imagine if "The Terminator" was remade with Dwayne Johnson. It might be entertaining to some degree but the shadow of Arnold Schwarzenegger is very big metaphorically, even for Johnson. That is how I feel about this reboot of "Ghostbusters". I was entertained but the original film from 1984 was so iconic that it is hard not to compare. Also, the 2016 version isn't perfect but it will be worth seeing as long as you keep in mind that it is a reboot, not a direct sequel.

"Ghostbusters" helped to reinvent the science fiction comedy genre in 1984. Before that, you had the Disney science fiction films in the 60's and 70's. A successful reboot would be hard for anyone. The problem most die-hard fans appear to be having with this new film that we have women staring as the protagonists (I don't know if I can classify myself as a die-hard fan because some fans are a lot more obsessed about "Ghostbusters" than I am). Many would call this objection from fans misogynistic but I myself can't remember hearing any criticisms until the first trailer came out, which by the way is the most disliked YouTube video that is not a music video. Maybe the bad trailers fueled the controversy or maybe the casting is what bothered people the most. Whatever is the true source of the outrage, some haters will be overly vocal. What really bothers me is that anyone who hates this film will be judged as sexist because that's the kind of world we live in. Even worse, some die-hard fans were even trying to figure out how to save their hateful cause once the good reviews started coming in. It's too bad we can't all just be honest and not judge others too quickly. I went into the movie with hopes that the movie would be good. I wanted to judge the film not by who was in it or by preconceived opinions but rather on whether the film worked as a whole. Was there a balance of fun with fear? Did the movie make me laugh? Were the characters sincerely created and was there team chemistry? Also, were the four main characters unique enough from each other and how heroic did they feel? Some people will not like this film because of its story or CGI but we should not classify them as bigots. First off, in my opinion, the movie was funny and that was important for its salvation. Comedy has also evolved since the 80's in that it is a lot raunchier but fortunately, this film wasn't as offensive as it could have been. I would hope that the filmmakers left room for improvisation, something that was a big part of the success of the original movie. Secondly, this reboot was scary at more than one instance. The movie wasn't as fun as I was hoping for but the characters were unique from one another. There was some chemistry to be had between all four main characters but not enough. I blame this on the character of Jillian Holtzmann. Every other Ghostbuster worked quite well on screen but Holtzmann seemed too goofy to be as smart as she was. Imagine if Bill Murray played Egon. Holtzmann did generate laughs but she was either cast wrong or incorrectly conceived in the minds of the writers. Also, it seemed like Kristin Wiig's character was the star of the show even though McCarthy's name is first on the cast list. At first, I was afraid that the reboot was trying too hard to be like original movie. In the 2016 film, you have stars from Saturday Night Live for example and the fourth Ghostbuster is an ordinary African American. in the first half of the show, my worries appeared to be confirmed because the opening sequence at the mansion felt too much like the start of the 1984 film with a scared citizen preceding the theme music cue. Other similarities include Gilbert being fired from Columbia and the three scientists investigating the incident at the mansion. The conclusion of the movie also resembles that from the 1984 film with the use of total protonic reversal. There are other examples and some of the references were too obvious but the good news is that enough steps were taken to allow the film to be somewhat original. By the middle of the movie, I was trying to do less comparing because I could sense that the plot was now following a different narrative structure. There were a few parts of the story that could have bothered me a lot such as Patty joining the team too easily but I can overlook them because there were other more important flaws. One mistake was that not only were the trailers for this reboot bad but an important part of the plot was spoiled. I think I would have enjoyed the film more if the possession clips were left out of the trailers. Here is the biggest problem I had with this movie but it is a problem with its exhibition, more specifically the 3D. Therefore, this reboot may be better in 2D. The filmmakers did the same thing with their 3D that Disney did with "G-Force" because it was full of unnecessary and distracting gimmicks. 3D should only be used to show depth in my opinion and any other tricks should be kept to a minimum. With this film, the aspect ratio was not what it appeared to be. This allowed proton streams, slime and other elements to appear to project out of the frame. That is too tacky for my taste. If I were to imagine the film in 2D, the CGI wasn't all that bad. The original film was one of the first comedies to utilize top-of-the-line special effects so I am glad the reboot wasn't too cartoony. I especially liked how real the possessed mannequin looked. The bad news is that the CGI in this reboot may not age well as the decades pass.

We've almost got a "Bridesmaids" reunion on our hands with the involvement of director Paul Feig, Melissa McCarthy and Kristen Wiig. I was worried about that fact too but it turned out to be a non-issue. This is the first movie I have seen with Melissa McCarthy where she has a major role. I wonder if the movie "St. Vincent" will now be identified as a "passing of the proton pack" between Bill Murray and McCarthy. I will confess that I didn't like McCarthy all that much before this movie and I only appreciated Wiig's voice work in animated films such as on the "How to Train Your Dragon" and "Despicable Me" franchise. I was happy to discover that I believed the performances of most of the lead actresses. I've only just started to recognize Kate McKinnon's name this year because I'm not into SNL. Chris Hemsworth was funny but he was unable to fully convince me of his character's stupidity unfortunately. I liked how Andy Garcia was the mayor. The villain in this movie, Rowan, seemed too one-dimensional. Another problem with him is that he changes appearances so much. I was surprised by how many cameos there were but as fun as they were, it almost became too much of a good thing. Thankfully, by the time they became overkill, the movie was over. The actor playing Dr. Martin Heiss was favorite cameo because it wasn't just a one-time appearance and Heiss was performed far different from the actor's previous role in the franchise. I will say one thing while I am on the subject: if this actor wasn't willing to reprise his character in a third sequel, why did he say yes to a cameo in a reboot? I did not expect the Rebecca Gorin cameo and I really got a kick out of Annie Potts' appearance as the hotel desk clerk. I was grateful that Dan Aykroyd and Ivan Reitman were the producers of this reboot.

So far, the critics appear to like this film more than the public. It isn't the first time. I would hope though that the positive reviews from critics are not out of fear of appearing sexist. As an honest confession, I am biased towards the films from the 80's. I feel the same way about this "Ghostbusters" as I do about Jon Favreau's "The Jungle Book". Both of these reboots/remakes are good but it is very hard to revise something that is so iconic. There is always a fine line that must be rode when it comes to reboots. Some succeed like "Batman Begins" and J.J. Abrams "Star Trek". With "Ghostbusters", it was funny and original in some ways but has a big, inherent shadow looming over it. It will appeal to those less picky members of the audience for sure. Others have decided to hate this movie from the get-go because it is ruining their childhood they say. No movie, not even the awful Ninja Turtles movie "Out of the Shadows", can ruin my childhood because I will always have the originals to enjoy.

3.5 Stars