Reboot a classic cult film. Who ye gonna call? Director Paul Feig apparently.
The film will draw its critics with some questionable acting as well as screenwriting. At times the movie could even feel rushed and may even suffer from a mild case of ‘death by CGI’.
However, Ghostbusters 2016 is a fun-filled and humorous movie, reminiscent of the 1984 original.
As a child of the 90s, it’s fair to say that I felt the void of proton-beam related action. The mediocre Ghostbusters II was released before I was even born in 1989.
Regardless, I still managed to become obsessed with my brothers’ old videocassettes as the original ghost fighting team saved New York City. Firstly from a giant marshmallow man and next from a tyrant obviously hailing from Transylvania with roots in the Dracula family.
Fast-forward to 2016 and we now have a third Ghostbusters movie at last. Fans will witness an entire rework of the original story for a new generation of viewers.
We open on a tourist group as they are guided through an old house; being recounted a spooky tale of a past resident. Cut to that evening and the tour guide is caught up in a rather paranormal encounter. When the danger hits a high note, that all too familiar theme-tune returns and cue my childlike, giddy excitement. A solid start.
What then unravels is a tale of old friends reuniting to prove to the world that ghosts do exist. Subtle positives for the plot include the use of modern social media, as the group struggles against the public perception that their discoveries are fake. A very nice touch. Despite their fraud label, the new Ghostbusters must thwart the sinister plans of the troubled Rowan North (Neil Casey).
This 2016 reboot often explores themes of order, wealth, friendship and, of course, the supernatural. Comparisons are easy to make to the original Ghostbusters such as both teams clearly struggling financially. There are though changes to be found: In 1984 the Ghostbusters find themselves in trouble with the law as the mayor of New York attempts to maintain order. Alternatively in 2016 the Ghostbusters receive their hoax labels from city hall as the mayor attempts a cover-up to ensure the public doesn’t descend into chaos.
Overall the plot and themes clearly draw inspiration from the original 1984 film. Subtly though the writers have made changes in order to achieve a fresh feeling in 2016. As a fan it is pleasing to see some of the small points of nostalgia within the film with nods to the original story. One example of a simple yet pleasing plot point is that troubled scientists from both films originally begin the film working at Columbia University. Despite this though, the film did attempt to squeeze in extra storyline points, making the movie appear rushed; Proton packs seemed to just appear from thin air with no build-time and the Ghostbusters even have an array of advanced new devices, hours after damaging setbacks for the group. This can either be attributed to a cramped script or poor editing.
So now for the topic that has had everyone talking about this movie. The all female Ghostbusters team.
The decision to gender-switch to four female protagonists seemed to draw large-scale criticism from fans and critics alike. This was echoed with the release of the film trailer which has become the most disliked film-related video in YouTube history; Placing 9th overall for the most dislikes any video has received. With it’s release, alarm bells were ringing for me and I couldn’t help but fear that the franchise itself may become haunted.
Director Paul Feig has seen widespread criticism particularly from the large fan base of the original movies. In an interview for IGN Feig attributed the discontent with the film trailer to “a second wave” of viewers who “made sport” of hitting that dislike button. He went on to say much of his comedy work was based on “behavioral characters” whose humor is dependent on relationships with other characters. After viewing the film, Feig may have a fair point on this retort.
Loyal fans, you will not be encaged within an Ecto Containment Unit filled with rage at the new cast.
Without doubt the star performance came from Kate McKinnon. I found it hard to draw my eyes away from Jillian Holtzmann as the geeky, witty and even sexual behaviour really brought a new dynamic to the ghost-fighting team.
It is hard to not be a little frustrated by Dr Erin Gilbert, poorly acted by Kirsten Wiig. Unfortunately this character is shooting from the same proton pack as Venkman in Ghostbusters II: The script would occasional have flashes of character development but sadly fell flat. Depth to the character is occasionally shown in a couple of story-setting scenes however the film frustratingly doesn’t explore these any further. Moving on, sadly for Patty Tolan (Leslie Jones) whilst being fun and full of wit will still be generalized as nothing more than a ‘sassy black woman’. Highly likely to draw criticism there then.
Flaws aside, this team does have a real balance. What is clear is that there is a good chemistry between characters and actors alike.
The Ghostbusters also have a new PA in the shape of Star Trek and Thor star Chris Hemsworth. “Kevin Beckmen” is an absent-minded stud that provides a fair share of laughs and only adds to the group. In fact the only other time we see any kind of acting range from Kirsten Wiig is when she has the hots for Hemsworth! Although handsome hunk wooing the female lead with just his appearance? I sense more critique forthcoming in relation to stereotypes.
So what about our dead cast? Ghosts in this film definitely like a jump scare. Although the CGI was sadly average at best. There was even a cliché large battle sequence, which was moderately entertaining but could feel a little overdone.
So who and what from the original films made the jump across to the reboot? Don’t worry, I won’t spoil too many of the surprises.
Throughout the movie you will witness a series of cameos from the original cast. Without doubt though the hat must be tipped to Dan Akroyd’s short yet so sweet appearance as a New York cabbie. There is almost so much nostalgia packed into the film that it can leave even the most die-hard fans feeling fatigued. Akroyd’s small role as well as the portrayal of Slime does offer some redemption to a flawed script. Although there was a very strange cameo for returning star Bill Murray. It’s just odd. Fans will either love his role, or be like me and question the purpose behind the character’s very existence.
As a fan, I was overall pleased that the franchise has been brought back from the dead with this film. Yes, there will be critics that bring it down. But Ghostbusters is supposed to be fun, get a few laughs as well as hunt down some ghosts. Does it do that? In abundance. Will it be a hit for new audiences? Only time will tell. Let’s just hope any team behind a new Ghostbusters II learns from the mistakes of the last time they made a sequel for this classic.
One last time though for old time’s sake: Who ye gonna call?
Feature photo credit: ghostbusters.com
