You have got to be kidding me. This is the movie that has caused so much hatred, rage, and controversy? This harmless, average, fun fluff piece? Pretty much everyone already knew if they liked the film or not before it was even released. I think a lot of people need a reality check not only on this reboot but on the original as well. Hailing the original as some sacramental divine piece of cinema that cannot be improved on is a complete joke. No, I don't hate the original. No, I don't love the reboot. They are both somewhere in between with the original barely edging this out in terms of filmmaking. If we were to rate comedies on their "laughs-per-minute" then the edge would go to this reboot.
But how, when the special effects in the reboot are clearly superior? Turns out that there is far more to film technicalities than bright lights, pretty colors, and realistic green slime. Where Ghostbusters (2016) falters is in the editing and how the humor is set up. The film is too focused on being a ball-busting roller-coaster ride; rarely stopping to catch its breath. There are quite a few legitimately funny bits in here that could have landed even better if the editing was more precise. Silence and patience can work wonders in action comedies. Hell, just look at what Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton were doing literally one hundred years ago.
The cast members are at their best when they aren't forced into doing line-o-rama improv. I found Leslie Jones and Melissa McCarthy to be the shining stars of this with Kristen Wiig and Kate McKinnon not far behind. McCarthy notably is a groan-inducer to most, but she does well in films that she or her husband did not write or direct (Spy, St. Vincent, and now this). Jones acts as the grounded everywoman who keeps the nutty ghost hunters in line, and for my money has the best comedic timing out of the four. McKinnon seems to have downed a few energy drinks before every shoot as she is incredibly extra in every scene, often more so than required. Wiig tries to bring an emotional backstory to the picture but it gets lost in all of the neon rainbow effects.
If you're one of the few somehow still on the fence about this: give it a try. It won't ruin your childhood, or kick your dog, or kill your family. At worst you'll walk away unamused and then proceed to pop in the original.
But how, when the special effects in the reboot are clearly superior? Turns out that there is far more to film technicalities than bright lights, pretty colors, and realistic green slime. Where Ghostbusters (2016) falters is in the editing and how the humor is set up. The film is too focused on being a ball-busting roller-coaster ride; rarely stopping to catch its breath. There are quite a few legitimately funny bits in here that could have landed even better if the editing was more precise. Silence and patience can work wonders in action comedies. Hell, just look at what Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton were doing literally one hundred years ago.
The cast members are at their best when they aren't forced into doing line-o-rama improv. I found Leslie Jones and Melissa McCarthy to be the shining stars of this with Kristen Wiig and Kate McKinnon not far behind. McCarthy notably is a groan-inducer to most, but she does well in films that she or her husband did not write or direct (Spy, St. Vincent, and now this). Jones acts as the grounded everywoman who keeps the nutty ghost hunters in line, and for my money has the best comedic timing out of the four. McKinnon seems to have downed a few energy drinks before every shoot as she is incredibly extra in every scene, often more so than required. Wiig tries to bring an emotional backstory to the picture but it gets lost in all of the neon rainbow effects.
If you're one of the few somehow still on the fence about this: give it a try. It won't ruin your childhood, or kick your dog, or kill your family. At worst you'll walk away unamused and then proceed to pop in the original.