User Reviews

I really like the Ghostbusters franchise. And I don't mean that like some people, who mean they loved it when they were little and still love the movie now as they look back on it through the rosy tint of nostalgia. I cannot be like that; I didn't see Ghostbusters until I was a teenager, and I did not love the film until I was a young adult. However, once I click with a story, I never let it go and tend to pursue it beyond its most famous and mainstream component. In this case that involved watching "Ghostbusters 2," playing "Ghostbusters: The Video Game," watching all of "The Real Ghostbusters" and "Extreme Ghostbusters," and reading every single one of the IDW comics from "The Other Side" all the way to the most recent issue of "Ghostbusters International." Oh, and I also have a pair of Ecto Goggles which I clip onto my pistol belt and wear with a Ghostbuster zip-up shirt I made with a name badge, no-ghost patch on the right sleeve, pocket on the left sleeve, and velcro fasteners on the cuffs. Those are my credentials, that's the kind of person I am. So the big question is, "What did I think of this reboot?"

This remake of Ghostbusters made me laugh a lot, and I liked the characters. While one of the main characters is clearly drawn to Chris Hemsworth's character Kevin, she is not persistently/creepily perusing him in the same way that Venkman does to Dana in the 1984 film. In fact, she actually keeps enough possession of her sanity to not be mindlessly blown away by his muscles and good looks and instead suggests they not hire him because he would clearly be a horrible secretary. Setting her attraction aside, the movie did not have a romantic subplot, and I think that is fantastic. We got a bit of backstory for a few of the characters, which is more than we can say for the original Ghostbusters film. And despite the trailers' best efforts to convince everyone that Patty was a certain overused character type, I was able to enjoy the character as she actually is in the movie, where she is quite the history buff and actually seems pretty laid-back a lot of the time.

The ghosts felt much more dangerous than they did in the original two Ghostbusters films. For the first time I really felt like this was a potentially lethal line of work *before* we got to the the main enemy at the end of the movie. Some of the ghostbusting sequences were very cool, maybe too cool if you want this movie to be just like the one from 1984, but I think the sillier moments help to balance that out. (There are some situations only Ghostbuster type action heroes find themselves in because all the uber-cool heroes like James Bond somehow manage to avoid being smushed by gigantic parade balloons and the like.)

There were new weapons for the Ghostbusters to use against the ghosts in this film, but I was surprised to find I was okay with that. I suspect this is because I have become accustomed to similar versions of several of them in the fantastic IDW comics continuing the adventures of the original Ghostbusters. (In the comics, Egon invents similar grenades and modifies several of the proton packs to include pistol-style firing mechanisms.) If I have one complaint, it is that I do not think the technobabble was as good in this film as it was in the 80's movies.

This movie may contain the most entertaining credits I've ever seen, and there was an easter egg waiting for fans of the original movie at the very end. When the lights came on, my first thought was, "I hope they make a sequel," which may make me a terrible person in the eyes of some, but I don't get my opinions secondhand from the "cool" people, I try to think for myself.

I reluctantly gave this a 6 star rating, but could easily have gone lower. This is a perfect example of what happens when you insult women by plugging them into the roles of near iconic male characters, and then give them little quality material to show off any comedic talent. The funniest line for me was when the ghost got on the train to Queens and the black lady says "that'l be the third scariest thing on that train." See what I mean? Then, you complicate matters by plugging Chris Hemsworth who is not really known for his comdeic talent, as the receptionist, resident hunk, stupid man (because in a movie with all women leads, you know the man has to be studpid). Above all this movie relies completely on CGI special effects so much that the story, if there is one, gets lost in the shuffle. The closing credits almost had more entertainment value.

Before anything, I just want to say that I'm a teenager.

This movie was just a movie. Plain and simple. It had a plot, a climax, a conclusion and everything a movie needs. Was it great? No. Was it terrible? No. If you absolutely love the original Ghostbusters movie and don't want to see it tampered with, don't see it. If you are willing to see something different and have a couple honest laughs, see it. It's entertaining and funny.

In my own opinion, the movie should be looked at as if it has no connection to Ghostbusters. Look at it as a comedic movie and you'll enjoy it. It reminds me of Jurassic World as you have to watch it without thinking to get an amazing experience out of it.

Leslie Jones saved this movie for me. The first 30 minutes was unfunny with one of the first jokes being a fart joke. Leslie's character Patty was this outside perspective that I could relate with. Just sitting there being confused. On the other hand, Chris Hemsworth was probably the only person who got almost no laughs out of me. He was just stupid.

In conclusion, this movie is an average summer movie. The Jurassic World of the Ghostbusters franchise.

Admittedly, as 80's or 90's child, after watching the trailer and following the social buzz around it, you could instantly hate this as another franchise which was sacrificed for creating a modern rip-off that even breaks with original (male) cast and characters.

For some reason, I still gave it a chance, maybe because there's not too much must-see movies around in summer months and I thought it could be funny if I just see it as a standalone- movie not having to care with all that Ghostbusters legacy.

And surprisingly, it did a pretty, pretty good job in entertaining me, nothing more, nothing less...

The female cast in general did a pretty good job in playing their quite diverse characters, their performances ranging from okay-ish to insanely funny - I really fell with in love with Kate McKinnon and her playing the bats**t crazy Jillian Holtzmann.

Despite of what you've heard or read before, its clearly not a feminist version of the original - way too many stereotype jokes pulled off, some even trying too hard ("That stuff went everywhere..."). In general, Ghostbusters goes for every potential joke, goof and stereotype, but most of the time, it just scores. Maybe too much, but not for me... sometime I appreciate a high pace of stupidity and can deal with a simple plot and several inconsistencies. I really had to laugh quite hard and absolutely think it was worth the money - I'd watch it anytime again, at least on Free-TV.

Regardless of the character overhaul, it still picks up most of the traditional elements of the original movie in terms of equipment, locations and even ghost characters, maybe it even tries too hard with lots of references and many original cast appearances. Could be an excuse for the female cast thing, though....

Some also complained about the cheap CGI but I think they were clearly above average, in ghost detail animations as well as on New York City total shots when hell finally breaks loose.

To sum it up: Get rid of expectations, anger about the remake and any feminist prejudice and just enjoy a 'good clean fun' summer blockbuster - there's still more love and detail in it than in the new Die Hard movies.

When I heard that they were remaking the movie Ghostbusters with female cast members, I admit that I was actually looking forward to it, specially considering the four particular actresses they had chosen for the part. I understood that movie remakes are typically the greatest, but considering the fact that 3 out of the four cast members are currently or were once members of SNL, I had some hope. Unfortunately, Wigg's comedic talent wasn't able to shine with her boring character with a lack of personality, McKinnon's character was just upright stupid and unrealistic, Jones's character was just a black stereotype, and McCarthy's role lacked character as well. Many of the jokes just fell flat (Steve Higgins small role and joke with the middle finger, the won tons, Kevin's (aka. Chris Hemsworth's) logo scene, the thing with the hair dye at the end, and so on). Also, the had many references to the original ghost busters throughout the film, and yet I suppose the setting takes place in a universe where the original squad had never existed, it's like a slap to the face to the original cast. Sure they had Bill Murry and few other actors for the older version show up in a few small parts, but they play such tiny roles, and as different characters..

And what's the deal with remaking older movies with female actresses or poc as the main characters. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with Hollywood wanting a bit of diversity in their work, but they're doing it all wrong. While this movie has good intentions when trying to cast female members, I guess either to have more representation for younger girls to look up to or show that women are equal to men or whatever, but when they try to do with a remake of a movie that was already amazing, it only makes matters worse. This movie will be forgotten within a few years from now, unlike the 1988 version, which most people had at least heard of reguardless of age before this one. On second thought, this movie isn't trying to create diversity, they're doing this for profit. They know that with the adults and their nostalgia these days, and with the younger now being obsessed with the classics due to them being conditioned to think that everything from their own generation sucks (which is clearly saying a lot about the older generation ironically, they're the ones whom produce our movies, not us), they can get some quick and lazy bucks by bringing back a film that should've been left alone in the first place instead of thinking up of a new script and story (that of which could also have female and/or poc leading characters), because they know people are more drawn to things that they are familiar with (as was I obviously). Whatever, I'm so done with remakes. There are many movies out there in today's time (yeah they exist) with original plot lines that are currently or were recently successful in the last year or so, so why watch a crappier version of a movie you've already seen before?

I admit from the start that I'm a massive fan of the original GHOST BUSTERS, although the sequel isn't so hot. Both films look like absolute classics compared to this ill-advised reboot of the series, recasting with an all-female ghostbusting team. Although the film looks similar to the original movies, it feels absolutely NOTHING like them. Gone is the character interplay and genuinely funny and droll performances that could be enjoyed by kids and adults alike; it's replaced by the kind of modern-day sarcasm and idiocy that I always end up hating. The new cast members are all unlikeable, and the likes of Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy seem to be competing as to who can be the most irritating of the lot. Yes, the new-fangled CGI effects are very colourful and pretty, but they don't have any of the character and finesse of the old effects, which you knew were hard to do thus all the more impressive. The plot is as predictable as they come, and the only person who raised the occasional smile was Chris Hemsworth. I'm afraid the new GHOSTBUSTERS should never have been made.