Director: Paul Feig
Cast: Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig, Kate McKinnon, Leslie Jones
Have I Seen it Before: Yes, indeed. More on that in a minute…
Did I Like It: It’s a Ghostbusters movie. Just go with it, guys.
In lieu of my normal write-up, I’m re-printing the blog I posted shortly after originally seeing the film in the theaters. I can’t say any of my original assessment has changed since that initial screening, except for in one element. Home video presentations of the film allow elements of the frame—especially in big effects shots—to leave the frame, seemingly in an attempt to extend whatever 3D work was done in post. I’m not sure if other films have attempted this, but it’s objectively lame. Let a film’s frame be the film’s frame. We’re just now pulling out of the dark ages of pan-and scan, and now we have to deal with this. Ugh. The movie itself is still enjoyable, though…
“Let’s Talk About Ghostbusters, shall we?”
WARNING: Some spoilers ahead.
All this week I went to various older movie theaters, catching matinees and jotting down my thoughts as I went. I’ve got a solid five weeks worth of blog entries out of my little travelogue, and I meant to put the first part of the series out this week…
But my movie theater pieces will start next week. I really want to talk about the last movie I saw this week.
Ghostbusters (2016) is fantastic. It is easily the best movie of the summer (and I spent the last week seeing pretty much everything), and it is without a doubt far superior to the depression shit show a direct-sequel Ghostbusters III would have been had it come to pass.
It’s bright, colorful, and occasionally startling*. The special effects are on point. It’s filled with awesome variations on the original gadgets, and several cool additions to the arsenal. It’s also a completely workable adventure story about four unlikely heroes saving the City of New York from imminent disaster.
In short, it is everything that a Ghostbusters movie needs to be.
Which also means that it was undeniably and consistently funny. Deal with it.
Now, I’m not going to say that the only possible reason you could have to dislike such a film is that you are so blinded by your misogyny you can’t see two feet in front of your face. You’re just going to have to deal with how much you hate women on your own time.
Okay, some of you may be so attached to your childhood memories of the original that you worry this film will somehow break down the purity of those memories. Let me reassure you. Somewhere around the time that I heard the familiar whine of a proton pack booting up, I felt like a kid again and that feeling didn’t let up until the final post-credits scene**. The movie won’t ruin your childhood; if you’re lucky, it’ll bring you back to it.
There may be a few quibbles with the movie, but they are so minor as to not warrant reference here. Go see Ghostbusters. Go see it twice.
That all being said, Hollywood: Please don’t remake Back to the Future. I don’t think my mortal human heart could take it.
*Anybody who insists that the original Ghostbusters is actually scary is lying, or was a child when they first saw it and has refused to develop beyond that point in the ensuing thirty years.
**Speaking of that post-tag scene: While I really hope the mentioning of Zuul isn’t meant to telegraph the jumping off point for their next adventure, an amusing exchange happened after the scene that works as a perfect microcosm of the bullshit controversy this movie has attracted just for existing.
Just as the scene ended, one girl, no more than seven years old screamed out with geekish delight, “THAT’S THE VILLAIN FROM THE FIRST MOVIE!”
Immediately, some meathead douchebag right around my age turned his nose up and said, “Uhh… Actually, Zuul was the villain in the second movie.”
This is the problem with guys like this. They’re not only assholes; they’re wrong. For a flash, I thought about defending the child, but then I realized: both she and the movie didn’t need me to defend it. Just go see it.