Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Ghostbusters (2016)

This is topic Ghostbusters (2016) in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=002212

Posted by Stu Jamieson (Member # 4626) on 07-30-2016, 05:38 PM:

The original release of Ghostbusters is not a masterpiece. No, shuttup, it's not! It was a mildly enjoyable slice of 80's cheese aided by a mega pop hit released on gimmicky coloured vinyl. It stands as a monument of marketing genius more so than a milestone in masterpiece film making. Personally, I've never understood it's enduring popularity; I've not sat through it's entirety since it's initial theatrical release.

So, naturally, my expectations for this reboot(?) were not high. I was hoping for something fun but not necessarily mind blowing and this is pretty much what Ghostbusters 2016 is.

The strength of the new Ghostbusters is in its principal female cast - Kristen Wiig, Melissa McCarthy, Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones. The women have great chemistry; they form a funny and sassy team and this experiment to flip the gender of the principals is largely successful. It's certainly a better idea than giving the team a dog or a baby to look after.

The weak link here, as it turns out, is Chris Hemsworth whose imbecile receptionist character is, well, just an imbecile. You get the distinct impression that he is going for something funny here but he's really just an idiot. Perhaps those who are appropriately inclined find him cute but this little duck, I'm afraid, found him charmless.

Neil Casey stands in for the Rick Moranis role and is funnier and much less irritating.

In the end Ghostbusters is, well, Ghostbusters. This new version is easily as fun as the original and, indeed, I may actually watch this one again.

7 out of 10

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 07-30-2016, 11:59 PM:

I haven't seen the new one yet, but I agree with you about the original -- I never did understand the rabid appeal of it. It's got some laughs (mostly due to Bill Murray's and Rick Moranis' deadpan delivery) but I never really thought it was amazingly wonderful. Just OK.

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 08-04-2016, 11:00 PM:

I liked the cast, but sheesh, the script was lame, forced unfunny humor and largely inconsistent. Loved the 3D IMAX presentation, the breaking out of the FX shots, and other assorted items, was a blast

Posted by Terry Monohan (Member # 8285) on 08-08-2016, 07:54 PM:

I watched the movie today at the AMC Metreon in SF. What great 3-D effects on this film. Loved the way they shot in a letterbox type and then showed many 3-D effects out of the top and bottom of the screen. Best 3-D I have seen in the last 5 years. So nice to see effects pop off the screen at times. Will get It on 3-D Blue Ray when It comes out.

Posted by Jonathan Goeldner (Member # 4854) on 08-12-2016, 12:19 AM:

so apparently Sony lost $75 million - looks like the sequel might not happen:

http://collider.com/ghostbusters-2-unlikely/