So, to address the twin 800-pound gorillas in the room, the new Ghostbusters isn't that bad. It doesn't crap all over your childhood memories too much. After all, Ghostbusters 2 did that all on its own. Did you really want another movie to be angry about? It is a fairly blasé remake of the original that sort of sails into a new direction, but not any new territory that we haven't seen before. There are some laugh-out-loud funny jokes, and I was entertained by this somewhat forgettable comedy that I probably won't remember much after a couple months. Second, the whole woman issue. This was such a bald-faced, fabricated, first-world, tempest-in-a-teacup issue. Many of you remember that when the trailer came online, it had (and still has) the dubious distinction of becoming the most hated trailer of ALL time, ever since they've been keeping track of these things. The, a lot of jerks came out of the woodwork saying it would suck because of "those four stupid, unfunny women." Needless to say, this brought out all the feministas retorting back that men in general, and Hollywood in particular, are a bunch of mysogynous pigs who want to keep women down. Nothing could be further from the truth. I think the actresses did journeyman's work of a substandard script. There is only so much you can do with inferior material (more on that later). Sony, the film's studio, knew they didn't have a really good picture on their hands, and with the extreme negative backlash, they started panicking. But as the old show-business adage says, there's no such thing as bad publicity. Sony decided to glom onto this ridiculous back-and-forth coming from both sides and fanned the flames in the media to create a false sense of outrage that both sides fell for-hook, line and sinker. Essentially, Sony pulled off one of the most ingenious sleights of hand, by focusing attention on a manufactured conflict to get our minds off a mediocrely-made, cynical cash-grab remake. One of my favorite YouTube personalities, Comic Book Girl 19 went into much more detail about this. I highly recommend you check out her thoughts here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sn_vAcFGTJU
So, with that out of the way, "what was so bad about it," you may ask? Well, as it turns out, plenty. Most of the problem comes down to the story. A wise move on the producers' part should have been to go in a different direction altogether, instead of just rehashing the old movie. The original Ghostbusters works precisely because nobody knew what they had or what to make of it. They didn't know it was going to be a monster hit outside of the fact that the writers, directors and actors involved were the creative forces who brought us some of the most amazing comedy ever made, including: Saturday Night Live, The Blues Brothers, Animal House, Caddyshack, Meatballs, and Stripes. Also, comedy has evolved over the years. In the comedies from the late 70s and early 80s, while there was broad, screwball stuff, you actually had to have some brains to "get" some of it. You were required to think a little. Comedy was written mostly for adults, not to family-friendly groups or rubes. Comedy has devolved back to its more broad roots of The Three Stooges or Laurel and Hardy, where everyone is waving their arms at you screaming, "Look! We're being funny!" like hyperactive kids. And while I am a fan of their work, the stylings of Will Farrell, Jim Carrey, Adam Sandler, and Mike Myers are the result of this dumbing-down. When you watch Ghostbusters, it is not special-effects-heavy (they didn't have the budget), walks a very fine line between being genuinely scary and outright hilarious, and relies heavily on nuanced dialogue and action, being performed by some of the undisputed masters of the craft. In other words, they had to be clever. While the giant Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man is over the top, what makes Ghostbusters funny are lines like ""You're endangering our client. The nice lady who paid us. In advance," "My parents left me that house. I was born there," "I collect spores, molds and fungus" or "That's a big Twinkie." Unlike the new version that delivers everything with a wink and a nod, the original Ghostbusters is dead serious about its material, no matter how over-the-top it got. There aren't sly nods at the audience, but rather fully invested actors in their respective roles grounded in its own reality, which makes it more believable, relatable and therefore more real feeling.
But, let's talk about our new stars quickly. They did great with what they had. Melissa McCarthy (Abby Yates-the Ray Stantz of this group) wisely sheds her gross-out persona of Bridesmaids and instead inhabits her mousy persona of Spy, which works well for the character. Unfortunately, the character is a tad pathetic, but McCarthy makes you care for Abby. Kristen Wiig (Erin Gilbert-the less-confident but no less smart Peter Venkman character) is the oddest of the lot. She plays the straight one, the Abbott to the rests' Costellos. I found her character a wasted opportunity, essentially fawning over the beefcake but dumb receptionist (Chris Hemsworth playing the Annie Potts role). Leslie Jones (Patti Tolan-the every(wo)man Winston Zedermore part) actually has the most laugh-out-loud lines. In my opinion, her jokes were the funniest of the movie. But the real revelation is Kate McKinnon (Jilian Holtzman-the Egon Spangler mad-genius character). She doesn't get that many lines. On top of that, Jilian is incredibly weird. But her off manner and totally incongruous reactions to characters and situations are the absolute best thing about the movie. Since most of them tend to be in the background, it only heightens their comedic punch, and she steals EVERY scene she is in. I haven't been watching Saturday Night Live a lot recently, but if she is consistently this good on the show, it's no wonder why people rave so much about it.
Besides the stars' performances , there's not a lot to talk about. The effects are over the top, which keeps us from becoming fully invested in the world, and instead remind us we're watching a movie. The movie is basically a remake, never straying too far from the outline of the original. But instead of grounding us in a "reality," like the first one, it one-ups everything with classic deus ex machina-style. For instance, in the original movie, everything looked slapped together with wires and duct tape. Their equipment looked as it was pieced together with odds and ends. It looked used, lived-in. In the new movie, new stuff just shows up when they need it because the plot says so. Everything was quickly and conveniently invented and built by Jilian from God-knows-what and paid for from God-knows-where. In the end, the movie felt like a cheap copy of the original with an amazing paint job so you won't realize the engine is burning oil and has thrown a rod. If you can wait, rent it instead. The only way Hollywood will stop making these crappy remakes is if the audience doesn't go. Hate all the remakes lately? Vote with your feet and see something original instead. I know it's scary, but you probably liked the original Ghostbusters because you never saw anything quite like it before. But if you must--go see it. There is some funny stuff, and despite all I have said here, it is entertaining. I did not leave the theater feeling ripped off. I left feeling regretful nostalgia teamed with an empty realization that what I just saw was, in the end, only mediocre. And in the end, that would be great for a lot of films, but makes this Ghostbusters only a pale pretender to one of the greatest comedies ever made.
No comments:
Post a Comment