Author |
Message |
Dr. Lecter
You must have big rats
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm Posts: 92093 Location: Bonn, Germany
|
Ghostbusters (2016)
_________________The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!
|
Fri Jul 15, 2016 8:22 am |
|
|
thompsoncory
Rachel McAdams Fan
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:13 am Posts: 14544 Location: LA / NYC
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
I thought it was hilarious and super entertaining. Kate McKinnon stole every scene she was in and I loved the theme of female friendship that resonated throughout the whole thing. Can't wait for the sequel. A-
|
Fri Jul 15, 2016 8:34 am |
|
|
Jack Sparrow
KJ's Leading Idiot
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:15 pm Posts: 36923
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
This was a good movie and had decent laughs throughout. The story is definitely engaging but its very predictable by design. The friendship between the leads seemed good in the first half but under utilized in the second half. Compared to the original this lacked the seriousness sometimes the script demanded. Hemsworth as the dumb assistant is great and Kate Mckinnon is really great and breath of fresh air in every scene she is in, specially the final sequence. The final sequence here is even better than the original movie and graphics are great throughout.
7/10
|
Fri Jul 15, 2016 8:39 am |
|
|
tree and a half
Cream of the Crop
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2016 11:38 am Posts: 2084
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
I went into Ghostbusters with low expectations and they were met, but I would have loved to have seen those same four leads in an actually funny movie. *D*
|
Fri Jul 15, 2016 9:47 am |
|
|
Corpse
Don't Dream It, Be It
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 12:45 pm Posts: 37152 Location: The Graveyard
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
I really enjoyed this. The film goes a bit off track during the third act, but the first two acts are very good. And Chris Hemsworth's dance scene during the credits is amazing.
_________________Japan Box Office “Gods are great ... but the heart is greater. For it is from our hearts they come, and to our hearts they shall return.” “We were like gods at the dawning of the world, & our joy was so bright we could see nothing else but the other.” “There are three things all wise men fear: the sea in storm, a night with no moon, and the anger of a gentle man.” “You have to pretend you get an endgame. You have to carry on like you will; otherwise, you can't carry on at all.” "Paper is dead without words / Ink idle without a poem / All the world dead without stories."
|
Fri Jul 15, 2016 6:37 pm |
|
|
publicenemy#1
Extraordinary
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 12:25 am Posts: 18880 Location: San Diego
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Underwhelming.
|
Fri Jul 15, 2016 6:43 pm |
|
|
Webslinger
why so serious?
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:24 pm Posts: 4110 Location: Stuck In A Moment I Can't Get Out Of
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
It's unfortunate that this Ghostbusters remake has been mired in such vicious controversy throughout pretty much every stage in development. Strip away the outcry of from some of the fandom, the back-and-forth "misogyny is bad/PC is bad" mudslinging, and all the other unnecessary baggage that this film has inherited, and what's left is a thematically slight but highly enjoyable romp. Like the 1984 original, the script is nothing special, but the chemistry between the four leads and scene-stealers among the supporting cast almost singlehandedly makes the film work as well as it does. All four actresses are in near-perfect tune with one another's comedic sensibilities, which allows the film to move along its various noisy setpieces breezily. Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones bring their sharpest oddball humor from SNL, while Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy are surprisingly effective as the straight (wo)men. The bond that the four develop over the course of the film is palpable, which lends a little bit of heft to the busy, effects-driven climax. Outside of the core group, however, Chris Hemsworth proves to be a comedic revelation. As a gender-flip of the dumb blonde taken to an even higher level of caricature, Hemsworth's sublimely-played dimwittedness allows him to walk away with every scene in which he appears. While the film won't achieve the lightning-in-a-bottle cultural success of the original (and definitely won't do anything to change the naysayers' tune... assuming they even bother with seeing it), it's more than adequate as an increasingly rare beast: an effects-driven blockbuster that works not because of its pyrotechnics and CGI, but rather because of its characters.
B+
_________________ This Post Has Brought to You by Your Friendly Neighborhood Webslinger.
|
Fri Jul 15, 2016 6:58 pm |
|
|
trixster
loyalfromlondon
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 6:31 pm Posts: 19697 Location: ville-marie
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
bustin' makes me feel good
_________________Magic Mike wrote: zwackerm wrote: If John Wick 2 even makes 30 million I will eat 1,000 shoes. Same. Algren wrote: I don't think. I predict.
|
Fri Jul 15, 2016 7:10 pm |
|
|
Magic Mike
Wallflower
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:53 am Posts: 34876 Location: Minnesota
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
thompsoncory wrote: Can't wait for the sequel. Hopefully one happens. Feig said it needed 500 Million WW for one to happen and I don't see that. Not having China will hurt it.
|
Fri Jul 15, 2016 10:35 pm |
|
|
Jack Sparrow
KJ's Leading Idiot
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:15 pm Posts: 36923
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
I also do want the sequel to happen and hopefully Feig does it.
|
Fri Jul 15, 2016 10:45 pm |
|
|
Ghostooze
Indiana Jones IV
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 3:47 pm Posts: 1406
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
the angry nerds managed to get this to a 4.5 at imdb lol
Apart from the lame villain, the movie is fine. nowhere near as bad as the hate it got before and now. i enjoyed it more than ID4 2 at least.
|
Sat Jul 16, 2016 1:03 am |
|
|
David
Pure Phase
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:33 am Posts: 34865 Location: Maryland
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
After an agonizing two-year march from announcement to release (dreadful misogyny! unholy political correctitude!), people will pay to see the female-led Ghostbusters reboot hoping for an abomination, a call to arms, a social-justice lightning rod, the greatest movie ever, the worst movie ever. But ultimately it is just a modestly diverting, slightly mediocre action-comedy romp whose high-profile gambit (the progressive girl-power casting) is countered by numerous very conservative choices. This is no revolution, and we are in fact on sadly recognizable ground here: a beloved brand remastered at a much higher volume, loaded with more violence and plenty of pause-for-applause fan service. Other than Kate McKinnon, whose tics and mannered gesticulations never cohere into a genuine performance, the cast is fine, though this is not a career highlight for any of the principals. There are a few big laughs, but there is a great deal of dead air, too. The pacing is haphazard, and the primary antagonist is incredibly dull, but the supernatural F/X are mostly cool (Slimer!).
C+
_________________1. The Lost City of Z - 2. A Cure for Wellness - 3. Phantom Thread - 4. T2 Trainspotting - 5. Detroit - 6. Good Time - 7. The Beguiled - 8. The Florida Project - 9. Logan and 10. Molly's Game
|
Sun Jul 17, 2016 12:35 am |
|
|
David
Pure Phase
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:33 am Posts: 34865 Location: Maryland
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Corpse wrote: And Chris Hemsworth's dance scene during the credits is amazing. I loved this. It should be a scene in the movie proper. Question bordering on pet peeve: is this movie called Ghostbusters or Ghostbusters: Answer the Call? This tagline-or-is-it-a-subtitle? even shows up in the end credits.
_________________1. The Lost City of Z - 2. A Cure for Wellness - 3. Phantom Thread - 4. T2 Trainspotting - 5. Detroit - 6. Good Time - 7. The Beguiled - 8. The Florida Project - 9. Logan and 10. Molly's Game
|
Sun Jul 17, 2016 12:38 am |
|
|
Libs
Sbil
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm Posts: 48626 Location: Arlington, VA
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
After all the speculation, Ghostbusters arrives and...it's good. But not great. Given the significant level of talent involved, this probably should have been better than it actually is. That said, it's still funny and enjoyable, and does not besmirch the original in any way. All four actresses are solid (special notice for Kristen Wiig, who makes her character just weird enough to be more than just the "straight woman") and have nice chemistry together, and Chris Hemsworth is a riot. All in all, though, this is my least favorite so far of the four Melissa McCarthy/Paul Feig collaborations. B
|
Sun Jul 17, 2016 1:31 am |
|
|
David
Pure Phase
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:33 am Posts: 34865 Location: Maryland
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
I thought Ernie Hudson's was the only valuable, genuinely amusing cameo. Sigourney Weaver's is all right, I guess. She is just there for a minute, no harm, no foul, in and out.
The movie completely halts to give Bill Murray a showcase, and this hurts the pacing. His character is roughly the equivalent of William Atherton's skeptical EPA bureaucrat in the original, but nowhere near as effectively obnoxious and sneering. And Dan Aykroyd's bit (the cab driver who "ain't afraid of no ghosts") is just painful.
_________________1. The Lost City of Z - 2. A Cure for Wellness - 3. Phantom Thread - 4. T2 Trainspotting - 5. Detroit - 6. Good Time - 7. The Beguiled - 8. The Florida Project - 9. Logan and 10. Molly's Game
|
Sun Jul 17, 2016 1:53 pm |
|
|
Dr. Lecter
You must have big rats
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm Posts: 92093 Location: Bonn, Germany
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
David wrote: Corpse wrote: And Chris Hemsworth's dance scene during the credits is amazing. I loved this. It should be a scene in the movie proper. Question bordering on pet peeve: is this movie called Ghostbusters or Ghostbusters: Answer the Call? This tagline-or-is-it-a-subtitle? even shows up in the end credits. This is bugging me a bit as well. Not sure the filmmakers ever decided.
_________________The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!
|
Sun Jul 17, 2016 2:45 pm |
|
|
publicenemy#1
Extraordinary
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 12:25 am Posts: 18880 Location: San Diego
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
David wrote: After an agonizing two-year march from announcement to release (dreadful misogyny! unholy political correctitude!), people will pay to see the female-led Ghostbusters reboot hoping for an abomination, a call to arms, a social-justice lightning rod, the greatest movie ever, the worst movie ever. But ultimately it is just a modestly diverting, slightly mediocre action-comedy romp whose high-profile gambit (the progressive girl-power casting) is countered by numerous very conservative choices. This is no revolution, and we are in fact on sadly recognizable ground here: a beloved brand remastered at a much higher volume, loaded with more violence and plenty of pause-for-applause fan service. Other than Kate McKinnon, whose tics and mannered gesticulations never cohere into a genuine performance, the cast is fine, though this is not a career highlight for any of the principals. There are a few big laughs, but there is a great deal of dead air, too. The pacing is haphazard, and the primary antagonist is incredibly dull, but the supernatural F/X are mostly cool (Slimer!).
C+ Just about what I thought about it too. McKinnon had some funny moments but I'm surprised people seem so enamored with her performance
|
Sun Jul 17, 2016 8:07 pm |
|
|
Algren
now we know
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:31 pm Posts: 67043
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
So opinion is mixed verging on positive. Congrats, Bradley, for correctly guessing which way it would turn (and then turning the opposite).
_________________STOP UIGHUR GENOCIDE IN XINJIANG FIGHT FOR TAIWAN INDEPENDENCE FREE TIBET LIBERATE HONG KONG BOYCOTT MADE IN CHINA
|
Mon Jul 18, 2016 2:13 am |
|
|
zwackerm
Hold the door!
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 10:26 pm Posts: 20348 Location: Where they shot Knock at the Cabin
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)e
I liked it. Did not love it. The issue was that the situations were not funny, it was the dialogue. And there was a lot f dialogue that was not funny. I did lol a few times, enough that there weren't too any awkward lulls. I thought he actresses were really good, especially Leslie Jones. Kate McKinnon sort of just acted drunk. I liked that McCarthy played more of a Spy than a Tammy type role here. And I really liked the special effects, the ghosts looked cool. I think one way it actually improved on the original was the ghosts actually caused havoc Instead of just reading and eating sausages. Not a classic overall, but a fun time at the movies.
B
|
Wed Jul 20, 2016 6:30 pm |
|
|
Jmart
Superman: The Movie
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:47 am Posts: 21152 Location: Massachusetts
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Good, funny, solid, harmless, yet about halfway through the movie I got a sinking feeling that I couldn't shake: the entire thing felt completely unnecessary. The movie doesn't quite justify its existence, and that's a problem. Then again, there's that picture going around of those two girls in costume talking with Kristen Wiig at the premiere. If the film is in any way inspiring to them and others like them, then the film probably did its job. For everyone else, it's fine, but it's definitely a step down for Feig.
B
And the only cameo that felt in any way organic was Ernie Hudson's.
_________________My DVD Collection Marty McGee (1989-2005)
If I’m not here, I’m on Letterboxd.
|
Wed Jul 20, 2016 10:28 pm |
|
|
zwackerm
Hold the door!
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2014 10:26 pm Posts: 20348 Location: Where they shot Knock at the Cabin
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
There were three young girls sitting in front of us. They seemed to LOVE it. Cracked up at every little thing.
|
Wed Jul 20, 2016 11:22 pm |
|
|
Steve
Indiana Jones IV
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:09 pm Posts: 1798
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Disclosure: I'm generally not a fan of the reboots / remakes that have been happening recently, thinking of last year's Star Wars: The Force Awakens and Jurassic World in particular. Sick of seeing the same "epic shit" happen over and over in a desperate and dulling attempt to entertain me to death. Where's the original ideas? So in no way was I anticipating this movie, nor did I think it was a good or necessary idea to make it. A friend asked me to see it and I said Why not?
Hell, it won me over. I laughed my ass off enough a number of times. The characters were endearing and charismatic, each of them slaying me in different scenes. And I think it's awesome that they were all chicks. There's seriously SO FEW MOVIES that feature even 50% female leads, much less closer to, I dunno, 80%. Seeing these ladies uncover the Busting of Ghosts in their own way was a ton of fun, and worth the remake (but seriously, stop now).
B+
Hemsworth, McKinnon were probably my favorites, though Leslie Jones might've got the biggest laugh from me: looking into the roomful of mannequins, "Okay, a room full of nightmares. Not goin in there." (something to that effect)
_________________ how am I not myself?
|
Wed Jul 20, 2016 11:32 pm |
|
|
Magic Mike
Wallflower
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:53 am Posts: 34876 Location: Minnesota
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
I thought it was really entertaining and I laughed quite a bit. Though it's not as hysterical as Feig's R-Rated comedies. I kind of miss the foul language coming from McCarthy's mouth. But it was still pretty funny for keeping it PG-13. Definitely a fun time at the movies. I thought the actresses all worked really well together. I want to see them all return for a sequel. Chris Hemsworth pretty much stole the show though. He was hilarious and on a superficial note has never looked more attractive. I'm glad they're planning to incorporate the credits dance sequence with him back into the movie for the Blu-ray release.
The special effects in this looked great too.
8/10 (B+)
|
Thu Jul 21, 2016 12:37 am |
|
|
Magic Mike
Wallflower
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:53 am Posts: 34876 Location: Minnesota
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
zwackerm wrote: There were three young girls sitting in front of us. They seemed to LOVE it. Cracked up at every little thing. My audience was made up of families and it was packed. But I went on discount Tuesday. I'd say it was almost sold out. There were tons of little boys there too. The ones in front of me laughed a lot. It's definitely attracting families so I hope it legs out like a family film.
|
Thu Jul 21, 2016 12:39 am |
|
|
Dil
Forum General
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 9:48 pm Posts: 8942 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Not the complete travesty the trailers made it out to be, but I still thought this was pretty mediocre. It was at least entertaining for the most part though.
|
Mon Jul 25, 2016 2:55 am |
|
|