I'm sure all of us have at least one classic movie that we hold near and dear to our hearts. They exist as a gem of time and society or as a shining example of undeniable genius. Seeing the screenwriter and the director's vision come to life can honestly be a magical experience. It's for these reasons that I despise movie remakes. Remakes are little more than lazily crafted, wholly unnecessary cash-grabs that RARELY offer a new perspective on a classic. Feminized remakes, more than any other kind, commit these cinema sins.

Feminized remakes are titles like "Ghostbusters (2016)" and debatably "Ocean's 8." Not only do these films fail to offer any continuation or nuance to their father films, but they also fail to highlight the female perspective in either movie.

I think the only way you could make a remake like this worth-while and commendable would be to show the audience how the change of sex would've impacted the original story. It might be controversial to say, but men and women are cut from a different cloth. Each sex focuses and connect with various social cues and interpret different situations and words differently. Just imagine how deep "Ghostbusters (2016)" could've resonated with female viewers had Kristen Wiig's character Erin Gilbert quit her job at the university because of the glass ceiling instead of being fired because she co-wrote a book about ghosts. (Let's be honest, in a movie about ghosts THAT was the most unrealistic, immersion-shattering part.)

Another problem I have with this kind of remake is the fact that the people behind creating these movies want to bank in on feminism, but they all stop at just having a female-centered cast. "Ghostbusters (2016)" was created by self-declared feminists. I say self-declared because anyone who watched the movie would know that it's all for show. They had the power and potential to make a statement in this movie; they could've made many, in fact.

As I said above, they could've addressed the Glass Ceiling in the film or discussed how women are perceived as being, not cowardly, per se, but rather meek when faced with conflict. I would say they could've mentioned unwanted comments and sexual harassment too, but given how much they sexualized and objectified Kevin (Chris Hemsworth) shows that they don't care about that either. Which, while on the subject of that, here's a PSA: it's hypocritical to complain when women are overly sexualized and stereotyped but cheer and laugh when the same thing happens to men. It's not cute when either sex does it. It's disgusting. Oogle people to yourself like a respectable adult.

The icing on the cake is that more times than not, movies like this are under the category of "comedy." I'm not going to argue whether or not either movie was funny, because humor is too subjective. I'm not even upset with them because I didn't find them funny, I'm mad because even the people who made them can't take their movies seriously. (Though, as a side note, let's not pretend that Hollywood nonchalantly slaps the comedy genre on just about anything to remind audiences that they should be laughing). The original "Ghostbusters" wasn't a comedy, but it did have humor sprinkled throughout it just like previous "Ocean's" movies were action/suspense movies. Understandably, some people could argue that their aforementioned, absent nuance can be found within these films' focuses on humor. I can't personally agree with that though, because the comedy is just filler between the story's iconic exposition, climax, and conclusion.

I recently found out that there's a feminized "Terminator" remake in the works. I have never seen "Terminator" and do not know its plot or characters other than the fact that Schwartzenegger "will be back." I think that if I were to go and watch it on opening night that I'd probably find it enjoyable. It's ridiculous, really, because what's the point in watching the remake if you didn't bother to see the original. The remake should appeal to people familiar with the series, in fact, those people should be the ones who benefit the most from them.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm a woman; this isn't some childish, sexist, antifeminism rant.

While I can't say that I ever felt as though I needed a woman, explicitly, to inspire me when I was a child, I do believe that it is vital to have women in influential film roles. I just don't think we should let Hollywood dish out lazily written gender-bent scripts.

For Christ's sake, "Ocean's 8" was a shoddy, uninspired story that relied on its illustrious cast like a crutch. I want to see original stories full of genuinely compelling and complex female characters, not blatantly traditional male archetypes but as females. I'm sick and tired of it. Not every woman in film has to be a limp-noodle damsel in distress, nor should she be the boring, now overused, and unoriginal unflinching, infallible female badass.