This past weekend, the movie "Ghostbusters," a remake of the original 1984 film starring Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, and Sigourney Weaver, hit the screens. The title is telling of the basic premise: a quirky group of individuals that uses science to capture and contain ghosts. The 1984 film was undeniably a success. It is known for its comedy and stunning visual effects at the time, and had Oscar nominations for Best Visual Effects and Best Original Song. Needless to say, it developed quite a cult following, and is a movie beloved by many.
However, from the moment the remake was announced, the Internet has taken a personal vendetta against it. Despite the promising cast and updated visual effects, it seems no one wants this movie to exist. The official trailer has over 36 million views on YouTube, but almost 4 times as many dislikes as likes, making it the top disliked video. Not to mention the comments are atrocious (which actually, the movie has a clever way of commenting on.)
Personally, I was excited when I first heard about the movie. I had never seen the original, but absolutely love Kate McKinnon, and also appreciate the works of Kristin Wiig, Leslie Jones, and Melissa McCarthy. The comments made me angry. How can you judge a movie when you haven’t even seen it? I watched the trailer for the original movie and found it no more engaging or special. So why the hate? Was it the fact that the remake had an all-female cast, which obviously would strip the movie of all hilarity and charm? Or was it simply a nostalgic effect?
Either way, I felt I had to know, and decided to watch both films this past Thursday.
Here are my thoughts.
I want to make one thing clear: this remake is NOT the original by any means.
These movies have two different vibes going for them. The original has an 80’s charm to it. The jokes are corny and the characters, simple. For the time, the visual effects are extremely impressive, and I’m not going to lie, I felt a little more than creeped out during the opening scene with the librarian and whenever Sigourney Weaver’s character was possessed. I felt this movie did better in terms of having a plot and sticking to it, and I enjoyed its creativity.
While I felt the original was more simplistic in its delivery, the remake was quite the opposite. What else would you expect from this decade? From the jokes to the visual effects and even the layered nature of the plot, everything is a spectacle. This is not necessarily a bad thing because it does its job in terms of entertainment. In fact, I found myself smiling throughout the majority of the two hours and heavily engaged in the film. If anything, the spectacle hinders the plot instead of enhancing it. While at times the film seems split between the actual overarching plot of stopping the amplification of paranormal activity and the comedic dynamic of the four leads, the two eventually found a balance in terms of screen time and focus. There were times that jokes would prolong, making the development of the plot secondary, and therefore the progression a bit confusing. It definitely has a different feel when compared the original.
However, I that the plot of the original Ghostbusters movie was not what made it the beloved classic it is today. Apart from the visual effects, it is rather the humor that draws the cult following. Humor evolves with each generation, each decade even. We find things funny because they in some way reflect the lifestyle and ideals we as a society hold. Therefore, it changes, and I feel that fact is prevalent when comparing these movies.
The original, like I said above, was a bit corny in mind. The jokes were subtler, usually said in deadpan, and so casually that you almost miss it. They are clever. For me, it was a situation where I heard the joke, logically knew why it was funny, and would let out a snort, maybe a laugh or two for the real zingers. It’s a funny movie, but the type of humor seems almost foreign in this day and age.
As oppose to the deadpan in the original, the remake definitely contains more of the modern, aggressive humor. It by no means dominates the movie, making it difficult to sit through and shallow in plot. While it’s a bit more intense, it’s also clever. The one-liners seem so random, and yet so fitting at the same time. The humor in itself ranges from the subtle reoccurring wanton-to-broth ratio gag, to Kate McKinnon’s facial expressions and odd mannerisms, to Leslie Jones’ “let the power of Patty compel you.”
Those who have seen the movie know what I’m talking about, and can hopefully picture the spectrum I’m painting here. Is it a better humor than the original? It definitely is a different type of humor, and I don’t really see one statistically being better or worse; it’s very subjective. But personally, I laughed harder watching the remake.
A few more highlights regarding the remake:
It has a fantastic commentary on gender roles and includes a stellar lineup of positive female protagonists. Each of the four women is incredibly intelligent—whether it be in paranormal research, physics, engineering, or history and street smarts. I walked out of the theater wanting to change my major to physics because the complexity behind the technology seemed so fascinating. Each character can easily hold her own. There is no montage where they grow from defenseless maiden to warrior because they are extremely capable from the beginning. Apart from a past falling out that is quickly resolved, there is no drama or petty competition between the protagonists. They genuinely care for one another, and easily come together as a team. While different, they are accepting, and by being so are able to compliment each other beautifully. For me, it was very reminiscent of my friend group and the dynamic at my all girl’s high school, not the portrayal of girl groups that tends to permeate the media. It was refreshing to see, and gave me hope for the future generation.
And I cannot forget to mention Chris Hemsworth as the ditzy receptionist, Kevin. If you’re worried that this movie will contain no humor because it stars four women, then fret not, because he is hilarious. From failing to do the simplest of tasks and clearly lacking basic social knowledge, it’s the sheer oblivion his character has towards the world around him that sells his jokes. You, as well as the Ghostbusters, just sit there thinking “how does this man’s brain work?”
All in all, I found the "Ghostbusters" remake to be funny, engaging, and empowering. It does feel a bit long at times, and major plot points to the overarching arc are occasionally brushed over to leave room for a prolonged gag, but the chemistry between McCarthy, Wiig, McKinnon, and Jones is undeniably stellar. To be honest, I feel the only problem people could have with this movie that would cause such strong YouTube comments would be the fact that this is not the original. I blame nostalgia.
Personally, I think the remake is worth your time and would highly recommend seeing it. If you're worried that it will not be funny, don't be. The women in this cast are absolutely hilarious--words cannot describe. If you’re looking for the original "Ghostbusters" then do not expect much out of this movie. There are many nods towards the original, but it feels like a completely different movie, and to be honest, I don't think that is a bad thing.
