I don’t really want to write this review. The 2016 "Ghostbusters" remake has been such a polarizing topic since its announcement and the female-driven cast did nothing but provoke the internet trolls who directed an unrelenting barrage of derogatory comments and tweets at the leads for no other reason than their ability to conceive children while such sexism-baiters have likely never even gotten an opportunity to participate in such an action. In this context, any criticism of this movie can easily be misconstrued as support of sexism while any genuine enjoyment can be interpreted as appeasement towards the social justice crowd. For this reason, let me begin by saying that this movie is at no point dragged down or made inferior by having a quartet of female leads. But that doesn’t mean it’s a good movie.

The story is markedly different from the 1984 original film, a movie about former parapsychology professors sticking it to the man and going into business for themselves as ghost exterminators. This one focuses on Dr. Erin Gilbert (Kristen Wiig), a former paranormal detective who let the pressures of disbelief get to her and abandoned her craft and her friend Abby (Melissa McCarthy) for a teaching position at Columbia. One life-changing ghost encounter later, Erin rejoins Abby and her engineering partner Jillian Holtzmann (Kate McKinnon) to study spectral anomalies. Meanwhile, happy-go-lucky MTA worker Patty (Leslie Jones) is confronted with a ghost set upon her by disturbed outcast Rowan (Neil Casey) and tracks out the newly-formed Ghostbusters to clean out her station. Together with their clueless receptionist Kevin (Chris Hemsworth), the four women use their witty equipment and scientific know-how to uncover Rowan’s secret plot, fight the various ghosts popping up all over the city, and save New York before it becomes a portal into the underworld forever. Opposing them are the gutless Mayor Bradley (Andy Garcia), his PR-hogging assistant Jennifer (Cecily Strong), and the offensively poor delivery man Bennie (Karan Soni).

Beyond the basic story elements, there is a lot going on in this movie. Interesting ideas such as the team’s divisive lack of confidence and motivation by scientific intrigue rather than pest control are pushed to the forefront and serve to differentiate from its well-known predecessor. However, they don’t distract from a terrible script. The writing of the movie is so markedly bad that it is easy to distinguish between scripted scenes and improvised ones just from the complete tonal reversal from stiff and upheld to relaxed and flowing. Only about a quarter of the jokes are funny, and even then it’s largely due to the brilliance of the delivery from the four leads. Almost all of the impressive technical jargon is lifted verbatim from the 1984 version and is intentionally delivered so rushed that it is hard to detect that its even English, let alone brilliantly explained science fiction technology. At times, the characters are as stupid as horror movie victims, often choosing to wait until the last possible moment to act and robbing more than a few scenes of any sense of suspense. There’s also the issue of Holtzmann. All the other characters have defined and likable personalities; Erin seeks recognition and validation, Abby is bold and brazen, Patty is generally kind but has a clear limit for the amount of crap she can put up with. But Holtzmann’s identity is so unidentifiable that it’s hard to tell if McKinnon, a talented comedian and actress, was being directed at all. Everything she does is nonsensical and usually contradicts other actions she’d taken earlier, leaving the audience scratching its head in utter confusion.

Fortunately, most of the other players are adequate. Wiig is enjoyable as Erin, but doesn’t seem to bring more to the table that another comedic actress couldn’t have. McCarthy appears to be invested in the role and I can easily liken her performance to one that any member of the original cast would have delivered. Jones is largely the funniest person in the movie, with practically every joke perfectly timed and a flair for subtle character work. Hemsworth’s role is supposed to be the gender-reversal of the ditzy, attractive love-interest trope and he does well, even if his oblivious smile is more likely just him grinning at what an easy pay-day he just made. Casey is enjoyably creepy as Rowan, but he isn’t given much material or screen time to work with and the lackluster finally truly doesn’t let him showcase his full range. Garcia and Strong are both so underused and underappreciated that their performances fly completely under the radar.

The cinematography sinks to a level I did not expect from Paul Feig. He isn’t known for brilliant camerawork, but here it looks downright sloppy. The effects are so cartoonish that they become funnier than half the jokes. The few action sequences in particular are so poorly shot that it is impossible to distinguish spatial positioning and timing, things that are crucial to a fast-moving scene and humorous dialogue. The sound design is more suited to an under-budget B movie than a Hollywood blockbuster. Perhaps most tragic is the editing, which cuts into the timing of jokes and delivery, ruining a few jokes and occasionally making the trained and professional actors look like amateurs doing the stand-up circuit.

One interesting and funny aspect of the movie are the cameos from the original cast. At first, the movie seems to take place separate from the 1984 original, but several characters drop hints that there is a larger universe at play here. This makes it all the funnier to see Bill Murray as a deceptive ghost debunker, or Annie Potts as a put upon and sassy concierge, or Dan Aykroyd, a man who has done his level best to destroy his own legacy, as a surprisingly informed and causal New York cabbie. They’re little touches, but scattered strategically around the movie and even the tongue in cheek nod to the late, great Harold Ramis will get a laugh.

Overall, I really don’t want to dislike this movie. For all its flaws, you can feel the effort that went into its creation and the legitimate passion and enjoyment that was derived from its production, especially in the four leads. It’s hard to say whether people were motivated to try and prove the internet wrong or if they just considered it a comedic project they could have fun with. Even if the writers couldn’t write a good joke to save their lives, they clearly understood what was fun and enjoyable about the original and knew how to replicate and update the group dynamic, comedic style, and thematic symbolism for the 21^st century. There are still some interesting ideas here and admirable character work, they’re just not presented very well. So if you have an afternoon to kill and a few bucks in your pocket and want to see a movie that will definitely pass the Bechdel test, this is a pretty good use of your time. On the other hand, hopefully Hollywood will see this as the beginning of the decline of reboots and remakes of 80s and 90s licenses. Seriously, it has to stop. 2/5