Okay, so I took my wife and daughters to see this movie over the weekend and I thought I'd share my thoughts as a superfan of the original. This may be a long post so I'll put a summary at the end if you're lazy or incapable of reading more than 2 sentences at a time.

Let me preface by saying when they announced a new GB movie I was more than thrilled; I was ecstatic. BUT, then I heard they were doing an all-female cast and I was perturbed. Why? I don't care if they cast women, but why must they ONLY be women? Eventually, they cast the women and I was less perturbed. I can't say anything negative about any of them prior to seeing this flick. I'm not a McCarthy hater (mainly because I haven't seen her in anything unfunny; then again, I've only seen in her in a couple of movies (she's not been in the chick flicks my wife has made me watch), Wiig has been funny in all the stuff I've seen her in and Iv'e found McKinnon and Jones funny on SNL. However, I was still worried that this would be an anti-man woman-loving "family" flick. Let me state at this point that it was NOT. GB16 is NOT openly anti-man. If you look closely, though, you will see that every man with a speaking part is either a jerk or a complete imbecile (not just Helmsworth character is so stupid, you wonder how the heck are they even still alive), except for Ernie Hudson's cameo, but that came right before the credits rolled. With that said, i still didn't get the sense the movie was anti-man.

Getting back to the timeline, the first trailer came out and I laughed a couple of times so I was cautiously optimistic it'd be a decent comedy. Turns out, I was probably the ONLY one outside of those that worked on the movie that thought so considering it was YouTube's most dislike trailer EVER. The 2nd trailer comes out and I still feel the same: it looks like it might be a decent movie. (Regardless of the trailers, I WAS going to see this movie; I am a super GB fan after all).

Fastforward to July 15th and I'm on my way to the theater.

How was the movie, you ask? Well, the movie is okay. I laughed a few times (note: the humor is sophomoric and juvenile), I cringed twice (there is a queef joke and a shot to the crotch), but I was entertained for the duration of the movie. I was not bored at all. Make no mistake, this is no classic, this is NOT a great movie, but it is okay. The story was not great and was way too derivative of the original and the damn PKE meter looked like a stupid kid's toy and don't get me started on the new Ecto-1, but they kept the sound effects (which I LOVE) for the most part and the 4 Ghostbusters were pretty funny. If I wanted, I could easily go through and nitpick this movie to death, but I'm not. It was okay and 2 out of my 3 girls liked it (my oldest two ages 15 and 11; youngest is 8).

Should you see this movie? Well, that's entirely up to you. Let me help to clarify things by stating this: if I had to rank GB properties, it would go thusly: GB, GB2, GB2016, Real GB, Extreme GB, Slimer and the Real GB.

Or, let me put it this way: I would say this movie is about as good a movie as Pixels was. Now, I like Pixels and enjoyed it even though I know it's not a good movie. I liked GB2016 even though I know it's not going to be close to a classic.

Hope that helps people who were on the fence about seeing it and feel free to ask any questions and I'll do my best to answer them.

And remember, don't cross the streams (something that was never said or played any part in the new movie).

No interest.... there was no point to rebooting this movie franchise other than to make money. Ill take the video game for closure... and call it a franchise.

(07-19-2016, 11:31 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: No interest.... there was no point to rebooting this movie franchise other than to make money.   Ill take the video game for closure... and call it a franchise.

It's sad, really. It's like they didn't understand what made Ghostbusters so special. The original was NOT just a comedy. At best, it was a hybrid comedy, like a horror-comedy. The movie and characters (outside of Venkman) took themselves very serious. It's just the characters responded in ways that ended up being funny.

This new thing is pretty much a straight up comedy and while I liked it and laughed, it's nowhere near what Ghostbusters is nor what this movie could've been.

These were original characters. None of these women played female versions of the original. The closest you could come is that Melissa McCarthy's character was much like Ray with a little Egon and Venkman thrown in, but I never got the sense she was like that. She was an original character; they ALL were.

In fact, Leslie Jones was probably my favorite of the 4. I think I laughed at her parts the most.

Anyway, if Sony learned their lessons from this one (not the least of which is DON'T ALIENATE THE VERY SAME PEOPLE YOU WANT TO WATCH YOUR MOVIE), then they could take these 4 new characters and make a good GB movie with (with hopefully less video game-y and toy-ish gadgets). But, considering this is Hollywood and their takeaway from Deadpool's success is to make everything R-rated, I ain't holding my breath.

(07-19-2016, 11:31 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: No interest.... there was no point to rebooting this movie franchise other than to make money.   Ill take the video game for closure... and call it a franchise.

yeah i have no desire to see this, and would much rather watch ghostbusters 2

(07-19-2016, 11:28 AM)PhilHos Wrote: And remember, don't cross the streams (something that was never said or played any part in the new movie).

Sort of hard fr women to cross the streams, eh.

What I liked about the original, as PhilHos mentioned, was that it wasn't just a comedy. It was suspenseful and had elements of horror. It also wasn't action. What would happen if 3 real scientists and a guy they hired tried to get rid of ghosts?

The trailer for the new one looked bad, but only because of how it was cut. I like Wiig in movies (not on SNL though) and McKinnon in general. Jones is funny more often than not on SNL. Not really a McCarthy fan anymore, but she is talented. Open minded about seeing it, but I've decided I can wait for blu-ray.

I'm hoping it's not too actiony in that scene we see in the trailer with them fighting a lot of ghosts.

i have a jailbroken firestick coming, so if we decide to get drunk and watch it, thats about the only way i'll end up seeing it

(07-19-2016, 11:51 AM)PhilHos Wrote: It's sad, really. It's like they didn't understand what made Ghostbusters so special. The original was NOT just a comedy. At best, it was a hybrid comedy, like a horror-comedy. The movie and characters (outside of Venkman) took themselves very serious. It's just the characters responded in ways that ended up being funny.

This new thing is pretty much a straight up comedy and while I liked it and laughed, it's nowhere near what Ghostbusters is nor what this movie could've been.

These were original characters. None of these women played female versions of the original. The closest you could come is that Melissa McCarthy's character was much like Ray with a little Egon and Venkman thrown in, but I never got the sense she was like that. She was an original character; they ALL were.

In fact, Leslie Jones was probably my favorite of the 4. I think I laughed at her parts the most.

Anyway, if Sony learned their lessons from this one (not the least of which is DON'T ALIENATE THE VERY SAME PEOPLE YOU WANT TO WATCH YOUR MOVIE), then they could take these 4 new characters and make a good GB movie with (with hopefully less video game-y and toy-ish gadgets). But, considering this is Hollywood and their takeaway from Deadpool's success is to make everything R-rated, I ain't holding my breath.

i mean come on.... Why redo basically the plot of the original? they couldn't pull a new plot together?...       they should reboot movies that weren't great the first time around... not ones that will stand the test of time on their own.

The director and whoever wrote the movie should be ashamed in my opinion.      So much they could do with the franchise and they choose to hack and slash the original film...  I keep hearing this guy (director) understands comedy but nothing seemed remotely funny from the trailer or other movies he is credited for.

the things you describe in the movie and other reviews I have read make me want to see it less.   I just don't want any of this in my mind when I think ghostbusters.


if anything they should have done some sort of passing of the torch if they got those guys in there for cameos they could have easily done just that.


And its not just this movie its most of what Hollywood is selling theses days and im not buying.  worst part of it all is I am a huge ghostbusters fan.. but was never excited for this movie. or most remakes of good movies.

Too many people pre-judged this movie.

I will admit that I was disappointed when I found out it was a re-boot instead of a sequel, but I will still probably see it.

(07-19-2016, 11:31 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: No interest.... there was no point to rebooting this movie franchise other than to make money.  

The only reason they make ANY movie is to make money.

So far it has a 5.2 rating on IMBD. yikes

(07-19-2016, 01:16 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: What I liked about the original, as PhilHos mentioned, was that it wasn't just a comedy. It was suspenseful and had elements of horror. It also wasn't action. What would happen if 3 real scientists and a guy they hired tried to get rid of ghosts?

The trailer for the new one looked bad, but only because of how it was cut. I like Wiig in movies (not on SNL though) and McKinnon in general. Jones is funny more often than not on SNL. Not really a McCarthy fan anymore, but she is talented. Open minded about seeing it, but I've decided I can wait for blu-ray.

I'm hoping it's not too actiony in that scene we see in the trailer with them fighting a lot of ghosts.

Two things (sort of spoiler-y so beware): Yes, the ending is too actiony and I didn't realize it while watching, but the female Ghostbusters only bust one ghost the entire movie (and this ghost ends up being set free later!)

(07-19-2016, 01:28 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: i mean come on.... Why redo basically the plot of the original? they couldn't pull a new plot together?...       they should reboot movies that weren't great the first time around... not ones that will stand the test of time on their own.

The director and whoever wrote the movie should be ashamed in my opinion.      So much they could do with the franchise and they choose to hack and slash the original film...  I keep hearing this guy (director) understands comedy but nothing seemed remotely funny from the trailer or other movies he is credited for.

Not to keep dumping on the movie 'cause I was okay with the finished product personally, but the idea to reboot the movie was the director's - Paul Fieg. Supposedly he was asked to direct and before he agreed, he demanded that it be a reboot instead of a sequel.

Hollywood doesn't know how to do a comedy any more. It's all slapstick or vulgar jokes. Not that I mind slapstick or vulgarity, but there's no subtlety in the movies. I keep expecting to watch the next Sudeikis or McCarthy movie and hear a laugh track.

Going to stop now before I tell anyone to get off my lawn.

If I was going to make another Ghostbuster movie, it would be more of a 30 years later sequel with better comedic/serious writing. I also would scrap this cast and go all male with Will Ferrell, Steve Carrell, Seth Rogen, and Kevin Hart.

(07-19-2016, 11:51 AM)PhilHos Wrote: It's sad, really. It's like they didn't understand what made Ghostbusters so special.

What made Ghostbusters 1 and 2 so special was Harold Ramis who wrote it. The man is comedic genius up there with Mel Brooks in my opinion.

Also, when you have a cast with not only Ramis but Ackroid, Murray, Moranis(sp?) Weaver and Hudson you can't go wrong.

Seriously, I don't know why Harold Ramis doesn't get more credit for the scripts he wrote and is considered one of the best. From Animal House to Caddy Shack to Stripes to Ghostbusters, the man was a great writter. I'm sure if he were alive today, Ghostbusters 2016 would have been great.

Kind of want to see it. Love the original. But as a woman think it could be a great movie and four funny womn.

I saw it and it exceeded my expectations. I think as far as remakes go it was one of the better ones I have seen recently, but thats not saying a ton.

I got to see this picture with my family last night.

I felt like the cameo(s) were forced. Original cast members who played parts (Murray, Aykroyd, Potts, Weaver, Hudson, Slimer, Stay Puft) and the bust of Ramos in the new building just took away from the forward progress of the story. They all seemed 'fitted in'...and they really didn't have but 1 or two lines.... so , again, for nostalgia reasons or because the movie need that to bring in the former fans?

Re-boot or rip-off? Runs a pretty fine line to either options.

Like Philhos, there were some laughable parts, but the kids didn't seem too into it, and I was holding on pretty hard.

Overall, I guess I'm glad I saw it, as a fan of the original, and I know it had to be a re-boot...but at the same time...nah.

I'm walking on the treadmill yesterday before lunch, and the wife was reading the Sunday paper, when outta left field she says "Hey, why don't we go see Ghostbusters today?" This was somewhat surprising because my wife's movie tastes tend to run toward bloody torture movies like Saw or those damn movies where cameras capture pots moving on their own or babies levitating in cribs and shit that makes me want to sleep with the effen lights on. But, she loves Melissa McCarthy and Kristen Wiig, too, so I capitulated. And, on a 94 degree Sunday, sitting under blasting A/C in a dark theater aint the worst idea.

I thought it was ok. We saw it in 3D, and the effects were decent. There were a few laughs, and Kate McKinnon crated a funny, weird vibe. As someone else mentioned, the cameos felt a little forced. But, I was never bored, and it moved along pretty good. It was a fair summer movie, and I've paid to see much worse over the years.