MovieChat Forums > Psycho (1960) Discussion > OT: On the New "Ghostbusters" (MINOR SP...

OT: On the New "Ghostbusters" (MINOR SPOILERS ON CAMEOS/JOKES)

posted 8 years ago by ecarle
11 replies | jump to latest

My semi-interested trudge through the summer movies continues...and there ain't much left . Of summer movies.

"Ghostbusters." Interesting, I had kept picturing this as "Lady Ghostbusters" during the production, but when that title came up on screen, I realized, hey, this ain't a sequel, or a prequel. Its a REMAKE.

Or is it? I suppose that minted-for-the-21st Century phrase "reboot" is more appropriate. We keep seeing things from the 1984 original without any discussion OF the 1984 original. Things like the Firehouse Office Building(too expensive for the ladies this time; they move above a Chinese restaurant.) Or the green blobby little over-eating creature called "The Slimer." He was always a bit Disney to me, but with a National Lampoon grossness to him, as well.

As with so many damn reboots, the movie kicks in with the original "Ghostbusters" theme song and just when the audience is rocking...they turn it off. And replace it...later in the film...with a new rap version where you can barely make out the melody of the original. But of course.

---

Elsewhere on some other thread, before I saw the film, I made some regular-guy comparisons of the two casts and found these match-ups:

Bill Murray: Melissa McCarthy (the star of the thing)
Dan Ackroyd: Kristen Wiig (funny on SNL, not funny in movies)
Harold Ramis: Kate MacKinnon (The "surprise" thinking person's star)
Ernie Hudson: Leslie Jones(The er, "working stiff" one; also of course, black.)

That turns out to be right except I'm off on one.

Kate MacKinnon is Bill Murray. Its her movie.

Just as Kate has been the break-out star of SNL the past few years, so does she take this movie(her debut?) over from her more stellar co-stars.

I've read a lot of reviews of the new "Ghostbusters" and almost all of them singled out MacKinnon for her manic scene-stealing. But ONE reviewer said she ruined the movie with her "Three Stooges" mugging. There's always one. And I'm afraid I kept thinking about THAT review as I watched MacKinnon.

Well, she DOES mug. But with great skill...perhaps a bit more Jim Carrey than Bill Murray, but she stays hip. It IS her movie. You always look at HER in a scene. She will be the star born out of this, depending on the next vehicle.

Meanwhile, Kristen Wiig is reduced to straight womanhood(I can't say I've ever found her particularly funny; like Ackroyd, she's mainly an impressionist), and Melissa McCarthy fights valiantly to impose HER comedy chops on a character who can't support the usual MM persona(for one thing, she's not allowed to go "R" rated on the verbal sex front, in this picture.) As expected, Leslie Jones (like MacKinnon, a "new" SNL star) is funny in her big ol' loud way. I noted in the credits that while MM and Wiig each got one assistant apiece, Kate and Leslie had to share one("Assistant for Ms. MacKinnon and Ms. Jones"). Not fair. Shoulda been the other way around. Kate and Leslie save this thing as best it can be saved.

And oh: one of those Hemsworth brothers as the "dumb blond male secretary." I can't remember if this is the one who plays Thor. The part is dumb.

---

As for the movie itself, well, the CGI is state of the art. This is your up-to-date HD-CGI 3D Ghostbusters. One thing some Columbia exec said about the success of the 1984 Ghostbusters was: "We couldn't get the effects right in time for release, but nobody cared." Well, the effects ARE right for this one and we get -- another 2016 CGI battlefest.

What we also get, unfortunately, is a really, really, REALLY bad script. Too much plot. Too much straining for laughs that aren't there(always painful to see.) Absolutely no sense of the original "SNL/Lampoon" hipness of the comedy(which, admittedly, has little relevance in 2016.)

Its pretty bad.

But this:

Bill Murray shows up. Recall that after he disliked "Ghostbusters II," Murray not only refused to be in another Ghostbusters, he refused to allow another one to be made without him(he controlled sequel rights.)

Well, Bill's spent the last few years "becoming a nice guy," and making up (evidently) for off-screen meanness (particularly towards the now late Harold Ramis) and I guess Bill decided to go the whole nine yards -- he allowed this Ghostbusters to be made, and he's in it for a little bit, and he IS funny. And the nostalgia is there. (Note in passing: a coupla years ago, Bill Murray was in a serious film with Melissa McCarthy. Maybe they bonded for this.)

Ackroyd shows up. Signourney Weaver shows up(how soon we forget she had THIS franchise, too.) Ernie Hudson shows up(and he was cool in Ghostbusters, too; just not in it enough.) Annie Potts shows up. The late Harold Ramis shows up(as a statue.) Only Rick Moranis took a pass. I wonder why. But the rest of them bring back the Big Eighties in a big way. Though yeah, they all got old. Eh. Did we?

None of the old Ghostbusters cast play their old characters. Its just as well, because this one here should just probably sink on its own.

I have read that the new "Ghostbusters" is(as of right now) not allowed to be released in China(The supernatural stuff? The feminism?). That's going to hurt re-couping on a disappointing US take. I expect the new Ghostbusters will still make money. But not nearly enough.

Oh: I stayed all the way to the end. There's a "post end-credits scene." It sets up a sequel. We'll see.

PS. I noted that for once, "Psycho" jokes got a rest. We instead got one OK Exorcist joke(MM is possessed and her head turns all the way around) and one truly great "Jaws" joke.

Andy Garcia as the NYC Mayor, is trying to cover up all the ghost sightings in his city as a hoax. ("We don't want mass hysteria")

Kristen Wiig yells an accusation at the usually deadpan Garcia, and he gets up from his table raging at her:

Wiig: Don't go all "Jaws Mayor" on us!
Garcia: (In furious rage) Don't you EVER say I'm the Jaws Mayor!!

And the mayor sics his cops on Wiig.

I thought that was pretty funny. People forget how important the Mayor was TO Jaws. And played so weaselly by the late, great Murray Hamilton.

[–] swanstep 8 years ago

Thanks for the review ecarle. Ghostbusters (2016) seems to have fitted in with the overall tepidity of the summer movies this year. At this point it's up to Jason Bourne and Mag 7 and Suicide Squad, and especially the latter two, to 'save summer' by becoming finally some breakout hits that people actually like, see several times, etc..

On Kristen Wiig in movies: I loved her small part as an ultra-undermining assistant in Knocked Up and I did like her in Bridesmaids esp. the shop-argument scene which was wonderfully extended in a deleted scene:

https://youtu.be/9jWY2Xg0N4I

Good to hear that Mackinnon delivers.

On Music in movies - the original Ghostbusters theme is a reminder of how effortlessly Hollywood created big pop-music hits throughout the '80s and '90s. What happened I wonder? It happens only very occasionally nowadays.

BTW, I got around to seeing The Nice Guys. Consistently funny, good chemistry between the leads - not much depth beyond that, but the initial impression is good enough to put it a notch or two above much of the rest of Summer I gather (it's going to do very well rewatched at home I think, possibly ending up on the infinite syndication loop that things like Meet The Parents are on). TNG reminded me quite a bit of The Heat (w/ Melissa McCarthy and Sandra Bullock and Ghostbusters director Paul Feig) which I enjoyed a lot too and thought was quite well-directed.

[–] ecarle 8 years ago

Ghostbusters (2016) seems to have fitted in with the overall tepidity of the summer movies this year.

---

I would say so.

I'd like to underline that the really big problem with the film is the script. Specifically, many of the lines.

The 1984 Ghostbusters script, along with the Animal House script, and parts of the Caddyshack script ...were all written by pretty funny people AND(I have read) re-written over and over again AND...of course...enlivened when Bill Murray was involved, by his great skill at ad-libbing and riffing.

There is very little well-written comedy in the new "Ghostbusters" and only MacKinnon really seems up to Murray-esque riffing. MM and Wiig have to carry the lion's share of the exposition, a lot of it. Leslie Jones seems to fight her own lines...and wins.

MacKinnon has another comedy coming, BTW -- something called "Office Xmas Party." I want to see it, sight unseen.

---

At this point it's up to Jason Bourne and Mag 7 and Suicide Squad, and especially the latter two, to 'save summer' by becoming finally some breakout hits that people actually like, see several times, etc..

---

As you know, I'm banking on Mag 7(a September release) and Suicide Squad, for very specific reasons. As for Jason Bourne, I paid to see all three of the originals and felt: "This is clearly THE action franchise of its time...why am I feeling nothing?" Part of it was Matt Damon. I recall he had one scene in the first one with Clive Owen(as an opponent who is quickly eliminated by Damon) and I was like "Wait -- why isn't Owen the star of this?" Well, audiences decided against me. Young audiences in particular, I guess.

But really, the three movies all merged into one for me. Bourne is Coming. And some CIA guy or gal wants him dead before he can Reveal All. Plus shaky-cam car chases.

I'll be seeing the new one. Matt Damon's finally a real star to me. Like he cares.

---

On Kristen Wiig in movies: I loved her small part as an ultra-undermining assistant in Knocked Up

---

Missed that movie.

---

and I did like her in Bridesmaids esp. the shop-argument scene which was wonderfully extended in a deleted scene:

https://youtu.be/9jWY2Xg0N4I

--
Wiig WAS funny in Bridemaids -- where MM also made her mark as "the female John Belushi" but..its been a long haul since.

Notable: Wiig played, pretty much, a straight role in The Martian last year. Her fate in the future?

I dunno, maybe Wiig will recoup and deliver. I just think its that tough reality: you're funny or you're not. You have to work at it, or you don't.

---

Good to hear that Mackinnon delivers.

--

I have since found a cache of "MacKinnon raves" (on the Roger Ebert site) that illustrate to me that she WILL come out of this movie a star. The others, not so much. But I could be wrong.

---

On Music in movies - the original Ghostbusters theme is a reminder of how effortlessly Hollywood created big pop-music hits throughout the '80s and '90s. What happened I wonder? It happens only very occasionally nowadays.

---

Different era, I guess. All the songs for movies were crafted, it seems, to fit with music videos that included clips from the movies and special appearances by the stars...short, "cinematic," peppy.

Indeed, the new "Ghostbusters" riffs off of how the original opened: with an unseen ghost terrifying some hapless victim and then, suddenly, the Ghostbustesrs theme kicks in...its rather like the "Mission:Impossible" opening, I guess.

---

BTW, I got around to seeing The Nice Guys. Consistently funny, good chemistry between the leads - not much depth beyond that,

---

And that was enough for me. Sad. But not THAT sad. At least Crowe and Gosling didn't have to strain to get laughs like 3/4 of the Ghostbusters cast.

---

but the initial impression is good enough to put it a notch or two above much of the rest of Summer I gather (it's going to do very well rewatched at home I think, possibly ending up on the infinite syndication loop that things like Meet The Parents are on). TNG reminded me quite a bit of The Heat (w/ Melissa McCarthy and Sandra Bullock and Ghostbusters director Paul Feig) which I enjoyed a lot too and thought was quite well-directed.

---

I always figured The Heat would generate sequels. I wonder if Bullock and MM have "star conflict" issues. Its just a guess. They were great together.

The truth of the matter is: the buddy movie is pretty damn surefire. Butch and Sundance. MASH. 48 HRS. Lethal Weapon. And sometimes, "the girls": The Heat. Thelma and Louise(though that one got serious, but then, so did Butch and Sundance.)

Meanwhile, back at the other two ahead:

There's a great new trailer out for The Magnificent Seven, back-to-back with its new international trailer that tells me: probable favorite for 2016.

This tracks with my liking of the "True Grit" remake a few years ago, and my idea that remakes can be OK -- even as sequels are not, generally.

They have, in Denzel, a solid anchor of a movie star, the Real Deal for decades now, charisma-plus. They also have, in Chris Pratt, something very rare: a possible NEW male star of(possibly) the highest order. He's got the looks but he's got the accessibility. And in "The Mag 7," he's got the lines. Its Brynner and McQueen all over again, but with -- honest -- bigger stars than those two were in 1960.

They've got Ethan Hawke reuniting with Denzel after Training Day ("I heard," said Hawke, "they were remaking the Mag 7 with Denzel and I said, "well, then you've got 6 uncast roles -- I want one!"). They've got Big Vincent D'Onofrio(of whom, Chris Pratt says in thr trailer "Lookee that -- that big bear is wearing people clothes.") That's one black guy, three white guys and it looks like the other three are a Mexican, an Asian, and an American Indian. Done, done, and done for 2016.

And they've got two secret weapons: (1) a truly beautiful young female star named Haley Bennett (who stole a few scenes in Denzel's OK "The Equalizer" as a gorgeous Russian hooker who gets "Frenzy" strangled by an evil villain -- who in turn gets revenge-killed by Denzel as Bob Rusk always should have been) and (2) the talented Peter Sarsgaard playing what looks like a truly evil and psychotic Industrialist Gang Boss(not for him, Eli Wallach's even-handed tyranny as a Mexican bandit leader in the original.)

"The Equalizer" (2014) is on point here because it had the same director as "Mag 7"(Denzel's pal Antonine Fuqua), it was based on something else(a TV show), and Denzel played a righteous avenger(and another one of those sixty-something tough guys, like Liam Neeson) who killed all the bad guys as nastily as necessary. I'm thinking this new "Mag 7" might go that route. R-rated maybe. But clearly tough even if "PG-13", to wit: 'How'd we do?" asks Denzel of Chris Pratt after an early skirmish with bad guys. Pratt: "I think we killed all of 'em.".

I'm interested. It looks like A list Hollywood craftsmanship, to me.

"Suicide Squad" is coming sooner. I'll save some remarks for that. But this: The Joker. Why so blockbuster?

[–] swanstep 8 years ago

But really, the three movies all merged into one for me. Bourne is Coming. And some CIA guy or gal wants him dead before he can Reveal All. Plus shaky-cam car chases.

I really liked the first two films. The Third one being mostly a prequel to the coda of the second really did make me feel like the films were repeating themselves and going nowhere overall.

Anyhow, Jason Bourne is getting tepid reviews so it's certianly not going to be the film to break the Summer's disappointing trend.

Early tweets and whispers about Suicide Squad suggest it has huge 3rd Act/Villain problems so that people should start to lower expectations immediately if they want to enjoy it. What a movie summer!

[–] ecarle 8 years ago

The Third one being mostly a prequel to the coda of the second

---

A what to the what of the WHAT?

Or as a fake Alfred Hitchcock said to Vince Vaughn when Vaughn spoke of the shot by shot remake of Psycho:

A what by what what of WHAT?

(On SNL. Darrell Hammond played Hitch.)

---

really did make me feel like the films were repeating themselves and going nowhere overall.

---

Me too . And yet. I saw all of them. Just like I saw Batman vs Superman.

I'm the living embodiment of Woody Allen's joke about an old lady at a restaurant:

"The food here is so bad...and in such small portions."

Actually, that joke doesn't fit here. My continual going to comic book hero movies, Melissa McCarthy comedies, reboots and sequels of POOR QUALITY fits Allen's joke.

But I know some folks just love Bourne. And I know that when that other guy tried to hold up the franchise a few years ago, Matt Damon was serverely missed.

I give up.

Irony for Damon: he seemed to sign up for another Bourne when his star career was waning again (like that "I Bought a Zoo" movie.) And then "The Martian" does great BO and gets Oscar cred for Damon and others.

I'm not crazy about shaky cam in general, so the car chases in Bourne bored me. The fights to the death , on the other hand, were pretty good. Fights to the death usually are, especially when that is what they HAVE to be. The other guy must kill Bourne, or Bourne must kill the other guy. Nobody runs away.

---

---

Anyhow, Jason Bourne is getting tepid reviews so it's certianly not going to be the film to break the Summer's disappointing trend.

---

Oh, well. As someone wrote, its hard to remember a summer in the last five years that WASN'T disappointing. Its like Hollywood just keeps following the same formula, counts on chumps like me to show up anyway, cashes the checks -- and doesn't care.

More to the point -- though Xenophobia starts to rear its ugly head here -- it would seem that Hollywood's current "worldwide model" has turned movies into a "no lose" proposition. Release ANYTHING and enough people will show up in various countries all over the world, to turn a profit, big(Batman vs Superman) or small. The kind of commitment in telling a good story that, say, Hitchcock wanted to "gift" to his audience NO LONGER MATTERS. In the summer at least.

----

Early tweets and whispers about Suicide Squad suggest it has huge 3rd Act/Villain problems so that people should start to lower expectations immediately if they want to enjoy it.

---

Having rhapsodized over my 1989 summer with the Nicholson/Keaton Batman(which got a few bad reviews itself, to go with generally good ones)...no, it ain't gonna happen for me this time. I trust it MIGHT happen for a younger generation.

I'm intrigued that "Suicide Squad" and "The Magnificent Seven" are less than two months apart in release for they "expose me" yet again: I just love movies where a team is assembled to go on a mission. Its Formula to the Max, but when done RIGHT...its at minimum fun, and sometimes a pop classic(The original Mag 7, The Dirty Dozen, The Guns of Navarone.)

And yet, I know that the original Mag 7 was based on a great Kurosawa samarai film, but that was way up at art level. "The Magnificent Seven" as a Western plays things a bit more fast and loose and fun. It did in 1960, I hope it does in 2016.

As for Suicide Squad, word is it was subjected to massive reshoots to "play funnier"(more one-liners) after B vs S underperformed *$800 million worldwide IS underperforming) as too "mopey and serious." Massive reshoots can mess with a movie's meaning.

Note : Ben Affleck will appear as Batman in Suicide Squad and he seems to be the linchpin for "Justice League" next year(a Com Con trailer is out.) Looks like we're stuck with him for awhile. Surprise: I like him -- I think he's got the Real Deal going in movie star looks (face, size, voice.) But too bad he wasn't in the Nolan Dark Knights, maybe. It looks like he's stuck in some thin gruel.

Meanwhile, the DC gang is out to ape Marvel -- Margot Robbie's Harley Quinn will get her own movie, too. And ...that Wonder Woman gal is a real beauty. Never too old to look and enjoy.

---
What a movie summer!

---

1997 looks better all the time.

Funny: in the 70's, it was like one blockbuster dominated the summer. Jaws. Star Wars. Grease. Alien...with maybe a few let in "on the side."

Came the 80's, the summers were nicely full of GOOD blockbusters AND Sleepers:

'81: Raiders, Superman II, For Your Eyes Only... Arthur(and its cheery theme song and Dudley's World Class Drunk act and Gielgud's snobbery-with-a-heart; I loved that movie)

'82: ET, Star Trek II, The Road Warrior, Poltergeist.

'83: The Empire Strikes Back, Octopussy, WarGames...Psycho II(it was a hit!)

'84: Ghostbusters, Indy II(lousy but a hit), Star Trek III, Gremlins

Fluff those all were, but.. a bit more diverse.

---

Entire summer seasons aside, consider these "one or two or three hit wonders" of summers gone by:

Psycho
North by Northwest
The Apartment(a DRAMA of sorts and a Best Picture)
Some Like It Hot
Rio Bravo
Anatomy of a Murder
Chinatown(!!)
Forrest Gump (A Best Picture)

Pretty sad comparing things today.

OK, back to my rocking chair...

[–] snelling 8 years ago

I respect your reviews, ecarle, but his name is spelled AYKROYD!

"'Extremely High Voltage.' Well, I don't need safety gloves, because I'm Homer Simps--" - Frank Grimes

[–] ecarle 8 years ago

Thank you for the reminder but I'm famous, I'm afraid, for typing fast, leaving typos in place, and leaving spellcheck behind. Though I have gotten more diligent on cleaning up posts in respect to those who take the time to read them.

I will commit Mr. Aykroyd's name to memory. With what fading memory I have left!

[–] swanstep 8 years ago

The truth of the matter is: the buddy movie is pretty damn surefire. Butch and Sundance. MASH. 48 HRS. Lethal Weapon. And sometimes, "the girls": The Heat. Thelma and Louise(though that one got serious, but then, so did Butch and Sundance.)

Agreed. The Buddy cop formula went down gangbusters in Zootopia earlier this year too.

We're in agreement that The Nice Guys is a solid comedy. It did only middling business which is disappointing. Well, after hearing some good word-of-mouth, I saw Popstars: Never Stop Never Stopping by Andy Samberg/The Lonely Island (Justin Timberlake and lots of SNL alums have cameos). It's been a financial disaster (making back less than half its smallish budget domestically)... yet it's a decent comedy, amusing throughout with one main set-piece that's an instant classic. It's also surprisingly good-natured. Maybe people are in such awful moods right now that they they can't let themselves go at a comedy? It does feel to me that both Nice Guys and Popstars would have done much better other summers.

[–] ecarle 8 years ago

Agreed. The Buddy cop formula went down gangbusters in Zootopia earlier this year too.

--

I've read up on that, and so it seems. I'm always having to rent the "children-oriented" films. Can find a kid to go to the theater with me.

---

We're in agreement that The Nice Guys is a solid comedy.

---

Nice to be in agreement. I'll agree that a "solid comedy" is about ALL it is, but its the old bromide: what used to be somewhat a "regular thing" at the movies happens so rarely anymore that it is to be celebrated when it shows up.

And this: both Russell Crowe and Ryan Gosling have "prestige chops" that made their presence in the roles a bit more substantial than otherwise would have been the case. Gosling's comic acting in particular seemed to flow from a real "base of talent."

---

It did only middling business which is disappointing.

---

Its just not the era for cop buddy pictures anymore

Suicide Squad has opened well for 2016, just behind Avengers: Civil War and Batman vs Superman. I think that tells us: The Time of Comix will not die anytime soon.

--

Well, after hearing some good word-of-mouth, I saw Popstars: Never Stop Never Stopping

---

I like that title: "Never Stop Never Stopping"

--

by Andy Samberg/The Lonely Island (Justin Timberlake and lots of SNL alums have cameos). It's been a financial disaster (making back less than half its smallish budget domestically)... yet it's a decent comedy, amusing throughout with one main set-piece that's an instant classic. It's also surprisingly good-natured.

---

Well, anymore it seems that a lot of these movies are "pre-designed" to make their money in ancillary markets. Some good reviews don't hurt.

---

Maybe people are in such awful moods right now that they they can't let themselves go at a comedy?

---

Shouldn't it be the other way around?

On the other hand, one of the truly fatal blows to political discourse modernly it seems to me is: the loss of a sense of humor among the candidates or their fans. Everything is "to the death."

Peeping out a bit: conservative types keep saying that liberal Hollywood no longer makes movies for them, and they are boycotting. I don't think this is so MOST of the time, but the lady "Ghostbusters" elected to launch with Hillary Clinton on the Ellen show and cameo star Dan Aykroyd said those opposed to the movie were "obese angry white male Trump voters." The funniest part of that statement was Aykroyd calling other people "obese." Anyway, is that any way to promote a movie? "Ghostbusters" underperformed, probably as a matter of content, but it didn't go out of its way to make friends.

Meanwhile, Clint Eastwood is out there promoting his new movie "Sully"(starring Quiet Democrat Tom Hanks) with an angry old man interview in Esquire. He supports Trump -- but mainly for the latter's outspokenness against what Eastwood calls "the p---sy generation." I notice the Eastwood interview is disappearing from some of its links on the net.

And: QT's "Hateful Eight" had one of his lowest grosses ever. Bad movie?(I loved it.) But the police unions who demanded boycotts said the film's failure " speaks for itself." Does it? I dunno.

Anyway, all these political folks would do well to leave the movies alone. Except, of course, for political movies....

---

It does feel to me that both Nice Guys and Popstars would have done much better other summers.

---

I'd like to hope so. But the truth of the matter is, we seem to be in an era where if a movie isn't "built and budgeted as a blockbuster," lower grosses are to be expected. Unless it gets Oscar nominations.

[–] swanstep 8 years ago

Peeping out a bit: conservative types keep saying that liberal Hollywood no longer makes movies for them, and they are boycotting. I don't think this is so MOST of the time, but the lady "Ghostbusters" elected to launch with Hillary Clinton on the Ellen show and cameo star Dan Aykroyd said those opposed to the movie were "obese angry white male Trump voters." The funniest part of that statement was Aykroyd calling other people "obese." Anyway, is that any way to promote a movie? "Ghostbusters" underperformed, probably as a matter of content, but it didn't go out of its way to make friends.

I guess the Lady Ghostbusters folk would say that their politicized marketing was in *response* to a troglodyte reaction online to early announcements about their movie. I forget the details, but there was certainly calling-for-boycotts of *any* all-female Ghostbusters going on. Pretty nasty stuff.... but, arguably, the film shouldn't have taken that bait and descended to its sexist critics' level. If you're not marketing a *Ghostbusters* film to *everyone*, you're doing it wrong.

I'd like to hope so. But the truth of the matter is, we seem to be in an era where if a movie isn't "built and budgeted as a blockbuster," lower grosses are to be expected. Unless it gets Oscar nominations.

One possibility is that the average person is just out of the habit now of going to see a *non-spectacular* at a movie. I even feel a bit of this attitude myself: a lot of things I'm happy to wait for at home, whereas I certainly make the effort to get to the (3-D) Imax for a superior spectacular like Gravity or Dark Knight.

One last comment about Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping - it's just a dopey SNL movie really (and one recurring gag in it, about gossip web-site TMZ, is uninspired to say the least - and in fact Amy Schumer had essentially the same gag this season but taken to much more brilliant extremes) ...with Andy Samberg's surprisingly good songs and dances. If Spinal Tap is a 10/10 in the musician-themed comedy sub-genre and Wayne's World is a 7-8 then Popstars is a 6-7/10.... my +ve point about it is just that in this summer 6-7/10 ain't bad!

[–] swanstep 8 years ago

Have finally seen Ghostbusters: Answer The Call (as it's been retitled for home video) and will now compare notes with ecarle's original review:

Kate MacKinnon is Bill Murray. Its her movie.

Just as Kate has been the break-out star of SNL the past few years, so does she take this movie(her debut?) over from her more stellar co-stars.

I've read a lot of reviews of the new "Ghostbusters" and almost all of them singled out MacKinnon for her manic scene-stealing. But ONE reviewer said she ruined the movie with her "Three Stooges" mugging. There's always one. And I'm afraid I kept thinking about THAT review as I watched MacKinnon.

Well, she DOES mug. But with great skill...perhaps a bit more Jim Carrey than Bill Murray, but she stays hip. It IS her movie. You always look at HER in a scene. She will be the star born out of this, depending on the next vehicle.

I guess I'm with the skeptical reviewer here - MacKinnon did strike me as mugging most of the time.... to the point where I never bought her character *as* a character at all.

Meanwhile, Kristen Wiig is reduced to straight womanhood

Absolutely I'm afraid... in a couple of different ways: not only is she asked to be fairly po-faced throughout, the one flamboyant character trait they give her is that she throws herself at Kevin/Thor at every opportunity. I never bought that at *all* about her character. She starts as a pretty controlled academic woman after all, so how then can we accept that *that character* would just lose her mind over a super-hunky guy (particularly over a super-dummy)? This struck me as really terrible character writing.

Melissa McCarthy fights valiantly to impose HER comedy chops on a character who can't support the usual MM persona

I agree that MM's character felt a bit dialed-down compared to her normally R-rated personae. Still, I believed her character (with one big proviso that I'll get to later).

As expected, Leslie Jones (like MacKinnon, a "new" SNL star) is funny in her big ol' loud way.

She was my favorite out of the main four. I found her less grating than she often is on SNL, and a pleasant surprise throughout really.

And oh: one of those Hemsworth brothers as the "dumb blond male secretary." I can't remember if this is the one who plays Thor. The part is dumb.

Not funny either. I'd heard pretty good things about Hemsworth in this, and was very disappointed - as with Wiig's and Mackinnon's I just never bought his character for a minute. Kevin kind of fuses Ric Moranis's and Annie Potts' characters from the original but manages to feel much less real than either of them and only about 10% as funny.

Well, the effects ARE right for this one and we get -- another 2016 CGI battlefest.

Unbelievable isn't it? Yet another column of light going up in to the sky that ends up sucking up buildings etc.. Make it stop Hollywood!

Its pretty bad.

Agreed. Completely unfunny.

But this:

Bill Murray shows up.... he's in it for a little bit, and he IS funny.

Didn't work for me. I though both his scenes were bad. I wasn;t close to laughing.

Ackroyd shows up. Signourney Weaver shows up(how soon we forget she had THIS franchise, too.) Ernie Hudson shows up(and he was cool in Ghostbusters, too; just not in it enough.) Annie Potts shows up.

I though these cameo were all pointless except perhaps for the Ermie Hudson one at the end of the film. Since I liked Leslie Jones's character the best I wish we'd spent some time with family and got to know Hudson earlier.

PS. I noted that for once, "Psycho" jokes got a rest. We instead got one OK Exorcist joke(MM is possessed and her head turns all the way around)

I enjoyed that whole MM possessed sequence.

and one truly great "Jaws" joke.

Andy Garcia as the NYC Mayor, is trying to cover up all the ghost sightings in his city as a hoax. ("We don't want mass hysteria")

Kristen Wiig yells an accusation at the usually deadpan Garcia, and he gets up from his table raging at her:

Wiig: Don't go all "Jaws Mayor" on us!
Garcia: (In furious rage) Don't you EVER say I'm the Jaws Mayor!!

And the mayor sics his cops on Wiig.

I thought that was pretty funny. People forget how important the Mayor was TO Jaws. And played so weaselly by the late, great Murray Hamilton.

That was pretty good I suppose but I'd had the joke spoiled for me....

As I watched the film I noticed a whole bunch of shots stealing from/referring to other movies... but I've forgotten them already. Oh well.

OK - here's a gripe I had with the whole film (incluing MM's character): despite there being a lot of *beep* scientific-talk spoken none of them felt like scientists at all. For example, they never collect any samples of the goo/mucus/ectoplasm. And they never seemed interested in exploring or trying to understand this alternative reality that was leaking through into our world. Maybe they thought that that would bring them too close to the original and to the 90's sequel.

Overall, I guess, the film reeked of not having a real script. I mean, I'm sure they *did* have script but it feels like it was slung together in a hurry *after* the project was given a greenlight with a release date already set. There were no great jokey set-pieces that sold the movie, no really good jokes embedded in the action the way there were in, e.g., The Nice Guys. No, there was just strainign-to-be-funny schtick by the individual actresses followed by tepid action followed by more schtick. Dead in the water.

It all added up to a big bowl of not funny and not really watchable for me. Ghostbusters: Answer the Call goes for me on the pile of borderline incompetent, Hollywood franchise entries that very quickly everyone who cares at all about the underlying franchise will simply agree to pretend *never happened* and to never speak of them again (Matrix 2 and above, Pirates 2 and above, The Hobbit films, Star Wars 1-3, the Thing prequel a few years ago, Batman v. Superman, and so on).

[–] ecarle 8 years ago

Have finally seen Ghostbusters: Answer The Call (as it's been retitled for home video)

--

Well, I guess that beats "Ghostbusters: Electric Boogaloo," but really, how demeaning. Can you imagine if Psycho can out on video as "Psycho: The Scary Old Lady."

---

and will now compare notes with ecarle's original review:

---

Uh oh. I shudder. When/if you ever get to the Mag 7, "Please be kind." "Girl on the Train," I don't care what you say. Hah.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kate MacKinnon is Bill Murray. Its her movie.

Just as Kate has been the break-out star of SNL the past few years, so does she take this movie(her debut?) over from her more stellar co-stars.

I've read a lot of reviews of the new "Ghostbusters" and almost all of them singled out MacKinnon for her manic scene-stealing. But ONE reviewer said she ruined the movie with her "Three Stooges" mugging. There's always one. And I'm afraid I kept thinking about THAT review as I watched MacKinnon.

Well, she DOES mug. But with great skill...perhaps a bit more Jim Carrey than Bill Murray, but she stays hip. It IS her movie. You always look at HER in a scene. She will be the star born out of this, depending on the next vehicle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I guess I'm with the skeptical reviewer here - MacKinnon did strike me as mugging most of the time.... to the point where I never bought her character *as* a character at all.

---

Well, at least I was even-handed and QUOTED that "mugging" review. I think its what Al Pacino said when an interviewer said he'd been accused of being a "ham": "Well, as I long as I'm a flavorful, well-seasoned ham."

Sometimes, mugging works. It worked for Jim Carrey(but not for me there.) Bill Murray did it sometimes(like as the idiot greenskeeper Karl in Caddyshack) and it was great. MacKinnon worked for me, here. She certainly outshone her co-stars in even HAVING a screen presence..with the possible exception of Leslie Jones, who CAN play big, but who actually "dialed it down a bit" for the big screen.

Oh, well. You say tomato. I say tomahto...

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, Kristen Wiig is reduced to straight womanhood
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Absolutely I'm afraid... in a couple of different ways: not only is she asked to be fairly po-faced throughout, the one flamboyant character trait they give her is that she throws herself at Kevin/Thor at every opportunity. I never bought that at *all* about her character. She starts as a pretty controlled academic woman after all, so how then can we accept that *that character* would just lose her mind over a super-hunky guy (particularly over a super-dummy)? This struck me as really terrible character writing.

---

Well, the big, big, BIG problem with this new Ghostbusters is the script. Again, we have to focus on the fact that Animal House, Caddyshack(most of it), Stripes, and the original Ghostbusters had great scripts or actors who really knew how to improvise(Bill Murray above all, but Belushi and his Animal Housers, too.) The new Ghostbusters has no real comic chops in the lines and the ladies are left to "work the material." Hence, perhaps, the mugging from MacKinnon.

Someone wrote that all four of the Lady Ghostbusters "didn't really know how to act for the movies," and that's kinda rich given how many movies MM and Wiig have made. But there was a weakness to all four in having to "act exposition" -- and MM looked lost at sea to me.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Melissa McCarthy fights valiantly to impose HER comedy chops on a character who can't support the usual MM persona
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree that MM's character felt a bit dialed-down compared to her normally R-rated personae.

---

Its funny. In the new Streisand/MM duet "Anything I Can Do, You Can Do Better," La Babs calls MM "a potty mouth." Maybe the line stung?

--

Still, I believed her character

---

OK.

--

(with one big proviso that I'll get to later).

--

OK.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As expected, Leslie Jones (like MacKinnon, a "new" SNL star) is funny in her big ol' loud way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

She was my favorite out of the main four. I found her less grating than she often is on SNL, and a pleasant surprise throughout really.

---

Well, she "dialed it down" most of the time, played to her loud strengths when she could and found a way for us to sympathize with her. (That she spent the summer being trolled and hacked and insulted allowed her to debut on the new Seasson of SNL like a returning hero...beloved by all.)

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And oh: one of those Hemsworth brothers as the "dumb blond male secretary." I can't remember if this is the one who plays Thor. The part is dumb.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not funny either. I'd heard pretty good things about Hemsworth in this, and was very disappointed - as with Wiig's and Mackinnon's I just never bought his character for a minute. Kevin kind of fuses Ric Moranis's and Annie Potts' characters from the original but manages to feel much less real than either of them and only about 10% as funny.

---

Hah. Well said. I suppose somebody at the studio said, "there's got to be a man in this, and let's make him hunky and dumb." That's it.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, the effects ARE right for this one and we get -- another 2016 CGI battlefest.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unbelievable isn't it? Yet another column of light going up in to the sky that ends up sucking up buildings etc.. Make it stop Hollywood!

---

I'm starting to suspect some sort of kickback system when the studios contract these sequences out to the effects houses. 1,000's of worker bees work(paid well? I don't know)...but somebody's gotta be making money off it.

Shall we harken back to the truly enthralling effects that recreated Mount Rushmore -- with meaningful suspense and character arc development -- in 1959 with NXNW? Now, THAT's an effects sequence!

What remains funny is that the effects in the 1984 version were kinda shoddy, right down to the StayPuft Marshmellow Man -- but that made them FUNNY.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its pretty bad.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agreed. Completely unfunny.

But this:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Murray shows up.... he's in it for a little bit, and he IS funny.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Didn't work for me. I though both his scenes were bad. I wasn;t close to laughing.

---

Well, first, I was just surprised to see how long he stayed on screen(two scenes). Remember, he not only wouldn't appear in any Ghostbusters sequel after the lousy 2 -- he used his contract rights to stop everybody else from making one. Times have changed, people have died(Harold Ramis), Murray came back and was nice enough to do this scene. (Someone suggested because Murray worked with MM on that Bad Uncle movie a few years back, maybe he relented.)

I suppose I was laughing at the idea that he was there, after all. And trying to act, after all. And then blown away.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ackroyd shows up. Signourney Weaver shows up(how soon we forget she had THIS franchise, too.) Ernie Hudson shows up(and he was cool in Ghostbusters, too; just not in it enough.) Annie Potts shows up.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I though these cameo were all pointless except perhaps for the Ermie Hudson one at the end of the film.

---

Agreed in general but...the point, I suppose , was simply that they all showed up. Except for Moranis, and , of course, the late Ramis(who shows up as a bust.)My problem was: every time I saw one of them, I wanted them to stay and give us a FUNNY movie. Even Ackroyd.

--

Since I liked Leslie Jones's character the best I wish we'd spent some time with family and got to know Hudson earlier.

---

Hudson was given the most "connection" to the new story. It would have been nice.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PS. I noted that for once, "Psycho" jokes got a rest. We instead got one OK Exorcist joke(MM is possessed and her head turns all the way around)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I enjoyed that whole MM possessed sequence.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and one truly great "Jaws" joke.

Andy Garcia as the NYC Mayor, is trying to cover up all the ghost sightings in his city as a hoax. ("We don't want mass hysteria")

Kristen Wiig yells an accusation at the usually deadpan Garcia, and he gets up from his table raging at her:

Wiig: Don't go all "Jaws Mayor" on us!
Garcia: (In furious rage) Don't you EVER say I'm the Jaws Mayor!!

And the mayor sics his cops on Wiig.

I thought that was pretty funny. People forget how important the Mayor was TO Jaws. And played so weaselly by the late, great Murray Hamilton.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That was pretty good I suppose but I'd had the joke spoiled for me....

---

Sorry about that. Well, maybe it was funny when you first read it?

---

As I watched the film I noticed a whole bunch of shots stealing from/referring to other movies... but I've forgotten them already. Oh well.

OK - here's a gripe I had with the whole film (incluing MM's character): despite there being a lot of *beep* scientific-talk spoken none of them felt like scientists at all. For example, they never collect any samples of the goo/mucus/ectoplasm. And they never seemed interested in exploring or trying to understand this alternative reality that was leaking through into our world. Maybe they thought that that would bring them too close to the original and to the 90's sequel.

---

Interesting points.

I've been reading a book about CAA -- the agenting company built by Mike Ovitz and Company. I'll have other posts about it(and more on it in THIS post) but it covers Ghostbusters quite extensively. As it turns out, the original Dan Ackroyd script was deemed Unfunny and too "abstract," and somebody else(Ivan Reitman, I think) decided the story should be about scientists who get thrown out of their university jobs and use their wits to survive -- with Harold Ramis' character being the brainiest of them all. "Now we have a movie."

---

Overall, I guess, the film reeked of not having a real script. I mean, I'm sure they *did* have script but it feels like it was slung together in a hurry *after* the project was given a greenlight with a release date already set.

--

For decades now, I've read how, on the one hand "screenwriters get no respect in Hollywood" but how, on the other hand, "without a good script, you don't have a good movie...let alone a great one." As we've demonstrated here, certain "entertainments" like NXNW and Psycho, Animal House and Ghostbusters, ET and Raiders of the Lost Ark, had GREAT scripts, or at least very good ones.

But those are very hard to generate. The right writers have to be found and everything has to jell (or it isn't aspic.)

On the other hand, it seems like there is a grand history of big stars being handed "great scripts" by their agents(The Sting and The Sixth Sense come to mind) and getting it IMMEDIATELY: its a great story, its gonna be a great movie, sign me on! And of course, if a novel is great, it's a sure thing for a great movie, right? You know. The Godfather. The Exorcist...Bonfire of the Vanities. Catch-22. Oh well.

----

---

There were no great jokey set-pieces that sold the movie, no really good jokes embedded in the action the way there were in, e.g., The Nice Guys.

--

I'll need to watch The Nice Guys again soon. In this CAA book, everybody goes on and on about how Shane Black's original "Lethal Weapon" script was like THE great script of the 80's. Well, Shane Black's back with "The Nice Guys." Maybe he DOES know something about character and action and how to blend them.

--

No, there was just strainign-to-be-funny schtick by the individual actresses followed by tepid action followed by more schtick. Dead in the water.

---

That's it.

--

It all added up to a big bowl of not funny and not really watchable for me. Ghostbusters: Answer the Call goes for me on the pile of borderline incompetent, Hollywood franchise entries that very quickly everyone who cares at all about the underlying franchise will simply agree to pretend *never happened* and to never speak of them again (Matrix 2 and above, Pirates 2 and above, The Hobbit films, Star Wars 1-3, the Thing prequel a few years ago, Batman v. Superman, and so on).

---

There have been articles about the "crisis" of all the movies that failed this summer and yet I'm not so sure: its like there was only a 10% decrease in box office from last year and all it takes are two hits to bring the whole average up (its been ever thus, back to the days of Jaws and Star Wars...and Psycho.)

But -- and this book I'm reading on CAA suggests why -- there can be no doubt that very few actually GOOD movies are being made these days, and that sequels and prequels are about the worst. The actors are packaged. The screenwriters are packaged. The packages are packaged. And -- cliché though it is -- so many of the people who work in Hollywood really don't care about narrative and story. They care about deals.

Batman vs Superman made $800 million worldwide -- beating the better Suicide Squad by a lot -- and yet: what a bad movie. And yet: what a great movie it COULD have been. The world has been waiting since 1978, since Superman was released, or maybe 1989, when Batman was released , for those two to come together. What a blown opportunity! And yet. $800 million(but I think Warners was hoping on $1.2 billion so...a bomb?)

PS. Career notes in passing: it would seem to me that Kristen Wiig's star is now fading, as Kate MacKinnon's rises. Hollywood can be brutal that way. But I may be wrong.