Too worried about making it really feminist or progressive?
Than making a quality product.
shareI don't know. It seems like they grasped onto the feminism thing more so to create a publicity stir. Paul feig seemed more interested in letting the cast ramble than to construct a stronger script and plot. That's great for some comedies, but it didn't seem like a good idea with Ghostbusters. They had to do something similar to Dan Ackroyd. He wanted Ghostbusters to be in space.
If you want a female Ghostbuster lead it's always best to go with a boy/girl team.
The feminist angle was clearly just a gimmick, nobody cares if they're all women it wasn't like any of them are sex symbols or massive box office draws or it being a story about social norms, so making them all women didn't matter anybody other than to the cast and crew it would seem.
The film was tonally different from the original, for instance the ghosts look very Disney where the original ghosts are a lot more grotesque and demonic.
"Paul feig seemed more interested in letting the cast ramble than to construct a stronger script and plot."
Ding ding ding we have a winner!
The thing is, if the movie was screamingly funny, nobody would care whether the movie was feminist or progressive (nobody sane, anyway). But since the movie is just moderately amusing, and not nearly as funny as the original, it gets picked apart. The real problem, IMHO the ONLY problem, is that the movie just isn't funny enough, and what laughs there are mostly come from Chris Hemsworth the supporting actor. If the leading ladies all had great laugh lines, the movie would have been a big win.
Would the film had been funnier if the Ghostbusters were all men? yeah maybe if you got different writers.
shareThe original has a very unique style that 2016 doesn't come close to, it's worth saying that Bill Murray has a very unique screen presence that none of the women Ghostbusters match.
share