Where should I start with the new Ghostbusters? Women. Let's start with women.
Women
There are women in this film. Quite a few of them. This shouldn't be surprising, given they make up half the population. But one glance at Twitter and you'd think they'd cast evil snake demons from the depths of hell. With all the backlash, I really wanted them to knock it out of the park and straight into the internet's face.
Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy are the two most acquainted with cinema. They starred in Bridesmaids, which was directed by Paul Feig, who also helms this film. It was well received, but I haven't seen it. Although, if they're as good in that as they are in this, I can't see what the fuss is about. They've clearly worked together before, their chemistry bubbling enough for at least a B at GCSE. But their characters are as distinguishable as Michael Bay's Transformers and they're no funnier than anyone else either.
The other half is made up of Leslie Jones and Kate McKinnon, both known for their contributions to Saturday Night Live. Jones does her usual shtick: sassy black woman. Depending on who you ask, it's either racist or a mockery of racists. If you ask me, it's become quite tired and Jones is at risk of getting typecast. She delivers some decent zingers, but often confuses comedy with shouting louder than Kevin Hart selling pears.
McKinnon, however, is someone I've admired for a while. Not least because of her pitch perfect impressions of the likes of Hilary Clinton and Justin Bieber. Here she plays a delightful mad professor role. It's a captivatingly insane performance that could give Christopher Lloyd a run for his money. Some may find it overwhelmingly bonkers, but I went with it. It also makes for a fantastic thirteenth Doctor audition.
Just like men, some women are funny, some are not. Ghostbusters demonstrates this perfectly, proving that (contrary to popular opinion) we are all the same species. Although it would've been nice to have more McKinnons and fewer McCarthys.
Jokes
Ghostbusters is allegedly a comedy. In comedies, the filmmakers attempt to make you laugh. One of the ways they attempt to do that is through jokes. Therefore, it stands to reason that Ghostbusters contains some jokes. The question is, are any of them funny?
You can easily imagine Paul Feig standing behind the camera, haphazardly chucking jokes at the cast in the hopes that they'll stick. At the beginning, they land fairly regularly, but the closer the film gets to its third act, the more gags slip. Like many big budget comedies, Ghostbusters shoves humour aside in its final moments, in favour of flashy effects and lifeless action.
Even when they do work, the jokes are rarely laugh out loud funny. The majority of them involve establishing a pace which is then broken through a well timed awkward moment. Like when a grand montage is swiftly brought down to earth by two characters saying "Let's go!" at the same time. At best, these prompt a small smirk or a brief chuckle. At worst, they render a scene an incoherent mess.
The best jokes take advantage of the politics surrounding the film; like a sharp gag near the beginning poking fun at the film's sexist backlash. Unfortunately, these are few and far between. And, to get to them, you have to wade through a lot of running jokes about soup and Jones screaming "THE POWER OF PATTY COMPELS YOU!" Sometimes these are a little funny, but I prefer my humour on the more satirical side. And sadly Ghostbusters fails to deliver enough of that, aside from the odd quip about anti Irish fences.
This all seems quite uncertain, and there's a reason for that. I'm really not sure whether or not I found Ghostbusters funny. Sometimes I did. But when you're rebooting a beloved '80s classic, sometimes simply isn't enough.
Ghosts
Aside from women, Ghostbusters also has ghosts in it. Much like Ivan Reitman's original, which had a genuinely creepy and often unsettling atmosphere. It justified itself as not only a wisecracking '80s romp, but also a decent spook-fest.
Paul Feig's reboot, on the other hand, is much weaker in that department. The film is coated in a very light and cheerful surface. The focus was clearly on the comedy, and even that felt second rate. The occasional cheap jump scare is thrown in, but it's a weak attempt to include a 'horror' element.
That's not to say the ghosts are bad; I actually quite like them. They're bright and colourful, but with a wonderfully macabre touch. Like someone dug up a load of corpses, then bathed them in nuclear waste and glow sticks. There's also a nice homage to the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man (along with a host of cameos from the original cast),
The problem isn't the ghosts themselves, but how they're handled. In the original, there are very few ghosts, but each one is tackled with an individual showdown. This time, the Ghostbusters run around killing hoards of them like they're in a Japanese shoot-em-up. There's more ghosts than before, but considerably less tension. They're swept aside carelessly, like extras in Man of Steel.
In the original, whenever a ghost was on screen, the characters were at risk. That made them scary. Feig's ghosts are merely an exercise in empty blockbuster spectacle. These Ghostbusters ain't afraid of no ghost, and neither am I.
Verdict
To recap, Ghostbusters is disappointing. It's occasionally funny and occasionally scary, but not nearly funny enough or scary enough to justify its existence. Still, I recommend you watch it. If only to witness the woefully underappreciated talents of Kate McKinnon.
5.3/10
Comments
Post a Comment