Cash-grab remake doesn’t deserve the bad hype
by Greyson Van Arsdale, ’17
The new “Ghostbusters” movie, sporting an all-female main cast and all-negative anticipation, defied the Youtube trailer comments with consistently funny comedy and just enough nods to the original work.
While none of the moments in the movie could be described as downright hysterical, the humor of all four leads blended in a very charismatic and natural way. Melissa McCarthy provided a solid platform to complement Kirstin Wiig’s shy style, Kate McKinnon’s off-the-wall comedy and Leslie Jones’s emphatic reality checks, all of which were boosted by Chris Hemsworth’s star power and beautiful-but-stupid humor.
The villain, portrayed by Neil Casey, seemed particularly appropriate for the remake. A genius social reject, villain Rowan North is vaguely reminiscent of the kind of meninist 4chan-dwellers who opposed this movie to begin with.
And for those who don’t want a politicized movie shoved down their throats — don’t worry about it. The “feminist” message is muted, if present at all. It’s just an all-female main cast; no more, no less.
The movie seemed to take big movie critics by surprise, earning a 73 percent on Rotten Tomatoes. The Guardian, the New York Times, Empire, and the Washington Post all gave the new iteration of “Ghostbusters” a positive review.
However, Rolling Stone probably described it best, saying the movie was “no big whup and no fat flop, either.” The new Ghostbusters featured unforced, easy-going humor that was reminiscent of the original movie.
On a similar note, those who criticize the movie as being inconsequential theatre fluff are missing the point. The original “Ghostbusters” was a hit because it was campy, featured natural-sounding humor, and was of absolutely no consequence. It was easy to watch, and so is the new movie.
In conclusion, is the 2016 “Ghostbusters” a shameless cash grab? Of course. But it’s a well-done one that stayed true to the style of the original and promises a fun time at the theatre.