My Thoughts On Ghostbusters (2016) · 8:32pm May 29th, 2017

It's time for more unpopular opinions! Aren't those fun to have? So prepare your butts. The porcupine needles of opposing viewpoints are heading in your direction!

I finally got around to watching the Ghostbusters 2016 movie and I have to say; it's really not as bad as people are making it out to be. I thought that the plot was pretty decent. There was a lot of good humor and action. At the end of the day, I think all of the controversy around the film turned out to be kind of dumb.

I know that the director said some idiotic things. I know that he provoked the press with his dumb thoughts about 'men not being funny' or whatever other tripe he decided to spout, probably to stir up interest in the new franchise. As they say, all press is good press; even negative news about a topic is good because people will still check something out to see 'just how bad it really is'.

But if you can ignore what the idiot director said and watch the film without any preconceived notions, it's actually not all that bad. I thought that the cast did a good job of portraying their various characters and the characters all worked off each other really well. The actors who played the roles definitely didn't deserve the hate they got on social media. Especially since they were mostly getting hate because of the dumb things the director said.

Some people complained about Kevin (the receptionist) being a 'dumb male stereotype'. I didn't really see it that way. I just saw him as a character who was a parody of those artsy people who think they are really great at everything they do (like Squidward for example), but in reality they are kind of hacks. Could a female be in the same role? Yes, but having the male there kind of made things more interesting. Especially when you add in Erin's attraction to him even though he is the very definition of a 'yuppy art person'. It added to the humor of the whole scenario and I could understand the director's choice of making him a male as opposed to making the character a female for this reason.

Something else people complain about is the humor being hit or miss. But honestly, I thought the humor in it was pretty solid (for the most part). If I had to change something, it would probably be to make the dialog a little more natural. In the movie the dialog at times does feel scripted. It doesn't have anything to do with the delivery of the lines. The actors did well with what they had to work with. It has to do with how the lines were written. I can see why they did this though. It was to make things more accessible to all audiences watching the reintroduction to the franchise for the first time. Hopefully in the next movie they will write the dialog so it flows more naturally.

Another complaint I heard about the film was that the main villain didn't have a solid backstory and wasn't as good as the original villain. I don't think that there will ever be a villain that tops the one from the first movie, but I personally thought that the villain in the Ghostbuster 2016 film was decent enough. He is a janitor at a hotel who is obviously fed up with people not taking him seriously, when he is obviously very intelligent despite his low station is society. Years of frustration at being underappreciated built up into pushing him want to make the people around him suffer. He might not have the most complex backstory in the world, but it made sense and fit the tone of the film. So I don't really think the complaints about this are well founded.

If I had to be picky about a few scenes in the movie, it would probably be these two scenes that occurred side by side. After the skeptic gets tossed out of the Ghostbuster headquarters's top story window, the police show up. And then the Ghostbusters are immediately taken to the mayor's office where they are told that they are going to be labeled as fakes to keep the general public from going into mass hysteria. The scene works fine but the whole, 'cat out of the bag' joke, wears a bit thin after the fourth time it is told. When they return to their headquarters there is no further investigation by the police about the murder or anything. You can assume that the mayor more than likely made an excuse on their behalf to get the police off their butts. However it would have been nice to have the newscaster on the television validate this by simply saying, 'the mayor has ruled the death of Martin Heiss (paranormal debunker) as an accident' or something to that degree. Just to let the audience know why no further steps were taken to investigate the Ghostbusters for what had happened.

Was the movie cheesy in some places? Yes. But you know what? The original movies were cheesy too. That is part of what added to their charm. And I think the cheesy factor also added to the charm of this film as well. Were the special effects kind of subpar? When it came to the ghosts...well sort of. I wouldn't say the effects were bad. They just weren't a style I personally enjoyed. I preferred the more realistic look of the ghosts in the original films. If there was something else I would change, it would be to bring back the more realistic style for the ghosts in the next film.

There were certainly a lot of interesting characters in this film that kept your attention. Dr. Jillian Holtzmann was probably my favorite character in the film. She was delightfully nutty and weird, which are the kinds of characters I tend to gravitate to in various entertainment platforms. A close second favorite would have to be Patricia "Patty" Tolan because she provided a lot of the great humor. Plus she serves well as the character who can always find the resources the other characters need, which is another type of character I tend to gravitate towards in books, films, and other forms of entertainment.

I also enjoyed the guest appearances by the original ghost busters who more or less acted as their mentors. I thought that was a great touch and really added a lot to the film.

At the end of the day, I thought this film was pretty enjoyable to watch. It was a lighthearted, action-filled, comedy, similar to the original films. It was the introduction to the new franchise and I thought that it did well. Not all movies have to be Academy Award winning masterpieces. Some movies are out there to be watched just for fun. And this was one of those movies.

So if you get a chance, give the movie a watch. It might not be the best thing you've seen in your life, but it is entertaining enough. At the very least it will stave off boredom until the next best thing gets released in theaters. Be rest assured that it isn't the worst thing you will see in your life. Trust me. There are plenty of other movies that fill that most esteemed place in the annals of movie history. If you want to watch a bad film, watch Howard the Duck or The Garbage Pail Kids movies. But if you are looking for an average comedy that will give you a small laugh here and there and keep you entertained, then this movie is for you.