Review: Ghostbusters (2016)

Imagine walking through a cemetery during the dead of night. Your flashlight illuminates the names of each headstone as you pass by when one suddenly catches your eye. It reads "Here Lies Paul Feig's Ghostbusters Reboot." You could have sworn the film hadn't even been released and yet here it lies, buried before its time beneath the soils of sour speculation.

Your knees plunge into the mud as you belt out "How did this happen?" Instantly you're hit with flashbacks to a trashy marketing campaign highlighted by the most disliked movie trailer in YouTube history. "Oh, right" you murmur under your breath.

Just then the ground trembles and, like a specter from its grave, Feig's film defies all expectations and rises from the blackest depths of Reddit hell. Your jaw drops and your eyes flare. You can't believe what's happening. Then it hits you. This isn't anything spectacular.

That's right. This new Ghostbusters film is not as bad as it previously looked. Those unfunny jokes in the trailers are actually quite funny within the context of the film. I actually laughed a lot more than I expected but not as much as the film wants you to. That's because about half the film's jokes fall flat. Most of the jokes that do work are the ones that make the film feel more like a Paul Feig movie (Bridesmaids, The Heat, Spy) and less like a Ghostbusters one.

That isn't a discredit to the cast, mostly. Melissa McCarthy and Kristen Wiig do fine work and I enjoyed Leslie Jones' performance more than I thought I would. They're chemistry is the highlight of the entire film. Even Chris Hemsworth gets a bunch of laughs, at least initially. What about Kate McKinnon you ask? Her character feels out of place in this movie. She is not a grounded character like the other three Ghostbusters but more of a hyperactive cartoon. She just did not mesh.

While the other girls' chemistry highlights the film, there are a bunch of lowlights. Aside from a sad joke ratio, the film lacks a good villain. In fact, the villain is a plot device. There is no development to his character at all so when the action-packed third act hits, I could not invest in anything that was going on. If a film is only as strong as its villain, then Ghostbusters is laughably weak.

Perhaps the most disheartening aspect of the film is its unwavering commitment to honoring the greatness of the original Ghostbusters. As soon as there seems to be any build up in momentum, the film completely derails itself to focus on a cameo or some reference to the original. In particular the cameos of the original cast serve no purpose to the story whatsoever and usually results in extended sequences of nothingness. The worst part is after a while you may begin to wonder why you didn't just pop the original film in instead.

Is the new Ghostbusters worth your time? I would say wait for the DVD rental. However, if you must see it in the theater, I highly recommend seeing it in 3D. I hear it's one of the better 3D movies to date.