Draven

I like GB2 a fair amount This definitely had more laughs.

RichC2

Shut it! Nobody liked GB2 and you can stop pretending you liked this one, you get nothing out of lying here.

Rob V

I took the family to see it last night (after watching 1 & 2 over the weekend) and it's easily the worst of the group. I didn't have any expectations going in and I left neither impressed or disappointed. It was "meh" all the way. The dialogue missed so many opportunities to be funny by just placing in filler (almost every line by Kevin was a total was of time).
Graphically, the movie was awesome and the 3D was pretty well done and not too "in your face". FWIW, my wife and kids loved the movie. I'd give it a 2.5/5.

Orbi-Wan Techno

I have noticed a lot more love for this version from people who don't keep up with threads and reviews that bash it... Most could probably care less with Feig says about the movie-going audience, who feels the new version spits on the original, etc.

GuessWho

Neil M.

This movie was a mess. It has some good elements and having all women is not even an issue. It's just not a very good comedy nor is it a good action film. I'm still trying to figure out why they even bothered having a villain. This movie made Bond villains seem three dimensional. I don't get the love for Kate McKinnon either. I didn't laugh at her at all. Chris Hemsworth and, surprisingly, Leslie Jones were probably the only characters that were funny. The cameos for the most part were a waste and not very funny.

It's amazing to me that we've waited all these years for another Ghostbusters movie and this is what we got. A rehash of the original that's not even close to being as funny or creative.

banthafett

I'm glad people are finally seeing that McKinnon is a fucking hack. The next Jane Lynch they have been trying to shove down our throats.

Supermallet

I've been a fan of McKinnon's since I saw her on Comedy Bang Bang! She's a real talent and I'm glad she's getting more exposure.

Obi-Wanma

I haven't seen McKinnon in too much, and I haven't seen GB yet, but the only reason I can see why one would compare her to Jane Lynch is because they're both lesbians, which has nothing to do with anything as far as their acting chops.

RichC2

Could be their comedy style

Obi-Wanma

What I was saying is that from what I've seen, I don't get that at all but maybe I haven't seen enough of McKinnon.

Orbi-Wan Techno

I don't watch SNL, but I thought McKinnon was a lot of fun.

Shannon Nutt

I agree she's a huge talent. I also agree with those (like Roeper) who say she's horrible in this film. Mugging for the camera is NOT acting.

Consequently, someone like Leslie Jones - who I don't necessarily think is a huge talent - is actually pretty good in this, much to my surprise.

Supermallet

It's clear her performance is love it or hate it. I loved it, a lot of people I know loved it, and a lot of other people I know hated it. I'm okay with that. I just hope she becomes a genuine star off the back of this film.

story

Prepped to see this by watching Ghostbusters I and II on Saturday afternoon with our 4.5-year-old daughter and she loved both. I warned her about scary parts and encouraged her to cover her eyes but she insisted on watching it all. She had her head under a blanket for the librarian ghost scare and when she heard the guys yelling she said she really wanted to watch it. I said, okay, if you're sure. She laughed and laughed at how scared the guys were and insisted she wasn't scary. In fact, nothing in the original scared her. However, the last few minutes of Ghostbusters II really upset her. When Vigo tried to possess Oscar she started crying out of concern for the baby. She had one tiny nightmare moment about Vigo, too, but not the librarian ghost or the cabby ghost or the terror dogs or Gozer, etc. But Vigo. It was as if all the special effect ghosts were funny or cool but as soon as she saw a creepy-looking "realistic" ghost guy, her sense of "stranger danger" kicked in. We had to skip everything from Vigo electrocuting the team to the new Ghosbusters renaissance painting (although, we probably could've skipped that particular moment, am I right?).

I don't know if our daughter is ready to see it in the theater, though. With the Blu-rays, we're able to pause, talk about scary parts coming up, etc. And though I can warn her, it will be in a loud, dark theater with no pause or mute option. Plus, given how creeped out she was about Vigo and how many of these ghosts are "humanoid," I just don't know. Maybe this fall after she's five if it's still playing in the cheap seats. Otherwise, Blu-ray, it is. And yeah, of course we'll get it on Blu-ray. We finished the originals and I told her there's a new one coming out, showed her the trailer, and she immediately noticed they were women and she said she didn't know women could be Ghostbusters, too. Granted, she says "I didn't know X" whenever she learns anything new, but I gotta say, she's really excited that there is a new Ghostbusters movie with women in it and my friends, that matters to me.

Anyway, saw the new one today for a matinee and I had a good time, it's a fun movie. Theater was about 1/4 full but with a crowd ready to laugh. I enjoyed it. I laughed, I had some scares/creeped out moments, and thought the story was pretty good. It is a little clunky, with some exposition and some forced transitions. Also, it's pretty stylized in terms of tone (a little cartoony) and special effects (a little polished), but that didn't bug me. I dug it and I'll see it again.

I agree with you on the first two as criticisms. There was inconsistent science in this movie for sure. And the heads turning nearly all the way around for two characters? How are they not dead? As for that third point, I admit it took me a little bit to not only realize it was an intentional stylistic choice for the tone of the film, it also took me a little while to be okay with it and once I was, I enjoyed myself quite a bit.

I can quote Ghostbusters because I've seen it 100+ times over 30+ years. I remember having seen it once in the theater and 2-3 times on home video as a little kid and being with all of my cousins and playing Ghostbusters and none of us could remember Egon's name. Know what we called him? Tex. Why? Because we remembered the line, "Nice shootin', Tex." That's how quotable the original Ghostbusters was to a bunch of 5-7 year olds who loved the movie. Meanwhile, I showed the new Ghostbusters trailer twice on Saturday to our four-year-old daughter and while I'm still undecided if she's ready to see this one in the theater, you wouldn't believe how many times she's asked me to say "Let's go" at the same time as her since then!

islandclaws

Caught this tonight because I had to see for myself.

Absolutely terrible.

So devoid of imagination and innovation it was sickening. So many pandering scenes grasping at vestiges from the original film it was really, truly pathetic.

And even my gf noticed Feig's clearly feminist agenda, with every male character being either an idiot or an asshole.

The cast had zero chemistry. McKinnon, who I had hoped might save the film instead came off as mugging for the camera WAY too hard. This ain't SNL; you don't have to fight for attention. Jones was Jones. McCarthy seemed very subdued. And Wiig was a bore.

Cameos felt so forced and unnecessary.

If you are going to remake such a beloved film, for fuck's sake bring something NEW to the table. This slavish reinterpretation has been diluted down to nothing but a big, safe snoozer.

Feig was absolutely the wrong person to handle this property. I'll agree with others that a "passing of the torch" film could have worked better, functioning as both sequel and soft reboot. Instead they blew it right out of the gate.

And for those of you saying this is "at least better than GB II"... fuck off with that noise. Cash grab or not, at least the chemistry was still there. And it was fun. GB2016 is a drag down a rough asphalt road.

jeffkjoe

Doesn't Richard Roeper have access to a studio?

Why are these interviews done in the middle of traffic or during his morning jog?

Dan

^ He's trying to tap into the YouTuber market. His next one will be in his dimly-lit SUV, reviewing Weiner-Dog.

DJariya

Leslie Jones just quit Twitter after a shit load of hate/racist posts directed to her.

http://deadline.com/2016/07/leslie-j...ia-1201788709/


I just skimmed her feed and some of the stuff directed at her is pretty awful. There's some really sick people out there.

She reads and answers a lot of tweets and it just kept getting worse.

Someone also created a fake account in her name and spread some pretty nasty comments pretending to be her.

TomOpus

TomOpus

Don't blame her at all. Like she said, she just made a movie.

banthafett

That shits crazy. Yeah she's not funny at all, but that shit is uncalled for.

B5Erik

It's ridiculous to blame the actors for bad movies.

And it's beyond ridiculous to post hateful, racist comments. It's pathetic.

Hazel Motes

This movie had no heart. None of the jokes landed. The ghosts were terrible. The villain was completely ineffective and poorly written and executed. The acting was bad. The cameo's were a major letdown. The first 2 films are essential New York movies. New York pulsated through the first 2 films. This film took place in Anycity USA. It was completly bland. There wasn't an ounce of atmosphere in the whole film.

The beginning was pretty good. When the old familiar theme hit a chill went up my spine. I've been waiting for this my whole life. It's just a shame the theme wasn't attached to a better movie.

2/5 for the opening otherwise it would have been 1/5.

TheHive08

It was incredibly meh. Went to see it with my wife yesterday in IMAX 3D (which actually had some fun visuals with the ghosts, which was the highlight). I thought the cast was fine, but the writing did them no favors. The jokes just weren't funny. The villain was poorly done. And I don't understand the movie's insistence on verbally pointing out the visual gags. Like when Kevin scratches his eye through his glasses for the first time and you realize they don't have lenses. That's funny. But then they immediately ask him, "Why don't your glasses have lenses?" And he says something about them being too hard to clean and the joke dies. There's also a bit where something loud happens and Kevin covers his eyes instead of his ears. Again, a decent visual gag. But again, right after, "Look, he's covering his eyes instead of his ears." I don't understand killing jokes like that, unless they think the audience is too dumb to get it without verbal confirmation of what they're seeing.

Anyway, I enjoyed the IMAX 3D aspects, and there were a few bits that I liked, but it was overall very disappointing. I'd probably give it a 2 out of 5.