MovieChat Forums > Ghostbusters (2016) Discussion > Didn't hate it because it starred women,...

Didn't hate it because it starred women, I hated it because it sucked.

posted 8 years ago by JustinJackFlash (161)
43 replies | jump to latest

I had no problem with the ghostbusters being female. I'm not one of those who think women can't be funny. The women in this film weren't funny but there were plenty of men in the film too, and they weren't funny either. Hell, 3 of the original ghostbusters were in it and they weren't funny! The problem was with the whole approach and the writing.

The ghostbusters themselves were annoying and eccentric. Look back at the original film and they're actually quite subdued. It's not the funniest film in the world, but when it is the humour comes naturally, it's not forced.

[–] MickyMac (3207) 6 years ago

It wasn't unique enough to bring in new fans. People saw the Ghostbusters being women as a gimmick, trying to make the men in the film stupid or assholes.

[–] JustinJackFlash (161) 6 years ago

Everyone in the film was stupid assholes. Regardless of gender.

[–] MickyMac (3207) 6 years ago

Nobody cares if the Ghostbusters were women, it wasn't like if it was gender neutral but it really isn't relevant.

[–] darkpast (8855) 6 years ago

Really?

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

Yes, really.

I agree with the OP. I was actually rooting for this film to succeed in order to shut down the misogynists and incels who were saying that 'girls can't be Ghostbusters' long before we'd ever seen any trailer footage for the 2016 release.

Alas, the film turned out to be genuinely bad, and even with all the best will in the world I can't say anything positive about it.

[–] MickyMac (3207) 6 years ago

It was tonally different from the original not because there were women it was because Paul Feig & Co were always gonna do things differently, the ghostbusters didn't have the screen presence and chemistry as Bill Murray, Dan Ackroyd and Harold Ramis.

It was bound to fail inevitably, a large part of it was due to the franchise being inactive for so long and it was a reboot that fans didn't want.

[–] hurricane (1963) 6 years ago

I'll sort of go with this.

Watched it a few weeks ago, as I'd Tivoed it. I didn't want to let the backlash, or the fact it had women in it affect my opinion. I even thought the trailer had looked pretty amusing at the time.

And though I didn't hate it, I won't rush to watch it again. Just something felt missing from it. I didn't laugh much, it didn't really have the same heart as the original. Just didn't feel it worked.

[–] MickyMac (3207) 6 years ago

As with The Avengers, X Men and Power Rangers it's always best to go with a mixed gender cast for a genre movie.

A boy/girl team would be less controversial and gimmicky.

[–] hurricane (1963) 5 years ago

I kind of agree.

I went into the movie without trying to pre-judge it. In fact, I even thought the trailer looked quite good. Found the whole; "Women are in it, waaaah!" reaction to be somewhat bizarre.

But somehow, it just didn't gel with me. Not sure why. Just didn't find the film particularly enjoyable. The gender of the leads was nothing to do with this. Just felt overlong, and a bit blah.

[–] MickyMac (3207) 5 years ago

It was nothing like the Ghostbusters we know and love and I don't think it was interesting enough to captivate a new audience.

The trailer revealed too much of what they were going for, the trailer was the most damaging to the movie it was pretty misleading with the tagline thirty years ago three scientists saved the world and starting with one of the protagonists being vomited on and saying the goo got everywhere.

[–] MickyMac (3207) 5 years ago

Female leads did create a lot of buzz but I don't think it inspired any huge numbers to go or stay at home either.

The visual effects did miss the point, they look very Disney, the original ghosts are a lot more grotesque and demonic.