Today we have the Ghostbusters reboot. This particular film has been much-maligned as of late. Is it worth your time? Let's find out.
The plot closely follows that of the original. After losing the support of their respective universities, scientists Erin Gilbert (Kristen Wiig), Abby Yates (Melissa McCarthy) and Jillian Holtzmann (Kate McKinnon) decide to start a business hunting ghosts. They hire inept spaz Kevin (Chris Hemsworth) and accept a new recruit, subway worker Patty Tolan. They soon get to work busting ghosts.
But they've got their work cut out for them; the mysterious Rowan North (Neil Casey) has been busy planting devices which attract and strengthen ghosts. And he's not just interested in a few ghosts. He wants an army of them. The Ghostbusters leap into action, but they may be too late. And to make things worse, the feds are conducting a campaign to discredit them. Can they save the world and their reputation?
A lot of people have had bad things to say about this movie even before it came out. James Rolfe, AKA the Angry Videogame Nerd, has even refused to see it altogether (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hz8X2A7wHyQ ). James Hill (the James of this blog) isn't too keen on it, either. Well, I decided to reserve judgment and see it for myself, and I'm here to tell you: it's not a bad movie. It's not bad at all (I watch Mystery Science Theater 3000, so I know bad movies). I mean, it's not great, but it's a decent way to kill a few hours. It's got some genuinely funny moments, a strong female cast, and they even came up with new weapons to fight the ghosts, such as a spectral wood chipper (yes, you read that right).
However, I don't think it brings much new to the table, and actually takes a step back in at least one area. The Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man is a friggin' balloon this time, so don't expect much from him. Also, the humor is hit or miss.
Bottom line: Ghostbusters (2016) isn't nearly as bad as people are saying, but it's not the Godfather, either.