Ghostbusters (1984 & 2016)
Let me set the mood with this fun remix of the Ghostbusters theme!
These two movies were a really fun way to go out of this
term, but probably not for the reasons you think. I got to show my fiancé Ghostbusters
(1984) for the first time, and while he said he would rather watch a newer
movie like Insidious, he did enjoy the comedy. Then, I convinced a friend
of mine who has never seen that original Ghostbusters to watch the newer
2016 movie without context of the original. It was a blast to hear her
commentary not knowing anything about the previous one other than they ‘hunt ghosts’.
It’s hard to evaluate these movies without comparing them, so
I’m not going to avoid it. It’s clear why the 2016 version was considered a box
office flop. It lost a lot of money, and even though it was received well by
critics, audiences and avid Ghostbusters fans didn’t care for it. But
why, or more specifically, why do I agree?
Let’s talk about 1984 (the movie, not that book by Orwell
that was terrible and unrelated to this). This movie was a change of pace for
our class on hauntings. Most media we interacted with this term was meant to be
horror, to scare or make you uncomfortable, whereas this movie was mixed genre of
paranormal fantasy and sci-fi that was a comedy. It was a lovely change of pace
honestly. I’ve always adored this movie ever since I first saw it with my dad
one day I was home sick from middle school. Let me tell you, chicken soup came
out my nose. As an adult, I can see some flaws, like some of the ‘manly’ humor
that would be considered more harassment nowadays, but that doesn’t ruin the
movie for me, only dates it.
But then we have the 2016 movie, an all woman cast. Here’s
my two cents from the get go: in comparison, it falls flat, but as a standalone film, it was interesting. To elaborate on that, we get nice special effects
and female representation and empowerment in this movie. There’s a similar type
of humor to the original movie along with several nice call-backs to the first
film in references to previous ghosts and special appearances by previous cast
members. But that makes the movie okay if it was a ghost movie. But it’s a Ghostbusters
movie, supposedly a remake. Yet, the plot is very different, and honestly
worse. There are well-known actors cast in the movie just for the sake of the
stars' names on the movie cover (I’m talking about the unneeded receptionist Thor).
My friend who watched it without context said it was funny, but too confusing
and fast paced because she didn’t know the references.
Overall: I’m glad I can form my own opinion and not just
trust the masses on the quality of a film, but the new Ghostbusters did
not stand up to the hype. You can’t beat the classic.
P.s. There's a remastered ghostbusters game my friend recently played that looked fun if that's up your alley!
Maddy,
ReplyDeleteI also agree that the original is unmatched. When doing this assignment, I had called my dad to talk to him as we used to watch the original all the time. He also agreed in terms of comedy and plot, the newer version fell horrible flat. Sometimes remakes are fabulous, such as The Evil Dead. However, in Ghostbuster's case, the newer one was a bust. It says something when two very goofy people (my dad and myself) think a movie is just too goofy.
When it comes to themes, I prefer this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWltUi1zXWM
-Alexis
I love The Living Tombstone! They do my favorite remix of Spooky Scary Skeletons! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mrGdGMNsv0
DeleteAs you'll see from my post, I agree that the '84 version is far superior in terms of plot and pacing. The new film is confusing, as your friend pointed out. I love the interactions between nerdy Louis and sophisticated Dana, and the way they both become possessed by the Zule beasts. The suspense builds from this point on, even though it's a comedy.
ReplyDeleteI did think the newer film was funnier, and my reaction surprised me. I wasn't expecting to change my opinion. But those three women are hysterical. And Kevin was really funny. Who knew Chris Hemsworth could be so funny? I love his dance at the end. And he turns the ditsy receptionist "dumb blond" stereotype on its head.
The one funny moment from the original that never be beat, though, is Ray conjuring the Stay-Puft ghost because he can't help it--"it's the first thing that popped into my head!"
That's the one thing I really missed in the newer version. There was no plot around Zuul. We get a tiny scene at the end of the credits teasing it, but I missed having that in there.
DeleteUgh. I just realized I spelled Zuul wrong EVERYWHERE. And I really need to re-read these before posting for word echoes!
ReplyDeleteAlso, of course, there are FOUR women, not three.
ReplyDeleteMy mom and I went to see the original 1984 movie in the theater and we also bonded over it. This is a woman who thinks Beetlejuice &/or Indiana Jones movies are too scary (she calls them nerve-wracking). When I told her I was kind of disappointed in re-watching it she was mystified. So maybe I'm being overly sensitive. Definitely the original movie with Zuul boasts a much, much, much better plot and pacing.
ReplyDeleteAnd this exchange after Mr. Stay-Puft appears has got to be one of the most hysterical bits of dialogue to ever appear in any movie ever ...
PETER: Well, there's something you don't see every day.
RAY: I tried to think of the most harmless thing. Something I loved from my childhood. Something that could never, ever possibly destroy us. Mr. Stay-Puft...
PETER: Nice thinking, Ray.
RAY: We used to roast Stay-Puft marshmallows, by the fire at Camp Waconda!
PETER: Ray has gone bye-bye, Egon. What have you got left?
EGON: Sorry, Venkman. I'm terrified beyond the capacity for rational thought.
[Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man growls at them.]
WINSTON: Oh, no.
PETER: Mother pus-bucket!