Spoilers Ghostbusters (2016): Grading and Review

[Starkers]

I gave it a B+ I liked it, though it is flawed. I was wary when the idea was mooted, but not down to the casting, basically down to the original being such a lightning in a bottle/utterly unique film, if anything the casting of Wiig and McCarthy and the involvement of Feig gave me hope.

The plot's a bit all over the place and the villain a bit bland, but the central cast are excellent and have great chemistry together. Some of the humour fell flat but you could say that about a lot of comedies. when it works its great and even when it doesn't work it isn't offensively bad.

Not my favourite film of the year by a long chalk but definitely closer to the top of the list than the bottom. I'll quite happily watch it again and I'd quite like to see the quartet (plus Kevin) return with maybe a more coherent plot next time.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

* I liked Slimer coming back for a joyride, and had no objection to Mrs. Slimer. Anyone complaining that this was ridiculous/too comedic really needs to look hard at this franchise we're talking about.

I couldn't not think about Muscle Man and Starla from Regular Show. Yeah, I really shouldn't be watching cartoons at my age.

 

[Mudd]

Plans for a sequel to Paul Feig‘s female-led reboot starring Melissa McCarthy, Leslie Jones, Kristen Wiig and Kate McKinnon are all but official, TheWrap has learned.

“The ‘Ghostbusters’ world is alive and well,” said Rory Bruer, president of worldwide distribution at the studio. “I expect ‘Ghostbusters’ to become an important brand and franchise,” he told TheWrap on Sunday.

 

[marillion]

They are? I had no idea. I live in a mining town and I haven't seen that particular variety. I thought they looked more like a variation of what street workers wear. Ironically, some local women invented mining gear specifically made to fit women better, and they went into production just shortly before the movie was announced. Here's the website for them.

https://covergallsworkwear.com/

Thanks for the link. I have passed it on to our supply office to see if they might find it useful. We have quite a few female miners here at Navajo, so it might be something we'd be interested in!

 

[Greg Cox]

* I liked Slimer coming back for a joyride, and had no objection to Mrs. Slimer. Anyone complaining that this was ridiculous/too comedic really needs to look hard at this franchise we're talking about.

Exactly. The original movie featured a giant marshmallow man for Pete's sake. How can you get goofier (in a good way) than that? And how can a comedy be too comedic?

Job One of any comedy is to make people laugh, not to stay true to some sort of iconic mythos or whatever. From what I saw at the multiplex, the new movie got the job done.

 

[Owain Taggart]

Thanks for the link. I have passed it on to our supply office to see if they might find it useful. We have quite a few female miners here at Navajo, so it might be something we'd be interested in!

Hey, no problem. Glad I could help This was successfully pitched to Dragon's Den (Canada's version of Shark Tank) and has been one of the great success stories of the show. Also a great local success story.

 

[Goji]

I saw it and enjoyed it. It was fine, if nowhere near as good as the original of course. If they make a sequel, I hope it turns out better than the first Ghostbusters II.

 

[Trekker4747]

Plans for a sequel to Paul Feig‘s female-led reboot starring Melissa McCarthy, Leslie Jones, Kristen Wiig and Kate McKinnon are all but official, TheWrap has learned.

“The ‘Ghostbusters’ world is alive and well,” said Rory Bruer, president of worldwide distribution at the studio. “I expect ‘Ghostbusters’ to become an important brand and franchise,” he told TheWrap on Sunday.

I'd still argue nothing can be 100% set in stone at this point. Sony also had "big plans" to continue the Spider-Man franchise with the Sinister-Six and cross-over with Fox's X-Men all of which was indefinitely put on hold when ASM2 disappointed in the BO. Supposedly they're still going to do the SS with Spider-Man in some work with Disney/Marvel but there doesn't seem to be much forward progress on that front.

If this movie fails to make a significant profit in the WW box-office and being a big enough merchandise grab for Sony it'd be sort-of foolish for them to go that much more forward with their "Ghost Corps" plan beyond, maybe, a sequel to Ghostbusters with a more reasonable budget and see if it shows that their franchise plans are able to move forward.

With this movie having a pretty tough ride to break-even, I wouldn't say anything is set in stone. Sony spent $144m to make this movie which is pretty insanely big for even a mid-summer action-comedy. It's not being released in China and the next 2-3 weeks it's going to have tough competition and it couldn't even beat a two-week old animated film this past weekend. How much they drop between opening weekend and weekend 2 is going to show what this movie's legs are going to be.

But it has a tough, tough, journey given its large budget. It's going to need to see almost $300 million just to begin to see profits over production costs, distribution and marketing costs and how much they have to give back to theaters.

I wouldn't say success OR failure is for sure at this point; just that it has a tough journey and, of course, they're going to act positive and like they're going to keep moving forward with their plans. Again, they said the same thing during/after ASM2 and look at how that turned out.

 

[Gaith]

WB was talking up a Green Lantern sequel after that movie opened, too.

 

[Trekker4747]

When factoring in marketing costs — the cost of promoting a summer tentpole globally can be upwards of $150 million — Ghostbusters may have to earn $375 million-$400 million worldwide to break even for Sony and partner Village Roadshow Pictures. That means it needs to do sizeable business overseas, since it could top out in the $130 million range domestically. (Sony insiders counter that the break-even number is $300 million).

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/box-office-analysis-why-ghostbusters-911836

 

[Mr. Adventure]

BTW, was the line about sending the ghosts to

Spoiler

Michigan

the same for everyone or did they personalize it for different regions because that got a big laugh up here.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

I'd still argue nothing can be 100% set in stone at this point. Sony also had "big plans" to continue the Spider-Man franchise with the Sinister-Six and cross-over with Fox's X-Men all of which was indefinitely put on hold when ASM2 disappointed in the BO.

..and there were plans for a Raimi-era Spider-Man 4, but after the disaster that was 3, that ended a series that had two massive hits and only one misstep.

With this movie having a pretty tough ride to break-even, I wouldn't say anything is set in stone. Sony spent $144m to make this movie which is pretty insanely big for even a mid-summer action-comedy. It's not being released in China and the next 2-3 weeks it's going to have tough competition and it couldn't even beat a two-week old animated film this past weekend. How much they drop between opening weekend and weekend 2 is going to show what this movie's legs are going to be.

Well, we know that other than rare cases in film history, every film has a noticeable, steady decline week after week, especially if the film under-performed from the start--the case with Ghostbusters 2016

But it has a tough, tough, journey given its large budget. It's going to need to see almost $300 million just to begin to see profits over production costs, distribution and marketing costs and how much they have to give back to theaters.

I wouldn't say success OR failure is for sure at this point; just that it has a tough journey and, of course, they're going to act positive and like they're going to keep moving forward with their plans. Again, they said the same thing during/after ASM2 and look at how that turned out.

"Tough journey" is the last thing a film needs hanging around its neck; right now, there is no widespread, release period audience dialogue as seen with Civil War or Dawn of Justice. One might argue that's because so much had been said before the film's release, but Civil War was discussed to feverish degrees with each new trailer or TV spot, and that did not stop post-release dialogue from being active and continuing long into its run. It seems with GB, there's no great interest--much like the ID4 sequel.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/box-office-analysis-why-ghostbusters-911836

Aside from that sizable box office target, the linked article also offers insight from analyst Jeff Block:

"The more I ponder it, the worse this scenario plays out. Curiosity played a big factor in the $46 million debut and, as such, I doubt it will hold like a typical Feig comedy. In fact, I think it's going to drop big time when Star Trek Beyond and Ice Age: Collision Course open next week," says box-office analyst Jeff Bock.

"I know Sony is crowing about it being a great opening for a comedy, but the entire Ghostbusters legacy is what's at stake here, and it's not looking good. This was supposed to be a blockbuster," he continues. "Sony definitively did not launch a franchise, and seemingly they might be the only ones that don't know it.

The failure/end of the Garfield Spider-Man series, and now the new GB currently on shaky ground just keeps Sony in such a terrible position when it comes to franchise management/growth.

 

[Csalem]

BTW, was the line about sending the ghosts to

Spoiler

Michigan

the same for everyone or did they personalize it for different regions because that got a big laugh up here.

Pretty sure that was the line here in Ireland too.

 

[Awesome Possum]

If the movie breaks even or even a small profit, it will get a sequel. Sony needs a franchise and Ghostbusters probably has the largest name recognition. My 6 year old niece has never seen the movies or the cartoons, but knows actually what the logo is. So keeping the franchise going is probably in their best interest, just because they don't have anything else. Maybe Men in Black or 21 Jump Street, which they are trying to crossover, but neither really compares to Ghostbusters.

I hope that they do keep it going. They at least have a chance to expand the mythos and do something interesting with the material. Maybe even respond to some fan criticism and fix it.

 

[Timby]

..and there were plans for a Raimi-era Spider-Man 4, but after the disaster that was 3, that ended a series that had two massive hits and only one misstep.

Spider-Man 3 was the highest-grossing film of Raimi's trilogy. The only reason Spider-Man 4 didn't get made is that Raimi and Sony couldn't agree on a villain and a script -- they were well into pre-production when he decided to walk away.

 

[Velocity]

Was it my imagination, or did the final big bad look sort of like Dan Ackroyd in the face? I mean, I know he played the cabbie, but this guy resembled him too, I thought.

 

[CommanderTrip]

Looking forward to seeing this in the next few weeks. Probably going to see star trek first, but I will definitely make it a point to see this one. (dont really care about spoilers, so I've been semi-viewing the posts in this thread for a while now) I grew up on Ghostbusters as a kid. My older brother and I wore the proton packs, we had the ecto 1 and the firehouse toys. We drank ecto cooler. Between TMNT, Batman '89, and The Real Ghostbusters cartoon, man it was a time to be a kid. I'm not offended or insulted that they did an all female cast this time. I also found certain parts of the trailer quite funny in a don't-take-it-too-seriously kind of way.

While it is unfortunate that a GB3 never arrived in theaters, a third GB movie was technically made in the form of a video game a few years back starring all four of the original ghostbusters (and a few other voice actors you will no doubt recognize from the GB movie). It's a fantastic game, and it really puts you into the ghostbuster experience. I highly recommend if you are a ghostbuster fan and just so happen to have an xbox 360/ps3 lying around, go grab this game used and you will not be disappointed.

I remember a long time ago too the proposed third GB movie had the gang all go to hell... and that hell was just a hellish version of NYC..... Potential to be quite funny/a big stinky turd blossom. Either way, I definitely would have been interested in seeing that movie in theaters.

 

[ancient]

From what I heard this movie wasn't as terrible as that legendary trailer was trying to convince everyone. That's nice.

 

[Trekker4747]

Thing is, why do they *need* a "franchise" or an CU? Yeah, it's working out very, very, well for Diusney/Marvel but only because they have butt-loads of established, known, characters people want to see in movies and are willing to go see and *want* to go see. It's hard to carry that over into brand new characters in a property/universe that isn't nearly as diverse or has 50-years of stories, plots and arcs to draw from. Same with WB/DC, established and very well-known characters. Probably the most well known characters in all of fiction and, again over 50 years of stories to draw from.

Universal has the Universal Monsters where, again, we're talking about some of the most popular fictional characters/creatures in fiction.

Maybe instead of setting their goals on making franchises/cinematic universes they should more focus on making good movies and then if one gets off the ground then maybe expand on it and build from there. Here, they but all of their chips, $144 million worth, on black and spun the wheel and it's looking like it's going to land on red. Just make good movies, don't focus on franchises or cinematic universes because it seems like that's hurting Sony more than anything. I mean, combining 21 Jump Street and Men in Black?! What?! That's just insanity. (FWIW, I've heard of their plans to do this and makes not a damn bit of sense.)

Ghostbusters is hardly something that lends itself to a wide franchise because how much can you really do with it? "Oh, a team of people with nuclear-powered backpacks go around and fight ghosts and.... well along the way they discover a ghost/someone with paranormal connections trying to end the world. And then, and then... A really powerful ghost comes and they all have to team-up to save the world.... and then they go back to their respective franchises too.... fight ghosts in order to save the world.

How much is there really to mine from this? It's not equitable at all to Marvel or DC. Hell, maybe they should look into getting the rights to some Inide Comic universe or something?

There's a huge difference between all-ready established franchises with dozens upon dozens of characters and decades of stories, villains, plots, arcs and key moments and trying to start all of this up from scratch by spending hundreds of millions of dollars. They're not going to achieve what Disney/Marvel has by basically shitting Platinum several times a year with movies that erupt from the box office with over a billion dollars by making action-comedies about ghost-busters.

 

[Awesome Possum]

It's all about making money and the only thing studios are willing to bet money on is proven concepts. Marvel established that cinematic universes can work with audiences. But instead of seeing that it is more due to the creative team making excellent movies, they see a chart and want to copy the chart. These movies cost a lot of money and they aren't intentionally making garbage, it's just that they don't want to take chances because there is a risk of failure. They can't afford to fail with how the film industry is doing now. It's why television is better than actual movies now, they take risks now. This is why every studio will bring out a cinematic universe and try to make Avengers level movies, they want to make a billion dollars and use name recognition to do most of the work. Lucky for them audiences want the same stuff they've seen before and not see any original.

Eventually the industry will change again because some movie was an unexpected hit. I actually expect a trend of soft reboots reuniting the original casts after The Force Awakens did so well. This Ghostbusters would have probably ended up being Ghostbusters 3 again if it had been delayed a bit longer.