Wow. You really watched this again? One of the worst films ever made. Just like the newer Star Wars sequels it had no properly planned script. Most of it was improvised garbage as can be seen in the making of the film. Don't waste your time with it.
But it’s not. It’s just a bad movie. No one barely even talks about it anymore and it only came out a few years ago. So just move on. Plus if it wasn’t for this film flopping, we wouldn’t be getting Ghostbusters: Afterlife 🤷🏿♂️
I have no idea how Hollywood continues to spend millions upon millions of dollars on bad ideas when they could just ask someone for free and, ya know, not do that.
I didn't know guys were gonna make a 2 hour commentary defending this Movie!! I gave it a chance I saw it at the movies and didn't like it. I normally enjoy your videos but please don't defend this movie. Because it garbage 💩
Ok I'm 34 minutes in and this just seems primarily a combination of bitching about Sony ineptitude, a review of the approach of the film, and how it compares to the first two. You guys barely comment on what's actually going on in the film.
I disagree with Paul's characterization of fans' complaints....they hated the lack of respect for what came before....and the lazy writing....and the lack of creativity....
It wasn’t that the team were women that was the problem, it was _why_ they were. Anyone who insists differently is being _wilfully_ myopic to the truth. And let’s be honest, thanks in part to the infamous Sony hacks it was evident from the very beginning that this film was engulfed in copious mean-spiritedness and spite. Compounded by a debilitating dearth of creative ingenuity, comedic excellence and one of the worst PR campaigns mounted in cinematic history and this aberration’s failure was assured! Fembusters should be taught in film school as an exemplar of how _not_ to conceive, write, produce and market a film...
I also disagree with him saying how critically acclaimed it was as the reviews were claiming the film was brilliant due to the fear of seeming sexist since Sony was spending so much time claiming if you dislike this film then you hate women
@@stevezpj I recall the initial 4 star Guardian review (not by their resident film critic mind) that tellingly devoted the majority of its column inches sneering at fans than it did extolling the film’s (non-existent) virtues. This sadly set the standard for the flurry of dubious positive reviews of Fembusters that followed from similarly ideologically-compromised reviewers. Fortunately they weren’t fooling anyone as it was blindingly obvious this film was a steaming turd and no amount of railing on ‘man babies’ and ‘basement dwellers’ could disguise it!
@@makara80 this is why I like Mr Plinkett's review of it - he never goes into any of the gender specific aspects of it and treats it 100% as a non-politicised film then tears it apart scene for scene and explains why the humour fails at every level. Personally, I hate Saturday Night Live and these are SNL actors just doing improv stand up and it has no cohesion at all.
I hardly agree with anything in this commentary. Especially on Pauls part. It sounds pretty clear that Paul just blindly confides in everything mainstream media tells him and just swallows it whole.
Amazing how you dispense with the criticism of "ghost busters but with women" by saying "nah". And then saying that ghostbusters go to hell, and the video game are terrible...
Like Walter Peck this film had no dick. This comment has got nothing to with four women. Even if it was trying to be like the original 4 men or if they tried being equality 2 men 2 women. This film just didn't have the heart and soul like the original. Again this is my opinion which I won't judge anyone that like this reboot. Some of my problem with the reboot was too Sony products. Okay the original Ghostbusters had Coca Cola product in Dana's fridge and Ghostbusters drink coke before their first job but it wasn't a distraction. Also I felt the women politics like the boyfriend leaving woman felt like Legally Blonde. Also the possession is a rip off of The Exorcist "the christ will comple you", The Simpsons and Scary movie has done that.
I've never seen it based on its reputation. If it's actually worse than two and only pandering to feminists then it must be terrible. It would've been much better if they'd gone by their original plan for the original Ghostbusters and had it as a multinational organisation, with Ghostbusters all over the world.
Since most of the usual female action hero icons were from a long time ago (T2 in 91, good Alien films in 79 and 86, good Underworld in 03 and 06), I can understand the female cast decision but it was an awful, poorly written rehash that made GB2 a better awfully, poorly written rehash.
I’m sorry, but your buddy Paul must have seen a different GB 2016 movie than the rest of the world because that movie was just bad without even comparing it to the 1984 movie. It’s just bad writing, editing, pacing and filing overall. Just sayin.
to really be unbiased, the ghost technology was definitely upgraded extreme Ghostbusters style which was nice to see, however my biggest issue was that the majority of the characters in this remake were likeable or relatable
Sorry it's a below average movie not terrible mind you, but just really boring and unimaginative. They knew this by using the WOKE gimmick. The original film was about new york working class Schmuck men who had their flaws which made them quite endearing. Something about the female cast just didn't scream new york average Joe's which the original film caught the spirit of. Bill Murray and Dan Aykroyd just excelled at more riskay comedy that was allowed back in the 80's and thats why those films worked as they appealed to everyone. The new film was so PC and flat and just didn't make me laugh whatsoever. Ghostbusters needs to have that working man pessimism about it.
Just wanted to say I like your channel and just put notifications up , your commentary is interesting and informative - also think this movie was awful - one star. Mr DNA
3 egomaniacal actresses CONSTANTLY trying to get a laugh with nonstop desperate ad libs. Improv is good in small doses, where this is a firehose for 2 hours. I chuckled exactly once from a Leslie Jones joke...the only one of the group not trying too hard and actually giving her character depth
Ghostbusters 2016 was intentionally made to bomb so that that dollar could surge. Ghostbusters afterlife will succeed bigly so that the yen can surge Oliver.
Hey Oliver, have you played Ghostbusters: The Game or seen the cutscene movie? Dan Aykroyd considers it Ghostbusters 3. I've seen the cutscene movie, and thought it was really good, and better than Ghostbusters 2, even though I don't dislike the second movie
@@ninfilms For me... I was EXTREMELY excited for this film... I loved the ideas that were being talked about, and the potential angles the film was going to take... Having the Ghostbusters be all female, WAS A GREAT IDEA... But the resulting film was an extremely huge let down... It rode the coat tails of the original film, far too much... The biggest "unforgivable sin" is that it's not a funny film... It really isn't, and I think it was due to having a terrible choice for who Sony let direct this... The director, and Improv, killed this movie. I want to see the latest film, because I am curious about how Ivan Reitman's son will handle directing a story set in the Original Ghostbusters Universe...
@@insertcolorfulmetaphor8520 I agree the majority of the problems wasn't it star four women as the audience have enjoyed films with strong female characters like Ripley and Sarah Connor, Thelma and Louise and Starbuck. My problem was the trailer got things wrong like how many years since the first Ghostbusters film to Sony product placement. Also I just felt the film had that it had all the women haven't got voices cliche has been done a thousands times since the eighties. Like the boyfriend leaves one of the characters. Even the Chris Hemsworth was stereotypical right let's have a good looking guy secretary thats thick. Janine from the original film was intelligent who was confrontational to both Peter Venkman and Dickless himself Walter Peck if she didn't agree with things. Also The Exorcist possession "let's christ compelled you" has been done since 1973. I don't agree with Sony and the director saying that the film flopped because of the women. It was because it was the storytelling and its marketing. Mainly the marketing as I feel it was sold by more people who are not passionate about filmmaking. If anybody watch the original trailer of Ghostbusters other than one flying book there was no showing of Ghost it was very simple and got the audience intrigued. We have to wait and see what the new one is going to be like.
This may be the only channel that refers it by "Answer the Call" (and not _2016_ ); Even GB 2 (1989) is a weak entry. While "Afterlife" is better, on balance this is not meant to be a "franchise".
I don't care that this movie was made but have a plan in place and get a cast that has better chemistry together because this cast lacked that despite what kevin has said basically he went into this movie without a plan
The only reason I like ghostbusters is Dan akroyd, bill Murray and Harold ramis. I don’t care about people catching ghosts, that’s not what interested me about the original. Ghostbusters 2016 is god awful, I hate improv comedy, not funny at all.
I'm in the camp of being a big fan of Bridesmaids, The Heat and Spy so went into this hopeful I'd find it funny [I watched it a bit later due to not really wanting anything to do with the culture war nonsense] and...I just wasn't that great. I think a big issue is the PG-13/12 rating [the directors cut is 'unrated'] as the previous Feig movies were 15's and this feels restrained by it and having to put references to the original films in [those tacky cameos etc]. I think if they'd done a lower budget stand alone film ['Demon Hunters'!] it would have worked a bit better as it just feels a messy. A Simple Favour felt like Feig was more comfortable and I enjoyed that more though nice to here it does have fans [the story about the women finding confort in it was very uplifting].
I watched this on TV thinking it would be a stinker giving the general consensus, but it was much better than I thought it would be. Still probably the worst of the 3 for me, but it was ok. Definitely doesn't deserve the level of hate it gets. My biggest gripe is that this was a reboot, not a sequel. I always thought they could have still had this cast, but made it a passing of the torch.
Film was a kind of grating but mostly harmless C+, typical of the slightly unfinished feel of most of Sony's films over the last 8-10 years. Would have been shrugged off in a more sensible year.
Good Video, but I really wish Paul Gannon would stop slinging garbage as if its good commentary by trying to downplay Ghostbusters, instead of looking into The Real Ghostbusters, or to the XBOX 360 game. He mentioned Extreme Ghostbusters, which was a good mention. As for the reviews at the time, are you sure the 2nd film didn't do well in terms of actual reviews? It got blown away given who it was against in 1989, because it was coming out right next to major films! 1989 was a film filled year! Ebert even gave it 3.5/5. www.rogerebert.com/reviews/ghostbusters-1984
@@voodoochile333 I don't feel that way about Roger Ebert, but opinions differ. You are free to disagree. I don't agree with many of his reviews, but I don't disagree with the way he reviewed.
@@voodoochile333 You can list them, and I would agree that I liked those, probably. I can't speak to everyone's taste, nor can you tell someone they liked something they didn't, or didn't like something they did. The reason I tend to go back to him, is often I find many critics at the time, and often times the public, share similarity in opinion to him. So, he is but one lens I gaze through to see what was thought of work critically in the past. The term "critically panned" or "critically loved" has the word critic in it for a reason, after all. I am not saying he is the end all be all, not by a long shot. I go to many critics, but if you don't have a database of your reviews knocking around after your long gone, it is often harder to find historical reviews, instead of modern ones of historical films. If you know of a place I CAN find historical reviews, as I have tried on google many times, please do share. Thank you.
@@Mathadar you can get siskel and Ebert reviews on RU-vid. You can get some of Eberts recommended movies like: Phantom Menace, home alone 3, Hitman, Speed 2, the Happening, ghost of Mars, garfield, anaconda, daredevil, rocky and bull winkle etc... All classics I'm sure you agree.
It was a woke snl reboot, that was a major problem. If they wanted to have a maximum of inclusion, they could have made a movie based on the Extreme Ghostbusters.
I just re-watched this film again in the Extended Cut again and I still absolutely love it is hap bad with the comedy and have great that's part of the reason why it's a bad movie but it's really not a bad movie and people should really give it more praise it doesn't work in the chronological timeline and the new Ghostbusters film is simply perfect and is the perfect third entry installment this film is a beautiful companion piece to the franchise and it would actually be really cool and awesome to have the Ghostbusters cross universe and meet up with these Ghostbusters that actually be phenomenal and it would finally let haters of this film wait excuse me let me elaborate sexist Piggy haters of this film to appreciate the four leads the Ghostbusters a lot #Sony #ColumbiaPictures #Ghostbusters #meet #SEQUEL TO THIS please Sony please allow the cross Universe to happen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I had avoided this for a long time because of the reputation, until I sat down and watched it... and thought it was OK. It wasn't great, a lot of the comedy fell flat for me, but the story and effects were decent enough to keep me engaged - I was expecting to spend 2 hours enjoying myself hating on it, but there wasn't really anything there for me to hate. "Meh" would be my overall reaction
God damn, many of these comments are embarrassing. It's so odd how this movie became an Important Symbol for the anti-SJW religion. It's just some goofy remake that probably shouldn't have existed, there are plenty of those, but noooo this one is special somehow because a magically important cultural phenomenon pushed you to react in this or that way to it and so you're a victim who now needs to righteously fight back against oppression by hurling ritualistically exaggerated trashtalk at it, sure... Watching people worship their own grievances embarrasses me. It should embarrass everyone.
Seriously guys this film is exactly like the video game awesome!! and is based off the script that was used in the video game!! Visually is exactly the same and that's part of why I love this film !!
I'm extremely happy that the film is available as a companion movie to watch with the first installments disc wise it might not fit chronologally but it is a perfect companion entry of the series and deserves to be apart of the series plus it would actually be really cool to see everybody cross paths in a Universe CrossRift since they teased Zuul at the end of this one and zuehl was the main antagonist in the new one so they could easily say yeah Zuul was paying the ass for us too and come together to fight a brand-new ghost enemy and altogether we say I ain't afraid of no ghost!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
