Wonder Woman 1984 (2020) review

2017’s Wonder Woman doesn’t always get the credit that it deserves from the DC Extended Universe fandom for everything that it did for the franchise. At a time where most DCEU films were utterly savaged by critics, Wonder Woman was the franchise’s first genuinely well-received outing. In fact, it still stands as the best-reviewed DCEU film to date with a 93% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and while certain parts of the DCEU fandom will feverishly try to deny it, the reason why it succeeded where films like Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice didn’t was because it was very much the antithesis of the early DCEU films. Instead of being an overly dour and overstuffed superhero epic, Wonder Woman was a predominately lighthearted but still emotionally powerful superhero adventure that was fully bolstered by Gal Gadot’s fantastic performance in the title role. Sure, she had already made a great impression when she made her franchise debut in Batman v Superman but it wasn’t until her solo film when she was truly given the chance to shine in a film that fully understood the importance of character and story. Ultimately, though, much of what made the film work was thanks to its director, Patty Jenkins, who made history as the first female director of a superhero feature from a major studio. Thus, Jenkins was wisely brought back to helm a sequel, which takes Princess Diana of Themyscira from the trenches of World War I to the more high-tech landscape of the 80’s, hence the title Wonder Woman 1984. And while it ended up facing the same unfortunate struggles that other blockbusters have faced thanks to COVID (i.e. getting delayed multiple times), WW84 has finally managed to see the light of day via a simultaneous theatrical and streaming release that allows those who are unable to see it in theaters to watch it at home via Warner Bros.’ streaming service, HBO Max. But no matter where it’s seen, Wonder Woman 1984 is another top-notch outing from Patty Jenkins that, just like its predecessor, is a prime example of the DC Extended Universe at its best which, given all the franchise’s early struggles, is very much a good thing.

It is 1984, and in the bustling metropolis of Washington D.C., Amazonian demigoddess Diana Prince (Gal Gadot) continues to operate as Wonder Woman, albeit in a relatively secretive manner that doesn’t conflict with her public persona as an anthropologist working at the Smithsonian. One day, Diana and her coworker Barbara Minerva (Kristen Wiig) come across a mysterious artifact known as the ‘Dreamstone’ that can grant those who find it the one wish that they desire the most. And sure enough, Diana and Barbara both end up inadvertently utilizing the Dreamstone’s abilities. Whereas the introverted Barbara wishes to become as strong and confident as Diana, Diana’s greatest desire results in the return of the love of her life, pilot Steve Trevor (Chris Pine), who had heroically sacrificed himself during the events of the first film. Unfortunately, these life changing developments are soon upended by the arrival of a new threat in businessman Maxwell Lord (Pedro Pascal), who seeks out the Dreamstone so that he can become the powerful figure that he’s always dreamt of being. In doing so, Lord ends up becoming the physical embodiment of the Dreamstone, thus allowing him to grant anyone’s wish and take whatever he wants from them in return. Naturally, this results in an endless array of conflicts that span the entire world, resulting in Diana and Steve embarking on a quest to stop Lord from going overboard with power and destroying the world in the process. And as Diana, Barbara, and Max all soon discover, their greatest desires come with even greater consequences.

 

If there’s one thing that can be said about this film, it’s that the 1984 part of its title is a 100% accurate indicator of what it truly is. Wonder Woman 1984 may be a modern blockbuster, but in execution, it is the spitting image of an 80’s film from the intentionally gaudy but still incredibly vibrant color palette that it sports to the overly extravagant outfits that the characters wear (e.g. Chris Pine in parachute pants… need I say more?). This is also reflected by the film’s primarily lighthearted tone which is then matched by its unabashedly old-school superhero plot with clear-cut heroes and villains. And while those two aspects of the film have admittedly been a major source of contention amongst critics and audiences, I’d say that they’re the key reason why it works as well as it does. In other words, while some may find this film to be overly goofy and cliché, it could very well be argued that it perfectly encapsulates what most of the films and TV shows from the 80’s were like from a tonal perspective. It should also go without saying that Patty Jenkins excellently maintains the same strong atmosphere that made the first Wonder Woman film such a hit, resulting in a highly entertaining homage to classic 80’s adventure flicks that’s full of great bits of humor that never overshadow the story’s powerful emotional beats. And just like the first film, Wonder Woman 1984 also boasts a lot of great action sequences and a suitably epic score. Whereas the first film’s score was done by Hans Zimmer protégé Rupert Gregson-Williams, this film’s score was done by Zimmer himself who, of course, was largely responsible for bringing the title character’s iconic theme to life in Batman v Superman.

 

It’s been well-documented at this point that Gal Gadot has basically been the DC Extended Universe’s MVP as far as its ensemble cast is concerned. As Wonder Woman, she has consistently established herself as a wholly charismatic leading lady and an indisputably badass action heroine, and sure enough, all this is once again reinforced by this film. Here, she trades in the innocent fish out of water character arc that she went through in the first film for one where, despite being emotionally hardened by everything that’s happened to her since she left Themiscyra, she’s still very much the kind-hearted heroine that we know and love. As for the heavily talked-about return of her long lost love Steve Trevor, the film’s handling of this plot-line feels like a natural way of doing the ‘resurrection’ concept that has always been common in the world of comics. And just like the first film, Chris Pine does a great job of being just as charismatic as Gadot without ever overshadowing Diana’s status as the main protagonist. This then brings us to the film’s main antagonists, and if there’s one advantage that Wonder Woman 1984 has over its predecessor, it’s that it has much stronger villains. It all starts with Pedro Pascal, who is delightfully over-the-top as the charismatic con-man Maxwell Lord while still managing to make him a surprisingly sympathetic tragic figure. This also applies to the other antagonist of the feature, Kristen Wiig’s Barbara, who gradually evolves from a meek introvert into the “apex predator” that is Wonder Woman’s classic foe from the comics, Cheetah. And while her final transformation may be a bit lacking visually, Wiig does an outstanding job at being Diana’s foil since her wish to become just like her comes at the cost of the good-natured and all-around sociable personality that she had before she used the Dreamstone..

 

I won’t be going over what I’m about to mention too much as I finish up this review, but I will say that I find it fascinating that a film that was shaping up to be one of the best-reviewed films of 2020 about a week ago… has suddenly become one of the year’s most polarizing releases. Yes, Wonder Woman 1984 has attracted some, to put it as nicely as I can, intense reactions from both critics and audiences. Basically, from what I can gather, it’s gotten a lot of flak for its light-hearted tone to the point where it’s been accused of being way too goofy instead of being a more serious and darker sequel. And yet, as I noted earlier, I’d say that this makes it a perfect representation of the era in history in which it’s set; plus, as I’m sure that I’ve made it clear at this point, I tend to prefer the superhero films that aren’t trying to distance themselves from the medium’s typically lighthearted proceedings. Case in point, Wonder Woman 1984 is a highly entertaining addition to the genre that, just like its predecessor, is fully bolstered by its terrific ensemble cast and Patty Jenkins’ excellent direction. In short, it’s another example as to why the DC Extended Universe has been a lot better than how it was when it was first starting out when it remembers that, when it comes to this genre, strong characters and a good story are always more important than whatever ‘cool’ action sequences those characters partake in. Simply put, no one does DCEU films quite like Patty Jenkins, and if you ask me, it’s about damn time that the DCEU fandom gives her the credit that she deserves for all that she’s done for the franchise.

 

Rating: 5/5!

Sausage Party (2016) review

(Disclaimer: I don’t usually do this but there are going to be some MAJOR SPOILERS at the end of this review following the rating as I will be delving into how much the film has changed since I saw it at SXSW. Also some of you might have recently heard of the controversies surrounding this film’s production, namely the fact that some of its animators were overworked and underpaid. It’s certainly a troubling situation but I will not be bringing it up in the review.)

It’s time once again to talk more about one of the films that I got to see early at SXSW in Austin, Texas this past March. And this one, Sausage Party, is a particularly noteworthy one because when it premiered there on March 14^th, it wasn’t finished yet. It was shown in ‘rough cut’ form, with some of the animation being unfinished. It so wasn’t finished yet that there was actually a scene that was just storyboards and apparently it had actually been screened sometime prior to that as nothing but storyboards. So because it was only a ‘Rough Cut’, I decided not to give it an official rating in my 2016 SXSW Recap Post. However, now the film is finally out in its finished state, meaning that I now have the opportunity to review it properly. Sausage Party is certainly a unique entry in the animated genre. While it may seem like your typical Disney/Dreamworks affair, namely in regards to the cartoony designs of its main characters that would certainly fit in any other animated film, believe me when I say that this is not an animated film you’re going to want to take your kids to. This is a very much R-rated animated flick that is as crass and filled to the brim with sexual innuendos and pot as you’d probably expect from the duo behind it; Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg. But if you can look pass all of the juvenile references, sex talk, and pot jokes, Sausage Party is actually a rather smartly written animated flick that very much takes advantage of its more mature rating, though maybe a bit too much at times, to produce a hilariously dark spin on what, on the surface, would seem like something you’d see in a Disney film.

The film mainly takes place within the confines of a supermarket called Shopwell’s. In this supermarket, its various food items are living beings who dream of being taken by ‘the gods’ [humans] and brought out of the store into ‘the Great Beyond’. One of these foods is a sausage named Frank (Seth Rogen) who dreams of being chosen along with his girlfriend, a hot dog bun named Brenda (Kristen Wiig), so that they take their relationship beyond ‘just the tips’. As fate would have it, they do end up getting chosen together by a female shopper during Fourth of July weekend. However, a jar of Honey Mustard (Danny McBride) that had been previously brought to ‘the Great Beyond’ but was then returned to the store warns them that the ‘Great Beyond’ is nothing but a bunch of BS and jumps off of the cart to his death, ultimately resulting in Frank, Brenda, a lavash named Kareem Abdul Lavash (David Krumholtz), and a bagel named Sammy Bagel Jr. (Edward Norton) falling out of the cart as well following a collision with another cart. Now on their own as the store closes for the night, the quartet decide to journey back to their aisles, all the while dealing with a douche (Nick Kroll, and by ‘douche’ I mean the feminine hygiene product) that seeks revenge against Frank for getting his nozzle bent. It is during this time that Frank begins to learn more about what Honey Mustard was talking about and through a meeting with the ‘immortal’ non-perishables led by liquor bottle Firewater (Bill Hader), Frank finally learns the truth about the ‘Great Beyond’; it is a lie. Even worse, when food is taken by humans, the humans end up “killing their asses”, resulting in Frank having to try and reveal the horrible truth to his peers before it’s too late.

The humor in Sausage Party is very much what’d you expect from Rogen and Goldberg; it’s full of sexual innuendo, pot jokes, etc. And in the case of this film, that also means quite a lot of food-related puns. Pretty much any food pun that you can think of is probably in this film. Now as far as the humor is concerned, I must say that this film actually has a really solid gag-to-laugh ratio. It will legitimately have you guffawing throughout and while on the surface it may seem like a really stupid food version of Toy Story, the writing is actually much more complex than you think. Yes, amidst all of the f-bombs, marijuana use, and many, many, MANY stereotypes that are represented in food form, there’s actually quite a bit of in-depth social commentary in this film, namely in regards to religion as represented by the food of Shopwell’s being led to believe that nothing bad ever happens to food, which of course isn’t true in their cases. Instead, the film promotes unity amongst cultures and taking control of your own life. So yeah… this film basically gives the idea of religion the middle finger. With that said, admittedly sometimes the film can be a little too crass for its own good. I mean, sure, I get it, it’s an R-rated animated film so they do have much more creative leeway to get away with stuff that you would NEVER see in something from Disney, Pixar, or Dreamworks. Still, there are times where it does feel like they’re just relishing in the fact that it’s R, meaning plenty of f-bombs thrown out here and there really for no real reason other than they can. Thankfully, that only happens a few times in the film.

Animation-wise the film is perfectly fine as a film made by a non-Disney/Pixar/Dreamworks studio with a low budget. It’s nothing special, for the record, but it does definitely deserve some credit for the ways in which it brings this world of food to life, mainly through its character designs. It also certainly does its job in giving the film a Disney-esque style with its own cartoonish and colorful style. Heck, they even got Alan Menken, the man who has brought us countless iconic Disney songs over the years, to do the film’s opening musical number. Needless to say all of this gets really hilarious when the filmmakers start to do more adult stuff with the animation, namely in the ending which, without giving anything away, is something that truly needs to be seen to be believed. The same can be said for scenes in which food characters are brutally killed by humans. Obviously it isn’t graphic in the same way that scenes like this would be if they involved humans but it does still provide a hilariously disturbing sight. As for the voice cast, pretty much every one is spot on for their respective roles; Seth Rogen as Frank, Kristen Wiig as Brenda, Jonah Hill and Michael Cera as some of Frank’s fellow sausages with the latter being viewed as a runt due to him being a deformed sausage, Edward Norton as the Woody Allen-ish Sammy Bagel Jr. (no joke, some people at the SXSW screening didn’t even realize it was Norton until the end of the film), Salma Hayek as a lesbian taco shell who harbors feelings for Brenda, etc. Admittedly most of the characters are rather one-note save for a few (e.g. Cera’s character Barry) but the cast does make it all work in the long run.  

Now like I said before, when I first saw this film I didn’t give it a rating at the time because it was only a ‘Rough Cut’. Plus, because the SXSW crowd was so into it (I’m pretty sure there were a few stoners in there… this is a Seth Rogen/Evan Goldberg film, after all), sometimes I couldn’t even hear the dialogue. So now I’ve finally seen the film in its final form and overall I must say that it really is a solid animated flick. For one thing, the film is absolutely hilarious from beginning to end; most of the jokes, even some of the obviously offensive ones, do hit. And while on the surface this whole premise of food learning of their true purpose in life may sound really silly, and let’s be honest that’s exactly what it is, the writing can actually be rather smart at times, namely through how it comments on religion and the beliefs that one has through said religion. Pair that with the hilarious mash-up of Disney-style animation with the messed up crap that goes on in this film and the absolutely spot-on voice cast and you just have one absolutely crazy but still highly entertaining animated feature. Like Deadpool and superhero films earlier this year, perhaps Sausage Party will open the door for more R-rated animated films. Clearly people are open for films like this that aren’t afraid to be a bit more mature despite being part of a genre that’s mostly seen PG-rated stories. I’ve seen quite a few great R-rated animated films before; South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut, Team America: World Police, etc. So hopefully thanks to this film, we’ll be seeing more down the road, including the certainty that is a sequel to this film, which ends on quite an interesting note that will no doubt set up an even crazier follow-up.  

Rating: 4/5

****

SPOILER SECTION (IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN THE FILM YET, READ NO FURTHER!!)

So as I’ve been saying throughout this review, when I saw this at SXSW not all of the animation was finished. Some scenes were in the early stages of rendering and some of them didn’t even feature full character animation yet. This was primarily the case during the opening song number and pretty much most of the finale, including the scene in which Frank tries to rally the supermarket food to fight ‘the Gods’ and, yes, even the infamous orgy scene. There was also one additional scene that didn’t end up in the theatrical cut. After the food have their massive orgy, Frank and friends learn from Firewater that they are actually only ‘cartoons’ brought to life by animators and voiced by celebrities like Seth Rogen and Edward Norton. The wise figure that is Gum then reveals that he has built an inter-dimensional device that would allow them to travel to their creators’ world. Frank and co. decide to enter it and they end up in Los Angeles right across the street from a diner where Seth Rogen, Michael Cera, and Edward Norton are having lunch. As the trio talk about doing an animated film about talking food, Frank and friends storm into the diner through the window to attack them. Now for the record I don’t know if this was actually intended to be in the film. The animation in this scene was completely non-existent; it was literally just the 2-D models of the characters on a 2-D plane set against the live-action footage. I mean personally I think it would’ve been a funny little ending tag seeing Rogen, Cera, and Norton get attacked by the food but it’s probably for the better that they didn’t use this scene. Instead, the film ends as Frank and his friends go into the portal. With that said, though, perhaps this scene will be featured on the Blu-Ray. It would certainly set the stage for what will no doubt happen in the sequel as Frank and co. interact with ‘their creators’.   

Ghostbusters (2016) review

Well… you’ve probably heard about this film quite a lot these past few months and suffice it to say, a lot of the discussions about it weren’t very positive to say the least. Somehow, for some reason, this was the one reboot in a current film landscape full of sequels, remakes, and reboots that people JUST couldn’t handle. And to me it’s rather strange that this film is getting as much flak as it is because Ghostbusters is one of the most famous franchises in pop culture history, mostly thanks to the 1984 titular comedy classic. Following the not-so-beloved (but seriously not as bad as many put it out to be) sequel in 1989, there were numerous attempts at doing a third Ghostbusters film. However, pretty much all of those plans ended up falling by the wayside, namely due to Bill Murray’s reluctance to return. And when franchise star Harold Ramis tragically passed away in February 2014, it seemed as if that would be it for the paranormal investigators on film. And then, just a few months later, that changed when it was announced that director Paul Feig would be directing a brand new Ghostbusters film. However, instead of being a continuation of the franchise, this new film would be a ‘reboot’ starring a cast of female leads… and to put it simply, quite a lot of people on the internet got really mad about this. How mad, you ask? Well, the first trailer for the film is the most disliked trailer on YouTube. There’s seriously no other film trailers on that site that have that many down-votes. And ultimately a lot of that backlash turned out be quite premature because the film is a genuinely solid crowd-pleaser. Is it perfect? No, not at all but it certainly isn’t as bad as a certain part of the internet claims it to be.

Sometime prior to the events of the film, scientists Erin Gilbert (Kristen Wiig) and Abby Yates (Melissa McCarthy) published a book on paranormal activity claiming that ghosts are indeed real. However, the book fails to be a success and Gilbert decides to distance herself from it. However, when she is about to start teaching at Columbia University, she finds that, to her horror, Abby had republished the book without her permission. As a result, the two of them end up getting shunned from academia but after a legitimate encounter with a ghost, they decide to continue their research with the help of Abby’s new assistant, engineer Jillian Holtzmann (Kate McKinnon). They set up their new ‘office’ on the top floor of a Chinese restaurant, recruit the dim-witted but extremely good-looking Kevin Beckman (Chris Hemsworth) as their receptionist, and also gain a new teammate in the form of Patty Tolan (Leslie Jones), an MTA employee who recently had a run-in with a ghost as well. Together, they come to be known as the ‘Ghostbusters’ and attempt to prove themselves to the people of New York by documenting and capturing ghosts. As this is going on, they also investigate into the increasingly frequent appearances of ghosts all over the city, which unbeknownst to them is being caused by an occultist named Rowan (Neil Casey) hell-bent on bringing about the apocalypse.  

So I guess the big question that some of you might be asking is how does this film fare as a comedy. And to that I say that the film does have a solid amount of humor. Now I’m not saying that every single joke in the film worked and there is a considerably noticeable lull at the halfway point. Still, the hit-miss ratio is still pretty darn solid; I’d say about 70-30. But another question that fans have raised in regards to the film is over the fact that instead of being a continuation of the franchise, it is instead a reboot with new characters. Whether or not this was the best move is debatable but at the very least, I feel that it worked because the film does manage to stand on its own as a unique entry in the franchise… though with that said, there are a few scenes in this film that do very much parallel scenes from the original film (e.g. the first ghost encounter). Also, there are quite a few callbacks to the original, namely the appearances of certain characters, but they didn’t bother me too much. This also included the cameos made by the original film’s cast, which actually weren’t that distracting (if I had to pick a favorite, it’d be Dan Aykroyd’s cameo). From a technical perspective, this film is certainly very well-made in terms of its action and visuals. Obviously in terms of the visuals there is a lot more CG used for the ghosts this time around but it all still looks really good and the film carries a solid visual style throughout. I mean, in terms of both visuals and action sequences, I feel that this film very much delivers in terms of being a modern-era Ghostbusters film all while still maintaining the same light-hearted spirit of the original films.

But of course one of the key elements to any Ghostbusters film is the strong camaraderie amongst its leads. And in the case of this film, that very much is the case with the group of Yates, Gilbert, Holtzmann, and Tolan. Not only that, but the film also very much succeeds in terms of making them endearing and likable characters. Both McCarthy and Wiig are solid and to reiterate a point that I made in my review of Paul Feig’s last film, Spy, this film is another case of proof that McCarthy’s truly at her best working with Feig. Their two primary co-stars get plenty of scene-stealing moments as well. Kate McKinnon is most certainly the most eccentric of the group as Holtzmann. It may be a bit too much for some but she certainly steals the show in quite a few sequences. The same goes for Leslie Jones as Patty, though she actually doesn’t go as over-the-top as McKinnon sometimes does. But it ain’t just the ladies who get great material to work with in this film. Chris Hemsworth once again shows off his great comedic chops in the role of Kevin. Simply put, the film very much plays up the fact that his character isn’t very bright (e.g. the first time the phone rings while he’s on the job, he doesn’t answer it because he assumed the actual phone was the one in the office’s fish-tank) and it’s hilarious. Of the cast, the only major weak link is, unfortunately, the villain. Nothing against Neil Casey, who’s mostly been known for his work behind the scenes as a writer on shows like SNL and Inside Amy Schumer, but the character of Rowan is admittedly rather bland, mostly just coming off as weird.

Now before I get to the conclusion for this review, I do have to address all of the backlash surrounding this film. Simply put… a lot of this backlash was really frigging stupid. I mean, seriously, out of all of the reboots, remakes, and sequels that have come out over the years, this is the one film that fanboys just couldn’t accept. I mean by comparison you don’t see people get that worked up over remakes of films like Point Break or Ben-Hur now, do you? And as much as some have actually tried to deny it, a good chunk of said backlash towards the film legitimately has been due to the fact that the film oh so dares to star women in the lead roles. And let me tell you, in 2016 this kind of sexism is just frigging embarrassing. What the hell is so wrong with having women be Ghostbusters, a franchise that has very much been dominated by male leads for the entirety of its existence up to this point. In having women be in the lead roles this time around, this film will no doubt give young girls great new role models to look up to. Now for the record, I know that the backlash towards this film wasn’t all about the whole ‘women are Ghostbusters’ thing. When the trailers did come out, even those who weren’t trolling the film weren’t too positive on them and I’ll admit that they were far from being ‘great’ trailers. However, just because a film has a lackluster trailer doesn’t automatically mean that the film is going to be bad. Thankfully, reviews for this film have been positive for the most part. So that shut up the trolls, right? NOPE! They then just proceeded to accuse anyone who dared to give the film a positive review of being ‘paid’ to do so. Oi… talk about setting fandom back many years.   

So with all of that said, what do I, someone who is NOT paid by Sony, think about the new Ghostbusters? I like it, I like it a lot. Is it perfect? No! There are some issues, namely in terms of pacing, and obviously not all of the jokes hit. If I were to compare this to the original film, which for the record I’m NOT trying to do here at all, I would still give the edge to the original film. But obviously that’s just because the original is still very much a classic and a tough act to follow. And yet that fact shouldn’t be held against this new film that much. Because aside from some scenes that do go off of scenes from the original film, this new film does succeed in being its own thing and as a result, this franchise’s new cast of leads prove to be a very badass new group of Ghostbusters that are very much worthy of standing toe to toe with the franchise’s original leads. In short, this film is, at the very least, a very fun crowd-pleaser. Will it appeal to absolutely everyone? No. I mean it’s pretty clear at this point that any of the trolls who have been bashing this film since the beginning will hate it no matter what. But you know what? Forget about them! If you were one of those people who were genuinely excited for this film, then by all means go see it. Don’t let those trolls spoil your fun. Seriously, even if I ended up not liking the film, I would’ve still encouraged you folks to see it because at the very least, at this point it does deserve to be given a chance. Because Paul Feig and the talented and funny group of actresses leading this film did not deserve any of the crap that they got from misogynistic and entitled fanboys at all.

Rating: 3.5/5

(P.S. There’s been a lot of talk about the film’s post-credits scene and I’ll just be honest… it’s not really worth it to stay through the credits. In fact, without giving any of it away, I guarantee that it might even elicit a groan from long-time fans because it does pull one very big callback to the original film. Here’s hoping the potential sequel doesn’t try to re-do the specific storyline that this scene alludes to.)

Ghostbusters (2016): Why You Should Give it a Chance

(Disclaimer: Literally just a day after I started writing this, a second trailer for the new Ghostbusters film was released online. I’m only going to mention it here for now but the reaction that I have to the first trailer will basically apply to the new one as well.)

As a film critic, I strive to be as open-minded as possible when it comes to every new film that I see. Even if I feel that the film doesn’t look very good based on what I’ve seen from its trailers, TV spots, etc., I still give it the benefit of the doubt and hope for the best. Because if you ask me, it’s both fairly cynical and quite unfair to immediately write off a film before you even see it. Unless you have a time machine that allowed you to go forward in time to when a certain film is released, which I’m 100% certain no one actually has yet, there’s really no way in knowing that a film is going to be good or not solely based on trailers and the film’s marketing. And that’s exactly what has been going on with what has easily been one of the most controversial productions in recent memory; director Paul Feig’s upcoming reboot of Ghostbusters. In fact, this film has been so polarizing amongst internet folk that it recently become the most disliked film trailer in the history of YouTube; no other film trailer is even close to having that many dislikes. Damn! Clearly a lot of fanboys aren’t too happy with this female-led reboot of the iconic Ghostbusters franchise… and I’ll be perfectly frank in saying that all of this vitriol is rather embarrassing because all of these angry fanboys are prematurely judging a film without even seeing it just because it’s trying something with their beloved franchise that they don’t like. So today on Rhode Island Movie Corner, I’ll be addressing the two primary reasons as to why the new Ghostbusters film is attracting so much negative attention online. And with that in mind, hopefully this post will serve as some kind of encouragement for people to actually give the film a chance instead of just writing it off right off the bat, which is what the majority of the internet has been doing so far.

The Ghostbusters franchise obviously needs no introduction. It’s one of the most famous franchises in pop culture history. What started with the 1984 titular film written by the film’s stars, Harold Ramis and Dan Aykroyd, ended up becoming a worldwide phenomenon, spawning a 1989 sequel, a hit TV series in the form of The Real Ghostbusters, and a wide array of merchandise ranging from toys to video games. As far as the films were concerned, over the years there were many attempts in doing a potential third Ghostbusters film. However, this planned sequel ended up facing numerous setbacks over the years, namely the fact that franchise star Bill Murray routinely expressed disinterest in returning. Ultimately, with the passing of Harold Ramis in February 2014, it seemed as if this Ghostbusters III wasn’t going to happen, especially after it was announced that Ivan Reitman would not return to direct the film. And then, in August of that year, things changed when it was announced that Paul Feig (Bridesmaids, The Heat, Spy) was going to direct a new Ghostbusters film that would star an all-female group of leads. Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig, Kate McKinnon, and Leslie Jones were then subsequently cast in the main roles for a film that will serve as a ‘reboot’ of the franchise; in other words, it seems as if the film will not be taking place in the same universe as the original films. So now the big question is this; Why is this new Ghostbusters film being subjected to some of the most vitriolic scrutiny that you’ll ever see, arguably even more so than some of the most hated films of all-time? Well, there have been two main reasons for this and the first is fairly obvious.

REASON 1: IT’S A REBOOT

Like any major reboot, this new Ghostbusters has been criticized by fans for one major reason; why reboot a film franchise when the original is so beloved (the first one, at least; the sequel, not so much)? Obviously this is a problem that a lot of people have whenever a franchise that they love gets some form of continuation but this has clearly been the one reboot, more so than any other, that a lot of people simply couldn’t tolerate whatsoever. But as for me, I’m not really part of that crowd. I guess you could say it’s due to the fact that I didn’t watch Ghostbusters until I was older. But you see, there is this stigma that the internet creates when it comes to sequels, reboots, and remakes in which fanboys claim that one ‘bad’ film ‘completely ruins a franchise’. In reality, though, that’s not really true because the previous beloved films in a series are still going to be there afterwards; it ain’t like they were destroyed in a fire or anything. If you didn’t like one entry in a franchise, just ignore that one and stick to the other films. Same goes for that argument of ‘[insert film here] destroyed my childhood’. No, your childhood wasn’t destroyed because of one film based off of a franchise you followed when you were a kid. So to put all of this into perspective, imagine this scenario. I’ve made it clear in the past that Back to the Future is my favorite film of all-time. A few months ago there was some talk about a potential continuation of the franchise which was quickly shot down by creators Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale, who said that it’ll happen ‘over their dead bodies’. But if a Back to the Future remake/sequel/whatever does end up getting made some day, that doesn’t mean that I’m going to be all pissy about it and condemn the new film before I even see it. I will, at the very least, give it a chance because it at least deserves that. And so does this new Ghostbusters film.

But unfortunately there’s another big reason why this film has been getting a lot of backlash…

REASON 2: IT STARS WOMEN

Yep… as much as some have tried to deny it, which basically means that they’re only further proving it true, one of the major criticisms that fanboys have had with the new film is the fact that the film stars a group of women in the lead roles. Don’t believe me? Need I remind you of when Mad Max: Fury Road came out and there were a minority of fans who were angry at the film for having a feminist slant given the greater focus on characters like Furiosa and the Wives? Well the same thing is happening to the new Ghostbusters film… and this one isn’t even out yet. It really is pathetic that this is one of the main reasons why the film has been getting a lot of vitriol directed towards it. Despite all of the advancements over the years in regards to lead female roles in film, here’s one instance where the internet just can’t let that happen for one of its beloved franchises (Imagine how angry the internet would be if this happened to other male-centric franchises). That was even more evident when another Ghostbusters film was announced in March 2015 that was going to have a cast of male leads and be directed by the Russo brothers. While it looks as if this potential film isn’t going to happen due to the Russo brothers departing the production, I saw quite a few comments online from fanboys when it was still in development that said something along the lines of “I’m more interested in that than the female Ghostbusters film”. No joke. That’s seriously what some people were saying.

Now obviously there’s a bit more to this backlash than the two reasons I listed above. It also has something to do with how people have reacted to the first trailer. Now as far as the actual trailer for the film is concerned, I’m not saying that it was a particularly ‘great’ trailer but it’s far from being the worst thing either. It definitely isn’t worthy of all those damn dislikes, that’s for sure. Yeah there are a few scenes that are clearly being lifted from previous films but the visuals do look pretty darn good and I found that there were genuinely a few laugh-out-loud moments in the trailer, particularly at the end when Leslie Jones’ character continually smacks Melissa McCarthy’s character in order to get the ghost that has been possessing her out, even after said ghost has already been forced out (“THE POWER OF PATTY COMPELS YOU!”). I mean at the end of the day I’m fully aware that this could end up being a disaster. I’m not denying that. However, a good chunk of the backlash towards the film is quite pathetic; not the part about it being a reboot, because that was inevitable no matter how well the first trailer was received, but the part about the film starring women in the lead roles. Seriously internet, it’s 2016… grow the hell up, will ya? What’s so wrong about a bunch of women being Ghostbusters, a franchise that has been fairly male-centric for pretty much the entire duration of its existence? I for one am excited to see how this new film is going to turn out. It certainly has a good cast and crew attached to it and at the very least it has the support of Ivan Reitman and the original film’s cast, many of whom are making cameos in the film. And yes, they even managed to win over Bill Murray as well, which I think is at least a good sign. You can rest assured that I will be seeing this film when it comes out. In fact, I might even end up seeing it twice if only to support it in light of all of the unfair hate that it has been getting.