It’s 10:12 pm back east. The first public screenings of Ghostbusters will start in a few and end by 12:30 or 1 am. Curious to know what people think…that’s all.
“It’s formula bullshit, of course — what else could it be? — but if you can lower your standards and just sit back and take it, it’s 80 minutes of silly ‘fun’ — fun defined as nodding submission to a super-budget presentation of a franchise concept that’s moderately amusing here and there and doesn’t piss you off. After the first 80 minutes it eats itself, leaving us to endure 35 minutes of CG overkill — Zack Snyder‘s Man of Steel finale meets the Independence Day sequel meets the Pillsbury doughboy monster meets the end of the world.” — From my own HE review, posted on 7.10.
“Much has already been written in advance of the opening of “Ghostbusters” about how the film will serve as a referendum on the future success or failure of female-centric Hollywood movies. All I can say is, I certainly hope this dreary, bleary comedy doesn’t end up serving as a referendum on anything. That would be a disservice to women, not to mention movies.” — Peter Rainer, Christian Science Monitor.
“Word to the studios: We lack penises, not brains! Taking a creaky but beloved Bill Murray franchise and recasting it with chicks isn’t progress. Ghostbusters demonstrates that a lame concept can’t make a female-driven film stronger. Meanwhile, shaming men as fanboys or misogynists for not embracing this dreck doesn’t help. [This] bloated 3-D action-adventure is symptomatic of a larger problem in this summer of chaos: sequel-itis. This dread disease — the reboot, the sequel, the prequel — squashes Hollywood one tent-pole film at a time like the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man in Manhattan.” — Thelma Adams, The Observer.