Charlesc-5

I'll be honest. I want as many people to see this movie as possible, but I can't help but feel I would be cheating in telling people this was a very well made movie. It is not.

The thriller / horror genre is considered the entry point for many directors (and actors) who want to show their chops but have very little budget, leapfrogging the system and getting the attention of producers and wider audiences, etc. I wish I could say this was such an example.

It took patience to get to the end. There were so many editing mistakes and missed opportunities, however...

With that said, for me, the journey was worth it. There is some solid character development and storytelling here and I hope that people will watch this. If movies are to reach out to people and get them to think, this is a great example.

I've seen all of the Ghostbusters movies. I saw the first one TWICE in the theater. I saw the second one IN THE THEATER and it wasn't a "revival". I was one of the few who liked the third one!

But... OMG. My problem is that I remember the other Ghostbusters movies as being somewhat.... funny?

Here, there's this one young man in the movie, "Podcast", who I gather is always saying things that are supposed(?) to be funny? Not one laugh.

Anyway, there is a heaping dose of Ghostbusters fan service here. The 3rd movie (Ghostbusters: Answer the Call) seems to have evaporated and we're picking up 40 years after the first(?) one.

My friend suggested they were trying to update the Ghostbusters franchise by doing a mashup with "Stranger Things". Not a bad observation.

As I was watching the movie, I was literally looking at my watch wondering when this movie was going to START. PROTIP: IF YOU SKIP to one hour and 20 minutes, this turns out to be a decent movie, however, don't expect the "fun" of the original.

When the movie started laying out the groundwork, I had no problem accepting the premise as Jason Statham as The Equalizer. But then things soon go way over the top before they start to look ridiculous.

Good actors, bad writing.

Jeremy Irons comes in to deliver the exposition that would probably be featured in the trailer. The words just sound so stilted and staged.

The dialogue is something out of a Frank Miller comic book as are certain characters that start to appear totally out of context or believability.

Minnie Driver looks great in her role, walks on, and is gone in like 90 seconds? We want more Minnie!

Perhaps the best thing overall is Emmy Raver-Lampman and Bobby Naderi who feel like the most natural thing in the movie. I liked them both and their chemistry worked!

Finally for acting, Phylicia Rashad tugged at our hearts as she gave the film a depth and warmth which was lost far too quickly.

Okay! It's an action film! But I felt the action sequences to be both over the top and behind the curve.

For a while now, Statham relies too much on editing and closeups when I know he can deliver the fighting scenes but he needs a better fight coordinator.

SEQUEL? I suspect as much. I do believe they could beef things up and make it better. Here's hoping Beekeeper II dials it in for the next time.