S.O.S. fantômes

I passionately dislike this movie as a Ghostbusters movie. Let alone the fact that it's also a bad movie but it's just- no! Rated higher than Ghostbusters II and they call themselves critics!? Its the worst in the series. Not in a sexist way but they might've created some of the dumbest most boring characters ever. Afterlife, though there isn't much development they still had decent characters (Paul Rudd was good but unfunny) It's just really stupid and to corny. I know Ghostbusters is a comedy series in general but this is just brainless and unfunny mish mash of a generic alien invasion film but with ghosts. . Yeah, it's got some alright ghosts and good VFX but it 50% just recycles the plot of the original! I mean if you "critics" are still gonna give Ghostbusters II a what, like 5? Well at least it has a unique story! It's just like your usual horror/science fiction "Oh look the paranormal is haunting all of the city!" Thing. It just tries to be chaotic and cinematic and you know what!? Its just a disgusting monster mess. Bad humor, unoriginal plot, but some cool ghosts and ghouls!

I will never get why you have to remake a movie if it is not to make it better. It's been a long time since I saw the Ghostbusters from 1984 but I know for sure that I liked that one better. Why would you spend so much money to a movie that is already been made before and even better? I really don't get it. This remake is painful to watch. The only decent comedian was Leslie Jones. At least she was a bit funny. But Melissa McCarthy, she's a total nightmare to watch. Why people like her as a comedian is a mystery to me. Her humor level is at zero point zero and the most annoying thing about her is her extremely irritating voice. Kate McKinnon and Chris Hemsworth were also a nightmare to watch. The special effects would have been good for 1984 but not for 2016. I so wished I would have watched the first Ghostbusters again instead of this failure.

It's a sad reality when a beloved movie is resurrected only to be mutilated by a misguided attempt at relevance. The remake of Ghostbusters is a prime example of how Hollywood can take an iconic property and reduce it to a soulless, pandering mess. This feeble attempt to recapture the magic of the original movie falls flat on every conceivable level, leaving fans and newcomers alike utterly disappointed.

From the outset, the movie's biggest flaw is its painfully contrived script. The weak plot feels like a sheer afterthought, serving as a mere backdrop for desperate attempts at humor. The "jokes," if they can even be called that, are painfully unfunny and rely heavily on crude humor and slapstick gags. This shallow and lazy approach to comedy lacks the wit, intelligence, and subtlety that made the original Ghostbusters so memorable.

The casting choices, touted as a progressive move, only further contribute to the movie's downfall. While the original movie had a dynamic ensemble that oozed chemistry and charisma, the remake feels like a jumbled mess. The main characters are nothing more than cardboard cutouts. The lack of depth and development in their roles is astonishing, making it impossible to connect with or care about their journey.

Moreover, the movie's blatant pandering and gender-swapping of the main characters is a disservice to the legacy of the original. Instead of focusing on crafting a compelling storyline and well-rounded characters, the movie relies on hollow gender politics as its primary selling point. This misguided attempt at social commentary only serves to overshadow the movie's flaws, and it feels like a cheap marketing ploy rather than a genuine creative choice.

Even the visual effects, which should have been a redeeming aspect, are lackluster. The CGI-heavy spectacles lack the charm and practicality of the original movie's effects, feeling more like a soulless video game than a cinematic experience. The iconic ghosts and paranormal encounters lose their mystique and become nothing more than flashy distractions.

In the end, the remake of Ghostbusters is a painful reminder of the consequences of Hollywood's obsession with cashing in on nostalgia. It fails to capture the spirit and magic of the original movie, instead opting for a shallow, derivative attempt that tarnishes the franchise's reputation. Fans of the original should steer clear of this abysmal remake, as it serves as a disservice to the legacy of the original and the beloved characters that captivate audiences worldwide.

I'm afraid this is not a good film.

I like some things of it. Some people complain about the CGI but I really think the monsters/phantasm were good and it's the only one thing that is better than the OG (obviously due to tech limitations at that time). I also think some of the scenes at the end work even they are merely a copy of the OG and not better than it. I also liked some of the origin details, like the logo or the song.

However, this film has 4 major issues:

1st, the cast. Leslie Jones is the best one, she knows when to do her thing, when to stop, when to listen, she is funny, it doesn't feel forced. McKinnon is super praised and I get why. Even if I didn't love her role - sometimes it seems she replaced the lack of any substance by weird expressions all the time - she is charismatic and I can clearly see her working very well with a better plot. But then...Melissa McCarthy is so bland here, so insipid, I can't even remember a single take from her. Wigg, on the other hand...I would prefer to forget what I remember. There is one good moment from her (when she met Hemsworth character) but all the rest is super annoying, super unnatural and not funny. Hemsworth's role is funny (in fact, the funniest when it works) and good to see until...it's too repetitive and more of the same.

2nd, the plot/story. I'm still trying to find out how do you want to reboot a classic film with this story to tell. It doesn't make sense. It would work potentially as a stand-alone episode if they decided to create a TV series with 12 episodes per season, as a film is not enough. After 15 minutes, I don't even remember the villain and why he did what he did. I don't understand how things scalated so quickly.

3rd, the editing. What an atrocious thing. This film would work so much better with less 20/25 minutes, with much less stupid (and weak) jokes...sometimes you can even see when they did several takes with scenes not matching from different angles. Yeah, that bad.

6.8?!?! How is this rated higher than the 1989 sequel?!?

This movie was awful. Like, really bad. I'm a huge Ghostbusters fan, but this was not it. Such a pointless movie to make, terribly acted and I'm pretty sure the rating was rigged somehow. Either that, or people have terrible taste in movies. The other three movies in the franchise were great, but this was horrible. Only thing remotely enjoyable (if I had to choose SOMETHING) was the cameo appearances by some of the original cast. Other than that... ummm... hmmm... cure for insomnia.

And that's it. Don't waste you time. Watch anything else.....