Ghostbusters (2016)

[starri]

I went back to find a previous thread and didn't see one.

 

However.  This.  Looks. Awesome.

[Joe]

Looks like good fun, which is all I want in a Ghostbusters movie. I'm sure plenty of people are getting their knickers in a twist right this moment, but I find myself unable to care what they think. I'm entertained, plan to see the movie, and that's all that matters.

[JessePinkman]

Actually doesn't look as good as I'd hoped. I'll still see it because I like all of the actors involved but I feel very...eh about it.

 

Also everyone gets to be a scientist and Leslie Jones is just a New Yorker? Okay.

[starri]

I have to admit, that does bother me.  I don't understand why they have to be regressive on that particular plot point.

 

However, the cast is very funny (and Kristen Wiig is also there), and the ghosts look fantastic.

[BatmanBeatles]

I am so going to watch this.

[Spartan Girl]

 

Also everyone gets to be a scientist and Leslie Jones is just a New Yorker? Okay.

 

Well, that's the route they went with Ernie Hudson in the original.

 

Freaking awesome trailer.  I am so ready for this.

[JessePinkman]

Well, that's the route they went with Ernie Hudson in the original.

 

 

Yes and that was 30 years ago. I'm just saying you have ONE black person in a prominent role in your movie, as far as I can tell, and she's the "street smarts" one, it's eye roll worthy.

 

But who knows, it might be more nuanced than that, she could be a secret scientist or the mayor of NY undercover, I don't know but my initial reaction is one of trepidation.

[Sharpie66]

According to the individual character posters (complete with mini-bios), Leslie Jones is playing a "municipal historian," which would have her the city expert on buildings, etc., so I'm cool with her not being a scientist if she's an expert in other, just as necessary, things!

[VCRTracking]

The trailer doesn't blow me away but I like Kate's character already. I just hope it's at least good and not terrible like the Vacation reboot/sequel.

 

I don't want to say Leslie wouldn't be believable as a scientist but there are white actors who I wouldn't buy as scientists either like Channing Tatum. Denise Richards as a nuclear scientist in a Bond movie or James Franco coming up with a potential cure for Alzheimer's is ridiculous to me.  Dolph Lundgren has a degree in chemical engineering but if he played a chemist in a lab with a white coat in a movie I'd be like "Oh come on!" I believe Wiig, McCarthy as scientists just because they're believable as nerds, not because they're white. McKinnon seems crazy in the Christopher Lloyd as Doc Brown way.

Edited March 3, 2016 by VCRTracking

[CaughtOnTape]

Kate with "Is it the hair?" had me rollin'.  My God she's hilarious.

[lovemytvshows]

I was quite meh about this until the trailer dropped and it looked like it would be a fun, enjoyable movie. Kate McKinnon is killing it in the trailer! That said, I'm just waiting for that pin to drop. You know the one...the meninist one....

[nobodyyoucare]

The trailer just gives me a bad feeling about this reboot. Honestly if they wanted to go all PC and have it be good they should just made a live action version of the Extreme Ghostbusters cartoon. 

[benteen]

The special effects look good but the movie looks dumb.  It does feel like a bad parody of the first movie.

[DollEyes]

Lied the trailer, but I would love the movie if Chris Hemsworth's character turns out to be gay.

[Bruinsfan]

I'd love a Michael Bay Transformers movie if it featured Hemsworth being cute with his character's boyfriend.

 

However, the cast is very funny (and Kristen Wiig is also there), and the ghosts look fantastic.

Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks that about the cast! I'm not as sold on the ghosts CGI though. The original was made 30 years ago, how is it that its effects were better than what I'm seeing in a current movie?

[CofCinci]

Too much CGI.  I'll still take my daughter to watch it with me.

[BetterButter]

[Racj82]

This trailer is completely underwhelming. I love seeing how wildly opinions are differing on this one. But, pretty much all of the bits weren't funny, not impressed by the CGI and I get no feeling of chemistry among the leads. The final product could indeed be good that trailer was weak sauce.

[nobodyyoucare]

[JessePinkman]

The problem with the CGI is that it's waaaaay too bright, it's like someone inserted Pixar coloring into the movie, it looks really weird. It reminded me Electro in Amazing Spider-Man 2.

 

 

No lie, this is infinitely better than the full trailer. Also I just wanna say I have never seen either of the Ghostbusters so "destroying it's legacy" means zip to me (I had NO clue Ghostbusters had such a rabid fandom, actually I don't think it does to this degree but making women the leads brought out a lot of misogynists out of the woodwork).

Edited March 6, 2016 by JessePinkman

[Dancingjaneway]

I cannot wait to see this! I love Kate M on SNL and I'm so excited that she is in this. I love the little Young Frankenstein nod in the preview. I also love the other girls in the movie so that makes this movie a must see for me. A lot of the blow back has been from men/guys who are butt hurt over the fact that it's an all female cast. All I can say is suck it! 

[nobodyyoucare]

I cannot wait to see this! I love Kate M on SNL and I'm so excited that she is in this. I love the little Young Frankenstein nod in the preview. I also love the other girls in the movie so that makes this movie a must see for me. A lot of the blow back has been from men/guys who are butt hurt over the fact that it's an all female cast. All I can say is suck it! 

No its not that is all female its that is pandering and is a cash grab to mass market. In other words soulless and an insult to the franchise. Sorry this movie will suck. 

[MisterGlass]

 

The original was made 30 years ago, how is it that its effects were better than what I'm seeing in a current movie?

 

I think this is a difference in aim as much as anything.  They are going for over-the-top here, and the originals were looking to make things that felt as real as they could manage.  I personally liked the practical parts of the original effects.  Not all of them hold up, but they look better than you'd expect.

 

 

No lie, this is infinitely better than the full trailer. Also I just wanna say I have never seen either of the Ghostbusters so "destroying it's legacy" means zip to me (I had NO clue Ghostbusters had such a rabid fandom, actually I don't think it does to this degree but making women the leads brought out a lot of misogynists out of the woodwork).

 

If you've got some time to spare the first one is worth seeing.  It is very much of the 80s.  There are places where the behavior is dated, especially from a particular character toward women.  Since he's deliberately written as a borderline creeper, a lot of this comes across as the character as much as the era.  There is also a remarkable amount of smoking.  However, there is some still-excellent comedy ranging from highbrow to gutter, and moments of real suspense.  There are some great one-liners.  The final act is absurd and iconic.  And if you have an interest in practical and optical effects, the movie is a good touchstone.  By the sequel, digital effects were in use (at least that's what I recall from the commentary track).

 

I grew up with the movie (and cartoon series), and I think a lot of the people complaining did too.  Egon is still a nerd icon for me.  After the divisiveness of the Star Wars prequels I think people are very prepared to freak out at the possibility of childhood icons being mishandled.  I like the idea of an all female main cast, but if the writing is bad there will be a limit to what Melissa McCarthy et al. can do.  All I can say at the moment is that the tone looks much more openly campy based on this trailer than the original, where the situation was nuts but the people and the gadgets were grounded.  I'll keep an open mind, but I hope that the trailer overemphasizes the amount of slapstick in the final movie.  I don't want the characters to behave like fools, and I want the film to be clever as well as funny.

[nobodyyoucare]

I'd love a Michael Bay Transformers movie if it featured Hemsworth being cute with his character's boyfriend.

 

Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks that about the cast! I'm not as sold on the ghosts CGI though. The original was made 30 years ago, how is it that its effects were better than what I'm seeing in a current movie?

Because somehow people think CGI is cheaper when in reality its often more expensive to get great quality compared to practical effects. Its when both are combined and the CGI complemented real effects that it gets great to the point where CGI effects look like they are practical. For example the crew of Davy Jones ship. You would swear the faces were some very sophisticated prosthetic mask but they were CGI. The big problem with pure CGI is it is too fake looking. There is no weight to the life form or whatever.

 

[Shannon L.]

Someone Recut the New Ghostbusters Trailer and Made It So Much Better

 

So what do you think?  I was ok with the original-even sent it to my son with the message "I could probably be convinced to go see this"--but I do think something along these lines would have been better. 

[Morrigan2575]

I didn't like the trailer.

[NumberCruncher]

As a woman, I have issues with people accusing those who don't like what they're seeing in the trailer as being sexist. I didn't like it either. Why? Because it comes off looking like a parody of the original and your typical Melissa McCarthy comedy with a Ghostbusters facade. I'm not a purist in any sense of the word--I've loved plenty of remakes--but this just looks disappointing. :(

[VCRTracking]

Hidden website taken from a shot of the whiteboard in the trailer:

http://www.paranormalstudieslab.com

 

It has this video:

 

I will say this, they put a lot of thought into the equipment!

Edited March 7, 2016 by VCRTracking

[NoWillToResist]

I will admit that I don't particularly care one way or another about this movie. I haven't seen anything to make me interested in watching it (and this is not coming from someone who is rabidly clinging to happy childhood memories of the original).

 

The sexist blowback I've read about this all-female version is annoying to say the least, because there are shitty remakes and re-imaginings and reboots and re-visitings of every fucking movie out there; why should Ghostbusters be an exception?  Hell, at least the original is old enough to deserve an update, unlike other movies/franchises out there. Having an all-female reboot doesn't ruin the original, FFS. The IMO shitty Star Wars prequels haven't ruined eps 4-6 for me. So what's the fucking drama?

 

That said, girl power or not, this doesn't look very appealing.

[NumberCruncher]

I will admit that I don't particularly care one way or another about this movie. I haven't seen anything to make me interested in watching it (and this is not coming from someone who is rabidly clinging to happy childhood memories of the original).

 

The sexist blowback I've read about this all-female version is annoying to say the least, because there are shitty remakes and re-imaginings and reboots and re-visitings of every fucking movie out there; why should Ghostbusters be an exception?  Hell, at least the original is old enough to deserve an update, unlike other movies/franchises out there. Having an all-female reboot doesn't ruin the original, FFS. The IMO shitty Star Wars prequels haven't ruined eps 4-6 for me. So what's the fucking drama?

 

That said, girl power or not, this doesn't look very appealing.

The drama, for me, isn't that there's a remake. It's that it looks pretty awful and painfully unoriginal. Unlike most people I don't hate the Star Wars prequels but even they weren't trying to re-tell episodes 4-6. I stand by my earlier critique that all this really looks like is the original Ghostbusters plot told in a really OTT, cliched, and slapstick way. I don't give a rat's ass that it's an all-female cast (and I say that as someone who thinks there aren't nearly enough female-centered movies). I do care if someone tries to remake a classic and does a crappy job of it. I'm hoping that this trailer is simply making it look worse than it really is, but that still doesn't solve the problem that retelling the same story again (only spoofier!) reinforces exactly why it never needed to be re-made in the first place.

As for those who are clearly hating on it using blatant sexist commentary, they can go crying all the way back to their moms' basements as far as I'm concerned. I just hope everyone else can be discerning enough to realize they make up only a small part of the criticism.

[NoWillToResist]

The drama, for me, isn't that there's a remake. It's that it looks pretty awful and painfully unoriginal. Unlike most people I don't hate the Star Wars prequels but even they weren't trying to re-tell episodes 4-6. I stand by my earlier critique that all this really looks like is the original Ghostbusters plot told in a really OTT, cliched, and slapstick way. I don't give a rat's ass that it's an all-female cast (and I say that as someone who thinks there aren't nearly enough female-centered movies). I do care if someone tries to remake a classic and does a crappy job of it. I'm hoping that this trailer is simply making it look worse than it really is, but that still doesn't solve the problem that retelling the same story again (only spoofier!) reinforces exactly why it never needed to be re-made in the first place.

As for those who are clearly hating on it using blatant sexist commentary, they can go crying all the way back to their moms' basements as far as I'm concerned. I just hope everyone else can be discerning enough to realize they make up only a small part of the criticism.

 

I am fully prepared for it to be bad (based on the trailer I saw). :)  The issue I have is the drama I witnessed happened when the all-female remake was announced. No one would have had a clue about its quality (or lack thereof) but there was such immediate backlash, it was ridiculous. And sadly, most of what I saw was bitching about there being an all-female cast. Obviously not every person who objected did so due to the gender swap, but the ones who were angered by it were very vocal.

 

It's not like Hollywood has never dared to remake a movie before. Of course it's painfully unoriginal. Have you seen the crop of movies these days? ;) The theatres are full of sequels, trilogies, spin offs, remakes, reboots, adaptations etc.  I just can't explain why THIS remake was vilified from the moment it was announced unless it was due to the gender swap. That's the only thing IMO that sets it apart from everything other crapulent and unnecessary remake that Hollywood churns out...

[VCRTracking]

It's tough because it's actually very late to get the trailer so close to the release. Usually the first trailer for a comedy that contains a lot of footage is at least 6 months before the movie comes out(Feig and McCarthy's last movie Spy for example) With Ghostbusters it's 5 months until release. It has to be because the special effects weren't ready until now and I think a lot of the gags and any good scenes involve post-production that's still going on.

[MrsRafaelBarba]

I like Melissa McCarthy, but.....

NOPE!

[nobodyyoucare]

 

The issue I have is the drama I witnessed happened when the all-female remake was announced. No one would have had a clue about its quality (or lack thereof) but there was such immediate backlash, it was ridiculous.

Because of the reason why the all female cast was given. I forget what the director/writers/studio gave but it was pure pandering. 

 

Also a lot of people were thinking it was Ghostbusters 3 and you still have people that do think this is Ghostbusters 3 and wonder why the hell the original ghostbusters haven't been shown in the trailer.

[CofCinci]

Why is the African-American character a non-scientist again?

[VCRTracking]

Okay I like the international trailer a a lot better:

[AstaCharles]

The ghosts look horrible. I remember reading a quote from Feig that he was planning to make this "darker"?I think it was posted here a few months ago. They all look the same, except for Slimer.

[Spartan Girl]

Well, for everyone that's been complaining about Leslie Jones being the only non-scientist, it just came out that Leslie Jones' part was originally written for Melissa.

[VCRTracking]

I could see how Patty could have been played by Melissa McCarthy.

 

This New Yorker article on Leslie Jones reveals the "I don't know if this is a race thing" line after being dropped while crowd sufring was ad libbed by her. The original line was "I can't believe you let me fall."

 

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/04/ready-for-prime-time

Edited March 11, 2016 by VCRTracking

[ribboninthesky1]

If only Rose Byrne was cast instead of Kristen Wiig!

[Traveller519]

Not that the trailer did a lot for me, but I don't remember being blown away by the Trailer for Spy either, and Feig and McCarthy piloted that one to near perfection.

 

There's obviously more at play here than this being an "unnecessary and pandering" remake too. Robocop was unecessary and pandering, and looked terrible from the trailer, and was terrible, and the trailer for that film has near unanimous thumbs up on YouTube. 21 Jump Street was unecessary, and no one knew how it well it would turn out, near unanimous thumbs up.

 

Ghostbusters has a 70% Thumbs Down rating. People are going out of there way to shit on the movie.

[JessePinkman]

I just wonder why...Ghostbusters of all things? I mean if they remade The Godfather and suddenly it was the Godmother and about Michelle Corleone MAYBE (but not really) I could understand spitting on the legacy of some great piece of cinema but it's fucking Ghostbusters...whoooo gives a shit? It's absolutely mind-boggling.

[Bruinsfan]

I loved the original and consider it one of the funniest comedies made in my lifetime. But as the original actors can't be reassembled for a sequel—unless Harold Ramis returns to appear in it as an actual ghost—and showed no interest in doing so for decades while all four were alive, I have no problem with recasting funny women (plus Kristen Wiig) in a modern update.

[Watcher0363]

I just wonder why...Ghostbusters of all things? I mean if they remade The Godfather and suddenly it was the Godmother and about Michelle Corleone MAYBE (but not really) I could understand spitting on the legacy of some great piece of cinema but it's fucking Ghostbusters...whoooo gives a shit? It's absolutely mind-boggling.

 

 

I loved the original and consider it one of the funniest comedies made in my lifetime. But as the original actors can't be reassembled for a sequel—unless Harold Ramis returns to appear in it as an actual ghost—and showed no interest in doing so for decades while all four were alive, I have no problem with recasting funny women (plus Kristen Wiig) in a modern update.

When it comes to comedies the original Ghostbusters is an Godfather or at least in the same rarefied air. I must admit when I was dragged to see this movie I did not quite get it or like it. Rolled my eyes so hard at the Stay Puff Marshmallow man, I feared they were going to lock up. But over the years I have come to realize just how good and clever Ghostbusters is.

 

Making an all female Ghostbusters team even 16 years into the 21st. century is still to unbelievable. How the film maker can be so blind to this is still beyond belief to me. Sure women have made great strides in science and the fantasy world of geekdom, but enough to pull off an all female Ghostbusters?  I just do not see it and will not bother to see it in the theater anyway. And this coming from a guy who thinks that the Heat with Sandra and Melissa, with every joke fully telegraphed, was one of the funniest movies made in the last ten years. And if they make Heat 2, I will be there with full price fare, because that is just how MotherF***ing funny I found the heat to be.

[JessePinkman]

Making an all female Ghostbusters team even 16 years into the 21st. century is still to unbelievable. How the film maker can be so blind to this is still beyond belief to me. Sure women have made great strides in science and the fantasy world of geekdom, but enough to pull off an all female Ghostbusters? 

 

Could you expound upon what you mean by this before I go in? Thanks.

[Watcher0363]

Could you expound upon what you mean by this before I go in? Thanks.

Sure. I would assume that this movie is being made to make money. With opening weekend being still very crucial to the movie industry. I ask who is the audience for this movie. The purist will not be rushing to see this, it is to radical of a departure with the all female leading cast. The all female lead cast, does open up the chick flick label, which it has already been placed in. Which is fine because women do generate movie revenue. However the subject matter, women chasing ghost with science equipment and gobbly gook techno babble. Even the Star Trek movies have dispensed with the gobbly gook techno babble to gain a larger audience. The purist hating the concept from the beginning, and trying to sell a supernatural comedy to an female audience is two strikes against the movie. A third may even be the African American lead being characterized as a non scientist or professor or learned it type.

 

Over a year ago I heard the director saying he thought people were some pejorative for not liking his all female concept. I thought to myself he has the right to that opinion. But do you know what he doesn't have the right to. 50% of my weekly disposable income for a night at the movies. I took some me time to see a movie alone this week, the family of three in front of me paid $56 to see a movie. Non 3D or Imax. I thought if I was here on a date night going to an Imax showing I could easily drop $60 dollars for two people.

 

The past two years have seen a lot of big budget movies trying to mass market movies to a large diverse audience. Failing to realize that their concept is not appealing to a large diverse audience. Any movie you can get made is a win for someone. But that will not guarantee success at the box office. Especially when you are being told from the beginning you are going down the wrong track. The Ghostbusters reboot may be a runaway hit, but I seriously doubt it. It just will not be worth me taking a chance of paying $30 an hour for some ones novel or re-imagined concept.

 

To me and perhaps to a few others around the world. The Ghostbusters reboot falls into the. I see you were able to get your novel movie concept made, and spent $140 million to make it. Well good luck with that. 

[AstaCharles]

I just wonder why...Ghostbusters of all things? I mean if they remade The Godfather and suddenly it was the Godmother and about Michelle Corleone MAYBE (but not really) I could understand spitting on the legacy of some great piece of cinema but it's fucking Ghostbusters...whoooo gives a shit? It's absolutely mind-boggling.

I'm female, grew up with the movie and in my circle of nerd friends (both male and female ) we pretty much consider Ghostbusters on the same level as the Godfather. The same level as Jaws, Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark. Those type of blockbuster films.

Now we're not frothing at the mouth in anger but most of us are just disappointed. I'm probably the biggest fan of Ghostbusters from my group, so I'm working on dealing with my disappointment. I remember my friend (who is a huge Star Wars fan) being very mopey when George Lucas' awful Episode One came out. We had a good laugh at that. Now it's my turn, lol.

ETA: I think the movie is one of the top 30 greatest comedies of the American Film Institute. I had to check Wikipedia, I remember reading that a long time ago.

Edited March 24, 2016 by AstaCharles

[JessePinkman]

Sure. I would assume that this movie is being made to make money. With opening weekend being still very crucial to the movie industry. I ask who is the audience for this movie. The purist will not be rushing to see this, it is to radical of a departure with the all female leading cast. The all female lead cast, does open up the chick flick label, which it has already been placed in. Which is fine because women do generate movie revenue. However the subject matter, women chasing ghost with science equipment and gobbly gook techno babble. Even the Star Trek movies have dispensed with the gobbly gook techno babble to gain a larger audience. The purist hating the concept from the beginning, and trying to sell a supernatural comedy to an female audience is two strikes against the movie. A third may even be the African American lead being characterized as a non scientist or professor or learned it type.

 

Over a year ago I heard the director saying he thought people were some pejorative for not liking his all female concept. I thought to myself he has the right to that opinion. But do you know what he doesn't have the right to. 50% of my weekly disposable income for a night at the movies. I took some me time to see a movie alone this week, the family of three in front of me paid $56 to see a movie. Non 3D or Imax. I thought if I was here on a date night going to an Imax showing I could easily drop $60 dollars for two people.

 

I'm finding how all of this relates to your previous comment hard to grasp but alrighty.

 

I'm female, grew up with the movie and in my circle of nerd friends (both male and female ) we pretty much consider Ghostbusters on the same level as the Godfather. The same level as Jaws, Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark. Those type of blockbuster films.

 

That's so odd to me, until this movie was announced I never heard Ghostbusters referred to in the same rarefied air as the movies you listed and I consider myself pretty well versed in popular movies, even ones I haven't seen. The more you know, I guess. 

 

And I totally get the disappointment, I was disappointed when Sony rebooted Spider-Man less than a decade after the last trilogy. 

[Zuleikha]

Now we're not frothing at the mouth in anger but most of us are just disappointed.

But what are you disappointed about? This is a movie being made by a comedy director with a string of hit comedies under his belt and starring four respected, accomplished comedians. The logical assumption is that it will be hysterical as hell. 

 

As far as I can tell, literally the only issue people have is that the team is all female.  Which whatever... people can hate what they hate, but we should be critical about why that's an issue and not try to pretend it's this innocent, devoid of sexism thing. Heck, one article I saw started with FB data to show that Ghostbusters' fandom is a 50/50 gender split, but then used that fact to argue for the importance of a mixed gender team. Because somehow, it was fine for women to love a 100% male team but it's just beyond the pale for Feig to think men could judge an all-female team simply on the basis of whether the movie is funny or not. Or if a person wants to make the argument that it was stupid to think men wouldn't be alienated simply by the fact of an all-female team, let's be critical about what that says about men.

 

However the subject matter, women chasing ghost with science equipment and gobbly gook techno babble. Even the Star Trek movies have dispensed with the gobbly gook techno babble to gain a larger audience. The purist hating the concept from the beginning, and trying to sell a supernatural comedy to an female audience is two strikes against the movie.

First, it's ridiculous to say that the subject matter is science equipment and gobbledy gook techno babble. The techno babble is hardly significant or gatekeeping. I had no problems with it when I was seven.

 

Second, what on earth is your basis for claiming that gobbledy gook techno babble chases off female interest? That sounds like some fake geek girls rhetoric crap. Pop sci-fi movies have always featured techno babble and women have always been a significant part of fandom (and often discounted as somehow not real, even as write the fanfic, publish the fanzines/fansites, create the fanart, and organize/volunteer at conventions). Do you somehow think Ghostbusters was such a huge success with no women and girls enjoying it?

[revbfc]

But what are you disappointed about? This is a movie being made by a comedy director with a string of hit comedies under his belt and starring four respected, accomplished comedians. The logical assumption is that it will be hysterical as hell.

As far as I can tell, literally the only issue people have is that the team is all female. Which whatever... people can hate what they hate, but we should be critical about why that's an issue and not try to pretend it's this innocent, devoid of sexism thing. Heck, one article I saw started with FB data to show that Ghostbusters' fandom is a 50/50 gender split, but then used that fact to argue for the importance of a mixed gender team. Because somehow, it was fine for women to love a 100% male team but it's just beyond the pale for Feig to think men could judge an all-female team simply on the basis of whether the movie is funny or not. Or if a person wants to make the argument that it was stupid to think men wouldn't be alienated simply by the fact of an all-female team, let's be critical about what that says about men.

First, it's ridiculous to say that the subject matter is science equipment and gobbledy gook techno babble. The techno babble is hardly significant or gatekeeping. I had no problems with it when I was seven.

Second, what on earth is your basis for claiming that gobbledy gook techno babble chases off female interest? That sounds like some fake geek girls rhetoric crap. Pop sci-fi movies have always featured techno babble and women have always been a significant part of fandom (and often discounted as somehow not real, even as write the fanfic, publish the fanzines/fansites, create the fanart, and organize/volunteer at conventions). Do you somehow think Ghostbusters was such a huge success with no women and girls enjoying it?

I can't speak for everyone, but I do know that the trailer disappointed me. I love all of the actors, Paul Feig has directed some funny movies, and I saw none of that in trailers. All of the clips used looked like discarded takes and no amount of vfx can hide that. And why should I expect more from a trailer? Because every other movie trailer I've seen featuring these actors (especially McCarthy) has had a few VERY funny moments that hooked me. I want to like this movie because I really like the actors and know they can and have been hilarious in the past. This may just be a misfire of a movie.