Ghostbusters (2016) [It does not inhabit the same universe as the originals.]
I get STARZ for free and I noticed that the 2016 Ghostbusters was going to be on, so I recorded it. I was out of things to keep me company while doing tedious work on my web site, so I started watching/listening to it.
Since the movie came out, various people have been arguing that the film is a continuation, not a remake or a reboot. The article linked to below says that although the movie is supposed to be a reboot, you can believe that it inhabits the same universe as the originals without any problems:
Here's the interesting thing, though; if you want to believe that the Ghostbusters reboot inhabits the same universe as the originals, then you won't have any problems. There are two key scenes that leave the possibility wide open.
It's Not Wide Open — There Are Many Problems
At around 19 minutes, the women are excited about seeing a ghost and say they were right, they weren't crazy, and ghosts are real. If this movie inhabited the same universe, they'd already know that ghost are real thanks to the original Ghostbusters team.
At around 23 minutes, they say they can become the first scientists to prove the existence of the paranormal. All they have to do is find an entity and capture it. If this movie inhabited the same universe, they'd know the original Ghostbusters team already did that.
At around 35 minutes, a graffiti "artist" ends up painting what becomes the Ghostbusters logo. If this movie inhabited the same universe, the logo would already exist.
At around 42 minutes, they are surprised that their new car is a hearse. If this movie inhabited the same universe, they'd know that the original Ghostbusters used a hearse.
At around 46 minutes, a guy on the news calls them "GHOSTBUSTERS" and one of them complains that it's not their name and that the news can't just make up a name. If this movie inhabited the same universe, the Ghostbusters name would be famous, not something a news guy just made up.
At around 47 minutes, Bill Murray plays a debunker (Martin Heiss). If this movie inhabited the same universe, wouldn't Bill Murray play a crusty old version of Dr. Peter Venkman who is still trying to get laid every 10 seconds?
At around 1:05 when talking about the cat being out of the bag before, the men are talking about things like UFOs, people dying mysteriously, and the entire town of Langville, Montana going missing, not what happened with the original Ghostbusters team.
At around 1:35, they choose the shape of the giant thing that attacks. Not one mention of something similar happening before. Speaking of not mentioning anything, they don't seem to recognize the huge Stay Puft Marshmallow Man balloon ghost that falls on them at around 1:28.
Since this movie has scenes that are very similar to the original and it has new content, I guess that means it's a remake and a reboot. It's a remakeboot. It is not a continuation. It does not inhabit the same universe as the originals.
This isn't the worst movie I've ever seen, but it's not even close to being as good as the original. It was unfunny for the most part and almost all of the characters were uninteresting. Kate McKinnon's character was about the only one worth watching. You don't really get to know any of them like you did in the original. The director, Paul Feig, can suck it if he thinks the only reason I don't like the movie is because it has them thar cooty-filled females starring in it.
- GoldLeader likes this