Ghostbusters

Sometimes in my English composition classes, I have ambitious students who wants to try something different. He wants to write his personal essay about his family but in the form of a hard-boiled detective mystery. She’ll want to write about her first job as an epic poem. One student from years ago claimed he was going to prove the existence of God with an 8 page research paper.

Sometimes I gently redirect these students and sometimes I tell them to just go for it. When I tell them it’s okay to do something ambitious or unlikely, the one thing I say is that my only criterion is success. If it works, it works and that’s what matters most.

This is the attitude with which I approached the remake of Ghostbusters. In my opinion, the 1984 original directed by Ivan Reitman is a perfect film. The writing, casting, and performances are about as perfectly calibrated as they can be. After more than 30 years, the original is still, if you’ll pardon the pun, monstrously entertaining.

So it’s either very ambitious or coldly calculating or just a little reckless to remake such a beloved film. But Bridesmaids director (and Michigan native) Paul Feig has spearheaded a 21^st century version that the internet has been buzzing about for the last two years. (As a side note, there was a strong misogynistic reaction against the casting of women as the leads. People who had this concern are cretinous knuckledraggers and don’t deserve the attention I am giving them at this moment.)

Anyway, going into it, I knew very well that no one was going to match  the original But my only criterion was success, I decided. If it worked, it worked.  

Here’s what’s successful about the new Ghostbusters: first and foremost, Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones. The two Saturday Night Live cast members are unpredictable, funny, and original while still occupying the roles they’re filling from the first film, that of nerdy tech geek and streetwise outsider coming to the group of scientists. McKinnon’s performance in particular is unabashed. As with Bill Murray’s 1984 performance, she give the appearance that she’s making it all up as she goes and finds it all delightful. Her clear joy combined with her distinctive quirk easily make her the standout of the film. Surprisingly, McKinnon makes a convincing action hero during her solo moment during the climactic battle with an army of ghosts. Whereas it was funny watching Kristen Wiig’s awkwardness in battle, McKinnon was actually exciting.  

Leslie Jones, while perhaps less unpredictable, can still make just about any situation funny simply by yelling about it. I about choked on my popcorn when her character Patty exorcises an evil spirit from Melissa McCarthy’s character by smacking her across the face and shouting, “The power of Patty compels you!” I appreciate the Exorcist reference but it’s her angry/panicky delivery that makes it really funny.

Chris Hemsworth also gets credit for playing Kevin, the world’s dumbest and (therefore most entertaining) secretary to the new Ghostbusters. Hemsworth shows a fun lack of self-consciousness and gets a lot of comedic mileage out of playing up his good looks and absolute lack of basic human intelligence.

Beyond that, the story is sort of unimportant. Melissa McCarthy and Kristen Wiig both do their typical schtick and do just fine. The special effects are fine but pretty standard for an expensive Hollywood blockbuster franchise starter.

The filmmakers embraced the film’s heritage and loaded the movie with cameos and winking references galore. Maybe it was smarter to do that than to ignore it, but the references became distracting after a while.

Still, considering this film could have been a giant dumpster fire of unmet expectations, the fact that it was not makes me want to label it a success. It’s not a perfect Ghostbusters movie, but that’s okay. There’s already been one of those.