You know, the movie is kind of fascinating in it’s levels of failure. I’ve been thinking about it a lot, and I have a pretty good breakdown on what happened between multiple sources of news and my own analysis. I’ve become somewhat of an expert on the subject. My breakdown contains spoilers, so be warned.
So here’s what happened: With GB3 in production hell, and Sony desperate for a bankable franchise, then executive Amy Pascal wanted a different director than Ivan Reitman, because Reitman was never happy with the scripts, casting, or studio meddling for GB3. When Harold Ramis passed away (wipe away tear) Reitman gave in and let the studio go ahead with a different director. This made Amy Pascal happy, since she didn’t like Reitman, and wanted a female-centric GB. In itself, this concept is fine, and a passing of the torch movie to four female ghostbusters would have been met with far more open arms from the mostly egalitarian fan base.
Mistake #1: The trouble came with her choice of director. Paul Feig not only was tapped to direct, but was given the worst thing you can give a director at Feig’s level “TOTAL CREATIVE CONTROL”. From the Sony email hack, we saw that the entire plot was roughly intact from pitch to shooting, though thankfully he left out the “Ghost-Aliens.”
Now had any studio exec with an ounce of sense read that email (i.e., not Pascal) they would have sent a reply roughly to the tune of “Are you freaking high?!” Paul Feig’s “vision” clashed with the attitudes of his own actresses, who wanted to make a good movie on par with the original in quality, or at least with the Real Ghostbusters cartoon, which McCarthy was supposedly a fan of. On-set arguments were frequent, with Paul Feig pulling his “TOTAL CREATIVE CONTROL” card early and often.
Mistake #2 To start with, rebooting the franchise was a terrible idea. Rebooting most franchises often results in an under-performing movie that utterly fails to energize the one market counted on to bring in money: The fans. Reboots usually have much better special effects, but since they often simply copy the story of the original, rarely adding anything new or engaging to expand on the source material, they’re almost always doomed from the get-go. There have been rare exceptions, but Rebooting has very rarely been proven to be a financially rewarding strategy.
Mistake #3 When a handful of sexist and racist comments appeared on the comments section of the Youtube release of the movie trailer, the marketing execs at Sony had a field day. It’s obvious now that they had always intended to make this movie appear to be a strong feminist icon movie, and were ready to fire with both barrels before the trailer even dropped. Rumor has it many critical comments were deleted while the blatantly misogynistic and racist ones were left intact to foster the illusion that any criticism was from “man-boys” and “misogynists.” This backfired wildly when life-long ghostbusters fans, eager for a worthy continuation, were slapped with these labels for having legitimate concerns about the movie’s quality. The marketing movement, however, didn’t slow down, and actually increased the pace and frequency of the “pro-feminist” angle, going so far as having the main cast insult critical fans on live television. This alienation of the fan base proved to be the single biggest death knell to the opening Box Office weekend, as a significant number of fans stayed home, or waited to watch pirated copies, rather than supporting a franchise that they love. Since franchise movies are dead in the water without the pre-existing fan base, the entire marketing of the film shot itself in the foot, thinking it would help them run faster.
Mistake #4 Re-shooting on the movie began almost immediately after the wrap party. Most of the main cast refused to come back for it. This is why some scenes appear horribly disjointed, and characters seem to be speaking to each other from totally different rooms, with no visible interactions. The cameos of the original cast were handled in a very similar way. It’s obvious that for half the scenes with Bill Murray, he’s sitting in a chair, alone, reciting his lines without passion. Among the film’s many disjointed scenes, this one is particularly jarring as it features the first of two deaths in the movie, before a final battle with a giant cartoon ghost. The move has no consistent tone. This rushed attempt to make Paul Feig’s “vision” an even remotely watchable movie may have done at least as much damage to it as giving Paul Feig TOTAL CREATIVE CONTROL in the first place. In the rush to meet the summer blockbuster season, much of the movie was cut to ribbons, and with limited actress availability for re-shoots, the end result is a complete and utter mess desperate for cohesion.
Mistake #5 Paul Feig obviously hates Ghostbusters. I don’t have any hard evidence on this, but from his attitude, reactions, and the little details I noticed in his movie, it seemed like Paul Feig never wanted to make an actual Ghostbusters movie, and from day one, he had a real resentment of the Ghostbusters fan base. While publicly he’s very nice, it’s obvious from his movie that he abhors the fans, as the movie is almost a perfect mathematical formula for fan alienation: Making it a reboot instead of a sequel, or a ‘passing-of-the-torch’ movie, despite the surviving original cast being on board for cameos, making the villain a bullied nerd with a knack for technology and a fascination with ghosts (basically an evil Egon Spengler, right after Harold Ramis died,) killing Bill Murray’s character after shoehorning in a completely pointless cameo, creating a female Slimer for absolutely no visible story purpose except as a commentary on what a cheap gimmick it is, copying every story beat from the first movie without reverence to source material, and making the end-form of the villain a giant cartoon version of the Ghostbusters trademark symbol, that the ladies then shoot in the crotch. These are just the highlights of a movie that almost brings the plot to a screeching halt at times in order to insult it’s own fan base.
Mistake #6 The movie is not pro-feminist. While the ladies do have about 3-4 minutes of good action scenes and creative ghost-busting, the rest of the movie portrays them as clumsy, egotistical, incompetent, and far less intelligent than they should be. More than that, the male mayor played by Andy Garcia, tells the women that he wants them to continue what they are doing, and he loves it, but that he must badmouth them in the press and brand them as frauds and even potential terrorists. A male authority figure tells the female protagonists that he has total control over their fate, and the women don’t even break free from it in the end. Instead, they receive a reward from the mayor’s office for their cooperation. The female ghostbusters are subjugated to a male authority and it is NEVER shown that they even try to resist this. In general, they just sort of seem to accept most of what happens, rarely trying to intervene in the events of their own lives. When kicked out of the “college,” the women just leave. When Bill Murray demands evidence of the paranormal, they give it to him (fatally,) when the Mayor tells them to take their lumps but keep on working, they don’t even object.
Of course, considering the movie also contains stereotypes that demean men, African-Americans, Asian-Americans, Ghostusters fans, etc… it’s hardly surprising that it’s also ironically misogynist in and of itself.
Ultimately, this movie is nothing but a hard lesson for Sony, but it’s questionable as to whether or not they will learn the right lessons. Since Tom Rothman, the famous monster behind the cancellation of Firefly, the main obstacle to a Deadpool movie, the man who had security throw Brian Singer off the lot during discussion of X-Men3, and who personally greenlit the disastrous Fant4stic movie, is now the exec in charge of most of Sony’s future movies, he probably assumes the failure of the movie is more related to “weak” female-centric stories, lack of popularity of the Ghostbusters brand, or that people don’t like science fiction movies. Sony has a history of being blind to everything but box office numbers, so I wouldn’t expect a Tom Rothman-headed Sony studios to turn out anything decent in the future at all, much less try once again to make Ghostbusters float with a good sequel.
So there’s the breakdown. As a life-long Ghostbusters fan, I did my best to put aside my irritation at this film and try to dive in logically and with a dispassionate eye. While the movie, in my opinion, isn’t as bad as it could have been, it’s still not very good and nowhere near a worthy sequel, much less a startoff movie for a cinematic universe, which was the original intention. The greatest pity is that most of us would absolutely LOVE a Ghostbusters cinematic universe, as there are already fan films and Ghostbusters fan chapters all over the country with the idea that Ghostbusters is ALREADY a franchise. The concept writes itself, and fans would have wholeheartedly embrace this, as every single city and town in America has it’s own unique lore and brand of folk tales to draw on.
If done right, a cinematic universe could even have brought in chapters of Ghostbusters (the fan made ones) to do quick cameos on the big screen, not just delighting fans, but reaching out and showing that he movie was more than a cheap cash grab.
Paul Feig’s Ghostbusters is nothing more than the low-hanging fruit of comedy and film making. Believing that doesn’t make us misogynists or man-baby’s. It makes us fans with a passion.
Sony doesn’t care, never did, and it’s cost them millions upon millions of dollars.
