This Ghostbusters review is both the most and least accurate one yet
Anyone who hasn’t gotten around to seeing the new female-led, Paul Feig-helmed Ghostbusters reboot yet is probably either a raging misogynist, a seething 1980s fanboy, or just someone who had other things to do this weekend. In any event, the film is probably the most frequently reviewed piece of pop culture that 2016 has yet produced, with seemingly everyone taking to the internet to render a weirdly fervent verdict. For months, all the haters and defenders of the film had to go on were the brief clips contained in the ads, but that didn’t stop anyone on YouTube from discussing the new Ghostbusters passionately and in great detail.
Now, the entire, 117-minute movie has landed in theaters, leading to a whole new wave of review videos. It would be impossible to wade through all of them. Life is, after all, finite, the afterlife notwithstanding. But one such video stands out: Onion and ClickHole contributor Jacy Catlin’s self-proclaimed “First honest review.” This is honestly the best place to start, since Catlin’s video is distinctly spoiler-free. In fact, it seems to contain not one bit of reliable information about the movie. And yet, somehow, it manages to very accurately convey the tone of the entire Ghostbusters controversy. Have a look.
In the version of that Catlin apparently saw, either in reality or merely in his mind, Ghostbusters is the story of a woman named Ghostbuster, a nude, overweight, green female ghost who flies around the world in her single-minded quest to coat everyone, everywhere in slime. The movie is just one sliming after another. There’s no more plot or conflict than that, it seems. But Catlin argues, that’s how it should be. In fact, he says, that’s exactly what the original 1984 film was, too, right down to the title character being a woman. “So all of these angry guys saying that the casting of a female in the role of Ghostbuster is ruining their childhood really need to hit rewind on their VHS tapes and watch the original again.” Who could argue with that? Case closed.
[via Exclaim! Comedy]