There's one important fact film scholars and some film makers tend to forget: film is entertainment. When you ask any newcomer to the world of film production they'll lecture you on the art of film and so too will numerous academic authors. While it is true that film is art this is something every film student needs to forget when making and watching a film because when all is said and done film is just story telling using a visual medium with the sole purpose to entertain the audience. Which as a film maker it is something I've had to unlearn.
That being said this new ghostbusters film is certainly entertainment. There are many films out there whose sole purpose is to entertain, to allow the audience to switch off for a couple of hours. Unfortunately if you despise these flicks this film is not for you. This film is not high art, nor will it endure the ages like the original, but it will certainly give you a couple of hours of giggles.
I'd like to say now that I did have fun watching this film. Though I'd recommend a little alcohol to fully appreciate it (but you never heard that from me).
An important part of any film/story is its characters and here these become the film's blessing and curse. Wait what? Well here's what I mean. We have some great, fun characters who are sadly under used. The film is too busy trying to progress it's weak story with endless references to the original that it actually forgets moments it set up earlier, brushes over character development and generally creates a mess of a story/plot holes when you actually think back on it. Ghosts can die? What? Where did that come from?
Jillian Holtzmann is a fine example of my point about characters being under used. Out of all them she is the most fun, interesting and hilarious yet who she is is never really looked at. Near the end she toasts everyone with tears the old how she never had a family until now speech. Touching yes but maybe if we actually know her back story it would have more impact.
Patty Tolan is another under used character. It could just be me but she had the feeling of being purely comic relief but initially thought of as having more to offer. A bit like Kevin why does he suddenly want to become a ghostbuster? Set up and dropped. Again like Bill Murray's cameo built up as though it's central to the story, dropped and never mentioned again as though it never was.
This is where, I feel, the film has its drawbacks. There's little time at all to breath and from reading an interview with the director I feel there must have been a lot cut out for time and if so it shows. I feel we could have suffered an extra half hour breathing time to fully flesh out the story and I feel this film could have been so much better for it.
Where this film succeeds is where you forget the lacking features (and this is fairly easy considering the pace of the film) and just sit back and enjoy the ride.
To round up if you compare this remake to the original which is better? Do I really need to answer this question? As a film in its own right it's not a bad one, not great but not awful. I'd say if you're in the mood for a giggle...maybe a little tipsy then give it a go you might enjoy it. It's a lot of daft, crazy, mind numbing entertainment. If only they didn't try to keep it similar to the original but make it it's own thing this film could have been much better.
No comments:
Post a Comment