Ghostbusters: how watching some dumb movie became a political statement

I didn't watch the original Ghostbusters. Not the movies, the cartoon, or any of the other stuff that was apparently a huge part of so many people's childhood. Apparently. I don't now if it's because I'm too young, or because I wasn't in the US during the nineties. Either way, the new Ghostbusters movie didn't mean much to me. I was vaguely aware of some hoopla going on online because the new movie has women on it, and that's like destroying the original film with feminism and social justice. Or perhaps attacking men and boys with. . . something. I learned long ago not to pay too much attention to any random thing the internet decides is significant.

Still, as I sat at the theater, musing about the ridiculous internet flamewars about this film, I couldn't help but remember that one of our many mass shooters attacked a movie theater during a genre film. For a moment, I considered leaving the theater to sneak into Star Trek, a film that I hadn't heard any "controversy" about. I didn't do that, but at the second I had to exercise a degree of courage to sit down and watch a dumb movie. I don't know when we got to this point as a nation, but it depresses me.

Anyway, Ghostbusters. The trailer. . . well, it starts with the thirty years ago Ghostbusters thing that I don't care about:

Worst, I didn't laugh once. For something that's trying to be a comedy, that's a pretty bad sign. So why did I watch it?

Because Chris Hemsworth is hot. I wish I could say that I was making some kind of feminist political statement, but the truth really is that simple. He's my favorite Avenger. Because he's hot. He had like one shot in the trailer and didn't get to say anything, and he's probably the least cool part of this poster:

But he's still what caught my eye

So how did the movie turn out?

Eh, it was alright. The first act was entertaining and engaging, the second act might as well have been a Zolpidem alternative, but the third act picked right back up. It wasn't particularly funny, except for the gag with Kevin (which, let's be honest, might have had to do with my celebrity crush, let's be real). The rest of the characters. . . were okay. I've forgotten most of their names (note: I watched almost a week ago, but couldn't finish my review for work reasons).

The two less quirky characters had an interesting arc, especially the scientist with a secret interest in the supernatural who was trying to get tenure. While I found McCarthy's character annoying, I liked the role she played in the scientist's story (ugh, I should probably look up these names). Patty was. . . well, my friend seemed to find her stereotypical, but since I'm not Black, I don't think I'd be a very good judge of that. I can only say that Patty didn't make me laugh, though I didn't actively dislike her. The blond engineer type who liked explosives was fun, but her comedic, over-the-top antics somehow didn't mash well with the rest of the film.

Therein lies the biggest issue with this movie. Though it had all the ingredients of a comedy, it wasn't very funny. Aside from Kevin's ridiculous shtick as a dumb-but-gorgeous secretary, most of the quirky characters felt incongruent with unintentionally serious tone. Perhaps serious is an unfair word. . . Adventurous tone probably fits better. Ghostbusters came off as an adventure with comedic tones rather than a comedy with adventurous tones.  

Still, I'm going to recommend this film on the strength of the last act alone. Very few movies that lose me in the second act manage to get me back in the third, so this one gets a nod.