Ghostbusters, but with Chicks

Have we discussed the recently announced casting of the Ghostbusters reboot? (Again, I do not know the real differences between reboots and reimaginings and whatever.) The Ghostbusters we deserve and want will be starring our pals Kristen Wiig, Leslie Jones, Kate McKinnon, and Melissa McCarthy. Which one will be Egon, do you think? What’s the feminine form of the name Egon? Will Annie Potts still be there? God, I love Annie Potts.
According to feminists I follow on Twitter and Tumblr, there are still a lot of butthurt men out there who are saying that this reboot is “ruining their childhoods” and in response, there are a lot of clever tweets and cartoons that are basically like, “Get over it.

Rumors also started floating around of the reboot (???) of my most beloved of franchises, Indiana Jones, and with hunk-of-the-moment Chris Pratt taking over Indy’s fedora and whip and heavy teaching load. Now, who will play Marcus? Can we just resurrect Denholm Eliot? And can I nominate myself for the role of Marion Ravenwood? I have brown hair and I am willing to open up a bar in Mongolia!

Advertisements

About flanny

Flanny was born and raised in a Detroit suburb, but tells people she's from Detroit without clarification because it makes her sound tough. She is not tough. Her favorite member of One Direction is Louis Tomlinson, and her favorite Agatha Christie detectives are Tommy and Tuppence.
This entry was posted in Movies, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

40 Responses to Ghostbusters, but with Chicks

  1. gnidrah says:

    Cheers Flans, now I can share my story of my (female) boss who told me yesterday, whilst we were discussing Ghostbusters, “women aren’t funny”.

    (I have to be polite to her for the next two weeks, then she leaves and I will get it all out of my system)

  2. facetaco says:

    I love The Ghostbusters, but I don’t think it should be made with ANYBODY except the original cast, regardless of gender. Plus it feels SUPER gimmicky to cast all women, and gimmicks rarely make for good movies. Don’t get me wrong, I’ll for sure be watching this. I just won’t be happy about it.

    And the female form of Egon is Shegon. Obviously.

    • That’s the problem, though–the fact that there are so few movies that prominently feature women that one with–gasp!–FOUR of them feels “gimmicky” to some people. (That said, I do wish we were getting original stories instead of the seemingly endless stream of sequels and prequels and reboots and spin-offs and words have lost all meaning)

      • facetaco says:

        It’s not just that it’s featuring women, but specifically that it’s a reboot of an incredibly popular franchise that replaces the men with women. THAT is the part that makes it gimmicky, in the same way that an all-male Designing Women reboot would feel gimmicky*. And it only concerns me because movies focused around a gimmick tend to forget actual plots and jokes and character development in the process.

        *I would watch the everloving shit out of this. While I don’t like movies based around a gimmick, I DO very much enjoy that in television shows, because you get to watch a slow, beautiful train wreck.

    • Sota says:

      It’s very gimmicky, but are we really surprised about that? Hollywood will do any gimmick they can to sell tickets.

  3. As much as I like Chris Pratt, I’m reeeeally not feeling him as Indy, unless it’s going to be a spin-off type of situation instead of a reboot (man, how I’ve come to loathe that word), and he’s playing a new character.

  4. Controversial opinion: I’m starting to believe that the funniest of these 4 women is Leslie Jones. Can’t wait to see her do more stuff!!!

  5. gnidrah says:

    I am just seeing it as a different film. It’s not about gender or remaking, it’s just a different film, and I am really interested in seeing it.

    THAT SAID IF ANYONE FUCKS WITH BACK TO THE FUTURE… (jk jk)

  6. FRQ says:

    Personally, I’m not board with this, but it has nothing to do with the cast. It really irritates me seeing reboots of movies that were good to begin with, which is why I don’t like either pieces of news.

    • This brings up an issue I’ve always wondered about–why not remake BAD movies, to make them better? I mean, I know the real reason is that those movies don’t have as much of a built in audience and studio execs are paralyzed by fear, but there have been so many films over the years whose stories had potential, but just didn’t come together. Since Hollywood is apparently allergic to originality, they should try to spin some clunkers into gold.

      • FRQ says:

        I’m right there with you. I think Ocean’s 11 is a great example. 21 Jump Street isn’t exactly the same situation, but it’s kind of taking an old cheesy franchise and making it fresh. If they proposed an Ishtar remake with two female leads, that would 100% pique my interest.

        • Yes! Those were both risks that paid off. I’d really like to see more of that kind of thing than all this fixing what ain’t broke.

        • facetaco says:

          Magic Mike should have been an all-male Showgirls remake.

        • That would have been amazing.

        • old man fatima says:

          That would have been so much better than the actual Magic Mike. I will definitely see #2 in theatres with a bottle of wine snuck in under my coat, though. And sidebar, at the end of the movie, Mike leaves the strip club to go to his lady’s house because he chose her over stripping and they are preparing to get sexy as the camera cuts to the credits, but did anybody else want it to stay on them for just a few more minutes because he was 100% still wearing his stripper outfit and I guarantee that he ripped those pants off in one hilarious fluid motion 2 minutes after the movie ended? “I don’t want to date a stripper, Mike.” “Ok.” *strip*

        • Erika says:

          I feel like Sabrina was a remake of a “classic” that wasn’t actually good and strangely the remake was better.

          Sabrina wasn’t the worst movie setting up Audrey Hepburn with a painfully old man (that honor goes to Love in the Afternoon; Gary Cooper seemed like he was going to keel over at any minute in that one), but there are so many things I hated about the original that are resolved in the remake. The original Sabrina goes to one of the best chefs schools in Paris and then apparently blows all that training to become Bogie’s housewife, and Bogart was uncharacteristically stuffy in that movie. I can’t help but think he couldn’t get over how much older he was, and that affected his performance. Harrison Ford, in contrast, really sells his transformation from an over-ambitious businessman to a man in love, or at least I thought so. William Holden is better than Greg Kinnear in every possible way, but that character isn’t important to the plot, so who cares?

  7. catweazle says:

    I have no stake in this as I’ve never seen the original Ghostbusters and don’t really care but my enduring dislike of Kristin Wiig ensures that I will not see this. Sorry not sorry!

    And if they reboot Indiana Jones with Christ Pratt I probably will see it but not in the theater, unless they decide to throw a Ghostbusters-style twist in there and make Indiana be into dudes instead of ladies in which case I will go to a midnight screening.

    • welcometocostcoiloveyou says:

      I have never seen the original Ghostbusters either! I have seen the second one with the painting or something? Clearly I wasn’t too impressed since I don’t remember much about it. That being said, I understand why people would be irritated that their favorite childhood movie was being rebooted, regardless of gender.

      I thought I was the only one who doesn’t find Kristin Wiig that funny. Sorry Kristin Wiig! If her funniest moments are from SNL, then I missed them since I rarely watch that show. I did see her in a movie called Hateship/Loveship, and I thought she was good in a more serious role, although the movie was pretty boring and not so great. I don’t understand the hype over Bridesmaids. I’m happy to see a lady comedy, but I just didn’t think it was that funny. Sorry ladies!

      • catweazle says:

        I tend to like her better in more serious roles because I don’t find her to be all that funny. I mean, I liked Bridesmaids but I didn’t love it. I think maybe some of my dislike comes from the fact that people loooooove her and talk about her like she’s the funniest woman on the planet but she just doesn’t do it for me.

  8. nastyemu says:

    When is someone going to make a sequel/reboot for Troop Beverly Hills?

    • flanny says:

      All those girls are adults now with various levels of famousness. I’d watch a reboot where Jenny Lewis was a troop leader and sang “Do the Freddie.”

      • nastyemu says:

        Perfect. Who do we get to be the leader of the red feathers? Also, we definitely need to find roles for Carla Gugino and Kellie Martin, we can leave out Tori Spelling.

  9. nastyemu says:

    The only problem I have with these reboots is that they give them the identical name. There were way too many times when scrolling through the channel guide I came across The Karate Kid and got really exited, only to have it be that Jaden Smith turd.

  10. old man fatima says:

    Thankfully the only winging I’ve seen about this is that it’s a classic and stop remaking our entire childhood. I think this is a better bet than a lot of other remakes, though, because there were more than enough ghosts just in one city to keep those 4 dudes busy, so there must be other ghostbusters elsewhere, right? It’s not like remaking Indiana Jones, because there is only one Indy. Or remaking Band of Brothers with ladies, because women didn’t hold combat roles in those days. There is nothing inherently masculine about busting ghosts and, as all of our favourite TV shows will show you, there were a lot more paranormal investigators than our 4 friends from the 80s.

    Also, the cast is great and I like what I’ve seen from Paul Feig so far. I’ll be there opening night in costume, 100%.

  11. mordonez says:

    So I guess I would say this. Why is everything always a reboot? And that’s not to say don’t make this lady Ghostbusters, it’s why oh why does everything always start over? Spiderman 3 (bad) was followed by the Amazing Spiderman (dunno, didn’t see), but Amazing Spiderman started with the origin story of the character, AGAIN. We totally know the bit about his uncle dying and he was bit by a spider and the whole thing. Really, we know already! Spiderman was created in 1962!

    Sort of the same thing with Tim Burton and Nolan’s first Batman films–again Batman’s “deal” is not a mystery to us– at theater with parents, parents killed, eventually becomes Batman. Great. Stop telling me about it.

    And so here, if this is intended to remake the first Ghostbusters movie, I am against it. I mean it could be Zack Galifinakis, Danny Pudi, Louis CK and a re-animated Phil Hartman and I would be against it, if we’re just remaking the first movie.

    If not, bring it on!

    Page 1 of new Ghostbusters Screenplay: “Welp, NYC sure has been beset by supernatural entities ever since the original Ghostbusters retired to go live in the Bahamas, but us four women somehow all find ourselves answering a weird classified ad placed by (surprise Dan Ackroyd cameo) to take over the franchise. ”

    If THAT”s the deal, then full steam ahead–I love Kristin Wiig and Kate Mckinnon, the other two are also fine, and Paul Feig brought you Wet Hot American Summer, so what more do we want? Other than, of course, totally original stories, or totally original Intellectual Properties, if you’d care grab your handy wastebasket and retch a bit.

Comments are closed.