“Ghostbusters”: the Other is not necessary 30.07.2016




What made “Ghostbusters” such enduring classics? Almost all of the iconic Hollywood hits of the last decade, a film by Ivan in new York was already risky as a concept; the blend of Comedy and horror, albeit with a serious bias towards the first, historically much more common in film visionary and cult, in “the Hunters” as inalienable became more fireworks and special effects, which threatened to overshadow everything else. The answer was found mainly in the sardonic humor of bill Murray, who became the leading element of the spectacle; however, the force of his charisma, the actor not only outweighed the aforesaid Ghost, but overshadowed stronger than it should, other people in the frame.

Comical equanimity Murray became the best contrast for the ghosts and their tendency to create in the frame of anarchy. Add shared quick pace and successfully deployed a handful of ideas — green kartofelnikova licking, Sigourney weaver in almost a missing dress, perfectly nasty William Atherton and, of course, song — and born movie could live happily ever after in any family with a VCR. But this formula was not stable, which clearly showed the second part, trying to extract a meager joke of Murray’s communication with infants and habits of eccentric secondary characters and is now looking like any of the countless sequels where everyone pretends that they don’t just work off the fee.

Ghostbusters
trailers

For all its merits, the original was never a sacred text, and because the third movie with a Quartet of tired old men never come true (no matter how convinced yourself otherwise Dan Aykroyd), to turn over a new leaf remake-restart was perfectly reasonable. Most importantly, as always — the balance between nods to the original and own spirit, and Paul Feig knew it right away; in front of us, with all the consequences, it was “Ghostbusters” from the author “Spy”. With no R rating here, however, still had meaning.

In practice, this means that there is humor on almost every taste — verbal, visual, nigeriano, absurd, parody — which is served without strict discipline (before that American comedians at all far away) and, by default, does not work every time, but this is unimportant, because one joke is quickly followed by another. The weakest impression in this plan produce duty references to other movies (“don’t be like the mayor from “Jaws”) and, significantly, cameo is the only actively useless and distracting moments in the film. Towards the end of the over a Comedy of ideas is perfectly visible in the awkward stage dancing of the military under hypnosis, the first of which is given on the film itself and the second for the end credits.

Comedy variety is reflected in the cast, where, importantly, no one is trying to imitate anyone from the original, but all work in the usual typecasting — Wiig goes from one awkward situation to another, McCarthy alternates kindness with overexcitement (if one of the children’s rating and stopping completely to turn around, it to her; however, other viewers, on the contrary, breathe a sigh of relief), Leslie Jones relies on shouting and sarcasm.

The local “hunters” to a much greater extent than the first four, are the team with equal divided by duration, but among them is its star Kate McKinnon, whose Holzmann gives the impression gained human form of bugs Bunny or benevolently-minded Joker. The only one here not banal things like backstory or even a hint of development, it is the eternal bearer of chaos with manic eyes and unpredictable energy, able to steal scenes even when you are in the blur in the background. Separately smart that she plays the role of the inventor; she divorced from reality just enough to not doubt its ability to almost pull out of the air any pseudoscientific gadget with a complicated name.

The men, on their side, together step back to the role of optional villains, preventing government officials and secretaries scattered. In other words, they worked here approximately the same extent that women in countless men movies except that nobody takes up the role of the weaver but also this is good because a romantic line here, nobody gave up, and her absence is still a little bit moves a remake of the original. At the same time, no one in the frame does not become an object of ridicule; even the character of Hemsworth (whose post-marvel future, seems to be in comedies) in his masterpiece of idiocy on good touching, and it is a pity that in the second half of the script gives him a dramatically different role.

Not too subject to its progenitor, the new film still inevitably moves to the big action climax, where this time, at stake is the fate of the world. Unaccustomed to such a Feig puts all this dark green computer chaos rather with a sense of duty than with traditional enthusiasm; exception — unexpected and spectacular tide solo release of the same McKinnon.

Ultimately, all successful revival of old franchises combines the pure enthusiasm of the audience on-site team, and here, too, enough to overcome all the problems and cameo, and light distortions, and false drama Wiig and McCarthy, and what Fall Out Boy did with the original song. The film does not forget the main reason why all of it came to hunt ghosts and have fun, and this already puts it closer to the first part of Reitman than the second. Will his own continue (if it ever will be) even better, not worse — the question, as always, open.




“Ghostbusters”: the Other is not necessary 30.07.2016

Поделиться в соц. сетях

Share to Google Buzz
Share to Google Plus
Share to LiveJournal