The real problem with the Ghostbusters reboot
Since the backlash gets such an "anti-feminist" label, I feel a compulsion to speak up.
- •"Progressive" casting for the sake of it.The problem isn't that women were cast. For one thing, it's so wrong to be attached to Murray, Ramis, Aykroyd and Hudson? That does not immediately imply hatred of women. But you don't just think THATS the twist that will freshen up the franchise. Story SHOULD come first.
- •Was this really necessary?Before we get to anything else, THIS is the question to ask. Why did we need this anyway? Was it impossible to make a feminist empowering film that had the same elements without piggy backing off a franchise? Also, I'm fine leaving Ghostbusters the way it was. And I'm a major fan of the original.
- •"You're ruining my childhood" is not a valid response.It's a sound bite answer, no doubt. But did you ever find out something about someone you respected that totally changed how you felt about them. Totally valid concern. Just leaves a bad taste in your mouth.
- •"This movie isn't for you."Wasn't this Melissa McCarthy's response to the "haters"? Then who is the movie for? She must know the movie is bad or she would have had a less defensive response.
- •"Those people need to go find some friends."Again, thank you for shitting on a potential audience.
- •"Dan Aykroyd and Bill Murray have praised it"As they were told to do as evidenced in emails from the Sony hack.
- •Using the logo, fonts, song, etc.If you're going to remake something, make it your own. I was and am incensed by the idea that using the original logo would somehow draw me in. And once in a while, I admit it has. Don't trick me into noticing your movie. That broadcasts that the movie cannot stand on its own.
- •There is nothing risky here.The original was kind of a risk. It's very high concept. The reboot is anything BUT risky. (See note about use of the logo, etc).