Saturday, August 6, 2016

Star Trek Beyond/Ghostbusters August o6, 2o16



"Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. Its five-year mission: to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man has gone before . . ." but not in this movie.



Finally! A Star Trek movie that breaks with the traditional: a script has got to say something about the human condition! Yeah, baby! We ain’t interested in that crap! Let’s just get to the action! No, not just action but action that is filmed so poorly that it’s unwatchable—Seriously, the first battle sequence where the Enterprise is totally destroyed (AGAIN!) had so much shaky cam going on that it made me physically sick—or  so laughable—I mean what the hell was that with the motorcycle and the portable transporter bit? I thought I was watching a Sonic the Hedgehog cartoon— and what the hell is it with alien Kung Fu? How did Jaylah, the beautiful alien scavenger, learn to use fake Chinese martial arts? Did Einstein get it wrong? It’s not time that’s a constant in the universe, it’s badly executed Kung Fu? I’m being a bit too hateful here. I don’t know for a fact that it was “baldy executed” martial arts (or that Einstein actually believed that time was a universal constant)  because it was gorged with shaky cam shots, close ups, a frigging car load of jump cuts and so much clutter that   . . . I COULDN’T SEE IT! What the hell, man? What is it with you guys; can’t you film a descent fight scene? If you don’t have a clue how to shoot fight action, checkout John Wick (2014) or the beautiful crafted Haywire (2011) or if you want learn how to stage a BIG battle sequence, study the Game of Thrones episode: Battle of the Bastards.



So, do I not have anything good to say about this movie? Well, the tribute to Leonard Nimoy was first class. They were able to blend it into the so called “storyline” naturally, and it was the best, best part of the movie. And the bromance scenes between Spock and Bones were really hilarious and . . . NEW RULE . . . Simon Pegg needs to be in every movie . . . no seriously, every movie ever to be made.
Grade: 70% = C-



I know this is supposed to be a review about the movie Ghostbusters and not a critique on social norms and fan behavior, but with the most recent twitter attack directed at Leslie Jones (who portrays Patty Tolan in Ghostbusters) I can’t get on with the review until I’ve had my say. You folk who are shocked, dismayed and angered that anyone would dare remake a far too precious classic like Ghostbusters  . . . get over yourselves. It’s not like they burnt up every copy of the original Ghostbusters and said, “Thou shalt watch no other GBers but the one WE made in 2016!” You can still watch the original anytime you want. Hell, TCM has been showing the original and the sequel at least twice a day all last week.  What difference does it make if we get a remake? Nothing’s lost! The original is still the original. And also, what the hell is all these nastiness about the remake being an all women Ghostbusters? Again . . . so what? “Oh, but it’s so sacrilegious! Only GUYS can ghost bust!” YIKERS! What? Did we time warp back to the fifties? No, my brothers and whichever misguided females may be in this herd of haters, it’s the 21st century and artists should be able to do whatever they think will work even if it is going against traditional type casting. It’s a new century my pretties, Time you all realized that. That doesn’t mean that you have to like what the studios put out there. No, you can raise artistic questions about the movie based on production quality the acting, the direction, script, etc., just don’t incite the villager to charge Frankenstein’s castle while yelling “KILL THE MONSTER!” when there is no monster to kill. And don’t give actors a hard time; don’t make your attack personal. There are quite a few times in my reviews when I “go off” on actors. But it’s based solely on their acting skill (or lack thereof) and not on what they look like, what gender they are, Their RACE?!  Seriously, are we still talking about RACE?! Okay, I know we are and I know that it is a touchy subject that our bastard American ancestors started way back . . . when they thought enslaving a people was a really cool economic idea. Yes, we still have a racial divide in this country . . . but we shouldn’t have one when it comes to acting because . . . Hamlet, Othello, Blanche Dubois  . . . these are literary characters. They don’t have a race because they are not real people. Actors, no matter what the Chevy commercial says, are real people and we should like them or not like them based on their skills as actors and nothing else. Anyway . . .



Ghostbusters (2016) is an extremely funny movie. I, my sister and the whole audience, (which included a bunch of little kids that really thought the fart humor was quite  . . . hilarious!) were cracking up.  And yes, Okay, I admit, we adults found the fart joke pretty funny also. For me, the funniest scene had the Ghostbusters interviewing the very sexy Kevin, played by Chris Hemsworth, for a receptionist job. The funny part is that Kevin is a total airheaded honey baby that can’t even answer a phone or take a message, but they hire him anyway because he is some sweet eye-candy. Yeah, the GUY is eye-candy! Get it?



The problem with Ghostbusters isn’t that it’s NOT funny because it is. It’s just funny in the wrong way. What? How can that be? Well, this Ghostbusters feels more like a series of unrelated SNL skits stitched together without any thought as to whether they relate to the main storyline, which involves busting ghosts! The movie isn’t titled, “Hey! There Are Not Enough Wonton In My Wonton Soup!” Yeah, the recurring wonton soup bit was funny, but how does it advance the story? For my sensibilities, humor in a movie is funnier when it relates to the story, when it is generated by the main actions of the characters. And speaking of character? Every character in this movie is a funny character. There is no “straight man” to bounce the comedy off of. Nothing is funny if everything, every moment is a punchline to a joke. Also, Ghostbusters lacks even a tiny bit of scary. The main antagonist, the “evil” dude who wants to bring forth a supernatural apocalypse is just way too goofy to be taken seriously.



Overall, it’s not a bad movie; it’s just not inspiring enough to give it more than one watch. And that’s a shame. You have these top of the heap comedians without a well-crafted storyline and funny lines that make no sense within the context of that storyline. So, who you gonna call? Ghost writers!
Grade: 76% = C+

No comments:

Post a Comment