Culture

The New Ghostbusters: Bad Politics Or Bad Cinema?

214 Comments

The new Ghostbusters, I am here to report, is not awful; it is merely bad.

With all the hubbub and controversy surrounding its all-female cast and almost chuckle-free official trailer, the film is expected to draw out a divisive motley of naysayers (justifiably, in my opinion) off-put by the reboot’s gender gimmick, and swarms of progressives eager to embrace the girl power. Likely, it will split the expectations of fanboys who embraced Ivan Reitman, Harold Ramis, and Dan Aykroyd’s 1984 original.

Some, myself included, may find it hard to buy the premise  – even in the wacky, fictitious world of Ghostbusters – of three female engineers (plus one black female subway attendant–how liberal!– played by Leslie Jones) playing the heroes in a job sector (STEM) where women represent only a quarter of its work force. With this statistic in mind, Ghostbusters ought to be an underdog story – after all, genre movies always work best when they exaggerate yet reflect the real world.

For instance, you could tell a story where a ragtag group of women, underestimated by their work force, band together to best evil spirits from New York. This premise could serve as a credible form of “female empowerment,” especially if the characters demonstrated a certain degree of intellectual and physical acumen.

Unfortunately, director and cowriter Paul Feig does not make this supernatural comedy about anything or anyone. Rather, Ghostbusters’s all-female vehicle openly comes off as a politically correct reboot we suspected it might be, manufactured to appease the fashion of the day: grrl power!

That said, one would not categorically dismiss the movie if it was, you know, fun. Ghostbusters, however, lacks wit, heart, and humanity; it is pure Hollywood product prepackaged for Millennials who are incapable of articulating an emotional response over 140 characters.

47955af2f3544d18430e8736c62c63870bab0251

“The power of pain compels you!”: an uninspired “Exorcism” reference is a sure sign of movie mediocrity.

Good popcorn movies are meant to emotionally engage and entertain, which in turn make them ideal vehicles for propaganda: studios can cleverly insert social and political ideas in the plot, making them difficult to detect for the escapist-driven consumer desperate to be immersed.

These ideas are then processed as “entertainment,” which the viewer, therefore, unconsciously accepts (conservative author Ben Shapiro wrote about this in detail in his 2011 book, “Primetime Propaganda“).

Ironically, Ghostbusters’s dumbing down of plot and narrative cohesion harms its left-leaning agenda. Due to this screenplay’s lack of structure (which I will get into), Ghostbusters’s progressive politics inadvertently come off harmless and self-effacing.

Ghostbusters puts itself above basic cinematic rules

You begin to wonder whether Feig and his cowriter Katie Dippold tucked away the man-bashing handbook and genuinely tried to make a fun flick with narrative pull – just, in the end, didn’t. Thus, what discredits this nouveau Ghostbusters is not its bad politics, per se, but its bad cinema.

Granted, the first twenty minutes show promise. After a bizarre opener (without the lead cast) that sets the stage for ghostly menaces to come, we are introduced to Erin Gilbert (Kristen Wiig), a mousy Columbia University professor desperately trying to get tenure.

As fate would have it, a past book of hers, co-written with old colleague Abby Yates (Melissa McCarthy), surfaces online and destroys her credibility in academia. Disgraced, Eric hunts down Abby only to discover she is working with a zany nuclear engineer (SNL’s Kate McKinnon) to eradicate Manhattan of troublesome spectres.

A fish-out-of-water, Erin initially serves as a sympathetic vessel for the audience to follow. Because on one hand she seeks redemption, but on the other she is skeptical of Abby’s supernatural beliefs – which should be a useful device as the story unravels.

But Feig, who directed other feminist fist pump flicks like Bridesmaids and The Heat, has no interest in character or story. Hailing from TV (Freaks & Geeks), Feig only knows how to craft a storyline by stringing together a bunch of loosely-improvised bits while piling a bunch of plot on top of them.

At 116 minutes, Ghostbusters pretends to have narrative drive – the ghostbusters must stop stubby, curly-haired occultist (Neil Casey) from breaking evil ghosts out of their (gender) barriers and letting them wreak havoc on downtown Manhattan.

Instead of using this as an opportunity to develop the characters, the script gets sidetracked with meaningless subplots and supporting characters who simply regurgitate laboured jokes and tired exposition.

Australian actor Chris Hemsworth joins the Ghostbusters as their clueless receptionist clearly hired as dispensable eye candy for the four female ‘busters. Hemsworth’s character is far too overqualified to be some sedentary receptionist – and that’s the point: his bodybuilder physique makes him an object of this film’s female gaze, set up as a feminist response to the traditional male gaze that predominates classical Hollywood.

Paul Feig’s name will go down in movie history

This notion plays into the kind of gender irony Ghostbusters is hinting at. Sadly, Feig is not a sophisticated purveyor of battle-of-the-sexes comedy like the great Howard Hawks (Bringing Up Baby) or Billy Wilder (Some Like It Hot).

An opportunity is wasted when Ghostbusters drops a bunch of the 1984’s cast – Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Sigourney Waver, and Ernie Hudson – into its modern setting. The film, in fact, is full of secondary male characters, yet nothing clever is done with them. I would have liked if they all ended up being possessed spirits, to playfully riff on Hollywood’s anti-male sensibility. Instead, most of these characters pass by in a flash, contributing to the hectic hollowness of this Ghostbusters plot.

Annex - Hepburn, Katharine (Bringing Up Baby)_02

“Bringing Up Baby” (1938): a better film to subvert gender roles and toy with notions of male supremacy.

In addition to comedy, Feig fails to demonstrate any ability for scale. It is hard to care about New York when it is portrayed in a series of bland aerials and establishing shots likely a product of second unit photography.

Feig does not properly build this world or explore any particular mythology of these ghosts. We have no notion of their nefarious abilities – suddenly, the ghouls drive cars, vomit goo, possess the bodies of humans? This is all done without any set up or consistency. Heck, these otherworldly villains are so ill-defined they barely fit into the universe of a film called Ghostbusters!

Ultimately, this type of careless filmmaking only harms the progressive agenda because we are not given characters or a world that is three-dimensional and, thus, relatable.

Even the four comediennes selected to replace 1984’s legendary cast are not well drawn. While their characters are set up to be a bit kooky, their behaviour becomes so erratic you sense this is a result of contrived and lazy screenwriting. At one moment, Erin, Abby, Jillian (McKinnon), or Patty (Jones) are smart, then all of a sudden they behave annoyingly childish – without explanation.

Yes, Ghostbusters is not awful, it is just not very good. There is one moment that summarizes it well: Leslie Jones leaps into a concert crowd only for the goers to back away causing her to plummet to the floor. Stunned, Jones’s character gasps, “Okay, was that a black thing or a lady thing?”.

With respect to Ghostbusters, one should respond: “No, it is just a bad movie thing.”

Read More: The New Ghostbusters Movie Will Be Ruined By The Feminist Agenda

214 thoughts on “The New Ghostbusters: Bad Politics Or Bad Cinema?”

  1. It is important to understand that when a trend is set, pop culture tends to follow.
    In the 50’s and 60’s shows like Gilligan’s Island and Leave it to Beaver had all white casts and no one batted an eye. Then de-segregation came and girl power and afterwards all TV shows had to have a token black and female “badass” character. South Park joked about it by naming their only black kid in school “Token”
    Then in the 80’s came open-borders multiculturalism, so suddenly TV shows like Power Rangers and Captain Planet had to have characters of all races and genders.
    In the 90’s it was gay liberation. So by the 2000’s comic books started having gay characters. Then Thor became female and Captain America black.
    I am just waiting for trannies to go mainstream so we can have a tranny puppet in the muppets who will be texting all day on Twitter and taking selfies. Children should grow up with all the right views you know.
    It will be funny when children’s sitcoms like iCarly and whatnot will be having tranny characters. Won’t it be fun ?
    It’s scary how just 5 years ago people were 50/50 on gay marriage and now everyone is for it. How much changed in just 5 years. Just imagine what kids will be watching in cartoons 15 years from now.

    1. I miss the politically incorrect cartoons and TV shows of my childhood.
      Like the original opening to Daniel Boone where he shoots a redskin “to make all Americans free”:

      1. Or the satirical version of my childhood:
        “Daniel Boone was a man, he was a braaaave man.
        But the bear was bigger, so he ran like a nigger up a tree.”

      2. This is the version I had :
        Daniel Boone French Canadian version 🙂
        Don’t look for lines saying he was working for the independence of the USA ( it could give us ideas :)), instead we got lines saying he was exploring north america 🙂

    2. I’m less against inclusive TV than I am against anti-testosterone TV.
      The only masculine television characters nowadays are villains, if that.
      As a boy I skipped school to watch Goku battle Frieza. Even to my child brain I could recognize strength, justice, and determination. Now all there is is lame humor and political correctness.
      Even Power Rangers emphasized martial arts, physical fitness, and studiousness.

      1. Those shows made a fortune for an Israeli billionaire and Hillary supporter named Haim Saban.

      3. Yeah dragon Ball Z was a great thing for boys to watch. One Piece is what I watch with my nephew since the other anime characters cry and shit.

        1. One Piece is great, so underrated. I would also suggest Berserk, the manga is better than the anime though…an absolute masterpiece

        2. or bleach. The first 50 episodes or so have a lot of “strong male leads”.

        3. Naruto is pretty bad ass too. It shows the transformation of a beta kid into an alpha.

        4. <<o. ✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤:::::::!be357p:….,..

        5. Gave Naruto a shot
          I watched 15 episodes waiting for something to happen, anything
          Nothing happened so I gave up

      4. DBZ, that was good shit. SSJ3 Goku was raw power with a cocky attitude, the kind of hero boys today need rather than some gender bending shit.

      5. Power Rangers also taught us a life lesson about women in charge: so often it doesn’t work out for the organization and it blows to work for them as a man.
        I’d say the same thing about DBZ but I’m still not sure what sex Freiza was lol.

      6. I got the honor of watching Dragonball both in English and Spanish dubs. In my hometown, it got so popular, when it played at our local Boys Club where I started lifting as a teen, even the tough cholo looking older men would stop their workouts just to catch the latest episodes.

        1. If you’re ever feeling too lazy to train, just ask yourself… What would Goku do?

        2. Young boys back then in the 90s had heroes like Goku or Wolverine to look up to. Now boys have Steven Universe.

        3. Yah that’s exactly my point.
          Even the modern renditions of wolverine pale in comparison. It’s all childish now.
          Goku was a true hero archetype, and showed that hard work and belief in oneself can lead to greatness.
          Boys nowadays are just taught to be obedient little drones.

        1. Deadpool was a guy prancing around for 1.5 hours worrying about what some girl would think of him. And in the end she didn’t even really care that he looked like a dried onion.

      8. Ever see the animated movies from Miyazaki’s studio? It started with Spirited Away and Howl’s Moving Castle in the early 2000s. Both were you go girl anime. To me, it was fine at the time. Every movie he has put out since then has featured only strong lead female characters- its lame and I cannot watch his stuff anymore. I guess anime peaked in the 90s too?

        2. I don’t know if that is the case, but certainly the stuff we are importing nowadays is much more controlled. Started with a push against the ecchi comedies and went from there.
          Still, anime and manga were always very broad media and we only ever got to see a small portion of it in NA.

      9. Agreed on both. Nostalgia for both help kick start healthier life style changes. Just about most of the cast members are involved in martial arts. Jason David Frank (Tommy) is one of the few childhood heros that will live up to your expectations.

      10. Watch the Flash, Daredevil, Gotham and Arrows first 2 seasons. In the flash even though Barry is pretty beta, all the males around him are super alpha. Daredevil is blue pill in the sense he doesn’t kill but he is alpha in every other area. Gotham is focusing mainly on James Gordon and he is alpha so much that he told his pregnant wife to leave him and go away forever when he was in prison. Arrows in his first 2 seasons was Alpha as Fuck but he became beta when he started dating the Jewish girl.

      11. Is the best cartoon you ever knew Dragon Z ? There was a goldmine in the 70 and 80ties in Spiderman, Daredevil, Superman etc. These were actually REAL stories. Even as a grown man you an enjoy reading them . Each issue has ten times better plot, language, dialogue than a multi billion dollar hollywood production.
        Dragon Z is like something written for retarded children who are not able to follow the simplest of plot (sorry to say)

        2. oh, okay- you start at 70s cartoons and switch to comic books. not sure if that was a typo or not. And yeah, all those 60s-90s comics had awesome story lines. Amazing what you can get away with before you get assimilated by the media borg. The new Ironman is a genius teenage chick now…I think Galactus swallowing the Earth is more believable than that

        3. My theory is that the decline had already started if that was the best that era had to offer.

        1. The best are the first five seasons. The rest not so much but not bad either.

        2. The one thing I like about it is ,men are men and women are just side characters or villians

    3. “It’s scary how just 5 years ago people were 50/50 on gay marriage and now everyone is for it.”
      Welcome to the manipulative power of media and the social engineering desires of the so-called elite that own it.
      When people were proclaiming that allowing gay marriage was freedom I found myself telling people that having a more permissive master isn’t freedom. It’s just having a longer leash. They don’t understand. Government still says who can marry who.
      I’ve seen people of various ethnic groups in all sorts of television going back into the 50s. There were things in 40s and 50s television even that we were told just didn’t happen. People simply lie for their cause. Sure a lot of big shows and the regulars were all white but that didn’t mean there weren’t episodes with a doctor who was a black guy etc.
      What I’ve seen erased from television were stock plots of television from the 60s through the 80s. Where the government was full of corrupt people. Plots regarding corporate and government cronyism. Criminals and government working together. Corrupt police. These were the weekly foils of the heroes in the show. From the Rockford Files to the A-Team to Knight Rider and many more. Even cop shows would have it. The hero cop overcoming corruption. TV used to have an undertone of american distrust of authority and that power is corrupting. It’s gone except in re-runs.

      1. I’ve seen people of various ethnic groups in all sorts of television going back into the 50s.

        I Love Lucy showed that American TV audiences in the 1950’s accepted Cuban immigrants as white people.

        1. FWIW, Cubans are not mestizos like Mexicans, they are (except for the black ones, of course) of European (AKA White) ancestry. Of course Desi spoke with that charming foreign accent, which did make him very non American to the audience at the time.

        2. I’m not so sure: Little Marco, Lyin’ Ted & the Cubans on the local MLB team aren’t going to be mistaken for Spainards or other Euros.

        3. Even Mexicans aren’t made equal. While in the south, mestizos and natives are more commonplace, up north there’s more white folk.

        4. Why not? Marco and Ted both look very Spanish. They aren’t mestizos, they’re white and their whiteness comes straight from Iberia. Sure, when they open their mouths they sound American, because they are Americans. As for the Cuban ball players, they tend to be black or mulattoes.

        5. True, some Mexican are white; but 80% to 90% of all Mexicans (depending on who you ask) are mestizos (to varying degrees). And while Norteños tend to be whiter, most of them also have native American heritage, unlike white Cubans, who do not.You can bet that Desi Arnaz was not a Mestizo.

        6. Clearly, Arnaz had that smooth Caribbean accent. And yes, before you damn Yanquis kicked the Spanish out, Spain held Cuba and Puerto Rico last, so the Spanish influence was bigger. Though in all fairness, in Cuba, there is not much of a mestizaje mix since most of the natives got wiped out by battle and disease. Since it was the Spanish and the African slaves mixing, the resulting products are called mulattos.

        9. Most people are too stupid to open a book and learn of Mexico’s Arabic roots as well.

      2. But today you are not allowed to be against it. If you are not pro gay , the SJW will be all over you to make sure you lose your job and income. So in fact they don’t know what people REALLY think.

    4. You’ll find not “everyone” is for it. That’s why the Obummer administration had to bring it in by the (ahem), backdoor…..

      1. When the POTUS calls a man “Courageous”, for getting tits bolted on his chest, you know America is fucked up. Also, Hoebama spoke up for the mentally ill (gay/tranny) crowd more than any other. Who would’ve thought back in 2008, that not only were we introduced to the first “black” president, but potentially the first homosexual one as well?

    5. “It’s scary how just 5 years ago people were 50/50 on gay marriage and now everyone is for it.” – Not everyone is for it, it’s just that everyone knows that if you publicly oppose it that you will be punished, whether it be at school, the workplace or social gatherings. The current situation reminds me of the old Soviet Union, where people knew better than say what the really thought if it went against the official narrative. In a bizarre swapping of roles, it is the US who has become the Godless Harlot and Russia is now the defender of Christendom.

    8. It’s scary how just 5 years ago people were 50/50 on gay marriage and now everyone is for it.
      Gay marriage is the ultimate virtue signal for middle aged single white women. It costs them nothing, it irritates the people they already don’t like, and makes them feel like they’ve accomplished something.
      That’s also why the trannies went from nothing to The Most Important Issue of our Time in, like, six months.
      If you follow the logic, the next big thing ought to be polyamory, but that’s not going to happen because middle aged single women are horrified by the idea of sharing a man’s resources with another woman.

      1. Nonono. No.
        You were absolutely right until the end. Polyamory is when one woman has multiple husbands, and sadly I think we all know just how disgustingly likely that may be to manifest next..
        (btw I’d bet anything they scream misogyny as both a justification -sexual reparations – and a preemptive deterrent to polygyny)

        1. Technically polyamory is multiple partners. The sex isn’t specified.
          The word you’re thinking of is polyandry.

        2. … Of course. Youre right!
          Lol not sure where my greek went for a min. Thanks
          But I still stand for everything else I said. Polyamory is already prevalent. We deal with it every day. Polygamy, and in all likelihood polyandry in particular are bound to at least be suggested.

      2. Hmmmm, I have been thinking the exact same thing. It seems to me that the whole reason why our sexuality has changed is not because of enlightenment but because of the power that women now wield in our society. As a matter of fact, the real reason why gay marriage is established is to allow an outlet to the male libido. That way, there is both an outlet and an another way to control it by the women of our society.
        Don’t believe me, then think of it this way. If you were a woman, you would have to work to deal with the amorous desires of men throughout society. If you were attractive, you would have to manage all the men trying to ask you out and start a relationship that would lead to marriage or sex. If you were not attractive, then you would have to find some way to obtain resources and power without having to rely on your outward appearance.
        Think of all of the women who support gay marriage and ask them if they would be willing to change the divorce laws from no-fault to establish fault. Would they do that? No, because no-fault gives them power and money. Another thing to ask them is would they allow men to have temporary slaves with attractive women who defaulted on their student loans. Would any of them consent to this? Well this is already going on with men who are ordered to pay child support and the child in question is not theirs. Any time a woman is questioned on her priviledge, she will get upset. At least we can question them, for now.

      2. How about Ranma 1/2, where the title character turns into a ginger chick when someone splashes cold water on him? At least on that one, he gets upset about it, even if he does use his female form on occasion to his advantage.

      3. I mentioned this cartoon on this site about a year ago. Im glad it got cancelled

    10. There are still shows showcasing govt corruption- House of Cards, Person of Interest, The Blacklist, etc..

    11. Don’t believe the bullshit, most people are against gay marriage. MSM is just one big illusion.

      1. Could be right. They couldn’t win it through votes. They had to use the Courts as a backdoor.

    13. Captain America was dying bruh. He was reaching 100. Steve a Rogers had to be replaced and who better to replace him than his right hand man Falcon.

    14. Most votes on GM tend to fail, when left to actual democracy. I think there are a great number of silent people who are privately still against it.

    15. Nobody white “batted an eye”. In principal though, nobody gave a shit about an all white cast for a particular show, it was (for me) having to watch an all-white television and movie industry. And in fact, the “token” black guy was more of an insult than an answer.

    16. “Nickelodeon is set to break fresh ground by introducing a married,
      biracial gay couple on Wednesday’s episode of the animated series, “The Loud House”.
      Societal “progression” = exposing impressionable children to men who fuck each other.

  2. You shouldn’t watch Hollywood movies period. Even if they’re good they’re funding the globalists anti-man, anti-male, anti-west agenda.

  3. I have no plans to see the movie, but I wonder if the ghosts organize to protest the Ghostbusters’ prejudice and brutality: Ghosts’ Lives Matter.

      1. And the ghosts get mad when terrorist acts knock their protests off the news.

  4. I can’t wait for the reboot of the Indiana Jones franchise as Indiana Jane.

    3. Indian Jane=minorities and female at the same time. Two birds with one stone.

  5. “Erratic” behaviour in female characters? I think they got that bit right. Also never, ever give a woman a proton pack…..

    2. Not that Id let them kick my childhood in the dick by watching this, but did anybody notice how they slung the proton gun part low, and really played up the phallic imagery of it?

  6. Lack of mythology sucks, but is exactly what I expected from the trailer. A good ghost movie must be about a good ghost, but in the trailer, the ghosts just seem secondary – just masses of CGI to be defeated by the great gurrls.

  8. No no no ladies. You have crossed your streams for the last time.
    The original Ghostbusters was one of the best feminist artistic works in recent memory. Starting with the powerful and aloof musician, played by Sigourney Weaver to the “dickless man” who unleashed the fury of the spirit world upon NY City, there was a consistent thread of male fecklessness running throughout.
    And, there was that great scene when the goddess, Zuul, ordered the boys to pick the agent of their own destruction to which Ray dutifully conceived of the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man.
    I can’t think of another film in which women have been portrayed as so in charge, and the men so goofy.

  9. i went to star wars and the gal on their did her girl power. (just wakeup and be better than darth vader and subdue men with just a look) …. I in no way in hell would see this movie.

  10. They should rename it “Postbusters” – an instant buzz-kill for any hard-on…

  11. God, we literally couldn’t parody the news these days if we tried. Check out the latest take on the scumbag who murdered five white cops. He was kicked out of the military because of a sexual harassment accusation:
    “Accounts from friends and fellow soldiers differ on whether the incident was a sign of mental instability or the outgrowth of a troubled romantic relationship. But no one seems satisfied with the way the Army handled the case, either in the war zone or back in Texas.
    Did [Michah] Johnson fail the Army? Or did the Army fail him?”
    First of all, OF COURSE the media is looking for excuses for this guy, right? Would the above question be asked if the shooter was a racist white man who murdered five blacks? Of course not. But it’s actually an interesting story once you dig into it–one that deals with the consequences of feminism/women in the military, and the way unbalanced, manipulative females use sexual harassment charges as a weapon.
    It sounds like the Dallas shooter did not possess hatred for whites when he was in the military. He hung out with a racially-mixed clique, which included a female soldier who became very close with him–so close, apparently, that they slept in the same bed, even though the woman claimed she had no romantic feelings for him. It sounds like she was putting this guy in a beta role, and using him for narcissistic supply and who knows what else. Then, at some point, she claims she found a par of her underwear in his possession, made a huge stink over it, filed sexual harassment charges, and the dude was sent home humiliated and, by most accounts, a profoundly changed man. It makes me wonder what race his accuser was.
    It will actually be kind of fun to see the way the Progressives hash this one out, but one way or another, rest assured, straight white men will somehow be to blame. Sane people can take a lot from this story, though. Fraternization within a war machine has its consequences, and totally ignoring the realities of gender is lunacy. Women make pisspoor men, terrible soldiers, and, apparently, even worse ghostbusters.

    1. Having been in the military with women I would have to agree, they have no place there.
      I had no problems getting a girl, then having us assigned to the same tent, and everyone knew why we bunked next to eachother… You simply cannot discipline human nature out of it.

      1. Women not only don’t have a place in the front-lines, they don’t belong in the Army or MC period. And probably not the Navy or Coast Guard either.

        1. Indeed. Now if you figure that to take one example I was at a training camp with like about 300 personnel, out of those 300 if memory serves me maybe 20 or so were female, and out of those 20 maybe 10 sort of bangable. Even if they all pick a guy and let’s for the sake of argument assume even the ugly ones get some action, that still leaves 260 guys empty handed. Doesn’t really build camaraderie does it..,
          I’m one of those guys who doesn’t give a fuck what others think but I still know that if something went bad, and one of the guys who ain’t getting pussy were to be the only guy who can save my ass, he just might not do it out of jealousy plus removing competition.

      2. Women not only don’t have a place in the front-lines, they don’t belong in the Army or MC period. And probably not the Navy or Coast Guard either.

  12. Interesting how “progressive” entertainment, from crime dramas to movies like this, tries to be more inclusive with female characters, yet the villain is just about always male. For some reason, feminists don’t complain about villain roles being a sexist and male-dominated aspect of Hollywood.

    1. basic instinct was pretty much the last time anyone tried that. Feminists attacked because the Sharon Stone character was a man-hating killer lesbo.

      1. I remember how the gays and lesbians retaliated by spoiling the movie for the crowds waiting in line to see it: They told everyone the ending even though most people thought they were being selfish assholes for doing so.

  13. there is actually a case that feminism has occult origins, and – separately perhaps – that feminism is a kind of possession (not necessarily demonic possession in the supernatural / Andrea Dworkin sense) but a form of mesmerism logically analogous to an hypnotic inductee believing they are a chicken until the hypnotist snaps their fingers and the trance is broken. Maybe we do need female ghostbusters then, but should be exhorting them to turn their ectoplasmic energy neutralizing beams onto the babylonian entity within their midst.

      1. possibly – and should definitely be treated by an exorcist rather than head doctor. Well both maybe, and a pest controller to boot

    2. I’m glad you stated this for I am drunk enough and bored enough to provide an essay on it forthwith!

    3. That is not a case, it is directly proven. Wiccan, satanism, Zionism, Babylonian rites, luciferianism, masonry – all of it depicts the “divine” feminine. This is a goddess worship and linked with the androgyny of the baphomet (goat of mendes). The baphomet was allegedly inspired by the image of a Muhammad and the sheitan (Satan). Our favorite “religion of peace” was actually and still is worshiping allah (NOT Yahweh m/Yahuah) but a moon goddess like the Babylonians and wiccans. Or it could be interpreted as Venus the divine feminine. Venus is also called the Morningstar or Lucifer. As for Zionism, it traces its roots from Babylonian Canaanite black magic rituals – the Talmud comes from this. It is from the Talmud that the protocols of the elders of Zion were mandated. Rockefeller, Rothschild, etc zionists all, established the feminist movement

      1. very interesting answer, although there’s a lot of detail in there that I would hesitate to affirm, and while there is much that I would agree with, I think the term ‘directly proven’ is something I would disagree with – certainly as a blanket statement, but also with respect to some of the detail. Re. Zionism, there is an occultic side to this, as the star of david suggest. Beyond that I think we need to treat carefully. There is a Babylonian influence (as the term Babylonian Talmud would suggest) and as far as I’m aware there is a magic in the Talmud. Re. the protocols of zions. Lets not go there. People can draw any conclusions they like about that, but nothing is proven, and even beyond the assertion that they are forgeries I have continuing difficulty with the idea that history’s conspiratorial masterminds would be so kind to put everything down on paper.
        As for Rockefeller, Rothschild etc. they are confirmed globalists, “new world order’ (at least in the secular sense and for the most part) and yes there is a link to feminism. Theosophy in particular provides an occult basis for ‘progressive’ movements and feminism natural aligned with it. One might hesitate to say ‘grew out of’ but the key point for me with regard to feminism etc is that there is a transgressive element to such creeds – they deliberately, and sometimes quite consciously draw on the sex magical side of reversing the ‘natural’ / given flow of sexual energies, of violating any kind of received ‘natural’ or ‘religious’ law. One only has to look to Crowley to see the importance of this in the occult: that doesn’t mean feminists etc are necessarily witches, occultist, satanists etc, but that there is a certain affinity between movements that at root begin in a kind of metaphysical rebellion. I would mention in this regard Lillith as the prototypal feminist who refused to “submit” to Adam. Lillith, and Jezebel are feminist heroes of sorts.
        As for the origin of the Baphomet you describe I’m not familiar with that argument. If you have some links I’d be interested in following them up – otherwise I can google it etc. The Baphomet I’m familiar with is that of Eliphas Levi, who as far as I remember seemed to think he was taking this figure from the Knights Templar who would worship him in their allegedlly homoerotic / sexual orgies. I have no idea whether any of that is true, or whether if so they got the Baphomet from Islam or the Ishmaelis or some other source – it’s all speculative as far as I’m aware but there’s no harm in looking at the evidence available. The more important point to take away I think is that the Baphomet has breast. The Baphomet statue recently erected by the temple of Satan in – I think it was Detroit or somewhere – has no breast, which was I believe a somewhat deceptive ommission – for the breasts are absolutely crucial to the baphomet, which is not a male figure, but a hermaphroditic one representing the meeting of the masculine and feminine principles – the poles of the principle of gender. As far as I’m concerned that’s a pretty solid link with everything that’s going on in the modern world with respect to gender neutrality, transexuality etc. Against I hesitate to call it satanic – I think seeing this as simply in terms of good and evil – i.e. in conventional fire and brimstone christianity – is only going to promote misunderstanding of what is ultimately a vastly complex and as yet unresolved tension in human history – basically the historical battle that has pretty much been incarnated in the controversies over gnostic religion. The occult threads its way within the modern progressive feminist and queer movements, but its a mistake to think that that’s nothing more than Satanism: it’s the struggle between the divine and human principles in all its complexity.
        If you have anything on islam and the moon / goddess worship side of things I’d be interested as this seems somewhat counter-intuitive, but then I don’t really know that much about Islam

      2. The Divine feminine is worshiped in all cultures except the desert religions and is not really good or bad. It just is.

      2. Instead you get to enjoy Melissa McCarthy. Getting behind her would be bad….getting under her would be even worse.

    2. That’s my Japan lol 🙂
      I have a more explicit figurine in my book shelf, initially my then to be wife minded it, but when she moved in and we got married she came to her senses hehe.
      I’m guessing that puppy is about $150 or so.

      1. I got mine for $60 (or was it $70?) a few years back when I was attending college in Nashua. There’s a comic book store called “Comic Store” that’s been in business since the 80s (although it has moved around a bit). It’s most recent location looks shady as fuck:
        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/08e94bbcf6b9c680e6ca6c8162856caaec44abbd20671f794424b6de44bb5493.png
        But prices are decent and they sometimes have rare stuff for cost.
        I’m not much of one for explicit figurines: I have knick-knacks for creative inspiration more than anything. Thank god my antique books still out number my weeb literature.

        1. Comic Store is between BUTCHER and GROCERY STORE, right? I know that strip mall

    3. Whoops! Now if you’ll excuse me, I have ectoplasmic mess to clean up.;-)

    1. You’re my hero.
      Does anyone else think that Ghostbusters 2 was better than the first? (Originals obviously).
      Or am I the only one….

      1. No, pretty much you’re the only one.
        Ghostbusters 2 wasn’t as bad as many of the fans seem to think.. but it was a pale imitation of the first one. The first one was funner, fresh, creative, and a classic 80s blockbuster, in the same decade that gave us other classics like Back to the Future, Raiders of the Lost Ark, E.T., The Goonies, Lethal Weapon, etc. The original Ghostbusters was also a bit darker and had some scary monsters and scenes in it. Ghostbusters 2 didn’t have any of the same energy and was toned down to make it more family friendly or something.

    2. thats cat is sitting on boxes filled with worthless Alpha Flight and Dr Strange comic books

  16. “Hemsworth’s character is far too overqualified to be some sedentary receptionist – and that’s the point: his bodybuilder physique makes him an object of this film’s female gaze, set up as a feminist response to the traditional male gaze that predominates classical Hollywood.”
    Except that IRL women generally aren’t attracted to some sedentary office nerd, who most likely would look more like someone from Office Space than Thor. They want to see guys not just looking good but out in the world doin’ stuff. A guy with that physique would be a cop or construction worker or something like that.

    1. Your construction workers and cops must be cut from a far different cloth than mine.

  17. What I can tell is that this remake of Ghostbusters is just a shitty rom-com type of film targeted towards mainly the female audience while disguising as an action horror comedy

  18. This movie was going to suck when the director made it about feminism and gender first.

  20. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7e519cde2499a6fc12bbc8885fc9dce528ed34e0ceb9c26bbc1382948f454f39.jpg

    “You have my sympathies” Completely different movie, but, Ripley makes the modern “feminist” heroes in Ghostbusters look completely ridiculous……but of course in 1979 we didn’t politically correctly write our characters….no wonder she endures as a believable character.
    Anyway, keep listening and you’ll hear Mozart’s Eine kleine Nachtmusik K. 525,.

    1. The great irony about Ripley is that the more Weaver was involved in production, the worse she became as a character.

  21. Just see Tarzan and the Warcraft movie, Tarzan had good and bad people of many races and no feminism and Warcraft had a faux action girl so both are good manly movies glad I watched both.

  22. Ghostbusters was unremarkable hokum the first time around. I confess I loved it when I was eight years old because I didn’t know any better. I outgrew it a long time ago.
    The real problem is that Hollywood seems to be incapable of making anything new at all, never mind anything a grown man might find entertaining.

    1. Yeah, the sequels, prequels, remakes, reboots, superhero bullshit and movies about street racing for the low-IQ Hispanic market all show Hollywood’s exhaustion.
      If someone wanted to make a fresh, edgy movie, he would have to go Red Pill by showing the truth about women, blacks, Jews, progressives and sexual degenerates.

      1. I do wonder what the cinema will look like after that happy day when our enemies are finally hauled off to the knacker’s yard.
        I dare say men will have plenty of good stories to tell once free at last to tell them in their own way, free from censorship. I can’t wait.

      2. You can’t say that! Now go up to your room and type out “All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy” on your old type writer until I tell you to stop……

      3. Indeed. Unless you are keeping an eye out for them, these types of fresh movies you’re talking about will go unnoticed and be forgotten. Have you seen the recent release from Nicholas Winding Refn, “The Neon Demon”? I’m a Refn fan and I expected big things in this movie, so I actually made the effort to see it in the theatre.
        Just full disclosure here: what follows is adapted from a pre-review that I gave to my brother while trying to explain to him why I was so excited to see the movie. After watching the movie, I gave him a full review, which I’d gladly post here if you’re on the fence about seeing the movie (however it’s 2,000+ words and contains spoilers, so not very appropriate).
        It seems the reviewers who saw it at Cannes were split right down the middle. The audience jeered and booed during and after the film. The reviewers variously criticize it as being either misogynistic kitsch or stylishly vapid gore-porn. Needless to say, I was excited to see this one. These types of criticisms usually mean that the movie is going to be visually stunning, conceptually driven (rather than character driven), and philosophically opaque like a tone-poem that’s designed to speak more to your guts than your mind (the soundtrack is obviously integral here, and there is some agreement out there that it’s one of Cliff Martinez’s best). Why anyone would expect something else from Refn is hilarious.
        Refn is generally fascinated by man’s ruthlessness, his violence, and his sometimes unlikely code of honor. It is interesting that he has made The Neon Demon his first foray into exploring these themes as they manifest themselves in female nature. Refn presumes to show us the highest levels of female competition by focusing on the top players in the beauty industry. It makes perfect sense, however the absolute horror that he reveals as being beneath the veneer of gentle femininity is no doubt where the cries of “misogyny” come from. Refn depicts an amoral predator with aberrant sexual appetites as the apex woman (embodying the best [winning] traits of female nature).
        It’s not the violence we ultimately find so disturbing, we see that all the time in the case of men, however it is the apparent eroticization of violence by females and their glee at being able to torture, murder, and even desecrate the bodies of their competition. The ideal of female competition, a far stretch from that of men, is like a cat playing with a mouse before tearing it to pieces and carrying around the corpse in its mouth as a trophy and a warning (the movie does contain images of cannibalism).
        My early prediction was that, “This could be Red Pill Film of the Year.”

        1. I wanted to catch that film because I’m involved in the image/model business, but now you have a red pill review, that solidified my decision.

        2. Refn strikes me as a beta though. Only God Forgives is a huge critique of traditional masculinity.

  23. You had me at subplots Mr Lime. From teeny dramas like the Babysitters Club, to Sex and The City, you can bet your tuckus any female driven story will have subplots. You know, because girls matter.

  24. It wasn’t terrible. I was satisfied.
    And I really wanna sit on Holtzmann’s face.

  25. 80% of ALL advertisements are directed towards women, since women spend most money anyways. making a movie tilted towards women makes financial sense, even if it’s shit

    1. Yes. Most of an economy’s output is devoted indulging the whims of women, not investing in scientific and technological progress. About 85 percent of a given advanced economy is devoted to private and public consumption. It should be 50 percent, tops.

    2. That is true, what I don’t understand is why the commercials now emasculate the men in the commercials. Maybe all the people in marketing are women and they hate men. If I sat in the meeting I would ask, well you might be marketing this to women but why insult the men?

      1. I’m rather glad the advertisers make it so easy for me to tune out. I save a lot of money.

      2. No. I sit in these type of meetings,. Two things 1) then men are cucks/gay 2) they need to pay for their child’s diapers…

  26. I gotta wonder how they hit 150 million budget. most of the actors are unknown and couldn’t have cost a whole lot. actor salaries would’ve been small part of this

  28. Turner Classic Movies was showing a block of flicks with the theme “Politcal Movies of the 70s”- Network, The Candidate, 3 Days of the Condor, etc
    I think American cinema(along with music) peaked back in the 1970s.

    1. Taxi Driver, Jaws, Star Wars, Rocky I, and Close Encounters of the Third Kind all of these were great movies. The rock bands from the seventies were the best. Black music known as Motown was awesome. Now we have crap for movies and music. The seventies were relatively peaceful for Americans we were drawing down in Vietnam and stayed out of war until basically the Gulf War of 1991. We had some minor engagements but nothing we could not walk away from, which we did.

      1. Other than a few outliers, I think black music completely died in the 70s- I mean compare 70s Stevie Wonder to what he became in the 80s- yeesh. Good white music lasted thru the 90s IMO, but now that is dead too…Bieber, Beyonce, crappy pop country is all that is promoted these days

        1. Pretty much all the mainstream music today is packaged music. No doubt that black music has turned into something horrible today. White music died around the time Kurt Cobain blew his miserable brains out.

        2. Depends because metal has gone from strength to strength; as in the quality bands and not that mainstream shit. Cobain was a fucking peanut and a coward.

        3. Top off my head, George Benson (Give me the night), Donna Summer (Bad Girls), Fat Larrys Band (Act Like you know), Kool and the Gang (Fresh), Sister Sledge (Greatest Dancer) were all 80ties I believe. I find that kind of music some of the best black music, or simply music, ever made.
          But it seems blacks have nothing now.

        4. all those acts got their starts in the 70s. George Benson is the man

    2. The fluff started in the 80s, ironically under feel good President Reagan.

      1. Yeah, as much as I love quoting all those 80s action movies, they are so silly

        1. And the cartoons. Mind you, I loved GI Joe action figures. In fact, one of the bad things about growing up poor in the 80s was that while I could buy the figures and the weapons on flea markets, I could never afford the fancy vehicles. However, I never liked the cartoons, partly because they seemed too PC to me even as a child, but mostly because even with all the big badass weaponry, NOBODY SEEMS TO FUCKING DIE! Not the good guys, and definitely none of the Cobra henchmen. No wonder I like anime more. Plus, I feel even among the gun lobby, there seems to be hesitation to actually go and start a rebellion, or even actually use their guns. Heck, in Texas, even most businesses who might be pro gun actually post signs banning open carry on premises. And perhaps that explains why the shock when black men get shot by police or when cops get sniped. Me, I wasn’t surprised nor shocked. Then again, I’m a heartless son of a bitch. All thanks to anime.

        2. LOL nobody did die! they parachuted out of planes, copters, off tanks, off motorcycles…parachutes everywhere!

        3. I don’t know. There’s kind of a certain charm to it though, the fact that they always manage to escape horrifying death at precisely the proper moment.

    3. No doubt. As much as I enjoyed Star Wars as a kid and even young adult, it and all the blockbusters that followed it changed cinema forever. And not for the better.

  30. Couldn’t they have at least gotten an attractive black woman? Leslie Jones is one hideous creature.

      1. I’ve never seen this commercial before….but it seems like it’s self-depracating for Leslie to take that part. I think Leslie missed the jokes of the commercial. ..that she’s an extremely unattractive woman that hits on guys that are repulsed by her lol Or maybe she is quite aware.

  31. Why have the all female cast instead of half female and male cast? They didn’t because it is about indoctrination to the feminist movement. For feminists, it’s not about equality but superiority.

  33. I remember this being an issue on this site back in March; the film just doesn’t look entertaining. The mediocre reviews certainly prove so. Makes you appreciate Aykroyd, Moranis, Bill Murray, Ramis, Hudson, and the like a hell of a lot more.

    1. It made 45 mill over the weekend, which means that quite a few people rushed out to see it unfortunately. I doubt it will make its money back though

        1. The consensus seems to be that it will just make its money back if it’s lucky. It won’t be a huge hit. McCarthy isn’t that big outside of America either, and neither is Ghostbusters really, at least not outside of the Anglosphere anyway

  37. There are so few films made in Hollywood worth a shit nowadays. I quite liked The Master, Nebraska, Wolf of Wall Street and maybe 2-3 others in recent times, but the last 6-7 years have been forgettable. There has been a lot of overhyping of competent and watchable films.
    It isn’t just politics that is fucking up Hollywood movies, it is the fact that studios must please shareholders and the stakes have raised considerably over the past few decades because the budgets of films are constantly increasing. It is the search for the biggest profit that’s fucking things just as much as bad politics.

  38. Women can make good comedy, I’m thinking of Elizabeth Bank’s “Walk of Shame” or Kirsten Wiig’s “Bridesmaids”. Jenny McCarthy has done great work as well.
    Promote it as feminist and you give it the kiss of death and merely indicate it has nothing else going for it, like being funny. Plus of course some SJW thinks its a great slap in the face to men.


  39. He speaks a lot of sense- the connections he makes can’t be ignored- we live in a matrix constructed by predatory aliens who’ve been here a long time.

  41. The original movie was shot in New York….this ripoff was shot in Boston. You can always tell when a movie has that fake feeling to it and they are using film or photo shots to give the appearance of a location (rather then shooting on site). I see this a lot with movies shot in Canada trying to have that American big city feel only to find out it was shot in a Canadian city (you can always tell).
    Besides that….the movie is another 80s ripoff and it’s awful. Some movies are best to be left alone. This pile will be remembered with the rest of those awful 80s remakes. This one will be even worse because they tried to throw in the cast of Bridesmaids to make it work (much fail). The should stick to their own shit and stop fucking up the good stuff that men “built”.

    1. I was wondering WTF is up with all the re-makes? With Chicks? I don’t get it, Maybe now that kids play with cell phones rather than toys, there is no Merchandising executive hammering the mantra of selling the shit to kids after the movie so nobody cares.

  42. Even if it wasn’t a vehicle for feminism, I wouldn’t spend time or money on this movie. What is the obsession with remakes, reboots, etc?
    I thought these people considered themselves artists.

  43. The only way to make a female empowerment film credible would be to show the woman/women in the film stuying STEM and going to the gym regularly. Because if they don’t, everytime a woman does something badass/clever, we can just say she’s a Mary Sue and we’ll probably be right.

  44. I honestly cannot believe that the new ghost busters reboot is not a parody of feminists/feminism/girl power culture…

  45. “The new Ghostbusters, I am here to report, is not awful; it is merely bad.”
    That’s actually worse, in my opinion. I have definitely gotten enjoyment out of a money because it was awful. Some movies manage to be so awful that they are enjoyable from a comedic standpoint (hell, Mystery Science Theater 3000 made a living off of this premise).
    But bad? That’s not even unintentionally enjoyable.

  46. The new ghostbusters is so bad I cant even read the whole article here. I have not seen this movie though, And likely never will. I did however watch the original Ghostbusters, It was great! I miss the old days in the 1980’s when shit was normal.

  47. I have a question for you, Harry. Why the hell did you waste good money on this cinematic suppository? Furthermore, why did you waste the time to pen this review of a movie that no sane ROK reader will ever even bother to see? We knew this movie was going to be a skidmark on celluloid as soon as it was announced. When the previews came out, it only reaffirmed our original position. When those four cunts degraded themselves by posing with dying kids in a misguided attempt to hype up their shitty movie, they irrevocably eliminated any possibility that this film would be even remotely palatable by anyone with an IQ higher than a soap dish.
    The movie is not “merely bad”. It’s an awful, steaming pile of leftist, progressive shit smeared onto celluloid and spoon fed to the retarded masses who are stupid enough to buy a ticket. The next time you’re inclined to throw away money on something, for whatever reason, I suggest donating it to ROK instead of using it to fund the rampant liberal agenda Hollywood is trying to cram down everyone’s throat. At least it’ll have gone to a worthy cause.

    1. Terminus: I did not pay to see this movie; was invited to a press screening. Alas, the only expense was my time. Also, this “Ghostbusters” wasn’t shot on celluloid, it was shot on digital. “The Force Awakens” is shit smeared onto celluloid.

  50. all this really bad media makes is even easier to cut the cord, throw out the TEE VEE and give a big middle finger to the box office, red box, netflix etc.

  51. The American womyn’s desperate thirst for masculinity and male accomplishment is disgusting and repugnant. Men make very bad women and women make even worse men. Women would all be fighting to live in naturally formed caves without men and instruction from men. They were never meant to be men, but being insatiable egotists, American women will never give up trying.

      1. Personal attack, zero substance. Spoken like a true white knight mangina libtwit.

        2. You mistake my happiness that you hate Trump as YOUR President for my approval of him as President. I hope he does well, but partaking in bodily fluids, like you and yours lapped up Clinton’s VJJ, is your specialty. I’m just glad you all suffer and pretend you’re not. The only ones that will be on their knees swallowing are you crybaby libtards. You’re the receptacle now, you have no choice. HAHAHAHA!!!!

  52. As with The Farce Awakens, the only way I’ll bother watching this movie is if it’s for free.

  53. Thank you for this article … Didn’t know anything about the remake of Ghost Buster & actually was contemplating to see it, but now I won’t !

    1. grotesque movie, just brutal faggy shit!…..saw it with a chick so I fucked HER in the ass after the movie as punishment!!!

      1. Hopefully you have had a change of heart since then. Pussy or no, I will not subject myself to watching that, a princess movie, a “romantic comedy” or any feminist movie. That girl you were with probably wanted to watch it for a shit test. Next time a girl wants you to watch a romantic comedy, take her out to a demolition derby or drag race.

Comments are closed.