Kristen Wiig on ‘Ghostbusters’ Backlash: ‘It Just Bummed Me Out’

Kristen Wiig Ghostbusters
MediaPunch/REX Shutterstock

When an all-female reboot of “Ghostbusters” was announced, many fans took to social media to decry the gender bending, and one of the new additions to the spirit-busting crew, Kristen Wiig, was not happy about the backlash.

In an interview with the LA Times to promote her new film “Nasty Baby,” Wiig revealed that she was “bummed” about the gender-focused controversy, and said this is the first film that she’s been a part of that’s garnered so much attention.

“The fact there was so much controversy because we were women was surprising to me,” she said. “Some people said some really not nice things about the fact that there were women. It didn’t make me mad, it just really bummed me out. We’re really honoring those movies.”

Paul Feig, who is directing the reboot, had a similar experience after the film was announced. Feig told Variety in March that Internet commenters wrote “some of the most vile, misogynistic s— I’ve ever seen in my life.”

“I figure it’s some wacked-out teenager,” he said of the Twitter commenters. “But almost constantly it’s someone who’s bio says ‘Proud father of two!’ And has some high-end job. You’re raising children and yet you’re bashing me about putting women in my movie?”

Kate McKinnon, Melissa McCarthy and Leslie Jones will star along with Wiig in the new “Ghostbusters,” which hits theaters July 22, 2016.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 89

Leave a Reply

89 Comments

Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. Edward The Great says:

    It was NOT about gender. I wish you brain dead idiots would stop claiming it is. It’s about the rape of our childhood by making a film whose trailer looks like a live action Scooby-Doo movie!!! It was crap!!

  2. acouvis says:

    I don’t hate this movie because it has women. I hate this movie because it’s a Paul Feig movie with actresses that I personally think are completely over-rated and wrong for Ghostbusters.

  3. Mona says:

    I, for one, can’t wait to see this movie. And I think the comments here and elsewhere are hilarious.

  4. Harold Billings says:

    “Misogynistic”? So what if it is? I’m a human and I’m entitled to like what I want and who I want. If I don’t like Ghostbusters with an all-woman cast, then I don’t. You can call it what you want to but I don’t give a damn about your witch-hunting words. That crap exists solely to control people, and it’s been used to much in the past couple of years that you’re about out of ammo.

    See, I don’t care if you don’t like why I don’t like the movie. It’s not your call to make. I get to hate it because of the race, gender, or hair color of the actors. That’s my birthright. I can’t hurt someone for those reasons, but I can damn sure not see their movie. I can dislike them personally for being anything I dislike.

    So yeah, I rolled my eyes at the all-female cast. I’m sick of gender politics and have no desire to pay my hard-earned money to have my nose rubbed in it on my leisure time. As is my right.

    Don’t like it? Think I’m misogynistic? Fair enough. That’s your right too. I just don’t know why I’m supposed to care about your label.

    McCarythyism and the Witch Hunts are over, and they are almost universally seen as bad things. Those who keep trying to bring them back will not be judged kindly by later generations.

    It’s okay for people to have different preferences and different opinions. It’s okay for them to like chick flicks or masculine movies. It doesn’t matter how hard you pound your meat hands and threaten to hold your breath, either. People are entitled to their opinions, biases, etc. Everyone has them. Without any exception whatsoever.

    I don’t like the new movie because I find the all-female cast another effort by the entertainment industry to shove gender politics down my throat, and I refuse to pay for them to do so.

    That is the way it is whether you like it or not, “misogynistic” or not, and it’s very unlikely to change. When your parents told you that you were special, and that because you are special, the world would change to accommodate your preferences, they lied to you. You are not special and the world doesn’t particularly care what you want beyond people’s individual ability to profit from your preferences.

    22 veterans committed suicide today, and a million people in this country are homeless. Half the world lives on less than $1/day.

    Here you are whining because people don’t want to see a movie that you don’t think they shouldn’t want to see, because of reasons you don’t want them to have for not seeing it.

    This is what people worry about when they don’t have to worry where there next meal is coming from. It’s what they worry about when they don’t have to worry about having a roof over their head. Scream privilege all you want, but it’s still better to be a rich woman than a poor man. It’s still better to be rich and black than poor and white. Bigotry in America is, was, and always will be about class and wealth, and the affluent white liberals amongst you desperately trying to divert everyone’s attention is destined to, eventually, fail, for the privilege is, was, and always will be yours.

    At least that’s your hope and expectation.

  5. Will says:

    Maybe you are seeing backlash from all types of people because this is upsetting, the travesty being done to Ghostbusters…. Also making this about men being mad because it’s all women is maybe some of the issues but far and away from the only issue. It’s hard to say others are the reason people are focusing on the fact it’s four females when there was a photo sent out by all the actresses and writers that are women holding a sign that said “Girl Power”, but ya this move is not about female empowerment…. I guess it’s easier to discount everyone as haters that is not happy with what you have done and surround your self with all two people that are happy with this direction.

    • mike pollard says:

      For sure. Absolutely right! I am SOOOO sick of issues with this idea being relegated to sexism. We KNOW what’s coming. I don’t pay to see melissa mccarthy movies. I get it. She’s the man.
      There isn’t a snow ball’s chance on hell that gender won’t be brought up in this film. So what if a woman can be and or act like a biker. Not gonna see it. It’s just not an angle i give a crap about.
      I didn’t cause the issue. I’m just forced to deal with it.
      I have a problem with using a beloved property to make a social point. It’s one hell of a ways from thinking that women should be bare foot in a kitchen.
      Truth is that people that take issues with dislike of this film see misogynists hiding under their bed and closet.

  6. but still i’m baffled at how delusional she is .

  7. yeah but it’s not really her fault…the movie seems horrible , period , she’s not the one who made all the decisions leading to that .

  8. JonJon says:

    Don’t blame misogyny on the fact that this movie look absolutely terrible. People don’t want to see cheesy CGI ridden, half assed sequel and reboots anymore. It’s done. Come up with original art already.

  9. Alexander says:

    I reckon someone who writes an article like this picks through the comments and only uses the 12 out of 1000 comments that are sexist, then claims sexism, when really the trailer was guff.

    In all honesty this could have been good with decent writing but the jokes seem like they are aimed at pre-teens and the original ghostbusters has a more adult feel with the jokes still being funny today.

    its a classic case of blaming something else because otherwise this film will get no media attention and flop, new transformers movies looked bad but nobody claimed hidden agendas or prejudice then, just needs to be accepted that this movie has been taken in a pitiful direction with mainstream slapstick jokes and it doesn’t look like its gonna work

    There will always be sexists on both sides claiming something but the majority of us (women included) just think it looks like something the guys from ‘epic movie’ or ‘date movie’ cooked up

  10. Kristoph says:

    This is not about are child hood memories being infringes upon with sequels. This is about the new generation of children that will be inspired as we once were. Kids now have a different understanding how stories are told, graphics are displayed and action are sequenced. My sons and daughters look at the great movies I admire most, as boring boring and bla.. So if the children of today get the same goosebumps, smiles, zeal and imagination as i did- Remake the hell out of them.. I know what the originals mean to me.

  11. James L says:

    If the only originality they have to offer is making male characters female then there is nothing creative going on here. I don’t see the point. Hollywood seems to be out of fresh ideas. SNL cast always seemed to fuel the engine of zany comedy films. SNL of late has been lacking. This is emblematic of their failures.

  12. Jacques Strappe says:

    I get as annoyed as anyone else about remakes. While the original Ghostbusters was an iconic movie of its time, its “classic” designation is open for debate.. Reading the comments, I can’t help but think this is more about misogyny than just messing with a “classic” buddy picture. The chick buddy pics are here to stay and not just a fad. Hopefully, one of these days, someone will write a role for Melissa McCarthy that elevates her beyond low class buffoon which she has nailed.

  13. Why won’t I see it? The original is a beloved comedy to me. It came out of nowhere and had actors I grew up watching on SCTV and Saturday Night (yes, it was called Saturday Night by its viewers for many years, before it became so trendy it had to be called SNL…I don’t call it SNL). This rehash doesn’t. This rehash is yet another attempt by Lorne Michaels to insert comedians that he uplifted and groomed into roles merely to make money for some big studio. I can predict that the black gal will play some over-the-top yelling and freaking out black woman…Add to that a yelling and freaking out overweight woman (the new stereotype McCarthy brings to every role she plays), and then Wiig and Mckinnon…I can surmise Mckinnon will channel the Venkman role, and Wiig the Harold Ramis role, unless they reverse that. Here’s where the concept goes wrong for me: comedy writers have a half-life. They peak at a certain time, and then kind of just don’t cut it any more for fresh laughs when it comes to features (see Mel Brooks post History of the World – yes, Spaceballs did, in fact, suck). As much as I love Aykroyd and the late Ramis’s stuff around the time of Stripes/Ghostbusters v1, I think they were probably goaded into making the male original cast reboot relentlessly by fans (and Michaels), because the sequel really sucked in every way compared to the original, and they didn’t want to see the series die on that note…ERGO let’s capitalize on all those funny lines they came up with over the years and years of tossing ideas around for their all-male original cast reboot, then adapt them for an all female cast and see if it doesn’t suck. But it probably will because you’re just trying to adapt original and interesting roles to women for the NOVELTY of having women do it. You couldn’t just bring in three male cast members of Saturday Night’s current or last generation without it falling flat on its face. Remember – Ghostbusters 2 fell flat on its face WITH the original cast, because of bad writing (even though it was the original writing team). And you couldn’t make the all-male original again because Murray didn’t think the new script was strong enough – the decision we as fans wish he had made before he signed on for GB2. I’m under no delusion that “Big Hollywood” is doing this to lose money. This isn’t an appeal to fans of the first movie in any way other than the trademark and copyright being used as a money-making vehicle. The cast of the new movie IS talented (save Jones and McCarthy, at least on THAT big feature level), but they’re only as strong as the writing…And Ramis and Aykroyd aren’t great writers anymore (sorry, I loved your work, until it started to suck). But it doesn’t matter in the long run, I guess. The movie will pay for it’s production and marketing costs with its opening weekend or global take and the studio-heads who greenlighted this travesty in the making will breathe a sigh of relief, so it’s OK because they’ve appeased Lorne Michaels and didn’t lose too much money. I’m predicting the movie will be a soulless suck-fest that will die a deserving death. I just hope it doesn’t ruin McKinnon’s nascent film career. She is the biggest female talent I’ve ever seen on SNL since I started watching it as a kid in 77. And that’s over a LOT of great female talent, IF I see it after it goes to home use, it will only be to watch Mckinnon and Wiig go head to head. While Wiig was great on SNL, she’s no Kate McKinnon. And no, I’m not Kate McKinnon, nor was I paid by her to write this, ;)

  14. Sharin Love says:

    I’m all for female ghostbusters, but come on, I’m sick of Melissa McCartney playing the same big-mouthed obnoxious character in every other movie released lately. Can’t the writers come up with any “new” characters anymore? First, it was remakes of all old movies, hardly anything new. Ok, after awhile we got used to that…but now it’s the same actors playing the same characters in every comedy that’s just a remake of another old iconic movie. It’s getting to where just about the only movies I enjoy are “indie” movies & documentaries. And then, if a movie is a hit, we have to have part 2, part 2.5, part 3, etc. ad nauseum. Why? Is it too expensive to to pay good writers? Do you get a discount on the price of a character actor if you sign them for a lot of movies at once? Like 6 for the price of 5? And why do we rarely get any great movies with the great actors? What’s happened to the cinema these days … I’m so sick of McCartney and Ed Helms, I could vomit. You give them awful roles, so I don’t know why they even do it!

  15. Jack Monte says:

    The fact that Wiig’s no talent is taking from other funny female actor’s jobs bums me out. And most of the backlash is this new mentality of put a female in former male role or change ethnicity and we have an original idea. People are tired of it. So raise ticket prices again so the studios can pretend that everyone still goes to watch movies and the take isn’t off.

  16. jhepp says:

    I don’t think the “backlash” against “pink-washing” good films is anti-women as much as just “don’t screw around with our fond memories.” Hollywood seems bankrupt of new ideas and this trend to remake good movies is embarrassing. A paraphrase: Roger Ebert once wrote (or maybe Gene, memory fails) that Hollywood shouldn’t remake successful movies, it should rehabilitate bad ones that could have been great. I agree with that sentiment.

  17. Renee R says:

    Playing devil’s advocate for this article in the face of all these comments…

    While arguably most of people’s complaints about this reboot are from messing with a classic (valid) or how it’s not a truly ‘female written’ story and is therefore insulting to true diversity (extremely valid), no one can deny that there is a misogynistic, anti-women root to some of the reactions. I don’t understand why people have to choose between either “crazy feminist who hates all those who hate the movie” or, as more seen below, hate the movie/actress choice due to love of the original without acknowledging one of the issues at hand here.

    Can’t anyone be disgruntled by the reboot while also feeling empathy for not only the diversity issue in Hollywood but also for the sexist shit McCarthy and Wiig have to go through for this??

  18. Martha C. says:

    Agree with other commenters. It’s not the women being the film that makes people angry. It’s the fact that we don’t need yet another remake of a classic film. Putting women in it will not make it better, but could make it worse as the original characters, whether you like it or not, were MEN. Like others have said, it’s like saying do we need the TV show Good Times remade with an all white cast? NO is the answer.

    This movie will bomb, mark my words, THEN these folks will really have something to be ‘bummed’ about.

  19. If you give them a one hundred dollar bill, people will complain that they want two. Personally, I think the movie reboot ought to have left it alone because it doesnt need to be fixed or reconfigured or rebooted or revamped. Its a classic that was produced with men as the lead characters; and stands on its own forever. As Thelma and Louise, or Whip It, etc, etc, dont need to be remade with males as the leads. I absolutely adore McCarthy and Wiig, and these extremely talented and beautiful women can and do shine bright in their own original works. Theses are just my respectable opinions.

  20. Too bad much of the debate was about something entirely different and not the fact that they were women.

  21. It has nothing to do with the cast being all women. It has to do with:

    1. There was no need nor reason to remake Ghostbusters
    2. Wiig is overrated, McCarthy is unfunny, and Feig is a complete hack. If you made this same movie with an untalented male cast and you would get the same backlash.

  22. Brad Wescott says:

    Another movie ruined with Hollywood pandering to the feminists. I won’t be seeing this sexist trash movie. It looks boring anyway. All the women I know agree. Bad idea from the start.

  23. Ben Champ says:

    Not as “Bummed” as she is going to be when no one watches the film….

    Seriously don’t understand why these people are so ignorant about why no one wants this to happen. Its bad enough that they are trying to suck the life force out of the existing legendary films, but then they have to stick actresses in there who are not only unfunny, but in a lot of their previous films have been deeply sexist and offensive.

    This isn’t about gender its about respect.

  24. Brett Caton says:

    “she was bummed about the gender-focused controversy”, despite participating in a film which only existed as a gender-focused product.

    Imagine if “Roots” had been redone but only with white actors. Or the “Shaft” series. That is how bigoted this was. The assumption was anything with males in it was inferior and only if there were female main characters could it be any good – but no, they couldn’t create anything original, so they had to drain the life out of an existing product and use it instead.

    “The fact there was so much controversy because we were women was surprising to me,” she said, before noticing her reflection and screaming, then noticing her shadow and screaming, then noticing her screaming and screaming… she’s pretty easily surprised.

    “We’re really honoring those movies”, she said, as she emptied her bowels over pictures of the original cast.

    ” Feig told Variety in March that Internet commenters wrote “some of the most vile, misogynistic s— I’ve ever seen in my life.””

    Prove it. I’m going to take a stab in the dark that people wrote “this is a shitty idea” and he read that as “all women must dieeeee!”. Misogyny is freakishly rare in the West. Most people love women, which is why they will give charity and help to women in distress – and ignore a man. You want to guess how many people will help a man crying in the street? It’s a damn sight less than will aid a woman doing the same.

    “I figure it’s some wacked-out teenager,” he said of the Twitter commenters. If that’s true, why would you pay attention to it? But you want to slander all the critics of this abomination, so of course you will tar them with the same brush.

    Everyone gets mean tweets. Deal with it.

    ” You’re raising children and yet you’re bashing me about putting women in my movie?”

    Yes. Because the two things are not connected. Women does not equal good. Remaking a movie with all women does not mean it automatically deserves protection. Loving humans who deserve to be loved does not mean we must love your pustulent product.

    • Omg…some of your remarks are hilarious…in the good sense, because a white Shaft?? Lmao! “White Roots” is not so funny or far fetched because Isrealites were the first recorded slaves…um, enslaved by Africa’s dark pigmented EGYPTIANS. “..emptying her bowels..” was a juvenile retort lacking true comedy. Everyone does get mean tweets, and its true we all ought learn to deal with it and stop running away when we aptly dish it out, then cry when its flung back at us. While, yes, women have come a long way; do you really, honestly see and read and hear and believe in your mind that women and girls are currently–overall–treated BETTER than men in this whole wide world??

    • Rob says:

      Good comment. This was about feminist totalitarianism. They want to erase anything good that men had done in the past and completely replace with women. Soviets followed a similar policy. They replaced any non-communist achievement with Communist Party drones. All totalitarians think alike.

  25. Tim says:

    It’s gonna flop hard next Summer.

  26. MehGibson says:

    It would be nice if Hollywood was creative enough to think up new female characters and plots to go with them, I’m just mad at the lazy writing these days. “Ok so we’ve done three spiderman remakes now lets do a female spiderman…with the same plot as the old ones.”

  27. Ernest says:

    This franchise meant so much to many and what the makers of this film (SONY) don’t understand is that we wanted a Ghostbusters 3 not a Bridesmaids 2.

    It’s not about them being girls. It’s about Sony taking the easy way out and trying to do another Bridesmaids style movie for the easy $$$.

    Sony didn’t listen to the fans.

  28. Dawn DuBois says:

    Im a women and consider myself a feminist. She should be bummed out there are not more original, good, funny or dramatic roles for women as leads in Hollywood, instead of being “bummed out” that people just don’t care to see a beloved movie rebooted and changed so much. Because that is the real issue. People loved Ghostbusters, people do not want to see a new version. Hell , even Ghostbusters Two didn’t do as well, and it HAD the original cast. Anyone remember the The Blues Brothers 2000 debacle? It is not because they re women, it is because this concept completely changes everything about the original. Even the Star Trek reboots, which held close to the same characters, has received plenty of criticism for the changes in attitude (Kirk a drunk, plenty of unnecessary sex scenes, etc.) Don’t mess with something beloved by an entire generation and expect no flack.

    • Those of us who share your criticism of the film have tried ad nauseam to point that out to the ‘it’s all sexist’ crowds in boards just like this one but the paint never dries on that label’s broad brush no matter how well you expose their thinly veiled ‘evidence.’ I’m in the middle of one w/a guy that took 3 MONTHS to respond to me putting him in a corner about his sensationalism over every 10th truly misogynistic comment outweighing the other 9 that have zero to do w/the women angle of this reboot. Even after I point out the truly original female-led shows such as The Sarah Connor Chronicles (when critiquing the Terminator Genisys film) or the choice of an actual trans person recently cast in the Rocky Horror film coming to TV as being examples of good, diverse progress, I’ve continually been labeled as a woman-hater by the trolls on this side of the argument.

      It’s a disturbing trend that goes along with the same broad brush of any criticism of the man in the White House is racist. All I can say is get ready because the expected leader in this coming presidential cycle’s going to give all of these ‘painters’ the same shots when criticism of her are brought up too. Ideological blindness coupled with instantaneous outrage are fueling these non-critical thinkers & it’s only getting worse.

    • I completely agree with you Dawn. You are 100% on target. Although this is holliwood we are talking about they cant leave well enough alone. Its like they enjoy trying to fix what “aint” broke.

  29. D. Gresham says:

    Agree. Hollywood always attempts to push their agenda but then complains about sexism or racism if people don’t agree or like it. Perhaps people could if they’re written an original screenplay; however, Hollywood is in serious need of creative minds to do this or is lacking new blood puppet masters. Haha
    What next, The Blues Sisters, Seven Little Women for Seven Little Brothers, Driving Ms. Caitlyn, The Godmother, or Dirty Harriet?

    I’ve noticed how well the Christian-based films are doing at the box office too. And, “some” people are amazed they’re drawing such big numbers… Hey, get a freaking clue. Many Americans are believers and those that aren’t also like a good fresh storyline. Wake up Hollywood.

  30. This isn’t complicated. If they want to make movies with strong female leads, do it. Write some new characters, some new stories, and if people really want to see more female characters like this, they’ll go; AND they’ll have their classic franchise with ITS fans PLUS a whole NEW franchise with its NEW fans. Everyone wins. And if people DON’T go to see it, then when the complaints come their way about a lack of said characters, they can say “look, we tried several times to make something great with strong female leads, we put our all in to it, and we’re proud of what we made, but no one took an interest, and we have a business to think of.” Same with comics or cartoons or whatever.

    The problem is that they’re not doing that. They’re not creating new stuff for women and minorities. They’re taking already established franchises and re-casting iconic characters AS women and minorities. This is a problem. On multiple levels. It’s a problem because you’re radically altering beloved classic characters. It’s a problem because you’re saying that your idea of diversity is scribbling over what’s already established with a brown crayon, or adding boobs. It’s a problem because you’re pretty much pandering to whiners at the expense of your fans.

    • IKR. Like when “somebody” decided to make black Simpsons…black Dracula…black Santa Claus, black “Wiz.” Oh…sorry..am I a racist, now. I wonder how long it will take for intellectual responses…I’ll wait…

    • D. Gresham says:

      Matthew Young – You’re correct. That’s exactly why someone like Tyler Perry has been such a success story. He’s smart, fresh and writes to his experiences and strengths. Could you imagine Hollywood taking and of the “Madea’s” movies and changing the characters race, sex or sexual orientation. For some reason I don’t think “Diary of a Mad “Hispanic (or insert other race)”, “Transgendered (or insert other sexual orientation or relation” Male/Woman (insert actual or post surgery sex).
      Hollywood need new blood (writers and puppet masters) and until the old blood/money is replaces they’re not capable of meeting the people’s demands for showcasing new talent while showcasing fresh writing without a fake/pushed agenda…

  31. Sorry says:

    I never, ever focused on the gender of the cast. When it was declared that the original cast/characters would not be in it, when it would stand alone from the original universe, when it would have “new tech” in it, and that actors I did not like were in it, I decided I would likely not enjoy it. The placement of the original cast in “cameos” disgusts me further.

  32. ryan says:

    It wasn’t who they casted that made me apprehensive about this remake. People are criticizing this film for the wrong reason. I’ll reserve judgment until I’ve actually, you know, seen the thing.

  33. None of these ‘chicks’ will ever replace BIll Murray and Dan Akroid… if you want to actually cherish the original… the director might have want to get “funny” women and not gender bending feminists to do the role.

  34. vap0r says:

    The people that are criticizing this movie are not “gender-focused”, but the movie makers are, the actors are, the movie is. It would be like remaking “Lord of the Rings” with all black actors then calling everyone that complains a racist. How about you just quit pushing your agendas on us?

  35. Stephen says:

    The problem isn’t with women, the problem is with Hollywood and the way they present women as strong female leads. They do it poorly. So when it was announced, it just wreaked of Hollywood crap. A remake is bad to begin with, then it seems they are trying too hard to be hip a trendy. It just looks like typical poor work being shoveled out by lazy Hollywood.

  36. D. Gresham says:

    Hey, why not remake Stripes? They could reprise all the roles as women and have them all become Army rangers, including the fat one (whomever they get to play John Candy’s character).

  37. Patric Swayzie says:

    im a huge fan of women and ghostbusters. im not understanding the problem here.

  38. D. Gresham says:

    Your “Kristen Wiig: ‘Ghostbusters’ backlash ‘just bummed me out’,” article is crap. It has nothing to do with misogyny, which female actresses and asshole writers will claim. It has to do with sticking to the original story line, which was all male. Why mess with perfection anyway, as the original was terrific as made. Perhaps what you really should be writing about is how Hollywood’s new batch of writers can’t think for themselves and is continually giving us remakes, revamps, re-tramps of movies…

  39. Tiffany says:

    It’s a reboot not a remake there’s a huge difference between those two things they’re making if you will a sequel with women bill Murrys in it but they’re not having women take the place of the original cast and making over the original Ghostbusters that’s not what reboot means there adding on to the story

  40. Tony Garvey says:

    Want to REALLY honor these movies? STOP re-making them. Every re-make up to this point has been half-ass and just plain bad. The you-know-whats in Hollywood need to find something original again.

    • Marl says:

      Batman begins was by far superior to the Tim Burton version.

      I’d like to see the reaction of a reboot of Thelma and Louise, but as Theodore and Louis. You’d get the exact same response and it wouldn’t be sexest.

      • Michael Lile says:

        First off, Batman Begins was not a “reboot” or “remake.” It was making a set of comics that came out called the “Dark Knight” series (and is not in the same line as the original Batman series). I personally preferred the Burton versions over the Nolan ones, as my fave villains were there. I’m sure had Burton stayed on, or if Nolan had gotten a chance to remake the horrid Schumacher 3rd and 4th movies, he would have done a lot better renditions… but the “Dark Knight” series Nolan did took the better of the villains (ie Scarecrow and Two-Face), and relegated them to half-villains under the dumbed-down versions of the other villains.

        Heath’s Joker was by far heavily inferior to even Nicholson’s Joker, who was more spot-on to the original idea of the Joker. Ra’s Al Ghul was a shadow of the original from the comics and the TV series, who actually wasn’t evil, and didn’t destroy just to take out corruption or greed… Ghul was way better in the TV series and subsequent movies, and Hamill’s Joker is by far the best. Heath’s Joker was a thug in clown face with a gun, and Ghul was a measly two-bit criminal bent on taking down Gotham.

  41. Mike says:

    I don’t have a problem at all with women-centric films. My issue is the forced nature of it. It is clear that in this case a bunch of executive sat around a room and said, “Here’s an idea… let’s make all of the Ghostbusters female.”

    There’s nothing organic about it, and within the Ghostbusters mythology it doesn’t seem plausible. How are they going to explain it? All the other Ghostbusters died/retired, and the only people who applied to replace them were female? It’s a continuity problem, not a sexism problem.

    Compare this to a movie like Spy, which I LOVED, where the female protagonists, antagonists, and supporting characters are plausible within the context of the film. I just don’t see how this is going to be the case for this upcoming Ghostbusters. Unless the filmmakers come up with a real clever way of explaining the all-female workforce.

  42. R. Morgan says:

    My issue with the premise is not that it’s women, it’s that it’s YET ANOTHER gimmicky remake. “Hey, let’s remake Lord of the Rings, but with an all Asian cast! It’ll be brilliant!” or “Hey, you know what we need? More tween gangster films. Bugsy Malone was just ahead of its time!” Ghostbusters didn’t need to be remade. Remaking it doesn’t appear (at least from what I have read) to be due to a brilliant new script so much as someone wanting to milk a hit movie’s last lifeblood rather than being creative enough to write something original.

  43. Luna Kraften says:

    I expect it to be a huge flop A remake of this with the special effects of today would be great but all female role eh.. Not to hip on the remakes to begin with but hey when hollywood anymore doesn’t have a thought in their own heads why not right?

  44. Toby Gaffney says:

    im sorry but macarthy has been box office posion the only movie shes been funny in is brides maid so itt’s not about the women aspect for me its the fact some of the woman in this reeboot (cause thats’s what it is….) are not funny in the least

  45. Dave Conley says:

    For me it’s because they are remaking a classic too soon there’s too much re-hashing re-imagining and re-booting in Hollywood, What do you prefer New tires or Retreads?

  46. Vin says:

    Its not because their women its because people want to see Bill and whoever’s else is alive still play the roles/ So get over yourself Kirsten.

  47. Adam Vant says:

    I read where Paul Feig is doing a remake of the Godfather starring Meryl Streep as Don Corleone, Zoey Deschanel as Michael, Kristen Weig as Sonny, and Melissa McCarthy as Clemenza.

  48. kevin says:

    i agree with Zirtoc…cmon The Ghostbusters are men period…its like making the Charlies Angels all guys..its ridiculous

  49. zirtoc says:

    I’ve got a GREAT idea for the next Charlie’s Angels. All dudes! It’s gonna be a blockbuster!

  50. Justin says:

    It’s more difficult to remake movies after changing essential aspects of the source material. It looks worse if it fails, which it probably will. Remakes generally are done poorly, like maybe 70% of em fail critically. If it is done well AND overcomes the difficulty of getting the old audience to appreciate the changes made, then it deserves all the praise. Sorry to Paul Feig, but anyone who’d try to create a movie that involves reimagining the Ghostbusters as females, is either artistically ambitious or is just naive. Movies like this cater to the audiences who pay for them – they’re consumable entertainment. It’s too soon for people to say the movie will definitely be an abomination instead of an honorable homage, but Feig doesn’t get to judge other people in how they live their lives, but we as the audience do get to judge how he makes his movie. We have to pay to see it, and if we all hate it then it’s pretty much worthless. If you hate the way I raise my kids on swear words you’ll still be an unemployed director…

    TLDR:
    1. Using women as the main cast is too different than before. It is more likely to fail than it already was, being a remake.
    2. Feig shouldn’t use personal attacks as a rebuttal for the audience’s concerns about his film.

More Film News from Variety

Loading