Lady Busters Makes Us Feel Good!
In this episode Chris and Allen return to bring you another bonus helping of franchise news, rail against trolls and uncover segregation in the Universal Monsters universe.
Chris gives a quick burst of his uncanny Takei, possibly the world’s briefest Star Trek Beyond reviews and needs feedback regarding your sexual picadillos involving film characters.
While Allen wonders if Trump is breeding Gremlins to build his wall, complains like an old man about the volume in IMAX and needs the human race to just try harder. They also have their longest, to date, post-show sting, so stick around.
So Ghostbusters opened and the world didn’t end. Probably the most contentious film release of all time, did the 2016 reboot really deserve the insane level of misogynistic trolling and disgusting racist abuse it received?
The casting of four women as leads shouldn’t have been this big of an issue in the 21st century. Somehow it just triggered something in the collective bile ducts of the internet boys club. Immediately down voting the trailer on YouTube to make it the most disliked in the sites history. Did the trolls really make a difference ? It wasn’t a great trailer sure, but then that should say more about the quality of trailers and modern movie marketing styles generally.
A clever director casting four anarchic comedic talents seems to have, in the most part worked, as it did in ’84. This film is very funny and well put together. The final third loses steam, there is no explanation why Time Square in 2016 has suddenly become a weird cleaned up 70’s version of itself in the finale and the villain and his masterplan could have used a little more fleshing out. Those are pretty minor gripes in what is a soildly funny and entertaining summer blockbuster.
So all those sexist, racist, misogynistic haters should be happy the movie has done pretty well at the box office, all things considered, and that they may have done enough to ensure there will be a sequel. The Ghostbusters they cherish nostalgically already under sold its blockbusting legend with two middling cartoon series, one featuring a (GASP!) female Ghostbuster, and a very average sequel.
With the sad passing of Harold Ramis in 2014 there was never going to be a Ghostbusters III with the classic line up. Going back further that was never very likely. After the second film Bill Murray was very vocal about no longer having any desire to be “slimed”. Ivan Reitman has stated that the most recent treatment (greenlit by the studio in 2014) saw Murray’s Venkman killed off in the opening scene only for him to return as a ghost to assist, the now adult, Oscar from Ghostbusters II. It should be noted that Bill Murray wasn’t the only hold out. In 1997 Rick Moranis stepped back from film work to focus on raising his children after the death of his wife Ann from breast cancer in 1991. He would, in time, return to performing although he declined a cameo in the 2016 reboot.
Still in a world of ever improving motion capture and CGI technology, with the pre-recorded audio from the video game and input from surviving cast members a slick animated Ghostbusters III doesn’t seem like such an unlikely prospect.
Back Off Man, I’m A Scientist:
Why does Hollywood keep making terrible sequels? Every movie fan has an idea where they’d like to see their favorite character end up after the credits roll, and more importantly whether they even need to see that story told. Cinema Blend offer seven questions every movie studio should ask itself when looking at their franchise properties.
On our last bonus episode we talked about Independence Day: Resurgence which undoubtedly suffered from the lack of Will Smith (question 3) the same could be applied to Grease 2 on the previous episode (with a little question 5 too). On the Dead Pool episode Allen raised the point that any potential Dirty Harry reboot would have difficulty in overcoming the current political climate regarding police brutality (question 2). The one that everyone should really focus on is, do people actually want this movie? (question 1) It would seem movies studios just want to exploit your familiarity for their box office gain and ignore this critical question.
Still, if they keep making them, we at Diminishing Returns, will keep watching them.
Was anyone really desperate for a triple X sequel? Apart from maybe Vin Diesel! Even bombastic action-cinema fan Chris wasn’t keen on the original and neither of the boys got excited by the prospect of xXx: The Return of Xander Cage. Where a thrill seeking extreme sports athlete -turned reluctant spy, for the National Security Agency, returns from self imposed exile (should that be xXxile?) for an totally radical and dangerous mission.
A minor Disney film, Pete’s Dragon (1977), has been remade starring Robert Redford and Bryce Dallas Howard. It seems wholesome and solid and, being a parent, Allen will end up with it in front of his eyes.
There was real enthusiasm, however, for Anton Fuqua’s remake of the Magnificent Seven. With Denzel Washington and Chris Pratt looking like they’ve slipped into the Stetsons of Brynner and McQueen with real ease. While this seven is more ethnically diverse we’d still like to see, at least some, of the seven one day being roping, riding cowgirls!
Next up for dissection are this sexy pair of thrillers Basic Instinct and Basic Instinct 2: Risk Addiction. The original steamy, post feminist erotic thriller courted controversy and made huge box office. It also catapulted Sharon Stone from B movie obscurity into the stratosphere. The belated sequel was obviously intended to return some wattage to her star power after a run of box office disappointments. From a Golden Globe win and Academy award nominations, in the 1990’s, to starring in one of the worst films of all time in Catwoman (2004). That film was nominated for seven Golden Raspberries and holds a 9% on Rotten Tomatoes. Returning to the iconic role of Catherine Trammell must have seemed like an easy ride to hitsville. It turned out to have more in common with the car crash in the opening scene to the sequel.
All clips in the episode are used under Fair Use for the purposes of criticism and are not intended to diminish the original works or limit the ability of the copyright owners to market or sell their product.