Three scholars are fond of paranormal phenomena research. When they are expelled from the institute for this, they decide to establish their own laboratory, which smoothly turns into a service for fishing for ghosts. In the course of the case, a stupid narcissistic handsome and a whispering black woman join them.
Genre: Comedy about paranormal Director: Paul Fig Cast: Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wig, Kate McKinnon Premiere in Russia: July 28, 2016 Age rating: 16+ It looks like: "Ghostly patrol", "horror", "pixels"
It's funny that the main theme of the scandal around the new "hunters" is what heroes turned into women. Because of this, half of the audience hated the film before the release, and the Western "warriors of social justice" raised it in advance to banners as an icon of feminism.
But in the film itself, Paul heroines almost does not play a role – only a couple of unsuccessful jokes (for example, the final boss hunters deliberately shoot at the eggs). Otherwise, the exactly the same remake-recovery could be removed with the male actors, and he would not have become better. The problem is not in women. About the same as it turned out at all, that instead of “ghost hunters” we received a “hunter”, read here.
► although some of them could play better.
The problem is that it was also clear according to trailers: a remake-reducing “hunters” was shot in the style of a stupid clown comedy, which cannot be compared with the original.
Classic films about hunters were ironic, romantic and places even frightening (you just remember Vigo!), and jokes became even funnier in contrast with the seriousness of the situation. The remake is trying to squeeze humor out of everything in a row, and usually unsuccessful. It comes to jokes below the waist (there is even a fart), and to the scenes in which the characters are defiantly blunt. A striking example is an episode at first, where the heroine desperately hides her monitor from the boss, without thinking of turning the compromising window. Or literally everything that the character of Chris Hamsworth does. Jokes here are much less funny than even the title of this review.
From the moment the remake decided to do in this direction, it was doomed to defeat. And even the brilliant actors of any gender would not have changed the situation.
► Well.
Acting in the film is just the worst. The best moments of the film are the scenes where the heroines communicate, put each other and comment on the situations in which they fall: “Similar to my former: they rushed away and left me in shit” (about the ghost of the subway).
Many of these remarks are clearly trained on the set, judging by the fact that they are noticeably higher than the level of the scenario.
Of the four hunters, the only adequate heroine Kristen Wig turned out, all the rest-with some oddities. In the West, everyone praises Kate McKinon, and indeed, her heroine Holtsman is the most memorable. It is extremely eccentric and constantly gets out – it dance, licks the gun, breaks the guitar. For the most part it turns out funny, but sometimes it is still too much. Kate plays a comic image, not a living person.
Some of the toilet jokes, by the way, “died” under Russian translation – maybe fortunately. But the replacement of some replicas (“mucus fell into all the cracks” was replaced by “mucus even fell on lipstick”)-this is a something level of DMC translation for consoles, where the “member” turned into a “nose”.
► The creators “appointed” Kholtsman with a lesbian in an interview, but in the film itself there is not a word. By the way, the same fate befell Sulu from the "Star Way".
And Leslie Jones replays all the time – she squeals and grimaces, because she was unlucky to portray the https://richy-leo-casino.co.uk/ obligatory black in the team. From her heroine made a walking stereotype of the “funny black”, up to the point that she wears hefty gold jewelry and listens to rap. So if you call the film feminist for the destruction of stereotypes, then it must be considered racist for their maintenance.
And sexist at the same time, because Chris Hamsworth plays an impassable idiot and Narcissa, who is kept in the team only for a cute appearance. But to be offended by all this is as stupid as to declare a picture of a progressive. Paul Fig shot a passing comedy, and recalled about the questions of the floor mainly when he fought off the original fans, declaring them with sexists.
► Now you understand why everyone has changed the floor? Were the secretary a woman, such jokes would be far beyond the line.
But the original fans have something to complain about and in addition to changing the floor of the characters. For example, a simplified plot on the limit, on the logic of which it is better not to think. Otherwise, questions will arise like “how the heroines were not in prison half a forty ago?"Or" Does suicide make you omnipotent dark lord?".
Original "hunters" nevertheless talked about the investigation of a whole paranormal business, as well as the relationship of heroes with society and lover. The new “hunters” are a set of occasionally funny episodes united by heroines and closer to the end – a stupid plan of not at all a terrible and even miserable villain. Where he is before the Sumerian gods and vampires from the original! And hunters deal with him suspiciously easy and fun. A sense of danger does not arise once, even when the heroines are forgiven with life aloud. The final battle with a crowd of ghosts turned out to be spectacular, but very frivolous.
► Supplier of new gadgets for hunters – again Holtsman. True, this trap is never used in the case.
She came out spectacular due to the fact that the creators of the remake turned on the imagination and endowed the hunters with a truly diverse weapon to combat ghosts: there is a plasma fist, grenades, and “vacuum cleaner”, and pistols. The use of such an arsenal is the only thing that the remake wins with the original, where the hunters always watered the enemy with fire, standing still. But yes, because of the gadgets, hunters now do not catch ghosts, but crumbling.
But the graphics in the film are weak and unenbitable. Most ghosts look like people hanging in the air, illuminated by blue. With a budget of one hundred and forty -four million, it was possible to draw better (everything went to fees, apparently). For comparison, a similar film “Horings” cost two and a half times less, and the monsters there are much more diverse.
► Among the few exceptions are the “final boss” copied from the ugi bugs from the “nightmare before Christmas”.
And leave the hope of everyone who hoped that the film at least indirectly became a continuation of the classics, as a kind of "hunters 3". This is one hundred percent restart, the events of the first two films in the reality of the third did not exist. As if the creators were afraid of comparisons with the original … and at the same time tried to put pressure on nostalgia for it. Otherwise, why would they insert the original song by Ray Parker into the film (and thank God, by the way: the cover of Fall Out Boy is terrible in the same scene) and the Camo of five actors playing in the old film.
And they would have played good hunters who instruct new ones, but all Camo are the roles of fleeting new characters. Moreover, they were clearly distributed taking into account how the star relates to the remake. Say, for Sigurni Weaver, who supported the film, and Camo made excellent. But the appearance of Bill Murray, who had long wanted to have anything in common with the restart, turned out to be humiliating, and he clearly plays through force. As such a cult and significant universe for the art of the Universe, it was possible to make such a bad and mediocre cinema – a mystery.
Review better than real "ghost hunters". The remake will soon forget, and the classic will stay with us forever.
Occasionally a funny comedy, which, if you should watch, then according to the "TV" before going to bed.