TheRealYuma
Since: Feb, 2014
07/17/2016 00:00:00
Fury Road isn\'t a reboot though, is it? I just don\'t see that comparison working. Overall, this is a solid review.
SpectralTime
Since: Apr, 2009
07/17/2016 00:00:00
How is it not? It\'s a movie that shares a premise with another popular movie, but not continuity with it.
TheRealYuma
Since: Feb, 2014
07/17/2016 00:00:00
Press said \"it\'s a reboot,\" but George Miller himself never called it own. Look it up Spectral. This http://madmax.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:Benxander/Fury_Road:_sequel,_reboot_or_something_else%3F![](\"https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/external_link.gif\")
may be helpful. It could be considered a Soft Reboot. Miller said \"It’s sort of a revisit. The [previous] three films exist in no real clear chronology, because they were always conceived as different films.\"
Leave a Comment:
Guess Who Everyone is going to be Cosplaying as Now
It's a sad realisation that a large part of 2016's Ghostbusters target audience will be sitting at home, arms folded, muttering to themselves that they will not under any circumstances watch this betrayal of a movie. Sad, because they are pointlessly denying themselves a perfectly good comedy and one of the few decent big screen releases in the last couple of months.
Ghostbusters is not really a remake or a sequel, but a reboot to the franchise. It follows some of the same beats of the original movie and has plenty of unsubtle references to it, but it soon becomes its own thing. To get it out of the way right now; yes, like a lot of reboots, Ghostbusters is largely superfluous movie that can't hope to beat the original. Unlike a lot of reboots however, it is actually done well, made by people who seem to have got the gist of what made the original good in the first place. This isn't like new Robocop or new Total Recall, which sucked out all the fun and salt and put nothing back in. It isn't quite Mad Max: Fury Road either, but it is certainly closer to that than the former. And that's not just because it has more women in it.
What makes it work is that director Paul Feig centres the movie around its characters, letting scenes largely work off of the chemistry between talented comedy actors, which is what the original did too. Unlike the original however, it doesn't go for the dry wit of Murray and Ackroyd but instead chooses to be very loud and silly. This is most obvious with Kate Mckinnon's turn as a platinum punk nerd who looks peculiarly like Egon from the cartoon. Her "wacky" antics can come off as either hilarious or intolerable, depending on how you are inclined. I liked her, but she was close to crossing the line.
There isn't much more you can say about a comedy movie other than "it's funny, go watch it''. But well it is funny goddamnit and you should go watch it. If you are anything like me, you'll appreciate the reason to go sit in a dark, fully air-conditioned room away from an uncommon scorcher of a British summer.