IMDb > Ghostbusters (2016) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Ghostbusters
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Ghostbusters More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 162:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 1617 reviews in total 

1399 out of 2450 people found the following review useful:

Dead on arrival

1/10
Author: Stephen Lancaster
10 July 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

As far as the end result... ...the film completely fell flat across the board. I have nothing against the four leads. I more or less blame the writers, director and the studios choice of direction for the new Ghostbusters.

The acting is some of the most stiff and cookie cutter I have ever seen. There were times when it really sounded like they were reading their lines. The actors did NOT mesh well at all and their interaction with all of the blue and green screen effects was lifeless and clueless.

I was just lost with the approach on their attempted humor. I mean, it's bad. I don't know what panel sat around the table reading the script and laughed at it, but I hope they never do again.

The effects were horrible. Every time, which was A LOT, they used a green screen, I found myself taken away from the movie.

The film constantly contradicts it's own established continuity. One minute they can't kill the ghosts, only contain them, the next, they can. Just ridiculous.

They even added a segment to the movie early on that shows the four girls poking fun at all of the hate for the film. I just don't think the studio gets it.

More mocking of the very people they expect to pay top dollar for their product.

Despite all of the sexist remarks towards the movie, the movie itself is EXTREMELY sexist against men and borderline racist. All men are portrayed as fools in the movie and in order to kill the final villain they have to shoot him in the crotch.

It almost seems the team behind the film knew how stereotypical and sexist their movie was, so they capitalized on the sexism against the film in order to hide that.

I honestly recommend wearing a padded glove when you watch this, IF you watch this. I have never face-palmed so many times during a movie in my life. I would not suggest this film to anyone except maybe children under ten years old and even then, it would simply be for a cartooned 3D experience.

I wish I could find positives because I dislike being so negative about a film. I understand completely the amount of work that goes into something like this. Chris Hemsworth was probably the best part of this believe or not. I could see him leading a team of his own Ghostbusters in another version if written correctly.

But I can't help but quote Jurassic Park concerning the very idea of this film.

The filmmakers "were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."

I really did try to give this film a chance despite all of the negative hype. But, the film was not funny and does not stand on it's own. Honestly, the only thing that intrigued me was seeing the cameos from some of the original cast.

I will add that if you were thinking you had seen the majority of the movie throughout all of the trailers, various clips, TV spots, etc., you would have been thinking correctly. Sony used all of what they considered to be the best material in all of the promotional releases. Let that be your red flag considering how poor the trailers were.

If someone were to ask me if they should go see it, I would say, "No, but if you are curious, just wait for it to become available for Internet streaming."

I don't think people will walk away from this movie afraid of ghosts. I imagine they walk away afraid of the movie and more so, the people who thought it was wise to make it in the first place.

There is some irony here. Ghostbusters 2016 has literally become a ghost. It was dead on arrival.

Was the above review useful to you?

1583 out of 2847 people found the following review useful:

Avoid Like The Plague

1/10
Author: StoryIsEverything from United Kingdom
11 July 2016

I went into this movie with an open mind hoping that it would not be as bad as the trailers and TV spots suggest. It is. I really wanted this movie to surprise me, to make me laugh to make me care for the characters and have some investment in the story, but it failed to achieve any of that. What I saw was a two hour mess of a movie. An unfunny, poorly written, poorly edited, contrived cash-in on a beloved classic which has some of the poorest dialogue and worst performances I've seen in a while. The computer generated effects were like something out of a live action Disney picture. The music, in particular the theme tune was uninspiring and added no impact or energy to the movie. I honestly can't think of any redeeming qualities that this film has. After waiting so long for a new Ghostbusters film this comes as a major disappointment. Some things are just best left alone.

Was the above review useful to you?

1069 out of 2035 people found the following review useful:

Worst Franchise Reboot Ever Made *SPOILER ALERT*

1/10
Author: annilator86 from United States
11 July 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I was unfortunate enough to see an early screening with a friend and... man, this movie isn't bad; it's TERRIBLE. BEYOND TERRIBLE.

It's getting mixed to positive reviews, but the people liking this movie are the same people who jumped on-board the feminist "everyone who hates this film is a misogynist" train and they don't even mention anything beyond the parts they cherry-picked to like in the movie. Throughout the hour and a half + movie, the movie made a desperate attempt to be good to the point where it just appeared like they were trying too hard. Much of the humor is forced and most of the jokes are basic and can be seen/guessed even before the scene rolls. At times, it felt cheap and lazy. I thought I was watching a failing SNL parody rather than a good movie.

Leslie Jones is another problem; she portrays a stereotypical black woman with an attitude. Yelling? Check. Bitch slapping? Check. Every single stereotype about black woman? Check. Remember Winston Zeddemore from the original film? Was he a stereotypical black man at the time in the 1980s? Nope. Instead, he was an Average Joe who wanted a job and took it at Ghostbusters. Here, Leslie portrays her character in an almost-offensive manner when it comes to playing a stereotypical black woman. It's borderline inappropriate and, had she been a man, this film would've been TRASHED by critics for this portrayal of a character.

Also, it's Reverse Sexism in a film. Instead of treating both genders equally, Paul Feig displays men as idiots or assholes. This is true with Hemsworth's character, Kevin, who is the team's secretary. He's completely stupid, clueless and innocent; but mostly stupid. Janine in the original film was a smart, capable woman who had a lot of memorable moments and wasn't portrayed in a sexist, if not really unattractive manner. I almost walked out of the early screening because of how poorly men were portrayed in the film. And, probably, by now, everyone has heard of the atrocious final resolution to the final battle. SPOILER ALERT: SKIP IF YOU WANNA ACTUALLY SEE THIS BURNING DUMPSTER FIRE.

The final battle is resolved by shooting Rowan in the dick. That's right; four chicks shoot Rowan in the dick with their proton packs. -.- You probably already know this because of the GIF floating around the inter-webs, but, yeah. That's how the final battle ends; a really sexist approach to finishing the film. It sounds mild, but combine this with the portrayal of Kevin, Bill Murray's cameo and a few other male characters who interact with the main characters and you have a feminist film ready to go.

Along with these criticisms come with the really bad script that just acts like imitation crab in the food world; it's just an imitation. In fact, half the plot imitates the original in a distasteful manner that just really turns off Ghostbusters fans. It's unoriginal and it pays little homage to the films. When it does, it does it in lackluster fashion. Like, for example, Stay Puft's official sighting in this film is in parade balloon form, not true marshmallow form. If you were expecting at least one showdown with the destructive Puft himself, think again. He has been replaced by the logo ghost. XD

There's so much wrong with this movie, but these things are just a few of them. Thanks Paul Feig for messing Ghosbusters up. I guess Paul's been Busted and it felt good busting' this travesty of a film that will haunt GB fans for generations.

PROS: -Chris Hemsworth (For the most part) -Complete relief when the film ended

CONS: -Terrible acting -Abismal writing -Huge gaping plot holes (Like the inability to buy the firehouse but the ability to create advanced ghost busting technology and obtain parts and equipment.) -Poor CGI effects -Disrespectful cameos and treatment of original material -Reverse sexist message -A stereotypical caricature of a black woman (Leslie Jones as Patty) -Useless inclusion of Patty into the GB team -Non-existent character chemistry -Disappointing final battle which breaks all GB rules first established in the film -Unmemorable soundtrack -Poor editing -Inappropriate responses to constructive criticism hidden in film -Dull, ineffective, dry forced-humor -Identity crisis (Reboot or Sequel. Choose one, Feig.) -Laughable film effort in general

This film is BUSTED and busting this travesty of a film makes me feel good; better than good... GREAT.

1/10 10/100 1/5 F

Was the above review useful to you?

1039 out of 1998 people found the following review useful:

Disappointing dross that bored an entire cinema.

1/10
Author: Matthew from London
12 July 2016

I've never seen the original Ghostbusters films, so I went into watching this with quite an open mind. It ended up being incredibly disappointing though, the CGI was terrible and reminded me of the early 2000s live action Scooby Doo films, the girls, who I'd imagine are funny in their own right, seemed to have absolutely zero chemistry between them and oddly enough Chris Hemsworth's character Kevin ended up being the most funny aspect of the film.

That's just my personal opinion however. My boyfriend who I went to see the film with whispered to me 'this is awful,' half way through and he revealed to me that he had felt ashamed while watching the film. I went because he guaranteed me it was going to be enjoyable and I think it didn't take long until he realised that the movie was a disappointment.

Was the above review useful to you?

1013 out of 1981 people found the following review useful:

This is NOT the worst movie of all time.

1/10
Author: Crosgrove
11 July 2016

Some people are saying that this is the wort movie of all time. It is not. It is merely a really bad movie with no redeeming qualities, and it insults your intelligence.

And, most of the YouTube videos made slamming it are 100s of times funnier than this movie.

Seriously, the movie is just not funny. In fact Batman and Robin (George Clooney and whoever played Robin) had more humor in it than this movie does, and that movie was worse than this one--that is how not funny this movie is.

Save your money. Read a cereal box. It will cost less and be funnier.

Was the above review useful to you?

1042 out of 2059 people found the following review useful:

Doesn't justify its own existence

1/10
Author: Jerry_Sprinkle from United States
11 July 2016

Awful but not necessarily for the reason you would expect.

Despite some early reviews I've read or watched I didn't find the movie to be anti-male. There was nothing offensively anti-man in it that wasn't something I've already seen before and laughed off a million times. Unfortunately that's part of the problem this movie has with humor creativity. There was nothing there to laugh about.

Thankfully Patty Tolan isn't a walking/talking stereotype. They made her a New York City historian instead of a caricature with "street smarts". Sadly, they didn't do her any other favors. Nor were the other characters flushed out at all.

Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy play a pair of old friends who re-unite but I never get much of a sense they were anything but aware they were in a movie. They try to riff and play off each other but it kind of falls flat.

Kate McKinnon's character stands out the most in this movie. The character just seemed too weird in an unrealistic way. She seemed to try chewing up scenery any time she was on a call sheet, even if she didn't have much to say. She didn't feel like she fit into what was happening.

One actress that stood out to me was Cecily Strong. Cecily Strong stood out to me the same way Kristen Wiig first stood out to me in Knocked Up. She only has a very small role in the movie but she's able to be convincing and funny without making it seem like she's in on the joke.

The performances weren't bad per se, they were just very underwhelming all-around. As a result, the film itself does not succeed.

I did like how the ghosts look in the movie. I also like the choice the filmmakers make at the end regarding the classic logo. However I have to be harsh on this movie because it's a reboot that ultimately did not need to be made.

Not only did they attempt to reboot a comedy (tell the same joke twice in a row and see how well it works the second time - comedy is a very very delicate thing and you need to respect the audience) but they went for a movie that originally caught lightning in a bottle. I don't even think Ghostbusters II did enough to justify existing. Maybe the lessons we didn't learn back when the sequel was made are the same lessons we won't learn from the reboot.

Was the above review useful to you?

354 out of 700 people found the following review useful:

one of the worst movies of this decade

1/10
Author: irishpatrick from Vancouver, Canada
2 August 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Honestly, I didn't care about the gender swap that much so long as the film would be a good watch. But it wasn't. it was a terrible, unfunny waste of my time and every other poor soul who had the painful misfortune of having to sit and bear witness to this god awful, inane, inept and pathetic excuse for entertainment. Not a single moment did this wretched movie give me the tiniest iota of anything that would resemble pleasure. Not a single joke made me laugh, not for any second could this film make me muster up a single emotion other than pure anger and disgust, I didn't care about any of the main characters and was so detached from them that if all 4 characters died horribly in the film I would have less of an emotion than I do when I flush my excrement down the toilet. Further-more just to give you an idea of how comprehensively bored i was, I found myself looking at my watch at a point in the film hoping it would be nearing it's end only to find that the film was only 30 minutes into it's running time. I abhor, despise, loathe and resent this movie and plea to anyone reading this to avoid this movie like the plague that it is. In fact I retract that statement as frankly comparing this film to the plague would be an insult to the plague as it has far more reason to exist than this film does.

Was the above review useful to you?

19 out of 37 people found the following review useful:

I don't get the hate

7/10
Author: Timea from Hungary
17 January 2017

I really don't understand why this film is hated so much. It's a comedy. It's only purpose to be funny and entertaining and it is. Yes, some jokes are over the top, but the whole film and the plot is over the top, so there's nothing wrong with that. I liked the original version, but honestly I like this one even more. The female leads were funny and every one of them has a different personality (yes, over the top personalities but still it's fine) I think people want to be more than it is: it's a comedy that sole purpose is to entertain and make you forget your daily problems for a few hours, and it definitely achieves that purpose.

Was the above review useful to you?

40 out of 79 people found the following review useful:

Loved it

10/10
Author: randybass from United States
6 October 2016

I've been a member of this site for many years but this is the first time I've written a review. I guess I didn't feel the need before, but I do this time to counter all of the negative reviews on here. I don't know what that's about - I thought it was a great movie. I was a fan of the original when it first came out, and this one held up very well next to it. The plot development was continuous, the acting was fine, the humor was there, the action was there. The cameos of the original players popped up at unexpected times. Dan Akroyd as executive producer - what's not to like? It paralleled the original in some ways, and diverged from it in others. Nothing wrong with that at all. Now I want the blu-ray set of all three movies (or is there going to be a fourth next year?).

I don't get the fem-bashing of the 4 leads. They certainly hold their own in this movie. But I guess some people just have to do that, for their own reasons. In rating it, I had to think if I gave it a 9 or anything less, what would cause me to give it a downvote? I couldn't think of anything. So 10 it is. I'll be watching this over and over once I get the blu-ray. My only complaint is the woman next to me taking a phone call in the middle of the movie - yes, I told here what to do with that. That turns me off to theaters so much.

Was the above review useful to you?

43 out of 85 people found the following review useful:

Great and Original in its own right

10/10
Author: jibranahmad from United States
14 October 2016

From the start the movie had an easy transition into the characters. They didn't have a full background on them, but you wouldn't feel lost connecting to them. Each character had their specific way and attraction.

I was quite surprised how much the movie achieved in such a short time. The initial beginning didn't feel too long or short, the detective work and mystery didn't feel boring, as well as time with characters as well as connection with them didn't feel too much or too little.

Their catastrophe and battle with the villain was perfect amount, especially for comedy. All in all the movie was great.

The downsides to this movie: In my opinion, I think this movie followed similar publicity as the reintroduction of Star Wars. In case of both movies, their inherit very popular titles from previous generation. This already sets a mood and expectation for the audience.

Unlike the new Star Wars (total copy and paste from my view), Ghostbusters went a different way from their original series. The original was intended a cross between a family movie and horror movie (which was very inventive). Ghostbusters is mainly targeted, or supposed to target people aged between 15-35 (I imagine this is why their sales expectations did not match up).

All summed up, the movie is really good, but don't expect it to be Ghostbusters reborn, this is something very different. I think if we get a sequel, then we can expect something similar to the original series as plot, characters, and mood will all align.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 162:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot synopsis Ratings Awards
External reviews Parents Guide Official site
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history