Ghostbusters

Reboot, re-imagining, remake...whatever you call them let me make one thing clear - I'm going to approach you with a level of negativity, just above the level you go into a sequel with.
(Don't get me started on sequels made more than a couple of years later).
Ghostbusters, the 1984 version, is beloved but is certainly not a cinematic classic though I note it was nominated for a couple of Oscars way back when (effects and original song I think). There will be no Oscars for the 2016 gender swapped version, though it wouldn't surprise if there are a couple of Razzies come next February/March.
A big deal was made on social media about the all girl Ghostbusters.
My two cents worth can be illustrated with the following - if casting four women in the leads was for some empowerment reason then good luck to them, but there's a lot of drooling over Chris Hemsworth's character and much made of how pretty and buff he is and just pay attention to where the girls shoot the big baddie towards the end. Just sayin'!
I don't really care whether it was all girl, all boy or a mix but there's something very wrong with the casting choices and something extremely wrong with the script.
I have to declare that I'm not particularly a fan of Melissa McCarthy, I just haven't found her to be funny and she comes across as try-hard funny too. Particularly in Ghostbusters where she's paranormal investigator Abby Yates. After outing her friend Erin Gilbert (Kristen Wiig) as another enthusiast of the ghostly dimensions just as she's about to be given tenure at a prestigious university as a science lecturer they team up with the kooky Jillian Holtzmann (Kate McKinnon, one of the film's few standouts) to investigate a sighting at a local museum.
From there the Ghostbusters are born, though they only take on that moniker when they are mocked by a news report.
They rope in the pretty but dumb Kevin (Chris Hemsworth) as their receptionist - again gender swapping from 1984 - and subway worker Patty Tolan (Leslie Jones) invites herself along to complete our foursome of female busters.
It seems our apparitions are being encouraged by the mysterious Rowan North (Neil Casey) who wants to over run New York with ghosts for some not completely clear reason. Perhaps to give those using up the CGI budget plenty to keep them busy in the second half.
Put simply, the awkward comedy employed by McCarthy and Wiig just doesn't work. Whether you blame them or the script or both.
There's some familiar territory from the original and this smacks as a cheap knock-off.
The 1984 Ghostbusters wasn't exactly a roll them in the aisles comedy but there was a cheekiness about it and it didn't need to resort to feminine hygiene jokes (the point where the movie lost me after a promising start) or prolonged scenes like where a dean gives the girls a bird flipping session for way too long.
We do get cameos from most of the original cast, Bill Murray's is more a minor role than just a cameo, and I did very much like Dan Ackroyd's.
Unfortunately, if you've seen the trailer then you know exactly what to expect. If you like that trailer then knock yourself out, you'll probably enjoy it. But if it worries you like it did me when it was first released then believe me, your fears are well founded.
There is apparently a scene at the very end of the credits, but I didn't care enough to bother to stick around. The thought of another one of these is bad enough, let alone waiting five minutes to find out what they have in mind for next time.
I'd really hope there isn't a sequel or franchise as the company owning Ghostbusters would be hoping.
Who ya gonna call? Not these Ghostbusters, that's for sure! If you want to see Ghostbusters, I'd advise the 1984 version.
4 out of 10.