Jason Reitman’s bro remake of ‘Ghostbusters’ will ‘hand the movie back to the fans’

'The Front Runner' Premiere - Arrivals

I have this thing where, if I find a story so stupid and offensive, I tend to ignore it because I don’t even want to waste my time giving those perpetrators any space. So it was with the controversy over the lady-redux of Ghostbusters in 2016. I saw the comments from toxic dudebros about how lady ghostbusters were “ruining their childhoods” and I saw the “men’s rights activists” wage a hateful and sexist campaign against the movie. And I thought that by largely ignoring all of it, maybe it would go away and we would stop talking about it. The MRAs did their work – they even doxxed Leslie Jones – and the 2016 Ghostbusters did not do well critically or financially. To be fair, the movie wasn’t great. But it “wasn’t great” because the script was a mess, not because ladies ghostbusted.

The whole thing left a bad taste. It was a clear signal that if salty bros whined and cried about how EVERYTHING should be about them and for them, they would get their way. And now they’re getting their own redux, courtesy of Sony and Jason Reitman. In 2020, Reitman will release his dude-bro remake of Ghostbusters, and to preview the newest remake, he said some shady sh-t to the Bill Burr podcast:

The last thing that Sony wants with the upcoming “Ghostbusters” sequel, slated for summer 2020, is to repeat what happened with Paul Feig’s doomed 2016 reboot. Not saying anything about the quality of the film, as each film fan is entitled to their own opinion (unjustly biased or not), but Sony’s last attempt to bring the “Ghostbusters” franchise back was met with some serious backlash from a vocal group of fans. And apparently, the studio learned a lesson from that, and has hired the 1984 film’s original director’s son Jason Reitman to bring the franchise back to a place where fans will be happy.

And when you hear Jason Reitman describe the incredibly detailed ways he’s going to bring the franchise back to its roots, it’s clear the new director is catering to those same folks that cried “sacrilege!” when Dan Aykroyd, Bill Murray, Ernie Hudson, and Harold Ramis were replaced by *GASP!* four women.

“I’m not making the ‘Juno’ of ‘Ghostbusters’ movies,” said the director, while being interviewed on a recent episode of the Bill Burr Podcast. “This is going to be a love letter to ‘Ghostbusters’. I love this franchise. I grew up watching it. I consider myself the first ‘Ghostbusters’ fan. I was like seven years old when that movie came out and I love it. I want to make a movie for my fellow ‘Ghostbusters’ fans…. We went back to the work files for the sound of the proton pack. And we went back to the stems of Elmer Berstein’s score. Just for where it says, in the teaser, ‘Sumer 2020,’ we went back and found the original physical vinyl letters they used to create the ‘Ghostbusters’ poster in 1984. Rescanned them and then our titles guys reprinted them. We filmed the titles. Not like in a computer. We shot physical titles with a light and smoke effect because that’s how they would have done it back in the day.”

“We are, in every way, trying to go back to the original technique and hand the movie back to the fans,’ the director concluded.

[From The Playlist]

This is some kind of unsubtle men’s rights/salty-bro code right? They’re “trying to go back to the original technique and hand the movie back to the fans,” meaning that not only has it been proven that ONLY MEN can be ghostbusters, but now only men and boys can LIKE Ghostbusters. Only bros are “fans.” Little girls and teenage girls and grown women can’t like Ghostbusters because their vagines render them incapable of the truest, purest fandom. Like, WTF is Jason Reitman playing to? He’s playing to the worst of the fandom. And it’s gross. So is his weaksauce explanation:

The BFI 62nd London Film Festival European Premiere of 'The Front Runner' held at the Cineworld Leicester Square

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

50 Responses to “Jason Reitman’s bro remake of ‘Ghostbusters’ will ‘hand the movie back to the fans’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Beli says:

    A lot of the whining last time was under the guise of “No, I’m not misogynistic, I just hate the unnecessary remakes of my childhood classics!”

    Let’s see, shall we?

    • Earthbound Misfit says:

      …especially because nothing is more unnecessary than this.

    • Redgrl says:

      Equally stupid is his ridiculous douche-bro hairdo.

    • Susannah says:

      I went to see the movie in Philly with three girlfriends. As we were going in to the theater, a group of 20 something bros were coming out of another theater and said, “Have fun at your dyke movie dykes” and then started laughing. My friends and I started laughing too because that’s one of the stupidest insults ever! That movie triggered so many guys, I don’t get it!
      (I hope that wasn’t considered too rude a word to write on here.)

      • Amy says:

        I really don’t understand it. The guys I know don’t seem to act like this. So who are the guys and what is their problem (and what women and men are letting them act like this?)?

  2. Maya says:

    Sigh…I officially give up on all Hollywood men except Universal treasure Keanu Reeves.

    I am so done with white American men at the moment.

    Not saying they are all bad but there seems to be fewer good ones than we thought.

    • BchyYogi says:

      I’ll see you one “cancel most American men” , and raise you to “colonialism was the evil scourge and fake Christianity paved the way” . #disillusioned

    • Sparkly says:

      With you on Keanu. I’ve been keeping my fingers crossed about Tom Hanks and Patrick Stewart as well.

    • Feebee says:

      I’m still rather partial to Dermot Mulroney. Don’t burst my bubble.

  3. Incredulous says:

    The fans will hate it and he’ll get thrown under the bus by the studio.

  4. Darla says:

    Well dude, you can cast jason Momoa in all the roles and I still wouldn’t see this. Hard pass.

    And I actually enjoyed the last Ghostbusters. Yeah it was a weak script but what a cast. It was enjoyable enough for me.

    • Maya says:

      I found it funnier than the 80s ones.

      The ladies & Chris were amazing even though the overall story wasn’t.

    • Digital Unicorn says:

      I liked it well enough and yeah it had the potential to be better if they had a better script – they had the cast to pull off something quite funny.

    • sash says:

      Yeah, I agree. I thought they had good chemistry and I really enjoyed it. I do think the script was weak. A little less of the improv stylings and a bit more polish and it could have been better.

    • Snazzy says:

      I also enjoyed it! I found it funny and Chris as the comic relief eye candy was fantastic

    • Tiffany :) says:

      I liked the remake a lot, but I think it was geared a little too much towards children. The “stakes” weren’t very high, because I didn’t think the ghosts were actually going to kill people. Maybe I was just so young when I saw the originals that it seemed they were more for adults than the 2016 version.

      • Tim Peterson says:

        I didn’t love the new film, but it didn’t ruin my evening, let alone my childhood.

        But the worst part was the original cast cameos. And the lame, lame villain.

  5. Who ARE these people? says:

    Women “expand the universe” only if you think you come from Planet Man.

  6. Mia4s says:

    The remake was pretty awful so I was never able to work up much energy on this whole thing. His wording was definitely unfortunate though. That said, they’re going two females and two males for the main characters in this new one. Not a bro fest from the sounds of things. And they are kids. So I’ll just sit back and wait for trailers. Hopefully it will be good. 🤷‍♀️

    • Sarah says:

      I also heard they were doing a two female/two male team. People trying to make this new movie out as being some kind of idol for MRAs to worship really don’t seem to know what they are talking about.

      As for Reitman’s quotes, the guy was talking about recapturing the aesthetics of the original film. The only way anyone could possibly be offended by what he said is if one twisted his words around to fit into a particular narrative.

      • Caroline says:

        yeah he’s a filmmaker himself and the son of the original director, this is not offensive unless you’re offended by people who are into recreating old-school film-making

  7. Relli80 says:

    I thought the remake was hilarious. I didn’t see because all the bad press and then caught it on TV. I guess there is room in my heart for both.

  8. Miss M says:

    WT actual F? As if…

    • Larelyn says:

      MAGA. Oh, wait, M(Gb)GA.

      Ironically, i’m at a conference for work learning about change culture and how to embrace change. America is broken.

  9. sash says:

    “back to the fans”

    AND AWAY FROM THOSE PESKY WOMENZZZZ!

    Not so subtle bro-code. You’re absolutely right.

  10. T.Fanty says:

    I guess they don’t need girlmoney then, because apparently I don’t count as a fan. Their loss. I’ll go see anything else that is playing on opening weekend.

    Also, dude, don’t act like artistic integrity matters when you got the job because of who your dad is.

  11. Lala11_7 says:

    After the HORROR that WAY TOO MANY men fueled regarding the last GB movie…BEFORE it even went into production….

    I don’t want to see the originals OR any sequels…remakes or anything else….

    It was disgusting…and it IS disgusting and I’m…SO TIRED OF IT!!!!

  12. Natalie S says:

    The original movie has not aged well. Peter Venkman is a creep.

    They need to update that. It’s just what it is. A lot of these movies do not have men treating women appropriately.

    And it’s dumb to make a big deal about the sounds and imagery when the story is what’s key. Do they have a good story?

    Why be exclusionary anyway? There were good bits to the 2016 movie. Why not focus on that and the good parts of the original movie and talk about the talent of the actors and having a good story and good jokes. Why be unnecessarily combative? Who even wants to associate with the kind of hatefulness that led to Leslie Jones getting doxxed.

    Her Weekend Update piece addressing that was amazing. She faced down everyone and refused to be made to feel bad or ashamed of herself. That took courage.

    • Tiffany says:

      Yup, the original was not very good and did not do well critically either.

      I liked Feig’s version and this is rich coming from Nepotism and Irony is Lost on Me Reitman.

  13. DahliaDee says:

    See all dudebros whining about how Brie Larson is ruining Captain Marvel with her rampant feminism. I just can’t.

  14. Simone says:

    But even the original got a sequel and it was trash! Cult classics are not remakable. It was a fresh idea with clever lines and a great cast, and even the original squad couldn’t make a franchise happen. The fans know this. Only douchebros with zero unserstanding of cinema, markets, or film think that casting women was the problem with the reboot. It. Was. Never. Going. To. Be. Good. It has nothing to do with women OR men.

    • Mia4s says:

      The original got a sequel because it made 10 times its budget (almost unheard of today). The remake didn’t because it lost $70-80 million and is considered a damaging financial failure to the studio. In adjusted dollars the original Ghostbusters made the equivalent of over $600 million in the USA alone. Basically Titanic and Black Panther money. Calling the original Ghostbusters a “cult classic” is ridiculous.

      The odds of this new one being some smash breakout are indeed iffy, but I don’t blame the studio for going this way. The cold hard truth is the remake did not succeed financially….and that’s all franchises are about for the studios. You think studios would be singing the praises of the inclusive Black Panther if it had made $70 million instead of $700 million? Hahaha! Nope. This movie’s failure had nothing to do with the cast being all female…but the bottom line is it failed, and sadly the dudebros get to coast on that. That sucks, but that’s showbiz. 🤷‍♀️

  15. manda says:

    The weird thing about the original Ghostbusters sequel (Ghostbusters 2) and the all-ladies reboot was that in both of these movies, people totally forgot/didn’t know about the events in Ghostbusters 1, which was always stupid to me. In the reboot, they should have been in the same world as the original two, and the Ghostbusters should have been portrayed as busting all these years, and now these are the ladies in charge right now. I don’t know why there always has to be this “people must be convinced this is really happening” thing in these types of movies (see also: zombie movies) and reestablishment of what is happening. We understand what is happening!

    (in G2, the guys were portrayed as somehow staging the whole thing–even though thousands of people saw the marshmallow man IRL. And people thought they were frauds, despite all the ghost stuff all over NYC in the first movie. Really weird and stupid creative choice IMO)

  16. MS says:

    Why does it have to be remade at all? Are there no original ideas left in Hollywood? Everything is a reboot. I prefer original films. They would rather spend a shit load of money of trying to recreate a film than give a chance to up & coming screenwriters, directors & actors.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      ” They would rather spend a shit load of money of trying to recreate a film…”

      No, remakes actually cost a shit load LESS than original material. They already own rights, they already have a built in audience, the property has name recognition and will practically market itself. Compare that to an original idea, and it takes MUCH more money and effort to get it on anyone’s radar.

  17. Feebee says:

    He knew exactly what he was saying. Spare me the ‘oops that came out wrong’.

  18. Prairiegirl says:

    My then-13 y.o. son LOVED the lady ghostbusters. He thought they were hilarious and capable. Woke a.f. Gen-Z boys for the win.

  19. adastraperaspera says:

    Here’s a fresh idea, boys. How about putting hands on a keyboard and writing new material entirely? Give some thought to including women as humans for characters while you’re at it.

  20. Cindy says:

    To be fair, I was also quite over at the time of all the women acting like this movie was some sort of milestone in modern feminism and going OFF on everyone who didn’t see the brilliance of it. A girl I went to college with on facebook told me that if I didn’t see the importance of the movie I’m not a true feminist. What the hell? I’m sorry, but if Ghostbusters 2016 is the first movie you think of when I say “feminist cinema” then you’re in DESPERATE need to watch more female-produced films.

    I don’t understand why people are so passionate about these dumb blockbuster movies. If you like them, watch them; and if you don’t, don’t. These are dumb, light movies made to entertain audiences and make money. They are not intricate works of art. Hell, the people producing this movie seem to take them less seriously than the fans who are not losing any money if they bomb.

  21. Patty says:

    Ghostbusters did not need to be remade period. It doesn’t need yet another remake period. I still haven’t seen the 2016 version; if I want to watch Ghostbusters, I watch the original. Everything doesn’t need to be remade, updated, or rebooted.

  22. Jay (the Canadian one) says:

    Be fair, it’s not a remake it’s a sequel. I remember the sequel being talked about and in the works simultaneously with the remake. It just took longer to get the original cast organised.

    And for the record, I saw the remake opening week, and I was disgusted by all the crap it and its actors got. I agree there’s room for the original and the remake, and I still think that applies. Hence I don’t think the sequel should get hate just for existing either.

    Granted, it may suck as bad as Ghostbusters 2, but I’ll wait and see.

  23. Fluffy Princess says:

    I’m not seeing this remake. I thought the 2016 version was fun and a lighthearted way to spend a few hours. I thought Melissa McCarthy and Leslie Jones scenes together were hilarious.

    But, I don’t care if the reviews for this movie are stellar. They could say this is going to be the best movie ever in the history of cinema and I’m still not gonna watch it.

    This whole backlash against women being superheroes and/or the heroes of their own lives or saving others instead of having a man do it, is just so…well sad. It’s so sad that there are SO MANY men who can’t stand the thought of a movie not being tailored to their EXACT specifications that they literally start foaming at the mouth and going bonkers. It’s sad how many are so emotionally stunted that they can’t enjoy something new or different or about someone who’s not a white dude. It’s just overwhelmingly, well, disappointing.

  24. raincoaster says:

    Big talk about purity from a guy who wouldn’t have a career if it weren’t for his dad. Like, literally, this is a Purebloods vs Mudbloods battle, when it comes right down to it.

  25. Mina says:

    I mean, Jason Reitman has done some incredible vehicles for women in most of his movies, if not all, so I thinks he’s hardly the bro type. I don’t see anything wrong in what he said. The 2016 Ghostbusters was a pretty bad movie, and not exactly because of the female cast.

  26. jay says:

    Their “bravery”?? Maybe don’t be a condescending prick when you’re apologizing the next time for being a condescending prick.