By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
'Ghostbusters' 2016 is pleasant but pointless
306a7d039f2f7ce6a693fe9feb8e521686fef4e010b45c2c552ee625c77f5325
The Ghostbusters Abby (Melissa McCarthy), Holtzmann (Kate McKinnon), Erin (Kristen Wiig) and Patty (Leslie Jones) in Columbia Pictures' "Ghostbusters." - photo by Jim Bennett
In a recent column, I confidently predicted the new Ghostbusters movie would be the biggest box-office bomb of 2016. That seemed to me like a solid bet, given that the movie was the subject of an unprecedented wave of online fanboy hatred and that the trailers looked decidedly unfunny. My plan was to ignore the movie altogether and be the first to say I told you so when it went down in flames.

But then an odd thing happened. The reviews started coming in, and they were almost universally positive. At first, I thought people were overcompensating to push back against the mindless backlash. (So did the fanboys, who posted comments everywhere that it was a conspiracy and that Sony Pictures was paying off critics.) But as I read more and more opinions from people I respect, I started to think that maybe, just maybe, this movie might be pretty good. And thus it was that I found myself on a Tuesday afternoon taking in a Ghostbusters matinee.

So whats my verdict? Mixed. Or, more accurately, mixed up.

I realized there was no way I could view this movie objectively, as the original film was such an iconic part of my youth. It came out shortly before my 16th birthday, so it hit me at precisely the right time for it to lodge itself into my prefrontal cortex from now until doomsday. I was the wiseacre kid who wanted to be as cool and funny as Bill Murray was, and Ghostbusters was, for me, the 80s adolescent How-to Guide to Geek Chic. So, as much as I would like to pretend otherwise, I went into this thing with a sizable chip on my shoulder. Pretty good wasnt going to cut it. This movie was going to have to wow me, and it didnt.

Yet, surprisingly, I still had a good time, partly because the 2016 Ghostbusters is bathed in nostalgia for the 1984 original. Look! Theres Bill Murray! And Annie Potts! And Sigourney Weaver! And Ernie Hudson! And Dan Aykroyd saying, I aint afraid a no ghosts! There was even a bust of the late Harold Ramis in the hallway. The cameos and callbacks were relentless throughout, so I softened a little in my unreasoning opposition to the reboot, but that wasnt enough to win me over.

It would have helped if, having brought Bill Murray back for an extended cameo, they had given him something funny to do. But every single one of these cameos was laugh-free. It was as if the producers said, Look, we know you love the old Ghostbusters, as much as we do. In fact, here they are! See? Isnt this great? Well, sure, but its also sort of pointless. If the only reason to make this film is to give a high-five to the original, then why bother making it at all?

That, really, is the crux of the problem. Sure, the new cast was perfectly adequate to the task of presenting slightly modified versions of the classic films comedic beats, and there were enough laughs to make for a pleasant but forgettable afternoon. But this movie had no independent raison dtre, no point of view of its own.

As for the box office, its not the Hindenburg-level disaster I anticipated, but its probably not going to make its money back, either. Sony executives still insist that, regardless, a sequel is on its way, and the end-credits scene teased the evil ghost from the 1984 film as the next villain, so we can expect another competent retread. That alone ensures that neither this Ghostbusters nor its planned sequel will permanently lodge itself into any 16-year-olds prefrontal cortex.
Sign up for our E-Newsletters
Have You Seen This? Street musician slays with clarinet
638421_Screenshot_1.png
Better than almost every face-melting guitar or drum solo. - photo by Facebook video screenshot

THE BIG EASY — Yeah, yeah, we all know that New Orleans is stuffed to the gills will incredible musicians.

But knowing that fact and then hearing that fact are two different things. You can step into any number of jazz clubs on any given night on Bourbon Street, and you’ll probably be impressed with virtually every act. Or you can sit at home on your comfy couch and watch this featured video.

In the video, you’ll see a woman who is in the groove. She is swinging hard, and wailing on her clarinet with a practiced expertise that makes it sounds so easy.

From note one you’ll be drawn in; your appreciation will grow with every second, and then your face will melt off when you realize how incredible she really is.

If you’ve never played a woodwind or a brass, you may not know everything that comes with a performance like this. Lung capacity and breath control are huge factors in keeping your notes clear and loud, and hitting those high notes is especially difficult.

So when this woman hits that high note and holds it for several seconds, you know you’re dealing with an exceptional musician. It means she has worked hard for years to develop skill on top of her natural talent, and we get to benefit.

It kinda makes you wonder how we let people get away with mumble rap and autotune when talent like this exists in the world.

I wish this video were longer, and I wish I had more information about this woman, but as it is, we’ll just have to appreciate the little flavor of New Orleans jazz posted by the Facebook group Clarinet Life.

Martha Ostergar is a writer who delights in the ridiculous that internet serves up, which means she's more than grateful that she gets to cruise the web for amazing videos to highlight for your viewing pleasure.
Latest Obituaries