bewnhurr

2001 maniacs is essentially a grind house movie if you look at it. The story is the third most important part of the film, after gore and sex. That being said, i do not really mind that since i am a fan of gore myself.

The plot in the movie is not anything new, a bunch of teenagers gets into trouble with the supernatural. You have seen that several times if your a fan of horror. What makes this movie better than average is the fact that it's self avare of it. It doesn't try to be the shining or something like that, instead we get pure grind house fun. The camera is even outdated for the time, a pretty classic grind house team (since they were made on a shoestring budget).

Robert Englund is great as the main villain (As always), the main cast of teens are bad and the acting overall from them is stale and uninspiring. What makes this movie fun to watch is the interaction of the teens (Bad acting) with the townspeople (mostly good acting). The plot moves along with a decent speed so you are never bored with it, and the climax is pretty good.

Another thing that really make it feel like a grind house aside from the gore and the sex are the fact that it is not scared of taking the low road. It's rare to have such strong language in horror movies that are mainstream produced as this one has. "Boy, Negro, Chinaman (Sorry, Chinawoman) and such. Its a movie that doesn't care at all and is just out to entertain you.

Is it better than 2000 maniacs? No, it is. not Is it a bad movie? Yes it is, but it's also a pretty decent one. Once again, that is if you see this movie as a grind house movie, which it really isn't, but there are strong influence by the grind house cinema in it. The best part of this movie is the kills, that isn't anything strange since that's true 90% of the time when there is a body count. But there is also a pretty fun dark humor in this film that doesn't go unnoticed.

What do you get when you take four actors, stick them together and have them all doing their own bit? The answer is a movie that feels more like a skit than a comedy. Combine this fact with marketing campaign that is almost in the lines of Citizen Kane "The movie no one wants you to see" but in this case it's "See the movie or you are a sexist".

Now that we have gotten that whole point out, let's talk about the actual movie. Ghostbusters is a reboot of the entire franchise. The first two movies did not happen and the original cast members that make cameos aren't playing the characters they should.

The comedy is a hit or a miss for most of the times. I personally do not find jokes about slime in every orifice and cracks to be that funny, even if it made me smile a little. The main problem with the humor is that it's not in the style of what i think of when i think Ghostbusters, it's more like a poor mans slapstick with cheap jokes about queefing and penises.

The skit about the stupid male secretary was also flat. The whole "My cat" joke was just horrible, the fish tank joke was just sad. Sadly, the movie is also full of filler scenes that are just here because they do not contribute much to the movie overall. And do not get me started about the nut-shots and other scenes like where they talk about some ghosts virginity. One thing i actually like was the fact that they used the bad CGI as a joke with the whole "Oh it's so fake" skit. But was it really necessary to do it two times? Again, this is a part of the movie that feels like "We're doing it because we need more stuff on film".

Now let's talk about the main bad guy and the ghosts in general, the main bad guy is just a big crybaby that have the power to control human beings, why? Because it's something easy to do. Combine that with the fact that the movie looks down on the audience by having the bad guy explain his plans, like it was convoluted or something like that.

This is a movie where you try to sell the idea more than you try to sell the movie, yes it would be great to see more movies with women as the main name in them but this movie would have been just as bad if there was four random dudes who suited up and went to catch ghosts, and why? That is because the thing that made Ghostbusters good was not the plot or the setting, but the characters and how they were together. All in all, Ghostbusters 2016 is not a good movie. It is not the worst movie i have ever seen and it doesn't deserve all the ones that it has gotten, but it sure doesn't deserve all the tens it got either. It's a summer movie that is there to rake in some cash.