New ‘Ghostbusters’ trailer brings something strange to your neighborhood

One of the highlights of 2015 for me (with the exception of my daughter’s birth, of course) was spending 20 minutes on the phone with Ernie Hudson talking “Ghostbusters.” Hudson, who hails from the Detroit area and even attended my alma mater, was in town to introduce some local screenings of the movie during Halloween weekend. As we talked about his time on set and his memories of the film, one thought kept going through my brain:

Oh my gosh, I’m talking to a Ghostbuster. If only my 12-year-old self could see me. 

Ever since first grade, when I saw the movie on VHS at my friend Joey’s house, I’ve loved “Ghostbusters.” I watched the “Real Ghostbusters” cartoon show every Saturday morning. I owned a proton pack, a ghost trap and the soundtrack to “Ghostbusters II.” My brother, cousins and I would grab whatever video cameras were around and make our own Ghostbuster movies. One of the first stories I ever wrote was “Ghostbusters Jr.,” an 88-page story scribbled in a spiral notebook that made my friends and me into honorary members of the team.

And it’s one of the rare movies of my childhood — along with “Back to the Future,” “E.T.” and “The Muppet Movie” — that only improved with time. As I got older, I picked up on more than the Slimers and marshmallow men. I realized what a perfectly calibrated comedy it is, with deadpan humor butting up against fantastic visual gags. Dan Aykroyd’s ambitious supernatural comedy was grounded by Harold Ramis and Ivan Reitman’s Everyman approach, with a liberal dose of Bill Murray’s above-it-all persona to sweeten the mixture. And Hudson’s role, too often forgotten, is also essential; the blue-collar entryway to a story about scientists and entrepreneurs. The gags are still great (Mr. Stay-Puft is one of my favorite cinematic creations) and the film is endlessly quotable. And if you want proof that “Ghostbusters” is special, look no further than “Ghostbusters II,” in which the same cast and crew can’t manage to make lightning strike again by doing the exact same things.

Ever since the sequel’s release in 1989, we’ve been haunted by rumors of a third entry. They were usually stoked by Dan Aykroyd and shot down by Bill Murray. And honestly, I was always glad. “Ghostbusters II” was a reminder that maybe you should leave such a delicate formula alone. And Aykroyd’s pitches were always so outlandish, featuring the Ghostbusters in hell or promising that they would explore new theories about the paranormal. It seemed like Aykroyd missed the entire point: “Ghostbusters'” greatest success was never in its concept, but in its chemistry. I never cared much about what new threat the gang would be facing; I just wanted to see those four comedians bantering again. And once Harold Ramis died, I lost a desire to see that. There’s no original Ghostbusters without Egon.

So, yeah, bringing back “Ghostbusters” is a hard sell for me. But the idea of remaking it with an all-female cast perked my ears up, especially when Paul Feig was announced as director. Feig (another Detroit native) was co-creator of “Freaks and Geeks,” arguably the best television show of the last 20 years. More than anything, that show hinged on the chemistry of its young cast (who still often act together and have become some the world’s biggest comedy stars). Feig went on to helm “Bridesmaids” (one of the funniest movies of the past 10 years), “The Heat” (a solid buddy-comedy) and last year’s “Spy,” which featured a Melissa McCarthy performance that was one of the best of the year. Feig knows funny, and he is one of the few directors who knows that women can be just as funny as men, often funnier. And when it was announced that Feig’s “Ghostbusters” would be headlined by McCarthy, Kristen Wiig, Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones, I got really excited. These are four extremely talented, funny women. Just like the original team, three of them honed their chops on “Saturday Night Live” (and McCarthy’s stints as host have been yearly highlights). This was a funny director, leading a funny troupe. Could they really do something new, fun and funny?

Today, we saw the first trailer for the film.

So, it appears this is more of a remake of the original film than a reboot or side-sequel (even though the seeds to a franchise were laid in the first movie). And I have to be honest: that might be a problem. “Ghostbusters” is iconic, and it looks like this film revisits many of the same beats. There’s a harmless-looking ghost in a library that turns evil. People wear weird contraptions on their head. Slimer shows up. Ecto-1 and the proton packs look familiar and there’s even a cameo by the original firehouse. There’s even the same awkward and outdated racial dynamics of the group, with the three white scientists and one black blue-collar worker (this time, she almost literally says “I know the streets”). It’s going to be very hard to sit through this film and not look at it as “Ghostbusters” with a new coat of paint. I wish they’d either picked up on the concept of the first film and had this be a separate franchise in a universe where the original film took place, or that they went in a totally different direction, even a different city, as New York is really tied into the original film. Personally, in an age where more people are working out of their home and horror films constantly take place in peaceful neighborhoods, I would have loved a suburban twist on Ghostbusters.

Having said that, there’s a lot in there I do like. Feig’s never been an overly visual director, but he began to push himself with the fight scenes in “Spy.” And here, the visuals look like a lot of fun. It’s bright and poppy, and there seems to be a lot of energy to the visuals. And I particularly dig what looks like it’s going to be the main setpiece in Times Square, with hundreds of ghosts walking about. The original’s climax took place on top of a building and the sequel’s took place in a museum. It looks like this might have a bit more craziness to it. The twist where the ghosts can possess people looks like it might be a fun addition to the series.

And I like what I’m seeing from the cast. No, it’s not an overly funny trailer. Neither were the trailers for “Spy” or “Bridesmaids.” When so much of your comedy is based on character interactions, sometimes it’s hard to sell that in a trailer, and I hope that’s the case here. Wiig and McCarthy look to be playing vulnerable and confident, respectively, and those are shades both of them wear well. I will never tire of Leslie Jones yelling. And McKinnon, who looks like the cartoon Egon, appears to be bringing the weird. Like I said, these are very funny women, and their chemistry is going to be key to this working. I’m glad I see hints of that. It may not be a particularly funny trailer, but it is a fun one, and it didn’t leave me cringing.

It’s easy to get up in arms over remakes, but it’s also a bit silly. The original films will still be there. The 1984 “Ghostbusters” will always be a classic. Hopefully this will also be enjoyable. And maybe keeping some narrative similarities to the original along with some homages isn’t a bad thing. Like I said, it’s the chemistry, not the concept, that makes a “Ghostbusters” movie great. And if these four ladies are allowed to be as funny as I know they can be, I’m happy giving them a call.