--- title: "Ghostbusters" year: 2016 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/ghostbusters-2016" fi1m_score: 64 critics_score: 67 critics_reviews: 25 published: "2026-09-19T15:34:11.566538+00:00" updated: "2026-09-19T15:34:12.022547+00:00" region: "US" licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Ghostbusters (2016) Directed by Paul Feig · 1h 57m · MPA PG-13 · Action, Fantasy, Comedy **Fi1m score: 64** · Critics 67 from 25 reviews *In a sentence:* Kate McKinnon dances with two blowtorches and the rest of the film never finds anything to match her > Paul Feig’s reboot has four capable leads, one remarkable one and a script that keeps looking over its shoulder at 1984. The first hour is good, easy fun; the finale is twenty minutes of green light with the jokes switched off. ## Synopsis Manhattan, the present. Erin Gilbert (Kristen Wiig) is a physicist at Columbia University a week from tenure when a book about ghosts she wrote years ago resurfaces online, and a stranger asks her to look into a haunting at the Aldridge Mansion. Her co-author, Abby Yates (Melissa McCarthy), is still chasing the paranormal in a tiny institute lab with the engineer Jillian Holtzmann (Kate McKinnon). At the mansion the three see a ghost; Erin is covered in slime, posts the footage and loses her job. They set up above a Chinese restaurant, hire Kevin (Chris Hemsworth) as a receptionist and are joined by Patty Tolan (Leslie Jones), a subway worker who has seen something in the tunnels. Meanwhile a hotel janitor, Rowan North (Neil Casey), is leaving strange devices around the city. ## Review Paul Feig’s [*Ghostbusters*](https://film.one/film/ghostbusters) had a job nobody would envy: remake a comedy people have quoted at each other since 1984 without copying it or insulting it. It arrived under a cloud of hostility that had nothing to do with anything on screen, and the plain answer to all of it is that the film is fine. It is a decent, good-natured comedy with four capable leads and one remarkable one, and a script by Feig and Katie Dippold that keeps checking whether the old film is still watching. It is funniest in the first hour, when the four women are alone in a lab with a new machine. The callbacks arrive in the second hour, and they slow it down. The four are cast to a pattern, and the pattern mostly holds. Kristen Wiig’s Erin Gilbert is the nervous one, a physicist who wants tenure and would rather nobody mentioned the book about ghosts she wrote in her twenties. Melissa McCarthy’s Abby Yates is the believer who never stopped, still in the same lab with a running grievance about a takeaway that keeps short-changing her on wontons. Leslie Jones’s Patty Tolan, a subway worker who knows the history of every building in Manhattan, gets the best plain-spoken lines and delivers them as if she were the only adult present. All three are good, and Jones gets a laugh from nearly every line she is given. The film belongs to Kate McKinnon. Her Jillian Holtzmann is the engineer, goggles up, hair up, dancing to DeBarge with a blowtorch in each hand, and she plays every scene as if she has received different instructions from everyone else and is enjoying them more. Whenever the plot needs a gadget, Holtzmann has built it. The scene where she lays the new weapons out on a table and talks the others through them is the funniest in the film. Chris Hemsworth’s Kevin, the receptionist hired for his looks and kept on despite everything else, is the other thing that works. He wears glasses with no lenses so he need not clean them, covers his eyes when the phone rings so he cannot hear it, and cannot be trusted with a message. We laughed at him more than we expected to, and slightly more than felt dignified. It is one joke told twenty ways, and Hemsworth plays every one of them straight. The look is better than a film like this needs. Robert Yeoman shoots New York at night in deep blues so that the ghosts, lit from inside in electric greens and turquoise, look like neon that has come loose from the shopfronts. Jefferson Sage gives the team an upstairs room over a restaurant, cluttered with copper and hand-lettered warnings, a nicer place to spend time than the firehouse they cannot afford. Jeffrey Kurland’s jumpsuits are orange-striped and slightly too big, so the women look as if they have borrowed them from a roadworks crew. Theodore Shapiro’s score does what it must and steps aside when the old tune arrives. The trouble is the second half, and it is two troubles. The first is deference. The original cast turn up one after another in small parts, each stopping the film for an applause break, and the firehouse, the slime, the car and the logo are all wheeled on and pointed at. Neil Casey’s Rowan North, a janitor planting devices around the city to thin the wall between the living and the dead, has a grievance and no line worth remembering. The second trouble is the climax, in Times Square: twenty minutes of green light, streams of it, columns of it, and not one joke we can recall. We were not bored, exactly; we were waiting. Melissa Bretherton and Brent White cut the first hour with good comic timing and the last quarter as a straight action film, with the jokes trimmed for pace. Set against Feig’s own films the pattern is familiar. [*Bridesmaids*](https://film.one/film/bridesmaids) (2011) and *Spy* (2015) both let their casts run and trusted the plot to catch up; this one has to serve a franchise as well as a cast, and the franchise wins. It is still a pleasant evening if you like the people in it. Go for McKinnon and Hemsworth and forgive the finale. It runs 117 minutes and carries a 12A. *Fi1m score 64, published 19 September 2026.* ## What the critics say Most critics like it, and several admit to being surprised, given the online hostility that preceded it. The praise clusters almost entirely on the four leads: their rapport, their banter, and above all Kate McKinnon, whose Holtzmann is named by review after review as the thing worth watching. The film is generally found funny, good-natured and lighter on angst than expected, with a sisterly spirit that many take to be its point. The reservations are consistent even among admirers: too much homage to the 1984 film, cameos that undercut the new cast, and a noisy, effects-heavy climax that few think lands. The spread is wide for a comedy. Variety judges the reboot too busy channelling the original to find its own identity; Radio Times finds the screenplay laughter-free; The Hollywood Reporter calls it an unfunny mess, though even there McKinnon is exempted. The dissenters are outnumbered, and they complain about much the same things as the fans, only louder. ### Reviews we read (25) - **The Guardian**, Peter Bradshaw (90/100, inferred): The critic praises the film's defiant energy and frequent hilarity as a terrifically inventive comedy that overcomes fanboy hostility. The strong ensemble chemistry and fun spirit are singled out for praise. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/jul/10/ghostbusters-review-paul-feigs-female-reboot-melissa-mccarthy-kristen-wiig) - **The Independent** (85/100, inferred): The critic calls the all-female Ghostbusters triumphant, hilarious, smart, dorky and badass, a film that directs itself to women the way the original directed itself to men. They praise the way it updates the tone and humour through a feminine perspective while retaining the goofy spirit, highlighting Kate McKinnon's standout performance. [Read](https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/reviews/ghostbusters-review-this-is-exactly-the-scrappy-dorky-movie-women-need-a7130641.html) - **Little White Lies**, David Jenkins (3/4/3): The critic finds the film much better than expected thanks to its stellar and charming central cast. It is genuinely funny and inventive with strong banter, though it struggles with effects and excessive homage to the original. [Read](https://lwlies.com/reviews/ghostbusters) - **Screen Daily** (80/100, inferred): After negative buzz, the remake emerges as a consistently funny pleasure radiating good cheer. It creates new dynamics and more pathos for the quartet rather than lazily recycling the original, with warm chemistry and a slyly feminist bent. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/ghostbusters-review/5106557.article) - **The Telegraph**, Robbie Collin (4/5): The review highlights how the film captures the spirit of the original with witty comic accuracy and a big sense of fun. The timely update and ensemble performances are noted positively. [Read](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/2016/07/10/ghostbusters-review-paul-feigs-fun-female-led-reboot-captures-sp/) - **Time Out**, Joshua Rothkopf (4/5): The all-female reboot is pumped-up, subversive and often very funny, adding a sharp sense of sorority. Kate McKinnon steals the show with her physical comedy, though it starts wobbly with too much homage to the original. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/ghostbusters-1) - **The AV Club**, Jesse Hassenger (B): The critic finds the film enjoyable and energetic thanks to the four leads' comic chemistry and rapport, though it sometimes feels like it is holding back. [Read](https://www.avclub.com/four-funny-stars-power-the-faithful-but-not-slavish-gho-1798188309) - **Empire**, Jonathan Pile (75/100, inferred): The critic says the film is fun, funny and full of energy after an effectively spooky opening, with strong turns from McCarthy, Wiig and Jones and knowing nods to the online backlash. They note some elements like McKinnon's antics and the finale do not fully land but overall it works and the haters were wrong. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/ghostbusters-2016-review/) - **The New York Times**, Manohla Dargis (70/100, inferred): The new Ghostbusters is a cheerfully silly, enjoyable disposable fun summer movie. It stands out for its female-driven cast and Kate McKinnon's eccentric performance as the mad-scientist Holtzmann. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/15/movies/ghostbusters-review-melissa-mccarthy-kristen-wiig.html) - **Film Comment**, Michael Sragow (65/100, inferred): The critic praises the strong ensemble of female leads and their comedic chemistry as the film's saving grace and main highlight, while criticizing the sprawling production and weak, incoherent action sequences in the climax. [Read](https://www.filmcomment.com/deep-focus-ghostbusters/) - **Slant Magazine**, Jake Cole (2.5/4): The critic notes that when good the film is funny, driven, and sometimes scary, praising its focus on friendship and touching moments, but criticizes pacing issues and a final act that feels like a rip-off of the original. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/ghostbusters-2016/) - **Variety**, Peter Debruge (50/100, inferred): Paul Feig's female-driven relaunch spends too much energy channeling the 1984 original to establish its own identity. It is both funnier and scarier than the first film but over-familiar with unnecessary cameos undercutting the new cast's chemistry. [Read](https://variety.com/2016/film/reviews/ghostbusters-review-melissa-mccarthy-1201810318/) - **Evening Standard**, David Sexton (45/100, inferred): The critic finds the reboot not bad and fun for a 12-year-old but pretty crass and less funny than Paul Feig's other comedies like Bridesmaids. They note it is essentially the original with added scale and volume, praising some performances and lines but concluding it is only a satisfactory starting point. [Read](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/ghostbusters-film-review-who-you-gonna-call-not-them-a3296636.html) - **Radio Times**, Alan Jones (★★): The reboot is uninspired, bland and lame-brained with a laughter-free screenplay that fails to replicate the original's charm or eccentricity despite the gender swap and strong cast. The noisy climax is desperate CGI with little humour or sense. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movies/ghostbusters-review-uninspired-bland-and-lame-brained/) - **Los Angeles Times**, Justin Chang (30/100, inferred): The female-powered update is a cheerful summer lark that demonstrates mediocrity is not exclusively male, but it recycles secondhand ideas and peters out before the climax. It is diverting for the pleasure of seeing the four leads in their jumpsuits. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-ghostbusters-review-20160707-snap-story.html) - **The Hollywood Reporter**, David Rooney (30/100, inferred): The critic deems the film an unfunny mess with a witless script that is short on both humor and tension, though Kate McKinnon stands out with consistent freshness. [Read](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/ghostbusters-film-review-909313/) - **Eye for Film**, Andrea Mullaney (80/100, inferred): The critic finds the film a refreshing, entertaining blockbuster that succeeds admirably by emphasizing fun over angst. She singles out the female leads' genuine delight in ghostbusting and their strong rapport and comic timing. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/ghostbusters-2016-film-review-by-andrea-mullaney) - **Polygon**, Julia Alexander (80/100, inferred): The critic finds the film hilarious and fun praising the ensemble chemistry of the lead actresses and Feig's direction of comedic moments while noting some pacing issues in action scenes. [Read](https://www.polygon.com/2016/7/10/12139368/ghostbusters-review) - **Collider**, Matt Goldberg (B): The critic praises the film's fun, original characters especially McKinnon's performance and its visual appeal while acknowledging some reliance on the original but overall recommending it as enjoyable. [Read](https://collider.com/ghostbusters-review/) - **Consequence** (75/100, inferred): The review calls it sturdy summer entertainment that delivers laughs and action skillfully highlighting the cast's performances especially Kate McKinnon's and the effective blend of comedy and action. [Read](https://consequence.net/2016/07/film-review-ghostbusters/) - **/Film**, Jacob Hall (75/100, inferred): The critic calls it a good, maybe even very good Ghostbusters movie that feels at home in the legacy while delivering color, humor, and spooky fun. He singles out the new team's friendlier, more heartfelt dynamic and the way it celebrates outsiders and science. [Read](https://www.slashfilm.com/545415/ghostbusters-spoiler-review/) - **NME**, Nick Levine (75/100, inferred): The critic calls it a damn fine effort that succeeds as a gag-packed ensemble comedy with standout performances from the cast, despite imperfections in the action sequences and some cameos. [Read](https://www.nme.com/reviews/reviews-movie-16519-304889) - **The Wrap**, Robert Abele (75/100, inferred): The critic praises the good-natured reboot for its exuberant cast chemistry, wacky interplay among the women, and fresh comedic focus, while noting the homage to the original and CGI-heavy climax as minor distractions from the fun. [Read](https://www.thewrap.com/ghostbusters-review-2016/) - **Deadline**, Pete Hammond (60/100, inferred): The critic calls the reboot a slick summer entertainment that delivers expected effects and cameos but falls short on laughs and original humor compared to the 1984 classic, with the cast (especially McKinnon) restrained rather than at full comedic power. [Read](https://deadline.com/2016/07/ghostbusters-review-melissa-mccarthy-kristen-wiig-video-1201784951/) - **Den of Geek**, Simon Brew (3/5): The critic finds the film a fun, eager-to-please summer comedy blockbuster with effective casting and some strong moments, though it falls short of the original and has uneven jokes and cameos. [Read](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/ghostbusters-2016-review/) ## Details - **Director:** Paul Feig - **Director:** Paul Feig - **Screenplay:** Katie Dippold, Paul Feig - **Cinematography:** Robert Yeoman - **Editor:** Melissa Bretherton, Brent White - **Music:** Theodore Shapiro - **Production design:** Jefferson Sage - **Costume design:** Jeffrey Kurland - **Producer:** Ivan Reitman, Amy Pascal - **Cast:** Kristen Wiig as Erin Gilbert; Melissa McCarthy as Abby Yates; Kate McKinnon as Jillian Holtzmann; Leslie Jones as Patty Tolan; Chris Hemsworth as Kevin; Neil Casey as Rowan North; Zach Woods as Tour Guide; Ed Begley Jr. as Ed Mulgrave - **Runtime:** 1h 57m - **Certificate (MPA):** PG-13 - **Release (the US):** 15 July 2016 - **Genres:** Action, Fantasy, Comedy - **Budget:** $144 million - **Box office:** $229 million - **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3i2CqernTE ## Where to watch in the US - Netflix: streaming, leaving 2026-10-01 - Tubi: free - Amazon Prime Video: rent $3.99, uhd - Apple TV: rent $3.99, hd - Amazon Prime Video: buy $14.99, uhd - Apple TV: buy $14.99, hd *Checked 2026-09-19.* Also available in: AE, AR, AT, AU, AZ, BE, BG, BR, CA, CH, CL, CO, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HK, HR, HU, ID, IE, IL, IN, IS, IT, JP, KR, LT, MX, MY, NL, NO, NZ, PA, PH, PL, PT, RO, RS, SE, SG, TH, TR, UA, US, VN, ZA. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## Awards - Kids' Choice Award for Favorite Movie 2017: Kids' Choice Award for Favorite Movie (won) ## If you liked this - *Ghostbusters* (1984), Fi1m 80: The original, still funnier and looser, with Bill Murray barely bothering to act — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/ghostbusters.md) - *Spy* (2015): Feig and McCarthy without a franchise to mind, and much better for it - *What We Do in the Shadows* (2014): Flatmates who happen to be vampires; the supernatural as domestic irritation, done cheaply and well - *Beetlejuice* (1988), Fi1m 83: Ghosts, bureaucracy and Michael Keaton; the design is doing half the jokes — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/beetlejuice.md) - *A Chinese Ghost Story* (1987): Hong Kong wire-work, a tree demon and a romance; proof ghost comedy travels --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/ghostbusters-2016