Why Chris Hemsworth's performance in the 'Ghostbusters' reboot matters

Ajouter une légende

While plenty of US fans have been excited about the new Ghostbusters movie, no one can deny this release fired up heated reactions and found its lot of e-haters. Half-way between nostalgia and conservative comments, the original fanbase was tremendously scared about the destruction of the dear, beloved movie that belonged to its childhood. Don't get me wrong, I'm the first one being skeptical about reboots, remakes and sequels. I came to dislike Finding Dory very much, smirked at the prospect of a 5th Indiana Jones film and don't even want to hear about the possibility of Beetlejuice 2. 

But let's face it, this passionate debate addressed one of the most current issues in use: gender equality. It is now an acceptable fact that in Hollywood, most lead roles and cues go to male actors. Funnily enough, this was less the case in the 40s, a time period that, despite its sexism, accepted more female directors in the studios. Recent polls demonstrate that the gender wage gap is increasingly wide. True, we're talking about already priviledged middle-class people who earn tons of money. But it doesn't mean that because of gender, an actress should be discriminated against and by her male counterparts. From Patricia Arquette's acceptance speech for Boyhood during the Oscars ceremony to Meryl Streep's master class in Berlin about Hollywood women leadership (directors and script-writing, mainly), this controversy has created a wide impact within the American film industry. 

However, most of the backlash didn't come from this inner industry. It was, in fact, initiated by a wider community of spectators: the hardcore fanbase. Why on earth didn't the fans accept their beloved characters to become females? There might be the positive discrimination aspect, to which, honestly, I couldn't agree more. I have to say I'm always uncomfortable about phenomena of communautarism, especially when it comes to change an original white middle-class character into a woman, gay or black one to make these minorities more visible. If such is the case, why wasn't this protagonist female, coloured or homosexual in the first place? 

The scriptwriters seem to have reacted to this kind of problem with a hilarious cue when actress Leslie Jones stage-dives at the rock gig... only to be carried on by no one, ending up on the floor: 

"Okay. So. I don't know if it's a race thing or a lady thing but I'm mad as hell" 

In doing so, this was particularly clever from director Paul Feig to shush the tremendous amount of passive agressive tweets on Leslie Jones' performance who had to quit Twitter. Her being the main target of Internet trolls made me realise that the backlash against the new Ghostbusters movie truly is sexist and racist. Besides, most of the criticism the franchise's new installment received was based on people's belief that the ghostbusters couldn't just be women. So there was much more than policital correctness going on. 

Actually, the movie was, to my great surprise, not that bad. I was a bit hesitant at first, I confess, but found myself laughing at most of the cheesy jokes (even if the very down-to-the-belt ones I didn't find funny at all). In that sense, it very much follows the first two installments of the franchise, which aim was to sell the very same item: a product. Ey, this is what capitalism is about baby, and a female sequel ain't going to change nothing about that. So obviously, you'll find many references to the first two movies, from the most cliché ones to other allusions to horror films. And cameos. Loads of them. In fact, I just loved how Paul Feig tried to discredit the whole cult going on around the franchise by making Bill Murray appear as Martin Heiss, the paranormal debunker. 

And who could be more apt at swaping down gender roles than talented actresses from the Saturday Night Live? Kristen Wiig is perfect as the stuck-up, would-be serious scientist, while Melissa McCarthy rocks as the crazy inventor. The only performance that put me off a little was Kate McKinnon's, whom, despite her gorgeous looks, makes it obvious she's gay in the film (which she is in real life). What I particularly enjoy about US comedy shows is that the industry actually showcases funny, talented women, if not sexy or feminist, while this is hardly the case in France. Take Tina Fey or fictional character Bridget Jones, for instance. The English speaking world's proven us that females can be simultaneously smart, witty, beautiful, women activists and make us laugh. 

But by reflecting about Ghosbuters' gender equity, I would like to focus on a character who's, to my mind, central to the movie: Kevin, the receptionist. Even his trade is something of a joke: seriously, how many times have you seen a receptionist or a secretary portrayed by a man in a movie? In that sense, picking up dashing, Australian Chris Hemsworth was a daring choice. Tall, handsome, muscular, blonde, blue eyes, but with no brains, Kevin is nothing like what you expect and plays a very unusual role: that of the male bimbo. Or the stupid Ken version of Barbie, if you prefer. 
From Legally Blonde to The House Bunny, Hollywood movies abund with stereotypical girls who seem to be not-that-dumb. Or not. And if not, they're likeable because 'nice' or 'sweet'. See Mean Girls or Sleeping Beauty? It all relies on the prejudice that blondes aren't that smart. And it was initiated a while ago. It just takes a screening of Some Like it Hot to realise that Marilyn Monroe was marketed from the start as the most iconic blonde in the cinematographic industry. 'If I'm going to be a senator by the time I'm 30, I need to marry a Jackie, not a Marilyn' tells Warner to Elle Woods in Legally Blonde. And why is that? Because sex-appeal and brightness are, according to common grounds, incompatible. Especially when it comes to women. Yup, popular culture has plenty to tell us about gender roles and what's expected from them. 

So it's quite enjoyable to watch such a gorgeous lad having just enough sense of humour to make fun of himself. I mean, we're talking about the impersonator of Thor in the Marvel movies here. Brad Pitt did it once with panache for the Coen Brothers' Burn after Reading, but not once did he have the lack of self-restrain Hemsworth shows on screen. I used to think he was a very serious actor who played in a very one-sided way. But watching videos of Ghostbusters' making-of showed that he just doesn't care. In an industry where you have to constantly fashion your image, this is exactly what I appreciate from comedians I like. I learned in an interview from the female cast that Chris Hemsworth is a great improvisor too and keeps goofing around on set. 


The ironic use of glasses to make him look smart was a clever device: Kevin wears them without lenses, because he's says it's a bore cleaning them as they keep getting dirty. The costume designers did a pretty good job in dressing up Kevin as the hip geek of the lot (the one who wears the best fitting clothes actually). In that sense, it felt truly rewarding to have the girls constantly musing and raving about his looks, as males would do on girls in a bad R'n'B music video. As for Kevin's intelligence, well, let's say that we face a child trapped in the body of a man. Covering his eyes to signify he won't eavesdrop, spitting out coffee while tasting it because he hates it, thinking the phone ringing is the one in the fishtank, Kevin is often oblivious to anything but himself. His mental abilities are totally unrealistic, and this is this very gap that provokes our laugh. Also failing to grasp sexual innuendo and Erin's moves towards him, he often creates awkward situations by adopting a very flat discourse. 

Now, in an article by the Washington Post, it's argued that the character of Kevin still reinforces gender inequality by casting a 'serious' actor in the funniest role of the movie, whereas the female actresses all come from the comedic industry. Yet Stephanie Merry seems to have forgotten that the original actors came from the Saturday Night Live show as well. Plus budding actor Chris Hemsworth has always acted in movies more or less associated to pop culture. So much for seriousness. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2016/07/21/the-problem-with-chris-hemsworths-stunt-casting-in-ghostbusters/

The reason why Chris Hemsworth's performance matters while not stealing the show can be summed up in one scene: Kevin's dance as being possessed by demon Rowan. At some point, when powered-up Kevin reaches the top of the Mercado Hotel, a crowd of policemen surrounds him. Kevin stuns and commands them to move their arms and legs stiffly, in what seems to be the mock-up of some robotic dance. 

The surprise comes up later on, during the ending credits: a flash-back of the Mercado Hotel scene displays Chris Hemsworth at his best, improvising and working on his dance moves. Director Paul Feig pointed out that he had cut out the scene with a different song - 'You Should be Dancing' by the Bee Gees - than the remake 'Get Ghost' by Mark Ronson and Passion Pit (which is a brilliant tune. The soundtrack as a whole was tops). 'This was the biggest decision of my life' argued Feig, about what he initally wanted to be a New York giant discotheque scene. However, the filmmaker added that it disrupted the flow of the movie and made it a little too goofy. The good thing is that it will make you stay till the very, very end, to dance on your seat. 
So, cut the crap Ghostbusters e-haters. Sit up in the nearest movie theatre, shut your mouth, enjoy girl power and Chris Hemsworth's performance.