Ghostbusters (2016)

[gregbrown]

He's just not beyond redemption (he refrains from being actually rapey with the possessed Dana).

Unless he really brought heavy amounts of tranquilizer to a date (which is its own kind of creepy), he totally did.

[Bjorn]

Unless he really brought heavy amounts of tranquilizer to a date (which is its own kind of creepy), he totally did.

 

I actually thought about mentioning that, but it's specifically thorazine, an anti-psychotic, which is believable that Dana could have been prescribed that after having had what most doctors would have considered a delusional vision in her apartment, and that Venkman just scrounged it up in the apartment.  The line though is really weird, where he specifically says 300cc, which implies it was delivered by syringe (a prescription would have been pills), but it would have been like a hundred syringes full.  Most likely a lazy script error that no one caught, but it pushes it towards the creepier interpretation.  Ultimately I think that's a line that probably doesn't stand out at all in 1984, but in a post-Bill Cosby world, jumps out as, "da fuq?!"

[brkl]

Huh, I literally can't remember the scene you're talking about right now. I just remember him turning down Dana when she's possessed.

 

I don't agree with that Nerdlove quote, Venkman is totally prepared to make people feel uncomfortable. He's also prepared to lie and doesn't care about causing people pain. So he's a creep and Dana must have bad taste in men to ever get involved with him. But he's not evil. I've seen so many films in which protagonists actually grab women. Venkman makes Dana throw him out but it's not like he struggles against her. He's out of the apartment like 20 seconds after Dana asks him to leave. He goes about wooing Dana like an asshole, but the society he lives in doesn't have a huge problem with that. That's not Bill Cosby material, that's just a creep.

[Bjorn]

Venkman makes Dana throw him out but it's not like he struggles against her.

 

When was the last time you saw that scene?  Prior to her demanding he leave, he looked in her bedroom against her wishes and asked if she lived alone, and answers simply "Good" when he learns that she does live alone.  When she finally demands he leave, he starts to walk away, but turns around and comes back towards her, getting to within a foot or two of her, as she says, "No, No, No."  She doesn't even know what he's about to say, but the character's kneejerk reaction is to just repeat no, over and over again, as he walks towards her without known intent, but clearly refusing to obey her demand that he leave her home.  And she's not joking.  She finally puts her hands on him, and physically pushes him across the room to the door.  When she tries to slam the door, he wedges himself into it , preventing her from closing the door, in order to ask for a kiss.  He, as a character, is jovial when doing it.  But again, they've met no more than an hour ago.  If a service person you hired to come into your home to perform work did this, the wisest course of action would be to both call the police and call the employer to demand they be fired.

 

Edited to add: Let's add some more context to this scene.  She hasn't been home in days, she's been staying at her mother's because she's terrified of her own home.  Her apartment has ceased to be safe.  Something, something dangerous may be in it, and she doesn't know what to do about that.  She doesn't know if it's real, or if she's having a breakdown.  And the help that she seeks further undermines her feeling of safety.  He ignores her wishes.  Refuses her demands. And forces her to physically remove him from her home.

[Ben X]

Here's the scene:

 

 

Bearing in mind that it is of course removed from the context of the movie.

 

He is being a super-creep here, but I disagree with your interpretation of Weaver's performance as "spooked as fuck" and I think you're exaggerating with your description of the scene in places (e.g. she doesn't ask him not to go in the bedroom, and when she says "no no no" it's because she's guessed what he's going to say). Also, that 300cc line,surely can be interpreted as comic exaggeration on Venkman's part to convey how amped Dana was? I think the film presents him as a creep here but tempers it with Weaver's unshaken performance and dialogue (she describes him as odd and like a talk-show host).

 

Of course, he's presented as an arsehole throughout the film to various degrees: conning a student into a date with him, blagging along on university funding, pushing his friend into a second mortgage, purposefully antagonising a government official which causes a lot of issues. He's one of a band of misfits, along with the manchild nerd and the socially-retarded nerd. I can understand that affecting people's enjoyment of the film. Probably the main mis-step the film makes is to have him get the girl at the end when he and Dana kiss as the credits start to roll. (Although they do have other scenes together, I don't remember them having much actual interaction to justify it - there's the scene with the cellist or whatever he is...)

[Nappi]

The new Ghostbusters was good fun! I liked it quite a bit.

 

That is all.

[sclpls]

I expected to enjoy the new Ghostbusters, but even so the movie definitely surpassed my expectations. Really smart, funny script.

[Dewar]

I'm sure that everyone who wants to watch it has seen it already, but I made my quarterly pilgrimage to the house of popcorn and saw Ghostbusters. It was really funny in a lot of different (not better or worse) ways than the original. I loved it.

[Twig]

I haven't seen it and I want to!

[SecretAsianMan]

I haven't seen it and I want to!

 

Me as well!  Though I probably won't have a chance while its in theatres...

[Twig]

New Ghostbusters was beautiful. Also Chris Hemsworth is a dreamboat. That hair, those glasses. Mmm.