It always sorta seemed like this was a good franchisable concept- they bust ghosts, so every movie they just fight a different kind of supernatural beastie, yeah?

Again someone below posted a good list but compare that trailer to the final Frozen Empire trailer above that has maybe two slightly funny beats. Paul Rudd says “Frozen to death” and then the little state puffs at the end.

In Ghostbusters 5, they’ll be contacting the CGI-puppeteered ghosts of all the original Ghostbusters, who were declared saints by Pope Portrait of Vigo the Reformed. His redemption backstory will bring you to tears, and then the rest of the 3 hour runtime will be all the characters crying over a museum tour of hologram…

An EPA bureaucrat with no charisma whatsoever, who if he’s known for anything it’s trying to shut down the guys who twice saved the city from destruction is somehow mayor 40 years later? How does that make any sense at all? Clearly just thrown in there so there can be one more character from the original doing…

1. The crew staggers in while Murray shouts “Hey, anybody seen a ghost?” before ogling a woman who passes in front of him

Hell Akroyd entire delivery of every line of the film is a joke. 

Someone posted it below and beat me to it but you are flat wrong. The trailer for the first film was full of jokes.

This is the AV Club. Blaming “wrongthink for wrong opinions” is basically what they do around here these days.

WHILE THE JOKES DID WORK BETTER IN CONTEXT, I WONDER HOW YOU CAN LOOK THAT TRAILER AND CONCLUDE IT LOOKS LIKE SOMETHING OTHER THAN A COMEDY OR ACTION/COMEDY? THE GOOFY MUSIC (AT ONE POINT SYNCED TO MURRAY DANCING), “ANYBODY SEE A GHOST?”, “IMPORTANT SAFETY TIP”, AKROYD’S GOOFY FACIAL EXPRESSION, THE REFERENCE TO SPOOK…

NO. THE OG TRAILER HAD PLENTY OF HUMOR IN IT.

“You know when something barely works one time, and it is only by the grace of god that everyone involved is not permanently financially ruined? Well, would it make sense to try that thing a second time, willingly subjecting yourself to the obvious risks a second time?”

I’ve been to Popeye Village. It had been a dream of mine ever since I read an article in the WSJ, back in the 90's. A few years ago, I was backpacking through Europe and ended up in Malta, so I went.

And it has gotten a critical reassessment that has been really favorable to it. A more minor work from Altman, sure, but a cartoonish ensemble comedy starring Robin Williams and Shelley Duvall that took a big swing and did something no other filmmaker would even dare to do at the time...that’s amazing.

Broadcast TV stations needed weekday afternoon programming, and back then it was whatever cartoon they could pick up on the cheap (Or “Our Gang” or Three Stooges shorts, another thing that has faded into obscurity).

It made 2 1/2 times its budget, (20 mill vs 50 million) which for 1980, was pretty impressive. ESPECIALLY when you consider it was a musical. Pirates of Penzance, as a comparison, made 700k (not sure as to its budget). Little Shop of Horrors made 39 million on a 30 million budget.
Jesus Christ Superstar, while it only…

Exactly who/what is the show supposed to be satirizing? Seems like a pretty basic question they never got around to answering.

The problem with this show is obvious from the title, it’s too vague and slack. Kate Winslet running a country seems to have been the pitch, but then they didn’t know what to do afterwards.

Americans wouldn't watch it if it were set in Britain. 

American media loves to put out political satires that aren’t actually satirizing anything, they just have the tone of having  something important to say. See also: The Regime. 

Alex Garland, “both siding” political violence and domestic terrorism