Fact check: Paul Feig made a Ghostbuster film that fundamentally did not appeal to fans of the original film. So, the marketing decided to call anyone not interested in the film a sexist bigot and try to shame them into supporting it. The strategy did not succeed.

1. Summary of the results

The situation with the 2016 Ghostbusters reboot was more complex than the original statement suggests. The film did indeed struggle commercially, grossing $229.1 million against a $144 million budget ^{[1] [2]}. The movie's trailer became the most disliked in YouTube history ^{[1] [3]}, and there was a significant disconnect between critic ratings (74%) and audience scores (49%) ^[4].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several crucial pieces of context are missing from the original statement:

• The controversy occurred during the politically charged 2016 election period ^[1], with director Paul Feig describing it as a "tense time in our nation's history" ^[5]
• The marketing strategy actively embraced political messaging, including references to "glass ceilings" and links to Hillary Clinton's campaign ^[4]
• Original Ghostbusters cast members, including Dan Aykroyd, actually supported the reboot ^[6]
• The film received generally positive reviews from critics, suggesting its quality wasn't as poor as the statement implies ^[4]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement contains several misleading elements:

• It oversimplifies the marketing strategy: While the marketing did become political ^[4], there's no evidence that the marketing team explicitly labeled all critics as "sexist bigots" ^[7]
• The statement ignores the documented presence of genuine toxic behavior: Sources confirm that legitimate criticism was often mixed with sexist and racist harassment, particularly targeting Leslie Jones ^[7]
• The claim about "not appealing to fans" is contradicted by support from original cast members ^[6]

Who benefits from these narratives:

• Anti-"woke" content creators and media outlets benefit from portraying the film's failure as purely ideological
• Film studios and marketing teams benefit from attributing the film's failure to audience prejudice rather than potential issues with marketing strategy or execution
• Political commentators on both sides benefited from using the controversy to support their respective narratives about culture wars ^{[5] [4]}