When Twitter began to buzz that the first Ghostbusters reboot trailer had been released, I was anxious to see if it would soothe my uneasiness over the casting of three white female leads and one black woman as the sole representation of “diversity” among the eponymous heroes.

Unsurprisingly, the trailer eviscerated my oh-so-low expectations by sinking to the racist low of the 1984 original. Leslie Jones’s character, Patty Tolan, is presented in the film’s first trailer next to three “brilliant” white female scientists as the seemingly intellectually inferior token black woman with street sense and a Cadillac.

Ghostbusters star Leslie Jones defends racial stereotyping criticism Read more

Perhaps it’s progress that Jones’s character is afforded the opportunity to be featured in film advertisements at all. In 1984, Ernie Hudson and his character, Winston Zeddemore – also the only team member who wasn’t an academic – was completely excluded from the trailer’s actor credits and character introductions.

Zeddemore first appears at the 1:13 mark of the original trailer with his face halfway cut off the right side of the screen. Then he mysteriously appears in five more frames without any explanation of who this sole black man in costume is.

Hudson penned an editorial about his experience with the Ghostbusters franchise. He found himself being negotiated out of his deserved pay, his role later gutted, and was excluded from the marketing.

As a daddy’s girl, I often found myself snuggled up next to my father and laughing at the ridiculous high jinks of the original pair of movies. I had some hope that Columbia Pictures would bring us a reboot that I could enjoy now I’m aware of the racial issues at play. Instead, the studio squandered an opportunity to rebuild characters in a way that provides a more inclusive representation of women than its male-centred films.

With three leading female characters, the film features no Latina, Asian or Indigenous women and simply opts to fulfil its black quota as a nod to the original storyline. Jones’s sassy black character is a transit worker for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, providing her with the skills necessary to track down ghosts across New York. But as the only representation of race and class commentary in the trailer, it ultimately pathologises the working class and blackness by making the two synonymous with a seemingly inept character.

The trailer juxtaposes Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig and Kate McKinnon as three experts in each of their scientific fields, then we cut to Jones. She enters with: “I’m here to join the club. You guys are really smart about this science stuff.” This limits her character to an academically aloof, street savvy black woman who is apparently only allowed in the crew (and in the film) because of her familiarity with New York City.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest The cast of the original film. Photograph: Moviestore Collection/REX

I wasn’t the only viewer to be offended by the characterisation of the sole black character in the trailer. Jones has since defended her role asking her critics: “Why can’t a regular person be a ghostbuster?” And she is right, a regular person should be able to be a member of the Ghostbusters team. But we have to ask why the only “regular” ghostbuster has to be black. Again. Why is blackness conflated with “regular”, essentially designating the white characters as irregularly exceptional people?

It’s reassuring that Jones does not feel misrepresented in the editing of her role, which commonly happens to black people in film. However, we cannot ignore how racism and sexism limit the representations black women see of ourselves to characters that fall far too flat in comparison with our real-life, wide-ranging intricacies.

The 2016 reboot has been hailed as a new, feminist Ghostbusters. But praising white women’s access to roles that challenge patriarchy yet simultaneously harm black women through perpetuating racist tropes can only be feminist if the word has no meaning.

Where white women stand on the backs of black women, and other women of colour, to gain success and power, feminism is not present. And the claim that the film somehow represents the practice of feminist casting and characters can only hold true if you do the mental gymnastics necessary to deny the fact that black women are women, too.

Although this trailer is the first we have seen of the film, and we have yet to see where the character development or storylines will lead, I won’t be heading to the theatres paying to watch a film that shrinks black womanhood for the ease of the white gaze in its marketing.