I'm going to amalgamate my two Personal Canon lists and add some more and make a huge fucking list (>1,000…
Five years after they defeated Zuul, the Ghostbusters are out of business. When Dana begins to have ghost problems again, the boys come out of retirement to aid her and hopefully save New York City from a new paranormal threat.
Wow, this was one of the most bizarre rewatches I've had in quite some time.
When this first came out I had already practically destroyed my VHS player by playing the first film over and over and over again. So when halfway 1990 the sequel finally reached the cinematic wasteland we call the Netherlands, I was first in line to watch it. And boy did I hate its guts. I'll be honest, I really can't remember what my fifteen year old self disliked about it so much, all I know is that I had never watched it again until now.
And yes, I think my fifteen year old self is an idiot.
This film, while never truly recreating the magical…
It's fascinating to watch sequels struggle with their previous successes and how to exactly incorporate them into franchise progression, but I would say that Ghostbusters II is acceptable in its own right because of its open, even frustrated view of itself. Having its cake and eating it too, Ivan Reitman's comedy sequel conforms the first act of the film to its struggling (and successful) band of characters after the events in Ghostbusters, settling into a rhythm which is abruptly abandoned for grander spooky elements and effects wizardry. It's as if the entire cast and crew realized that, either way, people weren't going to take the film on its own merits (it was made 5 years later after all, and…
........here's the thing with "Ghostbusters II".
It's definitely a watered down version of the original with many scenes playing by the same beats. It's not nearly as memorable or quotable. It's not nearly as funny in many areas with more jokes being hit or miss. And it's not as inventive with it's central concept as it should be which is to be expected from most comedy sequels.
And yet.............I still find a lot of fun to be had with it. It's not a GREAT movie or I'd even say not even that good of a film on it's own, but it's a solid enough effort. The cast still work brilliantly with each other (R.I.P. Harold Ramis and Dan Aykroyd's sanity).…
There were a host of great comedies back in the eighties and Ghostbusters was one of those films that went for that lucrative cash-cow, the merchandise. We got everything Ghostbustery, from lunch-boxes and t-shirts to pajamas and toys. It was done well and probably outshone the movie in the cash stakes.
Harold Ramis's second outing with the Ghostbusters was more of the same. It worked the first time around and with Bill Murray let off the leash more than the rest, this had more gags and a noticeably more fun approach. All the gang returned and with Peter MacNicol bringing his own unique brand of humor to proceedings, this hardly faltered in the comedy stakes. His role as the geeky…
Can you legitimately count it as watched for LB if you made out for half the running time with an amazing adorable person? They even suggested we watch this! Nobody in my life has ever volunteered to watch my all-time favourite movie with me, so obviously I was swooning with excitement. I was also, coincidentally, wearing my Ghostbusters pajamas and T-shirt. Best day ever? Best day ever.
One of the reasons the first Ghostbusters struck such a chord in the early 80's, and as a franchise continues to linger on in the public consciousness despite bringing nothing new to the table in a quarter of a century, is because Ivan Reitman's film knew exactly how daft the whole endeavour was and played up to it, casting gifted comic actors as the heroes involved & taking previously terrifying elements such as ghosts, demons & Gods & making them cheesy, comical and thoroughly beatable by the titular team of ectoplasmic nerds. After the first one, Reitman & writers/stars Dan Ackroyd & Harold Ramis didn't want to do another, they felt it was a definitive tale. Ghostbusters 2 is the inevitable result of great box…
This review may contain spoilers. I can handle the truth.
Morbid curiosity won out with me wanting to watch this one. I heard very conflicting things about this movie: when it first came out it was absolutely despised and regarded as one of the worst sequels ever but as time went on it seemed to get a big cult following as an actually good movie and part of the reason people wanted another Ghostbusters movie in general. With such mixed info I couldn't help but feel just a tinge of desire to see which side was right.
As much as I tried to go in with an open mind I'm sorry but people were right to hate this thing when it came out. This movie is such a hot mess,…
Really like the humor of this one. Yes it's cheesy and has an over the top villain but i love it!
Not as good as the original, but still very entertaining.
I don't know why people who liked the original "Ghostbusters" movie don't like its sequel. Actually, I remember having watched "Ghostbusters II" at least once before the original movie as a kid, and I really liked it. I still like it almost as much as the original movie, it's definitely one of my personal "cult" movies. The story's at least as intriguing as in the first movie, the characters still rock, and there's lots of fun along the way from the haunting of New York City to its spectacular rescue by our kinda anti-heroic Ghostbusters.
Mola el comienzo con la panda caída en desgracia, pero luego todo es cuesta abajo con un villano sin gracia, sin mitología molona alrededor, con el petardo de Bobby Brown, con un Peter McNicol pergreñando lo que será el pan de cada día de Christoph Waltz, sin William Atherton... repite el original paso a paso, pero con el handycap de que ya lo hemos vivido (la gente de NY olvida muy pronto) y queremos algo diferente, grande, molón.
A pale shadow of the original, but far from charmless. Even phoned in Bill Murray wisecracks are funnier than most things.
I found this sequel to be pretty much on par with the original for better or for worse. It was still fun and had a good amount of wit but the story was just as messy once again. I also found that Ernie Hudson was underused and under developed in this story as well, which made him stick out. The movie is enjoyable enough but I think a lot of people overlook its flaws because of nostalgia.
Muy pobretona como secuela, pero es probable que aquí quiera ser más generoso. Trata de repetir fórmula sin conseguirlo, pero cada poco había algo que me hacía dibujar una sonrisa, cuando no reír directamente (incluyendo todos los momentos en los que aparece Rick Moranis, el auténtico robaescenas). Un valor añadido es la escena de la estatua de la libertad, que tiene un valor simbólico especial sobre la ciudad y Peter McNicol puede que no sea la mejor idea para un lacayo de villano, pero es una parodia, al fin y al cabo. Echo mucho en falta la grandeza del score de Elmer Bernstein.
+ Schauspiel entspricht dem aus dem ersten Teil
+ hat witzige Stellen
- wurde sehr stark für Kinder angepasst
- wirkt oft lächerlich
I'm a guy of simple tastes. While some people like pickles on their burgers, I take the pickles off my…
After taking August off I'm back for what may probably be my last hunt depending on how things go and…