Harockerce What a beautiful movie!
GamerTab That was an excellent one.
Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.
Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one
SimonJack Five years after the first "Ghostbusters," Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis team up for this sequel. Sigourney Weaver is back as well, and Rick Moranis has a bigger part than in the first film. While ghosts remain the subject, and defeating them the work of the Ghostbusters team, the plot here is about defeating a demonic takeover of the Big Apple. So, the boys with the proton blasters have their work cut out for them. The only way they can win this one is by having all the citizens of New York City be happy and kind to others. It's an uphill battle, because, as the Mayor of NY says (David Margulies), "Being miserable and treating other people like dirt is every New Yorker's god-given right." That's the best humor in this film. To enliven the folks a bit, the ghost fighters turn the Statue of Liberty into a floating appearance that makes everyone happy. Well, it still has some humor, but one can see that another sequel probably wouldn't do too well. The idea has pretty much run its full development with this film.
stormhawk2018 It's pretty tough for a sequel to best, let alone match it's predecessor, especially when the first one is an undisputed masterpiece. So yeah, Ghostbusters II isn't as good as the first, but it's not a bad film by any means. Unfortunately most people don't see it that way. Me, I really like this one, and think it's still a really decent film, even though it isn't what it could have been. The story begins five years after the first. Following the defeat of Gozer at the end of the first film, the Ghostbusters have actually fallen on hard times. Instead of being hailed as saviors, they have since been slapped with a restraining order and forced to cease their ghostbusting due to all the collateral damage their 'busting' causes. As a result, the four have hung up their proton packs and gone on to other activities. However, they are forced to get back to it when an evil ooze begins wreaking havoc, especially when it possesses a painting of an evil 16th Century Carpathian tyrant named Vigo, causing him to come to life to terrorize all who end up in his way. I think the main issue at hand here is sequelitis. It's just unable to capture the magic that made the first so special. It doesn't have the freshness, nor does it have the same level of laughs, wit, and energy. Ivan Reitman returned as director, and co-stars Aykroyd and Ramis once again wrote the script, and, while they don't do bad in these roles, their performances don't really stand out. I do however, like that they raised the stakes, and showed how actions have consequences. I just wish they could have come up with some more creative and stronger ideas. The music is still good though, and I still dig the effects, and yeah, the performances are fine, if slightly worn, but, even though this one has it's moments, it doesn't have near as much heart as it should. I'm still giving this one a really high rating though, as I'm a big fan, I like these guys and what they do, and it's still a fun and entertaining film. Yeah, some of it is a bit sillier, but I can't help but like it. Without a doubt, my main reason for really liking this is personal. Sentimentality is key here, as the earliest memory that I can recall is seeing this in the theater when I was a mere three years old. I can only recall one scene clearly, but still, it's a memory I want to cherish as long as possible. Bottom line: yeah, this is a step down, but it's still a pretty decent film, and offers a fair amount of entertainment, and, compared to a lot of sequels, it's quite strong, so give it a chance.
Jesse This film is a disgrace to the original Ghostbusters. The original Ghostbusters is quite possibly my favorite comedy of all time. This sequel that was released in 1989 is downright terrible. I watching this sequel when I was about seven or eight years old and not liking it. However, yesterday I tried watching this film again since I love the original and I (shockingly) loved the 2016 one, and I could not even finish Ghostbusters 2 because it was so awful! I made it an hour into it and I could not even finish it. The movie is painfully unfunny. It felt like a parody of the Ghostbusters! I don't know what went wrong with this movie. I can watch the original and the new one multiple times and laugh out loud, whereas with the sequel to the original I only chuckled once! Overall, this movie is an absolute disaster. It is horrible and I will never EVER watch it again. This movie absolutely gets a 1/10! I'm telling you avoid it and just stick to the original 1984 one and the new 2016 one!
swilliky Five years after the original Ghostbuster, the four paranormal exterminators return for a second and final adventure. Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Harold Ramis, and Ernie Hudson all return as Dr. Peter Vankman, Dr. Raymond Stantz, Dr. Egon Spengler, and Winston Zeddemore respectively. They have been banned from investigating paranormal activity since their first adventure, but a new case draws them back. Sigourney Weaver also reprises her role as the haunted Dana Barrett who has a son who has become the object of obsession of an evil wizard Vigo (Wilhelm von Homburg) trapped inside a painting. The Ghostbusters discover a running river of slime beneath the city. The slime is reactive to emotions and thrives off of negative energy, but also dances to music.Check out more of this review and others at swilliky.com
