Ghostbusters 2: Actually a good movie

[Poop Master Flex]

Now I'm never going to debate that its as good as the first one, personally I think the original Ghostbusters movie is one of the best comedies ever made. For this reason I think Ghostbusters 2 gets such a horrible reputation because it wasn't as funny as the first, but to be fair that was pretty much impossible to do.

I thought they certainly tried to make it a good move and had a lot of the things that made the first movie so successful. I personally love this movie, it had some great moments like Vigo the Carpathian, the river of slime and controlling the statue of liberty with a NES advantage. I loved alll of Bill Murray's joke about Dana's kid and they had plenty of clever jokes and lines that made the first movie so successful. The premise of the movie was admirable and lastly I think its was a damn good follow up to the original Ghostbusters.

So what does everyone else think? Do you think Ghostbusters 2 was a good sequel or do you think it sucked and if you liked it or it sucked why?

 

[Larry]

Nawwww it was great, I loved that movie every bit as much as the first. I never really understood the heat it got. I thought the villain was better, I thought the implications matched up well to the first. It was still a really funny movie too. Who could ever forget the dancing toaster???!!! They just has so much fun with that movie and you could tell it was fun. They were able to do a little more with it since they already had a base from the first one, and they went places in this one that they simply didn't in the first, like having them committed, sued by everyone and shut down in the beginning of the movie, controlling the statue of liberty, the whole concept of the slime, etc... I wouldn't put one above the other, I think these movies are equals in their own ways.

 

[Mitch Henessey]

Ghostbusters II was hilarious. Bill Murray was still sharp as ever, and the rest of the cast provided a good amount of laughs. The scene where Egon, Ray, and Winston interrupt Peter and Dana's dinner at the restaurant always cracks me up. Dana and Peter are trying to have this moment, as they patch up some old wounds, but the rest of the Ghostbusters ruin everything, when they come into restaurant, and they're all drenched in slime. The chemistry among the entire cast is still there, and each character still provided a good amount of entertainment. Also, I enjoyed Peter MacNicol's character. He was a nice addition to the cast, and he did provide a good amount of funny moments, as he portrayed the obnoxious and possessed servant.

Ghostbusters II didn't feel like one of those "let's just make a shitload of money, as we capitalize off of the success of the original" sequels. Ghostbusters II didn't try to wow you with a bunch of over the top special effects, and this film really did feel like a new and different chapter in the Ghostbusters' world. A lot had changed in the lives of the characters, but the gang had to reunite again, because another evil spirit threatened the safety of mankind.

Was Ghostbusters II as good as the first film? No. It wasn't, and I don't think anyone will argue that. Ghostbusters II is a very solid film, but it's not as good as the original, and because of this, a lot of people will always shit on #2, when they compare both films. Usually, sequels can be a huge disappointment, especially when the new film has to follow in the footsteps of a praised original. The expectations can be huge, and sometimes, the bar is set way too high. Ghostbusters II is a very enjoyable film, and this film really doesn't deserve so much hate.

 

[justinsayne]

I wasn't aware people thought it was a bad movie. I remember this movie coming out, my dad was driving truck at the time and delivered a load of the giant posters for this movie to a chain of movie theaters, one the theaters sent several of the posters home with him for me & a few of my friends, so for years I had a giant Ghostbusters 2 poster hanging up in my room. I've always loved this movie, & have probably seen it more than I have the first one, I recently bought both as a box set at Walmart for $10. I've always found teh Ghostbuster movies to be fantastic, they perfectly balance all the sci-fi supernatural elements with comedy perfectly. I don't know if I'd Ghostbusters 2 is better than the first one, I would say both are pretty even, however I will say that Ghostbusters 2 is one of the few sequels out there that is just as good if not better than the original, something that is pretty rare in the movie industry.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

The second was very good. Its only two problems was the guy who was Dana's boss was irritating and that it wasn't as good as the first movie. The returning cast was hilarious, Bill Murray was great, the beginning Where Are They Now stuff was creative, the mood slime was fun and the Statue of Liberty stuff was silly but uplifting with the Jackie Wilson? song (Your Love Keeps Lifting Me Higher and Higher).

It even had a theme song and quick appearance by Bobby Brown. Very good movie, especially for a sequel

 

[Mustang Sally]

I enjoyed the second movie but admit it will always have it's critics, not because it was bad......but because the first was a classic. In these days of recycled ideas and familiar plot-lines, it's rare when a truly original idea comes down the pike; and Ghostbusters I was as original as anything ever done in the movies.

A further problem is that the original characters didn't really have anything new to offer; they were exactly the same as in the first movie. That's not a criticism; we like to see favorite characters return, but the situations they find themselves in have to amuse us sufficiently to make a sequel worth watching......and we needed some new players.

I thought Peter MacNicol did an insanely good job with his character; it added a refreshing new face to the mix. I also think it was wise of the writers to open the movie with Venkman and Dana not together. It seemed logical that their relationship wouldn't have worked, didn't it? Plus, having her with a baby conceived by another man added a sober dose of reality to the picture that made it stand out from the standard boring, formulaic sequel. It was an interesting sub-plot; would they make it work this time around?

Plus, how do you hate a movie that features the Statue Of Liberty walking down the streets of Manhattan while Jackie Wilson sings "Higher and Higher?" You haven't seen that done anywhere else, have you?

 

[Loveless]

Ghostbusters II is not a bad movie in any way, it just suffers in comparison to the first.
The only problem I really have with II is that the villain is weak. In the original you've got an apocalyptic ending brought about by Gozer, a God, manifested in the iconic, funny but also threatening Stay Puff Marshmellow Man and an inconic battle on the rooftop. In II you've just got a man, a warlord looking to reclaim his life. It doesn't work at all in comparison.