AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Pluskylang Great Film overall

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

merelyaninnuendo Ghostbusters IIMaybe, if focused less on the sub-plots assigned to the characters and more on the screenplay then it would have come off far better than the first one since the screen time was on their side.

winopaul When the librarians put this out on the end-cap, I thought it was the 2016 remake. Now I know, this is the sequel, not the all-gyrlll-power remake. I wanted to see the remake to find out if it was pretty good and it was fan-boy misogyny that made it a flop. That is a task for another day, but watching this movie, and reading about it here will help me understand the remake and it flopping.Now that I understand there was an animated series, and that burned in certain expectations into not fan-boys, but kids, well that might explain the vehemence towards the all-girl cast. When something is burned into your brain as a kid, its like a religion, and I can see them being really upset with the remake, they consider it blasphemous. I guess the remake could be done with the original actors, but they are both long in the tooth and expensive. I would have had the original cast have kids, and turn the business over to them, for the good of humanity. If Melissa McCarthy is as profane in the remake as in most of her films, I can see that as another betrayal. The original was a cute movie made into a kid's franchise, and then they do the four-letter-word treatment. They deserved to flop if that is the case.The one thing I don't understand here is the slighting of the black character. He was not an any Act 1 scenes, and then, poof, he is dressed up and running around Manhattan. Talk about prestidigitation. Maybe he held out for too much money (called "gettin' uppity" by Hollywood producers) and finally made a deal and joined the cast halfway through principle photography.This is a simple good movie. I barely remember the original, but I like this one. It was playful and aimed to kids. It did not try to slip in all kinds of innuendo and double entendre to keep mommy and daddy amused. Instead it had some art film elements, like New York being a hell hole, The statue of liberty being a beacon of hope, and yeah, love cures all. Very childish, almost infantile. I loved it.Despite the movie Trainwreck, most movies that break even are pretty good. This one was $37 million in, $215 million out, worldwide. When you look at inflation-adjusted box office, the original was $586 million domestic, this one was $244 million domestic, and the 2016 gyrll-power remake was $130 million. Seems about right.

thesar-2 Allow me to take a few moments to come up with at least comedy sequel that was funnier than the original and worked on its own while still honoring the original. Since I'll never come up with one, let me reflect on this sad and unnecessary mess.Talk about advertising. So many scenes in this movie were shot looking like the director had the trailer in mind the whole time. The number of one-liners telling the audience they're back and scenes of them lining up and posing for stills made the movie feel more like them giving the preview editor a break plus the audience "a reason" for them to just remember the first one. Heck, even the movie's poster with the ghost's two fingers up is not only all over this movie, but oddly on their uniforms…for no reason other than more advertising.Admittedly, some jokes worked. I did find myself laughing out loud a few times. But those were so few and far between. Even the comic genius, Bill Murray, didn't phone it in and gave it his all. Sadly, most of his attempts were obvious and fell flat.The over-complicated plot which felt like a future Spider-Man sequel, involves a bizarre love-triangle, sued and disgraced heroes, a demon magician, the Blob's emotional cousin, Christmas through New Year's anger and a baby in so much incredible peril CPS would report the film ten times over. It boils down to the same set-up as the first one with no one believing what they should've easily remembered from just five years prior and the Ghostbusters getting everyone to literally stand behind the Statue of Liberty and all-but sing Kumbaya. Wait. Stop there. First off, this sounds far too familiar: this exact setup was used for 1985's Fright Night and 1988's Fright Night II whereas the same people are now unbelievably back in their comfort-zone in not believing in either vampires or ghosts in a span of 3 to 5 years.Secondly, this is NYC, so the comparison (now) is easy to 9/11. Not even counting the world or the rest of the nation, how many people just in the five boroughs would forget what happened in their city a mere five years after the attack? I've never actually been to the city, but I doubt one person forgot it. So, why or how would a single New Yorker forget what happened in 1984's citywide ghost attack just five years later. Impossible.But, then, the writing was lazy. The jokes were almost completely off, but the setup needed a lot of work, as well.These last couple of days, I re-watched the original and this movie I hadn't seen in more than two decades in prep for the 2016 Ghostbusters "remake?" in a couple of hours. My hope is that the "reboot?" will be more Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade than 2011's Fright Night.I wouldn't recommend Ghostbusters II even with the random funny jokes or one's curiosity to see what happened to our beloved heroes from the classic original. That's sad because these leads are/can be comic masters and even with this cast that should've struck gold a second time, they couldn't joke their way out of this wet sack of slime. ***Final thoughts: Ahhh, back in 1989, that was my year. Actually, beginning in 1988, movies became my life. I saw everything and anything I could ride my bike to and spend my allowance on. When my (to date) favorite summer of all time came up, I relished in all the 1989 summer blockbusters, one right after another. In this case: Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, Ghostbusters II, Batman, Lethal Weapon 2, etc. etc.Back then, I wasn't much of a hard-nosed critic as I am today. Maybe because I've seen 10,000 more movies since and the same old plots wear on you after a while. But, in 1989, my mind was fresh and I pretty much loved everything…and still thought this movie was a disappointment. Funny enough, I hadn't even appreciated the original Ghostbusters quite yet. I might have only seen it once or twice by the time I saw this sequel. At least I got a cool Glow-in-the-Dark Ghostbusters II AMC cup…that still, unbelievably, works today, July 16, 2016. I guess, there's that.

adonis98-743-186503 I never understood why people hated Ghostbusters II so much i mean Rotten Tomatoes loved Superman Returns, Jurassic World and Mad Max: Fury Road but not this? The movie is still directed by Reitman all the original cast returns and i found the villain to be interesting besides the Franchise is pretty cartoony and screams 80's every time you see it i mean there are much much worse sequels out there people? This movie alone is 50 times better than the new Ghostbusters film and that says a lot because that one hasn't been released yet. Besides there's so many holes in 5th avenue, we really didn't think anyone would notice. Just enjoy it for what it is a fun sequel.