Synopsis – Having gone bankrupt and out of work, the Ghostbusters have now retired. But their services are required again when a series of events involving ectoplasmic slime threaten the city and Dana’s baby.
Director – Ivan Reitman
Starring – Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Harold Remis, Ernie Hudson, Sigourney Weaver
Released – 1989
Ghostbusters happens to be one of my top 20 films, and Ghostbusters Afterlife helped me forget about Sonys’ attempted 2016 reboot, so I figured it was time to revisit Ghostbusters II, to see if it had been wrongfully pilloried. And, although it brings back the beloved team of paranormal investigators for another supernatural adventure and is nowhere as bad as people make out, this sequel falls slightly short of capturing the same lightning-in-a-bottle magic that made the first film a classic.
As mentioned above, one of the film’s strengths is its returning cast. Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Harold Ramis, and Ernie Hudson all reprising their roles as the Ghostbusters, and their camaraderie is as endearing as ever. Murray, in particular, shines with his witty one-liners and effortless charisma that we have grown to expecr. Sigourney Weaver and Rick Moranis also make a welcome return, adding to the sense of continuity from the first film. It really is a shame that Moranis gave up acting.
The special effects in “Ghostbusters II” are an improvement over the original, showcasing the advancement in technology during the five-year gap between the two movies. The ghostly apparitions are more detailed and visually impressive, and the film’s climactic showdown is a feast for the eyes, rivalling anything Marvel or DC put out these days.
However, the film’s plot falls short of the original’s cleverness. It feels somewhat derivative, with a recycled threat in the form of Vigo the Carpathian and a rehash of the arc seen in the first film. The pacing is a bit uneven, with a slow build-up and a rushed climax, and some subplots that felt incomplete.
The humour in “Ghostbusters II” is hit-or-miss. While it has its share of memorable gags and funny moments, it lacks the consistent wit and sharp writing that made the original so iconic, with no lines as memorable as the first film, with this movie relying more on slapstick comedy and cheap scares, which, while entertaining, don’t reach the same comedic heights.
In conclusion, “Ghostbusters II” is a fun and entertaining sequel that successfully reunites the beloved characters and introduces impressive special effects. However, it doesn’t fails to capture magic lightning-in-a-bottle magic as the original, due to a slightly weaker plot and weaker humour. Like me, fans of the first film will likely enjoy revisiting the Ghostbusters, but they may find the sequel lacking some of the original’s spark.
Roses Have Thoughts 
Leave a comment