[7.3/10] *Ghostbusters II* is effectively a recapitulation of the first movie, with the slightest of twists. An evil demigod is threatening New York again, only this time it’s Vigo rather than Zuul. Venkman is pursuing Dana again, only this time she has a baby. An annoying dude is hitting on her until he gets possessed by the bad guy, only this time it’s Janosz instead of Louis. An uptight bureaucrat stands in the Ghosbusters’ way, only this time it’s the mayor’s aide rather than an EPA agent. A giant magical figure lumbers down the streets of New York City, only this time it’s the Statue of Liberty rather than the Staypuft Marshmallow man.

But you know what? I don’t really mind. The first *Ghostbusters* movie does not possess some magical blueprint that all movies should follow. But it offers an enjoyable, sturdy format on which to hang jokes, special effects, and group chemistry. I’m hard-pressed to complain about director Ivan Reitman, and writers/stars Harold Ramis and Dan Akroyd for returning to the formula.

This is, after all, a silly, jokey, over-the-top crowd-pleaser of a film. Despite its focus on the balance of positive versus negative emotions, it doesn’t really have anything deep to say. Despite the theoretically city- and globe-threatening peril, the stakes never truly feel that high. And while a few of the first movie’s edges have been sanded down for the sequel, the spirit of general irreverence persists and thrives.

Besides, some of those new spins and angles are just as delightful. For a movie that came out a half-decade after its predecessor, I appreciate the winking, meta detail of the fact that in-universe, the Ghostbusters are forgotten also-rans. Ray and Winston are appearing at kids’ birthday parties. Egon’s back at the university. And Venkman’s hosting a low-rent local access show. The combination of lawsuits and a skeptical public has left them back at the bottom of the barrel. There’s amusement, and a touch of real life commentary to be had, on the group falling off the pedestal, rather than straining to climb up it in the first place.

To the same end, they tone Louis down, making him a more endearing nerd than a constant annoyance. They give Janine more to do, mostly in terms of a romance with Louis, but still! She gets to be slightly more of a character in this one -- with a funky new look to boot. *Ghostbusters II* mostly fumbles around to put the characters back where they were when we left them. But the group’s triumphant return and reunion is a blast, and the changes at the margins are for the better.

Chief among them is the fact that Venkman isn’t just flirting with Dana like the cad that he is, but worms his way back into her heart through how well he does with her infant son. To be frank, the Dana/Peter romance is still as undercooked as it was in the last one, and doesn’t even get a meaningful resolution in this film. But the choice to pair Bill Murray with a baby, showing him plying his usual routine in the cutest of contexts, pays real comic dividends as he not only makes their moments together hilarious, but they also endear you to the character.

Unfortunately, Dana gets the short shrift in this one. While the last movie let Sigourney Weaver get in on the fun when possessed by Zuul, this one reduces her to the placid love interest she was for the first half of the original film (though does find time to put her in just her bra or a towel for no real reason). Despite the fact that the bad guy wants to steal her child and his henchman wants to marry her, she’s basically an accessory in the sequel, and it does a disservice to Weaver’s talents.

Likewise, whatever *Ghostbusters* gains by toning down Louis and making him more of an endearing character himself, it loses by assaulting the audience with Janosz, Dana’s desirous boss. He’s a broadly-drawn clump of stereotypical eurotrash, and his generic continental frou frou-ness is vastly more irritating than it is amusing. Despite Vigo’s status as the big bad, Janosz gets much more screen time as the secondary antagonist, and his scenes are an utter chore to get through.

Thank heaven for the production design and special effects though. If there’s one place where *Ghostbusters II* improved on a strength of its predecessor, it's in the visuals. The ghosts here are even more creative and vivid than in the last outing. The convicts harassing the judge who sentenced them to death, a translucent monster poking its head through the Washington Square Arch, and a ghostly *Titanic* finally completing its journey are all a spooky treat. The film gets tremendously creative even apart from the specific ghosts, with an invisible spook driving Dana’s carriage, Vigo sticking his head beyond the painting that contains him, and of course, an impressive river of pink ooze that runs beneath the city and eventually envelops the location of the film’s final big set piece.

That comes when Vigo turns the local art museum into a villainous jello mold. So our heroes naturally...animate the Statue of Liberty and enlist to raise the spirits of the grumpy New York citizenry and help smash their way into the eye of the storm. It’s a completely bonkers conclusion, but one that won me over with its setup, enervating spirit, and the sheer ridiculous audacity of it. Say what you will about *Ghostbusters II*’s lack of ambition, but god help me, it’s splashy and fun.

You can see it in the film’s comedy. The gags are slightly more family friendly this time around, which was probably a concession to the original being a four quadrant hit rather than a niche success. More to the point, the humor here is much more rooted in the ensemble than in Bill Murray as a one-liner machine. More of the gags and the sheer joy of this one comes from the Ghostbusters, Dana, Louis, Janine, and almost everyone they run into playing off one another, with a balance you didn’t really find in the group’s first outing.

Sure, *Ghostbusters II* is, at best, a minor remix of the film that spawned it, but it’s also a good time. You like hanging out with Venkman, Ray, Egon, and Winston. You like watching the latest impressive special effect wow you or gross you out or both. You like watching the good guys triumph over villainy in one of the most out there, but strangely rousing ways possible. In short, you like this movie. Or at least, I like this movie, even if it’s just giving me a little more of something I already liked.

This bad boy came in on Blu-ray today. I had to rewatch obviously because I just saw the new one a few times, but also to see if the new trend of hating this movie and calling it shit were valid. After watching the Honest Trailer on it, I thought maybe they're right. But guess what?

THEY ARE SO SO WRONG. This movie is still the shit. Full disclosure: I saw this movie a thousand times as a kid on video and I admit I saw it before I ever saw the first one. I had all the toys, watched all the cartoons, etc. But here is an even bigger reveal: I think I might like this one more than the first one. I think Bill Murray is funnier in this one too. Not like his jokes are better than in the first one, but he has more opportunities in this one to be funny. He's got more funny lines. I was so enjoying him in this movie I was thinking maybe I owe it to him to watch The Razor's Edge since that's the passion project he got to make for agreeing to be in Ghostbusters in the first place. Going to add it to the queue.

If you are doubting this movie like people do, I suggest you rewatch for yourself.

'They're back!'

I watched this straight after the first one. It was just as good as the first film. I enjoyed it.

This was another sequel that was fashionable to knock when it came out. It got panned because it couldn't live up to the first Ghostbusters. Well, what could? The first one was so original, so enormously popular than any sequel was bound to fail as far as matching it.

This second Ghostbusters was just fine, very entertaining and it was nice to see all the main characters back. It had a little nicer feel to it and was more family-friendly language-wise, so it even had some things going for it the first one didn't have.

The other major different in this sequel was watching Peter MacNichol, who reprized his "Renfield"-type character from Mel Brooks' "Dead: And Loving It" comedy with Leslie Nielsen. Here, MacNichol plays "Janosz Poha," another wacko with a thick Eastern European accent. He is hilarious, and elevates the enjoyment of this film. Otherwise, the rest of the cast plays and acts just as they did in the first film, which means you'll get a lot of laughs out of them The story just isn't as intense, that's all. No, it can't equal the original, but.....

The bottom line is this: Don't try to compare the two films. If you enjoyed the first, you'll like this.....period.

Who you gonna snore?

Ghostbusters II Is directed by Ivan Reitman and stars Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Sigourney Weaver, Harold Ramis, Rick Moranis & Ernie Hudson. Ramis & Aykroyd c-wrote the screenplay and it's a sequel to the hugely successful Ghostbusters from 1984. Plot follows on from the first film but five years later and sees the Ghostbusters disbanded after being derided as frauds and handed a bill for the damages incurred as they saved the world! However, a new supernatural threat is bubbling down in the sewers of New York and now more than ever the Ghostbusters are back in vogue.

It was probably asking too much for this sequel to be as sparkling as the first film. More so when one considers that there was a 5 year gap in between and a new decade was soon to arrive that firmly had no place for 80s nostalgia. Oh Ghostbusters 2 was a success, very much so, but after the rush of fans wanting some more from the kooky parapsychologists had died down, the feedback was very mixed from fans and critics alike. Understandably so since everything about this sequel is tired. The characters look bored and lack the expresso timing that was once evident, especially Murray who is badly underused here, and more troubling is that his Venkman, the best thing about the original film, is reduced to being a normal type bloke. That's criminal, because the spirited stuff falls to Aykroyd and co and tho they be solid pros, they ain't got Murray's wit and mannerisms.

The story too is weak. Featuring a seventeenth century tyrant and the inevitable rise of spooks unbound. Thankfully, tho, the effects are at least of the high and gloopy standard set first time around. And there's some tight gags in there for the knowing Ghostbuster ear. But repetition hangs heavy throughout, Ramis & Aykroyd seemingly not grasping that what worked in 84 will not totally transfer well to a new crowd who are now older and wiser. There's also the distinct feeling that this film is more about a cast get together to make some easy cash than enticing in a whole new audience. Peter MacNicol is a welcome introduction to proceedings as Janosz Poha, while more of "slimer" (who is now real cool) is never a bad thing. But the magic is gone and Ghostbusters 2 just comes off as shallow and dangerously close to soiling our love of the first picture. 4/10