Isn’t it crazy how you can be nostalgic for something when you can’t even remember if you decided whether or not you liked it? I can’t speak on your behalf, but I know that I do it a lot. I wouldn’t call myself a fan of the Ghostbusters franchise, for instance, but I can say that I am met by a warm, fuzzy feeling when I hear the classic Ghostbusters tune play. I think that is, in part, because I have always wanted to be a fan. I don’t know how it is for every movie fan with a blog, but I always go into a film wanting to like it. If every post on The ‘Bib could be me preaching to you why a slasher film about a vacuum cleaner that drives around the mall killing people is where it’s at, then I am a happy man. I want to be a part of all the fandoms, but I am also not somebody who can fake it.
Set five years after the original 1984 film, Ghostbusters II sees our cast of characters brought back together again to bust up some supernatural beings. Of course, as most of you are aware, this 1989 sequel didn’t exactly pass with flying colors. In fact, many people credit Ghostbusters II as being the straw that broke the camel’s back for the Ghostbusters movie series. The film received generally negative reviews and, although it did really well at the box office, it posted a significant decline from the original film in spite of having a considerably larger budget. It was also the last film in the series until the 2016 reboot.
With the old beat-up car, backed by the old-school Ghostbusters theme song, there is definitely a certain level of charm that is earned effortlessly simply by its own nostalgia and association with the original film. If you find the phrase “Sins of the father” to be an appropriate mantra, I will raise you that Ghostbusters II inherently benefits from the “Goodwill of the mother”. I believe that a great sequel should be able to be seen and enjoyed independently of the original. At the same time, the benefit of being a sequel is that it affords you the luxury of not having to. In the same way I wet my Michael Myers pajamas every time the Halloween theme music cues, no matter the quality of the sequel, you don’t have to start from scratch with Ghostbusters II.
One of the major pitfalls sequels often fall into is the preconceived notion that you can start off on third base (and can claim to hit a triple if things go even slightly well), and so, what happens is they squeeze what little water they can from a stone and call it a day. They then discover that the truth is far more unfortunate. However, that doesn’t mean they are starting off from square one. Sticking with the analogy, they are at least on second base with their core audience. Give them something, anything, with Ghostbusters and they will lineup at the door.
One of the takeaways I took away from Ghostbusters II is that it was bad judgment to go with the setup they went with for this film. Five years later, the Ghostbusters are now all washed up, hosting birthday parties and trying to seek out the glories of yesteryear. Ghostbusters in the real world had blown up as a major phenomenon, so I can imaging that seeing the Ghostbusters presented as nobodies in spite of feeling so relevant in the real world was a surprising development. It is a cliche for sequels, and it makes sense from a narrative standpoint as well, the idea of wanting to break down the group so that you can spend the whole rest of the movie building them up again.
However, the idea that everyone forgot all about the team and a giant marshmallow man wreaking havoc across New York in five years requires you to really check your brain at the door. In the thirties, we mistook a balloon for a UFO and have spent over half a century talking about it. A giant marshmallow man tearing up New York? No one’s moving on from that.
It doesn’t help that the approach of more or less hitting the reset button on the story and the world’s perception of the Ghostbusters creates a sense of repetition, a soft-reboot vibe to a film series that hasn’t been spent.
After saving New York City from the original film’s ghost attack, the team has been disbanded for tearing up the city during the battle. However, when the ghosts begin wreaking havoc once more, the Ghostbusters are now asked to answer the call.
Bill Murray remains a likable, charismatic protagonist, and an actor who can charm his way out from even the worst situation.
I don’t believe his character would be as appreciated if these films were released today. The reason being is that his character is, at best, a goofy, misguided man with good intent, and, at worst, an arrogant misogynistic man-child. I think nowadays we work too much in absolutes though, and his behavior is meant to be seen as misguides. Nowadays, we aren’t as open to character having shades of gray to them – at least not character we are meant to like in a mainstream film.
Admittedly, I will say that the portrayal in this particular film does feel a little like a portrayal from an actor who knows he can play this character in his sleep and feels ready to try – just a general sleepwalking, going through the motions vibe with him. I like Murray as an actor, but I think it shows that his limited bag of tricks have a shelf life when he isn’t given enough to sink his teeth into.
The rest of the characters remain zany and colorful, but I can’t say I get a lot out of them. Colorful and zany, but not particularly kinetic. They’re par for the course. I like Sigourney Weaver. She was great in Alien. This, she is just in. The original film let her in on the fun, becoming possessed by the main antagonist and letting her play something beyond the main character’s love interest. I also like Rick Moranis. He was great in Little Shop of Horrors. This, he is allowed to bring some of his chaotic, nervous energy, but, again, it just feels like there isn’t enough to it.
The banter in between characters and the improvisational (improvisational ‘feeling,’ I should say – I have no idea what was planned and what wasn’t) humor of the original film is still there in small bursts, and it can be good for an occasional one linker you can take with you and put in your pocket for later use (usually said by Harold Ramis), but it also doesn’t stack very high.
The special effects have aged, which is a natural, inevitable progression. These ones I actually found worse than the original films, however. Sometimes when reviewers write about a film from the eighties or earlier, we write as though we haven’t paid witness to the advancements that have been made in film. I think that is a fundamental mistake. Records are meant to be broken. Things are meant to be improved upon. It doesn’t always happen. Sometimes when things become easier to do, we take advantage and the result is a cheap, inferior product. Sometimes we lose what made something special in the first place. For example, a hyper realistic Lion King taking sense of expression in traditional animation. Likewise, if you can more easily copy and paste CGI in place of practical effects, sometimes you stand to lose a lot of charm and immersion. With this film, particularly, I feel like the special effects in key moments have really aged badly in this one – i.e. when the Ghostbusters are in the sewer and are stooped in the purple ooze. When they are brought out, the slime drips off of them like a thick mucus, but when they fall in, the visual effects look as though they may as well have been incinerated by an alien’s blaster.
At the same time, it is worth mentioning that the film does have fun visuals worth singling out. My favorite is when the slime gets on a woman’s fur coat and makes a monster out of it. Meanwhile, the visual of the Statue of Liberty walking through New York City is also an easy crowd-pleasing scene, even if it is too similar to and not nearly as fun as the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
As a film, I believe that the second Ghostbusters commits the cardinal sin of a sequel, in that, it fails to introduce enough new ideas and feels fully committed to rehashing inferior story beats from the original film. It doesn’t have the forward momentum that you would want from a new Ghostbusters film, already presenting them as washed up and uncool. It tasks itself with breaking them down so they can be built up again, but the monument it seeks to build is worth so much less than the one it tore down.
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings