MovieChat Forums > Ghostbusters II (1989) Discussion > HATED it when it came out. Caught it on ...

HATED it when it came out. Caught it on TV the other day...


...and really enjoyed it.

I then went out and bought the DVD (which was in a bargain bin, haha).

GOOD:

-it's the original cast, like it or not. Not gonna see that combo again.

-more Annie Potts!

-Rick Moranis less annoying, honorary Ghostbuster

-Venkman's TV show about psychics, with an uncredited Chloe Webb

-Titanic and Cheech

-S. Weaver is her underwear

-There are quite a few funny lines. I like the way Winston delivers the line about not catching the train number that just ran through him.

-I liked the villain, despite him being less threatening than the original one

NOT SO GOOD:

-that Dana married someone else and had a kid. But... if Venkman were a real person... she probably would.

-Peter MacNicol was a bit annoying

-some of the ghosts were TOO scary for younger viewers (heads on spikes? There's a fine line between funny-scary and scary-scary)

-it's basically a re-hash, yes.

Anyway, I'd give it a solid 8/10 now. The original was a MASTERPIECE, so that's hard to live up to.

reply

It's always interesting to re-visit certain films later in life you didn't like at first and seeing they're a lot better on a rewatch (and vice versa). I actually like that this one at times is as scary as it is, just gives it an edge to me.

It'll be interesting to see how people look upon this film next year when the reboot is out. I bet it'll get considerably more respect.

reply

I enjoy it, matter of fact barring some unforeseen circumstance I always watch it immediately after watching #1. It's a bit of a mixed bag, though.
-Viggo is pretty lame compared to Gozer, though to its credit there are more ghosts in #2.
-It was almost as funny as the original but definitely inferior.
-It was the first movie again (good since the first is awesome; bad in that it could have been so much more) only with different toys being advertised.

I give it a 7/10. It doesn't quite live up to the original but it's by no means bad.

I'm genuinely convinced that every movie would be better with Arnold Schwarzenegger in it.

reply

Speaking as one of those younger viewers at the time, I love that GB2 was a bit more scary and unsettling. It helps to raise the stakes, the way a sequel should.

"If it seems too complicated, make it easy on yourself: just send money."

reply

I always felt GB2 was far scarier than the first. GB1 had scary moments in it too like the library ghost, the Terror Dogs, Dana being kidnapped, etc. but GB2 has Ghost Janosz abducting Oscar, the heads on the stakes, the slime in the tub, the ghost train, Vigo, etc. all terrifying stuff when you're little.

reply

People bash GBII but it's the best sequel that could've been made. I think people are too concerned with little flaws while ignoring the bigger picture. Like you say, the original cast is there, and the vibe and tone is totally like a proper Ghostbusters movie with all the great set pieces, special effects and witty dialogue and acting. The people who say this movie is a disappointment, I wonder what they'd think of the upcoming all female ghostbusters sh!tfest. What a f-kin wreck that movie will be. GBII should be treasured in light of crap like that.

I've lost the bleeps, I lost the sweeps, and I lost the creeps

reply

Well I'm a huge fan of GB2 and I say give the new movie at chance until we actually have something to go by. I mean right now we pretty much have nothing.

"If it seems too complicated, make it easy on yourself: just send money."

reply

The new "movie" is an abomination that I will not speak of.

that said, GB2 was and is an excellent sequel, NOT a rehash. its just got a formula, like every other film series out there. I honestly think its better then the first, and I love both, but I can watch the 2nd one a lot more.

reply