Ghostbusters II (1989)

Ghostbusters II (1989)

1989 PG 108 Minutes

Fantasy | Action | Comedy | Science Fiction | Family

Five years after they defeated Zuul, the Ghostbusters are out of business. When Dana begins to have ghost problems again, the boys come out of retirement to aid her and hopefully save New York City...

Overall Rating

7 / 10
Verdict: Good

User Review

  • BarneyNuttall

    BarneyNuttall

    8 / 10
    It is so often that a major blockbuster, like Ghostbusters, will have an evil twin brother in its sequel. Think Jurassic Park or Jaws, for example. In Ghostbusters II, Reitman actually manages to hold the balance between new and old. Sure, it leans towards its predecessor but hey! It's a sequel to Ghostbusters! I want to see the guys bust some ghosts and Reitman delivers.

    The film starts in a very interesting place. The Ghostbusters have split up and retired. Ray (Dan Aykroyd) and Winston (Ernie Hudson) remain as Ghostbusters but now they are birthday party entertainers that even the kids hate. This scene made me very interested. I thought "Oh? Something has changed. It's as if our characters have, dare I say, developed!" This is true for both Venkman (Bill Murray) and Spengler (Harold Ramis) who have moved on since Ghostbusters. Sadly, the film doesn't hold on to this too long but I appreciate the sentiment.

    Before we can strap on our whatchamacallits, the gang is back together. It's here where the story literally becomes the exact same story of the first one. An evil ancient entity uses a strange young man as an accomplice to bring about the apocalypse. It aims to use Weaver's young son as a host, meaning that she has to call the Ghostbusters to come and bust some ghosts! Which they do with all the plasma streams, goo, and gargantuan monoliths of American culture you'd expect.

    At first, I was critical of this but, thinking on it, why wouldn't you rinse and repeat? For this isn't laziness. The film does have subtle differences from its predecessor. Notably, the cinematography is miles better. The frames and blocking were very flat in the first film. This wasn't a bad thing due to the film's genre but I would've liked to have seen them push the boat out a bit. Not to worry, they do here! Neon colours and some close-ups not only build tension effectively but elevate the whole film in general. One particular shot of Peter MacNicol bathed in red light with glowing eyes was a joy.

    Ghostbusters II, while admittedly recycled, is as enjoyable as the first one with some upgraded features. Equally as fun and, for my money, much tenser, the film stands proudly next to its oh so loved elder brother.