Ghostbusters II (1989) Columbia/Comedy-Horror RT: 108 minutes Rated PG (language, mild action, violent images, scary images, some sensuality) Director: Ivan Reitman Screenplay: Harold Ramis and Dan Aykroyd Music: Randy Edelman Cinematography: Michael Chapman Release date: June 16, 1989 (US) Cast: Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Sigourney Weaver, Harold Ramis, Rick Moranis, Ernie Hudson, Annie Potts, Peter MacNicol, Harris Yulin, Janet Margolin, David Margulies, Kurt Fuller, Wilhelm von Homburg, William T. Deutschendorf, Hank J. Deutschendorf, Cheech Marin, Brian Doyle-Murray, Ben Stein. Box Office: $112.4M (US)/$215.3M (World)
Rating: ** ½
Remember in my review of the first Ghostbusters when I said that they don’t make ‘em like that anymore? Ghostbusters II proves my statement is true. It’s a huge letdown after the total perfection that was the original movie. And it’s not like it doesn’t have all its original parts. It does.
The whole cast returns as do director Ivan Reitman (Stripes) and co-scribes Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis. It just feels perfunctory and stale. While the special effects are still top-notch, the jokes aren’t as funny and the actors appear to be operating on autopilot. Even Bill Murray’s performance feels programmed rather than inspired. Such is the fate of many a comedy sequel. The joke is rarely funny in its second telling. Ghostbusters II has its moments and the storyline isn’t too bad, but it lacks the magic and momentum of the 1984 original.
Set five years after the events of the original, the Ghostbusters are no more having been banned from any form of paranormal investigation following all the property damage they caused while saving New York from that evil demi-god. Peter Venkman (Murray) hosts a pseudo-psychic cable show. Egon Spengler (Ramis, Stripes) works in a lab at Columbia University. Ray Stantz (Aykroyd, The Blues Brothers) owns an occult bookstore and entertains at children’s parties with former co-worker Winston Zeddemore (Hudson, The Crow).
Venkman’s former girlfriend Dana Barrett (Weaver, Aliens), now the divorced mother of an infant son, asks the guys for their help after a supernatural incident involving her son. It involves a river of pink slime flowing beneath First Avenue and an ominous-looking painting of an evil 16th century figure. An incident in a courtroom results in the Ghostbusters being allowed to resume their paranormal extermination business.
What is it about Dana that attracts the unwanted attentions of so many weirdos? In the first movie, it was Louis (Moranis, Honey, I Shrunk the Kids), the annoyingly persistent wimp who lived across the hall. This time, it’s Dr. Janosz Poha (MacNicol, Dragonslayer), an annoying colleague with an unidentifiable European accent. The difference is the comically gifted Moranis made the character funny. MacNicol’s character is just creepy. Whereas Louis made me laugh, Janusz makes my skin crawl. It gives the supernatural comedy something of a sour taste.
Something about Ghostbusters II has always bothered me and it’s this. What happened to the romance between Egon and the receptionist Janine (Potts, Pretty in Pink)? Not only is it never addressed, it appears to have been forgotten about by everybody altogether. This time, she hooks up with Louis who’s still hanging around for some reason.
The cast still has chemistry, but it feels kind of flat in the sequel. It doesn’t have the same sparkle and effervescence as the original. The plot, while interesting, is a bit more convoluted as well. It comes together, but it’s a reach. The soundtrack is fairly lame and instantly forgettable. The dialogue isn’t as quotable this time around either.
Ghostbusters II falls short of the original on virtually every level, but I wouldn’t call it a bad movie. Murray gets off some funny lines and the effects are quite good. But there’s no getting around that it’s a pale imitation of its predecessor. Let me describe it like this. The first movie was obviously a labor of love. You can see and feel that all involved put their hearts in it. This time, it’s more labor than love. It’s mildly entertaining, but nothing special.
