kellym40 film review

The science heroes are back in ‘Ghostbusters II’

Rating 3/5

The original Ghostbusters was original and took on a surprising following over the 30 plus years since its release in 1984. When I first saw this second installment in the theater, I wasn’t quite sure what to think of it. Honestly, I thought it wasn’t as good as the first one (but I was still only a teenager at the time of its release in 1989). I decided to revisit the film since it was just on TV at the time of this writing.

The four Ghostbusters are back: Peter Venkman (Bill Murray), Ray Stantz (Dan Aykroyd), Egon Spengler (Harold Ramis), and Winston Zeddmore (Ernie Hudson) to battle this new paranormal threat. Sigourney Weaver returns as Dana Barrett, who has a new baby. Also returning to the supporting cast are Louis Tully (Rick Moranis) and Janine Melnitz (Annie Potts). Peter MacNicol joins the cast as museum curator Dr. Janosz Poha, who seems to have a crush on Dana, and becomes a servant to Vigo (Wilhelm von Homburg), the 17th century evil spirit trying to enter the world through Dana’s infant baby. Ivan Reitman returns to direct.

The film’s opening sequence shows Dana out with her baby in a carriage. She stops to talk to a street vendor, and then the carriage mysteriously begins rolling down the sidewalk into the city streets. In this sequel, there does not seem to be a whole lot new to bring to the table as an evil spirit tries to enter this world from beyond (in this case a painting) and bring an end to humanity. After viewing the film again, I can say I liked it a little more than my original viewing in 1989. It does have some merit despite having a similar story. The means by which the evil spirit attempts to come into this world is different and the presence of this mysterious pink slime that responds to various human emotions adds to this new story.

There is some expository dialogue between the characters to explain what has happened to them in the last five years and catch the audience up from the events of the first one. Soon the Ghostbusters discover the pink slime and begin to analyze it and investigate, get imprisoned for a time, then called upon when things start getting really bad.

Ghostbusters II isn’t too bad, at least not as bad as I originally thought. Again, as with the first film, the humor and comedy comes from the story and dialogue rather than being forced for comedy’s sake. Some of the dialogue, though, might not be as clever and witty as the original but still is decent and moves the story. There are some good moments here and there to keep the audience entertained. It’s not excellent and falls just under the original 1984 film, but it’s fun entertainment.

 

 

kellym40 film review

Ghosts be afraid, the Ghostbusters are here

Rating 4/5

With the release of the ‘Ghostbusters’ reboot with a female cast, and my recent review of that film, I decided to revisit the original 1984 film and offer some thoughts. You can view the trailer for the reboot here:

Ghostbusters 2016

The original film, written by Dan Aykroyd and the late Harold Ramis, is a comedy classic that has seemed to endure for over 30 years.

The film seemed to have all the right elements that appeared to have worked together flawlessly. With the comedy team of two Saturday Night Live alums, Bill Murray and Aykroyd, and Ramis, a funny man on his own having written several classics as Animal House, Caddyshack, Stripes, and Groundhog Day, among several others, and director Ivan Reitman putting this cast, with its great supporting cast, production pieces, and the scientific, yet witty, dialogue together into comedy gold with a mixture of action, sci-fi, and a little suspense. You can view the original trailer here:

Ghostbusters – Original Trailer

A quick synopsis of the film is three parapsychologists, after being fired from their university positions, decide to set up a service in which they capture ghosts and become the Ghostbusters. Murray, Aykroyd, and Ramis bring their characters to life with humor, quick-witted and intelligent dialogue, and a believable grasp of the scientific language. During the course of their adventures, they take on another member to their team portrayed by Ernie Hudson. All of the characters are varied and well acted with performances by Rick Moranis, Sigourney Weaver and Annie Potts as they round out the supporting cast.

The special effects in this film are many and decent for the time (1984) in which it was released. The story and plot appear simple but effective. The world of the paranormal and the “real” world collide during the climax of the film and results in the ultimate showdown between good and evil. The film is a well-blended mixture of a well-written script, visual effects, great direction and performances, and the right amount of comedy that flows from the characters and story rather than seeming forced and just there just for comedy’s sake.

kellym40 film review

From 1984 to 2016, the ‘Ghostbusters’ are back

Rating 2/5 Stars

More than 32 years ago, a film was released, penned by a couple of guys named Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis, and became a comedy classic. The film had the right amount of humor and story and the execution of those elements were blended well by the crafty Ivan Reitman (Ghostbusters II, Kindergarten Cop, Twins, Dave, Six Days Seven Nights – and a host of other memorable comedies and action-comedies).

Now, 32 years later Paul Feig and Katie Dippold pen a script and thus, Ghostbusters is remade. But somehow, Feig’s (Bridesmaids, The Heat, Spy) direction fails to do bring this adaptation up to par. I say adaptation because it is adapted from the script by Aykroyd and Ramis. That is one thing I liked about the film. It wasn’t just a rehash of the same story and characters with a couple of things changed here and there. It was a fresh take on the story with some big names in female comedy today like Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig, and Kate McKinnon. Leslie Jones joins and rounds out the four Ghostbusters.

McCarthy and Wiig play former friends and paranormal enthusiasts who had a falling out after writing a book together, and get sucked in to chasing paranormal activity after witnessing a sighting of a ghost. They are joined by a nuclear engineer (McKinnon) and subway worker (Jones).

While the film had its moments, I believe much of the comedy present was there for comedy’s sake. It seemed to have a lot of gags and “funny” bits, too much for my taste. The ladies’ new receptionist (Chris Hemsworth) was one the funnier roles, but there I think much of his actions and dialogue seemed to be there to just for comedy’s sake and Hemsworth’s portrayal appeared to be a little forced at times. It did have a decent story that I did find it somewhat captivating, and the characters were varied with some entertainment value, but, overall, I think it was trying to hard to be funny and just didn’t work for me.

The original cast even had cameos, which still didn’t seem to save the film. Bill Murray played a debunker of myths and facts. Aykroyd portrayed cab driver. Ernie Hudson played Jones’ uncle who happened to own a funeral parlor where she got the hearse (a nod, if you will, to the original). Even Sigourney Weaver had a cameo.

The film just seemed to not have enough substance to keep me fully entertained for the just under two hour run time. However, the other members in the audience seemed to enjoy the film there was a lot of laughter. So, while the film may work for some, it just failed for me.