AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Siflutter It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

Griff Lees Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Geraldine The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

stormhawk2018 It's pretty tough for a sequel to best, let alone match it's predecessor, especially when the first one is an undisputed masterpiece. So yeah, Ghostbusters II isn't as good as the first, but it's not a bad film by any means. Unfortunately most people don't see it that way. Me, I really like this one, and think it's still a really decent film, even though it isn't what it could have been. The story begins five years after the first. Following the defeat of Gozer at the end of the first film, the Ghostbusters have actually fallen on hard times. Instead of being hailed as saviors, they have since been slapped with a restraining order and forced to cease their ghostbusting due to all the collateral damage their 'busting' causes. As a result, the four have hung up their proton packs and gone on to other activities. However, they are forced to get back to it when an evil ooze begins wreaking havoc, especially when it possesses a painting of an evil 16th Century Carpathian tyrant named Vigo, causing him to come to life to terrorize all who end up in his way. I think the main issue at hand here is sequelitis. It's just unable to capture the magic that made the first so special. It doesn't have the freshness, nor does it have the same level of laughs, wit, and energy. Ivan Reitman returned as director, and co-stars Aykroyd and Ramis once again wrote the script, and, while they don't do bad in these roles, their performances don't really stand out. I do however, like that they raised the stakes, and showed how actions have consequences. I just wish they could have come up with some more creative and stronger ideas. The music is still good though, and I still dig the effects, and yeah, the performances are fine, if slightly worn, but, even though this one has it's moments, it doesn't have near as much heart as it should. I'm still giving this one a really high rating though, as I'm a big fan, I like these guys and what they do, and it's still a fun and entertaining film. Yeah, some of it is a bit sillier, but I can't help but like it. Without a doubt, my main reason for really liking this is personal. Sentimentality is key here, as the earliest memory that I can recall is seeing this in the theater when I was a mere three years old. I can only recall one scene clearly, but still, it's a memory I want to cherish as long as possible. Bottom line: yeah, this is a step down, but it's still a pretty decent film, and offers a fair amount of entertainment, and, compared to a lot of sequels, it's quite strong, so give it a chance.

TheGDfather Sequels are a tough thing to follow and this was no exception. We have to remember the first movie is an original. People talk about ghost all the time. But its an idea that was an original about 4 guys dressed up in outfits driving around a hearse. On top of that these guys where scientist (3 of them were the other was a random guy they picked up off the street who wanted a job. And he was black but it didn't give that stereotypical feeling directors try so hard to do in movies. Annoying as hell from a black person perspective. Like who the heck acts like that.) who were kicked out of a college and started a business against the wishes of the public. Most films that do this usually focus on one person. Not 3 individuals all together who have equal parts. The first film didn't even have a license to film in streets like you have to have now. You just can't go filming a movie anywhere you want. You are going to need a permit. In the first one they would go film and they would get told to leave. Kind of probably why they were so comfortable with telling the police in the second movie to go leave while they were drilling a whole in the middle of new york busy street. Doesn't that look natural to you?The second one brought back all the characters. No reason to fix what works. Those guys have been acting for years. Professionals before then and especially after the fact. So why mess with it. and sigourney weaver is a great female actress. Good looking and very witty. Believable and didn't over due her parts. She wasn't out classed by any of those actors. She held her own. The idea of the slime going through the sewer was great. It definitely kept you interested. And to this day I have that jackie Wilson "higher and higher" stuck in my head. I play the song at work all the time. Not very original to be honest sticking an old song in the movie. Movie directors of the late 80's and early 90's were all over that. And it worked. It also had a hip hop feel to it with the music. Bobby brown song was great. Another person lost in the late 80's and 90's with his music but was an icon during his time. (icon as you can get for music i guess.) The movie got 3 points off cause it missed on some things that they could have done. First the history of the characters and adding a dark side to it. Which you aren't going to get in a comedy movie. But successful movies that have a second movie use that movie to dig back into why instead of what. So sometimes you get a better reason that they didn't have time to explain it in the first movie. Kill Bill 2 is an example, The Godfather 2 is a perfect example. Even back to the future 2 which is in the future goes back and describes biff more. It just something really great scripts do to try to catch up to the book. And if your plot is good it works. But for what the plot was in this movie it did great. A group of scientist who got sued after the marshmallow man ripped through town and they got blamed for it, now they are doing other side jobs to stay afloat. Doesn't sound like a great plot, but you throw in great acting, great comedy, one liners, and simply just a smooth plot along with some creative ideas and you have a great sequel. So this is a must see movie to me. Especially if you have kids. I mean there are some nice cartoons to see and yes iron man is good (it will be a while before you see that on my review list, i have to go through the classics first) but this movie will be fun for your children if they like to be original. My son loves both ghostbusters and has seen all the star wars and hes only 7. And you can actually watch this movie and not have to turn it off realizing it wasn't for children. Who framed Roger Rabit was terrible about that. Good movie but still. I thought it was for kids, it wasn't. One more thing this movie I have came in a blu ray box with two of them in there, like a hard back book and two dvds inside with a personal letter from the director explaining why he made the blu ray set. Heart felt and i read ever bit of it. That reason alone is what makes writing reviews for movies and reading them so great.

thesar-2 Allow me to take a few moments to come up with at least comedy sequel that was funnier than the original and worked on its own while still honoring the original. Since I'll never come up with one, let me reflect on this sad and unnecessary mess.Talk about advertising. So many scenes in this movie were shot looking like the director had the trailer in mind the whole time. The number of one-liners telling the audience they're back and scenes of them lining up and posing for stills made the movie feel more like them giving the preview editor a break plus the audience "a reason" for them to just remember the first one. Heck, even the movie's poster with the ghost's two fingers up is not only all over this movie, but oddly on their uniforms…for no reason other than more advertising.Admittedly, some jokes worked. I did find myself laughing out loud a few times. But those were so few and far between. Even the comic genius, Bill Murray, didn't phone it in and gave it his all. Sadly, most of his attempts were obvious and fell flat.The over-complicated plot which felt like a future Spider-Man sequel, involves a bizarre love-triangle, sued and disgraced heroes, a demon magician, the Blob's emotional cousin, Christmas through New Year's anger and a baby in so much incredible peril CPS would report the film ten times over. It boils down to the same set-up as the first one with no one believing what they should've easily remembered from just five years prior and the Ghostbusters getting everyone to literally stand behind the Statue of Liberty and all-but sing Kumbaya. Wait. Stop there. First off, this sounds far too familiar: this exact setup was used for 1985's Fright Night and 1988's Fright Night II whereas the same people are now unbelievably back in their comfort-zone in not believing in either vampires or ghosts in a span of 3 to 5 years.Secondly, this is NYC, so the comparison (now) is easy to 9/11. Not even counting the world or the rest of the nation, how many people just in the five boroughs would forget what happened in their city a mere five years after the attack? I've never actually been to the city, but I doubt one person forgot it. So, why or how would a single New Yorker forget what happened in 1984's citywide ghost attack just five years later. Impossible.But, then, the writing was lazy. The jokes were almost completely off, but the setup needed a lot of work, as well.These last couple of days, I re-watched the original and this movie I hadn't seen in more than two decades in prep for the 2016 Ghostbusters "remake?" in a couple of hours. My hope is that the "reboot?" will be more Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade than 2011's Fright Night.I wouldn't recommend Ghostbusters II even with the random funny jokes or one's curiosity to see what happened to our beloved heroes from the classic original. That's sad because these leads are/can be comic masters and even with this cast that should've struck gold a second time, they couldn't joke their way out of this wet sack of slime. ***Final thoughts: Ahhh, back in 1989, that was my year. Actually, beginning in 1988, movies became my life. I saw everything and anything I could ride my bike to and spend my allowance on. When my (to date) favorite summer of all time came up, I relished in all the 1989 summer blockbusters, one right after another. In this case: Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, Ghostbusters II, Batman, Lethal Weapon 2, etc. etc.Back then, I wasn't much of a hard-nosed critic as I am today. Maybe because I've seen 10,000 more movies since and the same old plots wear on you after a while. But, in 1989, my mind was fresh and I pretty much loved everything…and still thought this movie was a disappointment. Funny enough, I hadn't even appreciated the original Ghostbusters quite yet. I might have only seen it once or twice by the time I saw this sequel. At least I got a cool Glow-in-the-Dark Ghostbusters II AMC cup…that still, unbelievably, works today, July 16, 2016. I guess, there's that.

adonis98-743-186503 I never understood why people hated Ghostbusters II so much i mean Rotten Tomatoes loved Superman Returns, Jurassic World and Mad Max: Fury Road but not this? The movie is still directed by Reitman all the original cast returns and i found the villain to be interesting besides the Franchise is pretty cartoony and screams 80's every time you see it i mean there are much much worse sequels out there people? This movie alone is 50 times better than the new Ghostbusters film and that says a lot because that one hasn't been released yet. Besides there's so many holes in 5th avenue, we really didn't think anyone would notice. Just enjoy it for what it is a fun sequel.