I'm expecting Ghostbusters 2016 to be our around October, so you'll have to wait a bit for that review. So lets take a look at that other movie people claim ruined the franchise. Ghostbusters II, the sequel to the original movie. Is it as bad as everyone makes it out to be?
Let's get the plot out of the way first. have you seen the original movie, or the 2016 film? Then congratulations, while exact details are different, it is basically the same movie. The only difference here is that it feels a bit toned down in comparison to its predecessor (I'm not going to compare scales with a 2016 movie). Instead of a demi god and devil dogs, we have a wizard trapped in a painting, and negatively charged slime. Instead of the Ghostbusters trying to fight a ghost made up of Marshmallows, we have them riding in the Statue of Liberty. It just doesn't have the same kind of hook to it, you never feel the weight of the situation due to the toned down details, and the fact that they tried to fit more jokes in, so it never has the same weight. The writing as well doesn't help the characters because what new characters we get, I don't get the feeling they wanted us to care about them at all, and those who return, which is almost the entire main cast of the original, again don't take the situation seriously at all, for the most part, so they feel a bit weaker as a result.
Visually and sound design wise, its the same as the original but again feels toned down in comparison, the music is very much 80's music and the only two that stand out are the Ghostbusters theme, and a rap version of the theme for all the wrong reasons. Quick poll, which is worse, the rap for GB2 or the Fall out boy version for the new one? It just feels more dated then the original does. I know its a cop out to end it there, but there's not much more to say.
Is it a bad movie? Yes... but no at the same time. Critically, yes, its a bad movie. Is it as bad as everyone makes it out to be? Not really. Remember, I have no nostalgia for the original movie, my view of it is "it's ok". I've enjoyed it more as I thought about it for longer though. This sequel, to me its in a similar sort of spot as the original not because its a good movie, but because its actually in the "it's so bad its funny", that the sheer concept of it is funny. Again, the plot of the movie is that a powerful evil wizard wants to live again outside of a painting, and uses negatively charged slime to not only protect teh museum he's housed in, but to also raise an army of ghosts, including the Titanic (which did have one of the best lines in the movie for me, I like that style of comedy). To bypass the slime shield, they have to remote control the statue of liberty to break into the museum. Is that stupid? Yes, but I love that because of how ludicrous it is when you stop and think about it in the context of this universe. I struggle to call it ironically good, as the internet has abused that line of thinking to death, but I wouldn't be surprised if people think of this movie in a guilty pleasure sort of way. Nothing to be ashamed of, I lump the first Bayformers in that same category as I think that's the only one of the four that, all factors included, is an ok movie. Could the movie be better? Yes. But for what it is, Ghostbusters II is ok, better then what most people make it out to be, or the vocal minority, its hard to tell online. Bit of a brain fart moment of mine to forget saying what was coming out on Sunday, so what's coming next?: The Toys to life toys: Amiibo, Disney Infinity, and LEGO Dimensions.