ghostbusters double review

I'm going to keep this brief simply because I don't have too terribly much to say about these movies.

In my mind, the most interesting thing about the first two Ghostbusters movies is how they're basically the same movie, just with the second one being a slight upgrade. They follow the same plot beats, the characters all go through similar arcs, and they have identical tones. Another thing which contributes to this is just how much Ghostbusters II doesn't connect with the first. It's set a few years after the first movie, yet the events of the first movie may as well have not happened. The characters here already didn't have the most dynamic arcs to begin with, but what little progress was made in the first movie was completely undone, and society in general around the Ghostbusters also pretty much acts like they're bums and ghosts don't exist. It's so very conspicuous that it's honestly pretty baffling¹. All that being said, I really don't want to complain too much since, as with examples like the Snyder Cut vs. the Joss Whedon version of the Justice League, the contrast between the two becomes fairly unique.

The second movie really polishes up some rough edges the original had. I mentioned that there weren't really characters arcs in the first movie, well the second has a number of characters seem like they might actually be different at the end of the movie. Additionally, Sigourney Weaver's character has significantly more agency, and feels less like a prop (which is always a plus). The effects are also better, with fewer examples of effects not syncing up with the background properly. There's also a far more interesting villain who acts as a imperfect yet effective foil of Bill Murray's character and is pretty enjoyable to watch. The writing is tighter in the second movie, with gags being better paced and just funnier in general. Finally, I'd say that annoying characters in the first had their negative attributes either turned down or made a bit sillier, which just makes for a more pleasant viewing experience²

Overall, while I enjoyed both of the Ghostbusters movies, I'd say that they don't really stand out from the many other fun 80's action/comedies. They probably warrant a watch due to the cultural significance, but that being the primary reason isn't exactly a compliment.

Fine.

1. As evidenced by the great deal of fan theories bordering on fanfiction about how the second movie is a purgatory/afterlife for the main characters, but I digress.^
2. They also never mentioned or called back to that professor/student nonsense Bill Murray had in the first movie, which is fine by me because I can't think of much they could've done in a PG movie to make me dislike him more. I know the 80's were a different time and all, but man it just felt slimy.^