Funny thing is that, for all issues with Ghostbusters’ sequel, video game and reboot stories, the comics have done a fantastic job linking all previous Ghostbuster stories together. Even gave the franchise its own sensible multiverse.
Yeah I agree, I would say the same about The Real Ghostbusters. That series explored many interesting paths that could have been taken in possible sequels, but without the need to keep the story alive for 2 hours in a feature length film.
Eh The comics were geared towards a niche audience from the start vs the general audience film that need to make +200 million nowadays so they go wide on theme and appeal. It's always SciFi films that try to make niche content with a blockbuster budget and half the time, it doesn't work.
@@1Piecer Maybe, but they had been doing it to explain crossovers with everything from Real Ghostbusters to TMNT. Plus it logically explained the actor’s 2016 cameos as AU doppelgängers
If you've ever watched the Ghostbusters documentary with Ivan Reichman, that Library scene, half of it was improvised. That bookshelf falling was an accident.
Today I don't think any of the Ghostbusters movies are scary, but I remember as a kid actually being way more scared of Ghostbusters 2. Vigo just looked scary to me, and that scene of a ghostly witch version of Janosz coming to grab the baby just haunted me as a kid.
yeah agreed, both of those things scared me, but wouldn't scare me today. much like Harry and the Henderson's scene with Harry's head popping over the front windshield screaming terrified me, gave me nightmares, but today wouldn't phase me lol
Men in Black had the same problem, the first film threaded comedy into the genre, but the studio’s takeaway was “this is a comedy” and they never got that tone back.
Very true. MiB has a lot in common with Ghostbusters, in that it was about an outsider discovering weird shit that blows away his entire perception of what reality is, and a large part of the comedy comes from their inexperience with dealing with the supernatural. When you make sequels to that story, your cast now already knows everything about the new, weird world. They're a part of it, so nothing surprises them anymore - and by extension, nothing surprises the audience anymore. All you can really do is keep upping the stakes dramatically, going all-in on the action/horror, or just making things goofy and going all-in on the comedy.
@@PontschPauPau3451 I like this take and would add that studios also tend to focus on what they thought worked. This applies to really franchises too, regardless of opinion. For example The Fast and Furious movies. Starts off as high stakes races to breaking every law of physics. Either you up the ante or make it funny. Both can and does work. Every studio wants to money first, art second. Some get it and can replicate it, but more don’t and try to hit the same beats.
I agree A fundamental corner stone of the franchise is the horror element And the cast plays the job straight not trying to be funny in the delivery on purpose.
Of everything to come out after the original movie. The video game was actually really good at capturing what made the original great! I highly recommend it to any ghostbusters fan. We've got the original cast coming back to voice the characters. Fun sequences that recreate/are inspired by scenes from the movies plus new sequences with original ghosts with really neat concepts and pretty scary setpieces.
I mean the game was good at tying up the Shandor storyline, but was reliant on old Ghostbusters locations in ways that would have been pandering in a movie. Also Bill Murray could have sounded a little more enthusiastic at times.
@@DoctorPhileasFragg Yeah but his addition to the game is so contradictory. Apparently Murray insisted on giving his co-stars equal time recording lines, but was nudged in due to his brother’s casting as the NY mayor and left a lot of his lines unrecorded.
Ray: Are you troubled by strange noises in the middle of the night? Egon: Do you experience feelings of dread in your basement or attic? Venkman: Have you or your family ever seen a spook, spectre or ghost? Ray: If the answer is "yes," then don't wait another minute. Pick up the phone and call the professionals... GHOSTBUSTERS! Ray: Our courteous and efficient staff is on call 24 hours a day to serve all your supernatural elimination needs. WE'RE READY TO BELIEVE YOU!
I would have loved Ghostbusters hellbent. But to be honest Ghostbusters after life might be okay to see on video but it doesn't excite me enough to want to go see in the theater.
I never understood the hate for Ghostbusters 2. Although not a good as the first one, Ghostbusters part2 is good too! Also, at least we got Ghostbusters the video game with all four OG Ghostbusters in it. The game was basically Ghostbisters 3. RIP Harold Ramis.
Thank you I love hearing people support Ghostbusters ll. It was the first movie I saw in theater back in '89. I was only 4 yrs old and it will always be special to me.
GB2 was only panned upon release because it wasn't quite as good as the first one but over the years, a lot of people have re-evaluated it and it's now generally regarded as a very good, worthy sequel.
yeah seems like that's the case for most things. which is unfortunate, but often true. there are exceptions, depending on who you ask, but yeah for the most part i agree
This is why "the original but more so" is a mistake. Alien and Aliens, Terminator and Terminator 2 - a sequel needs something new to say about the original!
I'm normally pretty on board and love the videos, but I have to say, I disagree that Ghostbusters 2 doesn't have horror elements. If anything, I think it has more horror than the original. Ask anyone who grew up in the 80s/90s to mention a scary moment they have etched into their minds from the Ghostbusters movies and I guarantee at least half the answers will come from 2. The severed heads and train in the subway tunnel, Yanosz's eyes lighting up in the corridor after the blackout, and especially Dana's bathtub, probably the one you'll hear the most, because it taps into a fundamental fear that also worked in the original; that even your own home isn't safe. Now, are these the scariest things in the history of cinema? No. But they're definitely on par with the scares in the original. You're right that they didn't balance the horror/comedy properly, and that's why it isn't as good, but to say it isn't there I don't think is accurate.
Viggo always creeped me out, especilly when his portrait got all whack, and the ghost nurse who stoll Oscar. the glowing eyes bit didn't scare me, in fact i always thought it'd be cool to do that in real life, why need a flashlight when you have glow eyes? lol, but yeah it still have scary elements, though i do think it leaned more into comedy, or rather cheap laughs, than horror
As a 90s kid, Viggo was one of the scariest things I recall as a kid. I grew up loving both of the movies, as did my friends & didnt know it was "hated" til years later.
Same!!! Watching no2 as an adult, I totally understand why it was hated. No where near as clever and well written as the first one. But personally, I still enjoy it.
The Staypuft marshmallow man was in Ghostbusters 1, which badly downplays the horror element of your argument. Not sure I agree with the comparisons between GB1 and GB2. I actually think the 2 movies are very close in terms of comedy and horror. GB2 added the baby being in danger which added an extra element of suspense. I think what made GB2 fail was how insane the fanbase was. Venkman and Dana don't wind up together after the first movie and fanbase goes nuts. That alone, like fr, is enough to make diehard fans lose their minds. Admittedly, the final fight is underwhelming, and the statue of liberty scene can either be great one viewing and total dog wash another. GB2 isn't the perfect sequel, but it's a million times better than that crime against humanity that came out a few years ago.
Going to have to disagree that vigo wasnt scary. And the scene where they find the river of slime underneath New York has stayed with me since i was a child. I get that a pink ooze may not be scary on its own but it was so massive and the pink made it look sickly or fleshlike.
I actually like ghostbusters 2 even though the soundtrack isn’t as good in my opinion but to me ghostbusters 2 does an adequate job at showing the state of the business after 5 years of no paranormal activity for them to really deal with so it’s understandable that they wouldn’t be people for others to look up to anymore even though they went a bit heavy on the comedy it’s still a pretty good movie in my opinion
I honestly think that Ghostbusters 2 leaned too much into horror rather than comedy, it’s just a bit more subdued. I remember my grandfather taking me to it when it came out and having the leave because I was scared. And then growing up being scared that Vigo was the monster in my closet.
I think the animated show manages to capture what you outlined as making the first film so good. I remember being terrified as a kid by the bogeyman or the sleep ghost. Yet laughed along a fair amount aswell.
Ghostbusters: The Video Game is probably the best sequel the franchise currently has. It's fun, it's comedic, it's spooky, it's eerie, and a large chunk of it was made using the various Ghostbuster 3 scripts that never went anywhere.
Horror comedy is probably my favourite genre. Love Dead Alive, Evil Dead 2, Drag Me to Hell, etc. Sadly they're so few and far between. A more horror focused Ghostbusters like Akroyd's script could have been incredible.
Ghostbusters is essentially a Lovecraftian comedy... and Lovecraft wrote some of the darkest, most nihilistic horror for his time, where large cosmic level entities invade our world via black magic, turning science and reason on its head. Plus the film felt grounded in reality with comedic dialogue instead of comedic situations being the source of the humor. I think the franchise began to falter because of the Real Ghostbusters cartoon. It was such a huge hit, both the sequel and 2016 reboot were written as live action cartoons that lacked the horror of the original. Yet ironically, the cartoon had a stronger horror element in some of its episodes than both of the sequels. I hope Ghostbusters 3 returns back to the grounded feel of the original, but I am not holding my breath based on the trailers.
I grew up with ghostbusters and the trailers didn’t really make it seem that the new movie was gonna be any good. BUT BELIEVE ME, Ghostbusters afterlife is the ghostbusters movie we’ve been waiting for. Give it a chance my friend. You won’t regret it.
I don't know, man. Ghostbusters 2 was freakier than the first. I mean...remember the scene when the power goes out and Janosz uses his new found powers to light his way through a hallway?
This is a great analogy on why The Original Ghostbusters holds up and it's sequels fail in comparison, honestly if Colombia Pictures realised on what Ghostbusters is better we could've gotten 6 movies now, weird to think about and I can see why it's been a struggle to get a proper Ghostbusters film off the ground, the Cast and Crew know how Ghostbusters works as a franchise and they wanted to do better than the original sequel and didn't want to retread that ground again, I can respect that.
Ghostbusters 2 scared the crap out of me when I was kid. I loved it. Still do... I have the poster of the paining on my wall, and yeah he changes poses now and then just like the real thing!
The Real Ghostbusters was a great animated series. Some episodes were (well I was a kid) very creepy. And the first Ghostbusters, well it was weird, the Marshmallow Man was awesome!
A lot of companies do not realize some movies and shows were perfect for their time, but not as much in the present. Ghostbusters is loved and adored, but if the exact movie was made now shot for shot and the 80s one never existed I do have my doubts it would have became the beloved classic it is. People's mind sets are different in each decade. Companies only see it as money "It made money then it will make money now".
Ghostbusters get called to a spooky mansion, tease other greats like Evil Dead and Rocky Horror to really make the audience guess until vaguely familiar blocks and Boos pass as we get chased to a quiet corner to chuckle our nerves away until we see a shadow jump up past a window, to melt out of a shadow to say"itsa me, Luigi..." queue awkward vacuuming until a hapless pair cross the streams and detonate the whole mansion. Act 2 involves everyone being a ghost yet refusing to acknowledge the fact, until an unexpected character comes home...
Ghostbusters II scared the crap out of me. I still love the Court Room scene. Me and my friends still say, "we're the best, we're the beautiful, we're the only, Ghostbusters.
The point where you actually feel the sense of danger and horror is when Egon is accused of blowing up the firehouse with shot of the NYC skyline being flooded with spirits in broad daylight scary. That scene alone made Ghosts in the day time genuinely scary with the thought of *"WTF can we do now?! We're doomed!"*
I really appreciate the change in the narrator a lot first of all. I never considered the duality between both of those genres in the first Ghostbusters
I think that the sequence that best summarize the dark tone of GB is the dialogue between zeddmore and ray while the ecto 1 that talk about the apocalypse is so well done , somber and ominous...is just a few seconds and words but boy ...is even best than some prtended serious horror movies.
You bring up a very valid point. But I think there is something significant missing from your analysis. In the original "Ghostbusters", Peter, Ray and Egon were underdogs. Their work wasn't taken seriously. And then they lost their jobs. They tried to rise above this by starting their own business, and it wasn't easy or cheap. After they opened their doors, business was bad and no money was coming in. Even Peter's attempts at wooing Dana were met with disdain. The down-on-your-luck idea continues when Winston is introduced as someone who's willing to do anything if there's a steady paycheck involved. We, the audience, are relating to their plights and -- most important -- we are rooting for them. So every time a little success came their way, we got what we wanted. They went from the bottom all the way to the top with the support of the mayor and cheering crowd. You can't say no one is taking them seriously anymore. Ghostbusters was a horror and a comedy. But it was also a success story. Ghostbusters II had no chance in hell of replicating that. It was done already. They did try. But they cheated and artificially pushed them back down. Ghostbusters II didn't have that same tone you mentioned. But, perhaps even more importantly, it didn't have the same appeal. If anything, it started out on a sour note by taking away everything the Ghostbusters achieved. And, again, artificially at that. They "told" us how they got pushed back down. They didn't "show" us. And we just weren't into it.
The charm of the original Ghostbusters was it explored something new. It's like falling in love. Once you're married, the butterflies are replaced with houseflies, and it's just not as magical. There foreground was horror/comedy, but it was painted on screen of exploration. The problem for a sequel is there isn't going to be that feeling of exploration. Putting kids in as the new explorers might actually work; one of the keys to having a riveting story is the world seen through new eyes. Best of luck to this attempt!
Yea, weird he didn't mention it. I think that one leaned much more heavily on the horror than the comedy, specially for a cartoon show for kids it was taken quite seriously.
the video game did a good job of picking up from where the 2nd movie left of and brought back the concept of IVO SHANDOR which has always been very interesting and links a lot of the events of the first film together. The afterlife sequel was an excellent final chapter for the original team, it truly was a satisfying book-end to their journey. With the new film coming later this year (hopefully) we are going back to the firehouse which should hit some major nostalgia notes but really hoping they do something new while still keeping to the essence that made these movies so much fun when we were kids.
From the trailers, Afterlife seems like it might have a chance at honoring the legacy of the name. What made the original great was that the characters took the horror aspects seriously. They were also jokers, but they never joked just to joke, it was always based on who each character was, and the situation they were in. If Afterlife can do similar, it has a chance. It's got Paul Rudd after all, he's great at playing a goofball who takes his situation seriously.
@Jermare the only reason why people say its going to be like stranger things is because it has actors from stranger things in the movie too, and i dont understand why
Grew up with these movies. I even recall an animated TV series that I enjoyed. If I remember correctly in the TV series Slimer had become an unofficial sidekick to the team.
I actually disagree with one of the fundamental points this video is making - that none of the sequels/reboots could do a scene like the opening library one. I would honestly rank the exploration of the subway tunnel in GBII with the same balance of character/horror/comedy; you have the creepy surroundings, you have the different characters reacting in different ways, and then the fantastic payoff with Winson's shout not echoing back, and that momentary uncertain pause before "WIIIIIIIINSTOOOOOOOOON" comes back at them. It's a great scene.
Ghost Busters worked because of the chemistry of the man cast members Aakroyd, Murray and Ramis.. it's just like with Tucker and chan in Rush Hours. Attempts to franchise it with spinoffs and reboots without these key actors is going to fail. RIP to Harold Ramis.
I appreciated your insight on the matter. Ghostbusters wasn't expected to be the hit that it was, on top of being a horror comedy as you said, it was also a sci-fi comedy, and to top that off, was asking for a fairly substantial budget for the time (it cost roughly the same as the Temple of Doom, which came out the same year) so when the movie sort of proved the studios wrong, it kind of doomed itself, because that meant the studios wanted their hands on it. Add a reluctant star, and being asked to repeat that success with all now restrictions, I just don't think it's easy. I hope Afterlife is half decent.
One thing that doesn't get touched on when discussing the Ghostbusters sequel is the fantastic theme by Elmer Bernstein in the original movie. It was perfect for capturing the goofy bumbling of our heroes, while also having some creepy elements to it. Not reusing that theme seriously hurt Ghostbusters 2. I mean, it had a good heroic theme, but I think it would have been more suitable for a superhero movie.
maaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnn I'm just grateful that you gave ernie hudson his due. people tend to treat the homie like an afterthought IF he's even thought of at all...
I’m thinking Will Ferrell Vince Vaughan Owen Wilson Steve Carell John C Riley Chris Tucker Chris Rock Martin Lawrence would make some good ghost busters any combo would revitalize the franchise
I would argue that the best "sequel" that captured the spirit of Ghostbusters and modernized it was Ghostbusters Extreme. It has that horror and humor.
Although never going to be successful for the masses, I always felt like the cartoons and comics did an excellent job of keeping true to the original release. Plus I have memories of being terrified by the cartoon as a child but movie wise I stopped at the second film. The attempts since seem to have been catastrophically bad films even removed from the Ghostbusters franchise, they just didn't cut it.
You can never relive the past, you can only experience the here and now. Like a good story you only need to experience it once and you will have it the rest of your life.
I would love to see what sort of movie Hellbent would become. I get the feeling they used that for the base of the Ghost World in Ghostbusters: The Video Game.
This just made me like and feel excited for the upcoming sequel EVEN LESS -- and for a few good reasons, actually; one being that it made me realize that it's basically just Stranger Things but with ghosts (and/or ectoplasmic monsters).
As someone who watched The Real Ghostbusters and Extreme Ghostbusters (the cartoon sequels), and especially enjoyed the Extreme Ghostbusters from 1997 because of their monster designs, I'm hopeful about it and wouldn't mind if they lean heavier on the horror. ..It can't do worse than the 2016 Ghostbuster movie anyway, which I was looking forward to only to watch it when it came out and to my surprise get so much toxic fratbro culture shoved down my throat. Worst part is that it could have been a perfectly decent ghostbuster movie, but they appear to have intentionally botched that.
Say what you will about practical effects and clever writing, Bill Murray was the glue that held the original Ghostbusters together. A comedic force of nature, his chemistry, with both his 3 ghostbusting buddies and with the redoubtable Sigourney Weaver was, in my opinion, what made that movie so memorable. Without him, or someone equally charismatic filling that role, no sequel has a snowball's chance of achieving the same level of success.
I always thought of Ghostbusters as a semi comedy with some horror moments in it. maybe a little more comedy than horror but still. but yeah, I do hope GB Afterlife will do the first movie justice. it looks like it will though, so I have hope.
Hello from a few months in the future! IMO, GB: Afterlife did a great job at capturing the balance between horror and comedy. It’s a great next generation sequel to the originals.
I'm happy to see there are a lot of comments supporting Ghostbusters II because I have always loved that one ever since I saw it when it first came out. Sure it wasn't the original but very few sequels live up to their original counterparts. That's why when one does we make such a big deal about it. If you watch it on its own merits and not constantly compare it to the original it's an enjoyable movie.
Thank God for Ghostbusters 2. Yeah it wasn't perfect but definitely built upon the world and gave us a glimpse of what it was like to hang out with the guys. Deserves way more credit than it gets.
Good video but they forgot to mentiuon that Ghostbusters II was more comedy because parents complained about the swear words, sexism Peter displayed and alcohol/smoking on camera. Not to mention how scary the film really was. Really sad imo. I grew up with those movies and the first is my all time favorite movie
Ah, the 80's. Comedy was tragic and a good scare made you laugh. I'm not kidding... Really. Look at Ruthless People and A Nightmare on Elm Street, Beetlejuice and The Lost Boys, Adventures In Babysitting and Gremlins. Even The Goonies. A lot of 80's movies were fun because the talent behind them were crafting stories designed to entertain our souls. Few movies since then have managed this feat, usually far and few in-between, but hope rides high on Ghostbusters Afterlife.
That is so weird, I never thought Ghostbusters was a horror! I think that's because as a 90's kid, by the time I watched it for the first time (I was about 6), I already saw movies with much more convincing special effects, so the creatures in Ghostbusters just looked like dummies for me and mostly only caused me to laugh with the exception of some jump scares here and there 🤷♀️ The same reason I can't enjoy Star Wars from the 80's 😅
I think you nailed it. It's a light-hearted horror movie, NOT a comedy. The humor doesn't come from sight gags or prat falls or other comedy tropes, but from the quirky characters played straight. The first movie took itself seriously, the rest didn't. Similar to Pirates of the Caribbean. The first was humorous because of quirky characters played straight, the rest suffered from heavy handed attempts to be funny and weird.
Mike of RLM is right when he says it was a lightening in a bottle movie. I like GB2 and thought Afterlife was alright, but they are never going to replicate the original. A big part of it's success was how unique the concept was. I think they can make great sequels, but they really have to change up the formula. Which Afterlife came so close to doing in its first 2 acts.
Funny thing is that, for all issues with Ghostbusters’ sequel, video game and reboot stories, the comics have done a fantastic job linking all previous Ghostbuster stories together. Even gave the franchise its own sensible multiverse.
Yeah I agree, I would say the same about The Real Ghostbusters. That series explored many interesting paths that could have been taken in possible sequels, but without the need to keep the story alive for 2 hours in a feature length film.
Eh The comics were geared towards a niche audience from the start vs the general audience film that need to make +200 million nowadays so they go wide on theme and appeal. It's always SciFi films that try to make niche content with a blockbuster budget and half the time, it doesn't work.
@@mensen2462 some of the Real Ghostbusters episodes were genuinely creepy too.
Everything has to be multiversein the west. Good for milking an IP.
@@1Piecer Maybe, but they had been doing it to explain crossovers with everything from Real Ghostbusters to TMNT. Plus it logically explained the actor’s 2016 cameos as AU doppelgängers
If you've ever watched the Ghostbusters documentary with Ivan Reichman, that Library scene, half of it was improvised. That bookshelf falling was an accident.
Ivan Reitman 👍
Today I don't think any of the Ghostbusters movies are scary, but I remember as a kid actually being way more scared of Ghostbusters 2. Vigo just looked scary to me, and that scene of a ghostly witch version of Janosz coming to grab the baby just haunted me as a kid.
Same. As he was saying Vigo wasn't scary to anyone. I was saying bull***t to myself out loud 😂😂😂
Lmfao so facts
yeah agreed, both of those things scared me, but wouldn't scare me today. much like Harry and the Henderson's scene with Harry's head popping over the front windshield screaming terrified me, gave me nightmares, but today wouldn't phase me lol
Janosz's flashlight eyes gave me nightmares for weeks for some reason.
I agree! The problems pointed out in this are not really the problem.
Men in Black had the same problem, the first film threaded comedy into the genre, but the studio’s takeaway was “this is a comedy” and they never got that tone back.
Very true. MiB has a lot in common with Ghostbusters, in that it was about an outsider discovering weird shit that blows away his entire perception of what reality is, and a large part of the comedy comes from their inexperience with dealing with the supernatural. When you make sequels to that story, your cast now already knows everything about the new, weird world. They're a part of it, so nothing surprises them anymore - and by extension, nothing surprises the audience anymore. All you can really do is keep upping the stakes dramatically, going all-in on the action/horror, or just making things goofy and going all-in on the comedy.
@@PontschPauPau3451 And pop songs that share the name of the film
@@PontschPauPau3451 I like this take and would add that studios also tend to focus on what they thought worked. This applies to really franchises too, regardless of opinion. For example The Fast and Furious movies. Starts off as high stakes races to breaking every law of physics. Either you up the ante or make it funny. Both can and does work. Every studio wants to money first, art second. Some get it and can replicate it, but more don’t and try to hit the same beats.
I agree
A fundamental corner stone of the franchise is the horror element
And the cast plays the job straight not trying to be funny in the delivery on purpose.
Exactly
Yep.
Leave it to Hollywood to steadfastly and consistently learn the wrong lessons from their successes and failures.
The original film has subtext and subtlety in the humour.
You felt the stakes
Of everything to come out after the original movie. The video game was actually really good at capturing what made the original great! I highly recommend it to any ghostbusters fan. We've got the original cast coming back to voice the characters. Fun sequences that recreate/are inspired by scenes from the movies plus new sequences with original ghosts with really neat concepts and pretty scary setpieces.
I mean the game was good at tying up the Shandor storyline, but was reliant on old Ghostbusters locations in ways that would have been pandering in a movie. Also Bill Murray could have sounded a little more enthusiastic at times.
@@benwasserman8223 Bill Murray totally phoned it in for the game, probably for the same reasons all the proposed sequels didn't get off the ground
I want a Ghostbusters sequel in the style of Extreme Ghostbusters.
@@DoctorPhileasFragg Yeah but his addition to the game is so contradictory. Apparently Murray insisted on giving his co-stars equal time recording lines, but was nudged in due to his brother’s casting as the NY mayor and left a lot of his lines unrecorded.
I thought you were talking about the original game for Nintendo for a second there.
Ray: Are you troubled by strange noises in the middle of the night?
Egon: Do you experience feelings of dread in your basement or attic?
Venkman: Have you or your family ever seen a spook, spectre or ghost?
Ray: If the answer is "yes," then don't wait another minute. Pick up the phone and call the professionals...
GHOSTBUSTERS!
Ray: Our courteous and efficient staff is on call 24 hours a day to serve all your supernatural elimination needs.
WE'RE READY TO BELIEVE YOU!
You are awesome 😎
I would have loved Ghostbusters hellbent. But to be honest Ghostbusters after life might be okay to see on video but it doesn't excite me enough to want to go see in the theater.
Ray Stantz in “Ghostbusters: Afterlife”… _”We’re closed.”_
@@velociraptor4you3291 oh,Oh,OHH! i screamed when i heard that!
@@manicdosed Appropriate reaction (👍😉).
I never understood the hate for Ghostbusters 2. Although not a good as the first one, Ghostbusters part2 is good too! Also, at least we got Ghostbusters the video game with all four OG Ghostbusters in it. The game was basically Ghostbisters 3. RIP Harold Ramis.
Thank you I love hearing people support Ghostbusters ll. It was the first movie I saw in theater back in '89. I was only 4 yrs old and it will always be special to me.
The darkroom scene has always creeped me out
Agree.
GB2 was only panned upon release because it wasn't quite as good as the first one but over the years, a lot of people have re-evaluated it and it's now generally regarded as a very good, worthy sequel.
💯 screw what the internet says. I love both ghostbusters films and they are classics
As a huge fan of the Ghostbusters series, seeing this in my subscriptions feed was pretty nice!
Same
Lightning doesn’t exactly strike twice a lot
Never can top the original
Not in the case of Ghostbusters
yeah seems like that's the case for most things. which is unfortunate, but often true. there are exceptions, depending on who you ask, but yeah for the most part i agree
This is why "the original but more so" is a mistake. Alien and Aliens, Terminator and Terminator 2 - a sequel needs something new to say about the original!
@@Technodreamer Aliens and Terminator 2 are the best examples of how to make a sequel work
I think Gremlins 2 does as well
Thr Fly, The Dark Knight and Terminator 2 wants to have a word with you.
I'm normally pretty on board and love the videos, but I have to say, I disagree that Ghostbusters 2 doesn't have horror elements. If anything, I think it has more horror than the original. Ask anyone who grew up in the 80s/90s to mention a scary moment they have etched into their minds from the Ghostbusters movies and I guarantee at least half the answers will come from 2.
The severed heads and train in the subway tunnel, Yanosz's eyes lighting up in the corridor after the blackout, and especially Dana's bathtub, probably the one you'll hear the most, because it taps into a fundamental fear that also worked in the original; that even your own home isn't safe.
Now, are these the scariest things in the history of cinema? No. But they're definitely on par with the scares in the original.
You're right that they didn't balance the horror/comedy properly, and that's why it isn't as good, but to say it isn't there I don't think is accurate.
Agreed. The Scoleri brothers creeped me out as a kid and I loved the film. His assessment of the sequel is a bit off but everything else is accurate
Viggo always creeped me out, especilly when his portrait got all whack, and the ghost nurse who stoll Oscar. the glowing eyes bit didn't scare me, in fact i always thought it'd be cool to do that in real life, why need a flashlight when you have glow eyes? lol, but yeah it still have scary elements, though i do think it leaned more into comedy, or rather cheap laughs, than horror
Agree completely
Yep totally agree, lots of moments in that movie creeped me out. The glowing eyes in the corridor especially for some reason.
totally agree. There were a LOT of really creepy moments in GB2. Personally more than the original for me.
As a 90s kid, Viggo was one of the scariest things I recall as a kid. I grew up loving both of the movies, as did my friends & didnt know it was "hated" til years later.
Same!!! Watching no2 as an adult, I totally understand why it was hated. No where near as clever and well written as the first one. But personally, I still enjoy it.
Nobody is going to make the exact same chemistry that the original cast had
The Staypuft marshmallow man was in Ghostbusters 1, which badly downplays the horror element of your argument. Not sure I agree with the comparisons between GB1 and GB2. I actually think the 2 movies are very close in terms of comedy and horror. GB2 added the baby being in danger which added an extra element of suspense. I think what made GB2 fail was how insane the fanbase was. Venkman and Dana don't wind up together after the first movie and fanbase goes nuts. That alone, like fr, is enough to make diehard fans lose their minds. Admittedly, the final fight is underwhelming, and the statue of liberty scene can either be great one viewing and total dog wash another. GB2 isn't the perfect sequel, but it's a million times better than that crime against humanity that came out a few years ago.
The abandoned subway scene in the second film was terrifying though.
Going to have to disagree that vigo wasnt scary. And the scene where they find the river of slime underneath New York has stayed with me since i was a child. I get that a pink ooze may not be scary on its own but it was so massive and the pink made it look sickly or fleshlike.
Looked great in the cinema
I actually like ghostbusters 2 even though the soundtrack isn’t as good in my opinion but to me ghostbusters 2 does an adequate job at showing the state of the business after 5 years of no paranormal activity for them to really deal with so it’s understandable that they wouldn’t be people for others to look up to anymore even though they went a bit heavy on the comedy it’s still a pretty good movie in my opinion
I honestly think that Ghostbusters 2 leaned too much into horror rather than comedy, it’s just a bit more subdued. I remember my grandfather taking me to it when it came out and having the leave because I was scared. And then growing up being scared that Vigo was the monster in my closet.
Let me guess you thought Batman Returns was too dark and scary???? I always liked Vigo
I second this! Vigo terrified me when I was a kid
Ah, the fear of angry large carpatian men, understandable.
agree on GB2
Ghostbusters 2 maybe the most underrated sequel ever.
I like it but it's to much of a retread.
I like it. 1 is better but 2 is not bad. True what he says here but i still like it.
it was cool when i saw it in the theaters, but upon rewatches its not as good to me. it fell into the sequel trap of doing everything over again
Ghostbuster 2 is 100% underrated no one talks about it
I love how the announcer is trying to talk and not talk about the reboot at the same time.
I think the animated show manages to capture what you outlined as making the first film so good. I remember being terrified as a kid by the bogeyman or the sleep ghost. Yet laughed along a fair amount aswell.
When I was a kid I very specifically found Ghostbusters 2 scarier then the first movie.
YES. DITTO.
Ghostbusters: The Video Game is probably the best sequel the franchise currently has. It's fun, it's comedic, it's spooky, it's eerie, and a large chunk of it was made using the various Ghostbuster 3 scripts that never went anywhere.
Horror comedy is probably my favourite genre. Love Dead Alive, Evil Dead 2, Drag Me to Hell, etc. Sadly they're so few and far between. A more horror focused Ghostbusters like Akroyd's script could have been incredible.
"Listen! Do you smell something?" -Stantz
Gets me every time.
Thank you for including Ernie Hudson. I’ve seen other videos about this topic and they always leave him out
i'm always so happy when nerdstalgic posts :)
Thank you!
Ghostbusters is essentially a Lovecraftian comedy... and Lovecraft wrote some of the darkest, most nihilistic horror for his time, where large cosmic level entities invade our world via black magic, turning science and reason on its head. Plus the film felt grounded in reality with comedic dialogue instead of comedic situations being the source of the humor.
I think the franchise began to falter because of the Real Ghostbusters cartoon. It was such a huge hit, both the sequel and 2016 reboot were written as live action cartoons that lacked the horror of the original. Yet ironically, the cartoon had a stronger horror element in some of its episodes than both of the sequels.
I hope Ghostbusters 3 returns back to the grounded feel of the original, but I am not holding my breath based on the trailers.
I grew up with ghostbusters and the trailers didn’t really make it seem that the new movie was gonna be any good. BUT BELIEVE ME, Ghostbusters afterlife is the ghostbusters movie we’ve been waiting for. Give it a chance my friend. You won’t regret it.
@@hazartboss Afterlife is garbage
@@drakocarrion ayo?
I don't know, man. Ghostbusters 2 was freakier than the first. I mean...remember the scene when the power goes out and Janosz uses his new found powers to light his way through a hallway?
This is a great analogy on why The Original Ghostbusters holds up and it's sequels fail in comparison, honestly if Colombia Pictures realised on what Ghostbusters is better we could've gotten 6 movies now, weird to think about and I can see why it's been a struggle to get a proper Ghostbusters film off the ground, the Cast and Crew know how Ghostbusters works as a franchise and they wanted to do better than the original sequel and didn't want to retread that ground again, I can respect that.
Back here now that the new movie is out and I almost cried for how good that movie was it one hundred percent caught the lightning in a bottle again
Ghostbusters 2 scared the crap out of me when I was kid. I loved it. Still do... I have the poster of the paining on my wall, and yeah he changes poses now and then just like the real thing!
Yessss! I get to watch during lunch instead of missing it! Nerdstalgic really makes my day; thank youu for another one
The Real Ghostbusters was a great animated series. Some episodes were (well I was a kid) very creepy.
And the first Ghostbusters, well it was weird, the Marshmallow Man was awesome!
A lot of companies do not realize some movies and shows were perfect for their time, but not as much in the present. Ghostbusters is loved and adored, but if the exact movie was made now shot for shot and the 80s one never existed I do have my doubts it would have became the beloved classic it is. People's mind sets are different in each decade. Companies only see it as money "It made money then it will make money now".
THANK YOU FOR PUTTING MY THOUGHTS INTO WORDS!
Ghostbusters get called to a spooky mansion, tease other greats like Evil Dead and Rocky Horror to really make the audience guess until vaguely familiar blocks and Boos pass as we get chased to a quiet corner to chuckle our nerves away until we see a shadow jump up past a window, to melt out of a shadow to say"itsa me, Luigi..." queue awkward vacuuming until a hapless pair cross the streams and detonate the whole mansion. Act 2 involves everyone being a ghost yet refusing to acknowledge the fact, until an unexpected character comes home...
Ghostbusters II scared the crap out of me. I still love the Court Room scene. Me and my friends still say, "we're the best, we're the beautiful, we're the only, Ghostbusters.
The heads in GB 2, I sure as hell didn’t laugh at them as a kid. And that mink coat scared the hell out of me.
Yes! 🙌
I've never seen it put quite so succinctly. You've touched on something I've never read before in any other critique. Nicely done Nerdstalgic!
The point where you actually feel the sense of danger and horror is when Egon is accused of blowing up the firehouse with shot of the NYC skyline being flooded with spirits in broad daylight scary. That scene alone made Ghosts in the day time genuinely scary with the thought of *"WTF can we do now?! We're doomed!"*
I really appreciate the change in the narrator a lot first of all. I never considered the duality between both of those genres in the first Ghostbusters
The first movie takes the horror seriously, and so do the characters. They all feel like they are just funny guys in a horror scenario.
I think that the sequence that best summarize the dark tone of GB is the dialogue between zeddmore and ray while the ecto 1
that talk about the apocalypse is so well done , somber and ominous...is just a few seconds and words but boy ...is even best than some prtended serious horror movies.
I was in grade school when this movie released. No one can beat the original version.
You bring up a very valid point. But I think there is something significant missing from your analysis. In the original "Ghostbusters", Peter, Ray and Egon were underdogs. Their work wasn't taken seriously. And then they lost their jobs. They tried to rise above this by starting their own business, and it wasn't easy or cheap. After they opened their doors, business was bad and no money was coming in. Even Peter's attempts at wooing Dana were met with disdain. The down-on-your-luck idea continues when Winston is introduced as someone who's willing to do anything if there's a steady paycheck involved.
We, the audience, are relating to their plights and -- most important -- we are rooting for them. So every time a little success came their way, we got what we wanted. They went from the bottom all the way to the top with the support of the mayor and cheering crowd. You can't say no one is taking them seriously anymore.
Ghostbusters was a horror and a comedy. But it was also a success story.
Ghostbusters II had no chance in hell of replicating that. It was done already. They did try. But they cheated and artificially pushed them back down. Ghostbusters II didn't have that same tone you mentioned. But, perhaps even more importantly, it didn't have the same appeal. If anything, it started out on a sour note by taking away everything the Ghostbusters achieved. And, again, artificially at that. They "told" us how they got pushed back down. They didn't "show" us. And we just weren't into it.
You've made me think of Ghostbusters evil dead crossover and now this is a thing that must happen.
The charm of the original Ghostbusters was it explored something new. It's like falling in love. Once you're married, the butterflies are replaced with houseflies, and it's just not as magical. There foreground was horror/comedy, but it was painted on screen of exploration. The problem for a sequel is there isn't going to be that feeling of exploration. Putting kids in as the new explorers might actually work; one of the keys to having a riveting story is the world seen through new eyes.
Best of luck to this attempt!
Extreme Ghostbusters I felt could be pretty disturbing at times. Especially given the artstyle it used.
Yea, weird he didn't mention it. I think that one leaned much more heavily on the horror than the comedy, specially for a cartoon show for kids it was taken quite seriously.
This is why Extreme Ghostbusters was actually pretty good.
the video game did a good job of picking up from where the 2nd movie left of and brought back the concept of IVO SHANDOR which has always been very interesting and links a lot of the events of the first film together. The afterlife sequel was an excellent final chapter for the original team, it truly was a satisfying book-end to their journey. With the new film coming later this year (hopefully) we are going back to the firehouse which should hit some major nostalgia notes but really hoping they do something new while still keeping to the essence that made these movies so much fun when we were kids.
From the trailers, Afterlife seems like it might have a chance at honoring the legacy of the name. What made the original great was that the characters took the horror aspects seriously. They were also jokers, but they never joked just to joke, it was always based on who each character was, and the situation they were in.
If Afterlife can do similar, it has a chance. It's got Paul Rudd after all, he's great at playing a goofball who takes his situation seriously.
I always wanted a sequel like Extreme Ghostbusters.
Nah, it's gonna feel exactly like stranger things
@Jermare the only reason why people say its going to be like stranger things is because it has actors from stranger things in the movie too, and i dont understand why
Grew up with these movies. I even recall an animated TV series that I enjoyed. If I remember correctly in the TV series Slimer had become an unofficial sidekick to the team.
Great narration and I appreciate you not artificially making the video 10 minutes long. Good stuff.
I actually disagree with one of the fundamental points this video is making - that none of the sequels/reboots could do a scene like the opening library one. I would honestly rank the exploration of the subway tunnel in GBII with the same balance of character/horror/comedy; you have the creepy surroundings, you have the different characters reacting in different ways, and then the fantastic payoff with Winson's shout not echoing back, and that momentary uncertain pause before "WIIIIIIIINSTOOOOOOOOON" comes back at them. It's a great scene.
It is very difficult to out perform the Original… The First!!!
This reminds me of Nightmare of Elm Street, where the sequels suddenly changed drastically in tone to horror comedy but somehow got more popular.
The editing of the musical score and the comedic timing were pure perfection. Ghostbusters may have been one of the greatest films of all time.
Ghost Busters worked because of the chemistry of the man cast members Aakroyd, Murray and Ramis.. it's just like with Tucker and chan in Rush Hours. Attempts to franchise it with spinoffs and reboots without these key actors is going to fail.
RIP to Harold Ramis.
Ghostbusters 2 is an odd film. It was a massively underrated sequel, yet it is so disappointing.
I appreciated your insight on the matter.
Ghostbusters wasn't expected to be the hit that it was, on top of being a horror comedy as you said, it was also a sci-fi comedy, and to top that off, was asking for a fairly substantial budget for the time (it cost roughly the same as the Temple of Doom, which came out the same year) so when the movie sort of proved the studios wrong, it kind of doomed itself, because that meant the studios wanted their hands on it.
Add a reluctant star, and being asked to repeat that success with all now restrictions, I just don't think it's easy.
I hope Afterlife is half decent.
I’d love to see a video essay / analysis between BladeRunner and BladeRunner 2049. I feel as though 2049 is the correct way of doing a sequel
A lot of the industry giants really underestimate horror, it can be done so well, so brilliantly, and proper comedy-horror is wonderful!
The Ghostbusters animated series of the 2000s was a good adaptation that touches the horror vibes.
One thing that doesn't get touched on when discussing the Ghostbusters sequel is the fantastic theme by Elmer Bernstein in the original movie. It was perfect for capturing the goofy bumbling of our heroes, while also having some creepy elements to it.
Not reusing that theme seriously hurt Ghostbusters 2. I mean, it had a good heroic theme, but I think it would have been more suitable for a superhero movie.
It’s never gonna top the ‘84 original
Very few films have since.
That’s a high standard for ANY movie.
maaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnn I'm just grateful that you gave ernie hudson his due. people tend to treat the homie like an afterthought IF he's even thought of at all...
I’m legit excited for GB afterlife. It looks good.
I’m thinking Will Ferrell Vince Vaughan Owen Wilson Steve Carell John C Riley Chris Tucker Chris Rock Martin Lawrence would make some good ghost busters any combo would revitalize the franchise
I dunno, i think Afterlife looks sick so far
I would argue that the best "sequel" that captured the spirit of Ghostbusters and modernized it was Ghostbusters Extreme. It has that horror and humor.
Although never going to be successful for the masses, I always felt like the cartoons and comics did an excellent job of keeping true to the original release. Plus I have memories of being terrified by the cartoon as a child but movie wise I stopped at the second film. The attempts since seem to have been catastrophically bad films even removed from the Ghostbusters franchise, they just didn't cut it.
The comedy in Ghostbusters is quite amazing, it reminds me more of 2000's Judd Apatow than anything else made in the 80s
You can never relive the past, you can only experience the here and now. Like a good story you only need to experience it once and you will have it the rest of your life.
A movie with a very similar tone is the original Tremors with Kevin Bacon!
I would love to see what sort of movie Hellbent would become. I get the feeling they used that for the base of the Ghost World in Ghostbusters: The Video Game.
This just made me like and feel excited for the upcoming sequel EVEN LESS -- and for a few good reasons, actually; one being that it made me realize that it's basically just Stranger Things but with ghosts (and/or ectoplasmic monsters).
As someone who watched The Real Ghostbusters and Extreme Ghostbusters (the cartoon sequels), and especially enjoyed the Extreme Ghostbusters from 1997 because of their monster designs, I'm hopeful about it and wouldn't mind if they lean heavier on the horror.
..It can't do worse than the 2016 Ghostbuster movie anyway, which I was looking forward to only to watch it when it came out and to my surprise get so much toxic fratbro culture shoved down my throat. Worst part is that it could have been a perfectly decent ghostbuster movie, but they appear to have intentionally botched that.
Ghostbursters 2 Soundtrack has a place in my collection ! It's awesome !
Say what you will about practical effects and clever writing, Bill Murray was the glue that held the original Ghostbusters together. A comedic force of nature, his chemistry, with both his 3 ghostbusting buddies and with the redoubtable Sigourney Weaver was, in my opinion, what made that movie so memorable. Without him, or someone equally charismatic filling that role, no sequel has a snowball's chance of achieving the same level of success.
I would prefer they just re-released with updated visual effects (not changing, just upgrading) verses all the reboots
I always thought of Ghostbusters as a semi comedy with some horror moments in it. maybe a little more comedy than horror but still. but yeah, I do hope GB Afterlife will do the first movie justice. it looks like it will though, so I have hope.
Hello from a few months in the future! IMO, GB: Afterlife did a great job at capturing the balance between horror and comedy. It’s a great next generation sequel to the originals.
I'm happy to see there are a lot of comments supporting Ghostbusters II because I have always loved that one ever since I saw it when it first came out. Sure it wasn't the original but very few sequels live up to their original counterparts. That's why when one does we make such a big deal about it. If you watch it on its own merits and not constantly compare it to the original it's an enjoyable movie.
Thank God for Ghostbusters 2. Yeah it wasn't perfect but definitely built upon the world and gave us a glimpse of what it was like to hang out with the guys. Deserves way more credit than it gets.
I'd love to see you talk about the Ghostbusters animated series
I love Extreme Ghostbusters.
I don't care what anyone says or thinks, Ghostbusters II is a classic flick. I love it and watched it a zillion times.
Time to make a spiritual successor: Spookrupturers
i think the difference is that back then producer had less power over the movie, it was still an artistic product, now is a corporate product
The elevator scene is the most horrific and hilarious at the same time. Completely genius
Thanks for that idea. Now I want a Sam Raimi cut of Ghostbusters, and I can't get it off my mind.
Good video but they forgot to mentiuon that Ghostbusters II was more comedy because parents complained about the swear words, sexism Peter displayed and alcohol/smoking on camera. Not to mention how scary the film really was. Really sad imo. I grew up with those movies and the first is my all time favorite movie
Ah, the 80's. Comedy was tragic and a good scare made you laugh. I'm not kidding... Really. Look at Ruthless People and A Nightmare on Elm Street, Beetlejuice and The Lost Boys, Adventures In Babysitting and Gremlins. Even The Goonies. A lot of 80's movies were fun because the talent behind them were crafting stories designed to entertain our souls. Few movies since then have managed this feat, usually far and few in-between, but hope rides high on Ghostbusters Afterlife.
You're spot on. That whole era would be next to impossible to replicate. These convos always make me think of the 'burbs. Hilariously creepy 😲
That is so weird, I never thought Ghostbusters was a horror! I think that's because as a 90's kid, by the time I watched it for the first time (I was about 6), I already saw movies with much more convincing special effects, so the creatures in Ghostbusters just looked like dummies for me and mostly only caused me to laugh with the exception of some jump scares here and there 🤷♀️ The same reason I can't enjoy Star Wars from the 80's 😅
I think you nailed it. It's a light-hearted horror movie, NOT a comedy. The humor doesn't come from sight gags or prat falls or other comedy tropes, but from the quirky characters played straight. The first movie took itself seriously, the rest didn't.
Similar to Pirates of the Caribbean. The first was humorous because of quirky characters played straight, the rest suffered from heavy handed attempts to be funny and weird.
I was so happy when this showed up in my recommendations, I love the Ghostbusters series!
You forgot to mention the music, that added hugely to the tone of the originals.
Ghostbusters scared the crap out of me as a kid, but I loved it because of the characters.
8 year old me was not only terrified but enjoyed the dialouge. I can still quote most of the lines and understand the adult humor now. I ❤ 👻
Mike of RLM is right when he says it was a lightening in a bottle movie. I like GB2 and thought Afterlife was alright, but they are never going to replicate the original. A big part of it's success was how unique the concept was. I think they can make great sequels, but they really have to change up the formula. Which Afterlife came so close to doing in its first 2 acts.
You know, Extreme Ghostbusters actually did a great job at doing horror and comedy.