It's an alright film, but it only got made because The Real Ghostbusters proved to be such a big hit.

Something that really bugged me about the film was the end fly-by scene of the statue of liberty. I couldn't figure how they thought it possible for the statue to climb down from that massive, uhm, pedestal I guess: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CdCNapEW4AA7Efv.jpg

Apart from that I really liked it. Not as good as the first, but still pretty damn awesome.

Sequels always get a bad rap. So many of them are bad that everybody assumes that none of them are good anymore.

Was Northern Exposure any good?

If we're talking about anything set in interstellar space (i.e. Star Wars), no, you can't just call somebody on the phone; information can't, according to the laws of physics, travel faster than light. Hence, such a phone call would not work unless some way around that law of physics has been developed.

Also, there's the whole issue of aiming the call in the right direction.

Best series that ever existed

Mooses ftw.

Well, people nowadays stay by accidents, fights and such by filming them with their smartphone instead of thinking of their security so in some ways, this Hollywood cliché was kind of visionary and became the norm :o)

___________________________________________________________


Anyway, I saw Ghostbusters 2 in the theaters back in the days then and liked it as it was an OK flick and didn't saw the first one yet. I actually even think I never saw the first Ghostbusters fully, just some bits here and there when there are re-runs on TV.

The difference being that Stay-Puft was a brilliant and totally absurd concept, whereas the Statue of Liberty was more along the lines of 'this will look good on a tee shirt'. Hence the digression and slow decline of Ghostbusters. Same goes for pretty much every Hollywood franchise sooner or later.

Proton packs, Slimer's spinoff show and the overall opinion of male vs female audience demographics... none of those things mean shit. What mattered was Aykroyd's ridiculous idea for a movie about a bunch of blue collar guys catching ghosts. Then Reitman and Ramis added the going into business idea as a foundation for a believable and fun ghost catching comedy with some light horror elements.

I didn't like her (nor others) in the Ghostbusters movies specifically. She was great in Alien and Aliens, for example.

Then again I've never found her that (sexually) appealing that she's made in many movies, including Ghostbusters. I don't care if she is 7 feet 8 inches, still meh. She's better as an alien-killing badass than a love interest of Bill Murray, then again I guess they both have about as much of sex appeal. Was it at the end of the first or second Ghostbusters where Sigourney and Bill kiss each other? It looked like they are thinking "Sigh, let's be done with this kissing scene, happy thoughts, another place...". About as much sexual spark as between Roger Moore and Grace Jones in "A View to a Kill".

In the first Alien movie, Sigourney was pretty sexy though.

You can read these IMDB reviews and maybe you'll understand. Not that they all explain why they hated, but I found some with some glimmer of explanation.

That's a good point, I admit. I guess in Europe people used to run away from terrorist bomb attacks, but nowadays they might run towards the explosion, just to get juicy Youtube videos of severed limbs and heads.

As they say, a terrorist bomb attack never hits the same spot twice, at least on the same day.

Because a lot of people take their movies far too seriously in my opinion. I have my favourite movies as well but don't grow a fit when a sequel disappoints, as with the Alien, Terminator or Star Trek franchises.

I did like the first Ghostbusters movie more than the sequel, but as a kid the sequel was still entertaining.
Today, as an adult, I don't like any of them. To me all the movies are quite bad compared to the magazines.

You mean like this? ;)

I live that show. :P

Everyone who comes up here says this place reminds them of it.