Why do people hate this again? As a kid I liked it better than the first one desu
no one hates it, it's just the exact copy of the first one
>>68679567
Everyone loved it. Then as time went on Bill Murray's opinions on the movie became public. So hipsters felt the need to have to agree with him so now they hate it.
>>68679678
I never read Bill Murray's opinions, and went and watched them both about a month ago. The second one isn't bad and I don't hate it, but >>68679598 is true
His name is Ernie Fucking Hudson. His image is on your poster.
>>68681742
>that feel when you filtered something that a post is replying to indirectly thus your cofusion
No smoking.
Ghostbusters is hands-down my favorite movie ever. The effects for 1984 were phenomenal, and most stand up even today. The comedic timing is 10/10. Ivan Reitman let the actors cut loose and improvise their own dialogue. Bill Murray is on point, and Dan Aykroyd went totally nuts with the script incorporating all manner of paranormal shit he was interested in out-of-character.
Ghostbusters 2 gets a lot of flak because it's not the first movie. The comedic timing is still amazing, the jokes are on point, and the actors are having a fun and great time with the script. The effects are still cool and fun.
The only thing that really takes me out of the movie is the late-80s pop/hip-hop soundtrack, but that's such a small part of the movie that I can ignore it.
Every character gets funny lines, funny moments, heroic moments, etc. Sure, the movie has the same formula, but that isn't a bad thing since it's not a total carbon-copy of the first movie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGIgXK4ubWM
Pretty good analysis of the underrated, underappreciated Ghostbusters 2
>>68682022
Goodbadflicks is such a comfy channel
RLM said it's bad so it's bad.
i liked it but its not as good as the first one.
the plot is kinda lame really. the first half is good
