Today is the thirtieth anniversary of
the premier of Ghostbusters II.
Also just gone is the 35th
anniversary of the original Ghostbusters,
but I wrote about that film five years ago. Back then, I wrote about
the different continuations of the franchise and the rumours of a
third film. Five years on, a new film has been and gone, rebooting
the franchise but failing to kick off its own sequels. However,
2016's Ghostbusters showed
there was enough interest in the franchise to get a sequel to
Ghostbusters II greenlit,
which is expected to arrive next year. Dan Aykroyd, who has a habit
of announcing imminent projects that exist only in his head, has also
said he's working on the script for a prequel, set in the sixties
when Ray, Egon and Peter meet in college. While there's a good chance
this will never happen, I actually feel this is the best way to
continue those characters. Recast them, tell the characters' stories
without having to worry about increasingly aged (or dead) actors.
Aykroyd has even talked about making it a TV series, which I think is
honestly the best format.
But
enough about the future, let's talk about the past. Everyone loves
Ghostbusters, but
where's the love for the sequel? While I'll be the first accept that
it's not as good as the original (let's be fair, not much is),
Ghostbusters II is an
absolute cracker of a film. It's clearly influenced by the success of
the animated spin-off The Real Ghostbusters,
which made the franchise a huge hit with kids, and is a more
family-friendly affair than the original. There are still a few
grubby jokes in there (Egon's line about his epididymis is one that I
didn't understand for years), but the overall tone is much less
adult-oriented. This is no bad thing, and the film's whole style is a
little smoother, more accessible than the original. It's less
interesting than the grad humour of the first film, but it's one that
can appeal to a broader audience, and it's a film that you could
easily put on for the whole family to watch and enjoy. It doesn't
quite go as far as making Slimer a character as he is in the cartoon,
but he is inexplicably floating around both the firehouse and New
York, although only Louis seems to ever see him.
On the other hand,
while Aykroyd and Ramis tweaked their approach to the script to make
it a little more kid-friendly, they don't miss the chance to have a
little pop at their unintended new target audience. Ray and Winston
make their entrance as children's entertainers, dancing to the theme
song at a party full of “ungrateful little yuppie larvae.” (Which
includes Jason Reitman, son of the film's director Ivan and now
working on the upcoming sequel. There's something very funny about
him telling the Ghostbusters that his dad says they're full of crap.)
There's some clear resentment from the writers there, that they're
having to write this sequel and make it more accessible to kids. None
of the main players were keen to work on another Ghostbusters,
(which is funny in hindsight considering that Aykroyd has spent the
intervening years trying to make a third), but even working on
half-enthusiasm they produce a great script.
It's true that the
script essentially follows the same beats as the original, with the
'busters going from has-beens to world-savers via a couple of major
set pieces and a ghostbusting montage. It's hard to disagree when
critics complain that they weren't getting anything new, but there's
also a sense of “if it ain't broke, don't fix it.” While there's
some influence from RGB, the intervening five years have been
very different and the 'busters have been sued out of business for
almost destroying New York City. What's less feasible is that they're
generally considered charlatans by the public (although the court
scene sees some definite support). They might have trashed the city
when they accidentally summoned up a giant marshmallow man, but it's
pretty much impossible that anyone could deny that actually happened.
There's a sense that the writers are snapping at the fickleness of
the public. Ghostbusters II had a record-breaking opening
weekend, only to crash completely when Batman was released the
following week. (Perhaps, given the New Years setting, releasing the
film in June was a mistake.)
While it's not
quite up to the standards of the original, there are some elements
that simply work better in the sequel. The characters have changed
over the five years between, in believable ways. Egon is a
researcher, Ray runs an occult bookshop, and Peter is a schlocky TV
host, all roles they fit perfectly into. While we still have little
indication of what Winston does when he's not in uniform, he gets a
much better share of the lines and action than in the original
(although he is unforgivably left out of the comeback bust in the
courthouse). Most notably improved is the Peter-Dana relationship.
Peter in particular is a far more likeable, more relatable character,
still a bit of a manchild but far less of a jerk. While Murray's
performance made Venkman the standout character of the first film,
it's inarguable that the character is a selfish, unpleasant person,
and it's hard to see why Dana falls for him. It's much more
believable that between films she broke up with him and made a new
life for herself, and that she'd grow close to this improved, less
asshole-ish version.
Janine and Louis
are stepped up to main characters, instead of recurring jokes. Annie
Potts (who got spectacularly hot between films) gives a less abrasive
but still brassy performance, and gets to play Janine without her
fawning over Egon. Not everyone liked this development, but she and
Louis work weirdly well, and it gives Louis the kick in the
confidence pants that he needs. Plus, Rick Moranis absolutely rules
the courtroom scenes. There's an amazing array of antagonists as
well: Kurt Fuller as the oily mayor's aide, Hardemeyer; the great
Harris Yulin as the ferocious judge Wexler; and of course, Peter
MacNicol giving a career-great performance as Janosz Poha. Indeed,
Janosz is perhaps the best addition to the set-up, something the
original film lacked – a secondary villain with a link to the main
threat. Janosz is at once pitiful and unsettling, and works as both
comic relief and a growing threat. Perhaps the inclusion of the
snubbed, nebbish white male using supernatural powers to try to get
one over on the world influenced the script for 2016's Ghostbusters,
with its own loser villain Rowan.
While there's no
topping Slimer or Stay Puft, Ghostbusters II has some truly
spectacular supernatural action. The battle with the Scolari brothers
in the courthouse is the best single ghostbusting scene in the
franchise, utilising some remarkable puppetry and video effects to
create two horrible phantoms with real character. While, like the
first film, much of the ghost action is put across in a pair of
montages, the creatures and encounters are more elaborate and
imaginative. Particularly memorable are the fur coat coming to life
and attacking its wearer, and the Titanic finally coming into
dock (“Well, better late than never.”) Vigo the Carpathian makes
for an impressive villain, one with genuine personality, something
that Gozer lacked, being more a force of nature than a character.
Wilhelm von Homburg was reportedly very unhappy with being dubbed
over, but the combination of his snarling face and Max von Sydow's
booming voice are effective.
The use of rivers
of slime must surely have been intended to appeal to the kids (and no
doubt further merchandising of “Ectoplazm”), but the idea that
the misery, cynicism and general shittiness of attitudes in New York
would manifest physically is a stroke of genius. It's never
completely clear what the link is between the slime and Vigo, but the
intention seems to be that the ghost is simply taking advantage of a
pre-existing phenomenon now that he is in New York, boosting his
power and using it to his own ends. Indeed, the use of
positively-charged slime against him would suggest that the ghost and
the gloop aren't directly connected. However, while the slime is
undoubtedly a kids' treat, Ghostbusters II manages to include
some genuinely unsettling, even scary moments, perhaps able to get
away with a little more due to its overall more family-friendly
content. Janosz in his spectral nanny guise has to be the most
upsetting visual of the franchise, although the garden of impaled
heads comes a close second. Most memorable of all, though, is this
film's giant monster: the Statue of Liberty herself, animated by
ectoplasm and the voice of Jackie Wilson. While it may not be as out
there as the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man, it's a brilliant and
unforgettable visual.
Of course, there
are some elements that make you wonder what they were thinking. The
soundtrack is, charitably, not quite as good as the original's
(Jackie Wilson not withstanding). I've a soft spot for Run DMC's new
Ghostbusters theme, but accept that this is nostalgia talking,
and it can't be considered a good track. There's a nice bit of Oingo
Boingo on there too, but mostly, this is not a decent soundtrack, and
the best performance by a musician on the film might be Bobby Brown's
cameo as a doorman. While I love the idea of Peter as a psychic
talkshow host, that scene is tonally out of step with the rest of the
film. Chloe Webb gives an impressively disturbed performance as the
date rape victim who's twisted her head up into thinking she was
mind-wiped by an alien, but that's a seriously tasteless and, above
all, unfunny joke. It's made all the more annoying by the fact that
so many fans misunderstand the whole point of the scene, thinking
that she was the one with the right date for the end of the world,
when it is obvious that the other guest was indeed psychic
and got the date right. The world was going to end on New Year's Eve
that year, but the Ghostbusters stopped it. Talk about missing the
joke.
In spite of a
couple of missteps, Ghostbusters II gets so much right that I
fail to understand so many fans' bad feeling towards it. It's a fun,
arresting adventure with a refreshingly uncynical message: that, you
know, being nice to each other actually is a good idea, and that
treating people like crap has poor consequences. It has some great
performances from a cast who, even if some of them didn't want to be
there, were firing on all cylinders, combined with some wonderfully
weird ideas brought to life with great effects. And how many films
can pull off a dancing toaster?
No comments:
Post a Comment