“Ghostbusters” was never something that I was that into actually
“Ghostbusters” (1984) was everything it tried to be. All the different genres were blended together seamlessly. The chemistry among the actors, along with the material they were given, was terrific.
I’m not someone who really thinks “Ghostbusters II” is too similar to “Ghostbusters”, but I thought it sucked for other reasons. The main story, with Vigo, just wasn’t there. A lot of it felt forced. The movie was just boring.
I know that’s the general consensus on them, just the brand never made a huge impact on me. That’s part of what never made me up in arms about the reboot. My only real issue with it (before I saw it) was how they approached the whole idea. Since they got most of the main actors back (that are still alive), why wasn’t the movie set in the same universe as the first two?
Maybe they didn’t want to do, which is fine, but I just wish the movie would’ve taken more chances. It’s enjoyable enough, but it’s not risky at all. That had all this potential, and it just hit a lot too many of the same beats as the first movie. The acting varies. Chris Hemsworth, Kate McKinnon, and Leslie Jones were the best. They were different compared to their other movies. Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthey were good but more just that they didn’t do a whole lot with their performance. They’re capable of better, so maybe it was just what was requested of them. Neil Casey as Rowan North, the villain, was good. His plot just felt like an after thought.
I enjoy “Ghostbusters” (2015) as more just an entertaining movie than an actually good movie. For a movie everyone made such a big deal about, it wasn’t really worth it. It was just such a safe movie. I’d be open to seeing another one, but the box office makes it seem really unlikely.