page_title: Ghostbusters II
section_title: Performance analysis and aftermath
hierarchical_section_title: Ghostbusters II / Post-release / Performance analysis and aftermath
caption_attribution_description: BEVERLY HILLS, CA - MARCH 09: Director Ivan Reitman attends The Canadian Film Centre cocktail reception celebrating the Telefilm Canada Features Comedy Lab held at Avalon Hotel on March 9, 2011 in Beverly Hills, California.
context_page_description: Ghostbusters II is a 1989 American supernatural comedy film directed by Ivan Reitman and written by Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis. It stars Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Sigourney Weaver, Harold Ramis, Rick Moranis, Ernie Hudson, and Annie Potts. It is the sequel to the 1984 film Ghostbusters and the second film in the Ghostbusters franchise. Set five years after the events of the first film, the Ghostbusters have been sued and put out of business after the destruction caused during their battle with the demi-god Gozer. When a new paranormal threat emerges, the Ghostbusters re-form to combat it and save the world.
  After the phenomenal success of Ghostbusters, Columbia Pictures wanted a sequel but struggled to overcome objections from the cast and crew. As with the first film, Aykroyd and Ramis collaborated on the script, which went through many variations. The pair wanted to convey a message about the consequences of negative human emotions in large cities. They settled on the idea of negative feelings creating a mass of supernatural slime beneath New York City that empowers malevolent spirits.
context_section_description: Financially, Ghostbusters II was a relative success but it failed to meet studio expectations as a sequel to the highest-grossing comedy of all time. Despite being predicted to outperform its rival films before its release it failed to do so. As a part of the most successful summer for film to that date, Ghostbusters II was seen as a critical and commercial failure; it also failed to garner the same passionate response from critics and fans as its predecessor. While Columbia did not comment, industry experts believed the film was undone, at least partly, by the combination of Batman attracting teenage audiences and Honey, I Shrunk the Kids taking family audiences. Another issue was the quantity of films being released close together and unexpected successes that meant films were staying in theaters longer than anticipated. By only mid-July, one theater was alternating Ghostbusters II and The Karate Kid III on the same screen because of their diminishing returns to play Batman and Lethal Weapon 2 on other screens.
  Reitman blamed changes in what audiences wanted from films. He said he felt contemporaneous society was more negative and cynical, and noted the popularity of Batman, which had a darker tone whereas Ghostbusters II is more positive, particularly its upbeat, optimistic ending that shows New Yorkers coming together to help defeat Vigo. Reitman also felt the novelty of Ghostbusters could not be repeated because big surprises like ghosts and epic finales were now expected. In 2014, he said, "It didn't all come together ... we just sort of got off on the wrong foot story-wise on that film". Reviewers often noted that the film largely resembles its predecessor down to the story structure, a giant figure stomping through New York, and a mid-film montage set to a theme song. Some noted that releasing a film set at Christmas in June may also have worked against it. It has also been suggested the five-year gap between films worked against it, both losing the momentum generated by the original and setting expectations too high. This period also allowed a potential cultural saturation of the brand through the cartoon series and merchandise.
  Reitman was disappointed with Ghostbusters II's performance and said making the film had not been as much fun an experience as working on Ghostbusters. He told Columbia he would not be part of a third film, and intended to break from comedies altogether. In a 2008 interview, Murray said, "We did a sequel and it was sort of rather unsatisfying for me, because the first one to me was ... the real thing ... They'd written a whole different movie than the one [initially discussed]. And the special-effects guys got it ... There were a few great scenes in it, but it wasn't the same movie." Moranis said, "To have something as offbeat, unusual, and unpredictable [as] the first Ghostbusters, it's next to impossible to create something better. [And] with sequels ... they want better." Much as with the first film, Hudson was disappointed his role was relatively small. In Ghostbusters, many of his major scenes had been given to Murray who was better-known, and Hudson felt the sequel continued to marginalize his character. He affirmed that despite this, he appreciated the role because of the positive way in which fans have reacted to it.
caption: Director Ivan Reitman in 2011. He blamed the film's perceived failure on audiences' desire for darker films.
exif: {}