Ghostbusters II (1989)

Five years after saving New York from the apocalypse, the Ghostbusters have been disbanded. Drs Ray, Egon, and Venkman have moved on with new careers. And Dana Barrett has done some moving on of her own. Dana now has a baby. Unfortunately for her, a diabolical tyrant—Vigo the Carpathian—has chosen baby Oscar for his new home.

In Ghostbusters II , the entire gang has returned—unheard of by sequel standards. Also typical of sequels—suckiness. But you won’t find that here, not under Ivan Reitman’s direction. Ghostbusters II is essentially more of the same. Ooze, crazy 80’s soundtrack, and Bill Murray.

The set-up is classic. A river of ooze is flowing beneath New York City. Filled with the hate and vile of residence, the emotionally reactive goo is ready to explode. But after raging a war on slime that cost the city millions, the mayor is reluctant to let the Ghostbusters do their thing.

From Murray to Akroyd, Ecto-1 to Potts, every successful element from the first film returns. Because of that, the film feels more that familiar. Even without the top-notch, biting dialogue, there is plenty to engage. The addition of Peter MacNichol is a good turn.

The film’s examination of life beyond the trio (sorry, I’m not counting the token black) is fun. Ray’s bookstore is a total laugh. Spengler’s near cult-like following is a hoot. And Venkman’s become a cheese-filled TV host. Each spin fits our beloved characters well.

Ghostbusters II is a nice compliment. The tried and true formula is solid. As I am late to the bandwagon, the film further cements Bill Murray as an amazingly multi-faceted actor. As I see it, if you loved the first, you’ll enjoy the second.

Ghostbusters (1984)

After Drs. Peter Venkman (Bill Murray), Raymond Stantz (Dan Aykroyd), and Egon Spengler (Harold Ramis) are kicked out of the university, the trio goes into business exterminating poltergeists and supernatural pests of all planes. Discovering their first client (Sigourney Weaver) lives in the penthouse that seems to be the gateway from some hideous evil means the ghostbusters must stop a coming disaster of biblical proportions.

The charm of Ghostbusters lies in its simplicity. Unpretentious but authentic, Ghostbusters perfectly combines key elements for success. Dialogue, character development/casting, scoring.  It’s spot-on.

Bill Murray and his dead-pan delivery are priceless. As Venkman, the lady killer parapsychologist, he kills with highly quotable one-liners throughout the film. Aykroyd plays the naive straight-man with his scientific jargon. Ramis, the silent partner, gets a few one-liners of his own amid an otherwise dour shift. The chemistry between these three is unbeatable. Supporting cast including Weaver, Annie Potts, Rick Moranis, the eventual ‘token black’ ghostbuster played by Ernie Hudson, and the dick-less EPA inspector all add layers of interest and humor.

The combination of director Ivan Reitman and writers Murray/Ramis (I forgive you for Stripes) is tight. Reitman paces Ghostbusters well, keeps it from jumping the shark, and reigns in our cast without harming them or the film. The special effects, while dated, are charming and add another layer to love. The culmination of the Stay-Puft marshmallow man is great. (Apparently, I’m the only one left who didn’t see that coming.) Equally fun is Weaver’s evolution to David Bowie.

After viewing Ghostbusters for the first time, it is remarkably easy to see why the film continues to pervade pop culture 20+ years later. This is a film that makes you want to watch. As I see it, Reitman has made an absolute classic worthy of your love and mine.

Bruno (2009)

I don't know exactly what to call this satiric piece from Sacha Baron Cohen. 'Disgusting' comes to mind and that's really a shame. What could have been an insightful spoof is content to be stupidity.

Baron Cohen's character, Bruno, is a homosexual fashionista immigrating to America with one thing on his mind: being famous. Through a series of missteps and vast gayness, we follow Bruno being ridiculous. The events herein are random and ill-fitting. Nothing makes sense. Its Bruno flaunting his genitalia or watching other people flaunt theirs. What Ron Paul, Paula Abdul, or a black baby named OJ has to do with an Austria queer is beyond me.

Bruno is hardly polarizing—it’s harmless really due to the inane nature. It doesn’t bring anything positive or thought-provoking to the screen.. It’s as if Baron Cohen sets out to shock, nothing more. Anyone—gay or straight—will find the film repulsive. This is not funny.

I viewed this film with overwhelming incredulousness. I question the film’s entertainment value as well. Henceforth, I will pretend this garbage doesn’t exist.

Land of the Lost (2009)

Perservence is needed should viewers wish to partake of Will Ferrell's latest offering Land of the Lost.  Rest assured, you will be lost amid a hodge-podge of useless banter and unfunny moments.  This adventure starved mess-terpiece is a vehicle of stupidity amid inane pop culture.

Ferrell stars as an palentologist who is laughed at and dismissed by his collegues for strange theories.  Year later, Dr. Rick Marshall is found at the natural history museum being derided by elementary school students.  Joined by a beautiful woman and Danny McBride, stupidity ensues.

Land of the Lost isn't funny.  It's stupid.  I'm unsure about the 'inspiration' of the original television series.  What is certain is this film is way too ridiculously random to be of any merit.  Various pop-culture references are made, but even they are not worth the time.

Avoid this mess at all costs.  Right about now, I'm wishing for 90 minutes of my life back.

Underworld (2003)

For centuries, a war has raged between vampires and lycans. In the modern day, the lycans are all but extinct thanks in part to vampire warrior Selene (Kate Beckinsale). When she discovers the lycan are hunting a human, she will stop at nothing to find the truth—even if it means waking Viktor (Bill Nighy).

Let me digress for a moment—Bill Nighy is awesome! The guy doesn’t make a bad movie. Romantic comedies, blockbusters, period films, dramas… Supporting or lead role, Nighy owns each and always executes brilliantly.

Underworld, in essence, is a retelling of the Montagues and the Capulets. With Gothic tendencies, it’s a highly-stylized film with little bite. But it's fun.

Director Les Wiseman sets the stage with a narrative from Selene. Without that, we’d have more of a mindless romp. Casting is an interesting mix. Again, Bill Nighy as Viktor—overlord of the coven—is amazing!! Kate Beckinsale looks amazing, but is otherwise wooden despite attempts at affection. Scott Speedman, the human object of her affection is horribly reminiscent of Scott Sapp and is a complete turnoff.

The production is dark, rainy, and doesn’t follow its own rules, even breaking with horror conventions. Underworld doesn't effectively build suspense of terror; it builds action sequences and disjointed dramatic moments. But it’s fun.

The special effects are well done. The change from human to lycan is often shrouded, the transition is believable. Viktor’s resurrection was seamless. The cascades of silver and ultra-violet bullets aren’t nearly as cool as what you’ll find in The Matrix. Take heart, viewer. The leather-clan Beckinsale matches Trinity corset for corset.

So what is Underworld? It’s a violent, sexy, and uneven story that ultimately adds nothing to either genre. The idea is good; the legend behind it even better; the execution just isn't there. To enjoy Underworld is to not expect much.