by
17 years, 10 months ago
by
17 years, 10 months ago
by
17 years, 10 months ago
by
17 years, 10 months ago
by
17 years, 10 months ago
by
17 years, 10 months ago
by
17 years, 10 months ago
by
17 years, 10 months ago
Sayingkingkilla
Hell yeah! Ernie deserves a bigger role in possible sequels. I think all 4 of ‘em should have equal screentime, personally. His part would have been much bigger in GB2 if he had just been there when they’re drilling Manhattan and when they're battling the Scoleri Bros in the courtroom. I understand why he didn't have a bigger part in the first, because he was just starting. But in the sequel, there is no excuse.
by
17 years, 10 months ago
by
17 years, 10 months ago
DSucrose"[b
]In my opinoin, Ghostbusters II suffers from playing it safe by following too closely to the plot structure of the first movie - the writing reason that Winston is rarely involved in the first part of the second movie is because he wasn't there in the first part of the first movie.
The court room scene in Ghostbusters II is the Slimer scene in Ghostbusters I (replace Peter's “We came, we saw” line with the trio's “Two in the box” line) (though, ironically, in Ghostusters II, Peter seems to take Winston's role as the guy that Ray and Egon explain things to, unfortunately making Winston even more valueless in the movie).
Dan Aykroyd fell into the same trappings with his Blues Brothers sequel (even more so).
Hopefully, if a Ghostbusters III comes to fruition, there'll be a few changes to this structure - Winston actually amounting to anything worthwhile would be great.