[JoshK]

One thing to consider is that these deleted/alternate scenes are in rough form and, given the white frames with filler sound effects, are most likely from an initial workprint cut.

Workprint footage always runs slow, with sluggish pacing amongst takes, and plenty of dry air. Had this scene been kept, it would've been trimmed a bit more (possibly removing one or two of Peter's reactionary zingers, particularly the flat, awkward ones) and there might've been inserts, other angles, ADR, and so on.

Plus, one thing I like about this variation of the scene is that Venkman addresses the elephant in the phone, something to the effect of "Sorry! Maybe you guys should've told me in advance."

[Zack]

I'm not seeing the fire scene in the shooting script on the site here. Did they add that in later? It just goes from Louis and Janine making a date to the guys showing up at Peter's apartment. I think the fire scene really ties Vigo and the slime together and gives them more of an urgency and confirmation to go look underground. It moves things into nighttime easier I thought. And there is more of a rush and urgency when they pull up in Ecto-1A at Venkman's place. I thought the scene where they go upstairs seems very nonchalant...

Gives all the museum investigation a real purpose when we see all the photos and reveal of the river.

[mrmichaelt]

I'm not seeing the fire scene in the shooting script on the site here. Did they add that in later? It just goes from Louis and Janine making a date to the guys showing up at Peter's apartment. I think the fire scene really ties Vigo and the slime together and gives them more of an urgency and confirmation to go look underground. It moves things into nighttime easier I thought. And there is more of a rush and urgency when they pull up in Ecto-1A at Venkman's place. I thought the scene where they go upstairs seems very nonchalant...

Gives all the museum investigation a real purpose when we see all the photos and reveal of the river.

I believe that is correct. They added the scene later on. It was decided more scenes needed to be added in order to clarify story points or expand certain portions of the movie. When they pre-screened the movie, the feedback they got was the ghosts, slime, and Vigo needed to be tied together better as well as the concept of good slime and bad slime had to be expanded on, too. That was from Cinefex magazine #40, page 25. They were pretty much working down to the wire again. The scene where Lenny enters the City Hall meeting room and fires Jack wasn't added until a month before the theater release because ILM couldn't finish a scene, involving ghosts pouring out of the Alexander Hamilton U.S. Custom House, in time

[Zack]

Thanks for the info! Definitely explains why Hardemayer getting sucked into the museum was cut(other than couldn't be finished). He was disposed off in the added scene and Lenny had the guys released. I guess it was supposed to be Louis and Sherm that see the sky going dark. Someone said that explains why the view is from where they would have been at Parkview rather than the mayors office.

[Winston1986]

I rather like the scene where Mayor Lenny fires Jack so I'm glad they weren't able to do the scene that's in this video of deleted scenes where he gets melted by the slime at the Museum.

[M.Thunder]

I might be wrong about this (I'm sure there are those around here who can correct me if I am)... but I think when GB2 was pitched, it was pitched as an October 1989 release, probably because the darker themes would have gone well with Halloween. This would have provided several more months then GB1 had and given them more time for more re-shoots and complex special effects. Supposedly when Reitman, Ramis, Murray and Akyroyd agreed to all return for the sequel, THIS was what they agreed to.

Then, at some point during the pre-production/early shooting, the release was moved up to July, for summer blockbuster season. Supposedly one of the many things that soured Bill Murray on the project was that he was pitched the GB2 story and thought it was really good, only when he showed up for the first day of filming, he found out that the script had been changed and large chunks of the story re-written. Things kind of went downhill from there. I've heard it was not a happy set to begin with, and then the movie was moved up AGAIN from July to June, which was great for the marketing people and bad for everybody else.

I will go to my grave someday still wondering what that first vision of the movie, the Halloween one, would have been like if it had ever gotten finished....

[d_osborn]

I think when GB2 was pitched, it was pitched as an October 1989 release, probably because the darker themes would have gone well with Halloween.

Do you remember where you read this? Any links? As far as I know, it was always going to be a summer release.

Supposedly one of the many things that soured Bill Murray on the project was that he was pitched the GB2 story and thought it was really good, only when he showed up for the first day of filming, he found out the hard way that the script had been changed and large chunks of the story re-written.

Yeah, the earlier script had way less FX shots, with more room to be a comedy. I don't believe it was a thing like Murray showing up on the first day and being surprised by the script changes. There was an interview during late GB2 pre-production (Starlog 140) where Murray mentioned the early story they sold him on, as well as the current script still needing work and screen testing with actresses for the female lead, before Weaver signed on. Murray obviously knew what was happening with it, even though he later said he didn't like the comedy coming second fiddle to the FX.

The story pitched to Murray was Venkman and Dana are married, and their son gets possessed. The rest of the cast pretty much took a backseat in the core story, so it morphed into what we know. More of an ensemble piece.

[M.Thunder]

Do you remember where you read this? Any links? As far as I know, it was always going to be a summer release.

I'm trying to remember...it was included in an account of the big 4 hour dinner that Sherry Lansing threw in LA, which is why it sounded like it was part of what was originally pitched to Reitman and the cast.... I'm trying to track it down again....

...I also may have the fact totally wrong. That is always a possibility.

I do know the actor who played the mayor talked about GB2's "July Relase" so either he got that wrong (possible) or the date was moved up at least once.

The story pitched to Murray was Venkman and Dana are married, and their son gets possessed. The rest of the cast pretty much took a backseat in the core story, so it morphed into what we know. More of an ensemble piece.

Are you sure that was a GB2 pitch? Because I thought I remembered hearing a story that that was one of the pitches for a Bill-Murray-less 90s GB3 movie: Dana and Peter are on vacation in Paris, and they leave their son with the guys at the firehouse and becomes a Junior Ghostbuster....

Tell the truth, I always wondered why Oscar's parentage wasn't one of the plot points in GB2.We don't even ever learn Oscar's last name. If they did that today I'd say it was because they were saving that reveal for the sequel, but we know it didn't work like that back then, so... yeah. I don't know where they going with that.

I also remember Ivan Reitman saying that he wasn't even sure Bill Murray was going to be IN Ghostbusters2 until he showed up for the first day of filming. And I have seen an interview where Bill complains that his part is so small even though his scenes are the only funny scenes in that movie. It just sounds like a big mess of crossed wires and hurt egos.

[mrmichaelt]

Thanks for the info! Definitely explains why Hardemayer getting sucked into the museum was cut(other than couldn't be finished). He was disposed off in the added scene and Lenny had the guys released. I guess it was supposed to be Louis and Sherm that see the sky going dark. Someone said that explains why the view is from where they would have been at Parkview rather than the mayors office.

You're welcome, Zack. Yeah, they saw it from Sherman's office in a draft. I didn't that about the POV. I just figured City Hall could see Central Park. Never did try to prove it.

I might be wrong about this (I'm sure there are those around here who can correct me if I am)... but I think when GB2 was pitched, it was pitched as an October 1989 release, probably because the darker themes would have gone well with Halloween. This would have provided several more months then GB1 had and given them more time for more re-shoots and complex special effects. Supposedly when Reitman, Ramis, Murray and Akyroyd agreed to all return for the sequel, THIS was what they agreed to.

Do you remember where you read this? Any links? As far as I know, it was always going to be a summer release.

I think M. Thunder might be alluding to this mythic rumored first script called "The Seed". In general, it's accepted the first version was the one called "The Last of the Ghostbusters" where Dana is kidnapped to Scotland (like Ghost Smashers was the first version of the first movie). Then Harold Ramis came aboard and they came up with several new story ideas.

The first idea of the river of slime was introduced shortly after they started with the moral notion that negative human emotions have consequences. The idea carried over to the sense that the bad vibes can build up in big cities like New York City and Los Angeles. Eventually, Vigo was created as the prime motivator behind the slime.

The second idea entailed Peter Venkman and Dana Barrett getting married and having a child. The infant was possessed and suddenly had adult agility and focus. Ramis concluded it was too horrible an idea for a movie and the marriage angle was a creative dead end. Eventually, the second idea evolved into Dana being a divorced mother.

Then the two ideas merged into a GB2 draft and what we see on screen. This was all from Starlog #140 and Cinefex #40 page 5-6.

But to note on June 15, 1989, while appearing on "Later with Bob Costas," Ramis revealed two other ideas for the sequel. One had the Ghostbusters as very successful, based in a high rise building, and now a worldwide company called Ghostbusters Inc. (like what was in a draft of the first movie as an epilogue) and the second idea had the sequel picking up literally from the end of the first movie. Obviously these two got scrapped.

All I know is they aimed for July 4 then June 23 then June 16. For some reason Reitman wanted June 23rd, but in the middle of production, the crew learned "Batman" was slated to release on the 23rd. Reitman asked the studio for the 16th much to the rest of the crew's dismay. (Cinefex #40 page 25)

[Zack]

You're welcome, Zack. Yeah, they saw it from Sherman's office in a draft. I didn't that about the POV. I just figured City Hall could see Central Park. Never did try to prove it.

Yeah, I'm not sure on that. I'm not familiar enough with New York but I remember someone saying that. Which is odd/cool to think that we are seeing it from the point of view of a deleted scene. Don't know how true that it is though!

[d_osborn]

Yeah, they saw it from Sherman's office in a draft.

Yeah, in the shooting draft, Louis and Sherman see the eclipse from the hospital. There was a goofy little montage of people seeing the eclipse in the 11/27 draft. The GBs saw it with a bunch of crazies spouting apocalypse theories at Parkview Hospital, a zoo keeper watched it while a Pterodactyl formed behind him, and the mink coat lady saw it, complaining to her husband that the NY weather is always weird before being attacked by her coat.

I think M. Thunder might be alluding to this mythic rumored first script called "The Seed". In general, it's accepted the first version was the one called "The Last of the Ghostbusters" where Dana is kidnapped to Scotland (like Ghost Smashers was the first version of the first movie). Then Harold Ramis came aboard and they came up with several new story ideas.

The solo Aykroyd first draft script that is mentioned in Cinefex is "THE SEED". Dana is kidnapped, fairies, underground civilization, 2,000 mile long underground pneumatic tube. Aside from THE SEED, I don't know of any other GB2 drafts with a different title. "THE LAST OF THE GHOSTBUSTERS" was a funny little quip from Bill Murray in the Starlog 140 interview. I don't think it was ever considered. If there are any other references to "THE LAST OF THE GHOSTBUSTERS", aside from Murray's joke, I would definitely love to see it.

The first idea of the river of slime was introduced shortly after they started with the moral notion that negative human emotions have consequences. The idea carried over to the sense that the bad vibes can build up in big cities like New York City and Los Angeles. Eventually, Vigo was created as the prime motivator behind the slime.

The second idea entailed Peter Venkman and Dana Barrett getting married and having a child. The infant was possessed and suddenly had adult agility and focus. Ramis concluded it was too horrible an idea for a movie and the marriage angle was a creative dead end. Eventually, the second idea evolved into Dana being a divorced mother.

Then the two ideas merged into a GB2 draft and what we see on screen. This was all from Starlog #140 and Cinefex #40 page 5-6.

The river of slime was actually added later in the process, in the 9/29 draft. In earlier drafts, it was a large mass of insects and vermin swarming to a symphony of negative vibes. Pretty gnarly! This is from a 7/88 draft...



I don't believe there were multiple drafts being developed simultaneously and then merging. It's my understanding that it was always just one collaborative draft in the process once Ramis started. The earlier idea that Murray claimed to like was him and Dana being married and their child getting possessed.

[mrmichaelt]

The solo Aykroyd first draft script that is mentioned in Cinefex is "THE SEED". Dana is kidnapped, fairies, underground civilization, 2,000 mile long underground pneumatic tube. Aside from THE SEED, I don't know of any other GB2 drafts with a different title. "THE LAST OF THE GHOSTBUSTERS" was a funny little quip from Bill Murray in the Starlog 140 interview. I don't think it was ever considered. If there are any other references to "THE LAST OF THE GHOSTBUSTERS", aside from Murray's joke, I would definitely love to see it.

Oh, yeah. Right. "The Seed" was the official name and Murray quipped the movie should be named "The Last of the Ghostbusters" instead of Ghostbusters II so there wouldn't be a Ghostbusters III.

The river of slime was actually added later in the process, in the 9/29 draft. In earlier drafts, it was a large mass of insects and vermin swarming to a symphony of negative vibes. Pretty gnarly! This is from a 7/88 draft...

I don't believe there were multiple drafts being developed simultaneously and then merging. It's my understanding that it was always just one collaborative draft in the process once Ramis started. The earlier idea that Murray claimed to like was him and Dana being married and their child getting possessed.

Not multiple simultaneous drafts, I said ideas. I merely meant they had two main ideas from the start of collaboration and over time, they became what we know as Ghostbusters II. I shouldn't have said 'merged' in retrospect.

7/88? I thought the earliest known draft after The Seed was August 5, 1988.

[M.Thunder]

Leave it to mrmichaelt to swing in with the right citations! You are a wonder.

And that STANTZ POV snippet is Dan's writing if I've ever seen it. For someone so technical, he has a lot more poetry in him then he gets credit for. That "writhing mass of vermin" idea is even creeper then the black slime we eventually saw in the Video Game...

[d_osborn]

7/88? I thought the earliest known draft after The Seed was August 5, 1988.

The 8/5/88 draft is the earliest that has ever popped up online, but there was a lot of script work prior to that. The 8/5/88 draft is actually a revision... around 11 pages was cut out of the previous draft. I could be actually mistaken on the 7/88 date. My copy is missing the cover page, so it could potentially be from even earlier.

Funny enough, the 8/5/88 revised draft was the first draft submitted to ILM and Columbia, much like the 8/5/83 was the first production draft submitted to BOSS and Columbia for the first film.

I'm not exactly sure when they got the greenlight on the film, or how much story work was done prior. I'm sure I have the info somewhere. The early stuff on GB2 development is pretty interesting, with the bad blood between Columbia head David Putnam and the core GB crew. I really wish they would have discussed this stuff on the BR release.

Leave it to mrmichaelt to swing in with the right citations! You are a wonder.

And that STANTZ POV snippet is Dan's writing if I've ever seen it. For someone so technical, he has a lot more poetry in him then he gets credit for. That "writhing mass of vermin" idea is even creeper then the black slime we eventually saw in the Video Game...

The GB2 Cinefex article is a great read if you're into this stuff. It's pretty much the closest thing to a MAKING GHOSTBUSTERS 2 book. Don Shay was even the editor of Cinefex magazine.

[mrmichaelt]

The 8/5/88 draft is the earliest that has ever popped up online, but there was a lot of script work prior to that. The 8/5/88 draft is actually a revision... around 11 pages was cut out of the previous draft. I could be actually mistaken on the 7/88 date. My copy is missing the cover page, so it could potentially be from even earlier.

I see. Got it. The Seed and drafts after it we all don't know of have to be '88 in theory since that pow wow that took place at Jimmy's was in early 1988. Bummer on the missing cover page.

Funny enough, the 8/5/88 revised draft was the first draft submitted to ILM and Columbia, much like the 8/5/83 was the first production draft submitted to BOSS and Columbia for the first film.

Ha, neat.

I'm not exactly sure when they got the greenlight on the film, or how much story work was done prior. I'm sure I have the info somewhere. The early stuff on GB2 development is pretty interesting, with the bad blood between Columbia head David Putnam and the core GB crew. I really wish they would have discussed this stuff on the BR release.

Like you said later on, it's always depressing to think there never was a Making Ghostbusters 2 to document this stuff.

The GB2 Cinefex article is a great read if you're into this stuff. It's pretty much the closest thing to a MAKING GHOSTBUSTERS 2 book. Don Shay was even the editor of Cinefex magazine.

Agreed! Reading about all the effects work alone is kind of mind boggling.

[Dougger]

Are any of the earlier drafts online? I've been dying to read them for the longest time.

[pferreira1983]

Do you think perhaps the production team should of aimed for a Christmas 1989 release? It would have allowed more time for ILM to complete the visual effects but story wise if the film was released at the end of the year it would actually tie into the idea of the film taking place close to New Year's Day. Considering the concept of the movie's plot it seemed a bit odd they went for a Summer release.

[Fritz]

Do you think perhaps the production team should of aimed for a Christmas 1989 release? It would have allowed more time for ILM to complete the visual effects but story wise if the film was released at the end of the year it would actually tie into the idea of the film taking place close to New Year's Day. Considering the concept of the movie's plot it seemed a bit odd they went for a Summer release.

Well, sure, but you have to remember: this was well in the heart of the "Summer blockbuster" era, when everybody put their tentpole moneymakers (or what the studio thought would be their big moneymakers) out in the summer. Columbia saw GB2 as a big summer blockbuster because GB1 had done so well.

If GB2 had been aimed toward a later release, Columbia probably would have thought it wouldn't have made as much money. And all the potential buzz about "Wow, they didn't put this out in the summer blockbuster season, it must really be a bomb" probably would have made that a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Nowawadays, there are much more intended "blockbusters" released all through the year. In 1989, it was pretty much seen as a summer-only thing. (And it's still seen as predominantly summer)

[pferreira1983]

But it wouldn't have had to compete with Batman, Star Trek V and The Last Crusade. Wasn't Back to the Future Part II released later that year? If so I wonder why Universal didn't release it as a Summer movie as well. For such a big sequel the second BTTF was released in October I think. It's ironic you mention GB2 being released for the Summer as back in 1984 Gremlins was supposed to be released at Christmas because well the film was set at Christmas but Warner Bros rushed it out to compete with Ghostbusters and the second Indiana Jones film for a Summer release.

[d_osborn]

Are any of the earlier drafts online? I've been dying to read them for the longest time.

Not yet, but it looks like Paul Rudoff is going to post a scan of the 8/5 draft he picked up from Tim Lawrence. It's an interesting read!

http://tinyurl.com/n5gmzzk

[Dougger]

Happy Halloween, indeed.

[d_osborn]

Happy Halloween, indeed.

Here ya go! http://www.theraffon.net/~spookcentral/ ... -08-05.pdf

[RGB4Life]

I think releasing Ghostbusters 2 just one week before Batman was a big mistake. If it had been released say 3 weeks before or even 3 weeks after, then it would've made more money.

[mrmichaelt]

Yep, pretty interesting read. I think this is what the 1st or 2nd collaborative Aykroyd-Ramis script?

For those that haven't read it yet, I'll use spoiler tags

I think the thing that intrigued me the most was how they elevated Louis' role compared to the first movie but Winston and Janine had a subdued presence throughout the movie. It was cool seeing some of the lines heard in the final movie were on these pages and preserved throughout the rewrite phase. Even funnier when the line was with another character at first like Egon's 'in science we look for the easiest explanation' was actually Peter's line! Ha, and those brat kids wanted Bozo not He-Man like in the movie. Neat to see the institute had 'Einstein' in its name. Dug the explanation of the psychomagnetic field (later called psychomagnotheric) but understood how they had to excise it in the final movie. How odd though to read Egon and Ray refusing Peter (and he was the one sought out first!) to help Peter at first.

And holy cannoli, Walter Peck testified at the trial! Middle name Margate. lol. Totally lol'ed when I saw a firm named 'Drexel, Burnham, Lambert' on page 46. Got pretty dark around page 54 with the husband loading his revolver... but didn't expect to see a swarm of insects in place of the River of Slime. And Peter was pretty much the star in this script. Tapping into the Con Ed transmission lines totally reminded of RGB when they did a similar thing in "Janine's Day Off" and "Attack of the B-Movie Monsters" Ha, and Winston was working at an airlines between movies.

This Post Contains Spoilers

Here ya go! http://www.theraffon.net/~spookcentral/ ... -08-05.pdf

Does it match your copy or is it another draft?

[pferreira1983]

I think releasing Ghostbusters 2 just one week before Batman was a big mistake. If it had been released say 3 weeks before or even 3 weeks after, then it would've made more money.

Or maybe it should have been released in time for the New Year?

[d_osborn]

I think this is what the 1st or 2nd collaborative Aykroyd-Ramis script?

No, Ramis and Aykroyd had both been working on the script for a while by 8/88. The earliest mention of a collaborative draft I've seen is 2/88, and Aykroyd even says that it was two-thirds finished by that point.

I know that the 8/5 draft was the first script submitted to ILM and Columbia, though.

Does it match your copy or is it another draft?

My script is the draft prior to 8/5. I'm not 100% sure on the date, since it's missing the cover page. The last 10 or 15 pages are from the 8/5 revised draft, though. Just from thumbing through the script that Paul posted, there are definitely some differences. The older draft is around 11 pages longer, too.

[mrmichaelt]

No, Ramis and Aykroyd had both been working on the script for a while by 8/88. The earliest mention of a collaborative draft I've seen is 2/88, and Aykroyd even says that it was two-thirds finished by that point.

Hmm, maybe one of those had Peter and Dana married and their child possessed?

My script is the draft prior to 8/5. I'm not 100% sure on the date, since it's missing the cover page. The last 10 or 15 pages are from the 8/5 revised draft, though. Just from thumbing through the script that Paul posted, there are definitely some differences. The older draft is around 11 pages longer, too.

Neat. Well, when you can, please note what's different. My interest is piqued.

[Spengs]

I think this is what the 1st or 2nd collaborative Aykroyd-Ramis script?

No, Ramis and Aykroyd had both been working on the script for a while by 8/88. The earliest mention of a collaborative draft I've seen is 2/88, and Aykroyd even says that it was two-thirds finished by that point.

I know that the 8/5 draft was the first script submitted to ILM and Columbia, though.

Does it match your copy or is it another draft?

My script is the draft prior to 8/5. I'm not 100% sure on the date, since it's missing the cover page. The last 10 or 15 pages are from the 8/5 revised draft, though. Just from thumbing through the script that Paul posted, there are definitely some differences. The older draft is around 11 pages longer, too.

d_osborn: If a copy of your draft script isn't already on-line, do you have plans to share it? I know i shouldn't, I feel a little bad in asking as its from your collection. I'm done putting my foot in my mouth for now.

[d_osborn]

No, Ramis and Aykroyd had both been working on the script for a while by 8/88. The earliest mention of a collaborative draft I've seen is 2/88, and Aykroyd even says that it was two-thirds finished by that point.

Hmm, maybe one of those had Peter and Dana married and their child possessed?

Yeah, from the way it sounds, that was one of the earlier ideas. Hopefully those REALLY early collaborative drafts will surface.

My script is the draft prior to 8/5. I'm not 100% sure on the date, since it's missing the cover page. The last 10 or 15 pages are from the 8/5 revised draft, though. Just from thumbing through the script that Paul posted, there are definitely some differences. The older draft is around 11 pages longer, too.

Neat. Well, when you can, please note what's different. My interest is piqued.

Totally! I haven't had a chance to read through Paul's draft, but I'm hoping to this weekend. I'm not anticipating anything drastic, but I noticed a few things.

d_osborn: If a copy of your draft script isn't already on-line, do you have plans to share it? I know i shouldn't, I feel a little bad in asking as its from your collection. I'm done putting my foot in my mouth for now.

No problem at all! I was always planning to scan and share the script. Paul beat me to the punch, haha! I had posted breakdowns of a few early GB and GB2 script drafts on GBHQ probably around ten years ago. Unfortunately, it seems those posts are long gone.

[mrmichaelt]

Totally! I haven't had a chance to read through Paul's draft, but I'm hoping to this weekend. I'm not anticipating anything drastic, but I noticed a few things.

Cool. In particular, there was only a mention of Egon and Ray building a new storage facility. There was no scene in the 8/5/88 of them looking at the crater. Maybe in yours?