237 replies to this topic

[Matt_13]

Wouldn't bank on the Enquirer.

[tdalton]

If Bill Murray says no and does something like shredding the script and mailing back to Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis...then we KNOW this movie WAS going to be VERY, VERY bad!! I say just do another video game in the spirit (no pun intended..lol!) of the Ghostbusters game that came out in '09..that would more than satisfy me in lieu of trying to put out a crappy 3rd film in which some young, snot-nosed little brats get handed over the Proton Packs..

http://jack.radio.co...sters-3-script/

While I take the story with a huge grain of salt, I don't think that Murray pulling this stunt would mean the script is bad. It seems as though Murray really doesn't want to work on this project, so I don't think any script that he's sent is going to be something that he's excited about, regardless of its quality.

I actually do hope that the story is true and that he did send them the script all shredded up. Perhaps that would anger Aykroyd and Ramis to the point that they wouldn't bother waiting around for him anymore to hold the project in a state of limbo while he decides what he wants to do, and instead they go ahead and make the film without him.

[coco1997]

While I take the story with a huge grain of salt, I don't think that Murray pulling this stunt would mean the script is bad. It seems as though Murray really doesn't want to work on this project, so I don't think any script that he's sent is going to be something that he's excited about, regardless of its quality.

I actually do hope that the story is true and that he did send them the script all shredded up. Perhaps that would anger Aykroyd and Ramis to the point that they wouldn't bother waiting around for him anymore to hold the project in a state of limbo while he decides what he wants to do, and instead they go ahead and make the film without him.

I was given a Wii for Christmas and also received the "Ghostbusters" video game. As much as I've enjoyed it so far, one thing that's stood out to me is the voice performances of the actors. While it's extremely satisfying to know that they were able to get pretty much the entire original cast back to reprise their roles, I did notice that Murray's performance seems pretty phoned in. It makes me realize that if he won't give 100% to a voice acting role in a video game, I just can't see him putting his heart into a third film.

Although I desperately want another "Ghostbusters" movie, most people will tell you that Murray was the heart and soul of the original two films and a "Ghostbusters" film without him is simply not worth anyone's time.

[tdalton]

While I take the story with a huge grain of salt, I don't think that Murray pulling this stunt would mean the script is bad. It seems as though Murray really doesn't want to work on this project, so I don't think any script that he's sent is going to be something that he's excited about, regardless of its quality.

I actually do hope that the story is true and that he did send them the script all shredded up. Perhaps that would anger Aykroyd and Ramis to the point that they wouldn't bother waiting around for him anymore to hold the project in a state of limbo while he decides what he wants to do, and instead they go ahead and make the film without him.

I was given a Wii for Christmas and also received the "Ghostbusters" video game. As much as I've enjoyed it so far, one thing that's stood out to me is the voice performances of the actors. While it's extremely satisfying to know that they were able to get pretty much the entire original cast back to reprise their roles, I did notice that Murray's performance seems pretty phoned in. It makes me realize that if he won't give 100% to a voice acting role in a video game, I just can't see him putting his heart into a third film.

Agreed. Murray's voice work was very much phoned in. It was disappointing, but expected.

Although I desperately want another "Ghostbusters" movie, most people will tell you that Murray was the heart and soul of the original two films and a "Ghostbusters" film without him is simply not worth anyone's time.

Even though I would agree, I don't want Murray to be the only thing standing in the way of the film. It seems like everything else is ready to go other than his agreement to be involved. If that's all that stands in the way, I want Aykroyd, Ramis, and Hudson to move forward on their own and do the film without him. The film will do well on the name value of the franchise alone, and if they can draft a solid crew of younger actors to augment the older cast, then I think they can make up for Murray's absence should he choose not to participate.

[Mr. Blofeld]

To be fair, Murray never really wanted to do Ghostbusters from the start; he only did the first film to get a studio greenlight on his real pet project, The Razor's Edge, which bombed horribly -- pretty sure he did the second one strictly for monetary reasons, as well. Seems to be his raison d'être for the most "popular" films he's done.

[SecretAgentFan]

While I take the story with a huge grain of salt, I don't think that Murray pulling this stunt would mean the script is bad. It seems as though Murray really doesn't want to work on this project, so I don't think any script that he's sent is going to be something that he's excited about, regardless of its quality.

I actually do hope that the story is true and that he did send them the script all shredded up. Perhaps that would anger Aykroyd and Ramis to the point that they wouldn't bother waiting around for him anymore to hold the project in a state of limbo while he decides what he wants to do, and instead they go ahead and make the film without him.

I was given a Wii for Christmas and also received the "Ghostbusters" video game. As much as I've enjoyed it so far, one thing that's stood out to me is the voice performances of the actors. While it's extremely satisfying to know that they were able to get pretty much the entire original cast back to reprise their roles, I did notice that Murray's performance seems pretty phoned in. It makes me realize that if he won't give 100% to a voice acting role in a video game, I just can't see him putting his heart into a third film.

Agreed. Murray's voice work was very much phoned in. It was disappointing, but expected.

Although I desperately want another "Ghostbusters" movie, most people will tell you that Murray was the heart and soul of the original two films and a "Ghostbusters" film without him is simply not worth anyone's time.

Even though I would agree, I don't want Murray to be the only thing standing in the way of the film. It seems like everything else is ready to go other than his agreement to be involved. If that's all that stands in the way, I want Aykroyd, Ramis, and Hudson to move forward on their own and do the film without him. The film will do well on the name value of the franchise alone, and if they can draft a solid crew of younger actors to augment the older cast, then I think they can make up for Murray's absence should he choose not to participate.

Absolutely!

I like Murray. I like his branching out into serious character roles. But his diva behaviour is really not necessary and reflecting poorly on his character. Why can´t he be professional, read the script quickly and say yes or no? Is he so in love with his status that he milks it endlessly?

I would like to see another GHOSTBUSTERS film. With or without him. And I am very sure that the studio wants the franchise (as any studio wants any franchise) to go on. I guess Murray´s role would not have been central anyway - it´s about getting a new generation in. Maybe they will retool it completely and do a reboot.

[tdalton]

Aykroyd says new writers join Ghostbusters 3

I'm not really sure that this matters at this point, but it's interesting that things still seem to be moving forward to some degree despite the near certainty that this project is not moving forward.

[coco1997]

Aykroyd says new writers join Ghostbusters 3

I'm not really sure that this matters at this point, but it's interesting that things still seem to be moving forward to some degree despite the near certainty that this project is not moving forward.

Unfortunately, we've heard this same song and dance before. There must be a half dozen different iterations of "Ghostbusters 3" dating back to "Hellbent" in the mid-90s. I also think all this news about a "GB3" script is moot if Bill Murray still refuses to be involved.

[tdalton]

Well, the quote from Murray in the article (which comes from a Letterman interview earlier this year) seems to indicate some semblance of willingness to at least consider the project if the script is good. We know he was displeased with the previous version of the script, which I can't say I'm surprised by given that it was written by the duo behind Year One.

[SecretAgentFan]

I guess they should just leave this alone. The first one was great. And it´s been too many years since then. And instead of having the three main Busters do this alone they almost certainly will have to bring in the next generation (studio mandate, appeal to the kids!!!) - and that would most certainly become awkward.

So why not skip that part and re-boot completely IF the studio desperately wants to rehash old ideas instead of doing something original?

I guess Murray really wants to delay things until the studio gives up on a "Ghostbusters 3" with the original stars.

[tdalton]

I'm not willing to completely condemn Murray regarding this particular round of attempts to get Ghostbusters 3 off the ground. The script was not in particularly good hands, if The Office, Bad Teacher, and Year One are any indication of the quality of GB3's script.

[coco1997]

I'm not willing to completely condemn Murray regarding this particular round of attempts to get Ghostbusters 3 off the ground. The script was not in particularly good hands, if The Office, Bad Teacher, and Year One are any indication of the quality of GB3's script.

If the script had been written back in 2006/2007 when "The Office" was actually still funny, then the script might've turned out well. But not if it's the same minds behind the "Office" of the last few years.

[thecasinoroyale]

As much as I love the 'Ghostbuster' films, I do think this 3rd one should be left to rest in peace. I fear with the current climate of films being made and especially comedies/sequels etc, a new film would lose the charm and look the previous films captured and it would be reduced to comedy far lower then we are used to without Murray et al on board in their prime, and it would be full of younger actors out to make a fast few million dollars, probably use a awful soundtrack and no doubt smother the thing in CGI.


Let this one go Dan!

[tdalton]

I'm still in the camp that wants a Ghostbusters 3, but I think they're going about it the wrong way at this point. Aykroyd needs to fire whatever writers he currently has working on it and then he needs to sit down with Harold Ramis and the two of them need to hammer out the script themselves, as they did with the first two films.

Heck, I'm even willing to accept new, younger actors taking over as a new team of ghostbusters as long as it means a third film. As long as they stay away from the SNL cast when it comes to casting the new team (they'd do well to look to at the casts of TV shows aimed towards comic-con fans, such as Chuck, when it comes to filling out the new cast), I'm open to the idea of them going that route.

[coco1997]

For those who hadn't heard, IDW is rebooting the Ghostbusters comic series in February with a mostly female team.



Going by that poster, my choices for a hypothetical cast are as follows:

Janine Melnitz - Emma Stone (I realize she's too young to play the original Janine, but she could/should pull off a similar-type character)


Kylie Griffin - Aubrey Plaza


Special Agent Melanie Ortiz - Cobie Smulders


All of them are gorgeous, all of them are worshiped by fanboys for previous sci-fi/comic book roles (Stone for "Zombieland" and "The Amazing Spider-Man", Plaza for "Scott Pilgrim vs. The World" and Smulders for "The Avengers") and most importantly, all of them have backgrounds in comedy and are very funny.

[Iceskater101]

This could definitely be an interesting movie, I don't know who the girl in the middle is but I definitely agree with your other choices! Emma Stone is awesome.

[iBond]

Still waiting...Yeah it's not gonna happen.

Edited by iBond, 14 February 2013 - 04:40 AM.

[tdalton]

Still waiting...Yeah it's not gonna happen.

 

Yeah, I don't think it's happening at this point, either, which is a shame.  

 

I think I'd even settle for a remake at this point (why not, they've remade practically everything else).  Perhaps if they went that direction and it was a huge hit at the box office, it could persuade Bill Murray to get on board for GBIII.  Not likely, but any forward motion for the franchise would be a positive in terms of making GBIII happen.

[Iceskater101]

I know I think it's sad how this isn't going to happen, I think it would be cool if they could reboot the comics.

[iBond]

Yeah, I've been waiting for a sequel for over 20 years! I remember the buzz that took place as early as 1999 and there were sites dedicated to the return of the series; but at this rate, if they do end up making a film it's most likely going to be a reboot.

Edited by iBond, 16 February 2013 - 12:01 AM.

[Iceskater101]

Yeah agree, I think doing it off the comics would be a cooler idea though, just saying..

[tdalton]

I still think that they could get away with making a third film, even with minor participation from the original cast.  There are a lot of good actors and comedians out there who could step in and do the series a good deal of justice.  I watched an episode of CASTLE last night and there were a few moments in which Nathan Fillion had kind of a Bill Murray / Peter Venkman vibe to him.  It's something that I hadn't really noticed before in his performance, but in that particular episode there were a couple of hints of it here and there that would make me think that he could step into a similar role in GHOSTBUSTERS.  Plus, he'd bring a lot of credibility to the film from the sci-fi community, which would be a sizeable part of the target audience.  I could also see Paul Rudd filling that kind of role as well.

 

Aykroyd seems very keen to get the film made, so I could see a scenario in which some of the original cast return, even minus Bill Murray (which at this point seems to be the only way the film would get made), and not have the film feel like a money grab by the studio or the original creative team.  I think it would be important to come up with the right script that would make a transition to a younger team of ghostbusters seem like a logical and reasonable move rather than something that stinks of being done to get the franchise and merchandise dollars rolling in again.  If it were up to me, I'd start out the film by casting Nathan Fillion and Yvonne Strahovski as two of the four new ghostbusters, as both are very big draws with the target audience that the film would need to be aiming at in terms of bringing in new audience members.  Then, they could keep with tradition from the first time around and go for a SNL cast member or two or find a couple of comedic actors from elsewhere in the industry.

[thecasinoroyale]

I fear that there is no room in cinema for the Ghostbusters anymore, there has been to many big films since that just show what CGI and blockbuster status can do, and where the films have big cult status, I don't think it will be as well recieved by the masses as we would like.

 

I don't think it's going to get to see the light of day, unless it's like the previous 'Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles' efforts and done in CGI itself.

[00 Brosnan]

This movie is never going to happen. Bill Murray doesn't want to do it, this has been going on for way too long. They're better off just rebooting the film franchise anyway. The original actors are pretty up there in age and I bet a good portion of the movie going audience (and target audience for that matter) weren't even alive or were too young when the last one came out.

 

I was born in 1987 and I have more nostalgia for the old cartoon show and only the first movie (all the way from 1984) was decent in my opinion anyway.

[coco1997]

I fear that there is no room in cinema for the Ghostbusters anymore, there has been to many big films since that just show what CGI and blockbuster status can do, and where the films have big cult status, I don't think it will be as well recieved by the masses as we would like.

Couldn't possibly disagree with you more.

[007jamesbond]

Even if Murray do come back, I doubt Ghostbuster III will have good review.........it is likely that it will end up like Indian Jones 4 with poor review and aged Murray like Ford was in his fourth movie.......there is sure a lot of good 80s movies that should be left alone 

[tdalton]

Even if Murray do come back, I doubt Ghostbuster III will have good review.........it is likely that it will end up like Indian Jones 4 with poor review and aged Murray like Ford was in his fourth movie.......there is sure a lot of good 80s movies that should be left alone 

 

I just don't see any way that it could end up as bad as INDY 4.  It definitely won't suffer from having Murray looking far to old to be in the film, as Murray flat out refuses to even read the script, which means he won't be in the film in order for that to happen.

 

GHOSTBUSTERS III could be very good if they ever got around to actually making it.  There are a lot of very talented actors and actresses out there who could step right into the roles of new ghostbusters that could both provide a new and exciting dynamic for the team while also retaining some semblance of the qualities that made the original films excellent.  At this point, I think I'd honestly be more excited by a spinoff or semi-reboot of the series, which maybe saw one or two original cast members (say perhaps either Aykroyd and Ramis or Aykroyd and Hudson) overseeing a new group of paranormal investigators plucked from the casts of great cult TV shows like CHUCK or FIREFLY and maybe mixing in an SNL cast member to round things out.  Combine a cast like that with a smart and witty script (easier said than done, I know), and there could be some great potential there.

[00 Brosnan]

Even if Murray do come back, I doubt Ghostbuster III will have good review.........it is likely that it will end up like Indian Jones 4 with poor review and aged Murray like Ford was in his fourth movie.......there is sure a lot of good 80s movies that should be left alone 

Ford's age didn't really bother me much in INDY4. I think most people's problem was that the plot is just not any good, nor were the characters outside of Ford.

[Shaun Forever]

Perhaps some things should just be left alone..............

[tdalton]

I feel kind of bad posting this, and I didn't want to taint the Harold Ramis thread with this, but apparently The Hollywood Reporter has gotten an update on the script for Ghostbusters III.  The script is being tinkered with to remove a small cameo by Harold Ramis.  The article also states that his involvement in the sequel was said to be minimal.

 

Ghostbusters III script being reworked

 

So, now it looks as though we'll only see two of the original Ghostbusters return for any kind of screen time in the third film, if it ever does actually get made.  It's clear now that Bill Murray will have no part of it, leaving Dan Aykroyd and Ernie Hudson to cameo alongside the new Ghostbusters.  Honestly, even if he wanted to get on board with it now, I'd rather just see Ernie Hudson and Dan Aykroyd anyway, as Murray's infantile insistence on not doing the film over the years has cost us a chance to see the four of them together on the big screen together for a third and final time.