'The Office' writers to script Ghostbusters III. From Variety:
Columbia Pictures is getting serious about scaring up a new installment of its blockbuster "Ghostbusters" franchise.
The studio has set "The Office" co-exec producers Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky to write a script for a film designed to bring back together the original cast of Harold Ramis, Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd and Ernie Hudson.
Studio would not comment on the development and has been mum on recent rumors that there was interest in making another installment of the franchise.
The scribes just wrote "Year One," a comedy that was directed by Ramis. Ramis with Aykroyd wrote the first two installments of the films. Ivan Reitman directed both the 1984 original and the sequel that was released in 1989. The close proximity between the writers and original Ghostbuster Ramis is evidence that the ghost chasers have sparked to the idea of returning.
"Ghostbusters" was Columbia's highest grossing film ever, until it was beaten by "Men in Black" and then "Spider-Man." An attempt to make a third installment of the franchise was stymied in the dealmaking stage. Sources said so much gross was pledged to the participants that it was next to impossible for the studio to make any money on a third installment.
No deals will be made with the original cast until the script is ready, but the gross percentage will certainly be an issue. Sony has a standing policy not to allow more than 25% of first dollar gross out the door.
The scribes, who are Emmy- nominated for their work on "The Office," just set up another picture at Columbia, selling their spec script "Bad Teacher" to the studio for Jimmy Miller to produce.
Ramis has directed a bunch of episodes of The Office, so this isn't very surprising. It's kind of interesting.
the last news i read about any GB 3 was something about a new videogame that would take the place of GB 3 because they're weren't going to do one - i believe words of Aykroyd.
Harold Ramis talks 'Ghostbusters' revival
There are more details on the effort to scare up a new "Ghostbusters" film. Flixster has a post about an e-mail interview with Dr. Egon Spengler himself, Harold Ramis. Here's what the actor and filmmaker shared:
"Yes, Columbia is developing a script for 'GB3' with my 'Year One' writing partners, Gene Stupnitsky and Lee Eisenberg. Judd Apatow is co-producing 'Year One' and has made several other films for Sony, so of course the studio is hoping to tap into some of the same acting talent. Aykroyd, Ivan Reitman and I are consulting at this point, and according to Dan [Akroyd], Bill Murray is willing to be involved on some level. He did record his dialogue for the new Ghostbusters video game, as did Danny and I, and Ernie Hudson. The concept is that the old Ghostbusters would appear in the film in some mentor capacity. Not much else to say at this point. Everyone is confident a decent script can be written and I guess we'll take it from there."
Quote from: MacGuffin on September 09, 2008, 09:58:36 AM
The concept is that the old Ghostbusters would appear in the film in some mentor capacity.
Boo. :yabbse-angry: Hopes suddenly dashed.
I smell Shia. Or Jonah.
Bill Murray commented on GHOSTBUSTERS 3 tonight at Fantastic Fest!
Source: AICN
Ahoy, squirts! Quint here. Tonight's closing night film at Fantastic Fest was CITY OF EMBER with director Gil Kenan in attendance and a surprise appearance by Bill Murray. I dug the movie (more on that later), but the reason you're reading this is due to a question Kraken asked during the Q&A.
I'm sure at some point the video of this will come out, but the non-line for line version of the question was how would Murray feel about strapping on the proton pack and kicking some ghost ass again?
I was very curious to hear Murray's answer. He's not as available to the press or public as Dan Aykroyd or Harold Ramis and he also seemed to be the least enthusiastic about a Ghostbusters sequel...
But tonight he said that he knew "some writers from THE OFFICE" were taking a stab at the script right now (which we already knew) and that he thinks that's a good start. He paused for a few seconds then said that he thinks enough time has passed and that "the wounds from GHOSTBUSTERS 2 are healed" and that he would definitely be into doing another GHOSTBUSTERS movie, stating that the first 40 minutes of the original film is some of the best stuff he's been associated with and the whole shoot was an amazing amount of fun.
He also went on to say that his enthusiasm for Ghostbusters was heightened after recording the voice of Peter Venkman for the video game over the summer. In fact, he said he found himself walking down the street singing the Ghostbusters theme song and then thought people walking around him were going to start yelling at him to "get over yourself, Bill," so he stopped... But the enthusiasm was there.
How cool is that?!?!?
And I got to shake his hand (down in a cave an hour and a half outside of Austin, no less) and have about 30 seconds of smalltalk with the man, where I blubbered something about STRIPES, CADDYSHACK and GHOSTBUSTERS being seminal films growing up and quickly ran back into the huge crowd trying to get at him. I found him to be a lot nicer and down to earth than I expected. It was a great day to be a geek...
Just thought I'd share the words from the man himself on GHOSTBUSTERS 3. If I was concerned about yet another '80s cornerstone being revisited (and possibly ruined) I'm totally over that now. If Murray is excited, then goddamn... who couldn't be excited?
Ghostbusters 3 Starts Filming in the Fall?
Source: ComingSoon
Dan Aykroyd participated in a chat with The Boston Globe in celebration of a new House of Blues opening and was asked by someone about the status of Ghostbusters 3. Here's the opening bit from the chat:
[Comment From Tom] Dan, I'm extremely excited for the HOB to be back in its birth-city!! I will be attending many shows. On a side note, and I'm sure you get these questions a lot, so I apologize in advance...Ghostbusters 3? I've heard that the writers of the Office are currently penning a script? How is this coming along, and should we look forward to this movie seeing the light of day? Thanks Dan!
Dan Aykroyd: Script is commenced early summer. Hope to be in production by late fall 2009.
It was announced last September that "The Office" co-executive producers Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky were going to write the script for the third film designed to bring back together the original cast of Harold Ramis, Bill Murray, Aykroyd and Ernie Hudson. It was reported then that the concept is that the old Ghostbusters would appear in the film in some mentor capacity.
Apatow's Ghostbusters?
Studio boss weighs in on sequel rumors.
Judging by the online rumor mill, you would think that 40 Year-Old Virgin and Funny People director Judd Apatow was going to be involved with the newly reinvigorated Ghostbusters 3 and that some members of his company of actors, such as Seth Rogen, would appear in the sequel as a younger group of GBs. But is it true?
"It's not true," Doug Belgrad, president of Columbia Pictures, advised The Los Angeles Times. "We have some great new writers working on a new script, but Judd isn't involved. Judging from the frenzy on the Internet, there still seems to be plenty of interest in the idea of doing another film, so we're certainly taking that as a good sign."
Columbia Pictures has tapped the Emmy-nominated writing team of Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky (co-executive producers of The Office) to pen the screenplay. They also scripted the upcoming prehistoric comedy Year One for Columbia and Harold Ramis, who played Dr. Egon Spengler in the previous two Ghostbusters films.
Original GBs Ramis, Dan Aykroyd, Bill Murray, and Ernie Hudson are not signed for the sequel but are reportedly willing to reprise their roles if the script is right. Aykroyd recently said production on GB3 could begin as soon as this fall if everything comes together.
I am really looking forward to this, but I fear it will be terrible.
I watched both of them again a few years back when they were re-released on DVD. The first was just as pleasant and sly as it was when I was younger. The second film... not so much. So it's not like a mediocre third entry could tarnish the series anymore than the second already did.
So I don't fear it will be terrible... won't be much of a loss... but I do hope it will be great. The kind of fun, inventive humor and special effects spectacles that most summer films promise but rarely deliver.
Original 'Ghostbusters' Cast Onboard For Reboot, Harold Ramis Says
'We're going to be the sage mentors,' says Ramis, who starred in and co-wrote the '80s comedy.
Source: MTV
Two movie trends have converged and brought us a project that had been rumored for years that almost no one thought would actually happen.
Right now, remaking '80s comedies is hot ("Arthur" and "Beverly Hills Cop") and anything supernatural is really hot ("Twilight" and, uh, "Twilight"). To capitalize on these trends — or maybe just because it's not fair to deny longtime fans any longer — Columbia Pictures announced that a third "Ghostbusters" movie is in the works, two decades after the last one came out.
Earlier this week, Harold Ramis stopped by MTV News to chat about his new Jack Black comedy "The Year One" (in theaters June 19). But we also asked Ramis — who co-wrote the first two "Ghostbusters" movies and, of course, starred in them as uptight-but-lovable Dr. Egon Spengler — to dish details on the upcoming reboot.
Ramis promised that all the old core players will take part in the updated version, including Bill Murray (Dr. Peter Venkman) and Dan Aykroyd (Dr. Raymond Stantz), who co-wrote the original films. "We're all going to be in it in different kinds of roles," Ramis said. "We're going to be the sage mentors. There are going to be young Ghostbusters."
As of now, no decisions have been made about just who those new Ghostbusters will be. But with Judd Apatow signed on as a producer, the Internet has been buzzing with gossip that comedians from his cinematic universe, such as Paul Rudd and Seth Rogen, will join in.
At the moment, Ramis is waiting on a first draft of the script, which is being penned by Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky, two writer/producers on "The Office," who also wrote "Year One." "Gene and Lee, both of whom I mentored, are now writing the new 'Ghostbusters,' " Ramis said. "I'm consulting with them, as is Dan Aykroyd and [original director] Ivan Reitman.
"Bill Murray is just waiting for the truckload of money to arrive to get him out of his office," Ramis joked.
After taking a jab at his old friend, Ramis assured us that Murray is definitely "in," even though the two haven't communicated directly about the project. "I haven't talked to him about it," Ramis said. "I want to talk to him about it eventually. I think we just need a script, because he's the thorniest of the group."
Another open question is who will take over directing duties, since neither Ramis nor Reitman is planning on helming the picture. "I'm sure we're all hoping someone else will do it," the 64-year-old Ramis said. "It's a lot of work!"
While we await casting and directing news, Ramis was able to shoot down gossip about certain stars once thought to be attached to a third "Ghostbusters." "Here's how old the rumors are," Ramis said. "Chris Farley was one of the rumors. It was going to be Chris Farley, Ben Stiller and Chris Rock."
Whichever actors end up portraying the fresh crew of wisecracking ghost fighters will be in for a challenge. "Someone asked Seth [Rogen], and he said, 'What?' " Ramis recalled. "He said, 'That'd have to be one great f---ing script for anyone to touch that.' He's right about that."
Oh how I love MTV's awful reporting. First of all, are those two trends even really trends at all? No. And the 'original' actors would also include Ernie Hudson and Annie Potts. But really, how could they ignore Ernie Hudson?
Ghostbusters 3 Arriving in 2011
Source: ShockTillYouDrop.com
More talk from the Ghostbusters 3 camp to put a production timeline in perspective.
Within the last year, there's been much speculation, fake fan videos that have been erroneously identified as pre-production FX and recent talk from Sigourney Weaver to keep us guessing as to where the story will take the characters next.
Harold Ramis recently spoke to Heeb and had this to say about the project:
Something's going to happen. Dan [Aykroyd] did write a spec GB3 screenplay a few years ago, but no one was motivated to pursue it. Now, 25 years after the original, there seems to be some willingness to proceed and apparently a substantial public appetite for a sequel. We'll introduce some new young Ghostbusters, and all the old guys will be in it, too. Think Christopher Lloyd in Back to the Future...GB3 is progressing with plans to shoot next summer and release in 2011.
This summer might be an exciting time to live in New York City, home of the Ghostbusters, especially if the production decides to set up shop there. Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky are penning the third film.
I will bet all my marbles that Seth Rogen is in this.
My enthusiasm for this hangs on Bill Murray's participation.
EXCLUSIVE: 'Ghostbusters 3' Script Is In, Ivan Reitman Confirms He WILL Direct
Source: MTV
A few weeks ago, "Ghostbusters" writer and star Harold Ramis revealed that the long-awaited third movie in the series is planned for a 2011 release. This news broke only a short time after "Avatar" star Sigourney Weaver speculated that Bill Murray's character Pete Venkman might appear in the movie as a slimer ghost, and that Oscar, her character's son from the second movie, would be a full-fledged Ghostbuster.
Ivan Reitman, director and producer of the first two movies, stopped to chat with MTV's Josh Horowitz last night on the National Board of Review red carpet in New York City. He shied away from addressing Weaver's spoiler-y speculation, but he did have some things to say about the general state of development for "Ghostbusters III."
Reitman said that the script from "Year One" writers Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky is in and that a second draft is currently in the works. He also confirmed that he will indeed be returning to direct the coming sequel, as had been previously speculated.
"They have delivered a draft," Reitman said of the script's progress. "We are working our way through another draft... good work is being done and all of us have our fingers crossed."
What he wouldn't do was address exactly what that "good work" entailed. Asked about Weaver's recent comments, Reitman laughed and kept things light.
"I'm not going to comment on what's in the script and on what Sigourney may or may not have said," he told us. "She's been so busy on 'Avatar,' I've not been able to find her. There's some very cool things in the new draft, let's just put it that way."
Reitman was all business again when the talk turned back to the schedule. "I hope to start shooting in this next year," he said, giving weight to Ramis' recent comments about a planned 2011 release.
Then the bomb dropped. Asked if he would be returning to direct "Ghostbusters III," Reitman answered with a simple and unequivocal "Yes." It's good to see the old gang all getting back together, isn't it?
Vulture Exclusive: Columbia Wants a Younger Director for Ghostbusters III, But Ivan Reitman's Contract Says Otherwise
Source: NYMag
Columbia's plan to reboot Ghostbusters is being haunted by a Mike Ovitz–orchestrated deal made in the early eighties on behalf of the series' original director-producer, Ivan Reitman. The studio's strategy is to revitalize the franchise for next year by having the original 'busters train a dramatically younger crew in Ghostbusters III, while a correspondingly younger director handles things behind the camera. However, Reitman's old contract — made at the height of his and Ovitz's powers — still gives him exceptional creative control over the series, including director approval. "Those deals were made in the eighties," explains one insider. "So his rights in this circumstance have a great deal of teeth." Therefore, while it's true that Reitman can't force Columbia to make Ghostbusters III with him, he can make it nearly impossible for the studio to make the film without him.
In fact, a source tells us that Reitman and all three original principals (Dan Aykroyd, Bill Murray, and Harold Ramis ... sorry, Ernie Hudson!) have a deal that says that if any of the four of them don't like any element of a new Ghostbusters, they can singlehandedly veto and kill the project; it has to be unanimously approved before going forward. (Considering that both Aykroyd and Ramis have been consulting on the story, Murray is likely the only unknown quantity on the actors' side.) However, the key difference is that Columbia would love for these actors to be onboard to pass the torch and cross the streams. Not so with Reitman.
Reitman was just 42 years old when he directed the first Ghostbusters sequel in 1989, and at the time had the most lucrative track record in comedy filmmaking: Twins and Ghostbusters II grossed some $300 million that same year. But now, at 63, Reitman (whose last movie was the bomb My Super Ex-Girlfriend) is precisely what the studio isn't looking for: While the second draft of the script for Ghostbusters III — penned by The Office writers Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky — won't be handed in until May, insiders say that by introducing a group of twentysomething 'busters, Columbia's brass hopes to do with the franchise what it's doing with Spider-Man by hiring on (500) Days of Summer director Marc Webb.
But the studio can't fully realize that plan unless Reitman bails. Sony hoped the problem would be solved for them if Reitman were too busy on another project, which they thought just happened: Vulture has learned that Paramount green-lighted a new comedy to be directed by Reitman called Friends With Benefits (originally titled Fuckbuddies). Co-financed by the director's Montecito Picture Company, FWB will star Ashton Kutcher and Natalie Portman in what's described as "an inverse Harry Met Sally," a sex comedy wherein two friends in a purely physical relationship begin to develop true romantic feelings for one another. Pressed for details, a source close to the project laughed and said, "It's pretty much what you'd expect from a spec script that was originally entitled Fuckbuddies."
(In its defense, Fuckbuddies is the offspring of Liz Meriwether, youngest member of the "Fempire" — the chick screenwriting cabal that also includes Dana Fox (What Happens in Vegas), Diablo Cody (Juno), and Lorene Scafaria (Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist). The script also made 2008's Hollywood Black List of great-but-unproduced screenplays.)
However, Sony's hopes that FWB would lead to Reitman making a graceful exit from Ghostbusters III will likely be dashed. Insiders familiar with Reitman's plans say he thinks the two comedies are not mutually exclusive, and still plans to direct both, raising serious questions about whether Sony will want to proceed with Ghostbusters III at all. However, losing Ghostbusters would make a tough 2011 even tougher, as the studio has no other franchise blockbuster scheduled.
Either way, the studio might want to revisit the words of Reitman himself from a 1989 Los Angeles Times interview, in which he downplayed the merits of ever doing another Ghostbusters again: "Ghostbusters II wasn't as much fun to make as the first one," Reitman explained. "In comedy, the element of surprise is everything. And I think once that element of surprise is gone, once people know there's going to be ghosts, there's going to be big ghosts, and they're expecting something big at the end, a lot of the tools that are at your disposal are gone."
'Ghostbusters 3': A sequel that will happen over Bill Murray's dead body?
Source: Los Angeles Times
You could argue that Hollywood's sequel mania really began in earnest in 1989, when the box-office grosses started piling up for both "Ghostbusters 2" and "Lethal Weapon 2," proving that there was no good reason -- from the business end of the equation -- why you had to come up with an original idea for a blockbuster movie when you could just milk something that had already worked. "Lethal Weapon" went on to a long and happy sequel life.
But Sony has never been able to mount another installment in the "Ghostbusters" franchise -- though you can't say it hasn't been for lack of trying. It feels as if every time I turn around, I read a story about how sequel efforts are moving ahead with another round of screenwriters at work, trying to figure out how to spin something off from the landmark 1984 comedy that ushered in an entire era of "Men in Black"-style comic special effects films.
If there's always one fly in the ointment, it's Bill Murray. Even though pretty much everyone else involved with the project seems to have a vested interest in making a "Ghostbusters 3," Murray, who is nothing if not an iconoclastic free spirit, keeps saying -- no way, Jose.
That doesn't mean that Sony couldn't just write him out of the movie, although some recent stories have argued that Murray, along with his fellow original stars, Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis, have veto power over any new project moving ahead.
But everyone seems to want his blessing. But bless his heart, Murray seems to feel the same way about sequels that I do: that with rare exception (and yes, Geoff Boucher, I'm willing to admit that "The Dark Knight" is a worthy exception), studio sequels are almost always more dutiful than inspired. In New York, promoting his new film, "Get Low," Murray laid it on the line. Asked if "Ghostbusters 3" was ever going to happen, he replied:
"No, it's ridiculous. That's an absolutely -- that's just a horrible rumor. It's like illegitimate children in Antarctica, it's ridiculous.... Mind you, we only made two, and the first one was still the better one, so another one wouldn't seem to be any better. The studio wants to make it because they can re-create the franchise and put new Ghostbusters in it. That's what it's about."
If you're laying odds, I'd say the odds of Murray giving his blessing to a new "Ghostbusters" sequel are about as good as the odds of Sandra Bullock getting back together with Jesse James.
Dan Aykroyd is writing Ghostbusters 3 (and swears it'll be good)
Source: SfyFy
Despite some very public misgivings from Bill Murray on the prospects of a getting the Ghostbusters back together, Dan Aykroyd is busily rewriting the script and promises not only that the sequel will be good, but that it'll pass the torch to a new generation.
Back in August, the notoriously press-shy Murray gave a rare interview to GQ, in which he said that he didn't have high hopes for the writers (Gene Stupnitsky and Lee Eisenberg, who wrote the prehistoric flopedy Year One) hired to script Ghostbusters 3: "Well, I never went to see Year One, but people who did, including other Ghostbusters, said it was one of the worst things they had ever seen in their lives. So that dream just vaporized. That was gone."
Aykroyd remains far more optimistic than his counterpart. "I think he was concerned that the writing on Ghostbusters 3 by these guys would not be up to standard, but I can tell you firsthand, I'm working on the script now and those two—Stupnitsky and Eisenberg, [writer-producers on The Office]—wrote Bill the comic role of a lifetime, and the new Ghostbusters and the old are all well represented in it ... we have a strong first draft that Harold [Ramis] and I will take back, and I'm very excited about working on it."
And the one-time Blues Brother isn't in denial about the fact that he and his fellow supernatural exterminators are no longer the spry, middle-aged men they were when they shot the first Ghostbusters back in the early '80s.
"Now [in Ghostbusters 3] my character's eyesight is shot, I got a bad knee, a bad hip—I can't drive that Caddy anymore or lift that Proton Accelerator anymore, it's too heavy. We need young legs, new minds—new Ghostbusters; so I'm in essence passing the torch to the new regime, and you know what? That's totally okay with me."
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2FOJxUh.jpg&hash=983591243baddee86adfd6bed2d2c1cc26b84e4b)
what is that photo from?
Quote from: Derek on October 17, 2010, 09:28:30 PM
what is that photo from?
he was at the Scream awards (http://www.cinemablend.com/new/See-Bill-Murray-Back-In-His-Ghostbusters-Uniform-At-The-Scream-Awards-21256.html) (whatever that means) collecting the award for best horror film for zombieland. felt like dressing up.
so is it meant to be semi-cruel, spike tv stunt a la bttf/fox, or an actual sign he may be giving his consent?
he's 60 i think. they didn't run too much as ghostbusters. i don't know why the original guys won't do it. make fun of the age thing and (don't) run with it.
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=73083
Exclusive: Ivan Reitman on Ghostbusters 3
Source: Jenna Busch January 7, 2011
"When do we get to see 'Ghostbusters 3'?" You know it's the first thing you'd ask director Ivan Reitman. ComingSoon.net got a chance to sit down with the man who brought us Slimer to chat about his new film No Strings Attached. Sure, we talked about the film, (check back for our interview soon) but there was no way we were leaving the room without getting the scoop on whether we'd see the proton packs again. There has been plenty of news, from who's read the script and who hated it to whether Venkman's son would be taking over the business. Here's what Reitman has to say.
ComingSoon.net: So, you know we have to ask you what's going on with "Ghostbusters 3," right?
Ivan Reitman: [laughs] We have a really good script, but Bill (Murray) has to read it. He hasn't read it. There has been all kinds of chatter online about him reading it and not liking it. He has not read a thing. He's never read anything. And I just sent it to him. So we'll see. God knows how long that will take. But we'll see.
CS: There have been a ton of stories online. Lots of back and forth...
Reitman: There is almost nothing that is accurate online about that film. Will you write that for me?
CS: I will!
Reitman: There is nothing... I mean, all these stories... there has been a ton of stuff about casting, about who's in... none of it is true.
CS: The whole Sigourney Weaver thing about her son taking over and Bill Murray coming back as a ghost...
Reitman: Oh, no, yeah... I mean, Sigourney Weaver has a role in this movie. All the original characters have parts. As well as a whole bunch of new characters... it's got a really good story, this one. Maybe the best of the whole series. I hope we get to do it.
Read more: Exclusive: Ivan Reitman on Ghostbusters 3 - ComingSoon.net http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=73083#ixzz1AlSSlLCs
'Ghostbusters 3': Dan Aykroyd Spills Details on Plot
"We will be doing the movie and hopefully with" Bill Murray, the actor says.
Source: THR
It looks like the Ghostbusters will be back in action.
After months of speculation, Dan Aykroyd, one of the original stars, hinted Thursday on The Dennis Miller Show that the film could start shooting in the spring.
He added that Bill Murray has not yet committed to the project, but he and the creatives behind the film are hoping Murray signs on to reprise his role from the first two films.
"Yes, we will be doing the movie and hopefully with Mr. Murray," he said, as reported by ComingSoon.net. "That is our hope. We have an excellent script."
In March, Ivan Reitman expressed that same sentiment to The Hollywood Reporter, saying: "There's a very good script that the other cast members have read and liked. We're just waiting for Bill Murray to read it."
But on Thursday, Aykroyd argued that the movie could go forward without Murray should he decide not to return.
"What we have to remember is that Ghostbusters is bigger than any one component, although Billy was absolutely the lead and contributive to it in a massive way, as was the director and Harold [Ramis], myself and Sigourney [Weaver]," he said. "The concept is much larger than any individual role and the promise of Ghostbusters 3 is that we get to hand the equipment and the franchise down to new blood."
The story line, according to Aykroyd, will center around the original Ghostbusters' inability to effectively bust ghosts anymore, so they set out to find new recruits.
"My character, Ray, is now blind in one eye and can't drive the Cadillac," he says, "He's got a bad knee and can't carry the packs. ... Egon [Ramis' character] is too large to get into the harness. We need young blood and that's the promise. We're gonna hand it to a new generation."
It's unclear whether the fourth Ghostbuster, Ernie Hudson, would be part of the cast. In April, the actor said he had not been approached by anyone in the project.
"I haven't seen anybody with any money, but I hear it's happening, and I've been reading all the press stuff, and the fans have been telling me that it's on," he told TMZ.
Meanwhile, Aykroyd did say Thursday that there has been no casting decisions made, but one of his recommendations would be Criminal Minds actor Matthew Gray Gubler.
"There's going to be a casting," he added.":We're going to see everyone that wants to do it. We're going to need ... three guys and a young woman."
lol. Bill Murray's been trolling Aykroyd for years. Gets funnier every decade.
'Ghostbusters 3': Bill Murray Out, Dan Aykroyd Says Film's Future Uncertain
With one co-star refusing to participate, long-awaited sequel in question.
Source: THR
Ghostbusters 3 will remain just an elusive specter, for now.
After a number of false starts, re-assurances and rumors, Ghostbusters creator, co-writer and co-star Dan Aykroyd has told London's Telegraph newspaper that a long-awaited third film in the famed sci-fi comedy franchise is on the backburner.
"At this point it's in suspended animation. The studio, the director Ivan Reitman and Harold Ramis feel there must be a way to do it, but Bill Murray will not do the movie. He doesn't want to be involved," Aykroyd explained. "He's got six kids, houses all over America. He golfs in these tournaments where they pay him to turn up and have a laugh. He's into this life and living it. I know we'd have a lot of fun [but] I can't be mad at him. He's a friend first, a colleague second. We have a deep personal relationship that transcends business and he doesn't want to know."
Earlier in the month, Akroyd hinted in an interview with Empire Magazine that Murray, who played Dr. Peter Venkman in the first two films, was not eager to be involved, but had not shred the script, as had been rumored on the web.
"Bill Murray is not capable of such behavior. This is simply something that would not be in his nature." he said. "Bill has too much positive estimation of my writing skills to shred the work."
In late 2010, Aykroyd said that the script offered Murray "a comic role of a lifetime."
Speaking of the script, Aykroyd told the Telegraph that anything they film would have to be respectful of the franchise's past.
"We're not going to do a movie that exploits the franchise," he said. "The script has to be perfect. I'm the cheerleader, but I'm only one voice in the matter."
In August, Aykroyd told The Hollywood Reporter that the film was written, and it could work without Murray.
"What we have to remember is that Ghostbusters is bigger than any one component, although Billy was absolutely the lead and contributive to it in a massive way, as was the director and Harold [Ramis], myself and Sigourney [Weaver]," he said. "The concept is much larger than any individual role and the promise of Ghostbusters 3 is that we get to hand the equipment and the franchise down to new blood."
The new franchise members, he said, would require the casting of three young men and one woman.
Paul Feig confirms he's on board for 'Ghostbusters' with 'hilarious women'
by Esther Zuckerman | EW
Paul Feig is the man to call. Feig confirmed on Twitter that he is indeed working on a new Ghostbusters movie starring women, and is bringing his The Heat collaborator Katie Dippold along with him.
It's official. I'm making a new Ghostbusters & writing it with @katiedippold & yes, it will star hilarious women. That's who I'm gonna call.
— Paul Feig (@paulfeig) October 8, 2014
The Hollywood Reporter reported that Dippold was going to co-write the project with Feig earlier today. In August various outlets reported that Feig was in talks to direct the movie. Variety reported then that his film would not be a sequel, but rather a reboot with female Ghostbusters.
Now it's time to let casting speculation begin. The combination of Feig and Dippold raises hopes that Melissa McCarthy will be involved. After all, Feig re-teamed with McCarthy for The Heat after she shined in Bridesmaids, which he also directed. McCarthy is also on the list of women Bill Murray floated when asked about the reboot at the Toronto International Film Festival. The Toronto Star reported that Murray's ideal Ghostbusters would be McCarthy, Kristen Wiig, Linda Cardellini, and Emma Stone.
Feig's announcement give hope for the future of the franchise, which has long been in question. After Harold Ramis died in February, Ivan Reitman backed out of directing the third Ghostbusters film.
so, bloodydisgusting has a detailed summary/breakdown of what they believe is the original script. (http://bloody-disgusting.com/news/3321478/weve-read-the-ghostbusters-3-script/)
i thought Spy was going to prepare me for Ghostbusters, i now wonder if i'll like Spy more than Ghostbusters. but also trailers are dangerous and what is this, i watch trailers now? it must be because i'm excited about Ghostbusters
I don't know about this one.
I have never found Leslie Jones funny. I only know her from SNL.
If you find her funny, tell me which skits.
Wiig and McKinnon are OK at times.
Is St Vincent the only McCarthy movie I've seen?
Speaking of St Vincent...Bill 2 time Garfield-ing Murray, are you happy?
What's so bad about GB 2?
Venkman hanging out with the baby and creepin on Weaver is worth the admission alone.
I don't know either.
Leslie Jones is very bombastic, but I can't say I find her funny.
She certainly has a unique look, though.
Wiig and McKinnon made the trailer.
I don't think I need to see McCarthy in any more parts for awhile.
Two Exorcist references in one trailer? Are horror comedies ever going to be finished with that?
The ghouly neon green trail following everything seems to soften up the look of the Ghosts and make them more Disneyfied.
What worked about The Marshmallow and Slimer in 1&2 is they're kinda cute but downright Terrifying.
Fwiw, here's an Australian trailer,
now with more Chris Hemsworth! It's slightly different, and somehow feels way less terrible.
Ooh. That does look about three times better.
Maybe a more reliable indicator is Spy, which by most accounts was a very good action comedy.
The backlash against the feminism should be entertaining to watch. Actually no, no it won't.
It looks fine, I think. It's a Paul Feig comedy, and it looks like it slots right in with all of the other Paul Feig comedies that he's made.
Unfortunately, between the chorus of unrestrained misogynists and the people who fetishize the original Ghostbusters far beyond its actual worth, any rational, non-hysterical analysis or expectation is getting completely drowned out. The most entertaining thing will be watching the steam shoot out of these dudes' ears when the movie turns out to be a massive financial success.
it's not accurate to say "all of the other Paul Feig comedies that he's made" as if his movies have equal value. Spy is better than The Heat.
it's accurate to say Ghostbusters with women is bothering men and that's absolutely ridiculous.
This could be a Trump-like litmus test. Who in your life has irrational sociopolitical anxieties?
Quote from: jenkins on March 09, 2016, 02:10:10 PM
it's not accurate to say "all of the other Paul Feig comedies that he's made" as if his movies have equal value. Spy is better than The Heat.
That's true, but it's a difference of degree, not of kind. My point is that you generally know what to expect of a Paul Feig-directed movie, and this one doesn't appear to break that mold. It will be within the bounds of quality one can expect from familiarity with its brethren.
i adore how a tidy close has been a recent wave within Xixax. things have recently been being well said. i'd say (i'm not in the wave) the mold of Feig exists within the overall mold of Hollywood narrative culture, and that within this setup the audience knows when things get intense the filmmaker will stay with you to the end. the fear of "betraying" the audience maintains an overall comfort of safety within the Hollywood filmmaking tradition, and i agree with and want to see the ghosts who don't know nothing about no narrative tradition. i mean, that sounds realistic to me.
in terms of feminism, my current perspective mostly came to me from Gus Van Sant's Milk:
QuoteDan White: You have an issue.
Harvey Milk: It's more than an issue. This is our life we're fighting for.
feminism, it's not my issue, so how can i be against it? what is it that i want, for women not to have what i have? "feminism is for everybody" is the most sane and simple way i can think to describe this, and during my conversations i hope i remember this.
but, you know, culturally speaking there's voice to support Feig as a mold breaker indeed. it's a bit silly to a sensible person, i think, to say women as Ghostbusters is a topic that should require some debate, but it's happening, and Feig dgaf. so, props. and i think many of us will go see this movie anyway.
I have to jump in and take umbridge with the "all other Paul Feig comedies" thing because
Freaks & Geeks >>> Bridesmaids >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Heat, Spy.
If you meant "recent Paul Feig" then yeah, it' looks in line with the last couple movies.
this is the formula i like:
seeing this Ghostbusters > not seeing this Ghostbusters
but i think it's already provided some things to talk about. thanks for the new Australian trailer Tictacbk
Decidedly not a good sign:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AQ44nPrRTM
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman on June 23, 2016, 12:13:43 PM
Decidedly not a good sign:
zero indication of the quality of the movie.
Firstly, it's obviously a forced studio decision. They HAD to put a cover of that song on the soundtrack. Who knows if it will even be on the movie outside of the closing credits.
Secondly, everyone LOVES to pretend that the original ghostbusters theme was a good song. It wasn't. It's a dumb, shitty song that people love for nostalgia reasons. The only reason it's catchy is because it stole a catchy hook from a slightly better song.
Quote from: RegularKarate on July 01, 2016, 11:15:55 AMzero indication of the quality of the movie.
Firstly, it's obviously a forced studio decision.
Fair enough, but it's just as likely that whoever at the studio exerted their exceptionally bad taste with this abomination of a song exerted said influence elsewhere in the movie.
And who let women in this thing, amirite?
(I actually don't care about this movie either way, though.)
Yeah, I honestly don't care as much about the movie. I just find myself snap defending it because it drives me crazy how mad at this movie people get. I know you're all cool, but some people... fuck.