Ghostbusters 3 is a go! (according to the writers, director and producer)

[GeneralFROSTY]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

I personally love Crystal Skull. I haven't heard a real valid argument about why it is so "bad" other than swinging with monkeys and the refridgerator.
But for Ghostbusters, the key charm to that movie was the whole "going into business" story. It will no doubt be difficult to capture that kind of charm with another story - not to say it is impossible, but I think if they deviate too much from what has come before, you are going to **** alot of people off.

 

[captainquinn]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

It would take a lot of thought but it can be done. Look how well the reboot of Thundercats has gone (so far) . Many of the elements are familiar but the story is not the same. Let's hope it goes that well with GB3.

 

[ghostryder]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

Rumor: Bill Murray Out and John Hodgman NOT In for 'Ghostbusters 3' | FirstShowing.net

 

[Weequay]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

What I dislike about murray is the constant game playing.

Just for once I would love to hear a serious conversation from him about this.

In fact I would love for anyone involved to actually tell us something truthful. We've heard theyve got a script, they havent got a script, murrays in, murrays out, its a go, its not....

It bull****.

I for one hope they leave GB well well alone. If murray comes back he will play it in the same 'cant be arsed' manner he does most things. As if to say you're lucky im here. I dont buy that Murray is a genius. GB 1 was a indeed pure genius, and he was apart of that, but hes not THE genius behind it all.

He often rags on GB2, yet he was more than happy to sit around the table and discuss money instead of script...

Weequay

 

[rodneyfaile]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

Have we ever considered that all this Bill Murray hesitation is just to stir up talk about Ghostbusters? He probably intends to be in the movie all along, but is just getting people interested and some free publicity.

 

[David]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

Well I know if it's made I'll be watching it if it's not...... well my life will still go on...

 

[Indys brother]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

From Hodgeman's twitter 18 hours ago:

ANSWER THREE: I AM NOT APPEARING IN GHOSTBUSTERS 3. Nor is @scharpling. That was a radio #fakecastingnews joke.

Which is a shame, really. I love the angle, and it works with or without Murray's participation.

 

[GeneralFROSTY]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

What I dislike about murray is the constant game playing.

Just for once I would love to hear a serious conversation from him about this.

In fact I would love for anyone involved to actually tell us something truthful. We've heard theyve got a script, they havent got a script, murrays in, murrays out, its a go, its not....

It bull****.

I for one hope they leave GB well well alone. If murray comes back he will play it in the same 'cant be arsed' manner he does most things. As if to say you're lucky im here. I dont buy that Murray is a genius. GB 1 was a indeed pure genius, and he was apart of that, but hes not THE genius behind it all.

He often rags on GB2, yet he was more than happy to sit around the table and discuss money instead of script...

Weequay

Agreen 100%
Murray needs to stop playing games and either commit or release an honest statement about why he won't.
If the man wants to spend the rest of his life playing golf, let him - there is no poblem with that.
I just hate the fact that his hesitation has held back this franchise moving forward for way too long.

 

[Solo4114]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

Well I know if it's made I'll be watching it if it's not...... well my life will still go on...

Yes. And Hollywood counts on this. It is your response "If it's made I'll be watching it" that encourages them to slap the title "Ghostbusters" on a film and kick it out the door, regardless of whether it's a turd.

 

[PhantomRonin]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

I'd like to see a sequel to the video game, a proper sequel not "Sanctum of Slime"

 

[rodneyfaile]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

Ive got some pieces for two Ghostbuster uniforms. (patches, belt, elbow pads, boots)

I just need to order some flight suits and get back to work putting them together in time for the movie. Not sure I have time to get it done for the original back in theaters in October.

 

[David]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

Yes. And Hollywood counts on this. It is your response "If it's made I'll be watching it" that encourages them to slap the title "Ghostbusters" on a film and kick it out the door, regardless of whether it's a turd.

But won't everyone, it's not just me. I know for a fact that if Lucas made another SW most on here, no matter what they say, would still go and watch it!!

"if you build it they will come"
"if you make it they will watch"

 

[rodneyfaile]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

The other side to that is that some will HATE a movie before it is even started filming.

Haters gonna hate.

 

[David]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

The other side to that is that some will HATE a movie before it is even started filming.

Haters gonna hate.

Agree with you there..

 

[ghostryder]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

Why Bill Murray shredded the Ghostbusters 3 script

 

[dbalschi]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

The National Enquirer reports movie news now?

 

[CB2001]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

The National Enquirer reports movie news now?

You mean "The National Enquirer reports news now?"

 

[Jeyl]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

"But let's be real, no Peter Venkman, no Ghostbusters...even if just for a cameo."

I hate statements like that.

 

[Satxer]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

Can we rename the thread? It is months old, and we know it is NOT a go yet...

 

[Solo4114]

Re: Ghostbusters 3 is a go!

"But let's be real, no Peter Venkman, no Ghostbusters...even if just for a cameo."

I hate statements like that.

Except, it's true.


See, here's the thing. The Ghostbusters "brand" is, for many many people, intrinsically tied to "Peter Venkman." You strip him out of it and, yeah, it's still Ghostbusters, but it's not "Guaranteed, asses in the seats opening weekend Ghostbusters." And Hollywood, before they greenlight this, needs to believe they can guarantee asses in the seats. Otherwise, why spend the money? Why not simply make "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare: The Movie" or "Legend of Zelda: The Movie" or "Silverhawks" or "Thundercats" or pick your branded property.

I mean, yes, the film and the franchise are about more than JUST Venkman, and some spinoff thing could be fun without him...maybe...but think of the backlash you'd get without him, the revulsion from critics, the internet flame wars, etc.? I think that, while Hollywood is willing to risk it on certain properties (IE: JJ Trek), with others, they recognize that the strength of the brand isn't MERELY the name, but rather the whole package. And while you could make money, you can't make the kind of money you WANT to make without all the pieces being there.



And let's also not forget that several Harold Ramis and Dan Akroyd projects in recent years have been....not so well received. Evolution, Year One, Blues Brothers 2000, etc. I think Hollywood recognizes that it needs Murray's BS detector to ensure that the project is worthwhile.