I know, I know – we’re getting just as tired of all of this back and forth surrounding Ghostbusters 3 as you are. But when you look at it, it’s not so much “back and forth” as it is “Dan Akroyd shooting his mouth off,” so it should come as no surprise that the most recent update from the former Blues Brother is that “Bill Murray will not do the movie.” Seems pretty definitive, and a good indicator that the film should just be abandoned. Wait, what’s that? Akroyd still wants to make it? Give me a break.

Akroyd told The Telegraph (via Vulture):

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. 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.

He claims they’re “not going to do a movie that exploits the franchise,” but recasting Murray’s iconic Peter Venkman (or, frankly, doing the project without Murray’s involvement at all) would be a flying in the face of that very claim. I’m really hoping now that he has a definite “no” from Murray, Akroyd will give it up entirely. Thoughts?

Read similar posts to Bill Murray says he won’t do Ghostbusters 3 on Filmonic

Ghostbusters 3 has been one of those projects that just won’t die. Dan Aykroyd took a crack at the script back in the 90s, then “The Office” scribes Gene Stupnitsky and Lee Eisenberg had a go at it, setting up the story to involve passing the ghostbusting torch to a new generation. Bill Murray has been the voice of reason in this whole thing; he was rumored to have sent a shredded version of the most recent script back to Aykroyd with a note that said, “No one wants to pay money to see fat, old men chasing ghosts.” Sony once said they won’t make the movie without Murray’s involvement, but now Aykroyd is singing a different tune: he says they just might recast Dr. Venkman altogether.

Empire spoke with Aykroyd recently, and the actor implied that Peter Venkman could be played by some other actor, akin to the way Jack Ryan has been played by Alec Baldwin, Harrison Ford, and Ben Affleck over the years. He also mentioned a desire to pull Rick Moranis out of retirement to reprise his role in the classic series:

If we can get the script to Ghostbusters 3 right, then it would definitely have Moranis as a major component. None of us would want to do the movie without having him as a participant.

While Aykroyd may claim none of filmmakers “want” to do the movie without Moranis, the same could be said about their “all for one, one for all” attitude regarding Bill Murray when this project first came to light a few years ago. But it’s clear that mentality only goes so far, as evidenced by his willingness to replace Murray if the outspoken actor refuses to take part in their version of the movie.

At this point, I wish the concept of another entry in this franchise would just quietly go away. But Aykroyd seems desperate to get this made, so I guess we’ll have to wait and see who pushes harder: Akroyd, or the legions of people who never want this project to see the light of day. Is anyone out there actually excited about a Ghostbusters 3?

Read similar posts to Dan Aykroyd may recast Bill Murray’s role in Ghostbusters 3 on Filmonic

Ivan Reitman goes right along with the Ghostbusters just as much as Dan Ackroyd and Harold Ramis. Probably not as much as Bill Murray, since a certain recent film made the valid point that Murray will always be Pete Venkman, even after the world starts ending. Reitman directed both Ghostbusters 1 & 2 as well as classics like Stripes and not-so-classics like My Super Ex Girlfriend.

As we’ve already heard: Ramis, Ackroyd, Murray, Eddie Hudson and Sigourney Weaver are all on board for a new Ghostbusters, but we haven’t yet heard about Reitman’s involvement. Sure, it wouldn’t be a Ghostbusters film without him, but right now no one is really sure how this new flick is going to shake down anyway. Turns out we might not have nailed down Reitman’s return just yet according to Bloody Disgusting:

Anyways, I have straight up confirmed, 100%, without a shadow of a doubt that Ivan Reitman, director of Ghost Busters and Ghostbusters II, is in fact attached to get behind the camera for Ghostbusters 3. While he’s attached, the word is that he hasn’t decided whether or not he really wants to direct, yet. So, yeah, is that news?

The third Ghostbusters would focus on a new team after the ‘Bustin’ trio reopens their business and tracks down Hudson’s Winston.

I don’t want to trash-talk Reitman, but if he doesn’t want to do it right off the bat, maybe other directors should be considered? We’ve had some good comedies by some talented directors since Ghostbuster 2 in 1989.

Read similar posts to Ghostbusters 3 Is Reitman’s If He Wants It on Filmonic

It’s nice to hear Harold Ramis talk candidly about Ghostbusters 3 for almost 7 minutes. I’m worried about the threequel so long after Ghostbusters 2 proved to be an enjoyable, but flawed, extension of the first film.

Ramis has opened up to Natalie Portman co-owned filmmaking website MakingOf.com, where he discusses the effects of the new film (CGI, but used sparingly), why Ghostbusters Go To Hell never broke the surface, what needs to be included for him to be comfortable with the next movie and how to honor the original when they don’t absolutely need another Ghostbusters film

CLICK HERE to watch Ramis talk bustin’.

Read similar posts to Harold Ramis Is Talking Ghostbusters 3! on Filmonic