Ghostbusters 3 is dead

[The Shad]

So sayeth Bill Murray.

"It's all a bunch of crock. It's a crock...
Harold Ramis said, Oh, I've got these guys, they write on The Office, and they're really funny. They're going to write the next Ghostbusters. And they had just written this movie that he had directed...Year One.

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. But it's the studio that really wants this thing. It's a franchise. It's a franchise, and they made a whole lot of money on Ghostbusters."

I suppose its for the best, going on what's said here.

But then

However, studios are a greedy group and it would not surprise me the least bit to see them go ahead with a new group of actors or better yet...you guessed it, a reboot.

[Devo DrakeFox]

Hmm...

Hearing that the third film isn't happening isn't so bad, but a reboot?

STOP

RIGHT

THERE!!

Why can't classic franchises just be left alone to age gracefully without soulless companies and studios trying to 'revitalize' them? WHY?

[ShayMay]

Jul 21, 2010 18:52:09 GMT Devo DrakeFox said:

Why can't classic franchises just be left alone to age gracefully without soulless companies and studios trying to 'revitalize' them? WHY?

[Super Sonic]

It wouldn't have been good anyway.

[madhair60]

Ghostbusters 2 isn't even good.

[lordgazza]

Well thats not entirely true Ghostbusters 2 is much of the same but it certainly isnt a bad film. If you like the first there is no reason you shouldnt enjoy the second. I tend to agree its the same story with this new karate kid when I heard about that I was just like why did it need to be made let karate kid alone like Ghostbusters it doesnt need another film/reboot/remake.

[Retro]

Ghostbusters 2 was alright. Worth the watch. But a third ones always had me skeptical.

Especially if it had been heading in that direction.

[Devo DrakeFox]

Jul 21, 2010 19:51:49 GMT madhair60 said:

Ghostbusters 2 isn't even good.

DIE.

[Badly-Drawn Manchild]

I thought the recent game was, in effect, Ghostbusters 3...

Anyway, I say Bill's a wise man for not wanting a third film to go ahead if the script wasn't up to par. I wouldn't be eager to see a revival of one of my biggest childhood icons, considering how other such "revivals" have turned out...

Also, I don't get the amount of stick Ghostbusters 2 gets. It's definitely inferior to the original, but in no way is it a bad film.

[Baxter]

Ghostbusters 2 eventually gave us the "Is it Ghostbusters 2?" gag, so it's a good egg in my books.

Jul 22, 2010 10:57:14 GMT Badly-Drawn Manchild said:

I thought the recent game was, in effect, Ghostbusters 3...

I thought that was the intention, too.

[madhair60]

Jul 22, 2010 9:04:05 GMT Devo DrakeFox said:

Jul 21, 2010 19:51:49 GMT madhair60 said:

Ghostbusters 2 isn't even good.

DIE.

Develop priorities

[Balls]

Ghostbusters 2 was nowhere near achieving the absolute brilliance of the first film, but it was okay. When you make a film as good as the first, if the sequel doesn't live up, it's seen as crap. I wouldn't say that's entirely true with GB2.

Anyway, good riddance. Ghostbusters 3 couldn't ever be good, no matter who handled it. There's this certain self-aware theme that goes through every single long-gap sequel that's inescapable. Like, these horrible nods to everyone in the audience that watched the original films to try and make you stand up in the cinema and shout at the thirteen year olds "HAHA YOU DON'T GET THAT BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T WATCH THE FIRST AND SECOND ONE! I'M BETTER AT WATCHING THIS FILM THAN YOU BECAUSE I'M OLDSCHOOL YOU LITTLE [censored]!"

This is true of every single one of them. I'm not even exaggerating here; even some of the ones I genuinely like do it. Rambo was an overly gory, definitely worth a watch testostallone romp that was worth the money I paid for it and Die Hard 4.0 was one of the most entertaining action flicks I've ever watched and genuinely worthy of the Die Hard name, and they still had that horrible feeling to them. Rocky Balboa, to its credit, did it far less, but was still guilty of it and I haven't seen it yet, but I can garandamntee that Toy Story 3 will do the same.

I still don't feel like I can fully explain what I mean, but some of you must at least get what I'm talking about?

[ShayMay]

Jul 30, 2010 16:05:24 GMT Balls said:

I still don't feel like I can fully explain what I mean, but some of you must at least get what I'm talking about?

I get what you mean.
They alienate their younger (or newer) viewers by throwing in references only those who have seen the prequels would get?

[Balls]

Jul 30, 2010 16:57:15 GMT ShayMay said:

I get what you mean.
They alienate their younger (or newer) viewers by throwing in references only those who have seen the prequels would get?

Yeah, except intentionally. It's pretty hard not to alienate a little bit, especially if it's an ongoing story. It's just they do it on purpose so you sit there being a smug [censored]. In Die Hard 4.0 it was one step a way from Bruce Willis breaking the fourth wall, pointing at the older viewers and saying "yeah, YOU know what I mean!" and winking at you. It's like some kind of giant in-joke that annoys me (and I'm usually one of the people who does get these references as I usually don't watch sequels to films I haven't seen).

[Samface]

Wandering back to the subject of the game for a moment, does anyone know if the Wii version's any good? I tried the 360 demo and was distinctly underwhelmed, but I want to get hold of it in one form or another just for the story's sake.

[The Shad]

Jul 31, 2010 12:10:12 GMT Samface said:

Wandering back to the subject of the game for a moment, does anyone know if the Wii version's any good?

I loved it.

Then again, I am heavily biased towards anything Ghostbustery. Far too short, but that's the only gripe I have.

[Samface]

I too am heavily biased, so your word is good enough for me! Onto the birthday list it goes.

[Alex]

Unfortunately, despite owning the game for several months, I haven't been able to play it because my laptop can't run it. I'm looking forward to finally giving it a run in a few months when I put together my new PC.

[Baron Canier]

If Ghostbusters 2 was any indication, then it's probably a good thing.

[segaz]

Jul 31, 2010 15:44:21 GMT Alex said:

Unfortunately, despite owning the game for several months, I haven't been able to play it because my laptop can't run it. I'm looking forward to finally giving it a run in a few months when I put together my new PC.

Nothing will beat the Mega Drive version anyway.

[The Shad]

It's alive! It's alive! _Maybe.

Except now, out of nowhere, not only does the oft reliable Production Weekly believe it’s happening, they believe Sony has actually set a start date for filming.

They say they’ve been hearing that Sony Pictures plans to put an Ivan Reitman directed Ghostbusters 3 into production in May of 2011. If true, that could mean you’ll see a Ghostbusters 3 in theaters during the summer of 2012.

Yet even Production Weekly seems a little uncertain on this rumor and if you’ve been following the somewhat tortured production process of Ghostbusters 3 at all, you know there are a lot of road blocks they’ll need to clear out of the way before they can begin filming in earnest. The biggest road block is Bill Murray who, up till now, has shown no sign of actually being interested in doing this movie. He’s demanded they kill him off, trashed the script, loudly proclaimed that he doesn’t think it’ll ever happen, and generally sounded like he simply doesn’t want it to. And without Venkman, there is no Ghostbusters sequel.

A few weeks ago, though, he did show up at the Scream Awards in full Ghostbusters regalia. Was that a sign that he’s had a change of heart and it’s full speed ahead on Ghostbusters 3? We’ll have more on this as it develops.

www.cinemablend.com/images/news_img/21505/21505.jpg