Navigation Menu

For the dozens of you that emailed and asked why this wasn’t up already, here’s the short answer;

It’s not as amazing as the rest of the web is making it out to be, so why hurry? And similarly, this one site cannot fight an Internet rumour tide, so with every site in the world posting this as a super serious scoop, why bother? I’ve got a day job, and this doesn’t qualify as “ignore the day job” type news. Interesting, yes. Hard fact? No. Until an Aykroyd or Ramis or Reitman pipes up, this is just the usual GB3 chatter.

Out promoting the crap out of Avatar, Sigourney Weaver is this week’s “Ghostbusters Alumni with the Most Press Coverage”, meaning the press are artificially weighting her comments as more true than any previous comments made by anyone even remotely involved with a third Ghostbusters film. However, this only confuses the issue.

It should be pointed out, again and again, that no one person has all the answers – even guys like Ivan Reitman and Dan Aykroyd, who are heavily involved, still cannot swear what they known hasn’t or won’t be altered by the studio.

But that doesn’t matter, because Sigourney Weaver is talking and it’s gospel and we should all treat it as immutable and argue about it as such because it will never ever change between now and the movie getting made.

First up;

BILL MURRAY IS THE ONLY GHOSTBUSTER RETURNING!

The interest in the third film appears to be ramping up, but Weaver said that after talking to Ivan Reitman, director of the previous “Ghostbusters” films in 1984 and 1989, she says she doesn’t expect to be part of the franchise’s new afterlife.

“As far as I know, I think Bill [Murray] is actually the only one in it,” Weaver said. “That may be wrong — the last time I talked to Ivan was a couple of months ago. It’s not meant at this point to be a reunion of our particular group of ‘Ghostbusters’ at this point, it’s a younger group. My only wish is that Oscar, my [on-screen] baby in ‘Ghostbusters II,’ has grown up to be a Ghostbuster, too.”

I call bullshit. And again, not because I think she’s lying – why would she lie? – but rather because I don’t think she has all the info. It could be that Ivan Reitman shared some stray thought de jour, which will be canned and replaced by production time.

I can believe that she might not be returning. As much as we love Dana, it would be weird to just have her there and bizarre if she’s the focus of cataclysm yet again (this was the plan for the video game, but when she passed and a new character replaced Dana, that idea of her being a supernatural trouble-magnet was cut short.)

Speaking of the video game – how can a studio see how excited people were with all the Ghostbusters coming back and decide that only Murray should appear in the third movie?

But the nail in this rumour coffin is that in another interview she’s dug up an old, long-thought-dead chestnut;

BILL MURRAY’S CHARACTER WILL COME BACK AS A GHOST!

Again, bullshit. This was long ago revealed as a joke that took on a life of it’s own. Recent interest by Bill Murray has increased the likelihood of his return as Peter, but not as a ghost.

It’s not helping that Ain’t It Cool News, in their usual, hysterical, and non-contextual way, have posted this as a real possibility. Nothing’s impossible, but when measured against recent comments on the matter some months back, in which it is referred to as a joke from ten years back when a third movie was first attempted, it’s very unlikely.

The fact that Weaver her self made a joke production out of spilling these particularly beans means it shouldn’t be take that seriously at all. But then, Ain’t It Cool News would have one less post today, and their motto ain’t “less is more.” Oh look, everyone else has taken it at face value too! Oh good. Thankfully, Slash/Film is being smarter about it.

A big thanks to all of you that emailed me. I doubt I could have missed this one, but thanks for thinking of PC. I’d name you all, but it would take twice as long as it took to write this post. And I put tiiiime into these posts.

[UPDATE]

A little something from last year;

Weaver wasn’t sure if there was a place for her in the story but she did think someone deserves a spot. “I would hope that my little Oscar would be one of the Ghostbusters even if I’m not in it!

From today’s interview;

“My only wish is that Oscar, my [on-screen] baby in ‘Ghostbusters II,’ has grown up to be a Ghostbuster, too.”

A small demonstration that sometimes, old talking points carry on for ages.

[UPDATE]
From Ain’t It Cool News – FOUR YEARS AGO, (and reported here, naturally);

And we had the script all worked out. Danny and I had the story and Murray got really… Murray’s so cantankerous, you know. Dan called him and said, “Would you be in the movie?” And he said, “I’ll be in the movie… but only as a ghost.

Again, Weaver is most likely rehashing an old talking point as a joke, and this is just confirmation that it is in fact very, very old. It’s outdated news (it was outdated when Ramis referenced it in 2005) – it is NOT a scoop today. Thought, had anyone had the presence of mind at AICN to link the two, an argument could have been made (ie Weaver says Murray as Ghost, old AICN interview says Murray as ghost = truth!)

Doesn’t matter, the damage is done – this is now getting picked up AROUND THE WORLD! Now you see why I didn’t bother to get out of bed for this “news.”

Post a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *