Ooh, that’s not good – fortunately, it’s speculative.
24/7 Wall Street runs a yearly feature, guessing which brands will die in the coming year. Some at interesting guesses, such as the death of Nokia (even though they are showing some interesting, possibly company reviving tech) and some headscratchers, like the death of Corn Pops (kids aren’t eating sugar cereal anymore… the idiots) fill out the piece, but the one that seems the most reasoned and worrisome is that Sony might unload Columbia-TriStar as a fast way to increase the worth of the company.
This doesn’t mean the death of Ghostbusters or Columbia-TriStar. They would end up belonging to someone else. But by selling Columbia-TriStar, Sony Pictures ceases to be. And if Sony Pictures hasn’t put Ghostbusters 3 into production before that, the greenlight process starts all over.





If Columbia was away from Sony than ghostbusters 3 might be good. But I doubt sony would let any possible moneymakers get away. As for the green-light process, I don’t believe it has even started now so it wouldn’t be a big loss.
That’s the same story every year: Sony talks about a very unlikely tentative release year, then the project falls in absolute silence before people ask the obvious so as to ensure a media-fire. Then, time for more silence as the date closes in and passes unnoticed, at least the studios hope. It may not be a bad thing for Sony to unload Columbia since they never truly could get a respectable DVD or Blu-ray edition for that matter.
Maybe someone else will.
As I live in fear of a terrible Ghostbusters 3, I consider this to be pretty uplifting news.
I highly doubt that Sony will drop Columbia but this would actually be good for a new Ghostbusters film. Another distributor/owner may have more resources to dedicate to the continued development.
Anyone else getting a shiver of nostalgia a la the Activision/Blizzard shake-up a few years ago?
It would only be bad for any prospect for a third movie. I would assume it doesn’t change Bill Murray’s contracts and stakes in the franchise one iota, and he’s the one putting the brakes on it. (And I’m personally not convinced that’s a bad thing at this point)
I just read the article and while I can’t comment on Columbia’s financial health, the loss of some of the other brands/companies certainly make sense. I’m rather surprised that there are still A&W restaurants still in business. The one I ate in in the 1980s is long gone. I think there’s still a KFC/A&W restaurant open on Long Island, but I don’t consider that to be one (KFC) or the other (A&W).
I fully expect MySpace to be buried soon. I remember six or so years ago when my friends were trying to get me to sign up for MySpace, and I was so reluctant because I saw no need for it. I signed up, but didn’t use it much, especially once they started masking and banning urls that they didn’t like (like affiliate urls). I was reluctant to sign up for Facebook as well, but they don’t ban urls and I found more use for Facebook (as an adjunct to my site), than I ever did for MySpace.
Considering the time and state of affairs with movies being exceptionally dark these days (tragedy=comedy) I think whatever they turn Ghostbusters 3 into it will be far better than Ghostbusters 2.
Sony has a lot of influence to make things happen. If Sony didn’t get GB3 made then I’m not sure who else has that kind of drive. If it gets sold to a lesser organization I wonder if they’d be any more capable to sway Murray since his position isn’t anti-Sony but anti-GB3.
@Paul:
Just FYI – KFC and A&W are part of the same corporation, YUM! Brands, along with Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, and Long John Silver’s.
http://www.yum.com/company/ourbrands.asp
@Marc – I know that they’re owned by the same corporation, though I don’t know if A&W was back in the 1980s when I last ate at a singular A&W restaurant. My point was that I don’t consider half-and-half restaurants to be one or the other. Like those Taco Bell/Pizza Hut cross-breeds I see in malls and some Target stores. To me they are neither Taco Bell, nor Pizza Hut.