This is most a chat between Ain’t It Cool News and Harold Ramis, talking about his work, Year One, etc., but as expected talk turns to Ghostbusters 3, which is then entirely wasted by AICN asking the same questions as everyone else. However, they do manage to get Ramis to say what has been common knowledge, but overlooked by a lot of enthusiastic fans – Ghostbusters 3 has not begun production. This is important info, because the project could fall apart tomorrow, but everyone already has 2012 marked on their calendar. Thanks to Nevil for the link.
Capone: They’re still writing, okay. So, we’ve been hearing all sorts of wild casting rumors about younger…
HR: No, none of that’s real. There will be young ghostbusters, but no specific casting is real, and no director is committed.
Capone: And, for the four main cast members…
HR: Everyone said they’d be in it.
Capone: Okay, it’s strictly a verbal thing at this point?
HR: Yeah, because there’s no…The studio does not want to commit to us at this point. It’s very…When everyone says ‘yes’ that will trigger a very expensive deal for the powers that be.
Talk about a way to extinguish fires…
Maybe – but fires running wild end in even more disappointment later. This is not new, this is how it has always been, and at least the possibility still remains.
God, I hope it doesnt get made. Continue with the games. Thats the way to go.
I agree 1000% patrick
I agree with Patrick. Ghostbusters 1 and 2 are great on their own, and I would hate for them to make a 3rd movie that could be the “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” to this series. It looks like it could shape up that way also since it’s another passing the torch type crap story.
ive always belived ghosbusters should be left in the 80s (with the exception of the game/s) im worried a GB3 will wreck my childhood, and besdies.. look what happend with indiana jones. just leave it be..
the thought of seeing a GB film, for the first time on the big screen, has always been a dream for me, i saw GB2 in the theatre, but i was a wee-guy. I was hoping this could get made to experience that. oh well.
Im geussing the script wasnt commenced yet? I mean maybe Harold was just being aggressive, since he’s stated its being written and therse no director, so hes making that clear, since they keep asking those same two questions. When we hear back from Harold,Dan, or Ivan in the next few weeks, we’ll know for sure where this project stands.
no new film will EVER be able to recapture the feel of the first one, nevermind the second one. elmer bernstein is no longer with us, and thats one of the resons the 1st movie is so good.
indiana jones was a passing of the torch movie (shia lebouf taking over?) thats not somthing any ghostbusters fan should be wanting..
the best thing is to re-release ghostbusters in cinemas… now seeing THAT on the big screen would be better than any sequel.
Well I thought the game was a fantastic idea, I really did. As for a third movie, I”ve been looking forward to a third movie for as long as I can remember, I”m 20 years old and I’ve been a GB fan since I was a toddler. Regardless of the plot, I would just love to see the guys back on the big screen doing their thing. I would of preferred the original “Ghostbusters In Hell” script which was actually worth my time, but I guess if that’s a no go, whatever.
Either way, I’d just love to see the franchise spark back up again with another movie.
I have no problem with a pass-the-torch kind of film as long as the new charcters are as strong as the originals. That’s the key-characterization. With a strong new cast of 5 new ‘busters (3 men 2 women) we could have a whole new series of Ghostbusters films. It all really boils down to the quality of the writing.
IMDB is a great resource, but until a project is greenlit, the content on the site is purely speculation – often user submitted, much like wikipedia. For a while there, Gladiator 2 was listed as going into production in 2007, so never take anything on IMDB as fact. Until the script has gone through a few drafts, been approved by stakeholders, salaries agreed upon, and production dates solidified by Sony, GB 3 is purely in pre-pre-pre-development by people who have been allowed to do so as an experiment by Sony.
That being said, I think it’s great that Harold was responsible for contributing to a premise that Eisenberg and Stupnitsky are simply embellishing on. For a while there I thought they were coming up with the entire concept. I’m still hot/cold on the whole thing… as a fan who is old enough to have seen both previous films in the theatre and remembers both experiences very well, I have trepidation about being disappointed with a new film.
Those in this thread who brought up the under-whelming Indiana Jones 4 make a great point, and I’d like to add that it was announced this past week by both Frank Marshall and Shia LeBeouf in separate occasions that Indy 5 is currently being drafted with hopes to go into production somewhat soon, as Harrison Ford currently says: “We’re not getting any younger”. I for one, am fine with this, as long as they’re doing it to cleanse the bad taste in my mouth following Crystal Skull, and not just to continue the franchise for the sake of continuing the franchise.
I miss 1989.
I agree with you Nev regarding Indy.
Like most of you, I’ve been dying to see a Ghostbusters 3 since pretty much right after seeing Ghostbusters 2. I’ve followed all the rumors and news over the years everytime something was started, and got excited, and then it eventually never happened. Then I noticed a trend, that the studio (Sony – the guys who screwed up Spider-Man and Resident Evil), were trying to force out the old Ghostbusters and replace them with newer hipper actors. Anyone remember when they were saying Chris Farley and Chris Rock? And then later it was Will Smith and Adam Sandler? And then it was Ben Stiller. Now it’s 2009 and they are trying to pull the same shit all over again, but this time with the likes of Seth Rogen and the Apatow gang (rumored).
This is not the movie I’ve been dying to see my whole life here, rather this is a cheap studio way to try to bring in the teens who loved Knocked Up and Superbad. It’s a gimmick! A gimmick they’ve been pushing since the late 90’s, to get whoever is currently “cool” and put them as a Ghostbuster. Same concept of putting Shia LaBeouf in Indiana Jones, or Justin Long in Live Free or Die Hard. Both of those instances, those actors didn’t do crap but hurt the final product, but who cares cuz it might of brought a few “tweens” into the theater.
Ghostbusters: The Video Game seemed too good to be true, and I’m still shocked that actually happened. I don’t think in a million years will we get another game that truly is fan service, while also being well made. Unfortunately Ghostbusters 3 looks like it’ll be anything but fan service, rather it’ll cater to Judd Apatow fans and The Office fans. Considering how big of a deal this 25th Anniversary was, and how well the game is selling as well as the blu-ray, I think it’s fairly obvious if they made another Ghostbusters with JUST the original actors that it would still make a crap load of money. Nobody would pass up seeing them back in the flight suits and the protonpacks, and also that the cast really isn’t even that old (Stallone and Ford are doing actual stunt work and they are older), this idea of putting in new actors is terrible and unnecessary.
p.s. the reviews for Year One are abysmal, and you will no doubt be seeing the exact same comedy in a GB3. Don’t know why they stripped the scripting rights away from Aykroyd like they did.
this movie needs to be made. Even if it sucks, it will breath some life into the franchise, and more stuff will be made. Indiana Jone’s movie was not terrible, just plot holey, and gaudy, keep in mind that GB will be done right, becase of the sheer amout of money that stands to be made off of it. the money is what gets people to do things. if they wait to release the movie when no other good film is slated, this thing could reach spiderman even Batman box office sales, even if it sucks. look at spiderman 3, that movie was bad. and yet, it made so much spiderman 4 is green lit. in the end it all comes down to money.
I hope it gets green lit, I was born in 1990, and the game was the first “Real” ghostbusters thing to be released, especially in my life time.
And I mean let’s be honest, we’ll all go to see it if they have freaking Medea as a ghostbusters. ((Prays to the GB gods that doesnt’ happen))
My point is, we ALL know no third movie after the first one will have the same fire, the same awesomeness, no movie DOES, it’s impossible. No sequel has ever been as good as 1, and twenty five years later? No, GB following the original team wont’ be as good.
Let’s be honest, the game wasn’t’ amazing, it’s story was okay, and good for being what it was, but I’d have felt jipped if I paid seven dollars for it. ((Mind you I paid 120$ for it on 360 and PS3 so….))
My point is, stop complaining about new actors, they ALWAYS do,you people just have to admit that THEIR WILL NEVER BE A MOVIE AS GOOD AS GB 1, NEVER, you could take a time machine back to the year after it came out, rewrite 2’s script, and it would STILL not be as good as one.
There’s NO actor that could pull off Ghostbusters, not even the original actors, I think however any of the said actors could pull it off.
They need to change it a touch, make it modern do a whole lot more, do you HONESTLY think a movie made now woudl even be GOOD? If they tried to remake GB1, it woudl be a sucky rip off that woudl just be money, and you all need to see that.
If we want a GOOD GB script, get good writers who respect GB, good actors who can stare in shock at a blue screen and say “Jeeze, we’re here busting ghosts, it’s a sucky job, btu we need the money and the stuff was free”
GHostbuster’s isnt’ abotu WANTING a responsibility, its about wanting to make money form something, and then realizing how much of a needed service it is, and even when people are cursing you you still TRY.
realize people like Peter Ray and Egon woudl be considered ass hoels now, idiots messing around with nuclear bombs, yeah no.
Ghostbusters needs to evolve to modern times, or else ti will become a horrible ghost in and of itself.
You CAN’T relive the glory days, suck it up, I almsot think new writers who respect the proton packs, and fear the fan base can write better scripts than Dan at this point. No offense to dan, but he’s not now, I think that he putting in comments and keeping everything in verse is better than him writing the whole script, in that case he can do whatever he wants without the same restrictions Let the funny guys do funny and dan do the ghostbusting and you’ll have a badass movie.
None of the guys have EVER done physical acting, their out of shape and and just like the fans over the generations have passed down the pride and the pacts, it’s time for the originals to do the same, pass the packs on, a good cast can do it.
Seth Rogan and them may become the busters, but honestly who but a fat nerd woudl be stupid enough to pack on an unused for 25 or so years proton accelerator?
The ghostbusters were outcasts, Ray was a somewhat shy and innocent person, Egon was a total nerd, and Peter was a perverted almost perverted dick.
And yet we loved them, The ghostbusters are the outcasts, the nerds, the oens who society said, “Who cares abotu them.” until the world was ending and after they saved the world, they WERE SUED!”
They were ripped on every chance they got and yet they still stood proud and did their jobs, and I think some of the modern actors could pull this off. I have NO DOUBT that they could, and I hope the right actors are chosen, and it goes well.
Ultimately, my point is, the past is the past, you can move on, or die in it, and while I just like every other person says I’m a god, the franchise isn’t, and without new blood it will die.
So choose death, or good but not quite as good as the original? I choose good, because you can ALWAYS get better, but you can’t come back from the dead. Unless your Superman, or a Carpathian prince…..
I think they should leave the 3rd one alone. I grew up with Ghostbusters just like everyone else here, and Ghostbusters II was the very first movie I can remember being truly disappointed in (I was 10).
You can be a big fan of something and love all the stuff that goes along with it without wanting the people involved to embarrass themselves by contributing a crappy movie to it.
Ghostbusters was one of those “character based” comedies that they used to make but don’t anymore. Nowadays everything is based on absurdity, or camp, or the Will Ferrell / Adam Sandler “man child” type of thing, or the over-the-top vulgarity of something like “American Pie”…
Ghostbusters was so great because of the originality of the concept and the chemistry between the characters. It’s been around 25 years now so the originality aspect has been lost a little bit — without having the same characters everyone knows and loves, what would be the point to a 3rd movie? Some new guys running around dressed as Ghostbusters? If I want that, I’ll watch one of those terrible fan films.
I am super happy to have the game as an unofficial 3rd movie. As a total non-gamer, I think the game is pretty awesome (and I’ve only played it on the Wii). All I’d really like to see now are some new movie and cartoon-based toys…
I have been clamoring for a Ghostbusters 3 since part 2 was released but, after learning that they plan on “passing the torch,” I’d rather it not be made.
in someways i hope that ghostbusters 3 comes to fruition and in another way i hope it doesn’t why i say this is mostly because harold ramis’s new film year one isn’t doing so well on the reviews front, and the fact that the script is written by the same people who write the episodes for the office. leaves me with some fear that if not done right ghostbusters 3 could end up like kingdom of the crystal skull a film everybody saw but no one remembers.
I wasn’t even alive when Ghostbusters came out and I was 1 when Ghostbuster 2 came out. I never got to see Ghostbusters on the big screen so….I wouldn’t mind if they did a star wars re-release type of thing. Or a 3rd movie. Either would be fine with me. I just want to see the band get back together for one more run. Re-relases tend to do well, and older sequels aren’t always “embarrassing” Rocky went out in style in “Rocky Balboa”. Let’s all try to be optimistic and throw some support behind the project.
You guy’s need to pull your heads out of the nostalgia, for once. And smell REALITY. If GB get’s left in the 80’s, it will die as a series. People WILL NOT remember. What if Star Trek was left just as the 60’s TV show, or Star Wars as just the three original films? They would ALL be eventually forgotten about. Every franchise has its GOODS and BADS. But you have to take BOTH for a series to survive time. Nothing is EVER perfect. Besides, you can’t judge a third movie not having seen it completed. Or even a director or cast,etc. Even announced. Or even a GLIMPSE at the script! Like I said, you guy’s better hear reality cknocking, and let it in. Because GB is almost 30 years old now, and the clock is ticking.
The arguments about wanting something new and fresh to revitalize the franchise are indeed interesting.. But pointless. No amount of, “Look at Star Trek and Star Wars,” can make this idea sound good. That entire explanation is completely asinine.
Star Trek didn’t sit stagnant for 20 years since its last incarnation. It had an ongoing TV series, as well as movie releases. Then, a re opening of the series with a new cast. More movies followed.. But it was never absent for such a lengthy period. And the newest installment of the series, not only pissed off a great deal of “Trekkies,” but it also took on an “alternate reality” approach. Something most Ghost Buster fans would probably b*tch about, considering the entire original cast would have to be replaced with new faces.
Star Wars was re released with new, updated footage that couldn’t have been done back upon its original production. Guess what? It was rubbish. But the boom pushed for the production of prequels. Surprise – they were garbage, too. Yep, they pulled in money, and tarnished the name of the originals to people who hadn’t even seen them.
There was a great deal of money involved in that situation.. and those movies had horrible acting and terrible plot lines. Sure, the graphics and action were neat, which is probably what we could expect from a new movie in the Ghost Busters franchise – pretty to look at, awful to sit through. So far, I love this plan..
Then we have the “passing of the torch.” Most recent example of that, which has been pointed out many times already, Indiana & Mutt Jones. This could be done, possibly even well.. but virtually nothing, if anything, of the original feel will be left over. Period. Sure, someone can script in some lame old jokes, but it will not be the same thing.
So, to those of you interested in seeing a movie in the franchise in theatres – good luck. Yes, it probably will be made. No, it probably wont be great. Will it help the franchise “survive time?” Yes. It sure will. A great deal of people who’ve never seen the originals, will then know exactly why they never wasted their time. It will leave another floater in the toilet bowl that is Hollywood cinema.
The arguement that it would never be as good as the originals simply because of nostalgia is dumb. I’ll tell you why: because there are movies released all the time that end up blowing our minds and are sometimes better than the originals. “Rambo” was better than “Rambo 3″ and possibly even “Rambo: First Blood Part 2″. Alot of people think “The Dark Knight” was better than the original “Batman”. “Rocky Balboa” was better, IMO, than almost all the others. I’d probably put it behind the original only. It does happen, good movies are still made once in awhile. I heard this same crap about Indy IV, how it would never live up to the old onces because of nostalgia. No, Indy IV was a horrible script, with ridiculous moments and too much exposition dialogue. Simply, it was a bad movie. You can’t blame the audience is a movie is not well recieved.
Ghostbusters 3 has a good chance of at least being better than Ghostbusters 2, but it won’t be if they are forcing this dumb gimmick down our throats of having it be about the Apatow gang. We want to see the originals, that’s what we’ve been waiting for for 20 years. I’m not paying 10 dollars for a movie ticket to watch random people shoot neutrono wands.
It’s less about nostalgia, and more about time. If this film were in production 10 years ago instead of today, I wouldn’t be as concerned about potential character development (and even 10 years is pushing it… ideally, a third film shouldn’t have been made any later than 1995).
In 1999, the sub-plot of passing the torch to new recruits could have taken a back seat to the driving narrative much easier than it can in 2009. When you’re in your late 40’s, the idea of promoting a next generation of recruits is more out of the hope of finding a little help, whereas when you’re in your late 50’s and early 60’s, it’s out of necessity.
I’m just not ready to see the original GB’s retire in a film form. I can use my imagination for that. My interest in the GB universe has been due foremost to the characters themselves, so to assume that my admiration can be simply transferred to a different team of “younger” characters is pretty bloody unlikely. Does anybody remember Cody and Vance Duke? The cousins who replaced Bo and Luke Duke when they left the Dukes of Hazzard? Hell no.
Just sayin’.
Personally, I hope they don’t make GB 3!
Btw, the game itself is awesome. The story is just ok, but that’s because it’s made for a video game. If they adapted this story into a film there clearly wouldn’t be as much ghost fighting. Also it was made with the best intentions possible. The makers of the game tried to give the fans what we’ve been wanting for all these years, and I can’t say the same about Sony who is clearly just trying to re-start a franchise with new actors. They have a history of screwing good things up. I doubt they’ve even watched GB1 or 2 in the last 10 years. The game was clearly made by actual fans with all the tidbits they included through-out, even in-jokes and references to the cartoon show, and to Ghostbuster 2 which is obviously the less popular film.
awesome game a bit easy and even on pro leavl find it a bit esy but overall best game i played this year but i am die hard GB fan as with the film i hope they do make it just like rambo and rocky this film serise needs the closeing page either they go into sunset or pass it onto another bunch of hopfulls, then we can all go on about GB 4 lol they have made us wait so long and im hopin the waiting is over we all know this will smash box office numbers over its first weekend so lets just see SONY get there ass goin and let the film be made
I said my piece and I’m leaving it at that. Because the way human nature is, both sides could provide GOOD and POOR reasons for their arguments, but there would NEVER be a clear right or wrong. Because everyone thinks they are right, no matter what. But I am of the camp who reserves judgement until I at-least read or hear some of the script, and see who has been cast. Bickering back and forth now just shows how selffish the original fans are. A third film can be the best avenue for future fans, down the road. But being closed minded in selfish attempts to keep the franchise just in the 80’s is what’s really ASININE. People fail to keep an open mind-(just like this “debate”)-which is truely sad. For all you know, GB3 could be that fantastic comeback that puts GB on the map. Or it may not…that’s the whole point. We don’t know a LICK about it yet. So why are you all bashing now? The simple answer is because you are all scared. It’s funny how you compare GB3 to the last Inndy film, but when I compare the GB franchises longevity to Star Trek and Star Wars you fellows “go for the jugular” and wont hear it. Wow. That’s DOUBLE asinine!
I think many factors are the cause of renewed Ghostbusters 3 talks, I’ll list them:
#1. 80’s things popular now… Okay lets see, Transformers, G.I.Joe, Rambo, Rocky remakes, Star Wars…etc… These things made a lot of money for the Film Studios, and they like a sure thing, they need sure things to protect their investments. That’s why sequels get made in the first place-with or without the same actors. That’s just the way it is.
#2.Ghostbusters Online Community… There is obviously a HUGE following and a solid core audience for this film. Internet chat, magazines JUMP when GB-3 news leaks or when an original producer/actor can be squeezed for info!
#3. The Video Game… There is such a frenzy over this game and solid sales of it highlight the fact that not only is there an original solid fan-base, but there has to be a NEW audience that will fall in love with not just the characters themselves (the most important part of a story), but the idea itself as a subconscious thing inside all of us, that needs an outlet to be expressed.
#4.The Original cast… Even Bill Murray finally wants another movie, someone who fundamentally isn’t that fond of sequels in any form, only to have his convictions forged in what he sees as the wildfire of Ghostbusters 2. Well Bill Murray’s interest in seeing a film be made has BIG sway in the eyes of the studio (Columbia/Sony) , believe me.
#5. A New Pool to Draw From… If they wanted a passing of the torch story, (or now need one), the studio KNOWS, not thinks, that there is a new pool of SUCCESSFUL, BANKABLE new comedians that are PROVEN to be able to carry a film. I wont cite names here, but you know who I’m talking about.
Thanks for listening to my opinion as to why Ghostbusters 3 might actually be made.
I hope Ramis’ statement above puts to rest all the idiotic comments I’ve been reading over the last two years such as “It’s being made! Its a fact!” What over-optimistic BS. Finally, a fresh breath of REALITY about the topic.
Sure, as a GB fan who wouldn’t want to see another one made? I’ve waited 25 years for this, but given recent excursions into sequels-from-80s-movies I think I’ll pass on this and just accept the new game as the finest sequel that could be made.
Hey, Extreme_gb4evr? I’m with ya on Indy 4. Do yourself a favor and run a google search for “Frank Darabont script Indiana Jones”. A friend turned me on this and I think you might like it. This was the ORIGINAL script for Indy 4, called “Indiana Jones and the City of Gods.” It was vastly better and if I understand properly, the very script that sold Ford and Speilberg on even doing the movie. ….and then Lucas got his hands on it and started making changes. We all saw how that turned out. >:-(
Yeah, what Bryan said about Frank Darabont’s Indiana Jones and the City of God’s script is true. Although it’s not perfect, it’s a MUCH better iteration of the final film that we were ultimately presented. Marion’s character especially felt more in tune with the series’ history, and didn’t just feel like she was tacked on for the sake of inclusion. Lucas’ main beef with this script was that he wanted the Mutt character added, so he hired David Koepp to come in for a re-write, and thus eliminated some of the best sequences (which Harrison Ford and Speilberg had gone on record as loving). So, once again, Lucas managed to screw over a once-awesome movie property. But I digress…
Lucas is to indiana jones as sony is to ghostbusters. Shia Lebeouf is to indiana jones as new recruits are to ghostbusters. Bad ideas. This movie should not be made if it is using the passing the torch gimmick “which has never worked in the film medium”. Simply because you cannot force replacements to greats. The truth is 95% of the audience is going to the film because of the originals. And when they are on screen we will be happy when they are off screen we will be waiting for them to come back. Lucas is very similar to many of the supporters of new recruits. He just doesn’t think things through. He assumes things can happen instead of looking at the past for reference. Like a child’s mentality. Look at Rocky Balboa, then look at rocky 5. Which is a better film? Rocky at 62 training and fighting. Or rocky passing the torch to his son and tommy gun? Its easy Rocky Balboa worked while Rocky 5 did not. Lets stick with a plot about the originals and not whore this franchise out like terminator. Sure there are 4 terminator films but now the franchise is such a cluster fck it is hard to watch the best terminator film T2 without thinking that the whole film is pointless since T3 undermines it completely. Whoever is getting a boner at the thought of 3 more ghostbuster films better cut the blood flow to their crotch right now. It’s taken 20 years for this one to become possible. The original actors and director own part of the rights and a couple of them aren’t on speaking terms. So if this film happens it will be the last. No point in thinking like a child. We have already had our hopes up and crushed several times since ghostbusters 2. Not including ghostbusters 2 which was great.
and thats what my beef is, if this is the book end of the series, why go the ‘torch’ route? What made GB successful in the first place? besides the highly clever premise/script, was the actors!
the actors made the films successful, with their subtle comedic movements, ad-libbing, and just overall great character embodiment.
when the average movie-goer hear GB3 is being made, they’re planning on seeing Murray, Aykroyd, Ramis, and Hudson being those goofy characters again.
Yes, nothings in stone yet, and were bitching about nothing, but were only going by what we’ve heard so far, and what we’ve heard so far isnt…what we were hoping for, and since in the past weve seen, new sequels (and prequels) end up epic failures, because hollywood is a marketing greed-machine, and movies have become less about art and more about the dough.
Putting aside nostalgia, and in all honesty, back then, big budget blockbuster summer movies like GB, Gremlins, BTTF and Indy were made with heart,passion, and style. NOW in the 00s, were just treated with an over hyped, poorly written, flavor of the week celeb being surrounded by really pretty pictures, lights and special effects.
it gives us all reason to worry. why worry? because its a movie we’ve been waiting for, for a very long time, and we want it to live up to the wait or atleast be fair and be done RIGHT.
If I read the word “Passing” or “torch” ever again, I may well go insane….! hahahaha
Ryan Willian LeClair, stop complaining about other people compaining. Everyone is allowed to voice their opinion. Your not doing anything different than we are, the only difference is you support this idea of passing the torch. This reminds me of Rob Zombie’s Halloween fans who say the exact same thing to people who slam the sequel for looking terrible. Guess what? People are going to have different opinions than you. Get used to it. All you can do is state your case and argue your points, and so far, in my opinion, you have pretty bad points. All you seem to be concerned with is Ghostbusters being forgotten about. Ghostbusters will never be forgotten about.
“The simple answer is because you are all scared. It’s funny how you compare GB3 to the last Inndy film, but when I compare the GB franchises longevity to Star Trek and Star Wars you fellows “go for the jugular” and wont hear it. Wow. That’s DOUBLE asinine!”
Again, all you seem to be concerned with is longevity, rather than quality of the product. And Star Trek/Star Wars and Indy are completely different concepts. Star Wars Episodes 1-3 are terrible on all levels, as is that Star Wars: Clone Wars show. The only good things about Star Wars after Return of the Jedi were some of the video games and novels. Personally, I’d rather they had not made those shitfest prequels, since generally when people reference Star Wars they are talking about the original trilogy anyway. Star Trek is a franchise based on an entire universe of characters, and there has been relatively no down time since the beginning. Indy IV is the closest thing to Ghostbusters in terms of precident, and because of a lame “passing the torch” story (among other things) that movie was shit. We don’t want to see that happen to Ghostbusters by forcing the franchise down the wrong path.
“Star Wars Episodes 1-3 are terrible on all levels, as is that Star Wars: Clone Wars show.”
No they’re not.
“Indy IV is the closest thing to Ghostbusters in terms of precident, and because of a lame “passing the torch” story (among other things) that movie was shit.”
And no it wasn’t.
Thank you Mills.
““Indy IV is the closest thing to Ghostbusters in terms of precident, and because of a lame “passing the torch” story (among other things) that movie was shit.”
And no it wasn’t.”
Yes superstarseven it was a crap film. Passing the torch contributed the most because they were focusing on cramming Shia Lebeuf and a father son story in instead of doing an indiana jones movie. And in all honesty we got a good father son story in last crusade. We didn’t need another. There were a few bad plotlines but thats what you get when Lucas isn’t distracted on star wars and decides he’d like to steal credit from another popular franchise.
New point. Think about this. When they needed an actor who could possibly play and hold his own with harrison fords indiana jones, as his father in Last Crusade. They found a really good actor, a legend in and of himself. Now in crystal skull they just hired a flavor of the month run of the mill teenie bopper actor. What line of thinking worked? And what line of thinking will they take for GB3. Certainly the later. Because thats hollywoods trend right now.
Well, I think they need at least ONE young recruit. I think this because new young fans that became fans because of the video game (like me) are going to want to see a young person in the mix, and not just four old men. But I too, completely object to to all the Ghostbusters being new. I like the original cast too much.
Shia LaBeouf had his first hit film with Holes back in 2003, what flavor of the month? Teeny bopper? He’s 23.
You just simply don’t like the guy, let’s not get it twisted here.
He didnt gain popularity untill recently, though. So i can see where Ttop is coming from. No, need to nitpick the point. lol
I’m quite frankly shocked to see so many fans against the idea of a sequel…I’d have never thought in a million years this’d be the case, especially since when I first heard about the idea myself…well, I was pretty excited. Of course, I got a dose of reality from a friend. It ain’t greenlit yet.
It’s all going to come down to the writing. If they can get a good writer who knows what made the first movies click in the minds of the audience, and keep “The Lucas” away from the final script (not necessarily George Lucas, but a writer/producer who might have that kind of power and no one to tell him when he’s screwing something up), then this movie will work. New actors or not, it’s all up to the quality of the actors and the quality of the writing.
As for sequels never being better than the originals…Spiderman 2…’nuff said. Alfred Molina…villain of the freakin’ year. Also, X-men 2 was a lot better than X-men.
I’m going to wait and see. If it’s greenlit, I’m going to hope to hell that it’s good. I’ll probably wait for the review though, as much of a fan as I am. I won’t judge the future, I don’t have the balls or the right.
Yah, Shia only recently became flavor of the month after the first Transformers, and since then he’s only been big budget movies. Have any of them been good? Was Eagle Eye good? Hell, even before Transformers he had roles in crappy films like I, Robot and Constantine. Ok, Constantine isn’t that bad, but still. He plays characters nobody seems to like. That’s not the point though, point is you shouldn’t throw anybody like that into Ghostbusters.
Personally, the only new characters that should be cast are supporting cast (like the mayor’s aid, the new mayor, etc.) Just because the Ghostbusters are older doesn’t mean we need to physically see them retire or pass the torch. Would you like to see Danny Glover and Mel Gibson pass the torch in a Lethal Weapon 5? Prolly not, cuz those characters are what made that series good, not “the job”.
Who was talking about putting him into Ghostbusters?
The only new people that would work well in GBIII are actors well versed in Improv and sketch comedy…like the originals.
If you tap the well of Second City or Groundlings then the film has a much better chance of being pretty good.
Also Shia has been making waves since 2003, Transformers gave him worldwide fame but the guy has been around for a while.
Ghostbusters 3 is Happening! The writers from the office arn’t through with the GB3 script yet but there getting close. That’s why Production hasn’t began yet because the GB3 script isn’t finished. In May Dan Aykroyd said that everyone has agreed to make Ghostbusters 3 and the Original GB’s are in GB3. He said that the cameras are ready to roll! He said that production will began in the Winter of 2009. You guys are going overboard about this. The movie is still going to happen in 2012!When Harold ramis direct Year One Jack Black told him that he wants to be trained as a new Ghostbuster in GB3! On the Imdb it said that Harold will reprise his role as Dr. Egon Spenglar now is that enough proof or what! The movie IS going to be made!
Last year you said the movie was coming out in summer 2009. Well, here it is. Where is it? Now you invest 100% in hopes and dreams based off of the few “maybes” thrown out there by Aykroyd and Ramis. Patrick? Please. Stop. You have 0% credibility on this topic; you’ve shot your wad in the past and now it’s just a broken record.
“Is that enough proof or what?”
Patrick? Are you a (gulp) registered voter? I mean, do you actually cast a ballot based on your findings and “research”? ( Oh God, now I understand why we’re in the mess we’re in. )
I’d be happy with another cartoon. Really. Something to spur more toys and video games. I mean I love the films, but most of my childhood rests in The Real Ghostbusters’ show and merchandise. Fuck, I even liked the Extreme Ghostbusters. Whatever keeps Ghostbusting on TV.
Superstar seven is right. I worked at second city for two years and I actually thought about the casts in terms of who would make good Ghostbusters. And there were many. If they went underground and got people with improv and sketch comedy backgrounds, that would be the way to go. And I want it to be mostly the old guys, but a new crew with good unknowns could be fine.
Him again…
I’m a selfish fan for wanting a quality product and seeing current Hollywood cinema as a let down. I guess the jig is up.
Go Ghost Busters 3! I just hope they give me enough time to tape my lightsaber to my neutrona wand, throw wings on my tricorder, and dig my Indy hat out of the closet. I wouldn’t want to miss this cluster of a midnight movie release.
I agree with unfortunate.
I personally wouldn’t spend a dime to see a new cast. They’re just going to hire a Jack Black-type comedian, because that’s all that is left, ..guys that say stupid and predictable lines and pull stupid faces. The movies today are all littered with recycled jokes, and involve predictably ordinary plots, a guy stays overnight at a museum that comes alive, or a dad uses a remote control to control fate, or a dad can no longer tell a lie. They’re all stupid STAPLE plots that are be-fitted for today’s “talent”. Not anybody can step into a GHOSTBUSTERS uniform and I think what we’ll see if that does happen is for many of us loyal fans, the death of the GHOSTBUSTERS. And if we throw ladies into the team like modern-day formulas dictate, then we’ll have a movie littered with male/female jokes that will take center-stage,..which has nothing to do with GHOSTBUSTING nor would they meet our expectations. Any changes that happen, will take center-stage. That is inevitable. So instead of the excitement and thrill, we’d have to deal with a 3rd of the script being written around the “changes” that none of us really want to hear about anyway. For instance, we’d have to watch the new team shooting the packs for the first time. Predictable. We’d have to see them trapping a ghost for the first time and their predictable reactions. Predictable. A lot of predictable stuff will happen that’ll take a lot of screen-time. I personally would like to be PLEASANTLY surprised, but that doesn’t sound like it’s going to happen. Let’s face it folks, movies are just stamped out anymore with no respect for us fans. Danny doesn’t care. Bill doesn’t care. They don’t want us to be wowed anymore, they’d rather compromise.
As someone else previously addressed, I do not want to see that moment on screen when the guys de-pack, hold their backs in pain and say something like “we’re getting too old for this.” If they make a 3rd installment I say from the opening credits there should be a new team established and the originals can appear during the course of the movie in brief supporting roles perhaps. And nothing corny either – I don’t want a shot of Ramis in a rocking chair reminiscing or Murray hugged up with Sigourney Weaver while talking to a new Ghostbuster in a split-screen phone conversation or something. Just pick up where the business would be now, address some of the past events through jokes etc and make it a movie that will appeal to this generation while staying true to the original.
My biggest fear is that the studio will not have enough trust in the original blueprint and will try to make GB sexier or whatever in an effort to increase ticket sales (like how GB 2 went more kid-friendly and, while not trash, did not come close to the original).
If a Ghostbusters 3 is to succeed it must both poke fun at itself and the absurdity of ghostbusting (the Venkman character fulfilled this objective perfectly in the first ones) while developing a compelling story. All we need is an intelligent script with the right kind of comedy (The Office writers seem like a great choice to me), actors/comedians who can pull it off (no Apatow guys), and the belief that we will come if they stay true to what made the original Ghostbusters such a classic film (and great cartoon series).