Jump to content

Ghostbusters (2016)

CactuarBill

By CactuarBill,
in Film, TV & Radio

 Share

Recommended Posts

CactuarBill

CactuarBill

Posted
Posted

According to a radio interview Dan Akyroyd has confirmed that Ghostbusters 3 will happen but will be CGI. He states that Bill Murray doesn't want to do a live action film but will voice a CG film. I got this news of Aint It Cool....
 

Hey folks, Harry here - wow, it's a CG sort of day. Ok - so if they go this route - will they do a CG John Belushi? As he was originally supposed to be a Ghostbuster. Hmmm, not sure what I think about a CG GHOSTBUSTER flick - I suppose - it's one way to make it a viable eternal franchise without having to recast the leads due to ancient decay. Hmmmm....


Aykroyd was interviewed on the radio and talks about GB:Hellbent. It sounds like it actually will happen. Murray is aboard, but only if they do it CGI. Here's a link CLICK HERE click on part 2 of the radio interview. If you use this, call me "Liverstealer."


Now I couldn't believe this when I read it and don't really know what to think. I've always wanted another Ghostbusters film but a CGI one, I don't know if it will work.

Anyway check the link to AICN out here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
toonfool

toonfool

Posted
Posted

I hated that they were worthless and rejected at the start of Ghostbusters 2, though they managed to justify why it happened. I'd like to have seen them at least start off as massive heroes for what they did in the first film, otherwise it negates everything they did.

Look at the Rocky franchise. The first one was a great story, but it didn't stretch too far, he didn't win the title (open for a sequel, too). The second saw him take the same journey, against the same fighter, who was ready for a fight this time. After that, the whole thing changed, as Rocky was successful.

Oops. I've just argued myself into a hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CactuarBill

CactuarBill

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Why don't they move on and perhaps try and make a new type of film with new, different characters and new jokes? Or am I being silly?

Akyroyd and co. always wanted to do another Ghostbusters film but Murray never wanted to do it but this way they can achieve to tell the story that they wanted to tell for years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goose

Goose

Posted
Posted

If this is a go project (and it really could be wishful thinking whatever Akroyd says) then surely Bill Murray would be happy to join the project? All respect to Bill, like him a lot, but if he turns this down you've got to ask some serious questions - Happy to do TWO GARFIELD movie voiceovers but not this?!

I reckon it could be Akroyd saying that this is the only way he could see a third movie happening as opposed to it actually being in the works.

Fuck it, I'm onboard!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
djezz

djezz

Posted
Posted

I really hate the whole 'the Ghostbusters go to Hell' angle Dan Ackroyd's been trying to sell for years. It's no wonder he's had so little support for it - it sounds like an awful idea for any film, much less a Ghostbusters film.

At least its not the 'typical' view of hell, i havent read any of the alleged scripts but the idea of the GBs running around a parallel NY seems like a natural progression of the first two movies to me - could be the potential for a lot of good character driven comedy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
djezz

djezz

Posted
Posted

If there was a good script, why on Earth wouldn't Murray do a third Ghostbusters movie?

with the exception of garfield (which i still think is his little private joke on the fact that lorenzo music provided the voice for venkman in the old ghostbusters tv show) he seems to be doing more grown up/arty stuff these days. maybe he thinks the idea of of doing another ghostbusters is backpeddling.

perhaps he didnt enjoy making the first two much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
utero2001

utero2001

Posted
Posted

Ghostbusters 1 is a bonafide classic.

Ghostbusters 2 stinks of money-grabbing and has a terrible, terrible finale.

Ghostbusters 2 was one of the first films I saw at the cinema, watching it now the only crap bits seem to be the first 20 minutes where your not sure if they were trying to be funny or not, but once the bad guy starts messing around its as good as the first IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Campfire_Burning

Campfire_Burning

Posted
Posted

At least its not the 'typical' view of hell, i havent read any of the alleged scripts but the idea of the GBs running around a parallel NY seems like a natural progression of the first two movies to me - could be the potential for a lot of good character driven comedy.

It doesn't sound like there's any progression there at all to me. The first two films were very Lovecraftian, with secret cults worshipping ancient gods and building temples and such into the city so the gods might return to rule over the Earth. Ghostbusters 3 sounds like a completely different franchise - it sounds like Little Nicky 2. Hell is overflooded with New Yorkers so the Devil starts sending the deceased back to Earth. The Ghostbusters go to Hell to ask him to stop and he sends them on some mission to stop this from happening, when in fact he's really duping them, presumably so he can swap the Hell New York with the Earth New York. That's an awful idea for a third Ghostbusters film, or as a reboot of the franchise. It might have worked as an episode of The Real Ghostbusters but it should never be allowed near the big screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
djezz

djezz

Posted
Posted

It doesn't sound like there's any progression there at all to me. The first two films were very Lovecraftian, with secret cults worshipping ancient gods and building temples and such into the city so the gods might return to rule over the Earth. Ghostbusters 3 sounds like a completely different franchise - it sounds like Little Nicky 2. Hell is overflooded with New Yorkers so the Devil starts sending the deceased back to Earth. The Ghostbusters go to Hell to ask him to stop and he sends them on some mission to stop this from happening, when in fact he's really duping them, presumably so he can swap the Hell New York with the Earth New York. That's an awful idea for a third Ghostbusters film, or as a reboot of the franchise. It might have worked as an episode of The Real Ghostbusters but it should never be allowed near the big screen.

Your plot synopsis does sound very underwhelming, though its got to be said that it wouldnt take much to add your lovecraftian undertones to it - its safer to call 'the devil' like 'went'b the oscillator' or something similar and to have a cult having invited it to use new york as a soul repositary in secret rituals.

its worth bearing in mind that the potted description of GB1 &2 are as follows:-

GB1: the devil returns to earth in a central park apartment building and the ghostbusters have to save the day.

GB2: dracula enslaves the new york art museum with his evil slime - only the ghostbusters can save the day.

When i said that it seemed like a natural progression of the series i was refering to the fact that the first two films dealt with threats that were like psychic manifestations of the spirit of new york (in the first it was the architecture in the second it was the population) for the third to deal with new york itself being an aspect of hell seems kind of natural.

:) im not giving up on this yet.

being CG would totally remove any feeling of connection with the original two, so if it is shit, it won't devalue the originals

Too true. Even if we just get some kickass new toys out of the deal i'd consider it a win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SeanR

SeanR

Posted
Posted

At least its not the 'typical' view of hell, i havent read any of the alleged scripts but the idea of the GBs running around a parallel NY seems like a natural progression of the first two movies to me - could be the potential for a lot of good character driven comedy.

Like in Constantine, with Keanu Reeves?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
djezz

djezz

Posted
Posted

Like in Constantine, with Keanu Reeves?

No such film, what are you rambling on about now man?

I heard they were going to make a hellblazer movie at one point but then sega were going to make a Psone version of nights at one point too.

Seriously, i haven't seen the thing but GB3 has been in development hell for nearly as long as the (hellblazer) comic has been running so im not sure that plagiarism is a factor here, im not sure the idea of a ghostly alternate reality is unique to the 'constantine canon of original concepts' regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SeanR

SeanR

Posted
Posted

No such film, what are you rambling on about now man?

I heard they were going to make a hellblazer movie at one point but then sega were going to make a Psone version of nights at one point too.

Seriously, i haven't seen the thing but GB3 has been in development hell for nearly as long as the (hellblazer) comic has been running so im not sure that plagiarism is a factor here, im not sure the idea of a ghostly alternate reality is unique to the 'constantine canon of original concepts' regardless.

hacktually I was talking about the

good character driven comedy

I laughed all the way through that film...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Professor Puzzles

Professor Puzzles

Posted
Posted

This sounds amazing. Ghostbusters has always been my number one 'franchise' so I welcome this news with open arms (as long as it's good.)

I had a dream when I was about 10 that they would make GB3 & GB4 back to back to wrap up the series. I hope my dream comes true.

The only other dream I've had come true was a few months ago when I dreamt I had a tiny little ipod with a clip on the back so I could wear it on my shirt. I don't actually have a new ipod shuffle but the release was close enough to my dream that I felt mildly powerful and psychic for at least a couple of hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
djezz

djezz

Posted
Posted

This sounds amazing. Ghostbusters has always been my number one 'franchise' so I welcome this news with open arms (as long as it's good.)

I had a dream when I was about 10 that they would make GB3 & GB4 back to back to wrap up the series. I hope my dream comes true.

The only other dream I've had come true was a few months ago when I dreamt I had a tiny little ipod with a clip on the back so I could wear it on my shirt. I don't actually have a new ipod shuffle but the release was close enough to my dream that I felt mildly powerful and psychic for at least a couple of hours.

why would they need to make two movies to wrap up the series, surely one more would do just fine?, after all we've all grown to live with just having two of the beggars (some would argue thats one too many already)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
djezz

djezz

Posted
Posted

I just want more Ghostbusters.

;) me too, but *please* dont give them the idea to make two at once, i'd more sooner see two movies with actual stories as opposed to having to sit through 'ghostbusters:reloaded' or 'ghostbusters:dead mans chest' if its at all possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept