Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media Entertainment

Original Cast On Board For Ghostbusters 3 444

bowman9991 writes "Dan Aykroyd reveals that all the original cast have now signed on for Ghostbusters 3, including Sigourney Weaver, Bill Murray, Harold Ramis and Ernie Hudson. Apparently Bill Murray, who holds a one-fifth controlling interest, was very reluctant at first, not even willing to read a third draft of Aykroyd's script. Aykroyd would like to see Ivan Reitman or Harold Ramis direct, wants to introduce a 'new generation' of Ghostbusters, and believes they could be filming the new Ghostbuster movie by winter."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Original Cast On Board For Ghostbusters 3

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Oops... I mean post.
  • Gee (Score:5, Funny)

    by QuantumG ( 50515 ) * <qg@biodome.org> on Thursday May 21, 2009 @08:35PM (#28048467) Homepage Journal

    I hope its as good as Blues Brothers 2000.

    • Re:Gee (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Zouden ( 232738 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @08:51PM (#28048587)

      I can't wait to see who they're going to cast as the annoying kid ghostbuster, complete with mini-backpack.

      I hear Jessica Biel is going to play the kick-ass female ghostbuster who doesn't take crap from nobody - but is she falling for the hunky new ghostbuster (Shia LaBeouf)?

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by vertinox ( 846076 )

      I hope its as good as Blues Brothers 2000.

      Last night I saw the new Star Trek with my girl friend and as we sat through the movie previews, they showed both the new GI Joe and Transformers 2.

      My girlfriend turned to me with a frantic look and said "They're ruining our childhood!!"

  • Can we (Score:5, Insightful)

    by lawpoop ( 604919 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @08:39PM (#28048495) Homepage Journal
    I'm all for Ghostbusters 3, but I don't understand this idea to put the original cast in it. They left Schwarzenegger out of Terminator 4 for a reason. Harrison Ford looked like a bad casting job in the latest Indiana Jones.

    Seeing a bunch of guys in their 60s doing action/adventure stuff won't cut it for me, I don't think. It's just a mis-match of the phases of human life and the plot of the story. Running around doing crazy shit is a young person's thing; a story where the cast is middle-aged should have the plot that involves the drama that a middle aged person gets involved in -- kids, grandkids, getting old, missed opportunities, rectifying relationships, taking on responsiblities, coming to terms with your life, etc.

    I think the baby boomers represented the great consumerist generation, and the marketers are trying to squeeze the last dollars out of this demographic.
    • Re:Can we (Score:5, Insightful)

      by binarylarry ( 1338699 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @08:41PM (#28048509)

      You really considered the original ghostbusters movies action adventure flicks?

      • Re:Can we (Score:5, Insightful)

        by lawpoop ( 604919 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @09:29PM (#28048857) Homepage Journal
        I don't know, it ended with some kind of lightning battle with an interdimensional god and a giant Stay Puft marshmallow man on the New York skyline... what category does that normally go in?
        • by _KiTA_ ( 241027 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @09:34PM (#28048891) Homepage

          I don't know, it ended with some kind of lightning battle with an interdimensional god and a giant Stay Puft marshmallow man on the New York skyline... what category does that normally go in?

          Acid Trip.

        • by gnick ( 1211984 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @10:12PM (#28049091) Homepage

          I don't know, it ended with some kind of lightning battle with an interdimensional god and a giant Stay Puft marshmallow man on the New York skyline...

          Damn it man, can't you preface that with a [Spoiler Alert]?!? It's still in my Netflix queue...

          • Re:Can we (Score:5, Informative)

            by HeronBlademaster ( 1079477 ) <heron@xnapid.com> on Thursday May 21, 2009 @10:30PM (#28049171) Homepage

            There is (or at least, there should be) a five year limit to how long after a movie comes out it's required to preface spoilers with a warning. That's enough time for the movie to go from theaters to crappy network stations.

            Books, on the other hand, shouldn't have that limit. It's hard to go through books as quickly as movies.

            • by PachmanP ( 881352 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @11:52PM (#28049673)

              There is (or at least, there should be) a five year limit to how long after a movie comes out it's required to preface spoilers with a warning. That's enough time for the movie to go from theaters to crappy network stations.

              Books, on the other hand, shouldn't have that limit. It's hard to go through books as quickly as movies.

              Harry killed Gandalf! My God, it's full of stars. The white whale gets away, but gets caught again for Free Moby 2 through 17. The yerks take over the world and have love children with the g'ould. The Pope is actually an alien, and Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones are the Illuminati.

              That said it was a good book, and you should read it anyway.

            • by bogjobber ( 880402 ) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:42AM (#28049891)
              [SPOILER ALERT] Jesus dies! [/SPOILER ALERT]
              • by iJusten ( 1198359 ) on Friday May 22, 2009 @01:17AM (#28050043)
                They're going to resurrect him in the sequel. After all, he's the most popular guy in the franchise.
                • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

                  by sorak ( 246725 )

                  They're going to resurrect him in the sequel. After all, he's the most popular guy in the franchise.

                  Yeah..The next one takes place in Utah. They have this funny scene at first where some dubious followers are doing the whole "weekend at Bernies" thing, and it's totally not working out for them, but then, surprise! He's back. After that, it's all dick and fart jokes. I wouldn't recommend it.

            • by Whalou ( 721698 ) on Friday May 22, 2009 @07:10AM (#28051751)

              Books, on the other hand, shouldn't have that limit. It's hard to go through books as quickly as movies.

              Get a better shredder.

    • Re:Can we (Score:5, Interesting)

      by MichaelSmith ( 789609 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @08:43PM (#28048527) Homepage Journal

      Seeing a bunch of guys in their 60s doing action/adventure stuff won't cut it for me, I don't think. It's just a mis-match of the phases of human life and the plot of the story. Running around doing crazy shit is a young person's thing; a story where the cast is middle-aged should have the plot that involves the drama that a middle aged person gets involved in -- kids, grandkids, getting old, missed opportunities, rectifying relationships, taking on responsiblities, coming to terms with your life, etc.

      I am 43 and I spend more time running around doing crazy shit than I did when I was 20 years younger, mainly because I have the money and time now, and my seven year old son has similar tastes in crazy shit (or is learning too, anyway).

      But yeah, Bill Murray wants to move on, maybe the others should as well. Maybe they won't be there in the fourth if it gets made.

    • Re:Can we (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rishistar ( 662278 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @08:47PM (#28048559) Homepage

      Seeing a bunch of guys in their 60s doing action/adventure stuff won't cut it for me, I don't think.

      Ghostbusters doesn't really have action sequences though in the same way that Indiana Jones did. The biggest action sequence was probably them running ut of the library.

    • Re:Can we (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Kamokazi ( 1080091 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @08:51PM (#28048585)
      While I agree with you for Indiana and Terminator, Ghostbusters is different. It's a comedy/action movie. Who the hell can replace Bill Murray and Dan Akroyd?
      • Re:Can we (Score:5, Insightful)

        by MichaelSmith ( 789609 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @08:53PM (#28048601) Homepage Journal
        If the new Pink Panther movies are any guide, nobody.
      • by GaryOlson ( 737642 ) <slashdot@NOSPam.garyolson.org> on Thursday May 21, 2009 @09:20PM (#28048805) Journal

        Who the hell can replace Bill Murray and Dan Akroyd?

        Jackie Chan and Chris Tucker? Chris tucker distracts Cuthulu with a continuous rant on Cuthulu's personal hygene and Jackie stunt fights thru the reanimated denizens of the Netherworld in a proton accelerated tuxedo.

      • Re:Can we (Score:5, Insightful)

        by penguin_dance ( 536599 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @09:47PM (#28048983)

        If anyone cares to notice, we're all recalling the original Ghostbusters which was great. That's because the Ghostbusters II (which also had the original cast) SUCKED big time!

        Unfortunately, I think this may be a case of, "Hey none of us are getting gigs, let's do a remake!"

        Sometimes you can't go back. {sigh} But I hope I'm wrong.

        • Re:Can we (Score:5, Interesting)

          by LurkerXXX ( 667952 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @10:40PM (#28049235)

          "Hey none of us are getting gigs, let's do a remake!"

          Yeah, they are all just desperate for work...

          Just take Bill Murray for example. In the past 5 years he's only got 12 projects listed on the Internet Movie Database

          Including :

          The Darjeeling Limited 67% fresh on Rotton Tomatoes [rottentomatoes.com]

          The City of Ember

          Get Smart

          Broken Flowers 87% fresh [rottentomatoes.com]

          The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou

          That's a struggling actor not getting gigs?

          Sigourney Weaver? Bah, she only has 18 film projects listed since 2004. And lots of TV gigs. LOTS. That's hardly working in the world of LA actors though, right? Oh.

          Harold Ramis? Well, he's sure slowed down in his writing, but he's been acting a little (Knocked Up,Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story, etc), a little producing, a little directing (a few episodes of The Office, etc). It looks like he's picking and choosing and having fun, not really struggling for projects.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            The Darjeeling Limited?? Bill Murray didn't even have a speaking role, he appeared for a full 5 seconds.

            The Life Aquatic was a steaming turd.

            Bill Murray hasn't been in anything good for years.
            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by LurkerXXX ( 667952 )

              And how much did he get paid for 5 seconds of work?

              I never claimed all the stuff was Oscar material, just that none of them are starving for work.

              I think they are doing this project, sure for some cash (more is always good), but also because it probably sounds like fun getting together with a bunch of old friends for a few months on a fun project.

              Not that that will make it a great movie, but that they've got motivation that's definitely not 'we aren't getting any gigs'.

          • Re:Can we (Score:5, Insightful)

            by SethJohnson ( 112166 ) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:29AM (#28049849) Homepage Journal
            Everything Lurker says about those people is spot on. He's missing any commentary on Akroyd who is DESPERATE for money. So much so that he played the Dad in Britney Spears' movie, Crossroads. Murray resisted because he didn't want to let Akroyd rape the legacy of Ghostbusters like he did with Blues Brothers (2000).

            Harold Ramis is the most successful of all, and I can only imagine the reason he would particpate is out of charity to Dan Akroyd.

            Seth
    • by Junior J. Junior III ( 192702 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @09:17PM (#28048789) Homepage

      Maybe the original cast could be the ghosts.

      Besides, Ghostbusters isn't really an action film. It's a comedy with some effects.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Goodl ( 518602 )

        Maybe the original cast could be the ghosts.

        Besides, Ghostbusters isn't really an action film. It's a comedy with some effects.

        ya know, I dont think this is a bad idea, the guys could be in the middle of a struggle to put down some nefarious spirit when one of the backpacks overloads and explodes causing a chain reaction with the rest of the guys. Cue big boom and when the dust settles they are all transparent like at the end of Jedi looking at one another and thinking *fuck*

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by corbettw ( 214229 )

      60s is middle-aged? What does that make your 40s then? Adolescence 2: Reading Glasses Boogaloo?

    • by CuteSteveJobs ( 1343851 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @09:41PM (#28048931)

      Iron Man was great because it gave 40-somethings an action hero *THEY* can relate to.

      Not your typical, whiny, prissy-haired Generation-Y superhero who between fighting bad guys (like "Eco Man" and "The Recycler") shops and uses his iPhone to update his Twitter feed: "kckd butt yo lol lawl in4a!"

      If GhostBusters 3 gives 60-somethings an action hero they can relate to (Because Indy 4 sure as hell didn't), good for them!

    • Re:Can we (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Have Brain Will Rent ( 1031664 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @11:05PM (#28049395)

      Running around doing crazy shit is a young person's thing; a story where the cast is middle-aged should have the plot that involves the drama that a middle aged person gets involved in -- kids, grandkids, getting old, missed opportunities, rectifying relationships, taking on responsibilities, coming to terms with your life, etc.

      Wow you need to know some different old people. In his 60's my Dad was travelling the world. Malaysia, Australia, The Alps, India... at his funeral (in his 70's) my sister and I found out he had three girlfriends at the time he died (no, that wasn't the cause :). At one point one of them took me aside and told me how while taking a break during sex she had ridden him naked around the living room and patio...

      • by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Friday May 22, 2009 @06:05AM (#28051315) Journal
        I think I'm going to bookmark this post, and reread it whenever I worry about getting old...
    • Re:Can we (Score:5, Insightful)

      by cashman73 ( 855518 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @11:07PM (#28049411) Journal
      They left Schwarzenegger out of Terminator 4 for a reason.

      The reason being that Arnold is a tad occupied with being the Governor of California at the moment,...

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 21, 2009 @08:40PM (#28048505)

    Ghostbusters 3: Haunted Retirement Community

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 21, 2009 @08:42PM (#28048517)

    At least they finally made up their minds.
    I remember when they first decided to make a new one, then scrapped the movie in favor of a video game... some of us are still haunted by the original ghostbusters games.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by greenguy ( 162630 )

      some of us are still haunted by the original ghostbusters games.

      I think that was actually the idea that made Bill Murray not want to read the third draft of the script.

  • ...and reboot the series. Then they could get Clive Barker or John Carpenter to direct.

  • Will there also be a live action tv series spinoff like a lot of films?

    Someone's already created a rather good intro:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBQi9LHIzbA [youtube.com]
  • Cocoon? (Score:2, Funny)

    by beatbox32 ( 325106 )
    With ghosts? Hell, may as well have Wilford Brimley sign on if he can get some time away from filming Diabeetus ads.
  • by FlyingSquidStudios ( 1031284 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @09:13PM (#28048753)
    In troubled times, I often like to say to myself the immortal words of Mr. Ray Parker, Jr. who said, and I quote, "bustin' makes me feel good."
  • by Conspiracy_Of_Doves ( 236787 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @09:17PM (#28048779)

    Please, don't let the 'new generation of Ghostbusters' consist of a goth girl, a hispanic guy, a guy in a wheelchair, and black mechanic.

  • by p51d007 ( 656414 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @10:25PM (#28049143)
    Terminator "4", Ghostbuster 3, Radiers 4, Batman 1,244 etc etc.... All hollywood knows how to do these days is take the same old worn out theme, slap on a fresh coat of paint and throw it up there. At least the "new" Star Trek "reboot" had a different cast!
    • by mosherkl ( 1251628 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @10:46PM (#28049291)

      C'mon. At least of the 6 major Batman movies, 4 of them were decent or good (I'm sorry, but Batman & Robin and Batman Forever SUCKED!). Did you even SEE The Dark Knight? Hardly slapping on a fresh coat of paint and slapping it up there. And nevermind that Batman Begins WAS basically a "reboot" for the franchise.

      And it's not necessarily originality that's lacking in Hollywood. It's the fact that original, high profile, big budget pictures tend to elicit quite a following if they're at least decent, and this causes sequels to be "big" as well simply because people who liked the first (or second, or tenth) will come see the next simply out of curiousity. Repeat ad nauseum.

    • Terminator "4", Ghostbuster 3, Radiers 4, Batman 1,244 etc etc.... All hollywood knows how to do these days is take the same old worn out theme, slap on a fresh coat of paint and throw it up there.

      I hate to break this to you - but Hollywood has been recycling themes and plots since about the time the fourth movie came out of Hollywood. Hell, even Shakespeare recycled plots and themes.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Animats ( 122034 )

      Not much. "Police Academy 8" is back in development, after being shelved in 2003 and 2006. I think that's the highest sequel number with the same title.

      Hollywood is down to mining the more obscure comic books and toys. The Silver Surfer has been done. GI Joe comes out this summer. There's another Transformers movie. Yawn.

      Even "Terminator Salvation" is disappointing.

      "Angels and Demons" isn't bad, except that it turns into one of those stupid "beat the clock" movies. (Previous "beat the clock" m

  • by jollyreaper ( 513215 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @10:38PM (#28049229)

    It's gonna stink on ice. It's going to feel like Star Trek and Indy IV, actors we love and respect acting like paunchy, 45 yr old high school football stars trying to hit on hot young thangs at the bar. Jesus, you were good twenty years ago but it's over now, show some fucking dignity and let it rest. But no, they won't. Even if I don't see the movie I'll be traumatized just from the sheer weight of hype out there.

    You know what the sad thing is? Ghostbusters 2 was an awful movie but, honestly, the first one wasn't very good either. The premise is still great, that holds up all these years later, but the damn thing was just so underwritten. As a first draft it's fine but there needed to be more punch in the dialog, more oomph per minute. I saw it about six months back after not having seen it since it first came out, my strongest memories from the cartoon. (Collect Call of Cthulhu? You guys rawked). While I missed out on all the sexual subtext as a kid (and didn't realize Akroyd was getting a spectral blowjob), I also didn't realize just how creepy Murray came across. He's the skeezy sexual harassment guy.

    Ah, well. It's not like common sense or good taste has ever turned Hollywood off from a project.

  • Pass what? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jav1231 ( 539129 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @10:45PM (#28049281)
    This "passing the torch" idea is bad. Those who relate to the cast aren't going to relate to the new team and if they go forward in new GB flicks, you'll lose the generation that remembers the original. Then you have a heavy burden: make the movie SO good you WANT to know where the new team goes next. That's a tall order and the odds are against you.
  • Rick Moranis? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by scubamage ( 727538 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @11:13PM (#28049461)
    Just curious, will Rick Moranis be involved? Last I heard he quit acting to spend time with his kids - by no means a dishonorable thing, in fact I laud him for that. Still, would be nice to see the WHOLE original cast back.
  • reboot (Score:5, Funny)

    by cstacy ( 534252 ) on Thursday May 21, 2009 @11:31PM (#28049579)
    The phone rings and a desperate call, but the team is already engaged and Rick Moranis is left to answer the call. Attempting to prove himself worthy of being a Ghostbuster, he goes alone to encounter a demon who sends him back in time several years before the original Gozer encounter. Rick does get some action with Sigourney Weaver this time, but some other things go horribly wrong. But there is plenty of action and special effects, and by the end of the movie the team is formed albeit with some slight changes. Ghostbusters Headquarters looks like the Apple Store. Complete with Macbook Pros. And lens flare. Lots of lens flare.
  • by xmundt ( 415364 ) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:22AM (#28049813)

    is the Buckaroo Banzi films. WITH the original cast....
                  Still waiting hopefully...
    THird best line in the movie: The answer Lithgow gave the general..."It's not my G-D planet, Monkey Boy!".

              Followed closely by
    "Where are we going to go?
              Home (says the Greek chorus...)
    When are we going to leave?
              Real soon now...."

    and the big winner:
            "Wherever you go, there you are!"

    regards & Cheerfully Off topic...
    dave mundt

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Working...