Ghostbusters 2016: Talk about the movie(s).

[nvek86]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

To quote the Video Blogger host of "Shameful Sequels" in his review to "Garfield 2" (paraphrased): "Bill Murray refuses to do Ghostbusters 3 but he says yes to this shit?"

Apparently it was a case of mistaken identity:

http://blog.moviefone.com/2010/07/21/bill-murray-admits-garfield-mistake/

Of course, this does not explain why he did the second one as well (but to be fair: he was the best thing about those films).

 

[Captain Craig]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Looks like the project is back in development hell (or more than likely dead). I don't really want to see a Ghostbusters III without Bill Murray. Ah hell...I'm a little wishy washy on the subject

Damn! Just kill this already! We don't need another Kingdom of the Crystal Skull!

I like Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

I liked "Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" as well. It's not a great movie by any means but it was enjoyable.

 

[Timby]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

To quote the Video Blogger host of "Shameful Sequels" in his review to "Garfield 2" (paraphrased): "Bill Murray refuses to do Ghostbusters 3 but he says yes to this shit?"

Apparently it was a case of mistaken identity:

http://blog.moviefone.com/2010/07/21/bill-murray-admits-garfield-mistake/

Of course, this does not explain why he did the second one as well (but to be fair: he was the best thing about those films).

If you think that Cohen / Coen thing is anything more than Murray being completely tongue-in-cheek, you need to think again. Bill Murray is basically the ultimate troll, and with Garfield, he got paid a truckload of money to go into a voice booth for a few days and record his dialogue.

In any event, I hope this finally kills the project once and for all.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

I think Bill would do it if they had a script in place that pleased him...to me that seems to be the problem with any of these attempts, there isn't a script that is of interest to him.

 

[Aragorn]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

To quote the Video Blogger host of "Shameful Sequels" in his review to "Garfield 2" (paraphrased): "Bill Murray refuses to do Ghostbusters 3 but he says yes to this shit?"

Apparently it was a case of mistaken identity:

http://blog.moviefone.com/2010/07/21/bill-murray-admits-garfield-mistake/

Of course, this does not explain why he did the second one as well (but to be fair: he was the best thing about those films).

If you believe that, then you'd also believe that Chuck Norris can personally make a $100 million movie he's barely in PG-13.

Maybe Ian McShane and Joan Allen can explain Death Race by saying they thought they were going to be working with the Paul Anderson who made Magnolia and Boogie Nights.

 

[Timby]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

I think Bill would do it if they had a script in place that pleased him...to me that seems to be the problem with any of these attempts, there isn't a script that is of interest to him.

Since you're apparently on a first-name basis with him, maybe you can ask.

No, Murray's reluctance (and now, refusal) is due to two factors: One, he had a terrible time on Ghostbusters II and it really soured him on the franchise. Two, he and Ramis still have never really mended their fences since the complete and utter falling out that came about because of Groundhog Day. It's not a Cold War like it was until about 2004 or 2005, but the two are still not anywhere near being on the best of terms. Murray's a very sensitive guy, and he was very hurt by Aykroyd and Reitman on Ghostbusters II, and he felt incredibly hurt by Ramis on Groundhog Day. He very clearly doesn't have much interest in resurrecting a franchise he isn't terribly fond of in the first place, especially when there's no real creative reason to do so.

 

[MPH]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Should just reboot it!

 

[Trekker4747]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

To quote the Video Blogger host of "Shameful Sequels" in his review to "Garfield 2" (paraphrased): "Bill Murray refuses to do Ghostbusters 3 but he says yes to this shit?"

Apparently it was a case of mistaken identity:

http://blog.moviefone.com/2010/07/21/bill-murray-admits-garfield-mistake/

Of course, this does not explain why he did the second one as well (but to be fair: he was the best thing about those films).

If you think that Cohen / Coen thing is anything more than Murray being completely tongue-in-cheek, you need to think again. Bill Murray is basically the ultimate troll, and with Garfield, he got paid a truckload of money to go into a voice booth for a few days and record his dialogue.

In any event, I hope this finally kills the project once and for all.

Yeah, I don't believe the "Cohen/Coen" story for a minute it sounds to me like classic Bill Murray trying to make a joke out of a bad choice. If he likes the work of the Coens so much he'd certainly notice the different spelling of the name, the lack of the other brother and, oh, the fact that he never met them during production.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

You have absolutely no proof that Bill Murray can spell.

For gods sake, the man is an actor.

AN ACTOR!

And he's not one of those actors that remembers lines either.

 

[Cyke101]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

I think Bill would do it if they had a script in place that pleased him...to me that seems to be the problem with any of these attempts, there isn't a script that is of interest to him.

Since you're apparently on a first-name basis with him, maybe you can ask.

No, Murray's reluctance (and now, refusal) is due to two factors: One, he had a terrible time on Ghostbusters II and it really soured him on the franchise. Two, he and Ramis still have never really mended their fences since the complete and utter falling out that came about because of Groundhog Day. It's not a Cold War like it was until about 2004 or 2005, but the two are still not anywhere near being on the best of terms. Murray's a very sensitive guy, and he was very hurt by Aykroyd and Reitman on Ghostbusters II, and he felt incredibly hurt by Ramis on Groundhog Day. He very clearly doesn't have much interest in resurrecting a franchise he isn't terribly fond of in the first place, especially when there's no real creative reason to do so.

I'm fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing... what happened in Groundhog Day that split them apart?

 

[Dream]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Since Murray did Garfield 2, he is obviously not above doing a bad movie simply for the paycheck.

 

[Timby]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

I think Bill would do it if they had a script in place that pleased him...to me that seems to be the problem with any of these attempts, there isn't a script that is of interest to him.

Since you're apparently on a first-name basis with him, maybe you can ask.

No, Murray's reluctance (and now, refusal) is due to two factors: One, he had a terrible time on Ghostbusters II and it really soured him on the franchise. Two, he and Ramis still have never really mended their fences since the complete and utter falling out that came about because of Groundhog Day. It's not a Cold War like it was until about 2004 or 2005, but the two are still not anywhere near being on the best of terms. Murray's a very sensitive guy, and he was very hurt by Aykroyd and Reitman on Ghostbusters II, and he felt incredibly hurt by Ramis on Groundhog Day. He very clearly doesn't have much interest in resurrecting a franchise he isn't terribly fond of in the first place, especially when there's no real creative reason to do so.

I'm fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing... what happened in Groundhog Day that split them apart?

Murray felt his character, and the story, should be played completely seriously, as though it were a drama, while Ramis said, "Come on, this is a comedy." There were several large blow-ups between the two on the set, and it culminated in Murray, after his last scene was completed, going over to Ramis and saying, essentially, "I have nothing more to say to you." Ramis reached out several times throughout the '90s and the early parts of the aughts, but Murray didn't return any calls from Ramis until something like 2005 (I believe that was the year; I need to check my interview notes); they're on speaking terms nowadays, but Murray is still pretty hurt. I'm sure that part of it is him being childish, but, really, he's earned it.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

I'm well aware of the issues that Murray has had...which doesn't make my point any less valid. I think he was waiting for a draft of the script which would absolutely convince him to come back and that addressed his concerns and problems. Obviously that script never came about due to his previous comments on the subject, and frankly based on what some of those supposed drafts were, I'm not surprised he has rejected the project.

 

[Trekker4747]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Since you're apparently on a first-name basis with him, maybe you can ask.

No, Murray's reluctance (and now, refusal) is due to two factors: One, he had a terrible time on Ghostbusters II and it really soured him on the franchise. Two, he and Ramis still have never really mended their fences since the complete and utter falling out that came about because of Groundhog Day. It's not a Cold War like it was until about 2004 or 2005, but the two are still not anywhere near being on the best of terms. Murray's a very sensitive guy, and he was very hurt by Aykroyd and Reitman on Ghostbusters II, and he felt incredibly hurt by Ramis on Groundhog Day. He very clearly doesn't have much interest in resurrecting a franchise he isn't terribly fond of in the first place, especially when there's no real creative reason to do so.

I'm fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing... what happened in Groundhog Day that split them apart?

Murray felt his character, and the story, should be played completely seriously, as though it were a drama, while Ramis said, "Come on, this is a comedy." There were several large blow-ups between the two on the set, and it culminated in Murray, after his last scene was completed, going over to Ramis and saying, essentially, "I have nothing more to say to you." Ramis reached out several times throughout the '90s and the early parts of the aughts, but Murray didn't return any calls from Ramis until something like 2005 (I believe that was the year; I need to check my interview notes); they're on speaking terms nowadays, but Murray is still pretty hurt. I'm sure that part of it is him being childish, but, really, he's earned it.

Bill Murray, as is suggested in that very movie about his character, is a big prima donna.

 

[Captain Craig]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Since you're apparently on a first-name basis with him, maybe you can ask.

No, Murray's reluctance (and now, refusal) is due to two factors: One, he had a terrible time on Ghostbusters II and it really soured him on the franchise. Two, he and Ramis still have never really mended their fences since the complete and utter falling out that came about because of Groundhog Day. It's not a Cold War like it was until about 2004 or 2005, but the two are still not anywhere near being on the best of terms. Murray's a very sensitive guy, and he was very hurt by Aykroyd and Reitman on Ghostbusters II, and he felt incredibly hurt by Ramis on Groundhog Day. He very clearly doesn't have much interest in resurrecting a franchise he isn't terribly fond of in the first place, especially when there's no real creative reason to do so.

I'm fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing... what happened in Groundhog Day that split them apart?

Murray felt his character, and the story, should be played completely seriously, as though it were a drama, while Ramis said, "Come on, this is a comedy." There were several large blow-ups between the two on the set, and it culminated in Murray, after his last scene was completed, going over to Ramis and saying, essentially, "I have nothing more to say to you." Ramis reached out several times throughout the '90s and the early parts of the aughts, but Murray didn't return any calls from Ramis until something like 2005 (I believe that was the year; I need to check my interview notes); they're on speaking terms nowadays, but Murray is still pretty hurt. I'm sure that part of it is him being childish, but, really, he's earned it.

I didn't know about that with Groundhog day either. IMO, Ramis was right then. I think that movie is gold. One of my favorites easily. Shame that Murray took the Takei to Shatner approach though with Ramis.

 

[Samurai8472]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Since Murray did Garfield 2, he is obviously not above doing a bad movie simply for the paycheck.

I think he knew it was going to be crap so he just did it for the paycheck and sleepwalked in the recording studio.

But for Ghostbusters 3 he probably wants it to be great and won't sign on unless it's up to his standards.

So I think he cares about Ghostbusters 3.

It's basically him wanting to put effort into something.

 

[Trekker4747]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

No, as has been pointed out (and made pretty much obvious since, like, 1985) Murray doesn't care about Ghostbusters.

 

[ALF]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Murray's a very sensitive guy, and he was very hurt by Aykroyd and Reitman on Ghostbusters II, and he felt incredibly hurt by Ramis on Groundhog Day. He very clearly doesn't have much interest in resurrecting a franchise he isn't terribly fond of in the first place, especially when there's no real creative reason to do so.

I didn't know about the Groundhog Day stuff, so that's interesting. I believe all of the players in GBII got screwed, not only Murray. Apparently when they arrived on the set of day 1 of shooting the studio had interfered with nearly everything and changed large portions of the film, aggravating all who had input in the original story.

As for the last point about resurrecting a project/without a creative reason, it doesn't explain Murray's involvement in the Video Game. I'm replaying it again right now and he's clearly channeled enough Venkman in the voice overs to make it believable. Perhaps he saw the game as a valuable project but not making the third film?

Ultimately I stand behind Dan A, he's the guy with the paranormal interest behind the franchise. All the great comedy Bill brought to the series is excellent but I don't think it's the crux of the Ghostbusters. That's Dan.



One interesting twist is last year, when Murray appeared at The Scream Awards show in full GB gear. At that point, I thought to myself, "I know he's having a laugh and all, but if in the near future he officially turns down his role as Venkman, isn't he doing sort of a 'screw you' to his fans?"

 

[Haggis and tatties]

Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

If they dont get a move on they will eventually be the ghost's getting busted. LOL