Bill Murray Still Causing Problems For Ghostbusters 3?

Published 5 years ago by

ghostbusters 3 logo3 Bill Murray Still Causing Problems For Ghostbusters 3?

To be fair, Bill Murray has never pretended to be much of anything but skeptical about the idea of rumored-sequel-that-will-not-die Ghostbusters 3 since the idea popped up over 20 years ago.  Even in a recent interview with Dave Letterman, Murray seemed to dismiss any passion left in him for the franchise as pitiable nostalgia than anything else.

Yet, as dedicated movie fans everywhere know all too well, Ghostbusters 3 is a project that just can’t make up its mind whether to live or die. Director Ivan Reitman may not want Columbia to replace him despite being past his prime, shooting might finally begin this year, Murray’s character Peter Venkman could die in the first few minutes and appear in the rest of the movie as a ghost- you’ve heard it all before.  Seriously, if it wasn’t for Dan Aykroyd’s religious-like devotion to the idea of a third entry in the hit comedy-horror franchise, the project would’ve probably died years ago.

According to the folks over at Bloody Disgusting however, Murray continues to be perhaps the biggest obstacle preventing Ghostbusters 3 from getting anywhere.  He has apparently not been answering phone calls from producers trying to get his approval on the screenplay.  Given that Murray is one of the four big names (alongside Dan Aykroyd, Harold Ramis, and Ivan Reitman) that has final say on the script, the long-gestating project looks to be held up once again.

ghostbusters1 Bill Murray Still Causing Problems For Ghostbusters 3?

Aykroyd is having none of that.  He reportedly called up his old acting pal Murray and told him to “stop acting like a jerk.”  Aykroyd has been pushing for this project since the beginning so it’s no shock that he’s less than willing to just let it die now.

What do you folks think?  Could Ghostbusters 3 potentially be worth all the trouble that’s gone on behind the scenes?  Is Aykroyd right to call out Murray for just causing more drama?  Or is it time to say farewell to the idea once and for all?

Ghostbusters 3 is still tentatively scheduled for Summer 2011 but I wouldn’t recommend holding your breath yet either.

Source: Bloody Disgusting

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. I wish people would get off of this man's back. If he doesn't want to do it, he doesn't want to do it.

  2. I wish people would get off of this man's back. If he doesn't want to do it, he doesn't want to do it.

  3. Get'em Aykroyd!

  4. In all probability, a third Ghostbusters movie would not be any better than the second. Having said that, the idea of seeing these guys get back together after all these years sounds like a blast. Murray certainly is the Beatle with the most artistic integrity in this situation, but it doesn't excuse him from Garfield or holding up a possible Ghostbusters sequel if his pals really want to do it. What else, aside from the occasional cameo, has he been doing lately anyway? We love our Ghostbusters and we love our Murray. So Bill, please, either make the damn movie or give us another Steve Zissou before you go.

  5. That's just it. We wouldn't be getting the guys back. This movie will be a vehicle by which to discard the old, and replace it with the new–new, younger, more “cool” Ghostbusters. I would love this idea if we were going to be getting the original crew (all of them alive) with the new one, but that's not what this movie will do. This will be Star Trek: Generations Ghostbustes style. I suspect this is why Murray doesn't want to do this. It's soundin like they want to do the same thing with his character that Burman wanted to do with Nimoy; to have him around just long enough to wave bye-bye, then shove him off the plank to spotlight the new guys. This is why Nimoy wouldn't do Generations. The story plot did no justice to the character and made him beside the point. If I were going to be blessed with a wonderful career after having spent my life's work building on a particular project and then to be told it didn't matter anymore–I'd be insulted. I really, honestly believe that's what is happening here with Murray and Ghostbusters. Know what? I don't blame him, at all. If I'm right about that being what is going on, he's a better, less greedy, and a better guy to not take the role.

  6. Oh, well…nevermind.

  7. Ghostbusters 4 evah.

  8. Yeah. Poor Billy Murray. Poor,poor guy. All those fans wanting to see him in one of his most famous roles just one more time. What a pain.

  9. … you said better twice. I loled once.

  10. I understand both sides. I'd be interested to see what they do though, You know that Dan and Ivan wouldn't just cock up a “new generation”. This clan would have to hold up the torch or Dan wouldn't go anywhere near it. He's a smart and picky man.

  11. I understand why some are anxious, but I really think these guys have it quite well handled. If only Bill will relax a bit.

  12. I'll wait and see… <=

  13. I actually would really like everyone to pull together and see a third “Ghostbusters.” I loved the first two movies, I really LOVE the game, and it is time for a third one. I read somewhere — some entertainment website — this past summer that they were planning to release the film on 12/21/12 — as we all know, the day the world is suppose to end. Granted, I really don't believe what I read…but it would make a great release date for the movie…at least I think so. I do hope the drama regarding this movie is overcome and they make a really good third movie. Of course for that to happen, they will HAVE to have all of the original stars in the movie…so I do hope they can pull it off. As for Bill Murray — well, of course he has to be in the movie…I miss him in movies (thankfully I did get a bit of him in “Zombieland” — excellent cameo!).

  14. I get what Sarah is saying in her second post and I agree with her. If this were just being made to conclude a story revolving around the originals, I'm all for a GB3. But with the way Hollywood is looking for pre-built franchises this wouldn't be a vehicle for the original busters, it would be looking to launch a new crew of busters. If I remember correctly, Aykroyd, , Murray, Ramis, and Reitman all own the rights to the characters but I'm sure the studio is working a deal to let a new cast continue on and that would almost be the nail in the coffin for me. If I wanted to see all these great 80's movies in the theater again, I'd rev my Delorean up to 88 and amp my flux capacitor to 2.1 gigawatts.

  15. reboot it with sandler, stiller, rogan, and chris rock.

  16. reboot it with sandler, stiller, rogan, and chris rock, with apatow directing, that would work.

  17. What Sarah said. Let it die for Pete's sake.
    4 old guys trying to get into uniforms that don't fit, working out to get in shape, comment's like, “We're too old for this Sh_t!” Where have we seen that before?

    Oh yeah, don't forget all the CG, tons and tons of it!
    But then again, I'm sure they could all use the cash.

    Bill, Keep being a jerk, DON'T answer the phone, that's what voicemail is for!

  18. If they make a new “Ghostbusters” I am completely against putting in new actors to play the old characters. The only way the movie will work, in my opinion, is if they bring in the old actors. I also think the idea of them teaching a younger group of people to take over the ghostbusting business is a good one. As long as they cast unknown *celebrities* to play the younger group. I don't want anyone to outshine the original cast. Again, I would really like to see “Ghostbusters 3″ — I was thrilled when they put out the game, I'd be tickled pink to see a new movie. Plus, if it worked out well and the movie was a success, we could see more “Ghostbusters” movies…however, again, they have to be REALLY careful and it has to be a REALLY good script.

  19. Oh well, that's what I get for not proof reading. :o( . I t was supposed to be: “……better, less greedy, and a more honest guy…..”.

    Nevertheless, I think I still got my point across, though.

  20. You did. Personally, I disagree with you, but that's just life for you.

  21. I'm starting to wonder how much of the press, rumors, and promises about GB's are more a rudder to steer a ship rather than wind in the sails. In other words, I'm getting an impression of manipulative tactics. I don't know anything for sure; all of this is just pure instinct. I mean come on, how could Sony say no if influential people started promising a movie that has a good story, and got the public excited about it? People would be taking out into the streets with torches and pitchforks if Sony said no after all of that. Then what if the story isn't so great and one of the actors with creative control doesn't cooperate? Manipulation could be implemented by ways of embarrassment, slander, and making him sound like a mean, bad guy……and then suddenly after a period of silence he'd be a saint once he stops moving against the grain. All of this is purely speculative, I don't know at all as to whether this is what is happening. I'm just a person who likes to read in between the lines. All I know is nothing has reported any constructive movement at all, since the news came out that there is going to be a new movie. It's got me wondering how much commitment Sony really has to this project, and why we're still hearing so many promises in the interim.

  22. Yes, I am posting again…not that anyone reads what I post! I agree with many of the comments here…and disagree, obviously, with some. People do want to see another “Ghostbusters” movie, that is easy to see. I mean look at the success the “Ghostbusters” game is having…all because it features just the voices of four “Ghostbusters” characters. Of course, it is a kick arse game as well so that doesn't hurt. I also agree that Dan Aykroyd is VERY picky about the movies he takes part in and he would NOT want to ruin such a classic movie series. So the script has got to be good for him to be wanting to further pursue this project.

    There are so many more things available now — meaning special effects wise — I would just love to see what they can do with a new “Ghostbusters” movie. I also highly doubt that they are going to kill ANY of the original “Ghostbusters” — that would anger way too many fans and the film would flop. Sure it would open big, then word would leak out that they killed a main character from the original films and that would be the end of that hot streak. The characters are just too well loved.

    Now, I can't believe what I am about to say, but whoever said that the “National Enquirer” is 100% wrong all the time. Sorry, but you are far from the truth. I no longer read the “National Enquirer” — mainly because I don't have time but also because it is simply too high priced nowadays for a tabloid — but when it comes to breaking stories, they are pretty good at getting it right. In the old days, yes…they were big on printing false stories but these days…when respectable journalists such as Anderson Cooper and Larry King take quotes from the “National Enquirer” obviously a lot has changed with this tabloid. My Mom still reads it…and I will catch a headline or two from the cover — sure enough, a week or so later, the story that the “National Enquirer” had original broke, is now big news. So give them a little credit. Unlike the other tabloids…it seems that the “National Enquirer” has actually stepped up a notch. Probably because they were tired of all the lawsuits.

    ANYWAY…back to “Ghostbusters 3″ — again, I would love to see it happen. If it doesn't – I will be a little bit disappointed but I will know it was because the script wasn't good enough and that they didn't want to disappoint the fans. It would also mean they weren't in it just to make money — which is a lot more then I can say for other celebrities.

  23. just reboot it Bill just doesn't want to do it. If he doesn't want to let him be.

  24. I think Murray should stop being such a dick and be grateful. The GB-franchise made him a star. What did he do after GB 2? A roadmovie with an elephant, a boring movie in which Scarlett Johanson play him against the wall and a cameo in Zombieland. Nothing to be proud of.

  25. The “Generations” plot did no justice to Nimoys character? What about that crappy reboot movie? He didn´t have to be in that either. They put Nimoy in it, just in case the movie sucked (it did), so the average cinema-goer would see it, just because Spock was in it.

  26. I don't care if GB3 isn't better than the first one, or the same as the second one. I just want to see it finally get made. Anyone who is a die-hard GB fan should agree. I'm hoping GB3 ( if it gets made) is every bit if not better than the first but if it even gets done at all would be a dream come true. Murray needs to come to his senses and just stop being so ornery. I wouldn't be hesitant to say that a good majority of his fans didn't primarily stem from the original movie itself. If he wants to do good by all of his fans he will come back and give this thing everything he has.