Dan Aykroyd Says Bill Murray Officially Out of ‘Ghostbusters 3′

Published 2 years ago by

Dan Akroyd Says No Bill Murray Ghostbusters 3 Dan Aykroyd Says Bill Murray Officially Out of Ghostbusters 3

A few years back, in the wake of Rocky 6, Die Hard 4, and Indy 4, it seemed like Ghostbusters 3 was well on its way to being greenlit with the original cast on board – including Bill Murray as a ghost. Now? Not so much.

Recently, there were rumors about Murray’s resistance to a threequel – rumors that involved the screenplay and a shredder, and which Dan Aykroyd addressed when word of Murray’s resistance spread throughout the Interwebs. Now, Aykroyd is confirming that Murray is 100% out of Ghostbusters 3.

On the status of Ghostbusters 3, courtesy of The Telegraph, Aykroyd said:

“At this point it’s in suspended animation. The studio, the director Ivan Reitman, and Harold Ramis feel there must be a way to do it, but Bill Murray will not do the movie.”

On why Murray is reluctant to take part in Ghostbusters 3:

“He doesn’t want to be involved. He’s got six kids, houses all over America. He golfs in these tournaments where they pay him to turn up and have a laugh. He’s into this life and living it. I know we’d have a lot of fun [but] I can’t be mad at him. He’s a friend first, a colleague second. We have a deep personal relationship that transcends business and he doesn’t want to know.”

Dan Akroyd Ghostbusters 3 Dan Aykroyd Says Bill Murray Officially Out of Ghostbusters 3

Aykroyd says he isn’t angry, but there appears to be some frustration on his part regardless of his friendship with Bill Murray.  The “houses all over America” bit seems particularly irrelevant. On whether or not he wants to recast Peter Venkman, Aykroyd said:

“We’re not going to do a movie that exploits the franchise. The script has to be perfect. I’m the cheerleader, but I’m only one voice in the matter. It’s a surety that Bill Murray will not do the movie, however there is still interest from the studio.”

Unfortunately, there was a distinct lack of a “No, we will not be replacing Bill Murray,” anywhere in that statement. While there are almost certainly Ghostbusters fans out there interested in seeing a threequel, there are no doubt far fewer fans interested in a sequel sans Bill Murray. That’s because the original would not be a classic without him, just like any sequel will automatically be viewed by many as diluted product.

It’s science, really: The less Bill Murray a film has, the less awesome it is.

Bill Murray Moonrise Kingdom Dan Aykroyd Says Bill Murray Officially Out of Ghostbusters 3

Bill Murray in Wes Anderson's 'Moonrise Kingdom'

Dan Aykroyd and everyone interested in making Ghostbusters 3 will likely need Bill Murray (who owns some of the rights) to sign off on the threequel before it can become a reality. That being the case, I (and I’m sure others) hope he holds out in perpetuity.

As always, we’ll keep you updated on the status of Ghostbusters 3.

-

Follow me on Twitter @benandrewmoore.

Source: The Telegraph

TAGS: ghostbusters, ghostbusters 3

72 Comments

Post a Comment

  1. I’m honestly surprised they are trying to make a third. They are getting old; and no Bill Murray? I thought they were going to cast some of the biggest younger stars of today for a reboot.

  2. Let this thing die.

  3. I dont mind them doing a 3quel to introduce a new younger set of ghostbusters but without bill murray they shouldnt even try.

  4. I think this is a smart decision by Bill Murray. As much as I would love to see a 3rd movie, I’d rather it not be done than risk it be a bust

  5. The shouldnt have made 2. The original stood alone by itself. I think its done and they should be happy with the original and stop with the sequels.

  6. No Bill Murray, no Ghostbusters 3. I want to see another film, but I see no point if they can’t get the entire cast to return.

  7. If Murray’s out, then I’m out as well.
    Not gonna bother to watch it.

  8. Time to move on. Ghostbusters is/was awesome for the generation it was created for.

  9. Ghostbusters without the protagonist is not Ghostbusters. You can’t recast the role, you can’t explain him away, and for heaven’s sake, don’t reboot it.

    • I think that’s just what they will eventually do…reboot it.

  10. The process of trying to get this franchise up and running again has already proven more entertaining than the finished product would likely be. Best to leave it up on the shelves and remembered fondly, I’d say.

  11. No Murray, no Ghostbusters 3 – I hope Dan will see this (and the studio behind it).

    If the worst came to the worst, write Venkman out of the movie but still reference him here and there. Recasts never work.

  12. Why not make a remake of the first one with a different cast? I would love to see cameos from the old team in it. I mean just trying to reunite the old cast is a up hill battle. Unless Bill Murray decides that he wants to do later. This guy is still making movies unlike the other cast besides Sigourney Weaver. I think another videogame will happen before Ghostbusters 3 ever get up and running. A remake of the first one will be better than none at all and I think the original cast will be happy with it. Just like what Bill Murray said, “no one won’t to see old fat guys running around chasing after Ghost.”

  13. please just leave it alone

  14. They kind of lost me when they came up with the whole “Ghost Busters, Jr.” angle, so my opinion is worth squat. But I wouldn’t want to see Murray’s part recast. If it was a remake and the whole crew was recast (which I likerly wouldn’t see, anyway), that would be another story. But I think if you had Aykroyd, Ramis, and Hudson in place, then a substitute Venkman would stand out too much. If the previews looked good, I would go see it with a new character as a replacement. (I vote for Bruce Campbell.)

    • Speaking of Bruce Campbell, he rocks. He has the perfect attitude to be a Ghost Buster but he is also old now. I think if this is going to work then it has to be a complete reboot with cameos from the old cast for nostalgic reasons.

  15. Something feels wrong with this whole statement. Sure Murray has and does all the things Aykroyd says but he still does and will do other films. Just not GB3.
    I said it before and I will again, this is starting to get sad. The only person you hear talking about this is Ackroyd. I haven’t read anything from Ramis or Reitman so all we see or hear is this “news” from Dan and it’s never really anything good.

  16. They should do a reboot & make it a darker, grittier version that is more realistic.

    Isn’t that how you’re supposed to do a reboot?

    (I’m being sarcastic, in case you didn’t know.)

    • And they should get Christopher Nolan to direct it (more sarcasm).

    • I love this idea. Willem Dafoe as Venkman. Gary Oldman as Stantz. Daniel Day Lewis as Spengler.

      And Lucy Liu as Winnie Zeddman.

      • Get Robert Patinson as Stanz, Taylor Lautner as Spangler, Paul Walker as Venkman, and Kristen Stewart as Dana.

        Hey, if you want to kill it, might as well nuke it. 8-)

  17. I like the idea of Bruce Campbell being involved in a GB3 movie if Bill Murray is out. With all the Ghost Hunter shows on tv now, maybe his character could be from a ghost hunting team that is a competitor of the remaining Ghostbusters (Egon, Ray, & Winston…You wouldn’t have to focus much on Venkman’s absence. Louis could be the 4th GB.) Naturally, the competing teams would have conflicts, but team up in the end to save New York.

    • This I like. Bruce as Venkman’s younger brother? cousin? somehow related anyway.

      Let Murray out and buy out his part of the picture. Then make the damn thing and be done with it.

      Murray is not the entirety of GB. There is more to it than just his smarmy one liners and pick up lines. Nothing no one else can do just as good if not better, besides, it will be a Next Gen style movie where the execs are trying to breathe new life into an old franchise. A passing of the torch as it should be. This has possibilities and while some die hards are all miffed that Murray might not be attached to it, I say so what. Take a chance and see what can be done without him. You might be surprised by the outcome.

  18. Bill replaced John Belushi in the first one. Slimer is a tribute to Belushi. They just need to make Bill into an ectoplasmic character for GB3.
    ….
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA OH PLEASE MAKE IT STOP

  19. I just wish Dan Aykroyd spent as much time writing the script as he does making press releases that state what we already know. Murray has been repeatedly saying that he isn’t interested in a third film, so if that’s the case, write a script without him. Venkman was a great character…buts that’s the beauty of writing, characters can be created and erased. I’ve posted on all of these threads regarding this movie…I just want to see the Ghostbusters franchise with new actors/actresses of ranging ages (the Bruce Campbell idea from above is spectacular casting). Aykroyd, Murray, Hudson, and Ramis are too old to be chasing ghosts, but they are young enough to be running the Ghostbusters from their office. Think of Ray and Egon as Bobby Singer from Supernatural…they do the research, create the equipment (potions/spells in Bobby’s case), and occasionally go out if absolutely needed. Venkman’s out…don’t kill him though, that’s overdone. He’s in China researching new technology or something OR he quit the business because Dana thought it was too dangerous. And I still say Winston should be mayor of NYC. What I’m saying is AYKROYD JUST WRITE A GREAT SCRIPT!

  20. As many of you have said above, just reboot the damn thing already.Whoever they cast to play peter has to be a special actor imo.And of course what they can do now with cgi certain parts would look amazing,but it doesn’t matter if the story is weak.The potential is there they just gotta make it happen.

  21. At this point just use the veteran GB’s as support characters. There is no use making them the main characters without Murray. Reboot it and have the older characters make cameos or small mentor type rolls. The Ghostbuster franchise has legions of fans out there…it needs to be done and frankly I am surprised it has not been done already with the lack of new ideas in Hollywood atm.

  22. Won’t e the same without Mutray. Shades of no Mel no Max?..

    Not to say they cannot do one without him though.

  23. Okay so Aykroyd wants to get the band back together, but Murry doesn’t want to be the front man. As said, just write him out, do not replace the character with a different actor. That is always lame. If everyone else is in, and last we where told they are, then just do it and be happy. The world does not revolve around Bill Murry last I checked. In fact why not pick up where the video game left off? Without Murry of course. Perfect tie in for a second game, as long as it’s its own being. And not one of those video game versions of the movie that completely changes the story from what we see on screen. I really hate that. And the idea of Winston as NYC mayor, I love that idea!! Oh and Peck would have to show up somewhere, but not in the same job, give him a crappy job and make him ask the guys for help perhaps.

  24. Just kill off Venkman and have him be an animated ghost or something. Murray was willing to lend his voice to the video game, and he was up for that Garfield sequel, so he’s shown willingness to continue the franchise AND star in a crappy sequel if he’s just doing voice work.

    And if he STILL won’t do it, then get a competent voice actor to replace him. Much easier to buy than replacing the character with another actor if he was still alive.

    • He’d still have to sign off on it, though.

      • That’s the point everyone is forgetting.
        Any script with or without his character in it still has to be approved bye Murray.

      • It’s less likely that this project would be killed because Murray refused to sign off, more likely because no studio will want to put up the money for it.

  25. Any new GB movie would surely have a load of CGI – just CGI Murray into as well. There has to be a right to his likeness for sale somewhere…

  26. No point making the movie if Murray isn’t in it. Count me out.

  27. Look, tell the GB3 without Bill Murray. The idea of Stantz, Spengler, and Zedmore running the back office is a fantastic one. Plus, all of the Ghost Hunters type shows on TV would be pretty funny and probably easy to riff on. Just pass the torch to a new band of Ghostbusters and have these cool guys in the back office.

    …But like the video game, PLEASE have Viggo the Carpathian painting in the GB HQ somewhere taunting the Ghostbusters from time to time. That part of the video game was spectacular. In fact, you can take a lot of the ideas from the video game and turn that into a pretty neat story.

    ~O

  28. I can’t understand why the guy won’t even agree to even a cameo… Come on Bill! -Still chasing that elusive Oscar

  29. IF they could get Moranis to come back, he could easily fill Murray’s shoes IMO. Just have Peter retire and Louis fill his spot. He was basically a Ghostbuster anyway at the end of 2. This would be a simple fix and one I would definitely be on board with. If you think about it, would Venkman actually still be a Ghostbuster? I think he probably would have cashed out along time ago. Especially, if the Fame and Fortune had ran out. The others, particularly Egon and Ray, would be the ones who still carried the torch. Plus, Moranis acting again…Priceless.

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com 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.

Be Social, Follow Us!!