Ghostbusters 3

[LostSon88]

What kinda bothers me is how Murray seems to have this "i'm soooo above this" kind of mentality in regards of GB3 and clearly doesn't care to do it.

And as much as i'd love to see Venkman in the next one, if he seriously has ZERO passion for the project, i'd rather not see him come back and/or just give him what he wants and kill him off.

Everyone seems to be pretty passionate about doing another one, its Murray that seems to be the real "Debbie Downer".

 

[dark_b]

so what if Murray doesnt want to do it?can he not move on? can he not have a negative experiene with GB2?

do a reboot or make another movie.

 

[Octoberist]

anything but a reboot

 

[dark_b]

i made a mistake. i meant to writte do a sequel with a new team. or do an original movie with ghost hunting.

 

[LostSon88]

Or do as they're planning and have the old team pass the torch to a new team...sans Venkman.

so what if Murray doesnt want to do it?can he not move on? can he not have a negative experiene with GB2?

do a reboot or make another movie.

Then when its all said and done he should simply sign off on the script and go away...

That's basically all they need from him anyway.

 

[Octoberist]

but let's not discredit (as a whole) Murray here. i know that some fans carry grudges against actors who may or may not like a certain movie in their body of work.

 

[LostSon88]

I don't carry a personal grudge against him.

My whole thing is if he's so dis-interested in another film...so much so that he suggests that they kill of his own character, why bother trying to rework a script to satisfy his needs when he's seemingly not even that passionate about the project to begin with?

If he'll only do it if they kill him off early and make him a ghost, why bother putting him in the movie? Simply come up with some excuse and/or write a cameo scene that'll explain why he'll be gone for the movie. It'll be disappointing for sure not having him in the movie but hey i'd rather they not shoehorn a role for Venkman just for the sake of having him in there.

 

[Webhead2006]

well i am sure come time for filming he would put forth the effort and passion. Once he is working with his friends and all that. for me perferably i would have the movie start with the old gbs trying to do a bust and things go wrong and they get hurt. They then decide its time to get a new crew to help out. So then after new guys are hired. The old ones get taken by the big ghost. Then the young guys are trying to save them. Then at the end old/new team together to take out the big baddie.

 

[GhostPoet]

They could just give Venkman a cameo. The new Ghostbusters team and most of the old team have to go see him for something...maybe he has an old book they need that he's been using as a coaster. Just some quick little thing, maybe a nice comment from Venkman on the new team. That's it.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Ghostbusters 3 - Ivan Reitman Versus Sony

 

[Octoberist]

wtf is up with Sony? they're becoming the new Fox while Fox is slowing become an okay studio again.

 

[Dr. Evil]

The only way I see Ivan Reitman giving up the director's chair is if his son directs the movie and Jason won't do that.

 

[Octoberist]

Jason is not remotely interested. he even said it in an interview. he loves Ghostbusters obviously, but he wants to work on his own movies.

 

[Octoberist]

Jason is not remotely interested. he even said it in an interview. he loves Ghostbusters obviously, but he wants to work on his own movies.

 

[iamlegend]

Ghostbusters 3 - Ivan Reitman Versus Sony

Good for Ivan Reitman. The last thing we need is some studio stooge getting their hands on the property and destroying what made it so valuable in the first place in some half cocked effort to "modernize" the product.

 

[Sam Fisher]

Ghostbusters 3 - Ivan Reitman Versus Sony

Why am I not surprised? Hollywood doesn't know when to stop.

 

[A&W]

It's quite possible that they might start from scratch in light of the new facial motion capture technology created for Avatar. As a result of that technology it's now a lot easier to deage an actor or actress. The costs could probably go down over the next few years as well.

 

[Octoberist]

Tron Legacy is a good example how Jeff Bridges looks with the 'deaging' tech. he looked great.

If you're talking totally motion capturing an actor in a real enviorment then the problem here is that I don't if it's as 'realistic' as people are making it out to be. Avatar featured 'aliens' not people. As good as Avatar's CGI was, it wasn't photo-real. but it's almost there.

 

[A&W]

Tron Legacy is a good example how Jeff Bridges looks with the 'deaging' tech. he looked great.

If you're talking totally motion capturing an actor in a real enviorment then the problem here is that I don't if it's as 'realistic' as people are making it out to be. Avatar featured 'aliens' not people. As good as Avatar's CGI was, it wasn't photo-real. but it's almost there.

yeah but for Ghostbusters they don't have to devote so much of the budget to creating an alien world, language, ecosystem, tons of new species and everything. they also don't have to devote so much money to inventing the facial motion capture because it's already been done.

PLus if they were going to change the story for this then filming could be one to two years away, and by then they would be able to get a better bang for their buck as the technology and improves and costs go down.

 

[Webhead2006]

for me i would perfer to see ivan director gb 3. since he knows the actors well and the characters/world well. But if someone else came on board i wouldnt be against it really. I would just hope he is still invovled as a producer and other stuff too.

 

[LostSon88]

Ghostbusters 3 - Ivan Reitman Versus Sony

I say no Reitman, NO DEAL...he's just as important as the rest of the cast, IMO.

They want a hot, new young director to take over the series? Fine. But let the originals close out their chapter the way it deserves to be. Let them pass it on to the next generation in this film and in the follow-up THEN hand it over to a new director to start his/her own arc for this series.

This is complete bull--

 

[GREEN =w= DAY]

wtf is up with Sony? they're becoming the new Fox while Fox is slowing become an okay studio again.

LOL

yeah, i agree with you there

except on Fox becoming an ok studio. i still have my doubts on them

 

[MoPlaYa]

I say no Reitman, NO DEAL...he's just as important as the rest of the cast, IMO.

They want a hot, new young director to take over the series? Fine. But let the originals close out their chapter the way it deserves to be. Let them pass it on to the next generation in this film and in the follow-up THEN hand it over to a new director to start his/her own arc for this series.

This is complete bull--

I Agree 100%

 

[terry78]

Reitman started the ****, and this is the thanks he gets?

Same old story...you make a decent piece of media, then the company that owns the rights shuts you out.

 

[iamlegend]

Reitman started the ****, and this is the thanks he gets?

Same old story...you make a decent piece of media, then the company that owns the rights shuts you out.

Not at all, in this case.

While the company could certainly just bury the project and end any chance of Reitman directing it, they can't just make it without him. He and the principle actors all have a stake in the property - ensuring that without their UNIVERSAL consent, it's not going to go down.

But I'll agree that this is stereotypical studio stuff... they want a quick buck with a "young" director that'll load the movie up with overrated, not funny actors that appeal to the mindless masses that eat up movie tickets.