Bill Murray: A necessity to GB III?


by DocRyedale

21 years, 3 months ago



by Ghost_buster20

21 years, 3 months ago

I was thinking an if you ponder about it, you kinda dont need bill in it. Not threw the whole movie any ways. Check this out its GB3 an the guys are ready to go out an bust a ghost but only 3 of the 4 of them are there. Wheres Venkmen? Not apart of the ghostbusters that for sure. why not just have the 3 original plus maybe a new member that they felt they needed to hire since venkman left due to sickness or maybe he was just tired of doin the old bust then trap deal, he could have left cuz he wanted to do some thing else with his life, go places or prehaps just didnt feel the need to bust ghosts any more. It will dissapoint fans sure but then again why not have murray appear some where in the film for a short Camo checkin up on how things are with the company an his old frineds. Couldnt that be done?

by hbk4life

21 years, 3 months ago

I'm caught in two minds here. I would love to see Ghostbusters back on the silver screen, but am unsure wether I want that without Bill Murray.

If you can't get everything right, remember that it may ruin the legacy. You only have to think about The Phantom Menace in Star Wars. It went totally off track, and alienated quite a few fans.

by Zedd

21 years, 3 months ago

At the same time though, if its done right they may have something. Sorta like “Friday” and “Next Friday”. No Chris Tucker in the second one yet that started up a whole new legion of fans for Mike Epps…and the old fans liked it because it was done right. We're the same ones that watched “Friday After Next”…and loved it I might add.

by Edimasta

21 years, 2 months ago

Huh, there is a new movie coming out with bill murray, am I right?

He looks pretty good in it Like he did not change much… letz hope there will be GB 3

by Zedd

21 years, 2 months ago

I wanted to see “Lost In Translation”…actually other than Groundhog Day there hasn't been a Bill Murray movie that I don't like.

by perfect_one2k31

21 years, 2 months ago

I don't think that Bill is needed for a new Ghostbusters movie. Neither is the whole cast. Sure there should at least one of the orginal boys in grey, but face it they wouldn't ‘boys’ anymore either would they? Nope look at the orginal cast now. We need a whole new fresh cast of younger unknown actors that could redefine Ghostbusting for the new generationof Ghostheads. Therefore no bill would not be needed. But then agian thats just me *head titled to the side and arms out to the side*

by garky

21 years, 2 months ago

In the last few years he's appeared in movies such as charlie's angels, osmosis jones and the royal tenabuns. yet he's saying he don't want to reprise his role as the character who made him. I am a big Murray fan but I think he being a little selfish to the fans of the ghostbusters who really want to see GB3 made.

Two ways they could do without him would be to say he and dana barratt have moved away and got married. or they could say he's retired and get someone just as funny has him like Will Smith has a new ghostbuster.

I just hope they don't spoil it by having someone else to play Venkman.

Only Bill Murray can play that role, so come on Bill sort your head out. (*peter) (*peter)

by KWilliams

21 years, 2 months ago

If the original cast does not appear in a 3rd installment of this franchise, there would be a mass influx of anger from GB fans around the world, not just if Bill Murry isn't there, but if ANY of them didn't appear in the film.

by Pareto

21 years, 2 months ago

CJ
I read that script, and hated it really.

CJ,
Is the full script draft available online anywhere? I'd love to get a chance to read it.