edited the title slightly… the incorrect “murry” spelling was driving me insane

I think if it's not a good script Murray will say no. He's been saying no for 20+ years now after all.

Venkman, while you are right about the 20% of the rights, at this point Bill does have more power. If we are to believe the statements of the Aykroyd, Ramis, Reitman, and Sony that they all wish for another Ghostbusters film, then Bill being the last one who needs to decide gives him that power.

Bill does care about Ghostbusters, going so far as to say he considers the first film one of his best. He understands the Hollywood machine and doesn't want to see Ghostbusters 3 be the next Crystal Skull. Bill makes movies which he feels are necessary to make. It was a challenge to get him to make Ghostbusters 2, and all the script changes and lackluster reviews left a sour taste in his mouth.

Bottom line, if Dan is telling the truth, if Ivan is telling the truth, if Harold is telling the truth and the script is really that good, Bill will say yes.

Ah yes well put. Also dident like the whole very defensive tone the guy took, like i was personally bashing murray, i wasnt but, hense is the internet i guess.

One question though. What is murrays ideal of good? Cause, while i get he as an actor needs to grow and cant be doing screwball comedies forever, short of his apparence in Zombieland, i have yet to see a single film he's done since groundhogs day that i liked. I liked him as an actor in lost in translation (but really he was just playing a version of himself in that) but i dident like the movie all that much.

Not to bring up those wes anderson films hes done which just seemed scarcastic and nasty to me. Again not murrays fault, he is a good actor, but, just saying, if thats his version of good ..idk man..

But to be fair, hes Bill Murray, I'm yourbigpalal83 posting on a ghostbusters blog so i guess more power to him. Just dont kill my dream bill…22 years waiting…common Murray..

Yourbigpalal83;168549
Ah yes well put. Also dident like the whole very defensive tone the guy took, like i was personally bashing murray, i wasnt but, hense is the internet i guess.

One question though. What is murrays ideal of good? Cause, while i get he as an actor needs to grow and cant be doing screwball comedies forever, short of his apparence in Zombieland, i have yet to see a single film he's done since groundhogs day that i liked. I liked him as an actor in lost in translation (but really he was just playing a version of himself in that) but i dident like the movie all that much.

Not to bring up those wes anderson films hes done which just seemed scarcastic and nasty to me. Again not murrays fault, he is a good actor, but, just saying, if thats his version of good ..idk man..

But to be fair, hes Bill Murray, I'm yourbigpalal83 posting on a ghostbusters blog so i guess more power to him. Just dont kill my dream bill…22 years waiting…common Murray..

Wasn't being defensive, just making the point that if any of them says no, its no. Murray has no more power than any of them to say no.

That said, whatever Murray's idea of good is, good for him. He cares about the franchise and he wants to do good things. For example, he was involved in the video game, because it was good, and fun. I think we can all agree that the story and everything was great about that, so if that's what his standard is, then we'll be pleased.

I'm just saying, my dream is a good Ghostbusters III, not just Ghostbusters III in general. So if Murray says yes, that probably means a dream come true. If Murray says no, it probably means that it wouldn't have been a dream come true if he just said yes just to make it.

u make an exelent point. the game was great. My one beef with it was it did rehash alot of the things in the first 2 films, but it dident bother me as i thought it would. now i want to see them expand on it and take it to new places while still keeping it ghostbusters.

I enjoyed reading this thread. Its good to know some people share my opinion that Murray isn't just holding out to be a dick, but that maybe he'd rather the fans get something good rather than just ‘something’. One thing very few people seem to take into consideration is that Ghostbusters has a rabid fanbase. If the movie isn't right, we'll complain about it forever, and then invariably Sony will rush out another one with the new cast to try and appease us. Then, third one which sucks, then bam! Gritty reboot. As much as Id love to see Ghostbusters 3, Id rather be left with the franchise in tact. The game was well beyond my expectations, and frankly, I can live with it if that's all we get.

Personally, I feel a bit sorry for Murray. Even though he's got just as much say as anyone, he's the one that gets all the flak for the series not having a third installment. He's always the go-to guy to place blame on and its got to have been tough to stick it out for so long.

I'm more afraid there is much more pressure for him to say yes now, even if the script is less that stellar.

Yourbigpalal83;168510
i just think that its kinda messed up, that he has so much power now over somthing that he really was a last moment replacement for.

Well lets think where would we be at now if john belushi was alive long enough to be peter we may not have had a gb2 you know

Yourbigpalal83;168510
i just think that its kinda messed up, that he has so much power now over somthing that he really was a last moment replacement for.

You can't minimilize his part in the movie like that.

Belushi was a great comedian, but the film would have been very different if he was in it, and who knows if we would even like it the way we do.

Let alone that there was a lot of improv on the set, and Murray was responsible for a lot of that, as well as Aykroyd and Ramis.

Murray is not “really just a last moment replacement”. He is probably the biggest reason the movie is as successful as it was.

Doctor Venkman;168594
You can't minimilize his part in the movie like that.

Belushi was a great comedian, but the film would have been very different if he was in it, and who knows if we would even like it the way we do.

Let alone that there was a lot of improv on the set, and Murray was responsible for a lot of that, as well as Aykroyd and Ramis.

Murray is not “really just a last moment replacement”. He is probably the biggest reason the movie is as successful as it was.

i agree
Its funny how all of a sudden murray is a replacement, i wonder what people would have said about Dan ackroyd if he was skeptical about the project.

Everyone here understands how frustrating this news is, but do you really think they would have even thought of sending a script to Bill if it was terrible. This is why it took so long for him to see it. They knew if it wasn't good, Bill wouldn't do it, then Sony wouldn't sign, and the whole thing would have been a waste of time.

All we can do is pray to god “GOZER please let bill swiftly read the final draft and sign on so we can see pre-production photos of them building ecto 5000”:-)