Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/708/708806p1.html

Ramis on Ghostbusters 3
Who could be the new star?
by Stax

May 16, 2006 - In a report attributed to InFocus Magazine, and picked up by various outlets including Hollywood.com, actor-filmmaker Harold Ramis offered up some details on the long-in-development sequel, Ghostbusters 3: Hellbent. He even suggested who might take over as the star of the franchise since Bill Murray refuses to.


Ramis reportedly wants franchise vets Dan Aykroyd and Rick Moranis to reprise their respective roles in the sequel, which the report claims will be called Ghostbusters in Hell, but he has his eye on A-lister Ben Stiller to star as a new Ghostbuster.

The script, written by Aykroyd, is said to feature a hell that looks alot like New York City. The Ghostbusters are able to be transported into hell via a portal in a New York warehouse.

"What Danny had originally conceived was sending us to a special-effects hell, a netherworld full of phenomenal visual environments and boiling pits," Ramis revealed. "But what works so well about the first two (films) is the mundane-ness of it all. So my notion was that hell exists in the same place as our consensus reality, but it's like a film shutter. It's the darkness between the 24 frames.

Ramis continued, "So we create a device to do it, and it's in a warehouse in Brooklyn. When we step out of the chamber, it looks just like New York, but it's hell. Everything's grid-locked; no cars are moving and all the drivers are swearing at each other in different foreign languages. No two people speak the same language. It's all the worst things about modern urban life, just magnified."

Ben Stiller? Hell no....dont ruin the franchise...

Side note: I saw the boxset/collectors tin for 1 and 2 for $20

I got the box set for $15.

Ghostbusters 3 would ruin it. Granted Rick Moranis and Ernie Hudson still look fit for their roles (I assume Moranis does, he looked exactly the same from Ghostbusters to Honey We Shrunk Ourselves). But Bill Murray (who said in the article doesn't want to return) looks too old now, Dan Aykroyd has gained weight since Ghostbusters, and Harold Ramis both aged and gained weight to the point you'd barely recognize him.

By Ghostbusters 4, their nuclear packs are going to have to be equipped with walkers.

Seems like there's one smart cookie here and his name is Bill Murray. Murray has been doing well for himself in the indie department so there's no need to for him. Why can't Hollywood just let things die? Without Murray you have no Ghostbusters, just like without Moe you have no three stooges.

i think ghostbusters 2 sucked. the plot was a duplicate of the first, was devoid of anything unexpected/hysterical (the first time you saw the stay puft marshmallow man you KNOW you were cracking up). not only that but the characters had nothing new to offer. same plot, same jokes, same type of villain...yet boring.

at least with this, if they play their cards right, they can play on their old age and give the characters new life. if its just a bunch of old men rehashing the exact same characters its going to suck, as well as if they do the same "ancient cult god is reborn and seeks to destroy the world" plot, that would suck too.

what really drove the first one was pure comedic talent. they had the script, they had most of the jokes written, but what really made the film funny was in the delivery. murray still has the exceptional gift of delivery, and is really the pivotal comedian of the film imho. without him there is no point in doing gb3.

i only remeber the first one briefly so if it does get realised or what have you ill get watching the movies before hand

Originally posted by PVS
i think ghostbusters 2 sucked. the plot was a duplicate of the first, was devoid of anything unexpected/hysterical (the first time you saw the stay puft marshmallow man you KNOW you were cracking up). not only that but the characters had nothing new to offer. same plot, same jokes, same type of villain...yet boring.

at least with this, if they play their cards right, they can play on their old age and give the characters new life. if its just a bunch of old men rehashing the exact same characters its going to suck, as well as if they do the same "ancient cult god is reborn and seeks to destroy the world" plot, that would suck too.

what really drove the first one was pure comedic talent. they had the script, they had most of the jokes written, but what really made the film funny was in the delivery. murray still has the exceptional gift of delivery, and is really the pivotal comedian of the film imho. without him there is no point in doing gb3.

I pretty much agree with everything you say PVS.The second one was so horrible WHY make another one?

THE NEW LOGO
http://img103.imageshack.us/img103/8356/ghostbusters34qg.jpg

GHOSTBUSTERS 3

New york is once again in grave danger as a 'plague' of spirits invades manhattan island when Hel is declared full.

Its upto Peter Venkman and Egon Spengler to train a new generation of Ghostbusters to concure the most dire threat to humanity the world has ever seen.

they want Ben Stiller? if they want him they might as well get the whole crew: Vince Vaugn, Owen Wilson, and them.

....Or they can accept the series is done and move on.

wolfwood I agree, plus they've left too long to make another one and it won't be as good as the previous ones.

Hollywood running out of ideas again. whistling

Any body remember the TV cartoon Extreme ghostbusters, they should make a film of that

They should have The Ghostbusters encounter The Cthulhu! They did in one of the episodes of the cartoon..

And have atleast one of the characters go mad.

Yeah, I hope they will get the fresh new crew such as Owen Wilson, Ben Stiller and the gang.
Plus the guy from the Rush Hour(what is the name? the partner of Jackie Chan).

DONG! (for merge)

Originally posted by vrempire
Yeah, I hope they will get the fresh new crew such as Owen Wilson, Ben Stiller and the gang.
Plus the guy from the Rush Hour(what is the name? the partner of Jackie Chan).


wow, Ben stiller and Chris tucker together in a ghostbusters movie...Dogs and cats living together! MASS HYSTERIA!!

Ok i am a huge fan of the first 2 but don't screw with them bye making a 3rd. i mean why mess with a classic

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
wow, Ben stiller and Chris tucker together in a ghostbusters movie...Dogs and cats living together! MASS HYSTERIA!!
I concur

Originally posted by PVS
i think ghostbusters 2 sucked. the plot was a duplicate of the first, was devoid of anything unexpected/hysterical

I disagree about the second one being crap but yes the plot was the same as the first but they still did a good job of it, Unlike men in black where they did the same thing but with the second one was'nt that good.

yeah, i'm not to fond of Ghostbusters 2. I still like it for the characters, but it is pretty smelly

Originally posted by Kazenji
I disagree about the second one being crap but yes the plot was the same as the first but they still did a good job of it, Unlike men in black where they did the same thing but with the second one was'nt that good.

men in black 2 was hysterical imho.

Originally posted by Schecter
men in black 2 was hysterical imho.

I just lost all respect for you.

I loved ghostbusters 1 & 2.
But men in black 2 sucked balls!!!

http://www.shocktillyoudrop.com/news/topnews.php?id=15005

Lol would do it if his character was killed off in the first reel

I think the previous was the best and the third one is quite a little in compare to those. But it is still the good entertainer and I like it. It has the most thrilling moments. Enjoy buddies.

Originally posted by jackfreex
I think the previous was the best and the third one is quite a little in compare to those. But it is still the good entertainer and I like it. It has the most thrilling moments. Enjoy buddies.



Yeah they really made the third one....

Ghostbusters was an incredibly big booty hit its original release back in `84 and why its hard not to - its a fun, exciting and imaginative thrill ride to watch. There are about a Ghostbusters like Bill Murrays constantly cracks wise and always fun, a light-hearted comedy film ghost busting consistently intense and exciting of course is a lot like the shift to, that might Marsh Mallow Man One of my favorite parts of the film technically flawless attack.

The video game is probably the closest we will get to a 3rd.
And its story sounds better then their "Going to Hell" one.

http://shocktillyoudrop.com/news/topnews.php?id=16833

It better not be 3D.

Am I the only one who thinks that this could be awesome? I mean yes, it could be a trainwreck, but I loved the first two as a kid and still do. I am excited and hope that it doesn't disapoint.

oh yeah man, i think i speak for us all when i say that "we're hoping for the best" After being completely let-down...,wait, i mean to say..., RAPED in the face twice by, george dufus with his frack ups with the stars and indiana franchises. Not to mention what has become of the Aliens, Predator and Terminator franchises. Logic tells us to expect, Ghostbusters to fail because it will. The magic was lost on that set some forty years ago now. How about we just retain our memories or try a completely different spin on the ghostbusters with a new cast? In Hollywood...,if you're looking forward to something, you're looking forward to heartbreak.

Two words: Star Trek

I really hope we will all be surprised and delighted with the result and the new breed of Ghostbusters and they are cult films of justice. Just hope that Hollywood does not ruin the money and new Ghostbusters will be younger, and they can retire for the next 10 years, with many suites, which can lead to someone named actors who heads the right Ghostbusters name into the ground!

Seen a thing on the actual KMC site with Ivan Reitman

Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
yeah, i'm not to fond of Ghostbusters 2. I still like it for the characters, but it is pretty smelly

I've never seen much difference between the two

and besides it was a bit hard to top what the first one achieved.

The one holding up this movie is Bill Murray. The guy has not even looked at the script which was given to him awhile ago. He passes up the hand that fed him and jumps on crap like City of Ember or Zombieland. Bastard, they do need him to be in the movie though even if its in a reduced role capacity. I hope that it happens and soon because a piano could fall on Rick Moranis and we would have lost an opportunity to see Louis Tulley again. As for childhoods being raped, grow up already, it was your uncle who got to that first. :P

Woah!!.....Zombieland was not crap.

As a comedy it was funny yes... as a zombie movie... nope! IMHO of course. Forgive me for the crap part.

Seen a news on Comicbookmovies.com, They're waiting on Bill Murry to read the script and see what he thinks of it before they start

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/scifimediazone/news/?a=31877

Originally posted by Kazenji
Seen a news on Comicbookmovies.com, They're waiting on Bill Murry to read the script and see what he thinks of it before they start

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/scifimediazone/news/?a=31877

I've heard that same story for a while. Bill Murray has been letting that script sit on his desk for a long time, because he doesn't want to do the movie. He prefers smaller films these days, and doesn't want to do anymore sequels.
Plus, there have been rumours about his health...

The whole "kill him off in the first reel" sounds like Charlton Heston in Beneath the Planet of the Apes.

I'd be surprised if this happens. Too much is delaying it for so long.

Ernie Hudson Talks Ghostbusters 3

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/BatFreak/news/?a=35851

Says the script is great...........come on Bill read it already !!

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=81518

alot of the characters gonna be portrayed as old folks.

Originally posted by roughrider
I've heard that same story for a while. Bill Murray has been letting that script sit on his desk for a long time, because he doesn't want to do the movie. He prefers smaller films these days, and doesn't want to do anymore sequels.
Plus, there have been rumours about his health... Bill has never really been a fan for doing sequels.

Which in retrospect on his part isn't that bad of an idea.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
Bill has never really been a fan for doing sequels.

Which in retrospect on his part isn't that bad of an idea.

But yet he's done Garfield 2 and obviously Ghostbusters 2



latest news - Dan Aykroyd Hints Bill Murray Could Be Replaced

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/debbiedowner/news/?a=54635

Dan Aykroyd shreds some rumors

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/28357

They've been at a standstill for years.

Dan Aykroyd may claim they can make it without Bill Murray, but I'm betting the studio has repeatedly vetoed that notion.

And the studio would love to do this without Ivan Reitman directing - as he is on a very long losing streak - but apparently Reitman's contract on future sequels is ironclad.

So they are at a standoff, and all of them getting older and fatter...

Originally posted by Kazenji
But yet he's done Garfield 2 and obviously Ghostbusters 2




Yeah and GB2 was such a GREAT BOX Office sucess too...


And he did the Garfield thing cause he is full of the Lorenzo Music guilt.

A movie does'nt need to be a box office sucess for it to be good.

Well it don't hurt it any..
And GB2 was good just in no way was it GREAT like the first one.

Well it was a bit hard top with what the first one did.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/debbiedowner/news/?a=55487

Originally posted by Kazenji
Well it was a bit hard top with what the first one did.

I always liked the sequel more actually, it's more feel-good and the Vigo character was a cool concept. I had a teacher at Comprehensive School who looked like Vigo.

Anyway... GB3? Why not? Not having Murray there would be disappointing but not the end of the world, they could just say after the 2nd movie he went off with Dana and Oscar somewhere. Bring in someone else who's a bit zany and eccentric to work off the straight-laced Spengler and the easily cowed Stantz. Give more screen time to Winston because he's never been given enough to do.

Their ages don't bother me, it's not as if you need to be athletic or a parkour expert to capture ghosts. Younger members (no teen s**t though), better technology could be brought, it's only natural if there's to be a future for Ghostbusters. It doesn't have to go overboard on special effects, I would hate it to become too chaotic with ghosts zipping here and there and entire locations being CGI'd in.

I want to see a Ghostbusters movie before all of them get way too old or god forbid, die. I hope they don't try to find somone like Venkman to try and fill his boots though. That would be a really bad move on there part. Anyway, I am sure it will still be epic without Murray being a part of it. He's too busy being full of himself ever since Lost in Translation.

Got no idea what the hell is going on with this third movie one minute Bill says he's not interested and next he is

and next Dan Akroyd saying there's an all script to be written.

Originally posted by Kazenji


alot of the characters gonna be portrayed as old folks.
I don't think it'll require great acting for them to portray old folks

Actually, I think they're old enough to portray ghosts at this point

Bill Murry definitely not appearing for Number 3

****en hell make up your mind....

The latest news from 6 days ago is it could be shooting next summer.
Was Ghost Busters 2 at the box office a unsuccessful sequel?


Here is the article.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/18/ghostbusters-3-shooting-next-summer_n_1981645.html?utm_hp_ref=entertainment

They haven't gotten any closer to making this film since the mid-1990's. There is no story here, until the day a camera starts rolling!

Originally posted by Kazenji
Bill Murry definitely not appearing for Number 3

****en hell make up your mind....

It wouldn't be the same if they only had Bill return, and not the other three.