Ramis on Ghostbusters 3
Who could be the new star?
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."
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 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.