If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SlashFilm)   Dan Aykroyd says Ghostbusters 3 will start filming next year, just like he said last year and the year before and the year before and the year before   (slashfilm.com) divider line 72
    More: Unlikely  
•       •       •

888 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 24 Jul 2014 at 6:47 AM (22 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



72 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-24 12:05:10 AM  
Everyday I say "Feels like earthquake weather" one day I'll be right.
 
2014-07-24 12:09:29 AM  
No, just, No.  The time has past. It's best to just move on.
 
2014-07-24 12:13:34 AM  
Since that song became up for grabs with local car dealerships it's just "Who ya gonna call? AutoNation!" to me anyway at this point.
 
2014-07-24 12:48:54 AM  
If Dan Aykroyd wants to make a movie with you:

encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com

img.fark.net

img0.etsystatic.com

www.dvdtimes.co.uk

You should just you know, take some time, think it over. Maybe lose a few pounds.
 
2014-07-24 12:54:56 AM  

bdub77: If Dan Aykroyd wants to make a movie with you:

[encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com image 204x236]

[img.fark.net image 284x177]

[img0.etsystatic.com image 340x270]

[www.dvdtimes.co.uk image 450x251]

You should just you know, take some time, think it over. Maybe lose a few pounds.


And not do drugs or get cancer
 
2014-07-24 01:05:14 AM  
More like Hip Busters at this point
 
2014-07-24 01:09:20 AM  
It's almost like he attaches himself to truly funny comedians that burn themselves out, so maybe he'll be funny by association?

I'm not hating, I'm just saying he's no Bill Murray, is all.
 
2014-07-24 01:26:16 AM  
Harold Ramis has signed on..... to play a ghost.
 
2014-07-24 03:15:21 AM  
imageshack.com

Sensing more B.S. with this.
 
2014-07-24 04:29:23 AM  
Ramis is gone. Murray doesn't want to do it. Moranis retired a decade ago. Aykroyd is, respectfully, past his prime. I don't see how any good can come from this unless they have a kickass younger writing team and new acting talent. However, the first film, and the second one to a lesser extent, were lightning-in-a-bottle moments in film history. Hard to replicate that. It only works if they write a script good enough to get Bill on board, and Dan surprises with a late career burst of energy and creativity that he hasn't shown in a couple of decades.
 
2014-07-24 06:49:48 AM  
Is this turning into Duke Nukem Forever?
 
2014-07-24 06:53:26 AM  
Dan Akroyd seems to be able to come up with a very good premise and execute it poorly, IMHO.
 
2014-07-24 06:54:28 AM  

nickdaisy: Harold Ramis has signed on..... to play a ghost.


I put it out of my mind that Harold Ramis died until I read your post. This project needs to die.
 
2014-07-24 06:58:35 AM  
Already watched that movie.  It was okay, I guess.
xbox360media.gamespy.com
 
2014-07-24 06:59:24 AM  

DubyaHater: nickdaisy: Harold Ramis has signed on..... to play a ghost.

I put it out of my mind that Harold Ramis died until I read your post. This project needs to die.


Wait, what?  (checks)  Died in February.  Must have slipped my mind as well.
 
2014-07-24 08:12:17 AM  

shower_in_my_socks: Ramis is gone. Murray doesn't want to do it. Moranis retired a decade ago. Aykroyd is, respectfully, past his prime. I don't see how any good can come from this unless they have a kickass younger writing team and new acting talent. However, the first film, and the second one to a lesser extent, were lightning-in-a-bottle moments in film history. Hard to replicate that. It only works if they write a script good enough to get Bill on board, and Dan surprises with a late career burst of energy and creativity that he hasn't shown in a couple of decades.


This.

I definitely understand reminiscing about the Glory Days (I've had mine too, and I miss them) and bringing it all together for 'one more time!' but without Howard Ramis, it wouldn't work without Bill Murray. I think it could happen with Aykroyd and one or the other, but without either of them it's too much of one man's stretch back to something that worked at one time and place in history. I think it would be more sad than funny, and that's a shame and a terrible way to end a franchise. I'm a sucker for a great trilogy, but would rather see no film than a suckfest.
 
2014-07-24 08:14:50 AM  

borg: bdub77: If Dan Aykroyd wants to make a movie with you:

[encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com image 204x236]

[img.fark.net image 284x177]

[img0.etsystatic.com image 340x270]

[www.dvdtimes.co.uk image 450x251]

You should just you know, take some time, think it over. Maybe lose a few pounds.

And not do drugs or get cancer


Or do 8 balls at the Viper Room.
 
2014-07-24 08:15:06 AM  

shower_in_my_socks: Ramis is gone. Murray doesn't want to do it. Moranis retired a decade ago. Aykroyd is, respectfully, past his prime. I don't see how any good can come from this unless they have a kickass younger writing team and new acting talent. However, the first film, and the second one to a lesser extent, were lightning-in-a-bottle moments in film history. Hard to replicate that. It only works if they write a script good enough to get Bill on board, and Dan surprises with a late career burst of energy and creativity that he hasn't shown in a couple of decades.


Put the pipe down please.
 
2014-07-24 08:18:37 AM  

shower_in_my_socks: Ramis is gone. Murray doesn't want to do it. Moranis retired a decade ago. Aykroyd is, respectfully, past his prime. I don't see how any good can come from this unless they have a kickass younger writing team and new acting talent. However, the first film, and the second one to a lesser extent, were lightning-in-a-bottle moments in film history. Hard to replicate that. It only works if they write a script good enough to get Bill on board, and Dan surprises with a late career burst of energy and creativity that he hasn't shown in a couple of decades.


It's strange how Ghostbusters 2 has kind of risen over the years. Being old enough to see both movies in their original runs in the theaters, GB2 was originally considered to be a more cartoon-y, special effects laden mess with a lot of the charm sucked out of it that the original had (the first movie was always considered as somewhat as a classic). It was the movie where they changed the slime color to pink to not scare the kids, and added Slimer as a good guy because they needed a goofy sidekick (instead of being funny themselves).

Some people ranked GB2 so bad, that they reported it as destroying the good will generated from the first movie (putting it on the Highlander 2 echelon of bad movies...if that movie ever really existed).
 
2014-07-24 08:18:49 AM  
I have just one movie title for you - Blues Brothers 2000.   Ghostbusters III wouldn't be a bad movie it would make the original Ghostbusters a bad movie it would suck so much.

Saw Dan Aykroyd doing a "Crazy Eddie" style commercial for for a liquor store.  Maybe they agreed to carry is vodka in return or maybe he needs cash either way he is just cashing in.
 
2014-07-24 08:21:46 AM  
GB was great - 30 years ago. Just let it be. I don't need to see new hip young actors doing the same jokes and rehashing the same plots. How about coming up with something new?
 
2014-07-24 08:22:25 AM  
I'm a massive Ghostbusters fan and you know what? I'll watch it. A lot.

/not always the sharpest box in the crayon
 
2014-07-24 08:38:16 AM  
Ghostbusters - Harold Ramis = FAIL!
Ghostbusters - Harold Ramis - Rick Moranis = Double FAIL!
Ghostbusters - Harold Ramis - Rick Moranis - Bill Murray = SUPER FAIL!

Seriously, why bother?  So you can piss on our memories for a few bucks?  That worked out well with Indiana Jones.

Let it go, that ship has sailed Aykroyd.
 
2014-07-24 08:45:47 AM  
Ackroyd also believes in aliens and conspiracy theory shiat. From what I understand his character in Sneakers isn't too far from reality.

Ackryod's always been sort of the straight man. He needs someone funny to play off of and without Ramis and Bill not being funny in years (with few exceptions), it's not going to happen.
 
2014-07-24 08:53:41 AM  

Mugato: Ackroyd also believes in aliens and conspiracy theory shiat. From what I understand his character in Sneakers isn't too far from reality.

Ackryod's always been sort of the straight man. He needs someone funny to play off of and without Ramis and Bill not being funny in years (with few exceptions), it's not going to happen.


I truly want him to make the movie that runs inside his head. I want to see how the Trilaterals are working with the Greys to capture as many ghosts as possible to power their war against the Illuminati in the 27th dimension.
 
2014-07-24 08:57:28 AM  
They should only do another Ghostbusters movie..... as a MUSICAL.

/trollingmode//
 
2014-07-24 09:00:55 AM  
I'd still like to do Dan's wife.

/he can watch, don't care.
 
2014-07-24 09:02:12 AM  

Any Pie Left: They should only do another Ghostbusters movie..... as a MUSICAL.

/trollingmode//


Given the likely quality of Ghostbusters 3 a musical is actually a better idea than anything Aykroyd has.  Worked for Spamalot
 
2014-07-24 09:20:46 AM  
I'll say it. Ghostbusters was a stupid movie, and I don't care if there is ever an addition to the franchise.
 
2014-07-24 09:25:27 AM  
Who cares? Ghostbusters II sucked ass. Why would 3 be any better?
 
2014-07-24 09:28:15 AM  

snowshovel: shower_in_my_socks: Ramis is gone. Murray doesn't want to do it. Moranis retired a decade ago. Aykroyd is, respectfully, past his prime. I don't see how any good can come from this unless they have a kickass younger writing team and new acting talent. However, the first film, and the second one to a lesser extent, were lightning-in-a-bottle moments in film history. Hard to replicate that. It only works if they write a script good enough to get Bill on board, and Dan surprises with a late career burst of energy and creativity that he hasn't shown in a couple of decades.

It's strange how Ghostbusters 2 has kind of risen over the years. Being old enough to see both movies in their original runs in the theaters, GB2 was originally considered to be a more cartoon-y, special effects laden mess with a lot of the charm sucked out of it that the original had (the first movie was always considered as somewhat as a classic). It was the movie where they changed the slime color to pink to not scare the kids, and added Slimer as a good guy because they needed a goofy sidekick (instead of being funny themselves).

Some people ranked GB2 so bad, that they reported it as destroying the good will generated from the first movie (putting it on the Highlander 2 echelon of bad movies...if that movie ever really existed).


^^ THIS

Cheron: I have just one movie title for you - Blues Brothers 2000.   Ghostbusters III wouldn't be a bad movie it would make the original Ghostbusters a bad movie it would suck so much.


Blues Brothers 2000

was so horrific that I turned it off after eight minutes.  I wanted to do an Elvis and shoot my television because the movie sucked so bad.
 
2014-07-24 09:38:04 AM  

slayer199: Seriously, why bother? So you can piss on our memories for a few bucks? That worked out well with Indiana Jones.


It was way, way, way more than a few bucks.  Imagine how much bank KOTCS would have made had it been great.
 
2014-07-24 09:57:22 AM  

snowshovel: It's strange how Ghostbusters 2 has kind of risen over the years.

Well, expectations change, especially when blockbuster quality goes from ankle-deep in piss to waist-deep in diarrhea.

GB2 was a much, much weaker movie.  It was obviously a sequel that lacked any purpose other than to exist, which everyone figured from the start.  Having said that, from a execution standpoint it's a surprisingly solid movie.  It's certainly a diluted experience compared to the first film, but it has a coherent plot, the actors hadn't lost a beat (though the dialogue is much weaker). . . you can follow it and enjoy it as long as your expectations aren't high.  Problem was, they were.  It was two-star entertainment following a four-star act, and that never ends well.

Furthermore, sequels were somewhat viewed as a negative then -- I mean, maybe a 1.5/10 on the Outrage-O-Meter, but generally it was more for slasher flicks, a sign you didn't have a fresh idea.  These days sequels are an expected commodity.  In an era when convoluted gobbledegook like Star Trek: Into Darkness or Revenge of the Sith or any of the Transformer movies are considered "solid" movies, GB2 is cinema. . . OK not gold, but a solid silver.  These days stuff like character depth and a coherent plot are considered rare surprises in films that move at a blur in hopes that you won't notice the glaring, nonsensical and pointless inconsistencies.  And, mind you, make a crapton of money.

This isn't to say there wasn't plenty of shiat back then, but the focus has certainly shifted.  Back in the day, terrible special effects were accepted even in big-budget films whereas they're comical now.  That's progress, but HOLY HOT DAMN has writing quality taken a nosedive.  I can accept the guild system among actors -- it's unfortunate but not crippling, usually -- but FFS Hollywood is throwing nine-figure budgets at projects written by the likes of Roberto Orci and Damon Lindelof!  Ramis could write better after being shot up with elephant tranquilizer, so it's small wonder GB2 looks better in hindsight.
 
2014-07-24 10:39:52 AM  
But this time it's gonna happen for sure!

I think the slim chance they could have gotten Murray in some capacity is gone since I don't think he'd do it without Ramis.

and It's not going to be the same without Egon and Venkman.

I love both movies and the recent game was pretty good but there is no reason we'd need an actual Ghostbusters 3.

Mugato: Ackroyd also believes in aliens and conspiracy theory shiat. From what I understand his character in Sneakers isn't too far from reality.


His father apparently wrote a book on Ghosts and Parapsychology at one point too.
 
2014-07-24 10:40:10 AM  
So is "Start Filming Next Year" the hollywood equivalent to any scientist saying "we're 5 years away from a commercial product!"

/i.e., don't hold your damn breath?
 
2014-07-24 10:42:33 AM  
I thought Ghostbusters 3 was the one I saw in the theatre in 1989. I honestly thought the headline was a joke. Turns out, the one I saw was GB 2. I honestly shouldn't be this honest about my embarrassing stupidity on the internet. Honestly.
 
2014-07-24 10:49:22 AM  

LZeitgeist: I definitely understand reminiscing about the Glory Days (I've had mine too, and I miss them) and bringing it all together for 'one more time!' but without Howard Ramis, it wouldn't work without Bill Murray.


We'll never forget you, Brent Howard!
 
2014-07-24 11:01:10 AM  

nickdaisy: Harold Ramis has signed on..... to play a ghost.


There is a theory that Slimer is the ghost of Belushi.
 
2014-07-24 11:01:48 AM  
I really think they should take the story and voice-over work from the video game and hire some AMAZING animation studio to make a photo-realistic CGI motion-captured movie out of it. They'd have to fill in some of the stuff from the gameplay sequences (easily done if they can get the guys into a recording booth) and they should consider casting someone to play the rookie and get rid of the whole "no talking" part of that character.

A little editing and tightening up of the game script and you have a perfectly serviceable Ghostbusters 3.
 
2014-07-24 11:01:48 AM  

slayer199: Ghostbusters - Harold Ramis = FAIL!
Ghostbusters - Harold Ramis - Rick Moranis = Double FAIL!
Ghostbusters - Harold Ramis - Rick Moranis - Bill Murray = SUPER FAIL!

Seriously, why bother?  So you can piss on our memories for a few bucks?  That worked out well with Indiana Jones.

Let it go, that ship has sailed Aykroyd.


You're not doing the math right. Here's a different example:

Blues Brothers - Belushi + Goodman = $$$
 
2014-07-24 11:03:10 AM  

menschenfresser: I thought Ghostbusters 3 was the one I saw in the theatre in 1989. I honestly thought the headline was a joke. Turns out, the one I saw was GB 2. I honestly shouldn't be this honest about my embarrassing stupidity on the internet. Honestly.


This just makes me curious about what you thought was Ghostbusters 2, if you thought 2 was 3. Did you think 1 was 2? Or did you think you saw 1, missed 2, and saw 3 in 1989?

I really want to know what you remember about whatever you thought was Ghostbusters 2!
 
F42
2014-07-24 11:16:32 AM  

snowshovel: It was the movie where they changed the slime color to pink to not scare the kids


Bullshiat, kids back then used to buy green ghostbuster slime to play with.
 
2014-07-24 11:19:07 AM  

B.L.Z. Bub: LZeitgeist: I definitely understand reminiscing about the Glory Days (I've had mine too, and I miss them) and bringing it all together for 'one more time!' but without Howard Ramis, it wouldn't work without Bill Murray.

We'll never forget you, Brent Howard!


Oops... meant Harold. I knew that, everybody knew that... good catch.
 
2014-07-24 11:23:46 AM  

Orgasmatron138: GB was great - 30 years ago. Just let it be. I don't need to see new hip young actors doing the same jokes and rehashing the same plots. How about coming up with something new?


How about instead of doing a highly unnecessary, incontrovertibly doomed third entry in a series that already started sucking by the first sequel, how about a couple of young, fresh writer-performers come up with an inventive sci-fi comedy in a similar vein?
 
2014-07-24 11:31:26 AM  
What Dan Aykroyd may look like:

www.mediabistro.com
 
2014-07-24 11:32:13 AM  

slayer199: Ghostbusters - Harold Ramis = FAIL!
Ghostbusters - Harold Ramis - Rick Moranis = Double FAIL!
Ghostbusters - Harold Ramis - Rick Moranis - Bill Murray = SUPER FAIL!

Seriously, why bother?  So you can piss on our memories for a few bucks?  That worked out well with Indiana Jones.

Let it go, that ship has sailed Aykroyd.


Actually Rick Moranis told Vanity Fair he would do Ghostbusters 3.
 
2014-07-24 11:33:00 AM  

Snatch Bandergrip: How about instead of doing a highly unnecessary, incontrovertibly doomed third entry in a series that already started sucking by the first sequel, how about a couple of young, fresh writer-performers come up with an inventive sci-fi comedy in a similar vein?


Sounds like a great idea!

www.pluggedin.com
 
2014-07-24 11:39:14 AM  

dragonchild: GB2 was a much, much weaker movie.  It was obviously a sequel that lacked any purpose other than to exist, which everyone figured from the start.  Having said that, from a execution standpoint it's a surprisingly solid movie.  It's certainly a diluted experience compared to the first film, but it has a coherent plot, the actors hadn't lost a beat (though the dialogue is much weaker). . . you can follow it and enjoy it as long as your expectations aren't high.  Problem was, they were.  It was two-star entertainment following a four-star act, and that never ends well.

Furthermore, sequels were somewhat viewed as a negative then -- I mean, maybe a 1.5/10 on the Outrage-O-Meter, but generally it was more for slasher flicks, a sign you didn't have a fresh idea.  These days sequels are an expected commodity.  In an era when convoluted gobbledegook like Star Trek: Into Darkness or Revenge of the Sith or any of the Transformer movies are considered "solid" movies, GB2 is cinema. . . OK not gold, but a solid silver.  These days stuff like character depth and a coherent plot are considered rare surprises in films that move at a blur in hopes that you won't notice the glaring, nonsensical and pointless inconsistencies.  And, mind you, make a crapton of money.

This isn't to say there wasn't plenty of shiat back then, but the focus has certainly shifted.  Back in the day, terrible special effects were accepted even in big-budget films whereas they're comical now.  That's progress, but HOLY HOT DAMN has writing quality taken a nosedive.  I can accept the guild system among actors -- it's unfortunate but not crippling, usually -- but FFS Hollywood is throwing nine-figure budgets at projects written by the likes of Roberto Orci and Damon Lindelof!  Ramis could write better after being shot up with elephant tranquilizer, so it's small wonder GB2 looks better in hindsight.


It's my #1 bugbear. $200m spent on a movie, but no-one will sit and review the shiat out of the writing and make it really tight, except Pixar and maybe Disney. It's the smallest thing, but it's what really makes great, memorable movies.
 
2014-07-24 11:39:44 AM  

The Man With Crazy Super Animal Powers: menschenfresser: I thought Ghostbusters 3 was the one I saw in the theatre in 1989. I honestly thought the headline was a joke. Turns out, the one I saw was GB 2. I honestly shouldn't be this honest about my embarrassing stupidity on the internet. Honestly.

This just makes me curious about what you thought was Ghostbusters 2, if you thought 2 was 3. Did you think 1 was 2? Or did you think you saw 1, missed 2, and saw 3 in 1989?

I really want to know what you remember about whatever you thought was Ghostbusters 2!


Well, I remember Ghostbusters 1. I knew that one was number 1. I also thought I knew that I had seen number 3. I thought there was a number 2 in between 1 and "3" that I hadn't seen, or couldn't remember. The old noggin noodle is getting kinda slow, I'm afraid.
 
2014-07-24 11:43:48 AM  

snowshovel: Some people ranked GB2 so bad, that they reported it as destroying the good will generated from the first movie


I have it on good authority that Murray did not enjoy making the 2nd movie. I haven't watched it in a while, so I wonder if that comes through in his performance. His character does spend a lot of the movie trying to get away from the other three guys. Then, of course, there was his falling out with Ramis, which happened a few years after GB2 and probably didn't make getting him on board with another film any more likely.
 
Displayed 50 of 72 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report