BLOGGERS NOTE: It’s not worth seeing without Bill Murray.
By: Sean O’Connell
Good news! After months of back-and-forth and very public “will he or won’t he” discussions, Dan Aykroyd now claims, on the record, that Bill Murray will not be involved with an ill-advised Ghostbusters sequel. Bad news! Aykroyd’s going ahead with the sequel anyway.
The comedian spoke with the UK magazine Metro, and inevitably was asked about the state of the ever-in-flux Ghostbusters 3. Aykroyd said they have a “brilliant” new screenwriter, who had cracked the code on the sequel’s story. They will be passing the ghost-busting baton to a younger generation, and he hopes to “be in production in the next year.”
But when it comes to Murray’s involvement, Aykroyd says it isn’t going to happen, adding:
“I can tell you he won’t be involved. … It’s sad but we’re passing it on to a new generation. Ghostbusters 3 can be a successful movie without Bill. My preference would be to have him involved but at this point he doesn’t seem to be coming and we have to move on. It’s time to make the third one.”
Without Murray? I don’t know about the rest of you, but if you can’t get all of the original Ghostbusters together for a sequel, then it’s time to put that sequel back on the shelf … permanently. The general consensus seemed to suggest that no one wanted a third Ghostbusters with senior-citizen busters. Take Murray out of the mix, and the series loses its strongest leg. To make a contemporary Olympic reference, this is like taking Michael Phelps off the relay team and still hoping the U.S. swim team has a chance to compete. Maybe a Murray-less Ghostbusters 3 finds a way to entertain. But this news should be the final nail in the coffin, not a reason to try and be excited.
Source: Cinema Blend