Splitsider

Thursday, August 2nd, 2012

Bill Murray "Won't Be Involved" in Another Ghostbusters :( !

Good news: Dan Aykroyd is very confident that there will be a Ghostbusters 3 very soon. He told the Metro:

We've got a brilliant new writer on it and we'll be passing the torch on to a new generation. We're working on it to make it just right to satisfy our fans. I'm confident we'll be in production in the next year.

Bad news: Dan Aykroyd also told the Metro that Bill Murray "won't be involved." He explained:

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.

To be fair, Aykroyd has been saying nearly the exact same statement for a while now but this sure seems like the most definitive "no" on Murray. Which begs the question: Does anyone want a Murray-less Ghostbusters? Sure, busting ghosts is pretty fun but as a conceit alone, especially on the third time around, is it funny in and of itself? At this point, maybe we should just let FunnyorDie film "Ghost-Buster Bluth" and say that it's the end of the trilogy.

Sponsored Content
  • Williamkess

    Please watch this.  Thank you.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JH30-gGRlJM

  • buddhistMonkey

    (((( "We've got a brilliant new writer on it and we'll be passing the torch on to a new generation. We're working on it to make it just right to satisfy our fans." )))

    I'll bet Dan said the same about Blues Brothers 2000. That movie was utter blasphemy, just as a Ghostbusters movie without Bill Murray would be.

  • Gcerda88

    You know who should help out in the writing? Wes Anderson.