O RLY? Ernie Hudson Claims Bill Murray Is The 'Ghostbusters 3' Hold Up

by Edward Davis
December 3, 2010 9:08 AM
14 Comments
  • |


This won't come as any shock. "Ghostbusters" actor Ernie Hudson -- who played Winston Zeddemore, the late enlister with the Ghostbusters in the 1984 original film -- says Bill Murray is the hold up for the still-gestating "Ghostbusters 3" picture. Anybody coulda really told you that. All the four Ghostbusters have script approval -- the real "four" being Murray, director Ivan Reitman, Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis -- and they have to all be on the same page for the movie to move forward.

Of course, everyone seems to be pretty fine about the concept and idea of a third "Ghostbusters" film except for Murray who has been notoriously critical and outspokenly negative about the project in the last year or more. In a recent interview with MikeMovie (via DreadCentral), Hudson explained the issues, describing it as an mix of Murray being picky and passionate. And it's been unclear up until this point if Hudson would appear in the film or not (Sigourney Weaver will be, Rick Moranis might be), but from the sounds of it, it seems he's on board as well.

Dan and Harold are working on the script. If it happens we will see but Bill has been the hold up. His definition of good is a little bit different than everybody elses. So we will see, I would love to see it happen. I know the fans have been asking for it ... so hopefully. Bill's a great guy, he's kind of quirky but I love him. He's a guy who is very much into what he's feeling. I know he really cares about his work, which is probably why there hasn't been another Ghostbusters as of yet."

So yeah, as you pretty much figured. Last we heard "Ghostbusters 3" might shoot in the spring of 2011 and Aykroyd recently confirmed that actors who are "strong possibilities" to take up the new mantle include Bill Hader, Anna Faris and Eliza Dushku (Will Forte has been rumored too).

You might also like:
Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    

14 Comments

  • jesus lopez | December 5, 2010 7:01 AMReply

    Bill murray don't need die, because the movie is in work for him, he is the heroe in the movie, like john in hard die, robert in indiana, or silvester in rambo. the new generation is only support but only him is importat
    in the movie.

  • jesus lopez | December 5, 2010 6:52 AMReply

    thats right, exist many villains in the real ghostbusters, choise any one sam hain or booguey man and one hundred characters monsters, even lucifer or hades.

  • LJRich | December 4, 2010 11:05 AMReply

    A lot of the actors are tense about this one. Rick Moranis and Sigourney Weaver were both skeptical about it from what I've read, and Moranis hasn't even agreed to do it yet, at least not that's been confirmed. To be honest...........I have mised feelings about this whole issue, and I'm a fan.

  • Sarah | December 4, 2010 10:24 AMReply

    "Bill Murray wants to die in the first reel as mentioned on many interviews and articles"

    That's what turned me off at the very get-go

  • Sarah | December 4, 2010 10:22 AMReply

    "Bill Murray wants to die in the first reel as mentioned on many interviews and articles. Couldn’t agree more.
    That’s right. I said it"...

    That's what turned me off at the very get-go.

  • rodie | December 4, 2010 5:41 AMReply

    Bill Hader (the smartass), Ed Helms (the enthusiast), Jesse Eisenberg (the geek scientist), and Jon Hamm (the working man).

  • Philip B | December 4, 2010 2:42 AMReply

    PS- I hope those are not the people you want as the new GB Dan...I really, really, really hope not...

  • Philip B | December 4, 2010 2:14 AMReply

    I'm at my desk as an assistant in Hollywood.

    My briefcase...a black bag with a Ghostbusters logo.
    My jacket...holds a Ghostbusters pin.
    My desk...a Hotwheels Ecto 1.

    I'm a fan. Not because I'm a GB dork and buy crap I don't need, but because the film was great. The film, not films. (Don't get me wrong, I still 'liked' GB2)

    Ghostbusters 2 had something great in it, but it lacked certain elements. I think the humor was more on and greater in the first film, as does Bill Murray. I agree with his choices that I have read on many sites and articles and interviews to what he would like to have changed and see in the next film.

    Ghostbusters 3 needs to be new and classic at the same time.

    Let's look at the newest Star Trek.
    The opening was dark, hard hitting, and put you in the world immediately. The film was made by a great director and story teller. He allows us to follow what I consider in this day boring (the 3 Act structure - been there a million times) while giving me / us something new.
    -It's not easy.

    Bill Murray wants to die in the first reel as mentioned on many interviews and articles. Couldn't agree more.
    That's right. I said it.

    The world is now filled with a tone that can push the real life threat of the world in which ghosts exist. In Ghostbusters we need to feel this real threat that we have only felt in very brief moments so far. Most of the time we are watching them catch ghosts who are just kind of hanging out.
    (Long story short)
    We need the Scoleri Brothers (Best part of GB2) or shall I say ghosts like them. (real threats)

    By bringing in a hard hitting opening, we reveal the dark world, show the real danger in their jobs (so when people don't like them we care more because of how they fought for us, just like fans need to fight to say- GB rock) we really care when Venkman dies (Seeking immediate revenge in the audience) and 'maybe others' die to save us, we get to see the 'cooler action moments' early on, and we can see why the GB need to be rebuilt...later on
    They could need to be rebuilt for various reasons not worth mentioning. (Oh, but I could...)

    Murray's concerns: Make it funny. GB2 was lacking what the first GB had. And die in the first reel. (Why he wants to die- pass the torch, doesn't want to film it, who cares?! Writers- work with it and make it amazing)

    GB 1 is my favorite comedy, because it had every type of comedy in it. The acting was great. And more importantly- I think it was great...looking back on the interviews and commentaries...because Ivan took his time with Dan to make something great instead of saying "scripts done?! Let's shoot it!" (Need I remind you Star Wars Eps 1-3?)

    You can't make a movie 'for the fans' without knowing everything. Look at the 'Real GB' cartoon. Sam Hain...The Boogey Man...great villains that could make great stories for a major Sony Picture films. It is...the 'fan' material. (Meaning it is the 'added' literature)

    Anyone reading this or am I rambling?

    Long?...maybe...
    Why? -Because, I wish I was who I know I will be tomorrow...today...so I can fix this thing.

    GB has meant a lot to me.

    A lot.

    Let the arguments help create something great.

    One last thing...if I was making anything like GB or Iron Man or Batman or whatever fan series you want to insert here__________
    I would bring in fans to read it. Real fans that can also give a real film knowledge background too.
    You're in LA. Just look for my bag or all the other fans I know that are out there praying for something great to come out of all of this.

    It's on you guys.

    Thanks Dan for pushing this. Thanks Sony for wanting to make more money. Thanks Ivan for helping to create and direct a great first film. Thanks Bill for not letting them make something you know will be bad. And guys...thanks Ernie for being the spokesperson at conventions and festivals who's willing to talk to fans about the series. (Met at Paramount once...you're the only person I have been star struck by since I have moved here. I'm working with someone you have made a film with. He also said you're great.)

    You're comedic writers...figure it out.

    (There's a moment were GB belongs to the fans and not the creators 'South Park') -So care about them...please! I don't care what you think about this...it's true. GB still exists and is a possibility of being made, because of the fans.

    I'm not a fan of most new comedies, because they fail to realize everything that makes GB a great, great comedy.

    Philip B.
    Fan and future filmmaker

  • Dr. Emerson | December 4, 2010 1:15 AMReply

    God bless you Bill!

  • Ryan | December 3, 2010 10:54 AMReply

    Gotta love Murray. He knows this is a bad idea. And considering his career success vs. the rest of those involved, I'll say he's the one to listen to. Just play the new Ghostbusters Video Game. It's like a movie, and the plot is fun. It's also the closest any of us will get to be a real Ghostbuster so play it.

  • jdfjl | December 3, 2010 10:41 AMReply

    Bill Murray is right. This is a stupid idea.

  • jonathan | December 3, 2010 10:24 AMReply

    The original Ghostbusters characters were smart, college research grant receiving scientists. I can't see any of the rumored new cast actors being able to pull anything like that off, except for Bill Hader. Bill Hader can do anything.

  • Stephen B | December 3, 2010 10:07 AMReply

    They've been talking about this movie for so long, I feel like I've already seen it. Spoiler alert: it sucked.

  • rodie | December 3, 2010 10:02 AMReply

    Murray and Hudson are really the only two original Ghostbusters I even care to see in a new one. Aykroyd hasn't been funny since the '80s and Ramis is huge, like really huge physically. Murray and Hudson should be the only original GBs still in the game and they should be shown training the next generation to take their place, while Aykroyd and Ramis should be retired and only have cameos in the film, but cameos that make sense to the story and help move the plot along...

Email Updates