Friday, August 26, 2011

Ghostbusters 3 "Officially Happening"? Not So Fast.

Last time we talked about the long-threatened third Ghostbusters movie was back in January, things were pretty much exactly the same as they've been for awhile now, with series star Bill Murray noncommittal about another entry, series co-star Dan Aykroyd extremely commital, and everyone else in kind of a holding pattern. Since then, not one element in the calculus has changed, but you wouldn't know it from looking at the big HuffPo declaration that the movie was "officially happening." Clearly, they're using a far more elastic definition of "officially" than is common in the parlance. So what prompted this sudden rush of excitement? Very little, in fact.

In a radio interview with Dennis Miller, Aykroyd predicted a 2012 shoot, and in the closest thing to news, claimed that they'll go ahead with or without Murray: "What we have to remember is that Ghostbusters is bigger than any one component." Now, bear in mind that Aykroyd has tried to mount a third installment for decades now, with Murray (who, for some perspective, wanted to call Ghostbusters 2 in '89 "The Last of the Ghostbusters") the one holdout. And while the property may indeed be more important than the person, there's also a potentially fatal credibility issue if everyone else comes back except the show's star. I'm sure Sony is fully aware of this, which is why they'll withhold a green light until Murray is signed, sealed, and delivered. And if history is a guide, that's sort of like herding cats.

Beyond that, there's also the question of whether they should even try to do a new Ghostbusters flick, especially one that, as Aykroyd promises, will pass the torch onto a new, younger generation of paranormal investigators. Does anyone want that? Do we really want the Ghostbusters where Ray is blind in one eye, Egon is too fat, and Peter is MIA? If the post-Star Wars, post-Indiana Jones world has taught us anything, it's that at some point, maybe it's okay to just have our memories of characters and stories we loved and be happy with them. At this point, I'm starting to feel like another Ghostbusters is like revisiting Back to the Future. Could they figure out a way to make it happen? Yeah, sure. Probably. But should they? Definitely no for the former, and I'm not so sure about the latter.

2 comments:

Abdul-Halim V. said...

I'm hoping (predicting?) they'll expand and kill some vampires and werewolves too.

Zaki said...

I could see that. They used to do stuff like that on the old cartoon show all the time.