'Ghostbusters 3' needs to happen soon, says Dan Aykroyd

'Ghostbusters 3' needs to move forward within 'the next three or four months,' says Aykroyd, 'or you will lose your main principals, and you won't be able to make it without us.'

Gregory Bull/AP
Fans dressed as ghostbusters pose at Comic-Con International in San Diego.

Ghostbusters 3 is inching closer and closer to becoming more than a subject that people refuse to stop asking Dan Aykroyd about (and he keeps on championing). Etan Cohen (Tropic Thunder, Men in Black III) penned the latest script draft this past summer. Meanwhile, Sony is taking steps that could allow production to begin next year; though, Fall 2013 seems more likely, rather than a Summer start date (as we previously reported).

Aykroyd says that Bill Murray has lost his rights to the property, which accounts for why the other Ghostbusters franchise gatekeepers (see what I did there?) are at last gearing up to move ahead without him. Indeed, Aykroyd is now confirming that the stage could soon be set for future installments after GB3… assuming the latter finally happens, that is.

Here is what Aykroyd told Esquire, on the rights issue:

Well, I have one-fifth of the voice, along with the partners and the other owner of the property, the picture company, and Ivan [Reitman], Billy [Murray], and myself, and Harold [Ramis]. We all have to sign off on it unanimously — uh, I’m not sure Billy does anymore, since he abrogated his rights by sort of, by saying, two years ago he said, “I don’t want to be involved,” and the picture company I think had some clause in there that if he actually passed on the third of fourth offer, he no longer has a view of the franchise. So, that’s for the lawyers to decide. Of course, I’d love to have Billy call me tomorrow and say, “Let’s go to work and start writing.”

There have been a handful of different setups and premises for Ghostbusters 3 over the years, including the ‘Ghostbusters in Hell’ concept that Aykroyd refers to as “Man-hell-ttan” – which might have resembled the plot for Ghostbusters: The Video Game, given what we’ve heard – and a passing-the-torch storyline that Cohen has carried over from the previous draft written by Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky (Year One, Bad Teacher). Not surprisingly, Aykroyd has confirmed the most recent script for GB3 sets the stage for a fourth installment.

To quote Aykroyd directly:

Oh, yes, the one that Etan has written now — with Ivan strongly collaborating with him, and with me doing revisions as needed, and studio input — totally leads to a next one. It feeds into it very organically.

However, it now appears that there is, in fact, a limit to Aykroyd’s patience, when it comes to making a third Ghostbusters movie. He isn’t budging from the claim that Sony has a surefire box office success on its hands – and, to be fair, we can’t argue too much with that assertion – but the actor/writer/vodka connoisseur is now putting an expiration date on his commitment.

Here is what Aykroyd said:

… We can’t wait forever. And now’s the time to tell the picture company, and I’d say this quite publically, it’s time now to sit down and make this movie, or you will lose your main principals, and you won’t be able to make it without us, because we have rights, and now is time to make the movie… You don’t take advantage of that in the next three or four months, I’ll see you in Australia, where we’ll be selling Crystal Head.

Is this a genuine sign that Aykroyd is ready to either go big or go home, when it comes to Ghostbusters 3? He could easily have some under-wraps information on the project’s status, given his intimate involvement; then again, we might end up hearing the same thing from Aykroyd a year from now, so don’t start holding your breath just yet.

Sandy Schaefer blogs at Screen Rant.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to 'Ghostbusters 3' needs to happen soon, says Dan Aykroyd
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today