Dan Ackroyd has finally acknowledged that Bill Murray won’t be part of Ghostbusters 3.
Talking to The Telegraph, Ackroyd said “it’s a surety that Bill Murray will not do the movie,” though he quickly added that “there is still interest from the studio.”
“The studio, the director Ivan Reitman and Harold Ramis feel there must be a way to do it, but Bill Murray will not do the movie. He doesn’t want to be involved,” says Ackroyd. “He’s got six kids, houses all over America. He golfs in these tournaments where they pay him to turn up and have a laugh. He’s into this life and living it. I know we’d have a lot of fun [but] I can’t be mad at him. He’s a friend first, a colleague second. We have a deep personal relationship that transcends business and he doesn’t want to know.”
This is the first time Ackroyd has acknowledged that Murray won’t be in the third installment. Of course, it brings up the next question of if there’s no Murray should there be a third Ghostbusters?
I would love to see a film where Spengler and Stantz recruit some new Ghostbusters with some younger comic actors in those roles. Zach Galifianakis comes to mind, maybe alongside a straight man like a Bradley Cooper. Part of me wants to see Jack Black in there. Maybe go with younger SNL cast members?
If Murray’s not going to be in it, honestly it just won’t feel like a Ghostbusters movie, and I’d rather have more of the cartoon series than a “pass the torch” type of movie.
While my first reaction is to pass on a Ghostbusters flick without Murray… I will see a movie with a good storyline that passes the baton to a new cast. Bill Murray on no Bill Murray, I’ll see a good, fun story.
Makes sense. Murray was never that big in either of the first two films.
Murray wasn’t that big in either of the two films? You do know which was is Murray, right?