Report: Jonah Hill and Emma Stone offered Ghostbusters 3

News Simon Brew 7 Nov 2013 - 06:36

Fresh signs of life for Ghostbusters 3, it seems, with a new casting rumour...

We'd pretty much given up reporting on Ghostbusters 3, a film that seemed destined to live in development hell for the rest of time. Truthfully, there's a sizeable bunch of people who would rather it remain there, given the wariness many have over a belated further sequel to a Ghostbusters movie. It's fair to say that the ghost of Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull looms over projects such as this.

However, Ghostbusters 3 may yet be back on the cards. A new report is now going as far as to suggest that both Jonah Hill and Emma Stone have been offered roles in the film, too. They've been linked with characters called Jeremy and Anna, about whom we know precisely nothing. But the idea of the film, as it was originally set out, was to hand the Ghostbusters mantle over to a younger generation.

If anything, this is still at the offer stage, but if true, it does at least indicate that the wheels are turning on the film. As we get updates, we'll pass them on...

SchmoesKnow.

Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook chum here.

Disqus - noscript

You had me up to the words Jonah Hill.
(So basically, you had me for the word 'Report' ! What's this all about now?)

Ghostbusters II was five years after the original. That's a long time for a sequel, generally speaking. However, it worked due to the smart idea they came up with of making the Ghostbusters has-beens who still owed the city money for the destruction caused saving it (you can't bill a ghost). But 24 years plus... come on, now. It's time to leave it behind. I love Aykroyd and Ramis, I get excited about any opportunity to see Hudson in stuff (I miss you at all times, Warden Glynn), but I don't see the value in a third Ghostbusters movie. The characters we love are the characters we love, so why bring in new ones that we don't? Murray is unlikely to return, and as much as the other characters are great, everything has its glue. I just don't see how it would work without being a predictable, sub-standard, training-new-recruits-as-they-shit-themselves-and-at-the-end-get-some-balls nonsense.

I hate 'passing the tourch' films at the best of times, but this one seems to miss the point of Ghostbusters. I didn't repeat view the first two because of the ghosts, I went back to see Venkman an co. What's the third one going to offer? A small Cameo of the 3 that are willing to come back and then hand over to characters played by less interesting actors?

Jonah Hill is the most over rated actor working today.

Jonah Hill, perfect.

I can see him donning the suit and pack and being hilarious.

I really hope this film gets made. I don't understand why anyone WOULDNT want this made? It's not going to ruin the originals, those will still be the same!

I think it could be great. But they should keep the same type of special effects they had from the first two. That's what made these films stand out. Those actual 'puppet' ghosts. No CGI ghosts please! Unless you can make them look like the puppet ghosts!

Maybe this outing will have the original cast as ghosts and someone will start seeing their dead parent (one of the original cast), portents of impending doom etc etc. new ghostbusters form, fight said impending doom and original cast still as ghosts can now rest in peace.

I don't know if I'd go that far but I am surprised by how popular he has become. I thought he was very good in Superbad (with Emma Stone) but since then he's just annoyed me in everything I've seen him in. I just kinda feel there's always someone who could do a better job.

How can people already slag off the new film before it has even been confirmed it is being made??

If you don't want to watch the new one (if it ever gets made) then don't.

If you do, and it ends up sucking, don't worry. The original 2 will still be exactly the same! They will not be changed in anyway if a 3rd film is made and sucks.

And just think, it may even be a very funny film! Clearly they want it to be funny or Hill and Stone would not have been mentioned.

Jonah Hill at Ray Stanz, Jesse Eisenberg as Spengler and as Venkman????? Hmmmm.

Ernie Hudson was the best thing about Torchwood: Miracle Day (and there wasn't much good about it) - such a shame his character was sidelined fairly early on.

If it doesn't have Bill Murray in it then it isn't a Ghostbusters film.

Ghostbusters was a Bill Murray vehicle without him any future 'Ghostbusters' projects might be Ghostbusters in name, they might even be good, but they won't be Ghostbusters in spirit.

Donald glover as Winston .venkman a CGI version of a young bill murry Motion captured by andy serkis! You're welcome

Let sleeping ghosts lie

Actually, it was a vehicle for Dan Aykroyd and Jon Belushi. Then Belushi died, and it was basically laid out as a sort of ensemble piece. Murray stands out, yes, as he does in most things, but each of the 6 main characters are wonderfully fleshed out.

Awaiting for this rumor to be debunked as fast as it arrived.

I thought he was decent in Moneyball.

Here is my GB 3 main cast choices: Jonah Hill as Ray Stantz, Jesse Eisenberg as Egon Spengler, Aaron Paul as Peter Venkman, Donald Glover as Winston, Kat Dennings as Janine and Emma Stone as the love interest. Thoughts?
I think this cast has everything. Jonah for the manic energy Ray brings, Jesse for the quirky scientific voice of reason, Aaron as the tough / wise cracking Venkman, Glover as the straight talking Winston, Dennings with the kooky Janine energy and Stone just because she's the hottest woman on earth. Throw in some original cast cameos, especially Louis Tully, and you got a GB 3 worthy of the legacy!

No Murray no point

He was very good in Moneyball, hilarious in 21 Jump Street and it LOOKS as if he is about to be great in The Wolf of Wall St.

The guy can do comedy, no denying that. So for that reason alone he should make a good addition to the Ghostbusters.

It's probably quite unjustified of me but I just can't get on with him!
Each to their own I guess.

Exactly, that's why this site is so good. Lots of valid opinions!

No Murricane means no deal. Also what is this crystal skull you speak of? Indy is a trilogy, they dropped a potential fourth after realizing it would be a horrible mess. Phew!

I still don't understand Bill Murray's objection to being in this. After all he did go back to Garfield 2 ; a tale of 2 kitties!!!

If Bill Murray won't touch Ghostbusters 3 because of the script then it's probably not going to be any good so why don't they just make Ghostbusters 4 instead? Skip this movie that's been in development hell for 20 years. Just forget about passing the torch and having fat Dan Aykroyd rolled out for everyone to cringe at and let a complete new team carry the whole movie.

It's gone on for so long now I've lost all opinion/objection. Just make it. Or tell us you ain't.

Hmm. Jonah Hill's presence is troubling to me, because I don't like most current comedians or the way comedies have been made in the past ten years. I don't really have faith in this project, no matter whether it's a sequel or a remake.

Gosh, stop slagging off Indy IV! It rocked my socks AND the casbah.

Sponsored Links