www.411mania.com
|  News |  Film Reviews |  Columns |  DVD/Other Reviews |  News Report |
SPOTLIGHTS  SPOTLIGHTS
MOVIES/TV
// The 30 Most Annoying Horror Characters, Part 1 (#30-21)
MUSIC
// Sabrina Sabrok Bares Her Enormous Boobs For Interviu
WRESTLING
// Top 8 Reasons WWE Should Stay PG
POLITICS
// Congress to Welfare Recipients: No More Strip Clubs, Casinos, or Liquor for You
MMA
// [PHOTOS] Arianny Celeste Is a Topless Tease
GAMES
// Top 5 EA Developed or Published Games


MOVIE REVIEW  MOVIE REVIEWS
//  The Grey Review
//  Underworld: Awakening Review
//  Haywire Review
//  Red Tails Review
//  The Devil Inside Review
//  My Week with Marilyn Review
 HOT MOVIES
//  The Dark Knight Rises
//  Captain America
//  The Avengers
//  Iron Man 3
//  The Hobbit
//  Spider-Man Reboot
SYNDICATE  SYNDICATE



411mania RSS Feeds





Follow 411mania on Twitter!




Add 411 On Facebook
 



 
 411mania » Movies » News



Advertisement
[Movies] Does Columbia Pictures Want Ivan Reitman Off Of Ghostbusters 3
Posted by Larry Csonka on 03.18.2010



According to Vulture, Columbia Pictures wants to make Ghostbusters 3 without Ivan Reitman, but it may not be that easy to do. The studio's plan is to revitalize the franchise for next year by having the original 'busters train a dramatically younger crew in, and along with that have a younger director handle things.

But not so fast. Reitman has what is described as "extensive creative control," including director approval. Also, the deals that Dan Aykroyd, Bill Murray and Harold Ramis have allow them to "single-handedly veto and kill the project if they don't like something." The studio wants them on board with the project, a second draft of the script will be turned in to the studio in May from Office writers Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky.

Columbia was actually hoping that Reitman's new project, Friends with Benefits, would cause a conflict with Ghostbusters 3 to make things easier, but Reitman thinks he can do both.


Post Comment (11)  |  Email Larry Csonka  |  View Larry Csonka's 411 Profile

  Send To Friend  |    Stumble It!  |    Digg It!  | 



Please add your comment below.
If you are registered, you can login and post under your registered name. If not, you can post as a guest or register.

* Please note that 411 moderates all comments. Your comment will show up on the site after it has been approved by an editor.
 
Name : 
Comment : 
Remaining Characters : 
2800
 

Comments (11)

 
stuff like this is what kills movies. Just work right with people and thats the difference between big screen and straight to dvd. If they were gonna strong arm people like this then they shouldn't have given them that type of contractual control over things.

Posted By: Guest#0349 (Guest)  on March 18, 2010 at 09:21 AM

 
 
yeah, while we're at it why not have a movie on the bible without jesus christ?

silly hollywood fucks.


Posted By: DTM (Guest)  on March 18, 2010 at 09:25 AM

 
 
Nice little sweet FU to the studio there and I like the loyalty being shown from the actors to the director. Now hopefully the studio will butt out and leave them to shape the script like Ghostbusters.

Posted By: Guest#7028 (Guest)  on March 18, 2010 at 10:13 AM

 
 
reitman is the right man to do this. im DIEHARD over ghostbusters, and hes brilliant (at least with this franchise) behind the camera. say what you want about ghostbusters 2 but i was 4 when it came out and i love it, in a cheesy way. he doesnt deserve that shit from coloumbia

Posted By: Stantz is my homeboy (Guest)  on March 18, 2010 at 10:47 AM

 
 
It's a relief to know that those dudes have veto-power with this movie, i think it assures that the product will be worth it. Let's be real: Bill Murray is crazy and hilarious so his approval means awesome jokes, Dan Akroyd's approval means awesome story, and Ramis's approval means Egon.

Posted By: Egon Spoogler (Guest)  on March 18, 2010 at 10:48 AM

 
 
It is doomed with or without him, but it will suck much worse without him.

Posted By: Guest#5668 (Guest)  on March 18, 2010 at 11:04 AM

 
 
Someone kill this project. Please?

Posted By: FCt (Guest)  on March 18, 2010 at 11:07 AM

 
 
Hey, why don't you go darker and edgier with it, like The Dark Knight?

PS Please don't screw up the franchise any worse that GB2.

PPS The latest game was kinda of fun.


Posted By: Guest#4322 (Guest)  on March 18, 2010 at 11:23 AM

 
 
I don't blame them. Ivan Reitman hasn't made anything funny in a very long time. You can easily see a guy like the directer of Zombieland stepping in and making it really funny.

Posted By: EricG (Guest)  on March 18, 2010 at 12:06 PM

 
 
yeah, while we're at it why not have a movie on the bible without jesus christ?

silly hollywood fucks.

Posted By: DTM (Guest) on March 18, 2010 at 09:25 AM

They actually did that. It was called "The Bible: In The Beginning." It doesn't have Jesus in it because... well, he doesn't show up in the Bible for... oh... the entire Old Testament!

But hey, it wasn't considered very good, so maybe you're right.

But then, there was this little movie called "The Ten Commandments." It did pretty well despite the absence of Jesus.

Anyway, I actually agree with you. If you have to push people around and rush things to revitalize a franchise, then you're grasping at straws and upping the chances your film is going to suck.


Posted By: Guest#7798 (Guest)  on March 18, 2010 at 03:33 PM

 
 
if it doesn't work out, they're just going to reboot it anyways..

Posted By: MAROON II (Guest)  on March 18, 2010 at 04:13 PM

 


www.41mania.com
Copyright � 2011 411mania.com, LLC. All rights reserved.
Click here for our privacy policy. Please help us serve you better, fill out our survey.
Use of this site signifies your agreement to our terms of use.