alright, i am new to this board and i had a few quuestions regarding part 3 of the ghostbusters, i was hoping someone could help me out. Why was part 3 not made? I heard dan ayk. wrote hte script and everything, i have heard stories ranging from bill murray did not want to come back to the studio not wanting to give up the money, is any of this true? Do dan and bill not get along anymore?someone please help me?

I don't know the story, but a lot of people who were involved in things that could be sequels have declined doing another movie just because they don't see it as going anywhere. Just like Jodie Foster refused to do the sequel to The Silence Of The Lambs. But her and Anthony Hopkins still get along fine.

I think it had to hurt Aykroyd.

In a dissapointing way, yeah. But he's more into it than the others anyway. I mean, if they came up to him and asked him to be in a Caddyshack 2 sequel or something, he might feel that it'd be a bit too much, so he'd decline, knowing that it would be an iffy project.

I don't think anything really happened. You have to remember that Bill Murray doesn't like sequels; he didn't even want to do Ghostbusters 2! This project simply doesn't intrest him or Reitman.

Can any of you confirm this?

Just would like to mention that there is a Ghostbusters 3 catagorie/forum on this site.

I second that, and most of the questions brought up right here have already been answered in that forum, and with great detail, it might help you better.

Aykroyd had an idea, had a rough draft, and then, supposedly, Ramis helped him finalize it. It was presented to Sony, who owned Columbia by then, and Sony rejected it, as Dan said, because they “wanted the next blair witch,” in the sense of low budget, big profit. And we all know that GB3 would not be low budget.
Reitman showed some interest early on, and offered to produce while Ramis offered to direct.
More recently, Dan Aykroyd declared GB3 dead because Bill Murray, who owns a fraction of the rights, (1/6 I think, can anyone confirm that?) didn't agree to a sequel, because one, he thought the character Venkman had been explored to it's fullest, and two, he didn't want another to be done EVEN if he wasn't in it.
Which poses an interesting question? Are these conflicting storylines? Or perhaps, as I'd like to think, did Sony finally Green-light the project and now it's just Murray holding them back?
Either way, Dan said it's done for.
But I like to take the viewpoint of a few people on this site, including Chad and Netsolo, in saying that I think we may see something happening in the next 5 or so years.
Who knows?