Here ya go:

http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/07/08/7-minutes-of-harold-ramis-talking-ghostbusters-3/

Neat!

Damn, I cant get that video to work. It was choppy the whole way.
Is there another place I can watch it?

atleast we can see that Harold is aware that Indy 4 was a ‘disaster’, and wants to be very careful with GB3.

Kojak;151482
Damn, I cant get that video to work. It was choppy the whole way.
Is there another place I can watch it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uG0ICtx7Gs8

batman2;151491
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uG0ICtx7Gs8

Thanks batman2!!!

I absolutely loved this interview. Fingers crossed that all goes our way.

This is exactly what I wanted to hear in reference to the special effects.

Steve;151499
This is exactly what I wanted to hear in reference to the special effects.

I know I'm not the only one who hates the really overdone CGI of most flicks today. I'm waiting for photorealistic CG rather than the eye candy stuff of today.

This interview alone makes me want a GB3 more now than I did when I used to visit gb.net on my 56k connection. Kids today don't know about that…

Anyway, what's very interesting here is that he doesn't just want to make another GB2, And DEFINITELY not an INDY 4, which came across more as a “now or never” than a legitimate and necessary film. Really it'd just be embarrassing to see the ghostbusters again, but much older, still trying to do what they did in their prime.

There's only one Stanz of hope that this might work and it's in the form of Rocky Balboa. That movie was I think the perfect revisiting of an old character as it gets. It had no hope of being better than the original and didn't try to be. It just wanted to be a good movie on its own and I think it succeeded despite Stallone's age. It's definitely not impossible for the GBs to return if they take a similar approach to Rocky. Or even Rambo, lol, forgot about that one, same thing.

deadderek;151500
I know I'm not the only one who hates the really overdone CGI of most flicks today. I'm waiting for photorealistic CG rather than the eye candy stuff of today.

To be honest, I think the effects of some of the high budget movies in the 80s look better and more realistic than the crap CGI effects of today's movies. Like I said in a post a while ago, there's something about the effects in the movies of the 80s (especially Ghostbusters 1 and 2) that's…I don't know…more gritty…more realistic…I can't find the right word for it but I definitely prefer the obsolete (almost) technology of puppetry.