It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Guess it's been around 30 for me! It is addictive no doubt about it
Skyfall for reference:
Nice but seriously, someone out here has way way too much spare time!
I have stopped counting.
@andmcit Good one!
I'm not sure. It's from a Reddit user's study in cinematography. Probably more of a Deakins fan than a Bond fan tbh. I think it's masterful that - considering these scenes of course aren't shot in order - Deakins made an almost perfect pattern.
Looking at it, it looks like
ACTION is tan
MI6/WORK is grey
SUSPENSE is blue
&
DRAMA is orange.
Brilliant.
SF is another example people should look at regards how to properly photograph a movie and why they shouldn't worry about SP too much.
The orange/teal fad is summed up in the image below...
It's straight out of a music video. It adds an artificial veneer to the image. SF and from the looks of it SP, use colour and hues to create evocative imagery.
SF shows it can do warm...
...cold...
...and tonal contrast properly...
While there are also moments where the balance and contrast is largely redundant of teal and orange...
These films are not comparable to the crop of recent blockbusters that do adhere to the teal/orange school of thought. They are lensed beautifully and the images are evocative, not merely music video style eye candy, with unnatural hues and contrast.
Hm, all this about a franchise in which several actors were dubbed to sound better for the UK/US audience ? Including by the one who should not be named here :) ?
Eh ben.. "Pouffff". Oh, ca c'est le bruit du paradoxe qui implose sous le poids de ma simple existence. Eh ouais, Duschnock, en zyeutant bien, on trouve des pékins qui savent causer le rosbif, mais qui savent aussi apprécier le plaisir immédiat d'un film bien doublé quand le sujet est léger.
Do you know that the translation in the subtitles can be very, very poor ? People often overlook that IMO. Dubbing has the lip-sync constraints, but subtitles have the space constraints. In a chatty movie, it can be a big problem.
Une fois j'ai regardé l'Arnaque avec la version française et les sous-titres français, la vache.
I prefer the French version of the Persuaders to the original version of the Persuaders (the dubbing is so incredible)
I prefer the original version of Goldeneye to the French version (it was the start of the weird dubbing for Bond movies, I still can't believe I had to look at a French dictionnary to understand a French line in a Bond movie !)
I think that making broad statements is the biggest problem actually. Comparaison n'est pas raison !
There is a huge difference between dubbing a film while making it, and dubbing a finished movie. To give examples of the two scenarios:
1. Dubbing Gert Fröbe, while making Goldfinger. The guy did not speak English well, but the film is in English, so they dubbed him. The dubbing was a creative choice, made by the director or the producers.
2. Dubbing the entirety of Goldfinger into German, for the German audience. The finished movie is altered for people who don't speak English and are too lazy to read subtitles.
Then why bring that up at all? By the way, what's the point of demonstarting again and again and again that you can write in your native language?
Watching dubbed things just take me out of the film I can't concentrate plus I don't get the intensity of the performance, watching DeNiro speaking Italian for the duration of his performance in GF2 is no problem to me I much prefer Coppola kept it authentic.
I wish Bond would embrace it more personally, QT got it so right with Inglourious Basterds, Waltz's performance is so more authentic for it.
There's no irony in me when I defend the dubbing. But I agree very good dubbing is so rare (and maybe over with the new Hollywood who wants to control everything ) that watching the original version with subtitle if you need it is often the better. I really had to look at a dictionnary to understand a French line in the French dubbed version of Goldeneye ! For one line, the French version of Bond talked like he was in the XVIIIth century !
But dubbing is IMO an art form, yes. And subtitles are not the obvious translation it seems to be. When there are lots of lines to translate in a few seconds, believe me, the subtitles can be a travesty, you're basically looking at a summary. The dubber will always say more than the subtitles. I gave an example in my French comments above.
I point out we talk about a franchise where the dubbing of some actresses is a taboo. So it's quite ironical some keep on writing dubbing is disrespectful for the actors.
Parce qu'il parait que ceux qui regardent des films doublés sont forcément des idiots qui ne parlent qu'une langue :)
Has anyone tried the trailer (my download) on their home cinema systems? Haven't had the chance to myself annoyingly....
It looked perfect! And yes, I have since watched your 1080p version on the projector, even better!
Ims one of dem idiots dat don't parole dem languages..
And I'm just kidding ...no offense to anyone ..just self parody.
Awesome! Reason I'm asking is I'm wondering how my version (since it uses the actual 5.1 surround sound track from the version sent to cinemas, hence also the improved image quality) stacked up on the sound front when playing it on a big home cinema system...since as you probably know, all the other versions are just stereo, as not as you'd hear in in theatres :)