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
If Binder's version should be used, it ought to be that very image he shot with his pinhole camera, with all the grain intact. Or even just try replicating it by taking a newer photo of the inside of a gun barrel.
I’d be happy with the Brosnan GB design as well to be fair.
The reason for that was that the original negative for each GB was duped (inter-positive which was then used to create a new inter-neg,) for the next film, which meant every time they did that, the quality deteriorated a little. You can see this with Roger Moore's GB from TSWLM (the original new GB shot for that film) and then that GB was duped for MR, FYEO, OP and finally AVTAK. With digital we do not have that same photographic degrade issue which they had back then.
It reminds me of the old pan and scan VHS tapes.
I tend to wonder why during the Moore era the scope version seems to change background colors. In some it looks pinkish, others yellowish. Perhaps it's the DVD and Blu-ray transfers using faded elements?
I don’t think it was exactly the same sequence repeated, I believe they made it afresh for every movie, I heard an interview with Binder’s assistant where he talked about that. But I assume the image of the gunbarrel itself they used ended up being all sorts of generational copies.
I think the way the gunbarrel emerges out of the dark, starting from just small reflections in the darkness, is rather brilliant to be honest, and a very clever update of the dot opening up.
They re-used the same GB for the first 3 Bonds (which wasn't actually Connery in the GB) and then re-shot for TB with Connery, as we know. They did a dupe (IP - inter-positive and from that an inter-neg) of Connery's same TB live action footage and re-shot the GB optical for YOLT so Bond would be in B/W rather than colour. Of course OHMSS was all new footage. DAF was re-shot GB optical with same Connery footage. LALD was, of course brand new footage and optical, which they duped for TMWTGG. I've spoken about Roger's GBs from TSWLM onwards. TLD was all new, and we duped it for LTK (I was in the cutting rooms and did liaison between editing room and Binder and his team at GSE optical company.) My very good friend, Alan Church, oversaw the GB opticals (it might have been Allan's interview you read). Alan was also brought back to rebuilt the 35mm GB elements for the 4k version of OHMSS. So, yes, it's sort of a combination of re-shooting the optical, and re-suing or re-shooting the live action footage. With Craig, it's all been completely re-shot from scratch each time. Hope that helps.
Thanks for that, but are you sure you're not mistaken? Just looking at the LALD and MWTGG gunbarrels you can see the matte line around the central hole is off centre in both, but too far to the left in one and too far to the right in the other; and LTK's can't be simply a dupe of TLD's as Tim looks to be at a different scale from one the other (he's much tighter to the edges of the circle in LTK) and plus of course the animation is different, with the circle opening up in the middle of the screen in LTK. And yes, Mr Church does also say that he remade the opticals for LTK in that interview.
Obviously the footage of the actors was reused on most occasions, but the actual gunbarrel optical appears to have been remade quite often (although I'm sure it got reused occasionally).
Well, I'm going by memory re: LTK. But the live action footage was from IP, as I've laid out, and some of the GB elements were re-used, and one of the issues is that dupes add more contrast with each copy, which is why the elements would be re-shot. I'll check with Allan, he'll remember exactly.
So if this is true - the gunbarrel following the Norway/Safin attacks young Madeleine and her mother scene - this actually makes a ton of sense. 1. Clearly separate the flashback opening and the present day (right after the events of Spectre, but before the post-main titles 5 Years Later jump) 2. circle back to Casino Royale similarly having a cold open before the gunbarrel and 3. Still having a more traditional pre titles with Bond, that doesn't feel as long as it might (20 mins+) were it not broken up by the gunbarrel.
Also explains why the cue released by Zimmer has the buildup like Spectre but shorter by half. Would only work in a SP like scenario over the studio logos if there was only one studio logo (MGM). Thi at the end of the Norway sequence would be more akin to leading to a familiar title sequence cue on a TV show.
Good point.
Yes, that's what I said, indeed. As I said, Tim is bigger in the circle in LTK than he is in TLD.
I’ve never noticed that, interesting. Both of Dalton’s GB’s were great.
I think based on CJF's comments the current longstanding theory of how the film opens, NTTD will go a little like this.....
MGM logo:
Safin at the lake:
Cut to the Gunbarrel:
Then off to Matera for the PTS:
Obviously, followed by the main titles:
I think we will see the young Madeleine in the water and then - after the Gunbarrel - cut to the older Madeleine in the water in Italy. This establishes the idea that Lea is playing the grown-up version of the same character we saw chased on the lake. However, I don't think the film will make it much may obvious than that.
If they follow the above, I think the cold open is purely there to establish mood and atmosphere. Essentially to wrongfoot the audience before the Bond experience begins properly. It'll be an intense, creepy little sequence to frighten you. I imagine they hope audiences forget it once they see Bond. Then when the lake sequence eventually becomes integral to the plot, it will reveal its latent significance to us.
I actually like the idea of opening with an intense short sequence then cutting to the Gunbarrel. It'll be very interesting and unique. Plus, it'll make sure the blood is properly pumping for the movie itself....I'm very intrigued by how they will play it.
I always found the Gunbarrel a little staid and boring. I don't need it at the beginning of the film. Especially if there are more inventive ways to incorporate it.......Come at me.
This is disappointing and annoying if it’s true. I personally need the GB at the beginning, or it effects my enjoyment of the whole film.
CR was forgivable, the others weren’t.