› ›

Too much CGI in Skyfall ? Or just Obvious CGI that wasn't needed ?

1…6781012

Comments

  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,216
    My point is, the Bond productions should settle for nothing but the best. I saw Logan over the weekend and was stunned when I read this article. The digital replacement was seamless, as it was in Mad max: Road Fury
  • stagstag In the thick of it!
    Posts: 1,053
    I had no issues with the CGI. I do think it overused in general within the film industry though.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Yes the CGI in the PTS with the bike chase can look a bit obvious but other than that I thought they used it sparingly.

    Although the explosion and building collapse at the beginning of SPECTRE does look obvious and what was the best part of the film could have been better if they hadn't bothered with that moment, it was unnecessary and didn't move the story on anymore.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    While I may not agree with a good bit of the CG usage in SF, the only instance of it where I felt it looked poor was during the PTS motorcycle chase. Any other instance, where I agreed with it or not, wasn't bad.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 8,216
    I agree.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    And since it's impossible for me to talk about the latter two Craig installments in a positive light, I'll take this opportunity to say: the CG explosion of MI6 in SF was pulled off terrifically well. If I didn't know any better, I would have assumed they just set off a bomb inside and filmed the result.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    That is true @Creasy47 but it didnt need to happen....as an Englishman it really annoys me.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    If they can't do it for real then don't do it
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited March 2017 Posts: 11,425
    I agree. Bond used to known for wonderful real stunts. The drift towards CGI has been entirely detrimental to the series.

    The rooftop chase in SF looks fake because they CGId the faces, even though the stunt was done for real. A real shame.
  • Some_Kind_Of_HeroSome_Kind_Of_Hero
    Posts: 6,844
    I haven't read through this whole enormous thread, but I will say the CGI on Silva's "Gollum" face was one of the series' lowest moments and could have been so easily avoided. It was such a brief moment, why not just use practical effects and makeup, instead of abominable close-up CGI? This has probably been discussed to death in this thread already anyway, so just consider that my two cents thrown in.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Another area - visual effects - where I'd argue Mendes has got it wrong.

    But frankly after DAd EOn should have banned CGI
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Even SPECTRE has pretty awful cgi despite doing everything for real
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    I'm fine with the location-building CGI that you would never know existed; shots of Morocco being extended in SP, or even how they added a few more carriages to the train they ride in SP. It's not noticeable, would've had no idea if I didn't see a BTS video on it. But, incorporating it into action sequences is a big no-no for me, especially from this series that has always done well enough to give us practical, jaw-dropping stunts.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    I dont know that cgi train really pisses me off
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    I didnt even know the train was CGI !!

    Shows how good that was .
  • PropertyOfALadyPropertyOfALady Colders Federation CEO
    Posts: 3,675

    LicenceRevoked wrote: »
    The scorpion was pretty well done. Also a large majority of Silva's island was CGI. They used the same technique as they used in Inception when they showed Cobb's crumbled dream world. The bit with the elevator was in fact CGI also. If you look closely the lighting doesn't quite match. It's a minor thing really, didn't spoil the enjoyment at all, just trivia :D

    What technique is that?
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    The lift sequence in SF was dire. Looked totally fake. Why not have some real stunt work? Using stunt men, not DC.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    MrKissKissBangBang wrote: »
    Jazz007 wrote: »
    I didn't find the CGI in SF as noticeable as that in QOS, where the dogfight scene was clearly nearly all CGI and really took me out of the film for a minute.

    The dragons were convincing - not real for sure and therefore not matching up to the crocodile scenes in LALD (which they were obviously trying to pay homage to); honestly never noticed if the helicopters were real.... Figured the dentures scene was CGI but that was definitely convincing. Mountains out of mole hills here, I think.

    Agreed.

    Even the earlier Bond films succumbed to special effects, and some weren't as good as others - even in the best of Bond films. DN, FRWL, GF, TB, YOLT, OHMSS, TSWLM - all had some back projection and not all of it was top notch. And yet, it doesn't affect the enjoyment of those films. Why is SF being penalised for using the latest version of visual effects when a) it's used minimally; b) it's not the worst in the series (that would go to DAD and QOS); and c) there's a proven history of other exceptional Bond using special effects for certain shots?

    What about the shots of the falling house in Venice in CR? Some of those effects are very dodgy. Or the close ups in the helicopter fight in SP? The fall through the glass in the QOS rooftop chase? The jump out of the plane with Camille?

    Side note: I still maintain the best use of back projection is probably in FYEO when Bond is climbing his way to St. Cyrils. Barely noticeable.

    I have to agree with this...I think this week is 'National Dump on SF & TWINE Week ' !

  • tanaka123tanaka123
    Posts: 4,325
    Never had a problem with the CGI in Skyfall.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Exactly....getting a bit OTT here.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Getafix wrote: »
    The lift sequence in SF was dire. Looked totally fake. Why not have some real stunt work? Using stunt men, not DC.

    It's just a guy going up a lift, it didn't need to be a stunt. I like the top down view of Bond as he goes up and it's far more stylish than watching some random guy grab onto the bottom of the thing and rise out of camera.
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,617
    THe CGI test is very easy and applied to all movies. Does it take me out of the film? If the scene is so gripping re the suspense, plot, character etc, the you can overlook some CGI. The brain cant scan for CGI whilst actively immersed in the movie. Unless the CGI is so poor and "in your face" that you just cant help but notice. I dont think there is anything in SF that is too bad and it did not put mainstream punters off (unlike other Bond movies),
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    And it was an important scene,Bond hanging from the lift,because his right arm gave way again,and he was sewating,basically showing the audience that Bond is still in a lot of pain.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    barryt007 wrote: »
    And it was an important scene,Bond hanging from the lift,because his right arm gave way again,and he was sewating,basically showing the audience that Bond is still in a lot of pain.

    Yes, it's a far more interesting choice. If it was done as a stunt EON would have to find an real working lift that they could use to get high up, and the camera would just be following the guy from the bottom floor to the top with a backed off lens to disguise the fact that it wasn't Dan. It would've been very boringly shot and staged. Imagine the comments here. "Wow, in the 70s EON would have stuntmen jump off the side of mountains but now they've got blokes latching onto lifts. Crazy stuff." The piss would've been taken.

    And if a stuntman was used, they'd have been tempted to use CGI to give the guy Craig's face, so let's consider ourselves lucky they had Danny boy there to do it.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    It also shows,when Bond fought Patrice,how much effort he would have had to put into that fight to the death,as he was obviously weaker than a full strength Patrice.
    Something that would have never been used if a stuntman had been used .
  • Jazz007Jazz007 Minnesota
    Posts: 257
    patb wrote: »
    THe CGI test is very easy and applied to all movies. Does it take me out of the film? If the scene is so gripping re the suspense, plot, character etc, the you can overlook some CGI. The brain cant scan for CGI whilst actively immersed in the movie. Unless the CGI is so poor and "in your face" that you just cant help but notice. I dont think there is anything in SF that is too bad and it did not put mainstream punters off (unlike other Bond movies),

    Bingo - well said.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    I guess it only bothers you if you notice it, and it really bothers me because there's just too much of it
  • stagstag In the thick of it!
    Posts: 1,053
    Getafix wrote: »
    I agree. Bond used to known for wonderful real stunts. The drift towards CGI has been entirely detrimental to the series.

    The rooftop chase in SF looks fake because they CGId the faces, even though the stunt was done for real. A real shame.

    I didn't notice this until you mentioned it. I'll definitely look out for it on my next viewing.

  • GamesBond007GamesBond007 Golden Grotto
    Posts: 66
    Back projection 4 Life!

    I have no issues with some CGI. I felt it was used respectfully in Skyfall and in some cases enhanced the film.

    Some on here will instantly go to the motorcycle chase over and through the bazaar but I found this to be one of the best uses of CG in the film. While it may be obvious that it isn't actually Daniel Craig riding the bike, I feel you can make the same argument for constantly trying to obscure the stuntmans face with every angle. Either way I know it's not DC.

    At least we can actually see Bond in action using this technique. The only time CGI has ever bothered me in a Bond film would be that damned tsunami sequence in DAD.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    GamesBond007 wrote: »
    Some on here will instantly go to the motorcycle chase over and through the bazaar but I found this to be one of the best uses of CG in the film. While it may be obvious that it isn't actually Daniel Craig riding the bike, I feel you can make the same argument for constantly trying to obscure the stuntmans face with every angle. Either way I know it's not DC.

    If that was one of the best uses, what would you deem the worst?
Sign In or Register to comment.