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
Completely agree with @Haserot and @Ludovico here. Has anyone actually seen documentaries about komodo dragons? In any case I'm quite relaxed really. But some people don't relax about a film.....they don't get entertained anymore. Or at least I don't read the positivity and happiness in it anymore. I find that such a pity. But I'm still relaxed :-).
Yes!!! That's the right attitude, both thumps up followed by hefty applause!
You can like a movie and criticize it at the same time...
You can also over-criticise it and making it appear that you don't like the film anymore.
But it's good to hear that remark ;-). Despite the flaws that really to a certain extent every Bond film has, I rewatching them at least once a year :-).
Well, in my cinema it was one of the very few laughters.
I'm more than happy for the Bond series to take inspiration from other movies or whatever just so long as the execution of it all is marvellous.
The use of cg needs to be used sparingly and applied only when absolutely necessary otherwise, like others have said do it for real or don't do it at all. The script needs to be tight, no glaring and riddling plot holes in the script, great score, satisfying utilisation of the Bond girl(s), excellent use of locations which includes studio sets great action and a real sinister, reprobating villain. I don't give a toss where the inspiration cones from just so long all things are aligned brilliantly and we get a fantastic movie.
Oowh funny, in my cinema the laughter came from the couple saying "He's keen to get home". And the sequence where Bond uses the shovel on the train. And Kincade especially: "Welcome to Scotland" and "You jumped up little Shit". I kinda hope Kincade returns. And I wouldn't be surprised. Perhaps as Bond's housekeeper or concierge?
Unlike other franchises, Bond has history, and it has a future (it will be around in another 50 yrs for sure). So there is a higher burden of quality on a franchise like this (remember all those bad effects in the early 80's that have really dated some movies from that decade?) because the movies will be rewatched forever. As an example, I just watched FYEO on blu, and was a little disappointed to see those closeups of Roger on the skis following the toboggon now, because the back screen projector is so much more apparent in Blu ray (if they could have forseen blu ray technology 34 yrs ago I'm sure they may have been more careful with the use of back screens then). To this day, I'm stilll amazed at TSWLM because I don't see much back screen stuff there (just amazing models and sets). Agree on Jurassic Park too...outstanding, to this day.
Sure we're being nitpicky, but I don't think anyone here is suggesting that we don't enjoy these films. My word, we wouldn't be here if we didn't enjoy Bond. We love this series (even those few movies that have descended into near farce), that's why we're here. Our commentary here is ' tough love' for our beloved franchise. Healthy debate is good for all of us, so we get multiple viewpoints and learn from each other's valid opinions. As long as it's never personal.
As I said, if they can make CGI as good as CR's crane sequence (still get goosebumps when I watch that scene - Campbell and co. shot that beautifully and in a very grand, traditional Bond manner with sweeping long range establishing shots....like a crane moving actually...., because they were confident they were filming the real thing), then I'm sold.
Agreed @bondjames :-). Perhaps I'm hoping a bit too much for some happy faces in here. And that comes from me, who said that tough discussions should be possible. I fully agree with you.
Perfectly said. I'm in total agreement. Bike rigs work really well (remember Arnie in T2?)
It was a little odd, and maybe there was some reason they had to do it this way (costs or weather or something else).
About the FYEO vs SF "void scene", your answer is about stunts being unnecessary to Bond. Well, let's choose another elevator scene then.
Here someone is really above the outside elevator in this DAF scene (and the fact it's Connery is the cherry on the cake), it's not a Bond CG avatar under a lift in a CG building. IMO, once again, here we've got definitely the feeling that Bond is a daredevil, who is not nervous despite being where he is. Something the SF CG scene does not convey at all IMO.
I can also testify there where laughs in the theater when there was the green screen effect for the motorbike chase. It felt actually so dated. I understand they couldn't mount a faking system on these roofs to have a shot of Craig there, like they did for Naomie Harris driving the car, but then again the result does not work IMO.
In the same scene, the PTS of SF, we have a "practical" effect, with Harris not really driving the car, but no green screen, she's really there. And we have green screen with Craig not really driving the motorbike on these roofs, but he's not actually there at all. Do you really see no problem if we get more and more of the latter just because you feel it's nevertheless ok ? Here you can't use your tactics to say others are SF hater, because I'm taking two examples that are both in SF :)
PS : Is there someone here who prefers the CG Patrice fall scene from the movie to the few images of the real stuntman fall from the trailer ? In CR, I think we had zero digital characters. In QOS we had digital characters in one scene (the parachute scene), in SF we had them at least in three scenes (end of PTS, lift scene, Patrice fall). I'm afraid people alas can be worried it's a trend in movies in general. But Bond is not Iron-Man, it's a bit more a problem to go that way IMO. And well, Craig's CG avatar modeling job is already being done, it's less expensive to use it again and again...
Moreover, in topics that are more friendly, and where there's generally a nicer atmosphere and a good sense of respect, you're always absent. Perhaps you're right about everything. And then I let you have the truth. But in all honesty, I'm not really reading your remarks anymore.
By the way......you really really don't understand me. Go ahead if you think that I want to portray others as SF-haters. But those are really YOUR words. Not mine. I at least try to respect others. And agree to disagree. But even agreeing to disagree with you is impossible.
The current CGI problem can be summarized by the difference between the Patrice fall in the trailer and the Patrice fall in the movie. I really wonder if someone here is able to say the movie version is the better of the two...
And then the problem is that, if I'm not wrong, the number of scenes with CG characters instead of actors or stuntmen is : CR + pre-CR : 0, QOS : 1, SF : 3... Once again, I don't mind if zombies in a movie are full CG, but here we're talking about the main characters.
good idea. Not sure if there is a thread just dedicated to the effects work throughout the Bond films or not. This topic along with hundreds of others always go off in different directions§
You should have MP this, don't forget we're supposed to be unable to agree with anyone else, it could come as a shock :)
About CGI and Bond 24, what we know from our resident Craig experts is that Craig is not really proficient with skiing. And yes, IMO it could be a worry if they plan to go once again with CG face replacment to deal with it. Hopefully it will be skidoos, where you can use more practical effects.
I am not keen on discussing CGI, on the contrary, I think there are more relevant things to discuss. I was just mentioning it as people seem to make such a big fuss about the Komodo dragons.
Fuck sake. You remind me of Silva making M's life dire. You really have any nice....empathic....guts??
It might not be the proper thread, but for sure it's relevant. We are talking about an all important part of franchise's heritage here.
Just like the back screen of old?
I am joking of course, but my point is that CGI is a topic of relative importance.
The DAF elevator scene was a 'inspiration' for Skyfall i think ;-)