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
His hair is not right too messy
Does anyone think they will do a video of Safin?
True, I even wanted Safin's reveal in the trailer to be just that Mask scene in that Room....alone. Almost feels as if that 14secs trailer had more mystery about it.
New footage? :-?
No new footage, all from trailer.
@marketto007 Just to be clear. @Safin_Unmasked claims that, not me.
I wonder why he is hiding some faces interesting
I figured that was just so everyone would know which one was Dali.
When there's a smilie in the post it generally means it's a joke.
No, it sinks, it doesn't collapse.
Bit of a shame it's not a new sculpt of the Vantage: that one was never very accurate looking. It's not even accurate to NTTD: the car in that doesn't have a fabric sunroof. I guess Corgi haven't got bags of cash so it's fair enough.
I don't know what people who say that are looking at....
He quite clearly ages, and quite a lot too.
(As per nature dictates).
Nah. It collapses as well as sinks. As most things do when put under such pressure, I'd imagine!
A brief mention of working with Rami on NTTD. And I think he handled the female Bond question quite well.
I would love them to keep the more over the top camp humour in the adverts, the one for Spectre was great
It's not shown to collapse, no. Otherwise where does Vesper's lift shaft lead to? It goes all the way to the bottom floor. The roof is intact when Bond tries to resuscitate her. A bit of plaster falls off the outside but that's not quite a collapse ;)
No one other than a pedant watches that sequence and suggests that it doesn't just sink ;)
"a bit of plaster falls off".
Amazing.
Okay. You've convinced me. ;)
Not really sure what that means. Which shot were you thinking of that shows the building collapsing? Maybe I missed it.
I'll respond first on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.
The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.
The only thing that the scene really takes liberties with is the speed of which the building goes down. It would really happen a lot faster in reality. Also, I'm not 100% sure, but I think I remember someone saying that the floatation devices would be a bit bigger than what were essentially barrels in the film. But yes, the main point is that house will also collapse on itself as well as sink. And if you want a specific visual reference, I think they convey it pretty well in the film during the wide shots without overdoing it. Yes, for dramatic reasons the elevator shaft needed to act a certain way - otherwise we wouldn't get our big moment with Vesper; but likewise the internal damage isn't a million miles away otherwise, considering that it's a big budget mainstream vision of it.
There's a couple of neat videos online about it, if it's something you're interested in following up on! The SFX guys did a great job on the scene.
Most of the time it's the interviewers that are the problems in Craig's media appearances, not him. That being said, he seems to be getting better at it, regardless. He looks like he's having fun.
Yeah, me too. I'm looking forward to seeing them on the telly. That's when it really kicks in that we're close to a new Bond. Very exciting.
Erm, what..? I'm just asking if you can think of a shot where it collapses...? You said it does so you must've thought you'd seen it happen in a shot in the film...? I'm not sure why you think I'm referring to any previous comment. How odd.
It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.
Here's a collapse:
Here are the last two shots of the building:
Notice how one has collapsed and the other is in one piece and has just sunk ;)