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
Goldeneye People talking
In LTK you have wider shots, you feel the space, the characters.
Oh, they are. When the screen is very large, you don't need so many close-ups. It's true that there are trends and styles and it is not a rule set in stone but neither is it that it is more cinematic for having more shadows.
Hmm... I think we'll have to agree to disagree on most of this then. I don't get the sense you know much about film language :)
Don't worry, I think the same about you too. ;)
I think we just disagree on which we prefer, which is fine and that's the nature of a discussion :) But the only reason I'm saying I don't think you know much about film language is what you wrote about 'the screen being very large' (which is a strange way of describing a wide angle anyway and inaccurate) and how that means you don't 'need close ups' (close ups are simply a shot choice like any other, and how they're used and edited into the film is a more often a creative choice rather than a practical one).
It's not me trying to be too snarky - not everyone works in filmmaking or thinks about this stuff often even if they're film fans. But like I said agree to disagree.
Sure, close ups exist and people use them. It's a choice as much as "flat lighting".
Well yes, everything's a choice, even if the flat lighting or close ups are for more practical than creative reasons. Or indeed vice versa. What we're discussing is which one sets the tone and tells the story visually more effectively, and to some extent which is more visually appealing (not necessarily which is prettier). Personally I find GE much more atmospheric in that way and better shot.
Yeah, that's my point too. We see the space and we see the characters. The scene breathes.
Well then, I suppose we'll see how many people prefer the GE or LTK scene if they want to continue the conversation.
If that's how you feel about the scene that's fine. Ultimately we can only go from how we feel watching films, and we all have our preferences. Again, I like the LTK one, but for me personally it can feel a bit stagey, which doesn't quite accentuate the tension of the scene, even if we see more of the space and it 'breathes'. I don't think it tells the story as effectively as it could. I'm more engrossed in the GE scene in large part due to the atmospheric visuals and the fact that it feels more real to me (the fact that's it's darker/has tighter shots is, in my opinion, much better for the mood). But we're all different.
sense to be. Valentin exists in a dirty dive bar dealing with dodgy crackpot arms-dealers whereas Sanchez's office is part of an opulent casino, and is later shown to host events.
It makes zero sense to darken the atmos at Che Franz but perfect sense at Val's.
GE's scene gets the nod for me, but for a more superficial reason: Bond's hair.
Gel is not your friend, Timbo, and the party has gone on too long at the back.
Yep.