› ›

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

24567…12

Comments

  • RyanKintRyanKint
    Posts: 83
    The arrival at Macau (filmed at pinewood ) also looked somewhat suspect . Again no real need to do the long shot. Just a close up would have been fine
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    The whole movie was CGI.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited October 2012 Posts: 13,356
    I think it all looked fine. Nothing stands out as obtrusive to me. The helicopters maybe but that was only on screen for a few seconds.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Samuel001 wrote:
    I think it all looked fine. Nothing stands out as obtrusive to me. The helicopters maybe but that was only on screen for a few seconds.

    That reminds me, I still need to return my looking glass.
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre
    Posts: 1,548
    PanchitoPistoles wrote:
    Obvious CGI parts:
    -Komodo dragon
    -Helicopters arriving to the island
    -Silva takes out his dentures

    The helicopers weren't too convincing but that was like a 2 seconds long shot. The other CGI things looked just fine.

    I really don't get all the fuss about the CGI in Skyfall. The movie has surprisingly little amount of CGI.

    I agree. Don't know what all the fuss is about. I didn't even know the helicopters were CGI to be honest. The denture and dragonn scenes was well done IMO. Whatever your opinion just compare it to DAD and how stupid Brosnan looked surfing away his dignity on that ridiculous looking iceberg! Also Skyfall is a lot/character-driven film so I really dont care about thye minimal CGI shots used. Almost as pointless worrying about it as the debate about the gun barrel.
  • MrArlingtonBeachMrArlingtonBeach
    edited October 2012 Posts: 110
    I look at it this way:

    If I can deal with the special effects in Moonraker, the CGI parts of DAD, and the freefall scene in QOS, I will have no complaints.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    MrArlingtonBeach wrote:
    I look at it this way:

    If I can deal with the special effects in Moonraker, the CGI parts of DAD, and the freefall scene in QOS, I will have no complaints.

    We wouldn't want that now, would we? ;)
  • Gareth00789Gareth00789
    edited October 2012 Posts: 655
    JamesCraig wrote:
    bondsum wrote:
    Komodo dragons in Macau?!! It's far too cold for komodo dragons to live in Macau all year round from my experience of the islands. They prefer hot and dry places. Shouldn't this have been set off the Indonesian islands instead? The casino must have been as hot as a desert!!

    Totally unrealistic. This movie is worse than DAD. [-(

    what!!! its one of the most realistic bond films ever . lol its ll stuff that can happen, like london underground for example
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    have to say that i just really really enjoyed the movie! Nothing stood out too much concerning the CGI for me. Certainly not in the same catergory as DAD.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,231
    Gareth00789 wrote:
    JamesCraig wrote:
    bondsum wrote:
    Komodo dragons in Macau?!! It's far too cold for komodo dragons to live in Macau all year round from my experience of the islands. They prefer hot and dry places. Shouldn't this have been set off the Indonesian islands instead? The casino must have been as hot as a desert!!

    Totally unrealistic. This movie is worse than DAD. [-(

    what!!! its one of the most realistic bond films ever . lol its ll stuff that can happen, like london underground for example

    He was joking I'm sure.
  • GermanladyGermanlady
    Posts: 6,601
    Sure he was.
  • UmustbjockingUmustbjocking
    Posts: 83
    I haven't seen the film so the only thing I can say is that this crew has proven to be as real as possible. Lets take the opening of QOS: Try jumping from balcony to balcony, slamming into walls without losing a beat, or CR jumping from crane to crane. You'd be out in 30 seconds flat. Some mention DAD and rightly so because if Cubby was alive he would not have allowed that to take place. Off course, its impossible to do a film of this scope without some "help" but its a FILM. You can't have people almost losing their lives. Ex Octapussy (stuntman almost got killed in train scene) On Tomorrow N Dies we know that helicopters can't hover like that, but it looked plausible. And then we have the studio: You can't miss a day, time is money etc. You can't have the leading men injured
  • UmustbjockingUmustbjocking
    Posts: 83
    Fellas, if DAD had the car chase without all the invisible BS and tons of guns, was just a ice sequence with maybe one gadget per car it could have flown. Such a great start on the film but what a disappointment overall. Shame...
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,231
    Germanlady wrote:
    You are right, but you know, how this goes. Before you know it, we have a BIG affair on our hands, how terrible the CGI is. If people would be able to restraint themselves from overreacting, it would be no problem. But we often see, they/we/I tend to overreact at times and that would be a sad thing, especially right now. That's all.. ;)

    I don't think it's overreacting at all to be honest. Overreacting would be, "Oh my God, there's such bad CGI in some scenes, this movie sucks."

    There was almost no CGI in the PTS, apart from the closeups with Craig on the bike (and those were more than adequate) and the glass panels that Patrice goes through were added digitally as far as I'm aware. But things like that are common practice and no big deal.

    I actually thought the effects for Silva's "physical trait" were great. The only thing that annoyed me was the helicopters bit, because I've noticed this in other films as well and I didn't think Bond would join that trend of Computer Generating helicopters, considering how well the real helicopter was used in the finale.

    It's only a small complaint but it's completely valid, no matter what you or others say.
  • Gareth00789Gareth00789
    Posts: 655
    jsut got back again tongiht. CGI not bad at all. i couldnt remember. everything looked good enoguh. very pleased with it all. But this might sound stupid, but it might show how much of a fan i am. Tonight, i did feel like i was going to cry. Its because i have been looking forward to skyfall the whole year. I enjoyed the journey of it and now its over. its realy sad. has anyone else felt like that????? :(( :((
  • dkwookiedkwookie
    edited October 2012 Posts: 31
    The worst CGI was the with the bikes on the roof of the bazaar in the PTS. They may have filmed it for real with stuntmen but they CGIed Daniels face on a long shot and then the close ups were green screen. I would prefer to see the stunt men from a distance, I know its not Dan and Ola but it amazes me that those stunt men drove on the roof top so I accept it
    Edit: I dont mind the green screen close ups, I expect that but its that one shot they CGIed Dans face over a stunt man on the bike. Reminded me of the guy in T2 with the Arnie face mask on for the dump to the drainage ditch
  • Gareth00789Gareth00789
    edited October 2012 Posts: 655
    isnt it funny, i couldnt even notice the bike cgi with daniels head. i have seen it twice and i just canoot see it. it must be good enough to not notice much. i think the worsr cgi if it had to be was the helciopter on the close up. But film was great and worth it in the end. it was like the trailers and how i emagend it to be almost.
  • dkwookiedkwookie
    Posts: 31
    Thats weird, it stood out to me like a sore thumb. I didnt mind the GGI anywhere else, just that one thing. It felt like cheating. I know its a stuntman riding that bike. Just film it so its hiding his face
  • JawsIsAliveJawsIsAlive
    Posts: 233
    The green screen on the bike wasn't too bad, and it's not like it's any different from the back projection in Connery's era.
  • UmustbjockingUmustbjocking
    Posts: 83
    dkwookie wrote:
    The worst CGI was the with the bikes on the roof of the bazaar in the PTS. They may have filmed it for real with stuntmen but they CGIed Daniels face on a long shot and then the close ups were green screen. I would prefer to see the stunt men from a distance, I know its not Dan and Ola but it amazes me that those stunt men drove on the roof top so I accept it
    Edit: I dont mind the green screen close ups, I expect that but its that one shot they CGIed Dans face over a stunt man on the bike. Reminded me of the guy in T2 with the Arnie face mask on for the dump to the drainage ditch
    I seem to recall that the stunt man had a bunch of black dots on his face when they were filming the motorcycle scenes, but as I ride bikes as well I saw in the trailers and some behind the scenes shots that these cats were doing all of it. With the help of some ramps of course so the bike can lift off. The narrow riding and landings are for real. The scene where Bond rides off the bridge onto a barge is tricky. Craig is starting the scene, but I can't tell if he went over because the ramp is to push the bike over the bridge and away from the rider who lands on the barge. Is that all Craig?
  • EllisEllis
    Posts: 224
    When did CGI become prevalent in movies? Was it 1989? It's amazing how great the Connery and Moore films were without CGI.
  • UnivexUnivex
    edited October 2012 Posts: 6,710
    The cgi was brilliantly done. No complains here, and I´m a cgi hater, trust me, after 2002 I had cgi-ptsd.
  • SharkBaitSharkBait
    Posts: 2,107
    Yes. A little cgi does hurt. I want back projection back. So realistic compared to cgi....
  • JWESTBROOKJWESTBROOK
    Posts: 5,745
    The great thing about the CGI.. is that it can be fixed for the BRay!!!

    But should it be.. :-?
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    edited October 2012 Posts: 3,497
    Ellis wrote:
    When did CGI become prevalent in movies? Was it 1989? It's amazing how great the Connery and Moore films were without CGI.

    Yeah, you just never saw that they used green screens.

    Brilliant realism.
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    SharkBait wrote:
    Yes. A little cgi does hurt. I want back projection back. So realistic compared to cgi....

    For Bond 24!
    ;)
  • JamesCraigJamesCraig Ancient Rome
    Posts: 3,497
    Gareth00789 wrote:
    jsut got back again tongiht. CGI not bad at all. i couldnt remember. everything looked good enoguh. very pleased with it all. But this might sound stupid, but it might show how much of a fan i am. Tonight, i did feel like i was going to cry. Its because i have been looking forward to skyfall the whole year. I enjoyed the journey of it and now its over. its realy sad. has anyone else felt like that????? :(( :((

    My friend, it's only the beginning...

  • ThepastykidThepastykid
    Posts: 553
    That's the great thing - James Bond Will Return - there is always a new film for us to speculate about, we have the US release where our friends there can start weighing in with their views. Then there will be the lead up to the Blu Ray release when you'll get to own a copy you can watch whenever you want. Loads still to come.
  • DCisaredDCisared Liverpool
    Posts: 1,329
    Thepastykid wrote:
    That's the great thing - James Bond Will Return - there is always a new film for us to speculate about, we have the US release where our friends there can start weighing in with their views. Then there will be the lead up to the Blu Ray release when you'll get to own a copy you can watch whenever you want. Loads still to come.

    How long does it take for the blu ray to be released do we think?
  • ThepastykidThepastykid
    Posts: 553
    My guess would be around late-Feb, early-March
Sign In or Register to comment.