› ›

Mission: Impossible - films and tv series

1…115116118120121…306

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    THAT is when I have an issue with CG; I can forgive it if it's not dominating an action sequence, but when I see, say, a flood of CG bad guys fighting real humans/CGI cars getting into wild crashes, I tune right out.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,801
    No, stop...
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,474
    Watching the trailer for the new MI movie in theaters really just made me want Bond back that much more.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2018 Posts: 23,883
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    But... But... @bondjames... This is real...

    giphy.gif

    ;)
    A sad stain on the franchise my friend. I thought they'd learned their lesson, but nooo... they were back at it again in that aforementioned sequence in QoS, not to mention the plane destruction (again reminiscent of DAD) and the parachute. Then they went further in SF with the Omega and CGI face and practically disgraced themselves in SP.

    Sad coming from a series that set the standard for so long.

    That's why I take nothing away from Cruise and applaud him for the efforts he goes to keep it real, even if much of it could be ego driven and marketing based.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    edited April 2018 Posts: 15,423
    The thing is... I'm not against the idea of a parasurfing scene on the glacier flood. What I'm against is that they made a complete embarrassment out of themselves with making the whole thing poorly executed with CGI. Get a damn stuntman, a whole stunt team, scout for location, build a set, fake the flood by demolitions or whatever if you will, film it professionally, and be done with it. But, no... blue screen, CGI ice, glacier, water and 3D computer animated Pierce Brosnan character model in the scene done in three days.

    ...And this comes from someone who often defends DAD against its detractors.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    @ClarkDevlin, the kicker for me is it's from the EXACT same film that literally opens with a terrific, practically-done surfing sequence, just to turn into a video game cutscene with the parasurfing sequence.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    The thing is... I'm not against the idea of a parasurfing scene on the glacier flood. What I'm against is that they made a complete embarrassment out of themselves with making the whole thing poorly executed with CGI. Get a damn stuntman, a whole stunt team, scout for location, build a set, fake the flood by demolitions or whatever if you will, film it professionally, and be done with it. But, no... blue screen, CGI ice, glacier, water and 3D computer animated Pierce Brosnan character model in the scene done in three days.
    Agreed fully.
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @ClarkDevlin, the kicker for me is it's from the EXACT same film that literally opens with a terrific, practically-done surfing sequence, just to turn into a video game cutscene with the parasurfing sequence.
    Precisely. The two sequences clearly demonstrate the difference and the first one is just incredibly thrilling even if it isn't as ambitious.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    @bondjames, agreed, good way to word it: wildly entertaining, regardless of how straight-forward it is/not terribly ambitious or unique.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2018 Posts: 23,883
    @Creasy47, that is, imho, really where the problem lies. They are trying to do more ambitious stunts these days, and have to resort to flimsy effects to realize the vision. If they just simplify the scenarios and cut the budget then they would be forced to do things for real and the result would in turn be more realistic.

    I thought the QoS plane chase was perfectly fine (apart from the absolutely abysmal 'blink and you'll miss it' photography) until the very end, when someone thought it necessary to have the plane go up near vertically so they could do the fancy parachute CGI drop into the canyon. If they'd just instead had Bond and Camille ditch the plane mid air (like they did in TLD) and jump out they could have avoided the poor DAD like plane disintegration effects. Also, did we really need to see their CGI faces in close up mid air? Not to me. They could have just had them put on helmets before jumping and then filmed stuntmen doing it from a distance. It would have looked much better because they could have filmed it for real wide angle rather than close up crap CGI.
  • Please_fix_FB_issuePlease_fix_FB_issue Denmark
    Posts: 3
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Tom Cruise discussed THAT stunt at CinemaCon today, and holy hell, I cannot wait to see how they pull that off:
    Who the f.... needs to do a halo jump to get into........ Paris?
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    @Please_fix_FB_issue,
    they probably need to enter a 2 foot by 2 foot window in the fifth floor of some special location that is impregnable from below ;-).
  • BounineBounine
    Posts: 2,599
    Just saw the trailer. Looks good. I just can't warm to Simon Pegg though. I find him to be too comical in the MI films for my liking.
  • BounineBounine
    edited April 2018 Posts: 2,599
    In terms of comic relief, I much preferred Emilio Estevez. Too bad they had to kill him off at the beginning. I would have liked to have seen him in every MI flick.
  • Please_fix_FB_issuePlease_fix_FB_issue Denmark
    Posts: 3
    boldfinger wrote: »
    @Please_fix_FB_issue,
    they probably need to enter a 2 foot by 2 foot window in the fifth floor of some special location that is impregnable from below ;-).
    As if it wouldn't be impressive enough if they just jumped out of a chopper 500 metres from the ground? Gotta be more to it
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    Please_fix_FB_issue wrote: »
    boldfinger wrote: »
    @Please_fix_FB_issue,
    they probably need to enter a 2 foot by 2 foot window in the fifth floor of some special location that is impregnable from below ;-).
    As if it wouldn't be impressive enough if they just jumped out of a chopper 500 metres from the ground? Gotta be more to it
    If they jumped from a low altitude over a high security area that includes things like radar they would be instantly spotted, wouldn´t they?
  • patbpatb
    edited April 2018 Posts: 4,617
    I think there are two levels. Ideally, I do get an extra thrill from seeing actors performing their own stunts. It shows a level of commitment, courage etc that takes the performace to another level.

    Without this, I still want to see human beings performing physical stunts. I suspect if Cruise could not have done the freefall, they had a choice of still using a stunt team or CGI the whole thing. Surely, the former is always going to have more dramatic impact?

    PS I watched the PTS to Moonraker again last night and even though you can clearly see its not RM, it's still a stunning opening IMHO
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    patb wrote: »
    PS I watched the PTS to Moonraker again last night and even though you can clearly see its not RM, it's still a stunning opening IMHO
    Agreed. I think a lot of the thrill comes from knowing that someone was up there in the air doing the stunt. If you can believe its the actor it's even better (irrespective of whether it is or not). I think it's a matter of suspension of disbelief. CGI cannot create that impression so well because the technology isn't quite there yet.
  • noSolaceleftnoSolaceleft
    Posts: 1,162
    fanbond123 wrote: »
    With modern CGI you can do almost anything and it can fool people. It would be easy to greenscreen Cruise hanging on wires in a studio and composite elements of the background and make you believe it's a genuine halo jump. If it's not one continuous scene with zero cuts then you can never prove it's all genuine. Just as easy to fool people in believing he held his breath for minutes in the last MI film.

    I also agree about Cruise bragging a lot in his recent action films. All credit to him hanging onto the plane in the last MI but he actually looked kinda scared doing it which kinda killed the impact. Had he looked calm hanging onto it it would have been a cooler scene! Sean Connery was hanging onto the top of a moving train, ducking under bridges, in The First Great Train Robbery but I don't recall him bragging about it. Fantastic scene.


    There’s really not a single word in this post I can agree with.
  • noSolaceleftnoSolaceleft
    Posts: 1,162
    bondjames wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    PS I watched the PTS to Moonraker again last night and even though you can clearly see its not RM, it's still a stunning opening IMHO
    Agreed. I think a lot of the thrill comes from knowing that someone was up there in the air doing the stunt. If you can believe its the actor it's even better (irrespective of whether it is or not). I think it's a matter of suspension of disbelief. CGI cannot create that impression so well because the technology isn't quite there yet.

    Also, lot of its appeal lies and the idea itself. A guy thrown out of the plane who doesn’t even consider to give up. I will never never forget how uplifting this scene was to me when I saw it in the cinema. Never!
  • RogueAgentRogueAgent
    Posts: 12,526
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    But... But... @bondjames... This is real...

    giphy.gif

    ;)

    OMG my most annoying moment of the franchise right there! Nooooooo!!!!!!
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    I´d rather watch that than most of the last two films.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    boldfinger wrote: »
    I´d rather watch that than most of the last two films.
    +1
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    Title card for the latest installment:

    DcYoSLfW4AAE0PY.jpg:orig
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited May 2018 Posts: 40,976
    Christopher McQuarrie is currently color timing the next trailer for Fallout, will be online in the next couple weeks:

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Color timing? What is that?
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Color timing? What is that?
    They time the colors.
  • boldfingerboldfinger
    Posts: 5,767
    So that the colors appear in the correct order, and not all at once.
  • antovolkantovolk
    Posts: 3,164
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Color timing? What is that?

    another term for colour grading.
  • Risico007Risico007
    Posts: 9,847
    I grade all blues A+
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    ClarkDevlin wrote: »
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Color timing? What is that?
    They time the colors.
    boldfinger wrote: »
    So that the colors appear in the correct order, and not all at once.

    Of course...I actually knew that. Obvious when you think about it.
Sign In or Register to comment.