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
This isn't 2002, and the Bond movie that will be released later this year isn't called Die Another Day... This latest TV spot promises a movie that is incredibly light on CGI.
Precisely Panchito. I'll remind everyone:
It reminds me when the same persons claimed I was insane to write there were some problems with Logan :)
Yeah but obviously it won't be as much as other blockbusters which tend to CGI entire cities for instance....more like Nolan, CG only when needed.
Anyway, a less polemical question : is it common for TV spots in the USA not to give a date for the movies ?
The dots on Waltz's face have nothing to do with practical stuntwork, nor does the addition of CG rain in post-production. So far I'm seeing nothing but real, practical stunts in SPECTRE, which to me is what's most important. I could care less if they use CG for other things like rain or
i am all for the same thing - if the stunt can be done practically in the camera, it comes off 100x better, because the stunt was actually done, and you can appreciate it more... but CGI in today's day and age is unavoidable, and it gives filmmakers a lot more control when it comes to effects, more than what they used to have... it's a nice thing to have if you're using it to enhance a shot or stunt - but it shouldn't be relied upon heavily (like DAD did)... but Bond has always used special effects, the models/miniatures/rear screen projection was the CGI of those days.. CGI gets unjustly frowned upon, because it's viewed as "cheating the audience", I don't fully agree with that - while some CGI can be loud and obnoxious, I think it has it's place, and without it where would films like Jurassic Park and Lord Of The Rings be without it?.. those films would've looked completely different.. just my opinion..
well, to be fair, it was half a dead city they CGI'd (unless you are also talking about the wide shot of the approach to the island - in which case they took shots of the actual island + a little CGI and composited into the shot of the boat).... but they built most of it on the Pinewood backlot - at least the area in which the actors were in, then just CGI'd the surrounding landscape and/or buildings in the background (and thats because they couldn't use the actual island itself, because it was deemed too dangerous) - it's not like they Phantom Menaced the entire city and the actors walking around a whole blue screen stage lol..
in the US, it is typical to see just the month of release shown when we are still this far away (because anything can change).. once we get into September and October, the official date will appear.
What big budget movies in the past 5-10 years, other than the Mission Impossible films and the movies directed by Christopher Nolan had as little CGI as Skyfall did or as Spectre will have? Again, Spectre will be incredibly light on CGI.. and now I will add "for a movie of its size". Obviously it will have much more VFX shots than a small independent drama...
We have seen the trailer and dozens of set photos, some of us have read the script, we know that Mendes dislikes CGI (he expressed during an interview that he would never do something like the Komodo dragon ever again).
He also once said the thought of doing another Bond movie made him "physically ill." To be honest, I take a lot of what he says with a healthy grain of salt.
I'm sure, they could easily do all this with make up.
But then everybody now would know what his face will look like in the movie.
I think it's just a "watch out for the paparazzi"-safety-reason.
Nope.
Hashima Island, also called Gunkanjima meaning Battleship Island, is Japan’s ultimate industrial ruins ghost town and was used in Skyfall. It was the creepy island used as Silva's base. No doubt they built sets for the dialogue scenes, but "SF didn't CGI and entire "dead" city."
http://www.pri.org/stories/2012-11-23/history-hashima-island-bond-film-skyfall
http://www.lovethesepics.com/2013/01/abandoned-hashima-city-island-inspiration-for-james-bond-movie-skyfall/
They didn't actually use Hashima Island. They built a small set at Pinewood based off of Hashima, and then extended it using CGI.
Deakins did no filming in China. That was all second unit. The first unit (which included Deakins) never went to China.
i remember listening to the Mendes commentary on Skyfall, and he said they wanted to film on the island, but it wasn't safe enough.. so they recreated pieces of the island (the street and courtyard) on the Pinewood backlot and used CGI to extend the backgrounds.
yeah, the wide establishing shots showing the whole island (as the boat approached), that was the actual island just composited into the shot - and the last shot showing the helicopters hovering over the island, that was the real island, with just CGI helicopters.
If I say "No" because I definitely looked at it once the DVD was out (to confirm the strong full CGI feeling I had in the theater), would you trust me ? Or do I really need to show frames from the movie compared to the images from the real location (hint : the real location is not a town as massive as in SF, and nature started to come back in the dozens of years since people left) ?
Most probably the team there 'just' took photos for some environment mapping to recreate the feeling of the place while doing it in full CG. Just like when they probably shot environment mapping of Rome on the cars in SP according to the images we saw, to probably recreate the Rome feeling with CG in some close-up shots/interior car scenes in studio.
Also, CGI on a face brings out the problem of the uncanny valley.