Thoughts on Licence to Kill?

1567810

Comments

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 2022 Posts: 16,368
    Yeah there are a few things out there which have 'workprint' ascribed to them which just aren't. There are a load of clips from a GoldenEye promotional tape which was distributed before the film was released (so the edits aren't finalised, some of the music is temped) which are bogusly posted as 'from the workprint' on YouTube.

    The way the screen blanks out on his laugh is probably the most suspicious bit: seems like it's just this audio, as you say. It's annoying that folks feel they have to fake this stuff: the audio may well be real but if they have faked the image then it confuses the whole matter. The version on YouTube does feature the distortion however:

  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    That reminds me of this.



    Haha!
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,270
    mattjoes wrote: »
    That reminds me of this.



    Haha!

    I've seen that recently. A brilliant piece of retconning there! :))
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited January 2022 Posts: 1,711
    mattjoes wrote: »
    That reminds me of this.



    Haha!

    That's hilarious, and about as believable as this LTK one!
    mtm wrote: »

    The way the screen blanks out on his laugh is probably the most suspicious bit: seems like it's just this audio, as you say. It's annoying that folks feel they have to fake this stuff: the audio may well be real but if they have faked the image then it confuses the whole matter. The version on YouTube does feature the distortion however:


    The YouTube video I found wasn't distorted. Just look up LTK workprint.

    About the distortion, what format was this supposed to be? I can't think of a wide-screen format that is prone to that kind of distortion.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 2022 Posts: 16,368
    mattjoes wrote: »
    That reminds me of this.



    Haha!

    That's hilarious, and about as believable as this LTK one!
    mtm wrote: »

    The way the screen blanks out on his laugh is probably the most suspicious bit: seems like it's just this audio, as you say. It's annoying that folks feel they have to fake this stuff: the audio may well be real but if they have faked the image then it confuses the whole matter. The version on YouTube does feature the distortion however:


    The YouTube video I found wasn't distorted. Just look up LTK workprint.


    You mean this one? Posted two years after the distorted one above?



    About the distortion, what format was this supposed to be? I can't think of a wide-screen format that is prone to that kind of distortion.

    Just old VHS or the like.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    Maybe for the Mega Absolute Edition of LTK, those lines will be put back in. I don't care much for the "Whatever.", but the laugh after killing Clive, made me think of The Shadow.

    "Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? James Bond knows."
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited January 2022 Posts: 1,711
    mtm wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    That reminds me of this.



    Haha!

    That's hilarious, and about as believable as this LTK one!
    mtm wrote: »

    The way the screen blanks out on his laugh is probably the most suspicious bit: seems like it's just this audio, as you say. It's annoying that folks feel they have to fake this stuff: the audio may well be real but if they have faked the image then it confuses the whole matter. The version on YouTube does feature the distortion however:


    The YouTube video I found wasn't distorted. Just look up LTK workprint.


    You mean this one? Posted two years after the distorted one above?



    About the distortion, what format was this supposed to be? I can't think of a wide-screen format that is prone to that kind of distortion.

    Just old VHS or the like.

    My mistake, the one I found was on Facebook from 2017.

    But old VHS in a wide-screen format, with the black bars totally unmolested by distortion? Odd.

    Also, if you play textual critic, you will note that only Tim has different bits, and none of the "cut" dialogue is mundane. The scene also flows much more smoothly without it, and that's rarely the case when you cut every other line of dialogue out of a scene. It's like how we can find interpolations in the New Testament!

    It's a shame he didn't say "Compliments of that idiot, Sharkey!" The insults in this fan edit don't really make sense.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 2022 Posts: 16,368
    mtm wrote: »
    mattjoes wrote: »
    That reminds me of this.



    Haha!

    That's hilarious, and about as believable as this LTK one!
    mtm wrote: »

    The way the screen blanks out on his laugh is probably the most suspicious bit: seems like it's just this audio, as you say. It's annoying that folks feel they have to fake this stuff: the audio may well be real but if they have faked the image then it confuses the whole matter. The version on YouTube does feature the distortion however:


    The YouTube video I found wasn't distorted. Just look up LTK workprint.


    You mean this one? Posted two years after the distorted one above?



    About the distortion, what format was this supposed to be? I can't think of a wide-screen format that is prone to that kind of distortion.

    Just old VHS or the like.

    My mistake, the one I found was on Facebook from 2017.

    But old VHS in a wide-screen format, with the black bars totally unmolested by distortion? Odd.

    It's horizontal distortion- you won't be able to see the bars moving side-to-side because they're black and featureless.
    Any early pre-production cuts of the film are hardly going to be in pan and scan.
    Also, if you play textual critic, you will note that only Tim has different bits, and none of the "cut" dialogue is mundane. The scene also flows much more smoothly without it, and that's rarely the case when you cut every other line of dialogue out of a scene. It's like how we can find interpolations in the New Testament!

    It's a shame he didn't say "Compliments of that idiot, Sharkey!" The insults in this fan edit don't really make sense.

    Maybe, but I'm not sure it'd be that easy to find clips of Tim where the performance matches. Also: is this sequence music-free in the finished movie?
    I'm on the fence, the lack of a laughing shot is odd so I can well believe that the audio is more authentic than the images.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    I love how Bond calls Sharkey an idiot. The moron just had to go and get himself killed, right, Bond?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Post credits scene, latest Bond film:

    Sharkey s ghost: "Who s the idiot now, Bond?"
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited January 2022 Posts: 1,711
    If you applied digital distortion (look at how clean some of the lines are) to the existing film, it would look exactly like this. This is just the movie with different audio.
    And indeed, it would be hard to get clips of Tim saying all this stuff, but this is just a guy impersonating growly Tim.

    https://fb.watch/aCwO9osH4L/

  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,368
    That's not really proof of anything.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,711
    mtm wrote: »
    That's not really proof of anything.

    Just that the audio is old. I suppose maybe the audio of one scene could have been found five years ago, and then a couple years later, the video of the one same scene was found, albeit distorted in convenient and artificial ways. And this one twice-rediscovered moment of a workprint contained a significant amount of weird, nonsensical and surprising dialogue from one character. I mean, maybe. I tend not to assume the less likely thing though.
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    Posts: 692
    I thought Bond was calling Lupe an idiot, because right after that he blames her for all the people who are dying, as she was the one who started everything by fleeing to America.
  • Posts: 1,630
    Matt007 wrote: »
    It’s a good but flawed film.

    “Out of gas” and “I love James so much” kind of undermine the otherwise well written female characters

    I found the treatment of Pam in the script ridiculous. They inserted a crush-plus-jealousy-and-broken-heart sub-plot straight out of a tv show for pre-teens to watch...
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 2022 Posts: 16,368
    mtm wrote: »
    That's not really proof of anything.

    Just that the audio is old. I suppose maybe the audio of one scene could have been found five years ago, and then a couple years later, the video of the one same scene was found, albeit distorted in convenient and artificial ways. And this one twice-rediscovered moment of a workprint contained a significant amount of weird, nonsensical and surprising dialogue from one character. I mean, maybe. I tend not to assume the less likely thing though.

    To me, a magically note-perfect impression of Dalton is less likely. Yes, it's been around a couple of years, again not proof of anything.
    And no: nothing says that the audio was found first on its own, your Facebook link says they took the audio from the 'workprint' and placed it over the footage from the BluRay, most probably ripping it from the same distorted video we've seen. Just because you saw that version first doesn't mean it was the first version.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,270
    Since62 wrote: »
    Matt007 wrote: »
    It’s a good but flawed film.

    “Out of gas” and “I love James so much” kind of undermine the otherwise well written female characters

    I found the treatment of Pam in the script ridiculous. They inserted a crush-plus-jealousy-and-broken-heart sub-plot straight out of a tv show for pre-teens to watch...

    Yes, that did rather cheapens the character. The first example, perhaps, of the soap opera stuff we were to see more regularly in the Bond films that came after this, culminating in the Craig era. The part where she mocks Lupe by saying "I love James soooo much!" is painful to watch. I'm still a big LTK and Dalton fan though. I think it's the better film out of the two he did.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,711
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    That's not really proof of anything.

    Just that the audio is old. I suppose maybe the audio of one scene could have been found five years ago, and then a couple years later, the video of the one same scene was found, albeit distorted in convenient and artificial ways. And this one twice-rediscovered moment of a workprint contained a significant amount of weird, nonsensical and surprising dialogue from one character. I mean, maybe. I tend not to assume the less likely thing though.

    To me, a magically note-perfect impression of Dalton is less likely. Yes, it's been around a couple of years, again not proof of anything.
    And no: nothing says that the audio was found first on its own, your Facebook link says they took the audio from the 'workprint' and placed it over the footage from the BluRay, most probably ripping it from the same distorted video we've seen. Just because you saw that version first doesn't mean it was the first version.

    I guess? I've heard equally "magical" impressions on Bond podcasts. And I've seen fake and parody Bond clips.

    I've never seen a single scene from an otherwise unknown workprint appear in various (there's a version without "slut") anonymously-sourced forms with a significant amount of uncharacteristic and odd dialogue. Also never seen a horizontal hold issue on what seems to be a digital file not recorded off an old TV screen.

    Do you suppose the entire "workprint" is visually identical to the released film, but with 40-50% of the dialogue different in startling ways? Or do you suppose only the one workprint scene recovered by this anonymous hero happens to be so novel?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    That's not really proof of anything.

    Just that the audio is old. I suppose maybe the audio of one scene could have been found five years ago, and then a couple years later, the video of the one same scene was found, albeit distorted in convenient and artificial ways. And this one twice-rediscovered moment of a workprint contained a significant amount of weird, nonsensical and surprising dialogue from one character. I mean, maybe. I tend not to assume the less likely thing though.

    To me, a magically note-perfect impression of Dalton is less likely.

    Could it be from another film or tv series?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    Looks like it was fake.

    The lines don’t appear on the final shooting script, as it matches more with what we saw on final cut. This was likely someone just having fun on the Internet.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,368
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    That's not really proof of anything.

    Just that the audio is old. I suppose maybe the audio of one scene could have been found five years ago, and then a couple years later, the video of the one same scene was found, albeit distorted in convenient and artificial ways. And this one twice-rediscovered moment of a workprint contained a significant amount of weird, nonsensical and surprising dialogue from one character. I mean, maybe. I tend not to assume the less likely thing though.

    To me, a magically note-perfect impression of Dalton is less likely. Yes, it's been around a couple of years, again not proof of anything.
    And no: nothing says that the audio was found first on its own, your Facebook link says they took the audio from the 'workprint' and placed it over the footage from the BluRay, most probably ripping it from the same distorted video we've seen. Just because you saw that version first doesn't mean it was the first version.

    I guess? I've heard equally "magical" impressions on Bond podcasts.

    Go on then, let's hear one. And not 'I guess?'- you know I'm right.
    I've never seen a single scene from an otherwise unknown workprint appear in various (there's a version without "slut") anonymously-sourced forms with a significant amount of uncharacteristic and odd dialogue. Also never seen a horizontal hold issue on what seems to be a digital file not recorded off an old TV screen.

    Again, not proof. I'm fairly sure I've seen lots of horizontal hold over the years. Search for 'VHS horizontal jitter'- you'll find lots of examples.
    Do you suppose the entire "workprint" is visually identical to the released film, but with 40-50% of the dialogue different in startling ways? Or do you suppose only the one workprint scene recovered by this anonymous hero happens to be so novel?

    Stop being a dick. Yes, if it's real it may just be this scene of interest. I'm pointing out why your reasons don't make sense, I'm not disagreeing that it could be fake. I've not heard an impression fit that well with existing dialogue, obviously you have. Just leave it at that because as per usual communicating with you has become unpleasant.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,368
    Looks like it was fake.

    The lines don’t appear on the final shooting script, as it matches more with what we saw on final cut. This was likely someone just having fun on the Internet.

    I tend to agree that it's more likely fake than not, but I don't know how they did the lines. I've not heard a Tim impression that good, even from folks who think they can do it.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    @mtm cool it down. You’re not helping yourself.

    And this “workprint” has already been debunked.

  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited January 2022 Posts: 1,711
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    That's not really proof of anything.

    Just that the audio is old. I suppose maybe the audio of one scene could have been found five years ago, and then a couple years later, the video of the one same scene was found, albeit distorted in convenient and artificial ways. And this one twice-rediscovered moment of a workprint contained a significant amount of weird, nonsensical and surprising dialogue from one character. I mean, maybe. I tend not to assume the less likely thing though.

    To me, a magically note-perfect impression of Dalton is less likely. Yes, it's been around a couple of years, again not proof of anything.
    And no: nothing says that the audio was found first on its own, your Facebook link says they took the audio from the 'workprint' and placed it over the footage from the BluRay, most probably ripping it from the same distorted video we've seen. Just because you saw that version first doesn't mean it was the first version.

    I guess? I've heard equally "magical" impressions on Bond podcasts.

    Go on then, let's hear one. And not 'I guess?'- you know I'm right.
    I've never seen a single scene from an otherwise unknown workprint appear in various (there's a version without "slut") anonymously-sourced forms with a significant amount of uncharacteristic and odd dialogue. Also never seen a horizontal hold issue on what seems to be a digital file not recorded off an old TV screen.

    Again, not proof. I'm fairly sure I've seen lots of horizontal hold over the years. Search for 'VHS horizontal jitter'- you'll find lots of examples.
    Do you suppose the entire "workprint" is visually identical to the released film, but with 40-50% of the dialogue different in startling ways? Or do you suppose only the one workprint scene recovered by this anonymous hero happens to be so novel?

    Stop being a dick. Yes, if it's real it may just be this scene of interest. I'm pointing out why your reasons don't make sense, I'm not disagreeing that it could be fake. I've not heard an impression fit that well with existing dialogue, obviously you have. Just leave it at that because as per usual communicating with you has become unpleasant.

    A couple people have called into James Bond Radio and done better impressions. Would have been on listener reviews shows.

    And you haven't pointed out why some mildly Bayesian consideration of prior probabilities doesn't make sense. You've displayed the skepticism of a turnip and called me a vulgar name! I can only hope this is a fake mtm workprint. :D
  • How can we be certain those Dalton lines were taken from a different film/tv show? Just putting that out there...
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited January 2022 Posts: 1,711
    How can we be certain those Dalton lines were taken from a different film/tv show? Just putting that out there...

    We can't! I think it's an impression. Most of it leans into what an impressionist would do, like the way he digs into "lying", "slut", and "alive". Of course, on the other hand, "Idiot!" sounds so bad and stupid, it may be taken from somewhere else. It doesn't even sound like it matches the other audio to me.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    Should have said “bloody idiot!”
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 3,152
    Did people use 'Whatever' as a dismissive in 1989?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,182
    Venutius wrote: »
    Did people use 'Whatever' as a dismissive in 1989?

    It’s been uttered and written since the 1900s, but CLUELESS certainly turned it into popular phrase.

    Though I think it was often accompanied by another word, like “sure, whatever” “yeah, whatever”, “okay, whatever”.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited January 2022 Posts: 1,711
    Venutius wrote: »
    Did people use 'Whatever' as a dismissive in 1989?

    Timothy Dalton's James Bond bloody well didn't! :)) That almost seemed deliberately comic.
Sign In or Register to comment.