Using CGI on Locations!

One huge thing that's bothersome about the newer Bond movies is using CGI to replicate locations in other areas or adding to landscapes, etc.

One thing I've always enjoyed about the Connery/Moore movies is the locations, and it was great knowing that I could go and it would still look relatively the same.

However, that visual effects breakdown of SPECTRE show that they added CGI buildings in Morocco shots, and even doubled Rome for Morocco!

Anyone else bothered by this? I suppose it's just the way of moving making now, but it's definitely one way Bond movies aren't quite the same any more!


  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 21,079
    Perhaps this thread can be revived in light of the recently shared video about CGI in NTTD?
  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    Posts: 3,583
    I wasn't aware of most of this cgi shots in SP. Interesting article and somehow also a bit disappointing that even Bond is full of CGI nowadays. I mean, way better than most other (action) films but it is a bit sad that we often can't be sure that the shot we see is completely filmed this way. Why had they to use CGI in the Morocco village in SP? This shouldn't be necessary?!
  • DarthDimi wrote: »
    Perhaps this thread can be revived in light of the recently shared video about CGI in NTTD?

    What video is this? I'd be interested to see.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 21,079
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Perhaps this thread can be revived in light of the recently shared video about CGI in NTTD?

    What video is this? I'd be interested to see.

    Here you go, mate:
  • ImpertinentGoonImpertinentGoon Everybody needs a hobby.
    Posts: 1,043
    Having just watched The Gray Man, I think we can be very happy with the quality of the CG in the latest Bond films. They really seem to be doing a lot of work planning (previs-ing seems to be the lingo) out all the shots and what will be there and what will not and how those things are brought in. There seems to be a lot of animosity in the VFX world expecially against Disney/Marvel because they have taken to just having the VFX artists switch out entire locations on the stroke of a pen by some higher up in the company and other crazy demands on a low budget ( As scattershot as the Bond productions have been, I don't think they ever go that crazy.

    As for using CGI to make one location look like another, I am really unbothered by that. They have been doing movie magic with locations all the time. They used to do it with backprojection or just having an establishing shot from a location and then the interiors on a soundstage at Pinewood. And of course they've always shot at a different location than what they claimed something to be. Miami Airport in CR is Prague Airport. The hovercraft chase through North Korea in DAD was shot in Aldershot. As far as I know, they never set foot in Afghanistan for TLD, that's all Morocco. The various train stations in FRWL were all shot at the same station in Istanbul and so on and so forth. In a paradoxical way it's more realistic to CGI the correct skyline or house front or whatever into a shot then to just pretend that Belgrade looks like Istanbul.
  • MooseWithFleasMooseWithFleas Philadelphia
    Posts: 3,223
    There's certainly a subjective element to it and I think each decision needs to be judged individually, rather than broad stroke saying CGI enhancement is bad.

    For instance, I really liked the added heels being CGI for the Paloma fight sequence, which allowing the stunts to be preformed in reasonable shoes to actually execute the real stunts.
    On the contrary, the added buildings in Morocco in SP or added snow to trees doesn't really add anything for me and I'd prefer the natural environment.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython Omaha, NE
    edited July 29 Posts: 6,396
    The kind of stuff they’re doing like changing backgrounds is basically the modern equivalent of matte paintings changing backgrounds in films of the old days. For example there’s certain shots in TSWLM where it’s supposed to make Roger Moore look like he’s at the pyramids but that was actually f/x composites.

    As long as Bond films keep CGI to the extent that they have, I don’t mind the use of it. This isn’t as concerning as something like centering a parasurfing stunt on a CGI effect where Bond is just in front of a blue screen looking completely dry when he should be getting drenched from the mist.

    The fact that many seem to not have realized what was a digital effect shows that the filmmakers did their jobs!
Sign In or Register to comment.