No Time to Die production thread

15705715735755761208

Comments

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    mtm wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke; just let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    The guy who made and posted it said he won't be submitting it to the competition...

    Oh I wonder why? It's great. Maybe he's got a better one! :)

    There's been a lot of backlash towards the competition from more professionally-aimed illustrators and designers, centred around MGM/EON grabbing the rights to all entries and being able to use them in the campaign, not just the ones selected to win and getting the prize money. (which, given the fact it has been confirmed they aren't allowing the use of any actual stills/framegrabs from the films, only original illustrations, is especially egregious IMO)

    He is one of the artists on the Poster Posse roster - a group of designers that studios like Disney regularly formally approach (and pay!) to do alternate official designs:





    This is true, had a discussion with one of the artists in the comments section when it was announced. He even said that " it's unfair that they won't even give credit to the artists and there is no guarantee that they will even return the one's which won't be used or win".
    They are not wrong to be honest.

    Oh is there no credit to be given? That seems odd. Maybe they just can't guarantee they'll give the name every time? If you don't credit the artist it actually makes it seem less like a competition in the tweets or whatever which makes Eon look bad- I'd be surprised if they don't.
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke and Craig was wrong; just accept it graciously without the sour grapes and let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    I really enjoyed the lecture about the validity of the sinking house - you should submit it to Viz.

    Well Craig wrote it, not me: it's not mine to submit ;) I liked the bit about "The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - .... etc. etc."
    Very funny, I agree ;) Enjoy those grapes.

    Some of us actually want to talk about NTTD rather than each other, however, so...


    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke; just let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    The guy who made and posted it said he won't be submitting it to the competition...

    Oh I wonder why? It's great. Maybe he's got a better one! :)

    There's been a lot of backlash towards the competition from more professionally-aimed illustrators and designers, centred around MGM/EON grabbing the rights to all entries and being able to use them in the campaign, not just the ones selected to win and getting the prize money. (which, given the fact it has been confirmed they aren't allowing the use of any actual stills/framegrabs from the films, only original illustrations, is especially egregious IMO)

    He is one of the artists on the Poster Posse roster - a group of designers that studios like Disney regularly formally approach (and pay!) to do alternate official designs:

    Cool I will check them out: looks like lovely stuff. I don't want to get into the ins and outs of that competition too much- I don't think it sounds that bad to me. Most competitions seem to work like that to me and the designers will get the benefit of the exposure of Eon's publicity- most 007 fan posters wouldn't get a retweet otherwise. It's not like they'll be selling prints of all the submissions or anything! :)

    I was thinking more of your comparison photo of a building collapsing. Truly hilarious stuff.

    It is quite funny that some folks need pictures to understand simple concepts, I agree. How long are you intending to make these sour grapes last for? No-one's interested.

    Well, given that you don’t seem to understand the phrase ‘sour grapes’, perhaps we should leave it there. I’ll leave the lecturing to you, sir.

    Good grief, you're even arguing about that. "Sour grapes is the action of making something seem less important after finding out they can't have it." You weren't right, so you're trying to belittle me for explaining it to you. That's exactly the meaning.

    Please can we talk about No Time To Die?

    You’re getting your knickers in a twist now, darling. The only point I made was that only a pedant would care and you’ve proved that with incredible aplomb.

    Back to NTTD.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,034
    antovolk wrote: »
    Yeah, there's no guarantee. And the crux is - is exposure a suitable substitute for payment.

    If someone like that guy did a Bond poster just for the fun of it and not for a competition organised/promoted by EON/MGM, then resharing/retweeting etc 'for exposure' without any sort of compensation is totally fair enough. But here EON/MGM actually put a call out to essentially crowdsource marketing materials under the guise of a competition - and all entries have the potential to be used regardless of if they win or not (and the artists lose the rights, which again, for original illustrations like this is a killer because they can't really use it in portfolios either...).

    Talenthouse's rival agency PosterSpy actually does these sorts of competitions/briefs with distributors a lot better because they ensure that the artists still retain as much of the rights as the they can and generally get a fair deal out of all this. There's a fine line to all this...
    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke; just let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    The guy who made and posted it said he won't be submitting it to the competition...

    Oh I wonder why? It's great. Maybe he's got a better one! :)

    There's been a lot of backlash towards the competition from more professionally-aimed illustrators and designers, centred around MGM/EON grabbing the rights to all entries and being able to use them in the campaign, not just the ones selected to win and getting the prize money. (which, given the fact it has been confirmed they aren't allowing the use of any actual stills/framegrabs from the films, only original illustrations, is especially egregious IMO)

    He is one of the artists on the Poster Posse roster - a group of designers that studios like Disney regularly formally approach (and pay!) to do alternate official designs:





    This is true, had a discussion with one of the artists in the comments section when it was announced. He even said that " it's unfair that they won't even give credit to the artists and there is no guarantee that they will even return the one's which won't be used or win".
    They are not wrong to be honest.

    Oh is there no credit to be given? That seems odd. Maybe they just can't guarantee they'll give the name every time? If you don't credit the artist it actually makes it seem less like a competition in the tweets or whatever which makes Eon look bad- I'd be surprised if they don't.
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke and Craig was wrong; just accept it graciously without the sour grapes and let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    I really enjoyed the lecture about the validity of the sinking house - you should submit it to Viz.

    Well Craig wrote it, not me: it's not mine to submit ;) I liked the bit about "The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - .... etc. etc."
    Very funny, I agree ;) Enjoy those grapes.

    Some of us actually want to talk about NTTD rather than each other, however, so...


    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke; just let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    The guy who made and posted it said he won't be submitting it to the competition...

    Oh I wonder why? It's great. Maybe he's got a better one! :)

    There's been a lot of backlash towards the competition from more professionally-aimed illustrators and designers, centred around MGM/EON grabbing the rights to all entries and being able to use them in the campaign, not just the ones selected to win and getting the prize money. (which, given the fact it has been confirmed they aren't allowing the use of any actual stills/framegrabs from the films, only original illustrations, is especially egregious IMO)

    He is one of the artists on the Poster Posse roster - a group of designers that studios like Disney regularly formally approach (and pay!) to do alternate official designs:

    Cool I will check them out: looks like lovely stuff. I don't want to get into the ins and outs of that competition too much- I don't think it sounds that bad to me. Most competitions seem to work like that to me and the designers will get the benefit of the exposure of Eon's publicity- most 007 fan posters wouldn't get a retweet otherwise. It's not like they'll be selling prints of all the submissions or anything! :)

    I was thinking more of your comparison photo of a building collapsing. Truly hilarious stuff.

    It is quite funny that some folks need pictures to understand simple concepts, I agree. How long are you intending to make these sour grapes last for? No-one's interested.

    The response to the competition on social media has been rightly icey. The usual reply is that "well there's always an undiscovered talent out there who won't have a problem with it", which is fair enough. But those above amateur level are right to deride. It's both freeing and restrictive, all at once.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 2020 Posts: 14,951
    antovolk wrote: »
    Yeah, there's no guarantee. And the crux is - is exposure a suitable substitute for payment.

    If someone like that guy did a Bond poster just for the fun of it and not for a competition organised/promoted by EON/MGM, then resharing/retweeting etc 'for exposure' without any sort of compensation is totally fair enough. But here EON/MGM actually put a call out to essentially crowdsource marketing materials under the guise of a competition - and all entries have the potential to be used regardless of if they win or not (and the artists lose the rights, which again, for original illustrations like this is a killer because they can't really use it in portfolios either...).

    Talenthouse's rival agency PosterSpy actually does these sorts of competitions/briefs with distributors a lot better because they ensure that the artists still retain as much of the rights as the they can and generally get a fair deal out of all this. There's a fine line to all this...


    Ah okay; I've not come across other competitions like this. To be honest I don't see why it would stop anyone putting the work in their folio (as I'm freelance and do my work under contract I doubt any of the work in my folio is owned by me! :) ) and the extent by which they'll be used as marketing materials is probably only stuff like those Star Wars tweets or maybe a gallery on a website- they're not going to be on bus stops or anything! :)
    I dunno: I take their points but I think it's more in the way of the principle of the thing rather than actual real world problems.

    And on a totally selfish level: if those guys aren't entering that's great for me- less competition!
    :D
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited January 2020 Posts: 14,951
    antovolk wrote: »
    Yeah, there's no guarantee. And the crux is - is exposure a suitable substitute for payment.

    If someone like that guy did a Bond poster just for the fun of it and not for a competition organised/promoted by EON/MGM, then resharing/retweeting etc 'for exposure' without any sort of compensation is totally fair enough. But here EON/MGM actually put a call out to essentially crowdsource marketing materials under the guise of a competition - and all entries have the potential to be used regardless of if they win or not (and the artists lose the rights, which again, for original illustrations like this is a killer because they can't really use it in portfolios either...).

    Talenthouse's rival agency PosterSpy actually does these sorts of competitions/briefs with distributors a lot better because they ensure that the artists still retain as much of the rights as the they can and generally get a fair deal out of all this. There's a fine line to all this...
    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke; just let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    The guy who made and posted it said he won't be submitting it to the competition...

    Oh I wonder why? It's great. Maybe he's got a better one! :)

    There's been a lot of backlash towards the competition from more professionally-aimed illustrators and designers, centred around MGM/EON grabbing the rights to all entries and being able to use them in the campaign, not just the ones selected to win and getting the prize money. (which, given the fact it has been confirmed they aren't allowing the use of any actual stills/framegrabs from the films, only original illustrations, is especially egregious IMO)

    He is one of the artists on the Poster Posse roster - a group of designers that studios like Disney regularly formally approach (and pay!) to do alternate official designs:





    This is true, had a discussion with one of the artists in the comments section when it was announced. He even said that " it's unfair that they won't even give credit to the artists and there is no guarantee that they will even return the one's which won't be used or win".
    They are not wrong to be honest.

    Oh is there no credit to be given? That seems odd. Maybe they just can't guarantee they'll give the name every time? If you don't credit the artist it actually makes it seem less like a competition in the tweets or whatever which makes Eon look bad- I'd be surprised if they don't.
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke and Craig was wrong; just accept it graciously without the sour grapes and let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    I really enjoyed the lecture about the validity of the sinking house - you should submit it to Viz.

    Well Craig wrote it, not me: it's not mine to submit ;) I liked the bit about "The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - .... etc. etc."
    Very funny, I agree ;) Enjoy those grapes.

    Some of us actually want to talk about NTTD rather than each other, however, so...


    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke; just let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    The guy who made and posted it said he won't be submitting it to the competition...

    Oh I wonder why? It's great. Maybe he's got a better one! :)

    There's been a lot of backlash towards the competition from more professionally-aimed illustrators and designers, centred around MGM/EON grabbing the rights to all entries and being able to use them in the campaign, not just the ones selected to win and getting the prize money. (which, given the fact it has been confirmed they aren't allowing the use of any actual stills/framegrabs from the films, only original illustrations, is especially egregious IMO)

    He is one of the artists on the Poster Posse roster - a group of designers that studios like Disney regularly formally approach (and pay!) to do alternate official designs:

    Cool I will check them out: looks like lovely stuff. I don't want to get into the ins and outs of that competition too much- I don't think it sounds that bad to me. Most competitions seem to work like that to me and the designers will get the benefit of the exposure of Eon's publicity- most 007 fan posters wouldn't get a retweet otherwise. It's not like they'll be selling prints of all the submissions or anything! :)

    I was thinking more of your comparison photo of a building collapsing. Truly hilarious stuff.

    It is quite funny that some folks need pictures to understand simple concepts, I agree. How long are you intending to make these sour grapes last for? No-one's interested.

    The response to the competition on social media has been rightly icey. The usual reply is that "well there's always an undiscovered talent out there who won't have a problem with it", which is fair enough. But those above amateur level are right to deride. It's both freeing and restrictive, all at once.

    To be honest, I don't really understand what they say when they say the artists retains the rights to these other items. If it's using someone else's IP then it's not as if they can exploit the artwork for personal gain anyway unless they get a licensing arrangement of their own.
    I don't know much about how these semi-professional fan poster artists work.
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    antovolk wrote: »
    Yeah, there's no guarantee. And the crux is - is exposure a suitable substitute for payment.

    If someone like that guy did a Bond poster just for the fun of it and not for a competition organised/promoted by EON/MGM, then resharing/retweeting etc 'for exposure' without any sort of compensation is totally fair enough. But here EON/MGM actually put a call out to essentially crowdsource marketing materials under the guise of a competition - and all entries have the potential to be used regardless of if they win or not (and the artists lose the rights, which again, for original illustrations like this is a killer because they can't really use it in portfolios either...).

    Talenthouse's rival agency PosterSpy actually does these sorts of competitions/briefs with distributors a lot better because they ensure that the artists still retain as much of the rights as they can and generally get a fair deal out of all this. There's a fine line to all this...


    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke; just let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    The guy who made and posted it said he won't be submitting it to the competition...

    Oh I wonder why? It's great. Maybe he's got a better one! :)

    There's been a lot of backlash towards the competition from more professionally-aimed illustrators and designers, centred around MGM/EON grabbing the rights to all entries and being able to use them in the campaign, not just the ones selected to win and getting the prize money. (which, given the fact it has been confirmed they aren't allowing the use of any actual stills/framegrabs from the films, only original illustrations, is especially egregious IMO)

    He is one of the artists on the Poster Posse roster - a group of designers that studios like Disney regularly formally approach (and pay!) to do alternate official designs:





    This is true, had a discussion with one of the artists in the comments section when it was announced. He even said that " it's unfair that they won't even give credit to the artists and there is no guarantee that they will even return the one's which won't be used or win".
    They are not wrong to be honest.

    Oh is there no credit to be given? That seems odd. Maybe they just can't guarantee they'll give the name every time? If you don't credit the artist it actually makes it seem less like a competition in the tweets or whatever which makes Eon look bad- I'd be surprised if they don't.
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke and Craig was wrong; just accept it graciously without the sour grapes and let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    I really enjoyed the lecture about the validity of the sinking house - you should submit it to Viz.

    Well Craig wrote it, not me: it's not mine to submit ;) I liked the bit about "The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - .... etc. etc."
    Very funny, I agree ;) Enjoy those grapes.

    Some of us actually want to talk about NTTD rather than each other, however, so...


    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke; just let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    The guy who made and posted it said he won't be submitting it to the competition...

    Oh I wonder why? It's great. Maybe he's got a better one! :)

    There's been a lot of backlash towards the competition from more professionally-aimed illustrators and designers, centred around MGM/EON grabbing the rights to all entries and being able to use them in the campaign, not just the ones selected to win and getting the prize money. (which, given the fact it has been confirmed they aren't allowing the use of any actual stills/framegrabs from the films, only original illustrations, is especially egregious IMO)

    He is one of the artists on the Poster Posse roster - a group of designers that studios like Disney regularly formally approach (and pay!) to do alternate official designs:

    Cool I will check them out: looks like lovely stuff. I don't want to get into the ins and outs of that competition too much- I don't think it sounds that bad to me. Most competitions seem to work like that to me and the designers will get the benefit of the exposure of Eon's publicity- most 007 fan posters wouldn't get a retweet otherwise. It's not like they'll be selling prints of all the submissions or anything! :)

    I was thinking more of your comparison photo of a building collapsing. Truly hilarious stuff.

    It is quite funny that some folks need pictures to understand simple concepts, I agree. How long are you intending to make these sour grapes last for? No-one's interested.

    Ah thanks for the detailed explanation @antovolk . I think artists should at least have the rights to use it in their portfolio for future references.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,951
    antovolk wrote: »
    Yeah, there's no guarantee. And the crux is - is exposure a suitable substitute for payment.

    If someone like that guy did a Bond poster just for the fun of it and not for a competition organised/promoted by EON/MGM, then resharing/retweeting etc 'for exposure' without any sort of compensation is totally fair enough. But here EON/MGM actually put a call out to essentially crowdsource marketing materials under the guise of a competition - and all entries have the potential to be used regardless of if they win or not (and the artists lose the rights, which again, for original illustrations like this is a killer because they can't really use it in portfolios either...).

    Talenthouse's rival agency PosterSpy actually does these sorts of competitions/briefs with distributors a lot better because they ensure that the artists still retain as much of the rights as they can and generally get a fair deal out of all this. There's a fine line to all this...


    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke; just let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    The guy who made and posted it said he won't be submitting it to the competition...

    Oh I wonder why? It's great. Maybe he's got a better one! :)

    There's been a lot of backlash towards the competition from more professionally-aimed illustrators and designers, centred around MGM/EON grabbing the rights to all entries and being able to use them in the campaign, not just the ones selected to win and getting the prize money. (which, given the fact it has been confirmed they aren't allowing the use of any actual stills/framegrabs from the films, only original illustrations, is especially egregious IMO)

    He is one of the artists on the Poster Posse roster - a group of designers that studios like Disney regularly formally approach (and pay!) to do alternate official designs:





    This is true, had a discussion with one of the artists in the comments section when it was announced. He even said that " it's unfair that they won't even give credit to the artists and there is no guarantee that they will even return the one's which won't be used or win".
    They are not wrong to be honest.

    Oh is there no credit to be given? That seems odd. Maybe they just can't guarantee they'll give the name every time? If you don't credit the artist it actually makes it seem less like a competition in the tweets or whatever which makes Eon look bad- I'd be surprised if they don't.
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke and Craig was wrong; just accept it graciously without the sour grapes and let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    I really enjoyed the lecture about the validity of the sinking house - you should submit it to Viz.

    Well Craig wrote it, not me: it's not mine to submit ;) I liked the bit about "The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - .... etc. etc."
    Very funny, I agree ;) Enjoy those grapes.

    Some of us actually want to talk about NTTD rather than each other, however, so...


    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    antovolk wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »

    'Two Popes to No Time To Die' sounds like an awesome movie I want to see :)
    RC7 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I'll continue on the terms set out in my original comment, if that's good with you - which was a general physics response to a general physics observation ("not a realistic sequence", "a house couldn't possibly sink in Venice " etc). Not really in reference to anything shown in the film, but if you insist upon that I'd say that there was more than a bit of plaster shown to be falling down.

    The walls of your average building in Venice aren't the thickest things in the world. So when the floatation devices become null and void as supports for the structure of the building and the weight of said building becomes a full load on the wooden stilts that almost all of Venice is built on, the walls will - at least partially - collapse in on themselves and increase the rate at which the structure will come down. The building obviously doesn't come down as one piece. The roof being intact means little to what has happened underneath it.

    It does come down as one piece though: I just watched it again- none of the exterior walls collapse. Some external chimneys fall, some plaster tumbles, some internal floors give way. But the whole thing comes down as a straight and rigid box. I know you think general physics mean it should collapse, and in the real world it certainly would, but I may return to my original point if that's okay with you: not a single storey or wall of the building is shown to collapse in the film.
    I think you're confusing what should happen with what the film shows as happening. Watch it again: screengrab the bit where the structure collapses if you can.

    You're absolutely correct.

    Back to NTTD.

    That wasn’t hard, was it? :)
    Let’s think about these things first without these silly knee jerk “you’re wrong!’ reactions all the time. It’s tiring.

    The only one who seems to incessantly lecture around here is you, wind it in. No one cares about the legitimacy of the sinking house. It’s great, period.

    Mate, you didn't understand the joke; just let it go. Folks are bored.
    Contraband wrote: »
    Contraband wrote: »
    Via1mXE.jpg

    If that's official, then it is the best poster in some time.

    Fan-made...

    Yeah I reckon someone's let their submission to the competition out early! :) It is a lovely bit of work though- love the palette.

    The guy who made and posted it said he won't be submitting it to the competition...

    Oh I wonder why? It's great. Maybe he's got a better one! :)

    There's been a lot of backlash towards the competition from more professionally-aimed illustrators and designers, centred around MGM/EON grabbing the rights to all entries and being able to use them in the campaign, not just the ones selected to win and getting the prize money. (which, given the fact it has been confirmed they aren't allowing the use of any actual stills/framegrabs from the films, only original illustrations, is especially egregious IMO)

    He is one of the artists on the Poster Posse roster - a group of designers that studios like Disney regularly formally approach (and pay!) to do alternate official designs:

    Cool I will check them out: looks like lovely stuff. I don't want to get into the ins and outs of that competition too much- I don't think it sounds that bad to me. Most competitions seem to work like that to me and the designers will get the benefit of the exposure of Eon's publicity- most 007 fan posters wouldn't get a retweet otherwise. It's not like they'll be selling prints of all the submissions or anything! :)

    I was thinking more of your comparison photo of a building collapsing. Truly hilarious stuff.

    It is quite funny that some folks need pictures to understand simple concepts, I agree. How long are you intending to make these sour grapes last for? No-one's interested.

    Ah thanks for the detailed explanation @antovolk . I think artists should at least have the rights to use it in their portfolio for future references.

    Anyone who wants to will do anyway though! :) Portfolios aren't hugely public.
    I guess that sort of thing only really comes into play when they're putting on an exhibition of their work or something.
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,014
    I'd like to see similar thrilling action set pieces in NTTD.

    tenor.gif?itemid=7923098
    But would it collapse or sink? 😏
    Ideally as in real life, the structure crumbles and collapses at the base while the weight of it above drives downward. As witnessed with the Twin Towers.

    And the filmmakers should strategically place a vehicle to block the line of sight and obscure the base, as if it was underwater.

  • I'd like to see similar thrilling action set pieces in NTTD.

    tenor.gif?itemid=7923098
    But would it collapse or sink? 😏
    Ideally as in real life, the structure crumbles and collapses at the base while the weight of it above drives downward. As witnessed with the Twin Towers.

    And the filmmakers should strategically place a vehicle to block the line of sight and obscure the base, as if it was underwater.

    Please, please stop.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
    octofinger wrote: »
    I'd like to see similar thrilling action set pieces in NTTD.

    tenor.gif?itemid=7923098
    But would it collapse or sink? 😏
    Ideally as in real life, the structure crumbles and collapses at the base while the weight of it above drives downward. As witnessed with the Twin Towers.

    And the filmmakers should strategically place a vehicle to block the line of sight and obscure the base, as if it was underwater.

    Please, please stop.

    Why is this discussion continuing?
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited January 2020 Posts: 7,526
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    octofinger wrote: »
    I'd like to see similar thrilling action set pieces in NTTD.

    tenor.gif?itemid=7923098
    But would it collapse or sink? 😏
    Ideally as in real life, the structure crumbles and collapses at the base while the weight of it above drives downward. As witnessed with the Twin Towers.

    And the filmmakers should strategically place a vehicle to block the line of sight and obscure the base, as if it was underwater.

    Please, please stop.

    Why is this discussion continuing?

    Slow news day, combined with too many NTTD threads. There's an individual thread for every NTTD topic, so there's nothing left to discuss in here.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    edited January 2020 Posts: 3,126
    007Blofeld wrote: »
    octofinger wrote: »
    I'd like to see similar thrilling action set pieces in NTTD.

    tenor.gif?itemid=7923098
    But would it collapse or sink? 😏
    Ideally as in real life, the structure crumbles and collapses at the base while the weight of it above drives downward. As witnessed with the Twin Towers.

    And the filmmakers should strategically place a vehicle to block the line of sight and obscure the base, as if it was underwater.

    Please, please stop.

    Why is this discussion continuing?

    Slow news day, combined with too many NTTD threads.

    @NickTwentyTwo How many takes are there in Nttd I see the last take is 581 on Cary's Instagram I wonder if we could piece together the takes and where they fall in the film?
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,014
    Well, the discussion related to NTTD in the lurch. Nothing sinister. Going just a little further, I'll wonder if NTTD will have its boat-flip/falling-structure moment.

    And now I will stop. Plus I won't talk about F**** Cl**.

  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    Well, the discussion related to NTTD in the lurch. Nothing sinister. Going just a little further, I'll wonder if NTTD will have its boat-flip/falling-structure moment.

    And now I will stop. Plus I won't talk about F**** Cl**.

    Fary Cugunawa?
  • ResurrectionResurrection Kolkata, India
    Posts: 2,541
    octofinger wrote: »
    I'd like to see similar thrilling action set pieces in NTTD.

    tenor.gif?itemid=7923098
    But would it collapse or sink? 😏
    Ideally as in real life, the structure crumbles and collapses at the base while the weight of it above drives downward. As witnessed with the Twin Towers.

    And the filmmakers should strategically place a vehicle to block the line of sight and obscure the base, as if it was underwater.

    Please, please stop.
    Well, the discussion related to NTTD in the lurch. Nothing sinister. Going just a little further, I'll wonder if NTTD will have its boat-flip/falling-structure moment.

    And now I will stop. Plus I won't talk about F**** Cl**.

    Sorry I was just kidding 😅
  • DrunkIrishPoetDrunkIrishPoet The Amber Coast
    Posts: 156
    Have you heard the one about the starving artist?



    He died of exposure.
  • ggl007ggl007 www.archivo007.com Spain, España
    Posts: 2,539
    NEW Heineken ad. Now you can see the taxi and Cardona streets:

  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,875
    I like it. :))
  • Posts: 1,680
    Kinda weird.

    The skyfall one was the best
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    edited January 2020 Posts: 12,459
    The ad's great. :) And amusing.
    Here's this - not officially confirmed, but looking like Billie ... instead of Beyonce, despite Beyonce's hints on instagram.
  • Posts: 11,425
    If the ad is on tv already where is the youtube link?
  • Posts: 12,506
    ggl007 wrote: »
    NEW Heineken ad. Now you can see the taxi and Cardona streets:


    Very funny, liked it a lot!!! :-bd
  • Posts: 3,164
    Getafix wrote: »
    If the ad is on tv already where is the youtube link?

    Soon, I suspect.
  • DonnyDB5DonnyDB5 Buffalo, New York
    Posts: 1,755
    Does Billie Eilish have any songs that remotely sound Bondian? She just doesn’t seem appropriate for Bond at all.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,976
    DonnyDB5 wrote: »
    Does Billie Eilish have any songs that remotely sound Bondian? She just doesn’t seem appropriate for Bond at all.

    I’m , if chosen, hoping that she uses it as an opportunity to “stretch “
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    The ad's great. :) And amusing.
    Here's this - not officially confirmed, but looking like Billie ... instead of Beyonce, despite Beyonce's hints on instagram.

    That was @Pierce2Daniel .
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    Just had a listen as I wasn't really familiar with her music.

    Interesting, not sure where she is likely to go with her song, she could do a ballad I guess but there is an experimental bent to her output.

    I can see why Yorke likes her, if the kids are listening to this and embracing this there is some hope.

    I'm not saying I'm bowled over and will be ordering the vinyl of her album but it is much more interesting than having Dua Lipa or that Sheeran fella doing it.

    Beyonce would have been pretty safe as it would have probably gone across the demographic.

    I am most intrigued to hear what she comes up with or most likely already written, performed and already recorded.

    Quite well kept under wraps, Adele was pretty much a certainty from the moment the press conference was out the way and Smith again seemed to be attached to the project at a similar juncture so it only really being recent that she was mentioned shows EON have been quite secretive here.

    Possibly she hasn't recorded it who knows, I would wager it is already in the bag and ready to go but stranger things have happened.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,499
    The song has been recorded, a couple weeks ago.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited January 2020 Posts: 10,588
    peter wrote: »
    The song has been recorded, a couple weeks ago.
    Are they saying it's Eilish on your end as well?
  • Posts: 17,280
    How close to the release of the films were the last few theme songs released?
  • ContrabandContraband Sweden
    Posts: 3,018
    Omega watch campaign with Naomie Harris

    EwxYRc9.jpg
    ceq5R7S.jpg
    9xT1GRD.jpg
Sign In or Register to comment.