"Dont blow it all at once ": Die Another Day Appreciation Thread

1444547495067

Comments

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    bondjames wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    w2bond wrote: »
    The perfect example of how it should be done is SPECTRE. Beautiful cinematography, good directing and CGI where necessary but never to an extent that it is obvious.

    I dunno where the CGI was in Spectre, and I don't know if it's because of the yellow filter, but the Spectre PTS helicopter fight looked fake to me, as bad as the latest Mission Impossible special effects. The building wall collapsing didn't look too convincing in the movie either

    That was for real. The trick in that scene was Craig s face plastered on a stuntman. More impressive than the similar SF stunt, wasn t it?

    It's not for real. They shot the explosion (briefcase detonation) for real, using a facade, but the building collapse is CGI.
    Thanks for clearing that up. I had heard that it was 'real' and I just couldn't believe it. Looked 100% CGI to me and so I thought my eyes were deceiving me. Likely a few more years before that becomes a genuine problem thankfully.

    Absolutely. The moment you see it in the trailer you realise it's CGI. The notion that it could be real is totally unbelievable.

    Strange though I see the CGI collapsing building in CR getting a lot of flak but the same thing in SP seems to get away largely unscathed.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,720
    bondjames wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    w2bond wrote: »
    The perfect example of how it should be done is SPECTRE. Beautiful cinematography, good directing and CGI where necessary but never to an extent that it is obvious.

    I dunno where the CGI was in Spectre, and I don't know if it's because of the yellow filter, but the Spectre PTS helicopter fight looked fake to me, as bad as the latest Mission Impossible special effects. The building wall collapsing didn't look too convincing in the movie either

    That was for real. The trick in that scene was Craig s face plastered on a stuntman. More impressive than the similar SF stunt, wasn t it?

    It's not for real. They shot the explosion (briefcase detonation) for real, using a facade, but the building collapse is CGI.
    Thanks for clearing that up. I had heard that it was 'real' and I just couldn't believe it. Looked 100% CGI to me and so I thought my eyes were deceiving me. Likely a few more years before that becomes a genuine problem thankfully.

    Absolutely. The moment you see it in the trailer you realise it's CGI. The notion that it could be real is totally unbelievable.

    Strange though I see the CGI collapsing building in CR getting a lot of flak but the same thing in SP seems to get away largely unscathed.
    That's because CGI added to move a scene along is not as distracting as CGI involved in a truly important moment IMHO.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Sorry but people who complain about perfectly done CGI in SP and CR have lost it.
  • Posts: 1,052
    Bring back wobbly back projection, that is the future!
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Wobbly back projection had character ..I wish real life was like that. I would look so much more cooler.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2016 Posts: 23,883
    It's amazing until how recently back projection was used. I think we even saw it in GE if I'm not mistaken, and that was 30+ years on from DN.
  • Posts: 4,325
    24 had some of the best back projection for when characters were in cars, I didn't notice it until I watched the extras about how they achieved it.
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 11,189
    Outside of the 60s I think the worst use of back projection in Bond (other than DAD) has to be the fire engine chase in AVTAK.
  • Posts: 4,325
    24 had some of the best back projection for when characters were in cars, I didn't notice it until I watched the extras about how they achieved it.
  • Posts: 1,052
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Outside of the 60s I think the worst use of back projection in Bond (other than DAD) has to be the fire engine chase in AVTAK.

    The ski mobile in the PTS in AVTAK has to be up there?

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2016 Posts: 23,883
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Outside of the 60s I think the worst use of back projection in Bond (other than DAD) has to be the fire engine chase in AVTAK.

    The ski mobile in the PTS in AVTAK has to be up there?
    Both pretty horrendous and not worthy of this great franchise imho.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    edited April 2016 Posts: 4,116
    bondjames wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Outside of the 60s I think the worst use of back projection in Bond (other than DAD) has to be the fire engine chase in AVTAK.

    The ski mobile in the PTS in AVTAK has to be up there?
    Both pretty horrendous and not worthy of this great franchise imho.

    I don't know. Maybe not now but back projection has a bit of old school charm for me.

    I mean it's obviously fake like the woodgrain on a 1970's Cadillac but like that Cadillac it brings back fond memories.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Outside of the 60s I think the worst use of back projection in Bond (other than DAD) has to be the fire engine chase in AVTAK.

    The ski mobile in the PTS in AVTAK has to be up there?
    Both pretty horrendous and not worthy of this great franchise imho.

    I don't know. Maybe not now but back projection has a bit of old school charm for me.

    I mean it's obviously fake like the woodgrain on a 1970's Cadillac but like that Cadillac it brings back fond memories.
    I don't mind it in the 60's films at all, or even the 70's, because that's what they had at their disposal then. Somehow it grates when I see it in the 80's or 90's Bond films though.

    I think that's more on account of the fact that I know there was a bit of regression in the 80's (at least for Bond) when it comes to special effects scale, due to lower budgets and what not at that time. For example, AVTAK's back projection is far worse than anything I can recall in TSWLM.
  • Posts: 1,052
    It seems a lot of the back projection is not really necessary. The scenes in AVTAK where Rog is in his snow suit in the studio look absolutely fine but then they chuck in the pointless back projection shot which adds nothing to the film. Are the close ups in lot of these scenes where they use back projection even worth putting in?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2016 Posts: 23,883
    Birdleson wrote: »
    It seems a lot of the back projection is not really necessary. The scenes in AVTAK where Rog is in his snow suit in the studio look absolutely fine but then they chuck in the pointless back projection shot which adds nothing to the film. Are the close ups in lot of these scenes where they use back projection even worth putting in?

    I've been thinking this for years. They hurt the scene and add nothing. Bond's been established. What little reassurance or development of character that is achieved through those shots does no where near counterbalance the damage done.
    Interestingly, similar errors of judgement are apparent in more recent films with the modern version of back projection (namely CGI), most notably in SF during the notorious close up OMEGA wrist flash and 'CGI superimposed Craig' face on a stuntman on a bike in the pretitles. Both arguably unnecessary.
  • Posts: 11,189
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Outside of the 60s I think the worst use of back projection in Bond (other than DAD) has to be the fire engine chase in AVTAK.

    The ski mobile in the PTS in AVTAK has to be up there?

    True, but that's at least a very quick shot. The back projection in the fire engine chase keeps on appearing.
  • Posts: 4,030
    In AVTAK they are establishing the snowmobile, so we can see where he gets the snowboard from.

    John Glen was used to using back projection from his 60s TV days. He said he thought it was a perfectly serviceable technique when he used it in LTK.
  • Posts: 1,052
    True it does go on a bit, I imagine though it was actually pretty time consuming and hard work to get these shots looking as bad as they do back then.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited April 2016 Posts: 40,682
    Sorry but people who complain about perfectly done CGI in SP and CR have lost it.

    It was much better done than it was in certain parts in SF, but definitely not "perfectly done."

    Nothing will ever top the DAD CG, though. It's too realistic, puts 'Gravity' to shame.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Sorry but people who complain about perfectly done CGI in SP and CR have lost it.

    It was much better done than it was in certain parts in SF, but definitely not "perfectly done."

    Nothing will ever top the DAD CG, though. It's too realistic, puts 'Gravity' to shame.

    That surfing scene was a game changer. Are you sure it wasn t for real?
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,682
    @Thunderfinger, I'm 100% sure it was real. You don't get CGI looking that great without it actually being reality.
  • I've always compared DAD to TMWTGG. Overall, both are pretty damn good and have several terrific scenes, along with relatively coherent storylines. The problem is that in both films the bad sequences are SOOOOO bad. The sumo wrestler, ass-grabbing "fight" for example. The "fight" with Nick Nack. And of course every scene with Halle Berry is a disaster. In fact, as bad as the ice cube parasailing scene is in DAD, I think Jinx doing a CGI backwards dive over a 200 foot cliff into a rocky shore is even worse.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,720
    I've always compared DAD to TMWTGG.
    No, DAD is better compared to DAF IMO. Bad FX city.
  • chrisisall wrote: »
    I've always compared DAD to TMWTGG.
    No, DAD is better compared to DAF IMO. Bad FX city.

    Yes. The sequence with the diamond laser include some of the worst effects in film that I have had to bear witness to.
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 6,432


    Thought DAD would be higher on this worst list. ;) DAD is competing with some god awful effects on this list.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    I've always compared DAD to TMWTGG. Overall, both are pretty damn good and have several terrific scenes, along with relatively coherent storylines. The problem is that in both films the bad sequences are SOOOOO bad. The sumo wrestler, ass-grabbing "fight" for example. The "fight" with Nick Nack. And of course every scene with Halle Berry is a disaster. In fact, as bad as the ice cube parasailing scene is in DAD, I think Jinx doing a CGI backwards dive over a 200 foot cliff into a rocky shore is even worse.

    Worse part of that scene is the character hit water.. could've killed two birds with one stone had she been a foot or so closer to shore.

    JUST KIDDING!!!!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2016 Posts: 23,883
    There was something very NSNA about that scene to me. It reminded me of when Bond and Domino jump off the cliff with the horse. As mentioned earlier, the DAD Jinx intro scene at the beach also reminds me of the similar one with Fatima in NSNA.

    I realize DAD was all about homaging, and wonder if they were actually giving that film a nod.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    bondjames wrote: »
    There was something very NSNA about that scene to me. It reminded me of when Bond and Domino jump off the cliff with the horse. As mentioned earlier, the DAD Jinx intro scene at the beach also reminds me of the similar one with Fatima in NSNA.

    I realize DAD was all about homaging, and wonder if they were actually giving that film a nod.

    If they were they'd never admit it.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,682
    @bondjames, I had that same vibe/comparison when I watched NSNA the other night: both are cheap looking dives that nobody should've survived (especially the horse, nailing the water upside down). Ejects me right out of any fun that I'm having.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    @bondjames, I had that same vibe/comparison when I watched NSNA the other night: both are cheap looking dives that nobody should've survived (especially the horse, nailing the water upside down). Ejects me right out of any fun that I'm having.

    Horse probably felt the same way.
Sign In or Register to comment.