Would you rather have a second Lazenby OR a third Dalton?

1838486888993

Comments

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,449
    Even the short car chase in AVTAK with Moore's Bond in a Tuxedo, is more inventive than the whole of the Norway car chase in NTTD.

    The Norway chase is beautifully shot for the most part but I had a "that's all?" feeling when it was over, cause I felt like the best bits were in the trailer. My fault, I know, but it was pretty underwhelming in the final film.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited February 16 Posts: 1,355
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Even the short car chase in AVTAK with Moore's Bond in a Tuxedo, is more inventive than the whole of the Norway car chase in NTTD.

    The Norway chase is beautifully shot for the most part but I had a "that's all?" feeling when it was over, cause I felt like the best bits were in the trailer. My fault, I know, but it was pretty underwhelming in the final film.

    Exactly. I expected something mind-blowing from that sequence, because the trailers suggested that. Also, many of the action scenes end too quickly in NTTD. Even Michael Bay who cuts quickly, have longer action scenes in his films.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,449
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Even the short car chase in AVTAK with Moore's Bond in a Tuxedo, is more inventive than the whole of the Norway car chase in NTTD.

    The Norway chase is beautifully shot for the most part but I had a "that's all?" feeling when it was over, cause I felt like the best bits were in the trailer. My fault, I know, but it was pretty underwhelming in the final film.

    Exactly. I expected something mind-blowing from that sequence, because the trailers suggested that. Also, many of the action scenes end too quickly in NTTD. Even Michael Bay who cuts quickly, have longer action scenes in his films.

    That shot of the vehicles and motorcycles entering the chase is really, really, really good stuff, but that was the shining highlight of the chase for me and I had already seen it overplayed in all the trailers and marketing - again, my fault, but I would've loved some more surprises and excitement from that whole bit.

    And yes, one of my other complaints with the action is its length. Just when it's getting good, it's over. I do think the one take is brilliant (and shows Mendes how it should be done to really impress audiences) but moments like Bond and Ash fighting really deserved a longer go of it (and perhaps better lighting).
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited February 16 Posts: 1,355
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Even the short car chase in AVTAK with Moore's Bond in a Tuxedo, is more inventive than the whole of the Norway car chase in NTTD.

    The Norway chase is beautifully shot for the most part but I had a "that's all?" feeling when it was over, cause I felt like the best bits were in the trailer. My fault, I know, but it was pretty underwhelming in the final film.

    Exactly. I expected something mind-blowing from that sequence, because the trailers suggested that. Also, many of the action scenes end too quickly in NTTD. Even Michael Bay who cuts quickly, have longer action scenes in his films.

    That shot of the vehicles and motorcycles entering the chase is really, really, really good stuff, but that was the shining highlight of the chase for me and I had already seen it overplayed in all the trailers and marketing - again, my fault, but I would've loved some more surprises and excitement from that whole bit.

    And yes, one of my other complaints with the action is its length. Just when it's getting good, it's over. I do think the one take is brilliant (and shows Mendes how it should be done to really impress audiences) but moments like Bond and Ash fighting really deserved a longer go of it (and perhaps better lighting).

    Much agreed. The vehicles jumping into the air and into the race is a very good shot. Also, Bond still shooting the already crashed car inside the forest is nice too. Also, Bond's outfit doesn't help the forest sequence.

    It's AVTAK all the way!
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,674
    For me, it's simple. NTTD is top five material, AVTAK bottom five. This is not to say that occasionally I may find myself more in a mood for AVTAK...but probably not before I watched NTTD another five times or so, not to mention about twenty other Bond films.
  • Posts: 15,801
    AVTAK
  • meshypushymeshypushy Ireland
    Posts: 12
    For me, I would objectively consider NTTD to be an average Bond movie and AVTAK to be in the bottom 3-4 of all Bonds (the pros being Moore, Walken, Jones, Macnee, the theme tune, its cons being Moore’s age and an awful ‘plodding’ and TV movie feel to the second half of the movie).

    NTTD just has zero ‘rewatchability’ for me though - just too many issues overall and I find everything post-London to be a hot mess (which gets progressively worse until the credits roll).

    On paper, NTTD is better than some Bond movies but it and SP are the only Bond movies that I have zero urge to watch again, ever.

    AVTAK, for me, is Moore’s worst Bond but even a plodding old-school Bond is still a watchable romp and wins out over NTTD.

    AVTAK all the way, on that basis!
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited February 17 Posts: 2,919
    Also, Bond's outfit doesn't help the forest sequence.
    Goddamn that goddam duster! :-O With the exception of Craig's suit in the London scenes, none of Bond's clothes seemed right throughout NTTD, but that duster was several shades of wrong, man.
  • AVTAK is one of the better comedy Bonds with a decent villain very much in a Trump vein (dodgy barnet and American capitalist) and great theme tune but I prefer Fleming style Bond IE NTTD.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,954
    It’s so funny how Trump lives in some people’s heads 😂
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 4,938
    To paraphase Mister White..."He's everywhere."

    Some very interesting thoughts on these two films. Starting to see the difference that re-watchability can make on a film. The ending of NTTD definitely holds it back for my re-watching.

    Interesting to see how others feel about the film.

    Bond is known for unique action. Lets see what you would rather see in an upcoming adventure.

    Would you rather some air action OR some underwater action?

    The series has some interesting air action sequences. YOLT with Little Nellie springs to mind, but we can't forget the OP action at the PTS with the acrostar. Underwater action has been featured in TB, TSWLM and LTK.

    Which type of action sequence would you rather see, assume that either will serve the story and not be inserted gratuitously.

  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,954
    I would love to see a really exciting underwater sequence ; but it’s a tricky thing to pull off. Even if beautifully photographed they can come off as ponderous.
  • Posts: 1,510
    Underwater sequences have figured into quite a few Bond films: sinking ships, diving for some secret device, etc. I like TB best because underwater was the core of the story.
    I prefer action, but no more motorcycles, trains, and planes. I would love to see a car chase I can actually focus on. (I'm talking to you QoS.) But not like the Matera scene in NTTD. Bond and Madeleine in the car being bombarded by bullets and shells was so unbelievable and reckless on Bond's part that it ruined the chase sequence for me. Action scenes need to be spectacular, but believable. CGI has gotten to the point that many films are so over-the-top those sequences are often too much. Sometimes less can be more.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,862
    I'm all for some aerial action. So long as a large part of it, is done practically with real stuntmen.
    The sequence in LTK moving from underwater action to aerial action would have to be one of the better scenes of this nature in the series.
    If they could pull off something like that again, then I'd be impressed.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 1,355
    Yeah. That underwater to aerial sequence is a very unique sequence in the Bond series and general action movies too. John Glen really knew how to add invention to action scenes.
  • Posts: 1,510
    I always want a Bond film to be more about the story than the stunts and special effects.
    I liked Dead Reckoning, but I was waiting for "the stunt" because of all the hype. Yes, it was impressive, but would the film have worked without it? Yes,
  • Posts: 1,551
    snow
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 4,938
    I fear that CGI has forever changed the way movies are filmed. The practical stunts are always more breathtaking and make you believe more in the story. Even great CGI is still obvious to most of us and it takes us out. However the cost savings and the ability to go OOT with the action means it is likely not going anywhere. One hopes that eon will continue with the track and continue to use practical stunts in their films.

    As for the question I feel like it's been a while since we had a good ariel sequence. Craig flew planes and copters but I feel like an actual air dog fight or chase would be refreshing to see again.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    edited February 20 Posts: 2,919
    Since62 wrote: »
    snow
    Yes! Still mourning the snowmobile chase that Dan didn't want to do in SP.
  • edited February 20 Posts: 2,864
    thedove wrote: »
    I fear that CGI has forever changed the way movies are filmed. The practical stunts are always more breathtaking and make you believe more in the story. Even great CGI is still obvious to most of us and it takes us out. However the cost savings and the ability to go OOT with the action means it is likely not going anywhere. One hopes that eon will continue with the track and continue to use practical stunts in their films.

    As for the question I feel like it's been a while since we had a good ariel sequence. Craig flew planes and copters but I feel like an actual air dog fight or chase would be refreshing to see again.

    It’s worth clearing up a few things about CGI in action sequences here…

    Often in modern films, CGI is used alongside practical stunt work. And it’s actually unnoticeable the vast majority of the time, at least when it’s good work. Even the Mission Impossible series uses CGI to create skylines and sandstorms behind Tom Cruise as he scales the Burj Khalifa (not to mention getting rid of his safety harness). The Bond series does this as well (much of the backgrounds during the Matera scenes in NTTD are CGI, while the actual car/motorbike stunts are very much practical).

    It’s also not quicker or cheaper at all. The cost of hiring VFX Artists is an additional fee for productions, and it’s also very time consuming. Much of it has to be discussed and planned ahead of time to ensure that all of this is filmed correctly (otherwise you can end up with substandard VFX work - see/read up on the film Cats if you want to see how a director messing up can negatively impact the post production work). So I’d personally say while CGI has changed the way action sequences are filmed, it hasn’t done so fundamentally but simply in terms of the technical process.

    Anyway, sorry for the rant! My vote goes for ariel, but I’d love to see a good underwater sequence at some point too.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,449
    I'll go with underwater. It's been a long time and Tom Cruise/Christopher McQuarrie look set to have dominant action sequences in the air covered in the next M:I installment.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 6,778
    I'd love a new scuba action scene, haven't had one in a long time.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited February 20 Posts: 1,355
    If Bond 26's poster shows Bond 7 with complete scuba gear and a harpoon gun, then the frenzy among Bond fans would be thunderous.
  • VenutiusVenutius Yorkshire
    Posts: 2,919
    Still missing the speargun that was CGI'd out of the Jamaica scenes in NTTD.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    edited February 20 Posts: 1,355
    Venutius wrote: »
    Still missing the speargun that was CGI'd out of the Jamaica scenes in NTTD.

    Same here. I was really looking forward to it.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,449
    Venutius wrote: »
    Still missing the speargun that was CGI'd out of the Jamaica scenes in NTTD.

    Yeah I was going to say, don't get too optimistic if we get another image of that anytime soon! I need to see it in the finished film first. I had really hoped they kept it in when I finally saw NTTD. I felt it was one of the more striking images to come out of that Jamaica first look video they dropped.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,954
    Venutius wrote: »
    Still missing the speargun that was CGI'd out of the Jamaica scenes in NTTD.

    Same here. I was really looking forward to it.

    I haven’t watched it since its initial Blu-ray release, and I do remember behind the scenes photos of him with a speargun. Did they act digitally remove it or did they make other choices on location.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 1,355
    talos7 wrote: »
    Venutius wrote: »
    Still missing the speargun that was CGI'd out of the Jamaica scenes in NTTD.

    Same here. I was really looking forward to it.

    I haven’t watched it since its initial Blu-ray release, and I do remember behind the scenes photos of him with a speargun. Did they act digitally remove it or did they make other choices on location.

    I think it could be either way. But I would like to think it's the latter.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 4,938
    007HallY wrote: »
    thedove wrote: »
    I fear that CGI has forever changed the way movies are filmed. The practical stunts are always more breathtaking and make you believe more in the story. Even great CGI is still obvious to most of us and it takes us out. However the cost savings and the ability to go OOT with the action means it is likely not going anywhere. One hopes that eon will continue with the track and continue to use practical stunts in their films.

    As for the question I feel like it's been a while since we had a good ariel sequence. Craig flew planes and copters but I feel like an actual air dog fight or chase would be refreshing to see again.

    It’s worth clearing up a few things about CGI in action sequences here…

    Often in modern films, CGI is used alongside practical stunt work. And it’s actually unnoticeable the vast majority of the time, at least when it’s good work. Even the Mission Impossible series uses CGI to create skylines and sandstorms behind Tom Cruise as he scales the Burj Khalifa (not to mention getting rid of his safety harness). The Bond series does this as well (much of the backgrounds during the Matera scenes in NTTD are CGI, while the actual car/motorbike stunts are very much practical).

    It’s also not quicker or cheaper at all. The cost of hiring VFX Artists is an additional fee for productions, and it’s also very time consuming. Much of it has to be discussed and planned ahead of time to ensure that all of this is filmed correctly (otherwise you can end up with substandard VFX work - see/read up on the film Cats if you want to see how a director messing up can negatively impact the post production work). So I’d personally say while CGI has changed the way action sequences are filmed, it hasn’t done so fundamentally but simply in terms of the technical process.

    Anyway, sorry for the rant! My vote goes for ariel, but I’d love to see a good underwater sequence at some point too.

    No apologies needed. I appreciate the perspective. I should have clarified some of my rather broad statements. I am not talking about taking the ramp out and making it grass for the jump in Mi Dead Reckoning, or removing the cables from Craig in the opening sequence of CR. I am referring to some of the bigger stunts from movies like Fast and Furious that defy physics and push the boundaries of logic. These big sequences where you can tell this didn't really happen. If its more expensive, why not see more practical sequences? I guess it's the OTT nature of things you can get away with in a CGI world.
  • Posts: 2,864
    thedove wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    thedove wrote: »
    I fear that CGI has forever changed the way movies are filmed. The practical stunts are always more breathtaking and make you believe more in the story. Even great CGI is still obvious to most of us and it takes us out. However the cost savings and the ability to go OOT with the action means it is likely not going anywhere. One hopes that eon will continue with the track and continue to use practical stunts in their films.

    As for the question I feel like it's been a while since we had a good ariel sequence. Craig flew planes and copters but I feel like an actual air dog fight or chase would be refreshing to see again.

    It’s worth clearing up a few things about CGI in action sequences here…

    Often in modern films, CGI is used alongside practical stunt work. And it’s actually unnoticeable the vast majority of the time, at least when it’s good work. Even the Mission Impossible series uses CGI to create skylines and sandstorms behind Tom Cruise as he scales the Burj Khalifa (not to mention getting rid of his safety harness). The Bond series does this as well (much of the backgrounds during the Matera scenes in NTTD are CGI, while the actual car/motorbike stunts are very much practical).

    It’s also not quicker or cheaper at all. The cost of hiring VFX Artists is an additional fee for productions, and it’s also very time consuming. Much of it has to be discussed and planned ahead of time to ensure that all of this is filmed correctly (otherwise you can end up with substandard VFX work - see/read up on the film Cats if you want to see how a director messing up can negatively impact the post production work). So I’d personally say while CGI has changed the way action sequences are filmed, it hasn’t done so fundamentally but simply in terms of the technical process.

    Anyway, sorry for the rant! My vote goes for ariel, but I’d love to see a good underwater sequence at some point too.

    No apologies needed. I appreciate the perspective. I should have clarified some of my rather broad statements. I am not talking about taking the ramp out and making it grass for the jump in Mi Dead Reckoning, or removing the cables from Craig in the opening sequence of CR. I am referring to some of the bigger stunts from movies like Fast and Furious that defy physics and push the boundaries of logic. These big sequences where you can tell this didn't really happen. If its more expensive, why not see more practical sequences? I guess it's the OTT nature of things you can get away with in a CGI world.

    There’s a few reasons why all these films use VFX. The main reason is creating a believable world that can’t be done practically. If Dwayne Johnson and Vin Diesel are meant to have a car chase through London you can’t shut down more than two small stretches of road in that city. It has to be filmed in at least two other locations (so even in FF there’s still a lot of practical stunt work, even with a heavier use of VFX in the sequence itself to create stuff like cars flying about) and it has to actually all look like London. Add to that necessary studio work with green screens for car interiors (which is the modern equivalent of using back projection in a way) and you can’t avoid it really. Again, it’s similar to the MI example. You can’t leave poor old Tom Cruise strapped to a safety harness to wait around for a sandstorm, nor can he put in positions which are too dangerous (believe it or not) in order to get certain shots of him where we need to see the skyline in the background. So VFX is used.

    Practical stunt work is great, and I think it should always be used in tandem with CGI, but it’s not feasible to use only one or the other. It never has been incidentally. Even in the old days of Bond you had several studio inserts of Roger Moore with back projection in order to make it seem like he was doing these stunts in the edit (and honestly, it looked dated even in the 80s) and a good dash of camera, editing and indeed special effect trickery was often used.
Sign In or Register to comment.