It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I know people don't give a damn about awards on this forum but Lee Smith has been nominated for an Academy Award, a BAFTA and an ACE Eddie Award (award of the American Cinema Editors guild) for his work on The Dark Knight. If it really is such a poorly edited film then how come professional editors though it one of the best editing work of 2008?
Beats me. But you're right, I often disagree with who gets awarded at these things (at least when it comes to the Academy). In 2010, Trent Reznor won an Academy Award for his score for The Social Network over the likes of John Powell's brilliant How to Train Your Dragon, Daft Punk's equally brilliant TRON: Legacy, and a host of other qualified film scores. How does this kind of thing happen? Beats me. All I know is The Social Network is a perfectly OK score, while the others are truly Oscar-worthy.
The first time I watched The Dark Knight in theaters, two of my biggest impressions of the film were that the cutting of scenes throughout the first act was far too fast (perhaps to get through so much material without causing the film to run too long) and the action sequences disjointed and confusing. As an amateur filmmaker/film buff/general audience member, I found the editing stood out to me in a negative way. I could probably watch The Dark Knight again and find examples of better-edited scenes in the film that might have led the Academy voters to their decision (the intercutting between Loeb being poisoned and whatever else was going on in that sequence perhaps?), but when it comes down to it, the real answer is: who knows what drives them to vote the way they do. I just know I'm not a fan of the way action is edited in Christopher Nolan's films and wouldn't want to see that carried over to the Bond franchise.
EDIT: All that being said, Batman Begins is still one of my favorite films of all time, and while the editing isn't exactly the part of the film that appeals to me the most, it also clearly doesn't prevent me from enjoying it as much as I do. So who knows.
Ah I was about to post their Tweet
Their FB page also states "The Club will do everything to meet the new Bond lady before the media rush is unleashed!"
I wonder if Sony are going to confirm anything else? And why no press conference or should have this information should have been embargoed?
This is one piece of news. I certainly hope they will announce lots of names plus maybe the title in a row. Mi6 itself has announced one more name this morning: Nolan's editor Lee Smith will work on Bond 24.
I am really astonished how negative people can become after some more cast&crew information has leaked. And I especially think the Academy deserves slightly more respect from the Bond community. Especially since "Skyfall".
For you @Some_Kind_Of_Hero the Academy may look like bullshit, but don't forget the Oscars are a competition. The film (or whatever category) that wins, won the most votes. It's as simple as that. Perhaps "John Powell's brilliant score" got 2nd or 3rd an lost with, let's say, 15 Academy votes. You never mention that. You don't take thát into account.
I always turn the whole "shabang" upside down and I reason like this: "Once you've reached the TOP 5 for a certain category, that's already one hell of an achievement. And if you, as an extra, also manage to win....than that's even more wunderful!" I am a positivist. Period! I'm quite tired how the Academy is being treated here. The Academy is about winning and losing really. And because there is one winner, a huge majority gets disappointed, because the other 4 nominated entries didn't win.
Then Thomas Newman's score.....still get's being beaten up on here. As if the Academy personally degraded David Arnold. What a load of nonsense really. Again here, try to reason the other way around: "A Bond score got frikkin' nominated for an Oscar, regardless who the person is who composed it!"
Also, taste is something so entirely subjective. But I can't stop thinking that your taste @Some_Kind_Of_Hero is quite the "cry of a minority". Perhaps not on the MI6-Community forum, but on the whole, on average perhaps it could very well be! Personally, I loved "The Dark Knight". I'm no expert on editing, but I thought Matt Chesse's editing on "Quantum Of Solace" was............well guys, step in here please. I think the past-paced editing of Chesse caused me headaches in the cinema! Again, editing is a matter of taste....but apparently also a matter of "enhancing dizzyness"! If you google for articles about the editing of "The Dark Knight" vs. "Quantum Of Solace" you will find that your voice is slightly of a "minority cry".
And please, "Bond 24" still needs to be filmed! We don't even know the title yet. So until then, I think the best thing to do is to stay positive, react in an uplifting way and trust our beloved Bond producers for their casting decisions. Perhaps Lee Smith excels for "Bond 24"! And perhaps for "Bond 24" your opinion about Lee Smith's editing will become part of a majority that could say his editing was magnificent.
Lea Séydoux? Lee Smith? The Oscars? Welcome....welcome to the great Bond family.
There shouldn't be any fear that Bond 24 will be reminisent of QOS's horrendous editting patterns. Nolan's films are fantastically put together and the involvement of Hoyte and now Smith only is furthering my excitement. Considering we have seen both Deakins and Baird departing following their work on SF, do we think there is a chance that Thomas Newman will not return? He's the last of the significant behind-the-scenes talent we have not heard from. Looking at the current pattern I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Hans Zimmer has the job.
That's nonsense! And you know it. I have great respect for Baird. And I would have loved him to be onboard (do you know the real reason why Baird hasn't been contracted? Maybe, like Peter Lamont or Roger Deakins....he simply wanted to do something else or retire?). But he is not onboard anymore. I have never said, in ANY of my remarks, that Baird is not Oscar worthy. But apparently, the sheer absence of his name in my arguments makes you already think that I'm "acting like Baird isn't Oscar-worthy". That's what I call "over-implying".
I know what the real problem is. Perhaps certain people don't accept change easily? For them....certain bells start to ring......heavily defending someone (Baird) and criticising the other heavily (Lee Smith). There's nothing wrong with that, until, for me, the criticism builds to such an extent that I want to confront people with where we are at this stage.
I defend BOTH Baird and Smith. But fact is, Baird is out. You should perhaps be more happy that Matt Chesse is out. And that's me saying this AFTER we know how QOS ended up. Again, I'm not an expert, but saying that you are worried about Lee Smith needs to be seen into context here. Ask yourself what all cinema-go-ers, who went to see either "Inception" or "The Dark Knight", thought when they saw these films for the very first time.
Calm down. Editing never destroys a film. It can substantially weaken the total result of a finished product though. Worries at this stage of pre-production of Bond 24 are IMO quite useless.
Sony can make confirmations but they don't make the announcements - that's down to EON and MGM.
Sometimes we have to wait for information to come out through another manner before we can confirm something publicly we know through private sources.
Director and Producers have say on how the film is cut - they obviously like Lee's style otherwise they wouldn't have hired him.
The plan is that the title be announced at the kick-off press conference as shooting starts. It's bound to leak beforehand, though. There will not be a repeat of the 'Bond 20' debacle where it started without a title.
Actually I would blame both as Nolan as director has a shedload of imput on how the movie should look like. And an editor should tell the director if the material shot is enough or worthy enough. Both are involved in the end product I would say.
So Lee Smith says, 'Chris, that $1m action scene you just shot, you missed a couple of cutaways and your coverage isn't consistent. Can you do it again?' No. He makes the best job of it he can.
It's not about "not liking" @doubleoego. The fact is you're implying things....that are simply not true.
So they did hire Lee Smith! All we had so far was an update on the imdb cast&crew page of Bond 24, which wasn't really a confirmation.
I am sure he will discuss this indeed and that Nolan will take that in consideration with his next movie, the man does not come across as unwilling to develop his skills.
I'm not implying anything. I'm flat out saying that I don't like the way the action is edited in the films I've seen in which Smith has edited, particularly Nolan's films and as I already said, I have every right to he cautious but I yet remain hopeful and obviously will wait and see how it all comes together.
Not possible given the shoot schedule.
Agreed. It was the director that shot the action not the editor. No one is even going to notice. Directors oversee editors anyway so chill.
:-O :-O :-O :-?? 8-} #-o =; %-( [-X