SPECTRE Trailer/TV Spot Thread - NEW TV Spots Page 117 - Final Trailer Page 106

1109110112114115121

Comments

  • Garth007Garth007 Missouri, USA
    Posts: 50
    Think people need to cool off on the color grading and cgi work on forums. Be happy were getting another bond film wether how good things are or not. Already bad enough people bashing Sam's smith song now it's on to knit picking before the film has even come out yet. Just my two cents tho...
  • RC7RC7
    edited October 2015 Posts: 10,432
    Garth007 wrote: »
    Think people need to cool off on the color grading and cgi work on forums. Be happy were getting another bond film wether how good things are or not. Already bad enough people bashing Sam's smith song now it's on to knit picking before the film has even come out yet. Just my two cents tho...

    That's why we're on a forum. For most of us this isn't a passive experience. To paraphrase Bill Shankly. 'Bond's not a matter of life or death... It's more important than that.'
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 11,119
    edit

  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 2,708
    I really love this kind of warm, sinister, smooth and panoramic feeling that Hoytema brought in Spectre. For example, his (and Mendes) interpretation of Rome looks amazing: the Eternal city feels like a medieval city on fire. A speed race with two high-tech/fast cars in the streets of (this) Rome is pure fantasy. BTW Deakins is a master and probably the best in the business if we speak about lightning a set but Hoytema's work seems excellent and quite unique for a Bond movie.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,432
    matt_u wrote: »
    I really love this kind of warm, sinister, smooth and panoramic feeling that Hoytema brought in Spectre. For example, his (and Mendes) interpretation of Rome looks amazing: the Eternal city feels like a medieval city on fire. A speed race with two high-tech/fast cars in the streets of (this) Rome is pure fantasy. BTW Deakins is a master and probably the best in the business if we speak about lightning a set but Hoytema's work seems excellent and quite unique for a Bond movie.

    Yes, Rome looks excellent. Intrigued to see what the 'day' shots look like. I think it could be really beautiful.
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 11,119
    I’d just like to add my two cents to the conversation about the colour-grading. You'd have to suspect that the thinking behind muting the lovely reds/pinks/greens we saw in the Day of the Dead on-set footage is the wish to lend grit or realism, to dial down the fantastical side of Bond. In my very humble opinion, it shows insecurity in the same way that QoS’s modish editing betrayed insecurity (the superfast edits are gonna make us look cutting-edge, ‘tough’, not silly etc – a choice which now looks not only bad but dated.) I also think that understanding the relationship between James Bond and a vivid, intensely technicolor colour palette is very important to locating that elusive Bond feel.

    I think you're making comparisons and drawing conclusions way way too soon. For me personally, I think editing can be way more destructive to the final outcome as compared to cinematography....if not done properly. I prefer a movie with perfect editing and flawed color gradings, then a movie with lacklustre 'tough', 'realistic' Jason Bourne-esque editing and wonderful color paletes.

    Moreover, like I said before, there's this 'film noir'-esque, 1950's-like idea that seems to run throughout all the trailers so far. And that already started off with the actual -great- first teaser trailer that premiered last March. You see that 'film noir' element running through every aspect of this film so far. (Jany Temime's wardrobe designs, white dinner jacket, Humphrey Bogart-like feel, Lea Seydoux looking like Hitchcock's favourite actress, Grace of Monaco, Sam Smith's title tune, which is very slow-tempo, the use of other props throughout the film, like a glimpse of a classic Citroen Traction Avant in the final trailer, a lot of filming at night, etc.).

    So saying that this is a sign of 'insecurity' in my opinion is way way early to tell. And slightly nonsense. So far I actually see good thinking behind these filmmaking choices, cinematography included.

    Apologies in advance for a long post: I’m thinking aloud, really. To me, what Martin Campbell and Phil Meheux (and EON, too, I guess) did on Casino Royale was daring and gutsy and artistically spot on. The Bahamas, Lake Como and, especially, the casino are jewel-bright and stuffed with overlush primary colours: it’s unapologetically ‘glamorous’ and it works because it’s a deliberate update of the Technicolor 60’s colour photography that’s absolutely part of James Bond’s lifeblood. It took balls to shoot the film like that; to recall, at the height Bourne-mania, North by Northwest, Charade (remember that?), some of the Connery Bonds, even a touch of Gordon Willis.

    I think the most daring choice with regard to cinematography was shooting the entire PTS in grained black-and-white. I loved that choice. To say that the rest of the cinematography is a 'deliberate update of good old Technicolor' is an exaggeration. Yes, the colors are beautiful, perhaps a bit too saturated at times, but so where all the previous Bond films. Phil Meheux really did good work, but cinematography wasn't the element that made "Casino Royale" stood out from previous Bond films. It was the story, the perfectly adapted screenplay from Fleming's novel, the acting. I think "SkyFall" showed us what one can really do to be brandmarked 'daring, gutsy and artistically spot-on'. And that was Roger Deakins work. No question about it.

    But it was also the right choice, IMO. Maybe the key visual idea of Bond is the Pulp Fiction-y one of a (deadly) character in sharp black and white moving through a world of vivid colour. (This whole thing started with Sylvia Trench sitting at a swathe of green baize in a bright red gown and emerald brooch opposite, when we finally see him, a man in a somehow incredibly, deeply black tuxedo.) The classic Bond contrast between the bright colours and pastels of exotic outdoor locations (the world of your ideal luxury holiday, so to speak, or of Mr White’s villa – I love the geraniums in that scene) and the greys and silvers of the villain’s lair, guns, machinery etc (the world underneath it) is the same basic idea. Bond films deal with sumptuous but sickening opulence, corrupt luxury etc and the intense, oversaturated colours are a part of that feel – James Bond’s real problem, which the dinner scene with Dr No perfectly stages, is to enjoy life to the full but not to excess; the villain is the person who always overdoes it, tips over into decadence. Bond’s world is full of bright glamorous colours; the villain’s world is where that tendency becomes garish, vulgar, overdone, nauseating - even if it’s minimalistic. That’s the opposition at the very heart of Bond, which Casino Royale understood and expressed beautifully through its cinematography (the relaxed, natural sky blues of Bond living it up with Vesper versus the oppressive intensity of the casino colours.)

    Again, a bit too much credit for the wonderful "Casino Royale". Obviously, you love that film. And to me it sounds that so much of your personal taste is interwoven in your arguments. Which is off course nice. But to make it sound that 'these oversaturated colours' should always be part of the Bond franchise for me sound conservative and formularic. I don't want every Bond film to have the same kind of colors.....the same kind of color saturation. I also want a Bond film to have some 'individual character' as well....some kind of ‘feel’ that makes it stand out from previous Bond films. You can either like or hate “Quantum Of Solace”, but it still is a rather unique entry in the Bond canon. One that can not be said from many Bond films from the pre-Craig-era (Brosnan, late Moore-era)

    One other thing, I DO think personal taste is important though. Just like some people don’t like to see a copy of another Adele song. We therefore get some nice artistic variation from Sam Smith. But it still is personal taste.

    Of course it’s only one aspect of the look of Bond, and absolutely something that often has to be dialled down. But the attitude behind the look of a Bond movie should always be: be bold, and steer as close as you can to the possibility of being called ludicrous – because that’s where the magic happens. Deakins and Mendes nailed Shanghai. The whole Patrice sequence, especially the ‘neon jellyfish’ fight is quite, quite brilliant mainly because, visually, it’s by far the most unabashed and fxxx-it-let’s-do-it beautiful moment in SF and, for me, the best thing in the whole movie. And the scene with Severine in the skyscraper works so brilliantly because you know that Bond (the man who is constantly making aesthetic judgements about the design of cars, clothes, architecture, everything, who appreciates beauty in general, and in fact knows who the villains are simply by noting that their taste is a bit off) is taking a millisecond to be awed by the beauty of the tableau – the girl, the painting, the wind in the drapes, the neon jellyfish. It would be a different, lesser, scene with Jason Bourne. No other spy or action hero has this aspect – I’d argue that it’s the one thing that makes Bond special and unique. That Ken Adam emphasis on design and aesthetics, and how much it says about character.

    I think here Roger Deakins didn’t just nail a few scenes. And don’t get me wrong, I LOVE the fight scene from the Shanghai skyscraper. I adored it (personal taste). But I think what sets apart “SkyFall” apart from many Bond films before it, even “Casino Royale”, is the ENTIRE cinematography…throughout the film. Not just a couple of memorable parts of the film. In its entirety it was spot-on! Turkey (as warm as Mexico in “SPECTRE”), London (the dreary grey color filters), Scotland, China…it all looked amazing.

    With regard to “SPECTRE” so far, I see people who completely adore the cinematography of Hoyte van Hoytema so far….based on the trailers. And others really get irritated by the choice of color filters. But is creating division not the result of a man doing something very daring and bold?? So far, I do think van Hoytema is doing a tremendous job. And I also think that, if we have seen the entire movie, we get to understand the choices of the cinematographer much better. And then we have another unique, daring, bold entry in the Bond series.

    It would be completely insane to suggest that the colour-grading might ruin or spoil the movie. But I am saying that the yellow, or ochre, grade and its toning-down, washing-out effects bespeak an odd unconfidence to me. I don’t think it’s there to make the film look more beautiful but, defensively, to make it look more ‘grown-up’ and it seems a weirdly irrelevant thing to bother with – and makes me nervous about other, more important, decisions. For me it all looks a little Mendesish – dipping your toe in the waters of ‘classic’ Bond and then half-retreating, afraid to fully commit. I guess I’m saying that if you decide, “Let’s do it, Babs, let’s have Spectre, and Nehru jackets, and a lair in the desert!” you don’t simply balance out all that Bondian excess by sticking a post-it on the DoP’s lunchbox saying ‘Dear Hoyte, pls bleach out desert sky & sand & then grade it all ‘realistically’. We don’t want to look camp, love Sam.’ It makes you look uncertain. It’s like painting Jill Masterson gold and then worrying that the shot looks…a bit too gold. It’s only a colour-grade, I know! And I could be wrong. But I do absolutely love Madeleine Swann’s train dress.

    But off course in part its also Mendes choice! He’s the director off course. He needs to approve certain decisions that Hoyte van Hoytema comes up with. But I do disagree with you fully that these choices smell like ‘uncertainty’, ‘afraid of fully committing yourself to Bond’ or ‘unconfidence’. I think especially here you’re creating a caricature of how the DoP and the director could be working together. Sam Mendes clearly ‘wants’ it this way. Barbara and Michael were basically praying Mendes to come back, and obviously gave them as much as creative responsibility and freedom as he wanted (something that’s quite unique in the Bond franchise, and that used to be very different when ‘Cubby’ was still alive. But that’s another discussion). My point really is: Just……please…….be a bit more patient. A few more weeks and then you can experience the entire full 150 mins by yourself. And then perhaps your arguments make even more sense….or maybe not.

    Ooowh, and most importantly. Let's look on the bright side: There's another Bond film coming :-D!
  • MansfieldMansfield Where the hell have you been?
    Posts: 1,262
    The notion that the direction of Spectre is unconfident is ridiculous. They haven't dipped their toes in the water and flinched because it's cold. Everything in Spectre that has been shown is bursting with grandeur and excess. Mendes has been deliberate in creating a new tone for Bond while also keeping it familiar. The artistic direction to accentuate certain hues is reflective of an initiative to coordinate imagery and mood. The old technicolor style does not achieve the same effect. Craig is the most emotionally detailed actor to play Bond. Adding mood to the pictures of a film that values characterization is an enhancement to the aspects that matter most to the pilot of storytelling. Their willingness to execute those choices shows confidence and courage.

    Look at the Mexico scene for instance, we know Bond is not authorized to be there and he is involved in an assassination. His character is wearing a mask for part of the sequence. Ultimately, we can infer that he doesn't know what he is involved in at the time of his actions. If the audience is seeing it through a subtle filter, then we are in the same position as Bond. You can't say that can or will take you out of the film when it's very inclusion is there to to convey itself to you in a more intimate way.
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 11,119
    Mansfield wrote: »
    The notion that the direction of Spectre is unconfident is ridiculous. They haven't dipped their toes in the water and flinched because it's cold. Everything in Spectre that has been shown is bursting with grandeur and excess. Mendes has been deliberate in creating a new tone for Bond while also keeping it familiar. The artistic direction to accentuate certain hues is reflective of an initiative to coordinate imagery and mood. The old technicolor style does not achieve the same effect. Craig is the most emotionally detailed actor to play Bond. Adding mood to the pictures of a film that values characterization is an enhancement to the aspects that matter most to the pilot of storytelling. Their willingness to execute those choices shows confidence and courage.

    Look at the Mexico scene for instance, we know Bond is not authorized to be there and he is involved in an assassination. His character is wearing a mask for part of the sequence. Ultimately, we can infer that he doesn't know what he is involved in at the time of his actions. If the audience is seeing it through a subtle filter, then we are in the same position as Bond. You can't say that can or will take you out of the film when it's very inclusion is there to to convey itself to you in a more intimate way.

    See my post above @Mansfield. I fully agree with you. It's also a bit balsy to say that with such long posts, that are full, FULL of arguments, neatly summed up, you "completely agree with every word of it". I find that a bit....eh....weird :-). I love this discussion though, and guys like @BombeSurprise are such welcome additions to this forum. Welcome @BombeSurprise :-D! Although I disagree with most of his remarks.
  • Posts: 13,098
    Garth007 wrote: »
    Think people need to cool off on the color grading and cgi work on forums. Be happy were getting another bond film wether how good things are or not. Already bad enough people bashing Sam's smith song now it's on to knit picking before the film has even come out yet. Just my two cents tho...

    people are bashing him? I like everything about it except his voice. Oh and the fact that my gay neighbors downstairs are playing it very loudly sometimes.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Garth007 wrote: »
    Think people need to cool off on the color grading and cgi work on forums. Be happy were getting another bond film wether how good things are or not. Already bad enough people bashing Sam's smith song now it's on to knit picking before the film has even come out yet. Just my two cents tho...

    people are bashing him? I like everything about it except his voice. Oh and the fact that my gay neighbors downstairs are playing it very loudly sometimes.

    My sympathies. Truly...
  • Posts: 13,098
    bondjames wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Garth007 wrote: »
    Think people need to cool off on the color grading and cgi work on forums. Be happy were getting another bond film wether how good things are or not. Already bad enough people bashing Sam's smith song now it's on to knit picking before the film has even come out yet. Just my two cents tho...

    people are bashing him? I like everything about it except his voice. Oh and the fact that my gay neighbors downstairs are playing it very loudly sometimes.

    My sympathies. Truly...

    Not Sam Smith's fault. And beside, it's their smoking in their flat that bothers me: for some reason we can smell it from here.
  • DCisaredDCisared Liverpool
    Posts: 1,171
    RC7 wrote: »
    Garth007 wrote: »
    Think people need to cool off on the color grading and cgi work on forums. Be happy were getting another bond film wether how good things are or not. Already bad enough people bashing Sam's smith song now it's on to knit picking before the film has even come out yet. Just my two cents tho...

    That's why we're on a forum. For most of us this isn't a passive experience. To paraphrase Bill Shankly. 'Bond's not a matter of life or death... It's more important than that.'

    you know you're getting close to the release of a new bond film when @RC7 quotes the great man himself. Squeaky bum time almost!
  • MansfieldMansfield Where the hell have you been?
    Posts: 1,262
    @Gustav_Graves

    The division you mention in your post is simply because no one has an emotional attachment in a trailer. Certain clips give you thrills and excitement, but there is little dialogue and the frames cutaway too quickly to follow a scene through from point A to point B. Naturally, it's expected that their artistic decisions cannot be appreciated until the entirety of the product can be experienced. The quality of the trailer is really insignificant to the quality of the film.

    Art is meant to move the senses. If the color grading works in a way that supports the characterization by providing a more detailed sensory experience, it is an artistic success.

    I don't know about anybody else, but that's what I want.
  • Posts: 11,119
    Mansfield wrote: »
    @Gustav_Graves

    Art is meant to move the senses. If the color grading works in a way that supports the characterization by providing a more detailed sensory experience, it is an artistic success.

    I don't know about anybody else, but that's what I want.

    And I fully agree with you again. Perhaps we're all getting very.....geeky, worried, over-critical (in a good way), perhaps suffering from insomnia.......only a few weeks before "SPECTRE" premieres ;-).
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    edited October 2015 Posts: 2,708
    Perhaps we're all getting very.....geeky, worried, over-critical (in a good way), perhaps suffering from insomnia.......only a few weeks before "SPECTRE" premieres ;-).

    Business as usual! :)
  • But back in 1995 people couldn't care less and loved that bit of 'ridiculousness'.

    I distinctly remember the silence during the bungee jump, and the laughs at the Brosnan fake plane catch, and it was not a laugh with the movie, but a laugh at the movie.

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,432
    But back in 1995 people couldn't care less and loved that bit of 'ridiculousness'.

    I distinctly remember the silence during the bungee jump, and the laughs at the Brosnan fake plane catch, and it was not a laugh with the movie, but a laugh at the movie.

    Me too. Vividly.
  • You may be right, antovolk, gustav, mansfield and thanks for your interesting points - especially about the 50’s vibe; let’s hope so. Fingers crossed!

    I’m just a bit down on excessive colour-grading in general. It’s an effect which is meant to operate on you subliminally; overdone, and therefore no longer subliminal, it feels pushy and embarrassing like catching the magician palming the card. Some movies (the Hobbit films were horribly heavy-handed in this respect) that try and subdivide the moods of the film into big simple blocks (twenty minutes of cold blue - tense! - fifteen minutes of warm amber - cosy!) seem to me to be hoping that four or five broad-brush decisions will take care of the entire visual side of things. Or even provide a ‘style’ for free. It’s an example of an easy technology tempting people to take short cuts. Even talents like Fincher can allow what should be a faint subconscious enhancement to hypertrophy into a sort of aesthetic tyrant that looms over everything. I have a feeling that there’ll soon be a strong reaction against crude colour-grading, but we’ll see.

    In the meantime I’m completely sure that HvH’s work will have absolutely nothing to do with all the above, and will be terrific. Tell you what I really liked: the shot of Bond driving to Austria.
  • MansfieldMansfield Where the hell have you been?
    edited October 2015 Posts: 1,262
    I’m just a bit down on excessive colour-grading in general. It’s an effect which is meant to operate on you subliminally; overdone, and therefore no longer subliminal, it feels pushy and embarrassing like catching the magician palming the card. Some movies (the Hobbit films were horribly heavy-handed in this respect) that try and subdivide the moods of the film into big simple blocks (twenty minutes of cold blue - tense! - fifteen minutes of warm amber - cosy!) seem to me to be hoping that four or five broad-brush decisions will take care of the entire visual side of things. Or even provide a ‘style’ for free. It’s an example of an easy technology tempting people to take short cuts. Even talents like Fincher can allow what should be a faint subconscious enhancement to hypertrophy into a sort of aesthetic tyrant that looms over everything. I have a feeling that there’ll soon be a strong reaction against crude colour-grading, but we’ll see.
    Your points are sound in the amount of content we have to look at right now. It's very easy to place two screens next to each other and make a comparison based on the color saturation. Everyone is going to agree with you in the context of a single frame because you are correct that on a superficial level, it doesn't look as good.

    In the case of The Hobbit, there is little characterization. That's the real problem with the color grading for those films. The only time it really works is in some of the scenes with Martin Freeman because he is the only character we really want to get to know with the way the story is presented. Every other scene it is just a generic ploy to convince us of the emotionality we should be feeling. In contrast with The Lord of the Rings, which I previously stated as an example of this same color grade modification, it works subliminally because we care so much about the characters and the story that we don't even take notice. When you look at the trailers for The Lord of the Rings, take notice of all the differences in Lothlorein, Gondor, Mordor, etc. Most of them look so much more immersing in the grade they were filmed at, but within the context of the film, it would be hard to imagine it another way.

    Considering this is the backstory of Bond as an adolescent, which should make it more personal than a simple mission briefing adventure, the color grading should not be unsupported by powerful performances. That will put it more in the realm of effectiveness with The Lord of the Rings.

    My prediction is this: The people who like the story threads and characterization will be totally immersed in it and find the color grading appropriate. While the people who don't like the story will use the color grading as an excuse or a reason for it not being enjoyable. The truth will be somewhere in between, though. Even if it isn't a great Bond film, if the elements that the color grading accentuates are present, that part of the production will be on point.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 34,269
    Did anyone see the newly posted TV spot or is that also old? Saw an MI6 Facebook page post it.
  • marketto007marketto007 Brazil
    Posts: 3,195
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Did anyone see the newly posted TV spot or is that also old? Saw an MI6 Facebook page post it.

    This one?


  • edited October 2015 Posts: 11,119
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    Did anyone see the newly posted TV spot or is that also old? Saw an MI6 Facebook page post it.

    This one?


    Yup, it has more elaborate interaction between MI6-staff members 'M', 'Q' and Moneypenny. It's also in the list down below:
    12.04.2014: "SPECTRE" Official Trailer #1: Teaser #1 / Title Treatment:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxsTLoq6jdg

    02.11.2015: "SPECTRE" Videoblog no#1 "Austria Shooting / Ice Chase":
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYKB75aIHWE

    02.26.2015: "SPECTRE" Videoblog no#2 "Pinewood Shooting / UK Shooting":
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15ez7ZYceOs

    03.27.2015: "SPECTRE" Official Trailer #2: Teaser #2:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvQJbF2CXLQ

    04.30.2015: "SPECTRE" Videoblog no#3 "Rome Shooting / Car Chase":
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BhuxLVMj4U

    06.10.2015: "SPECTRE" Official Trailer #3: TV Trailer no#1:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WJ8WxCA-fA

    06.15.2015: "SPECTRE" Videoblog no#4 "Mexico Preparations 'Day Of The Dead' ":
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lUusnn7puQ

    07.22.2015: "SPECTRE" Official Trailer #4: Full Theatrical Trailer #1:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujmoYyEyDP8

    08.13.2015: "SPECTRE" Videoblog no#5 "The Bond-Girls Of SPECTRE":
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oa-4YYgbZtI

    09.10.2015: "SPECTRE" Official Trailer #5: TV Trailer no#2:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU2xwrwWaQQ

    09.23.2015: "SPECTRE" Videoblog no#6 "The Action Of SPECTRE":
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ej9kDTw6RgA

    09.24.2015: "SPECTRE" Official Trailer #6: TV Trailer no#3:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFn8KuO0XNE

    02.10.2015: "SPECTRE" Official Trailer #7: TV Trailer no#4:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEKtbGYFowQ

    02.10.2015: "SPECTRE" Official Trailer #8: Full Theatrical (IMAX) Trailer no#2:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4UDNzXD3qA
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 67
    As there was a fantastic response to my Skyfall - Ultimate Trailer back in 2012, here's my 'Ultimate Trailer' for SPECTRE which brings together nearly all the footage from the teasers and trailers to really get you pumped!

  • Garth007Garth007 Missouri, USA
    Posts: 50
    Brendoge wrote: »
    As there was a fantastic response to my Skyfall - Ultimate Trailer back in 2012, here's my 'Ultimate Trailer' for SPECTRE which brings together nearly all the footage from the teasers and trailers to really get you pumped!


    Fantastic!!! Especially the very end of trailer nice touch :-)
  • Posts: 1,309
    I'm late to the party, @BombeSurprise, but your post on the previous page was one of the best posts I have ever read on this forum. Fantastic stuff.
  • @Brendoge: GREAT stuff! I'm impressed. It did get me even more pumped, something I thought impossible. I agree with Garth that the ending is perfect :-)
  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,090
    Brendoge wrote: »
    As there was a fantastic response to my Skyfall - Ultimate Trailer back in 2012, here's my 'Ultimate Trailer' for SPECTRE which brings together nearly all the footage from the teasers and trailers to really get you pumped!


    EPIC!
  • Posts: 498


    Just curious,
    Would someone be able to do this on the Spectre Trailer
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 3,052
    doubleoego wrote: »
    I don't say this lightly but SP looks to seriously challenge CR as Craig's best; something I couldn't say about QoS or SF.
    Simply well put, sir. That's exactly what I'm getting from these trailers too. I'm also liking Craig's laissez faire attitude in his performance, echoes of Connery at his finest. Everything looks bigger, better than before. Count me in.
    I'm literally blown away. Mexican skylines, snowy Austrian mountain tops, cold forests, eery sights of London and the Big Ben, Moroccan craters. I did not expect this to say, but I think 'my' Dutch Dop Hoyte van Hoytema could pick up an Oscar nomination! I'm so ffff-ING stunned from what I saw! This cinematography looks again....breathtaking. Could it top Roger Deakins' work on "SF" and Michael Reed's work on "OHMSS"? I'm seriously wetting my pants here :-O.
    Again, my thoughts exactly. I think Hoyte's done an amazing job. It looks even better than Deakin's work on SF, and I agree it has a Michael Reed feel.
  • Posts: 219
    Brendoge wrote:
    As there was a fantastic response to my Skyfall - Ultimate Trailer back in 2012, here's my 'Ultimate Trailer' for SPECTRE which brings together nearly all the footage from the teasers and trailers to really get you pumped!


    Great, Good job & well done!
Sign In or Register to comment.