The worst practical effects in Bond

MilleniumForce · May 2016

Ok, so a lot of people slam DAD for the poor CGI (rightly so), but are there any iffy practical effects?

Right now, I can think that one of the more obvious practical shots is the fighter jet crashing into the dish in GE. It's the same problem Burton's Batman had during the Batwing crash sequence; I think it's related to the ratio, but the point is it's very clearly a model.

Are there any you can think of?

Dutchfinger · May 2016

The Vulcan Bomber in Thunderball that sinks down was always really obvious to me, but i'm not as disturbed by that as bad CGI for some reason I find it more charming.

Thunderbird 2 · May 2016

For me in miniatures, it has to be the climax of OHMSS, specifically the moment Piz Gloria Explodes.
The actual model going up is fine I think - its the way it's edited as though the explosion of the building is an afterthought.

I agree about the bad CGI in DAD. The wave riding / para sail scene is very poor, and takes away from other sequences like the trio night surf at the start of the film, or the battle of the supercars inside the Ice Palace.

The only other one that stands out is due to lighting I think - the blue-screened sequences of Goldfinger when Felix finds Bond at the hotel seem a bit "off." Doesn't quite match in with the location stuff.

Dutchfinger · May 2016

Thunderbird 2 wrote:

the blue-screened sequences of Goldfinger when Felix finds Bond at the hotel seem a bit "off." Doesn't quite match in with the location stuff.

Agreed. The early Bond films had some terrible back drops. The one from the car chase in DN comes to mind. But the worst one for me easily is the one in TB, when Bond is fighting Largo on the Disco Volante and it truly seems to be a flying saucer with that speed!

Barbel · May 2016

Ah, but we are all looking at this with 21st Century eyes. Back in the 60s, audiences were conditioned to the limitations of film at the time and were a lot more forgiving. When I first saw the Bond films they were state-of-the-art and the back projection (say, the car chase in DN or the pool scenes in GF) went unnoticed. TB was spectacular, YOLT even more so.
Today we are used to watching these films (and their contemporaries) at home, while at the time of release they were a communal experience to audiences used to the conventions of their time, whose jaw would drop when (say) the volcano opened to admit a rocket ship.

chrisisall · May 2016

As kids seeing GF in the theatre (70's revival) we all laughed out loud at Goldfinger's jet.

Thing is, CGI, GOOD CGI, is at worst noticeable, and at best not distracting. DAD's stuff is not good. I don't hate it as much as most, but it's DN-level rear-projection bad.

)

hehadlotsofguts · May 2016

You can actually tell that the ending in TB was filmed in a tank in Pinewood. The close-ups of Bond and Domino are really dark

chrisisall · May 2016

hehadlotsofguts wrote:

You can actually tell that the ending in TB was filmed in a tank in Pinewood. The close-ups of Bond and Domino are really dark

Yeah, but stuff like that never bothered me at all. In fact, the worst effect in any Bond movie for ME is the volcano erupting in YOLT.... but I always just glance away.

)

Matt S · May 2016

None of the practical effects in the Bond films bother or distract me at all. It's the CGI in DAD and the CGI building collapse in SP that distract me more than anything. If I want to see bad practical effects/scenery I'll watch the original Star Trek series. Those away missions aren't the least big believable. Particularly the one with the unicorn dog. You know what I'm talking about chrisisall. I love it, but it's distracting. None of the practical effects in Bond distract me.

Chriscoop · May 2016

The only ones that even come to mind for me are the dummies used in the vehicle stunts, example being when jaws goes over the waterfall in MR, and also when the henchmen get blown up in their speedboat in MR, and also locque in the Mercedes in fyeo. I think it only distracts me as it was pointed out to me when I watched these films as a small boy, for some reason on the same lines the speed boat chase in frwl is far more realistic than that in MR.
Cgi just seems wrong to me in a bond film, I understand why they have to use it for certain elements but I'm not wholly convinced such elements add to a bond film.

Gassy Man · May 2016

Why everyone talk these days like Tarzan, not use articles like a, an, the?

Anyway, the model work from the 1970s on is pretty dodgy, the rare exceptions being some of the miniature cars like the BMW in The World is Not Enough. Flying miniatures almost always look obvious as models -- but that doesn't necessarily make them uninteresting. Indeed, I find the charm of models much more interesting than the videogame-like animation of CGI.

Barbel · May 2016

Not everyone, GM!

Chriscoop · May 2016

Gassy Man wrote:

Why everyone talk these days like Tarzan, not use articles like a, an, the?

Anyway, the model work from the 1970s on is pretty dodgy, the rare exceptions being some of the miniature cars like the BMW in The World is Not Enough. Flying miniatures almost always look obvious as models -- but that doesn't necessarily make them uninteresting. Indeed, I find the charm of models much more interesting than the videogame-like animation of CGI.

You made me read my post again then!

I agree the the miniature work is interesting, and somehow acceptable even when it's obvious. I just don't really think a bond film requires cgi work as a main spectacle. The venice palazzo scene in CR was all done on a proper set accept I think the short clip of the bystanders outside watching it collapse which was I think cgi. This worked quite well to my eye.

chrisisall · May 2016

Matt S wrote:

Particularly the one with the unicorn dog. You know what I'm talking about chrisisall.

The Enemy Within. I've memorized TOS.

Thunderpussy · May 2016

I've always thought the maggots in LTK looked awful, just like strips of
Rubber.

chrisisall · May 2016

Thunderpussy wrote:

I've always thought the maggots in LTK looked awful, just like strips of
Rubber.

I know maggots. I have them all over me right now. And that's what they really look like.

Silhouette Man · May 2016

The chemistry set explosions in DAF deserve a mention - truly awful effects.

Gassy Man · May 2016

Barbel wrote:

Not everyone, GM!

{[]

Gassy Man · May 2016

Chriscoop wrote:

Gassy Man wrote:

Why everyone talk these days like Tarzan, not use articles like a, an, the?

Anyway, the model work from the 1970s on is pretty dodgy, the rare exceptions being some of the miniature cars like the BMW in The World is Not Enough. Flying miniatures almost always look obvious as models -- but that doesn't necessarily make them uninteresting. Indeed, I find the charm of models much more interesting than the videogame-like animation of CGI.

You made me read my post again then!
I agree the the miniature work is interesting, and somehow acceptable even when it's obvious. I just don't really think a bond film requires cgi work as a main spectacle. The venice palazzo scene in CR was all done on a proper set accept I think the short clip of the bystanders outside watching it collapse which was I think cgi. This worked quite well to my eye.

{[]

Just doing my cantankerous best to support one of the great languages in the world. B-)

Matt S · May 2016

chrisisall wrote:

Matt S wrote:

Particularly the one with the unicorn dog. You know what I'm talking about chrisisall.

The Enemy Within. I've memorized TOS.

I'm not that good. I could probably name more episodes of TNG, but still not that many.

chrisisall · May 2016

Here's your unicorn doggie....

Yes, the sets were very not real, but it was like a morality play back then. Story was more important than motion picture quality production values.
Just sayin'.

Matt S · May 2016

chrisisall wrote:

Here's your unicorn doggie....

Yes, the sets were very not real, but it was like a morality play back then. Story was more important than motion picture quality production values.
Just sayin'.

You're right about the story being more important. I think we are more likely to forgive poor effects if the story is strong. Maybe there are some poor practical effects in OHMSS, like Thunderbird 2 mentions. I never noticed them because the story is one of the strongest of any Bond film.

That said, I found the unicorn dog particularly distracting ...

distractingly cute!

ThunderRaker · May 2016

The ending finale in Thunderball and The laser in Diamonds Are Forever.

Surprised no one has mentioned Kananga exploding from the air gun in the ending of Live And Let Die. When I was younger I disliked it quite a lot, but nowadays instead of laughing at it I laugh with it. The way Moore treats it so casually with -- "He always did have an inflated opinion of himself!" -- makes the scene so much more fun than the Thunderball finale, since it's taken completely seriously, and most of all, the poor old chap who decided to help Bond and Domino is left by himself

)

superado · May 2016

I watched a bit of FYEO on TV today and again saw the faked underwater close-ups of Bond and Melina. I understand that this was the solution for Carole Bouquet's sinus problems because of the seawater, so I actually applaud the effort, esp. the faked bubbles and the swirling hair achieved with fans even though it seemed too clear to look underwater.

thenoisydrum · May 2016

superado wrote:

I watched a bit of FYEO on TV today and again saw the faked underwater close-ups of Bond and Melina. I understand that this was the solution for Carole Bouquet's sinus problems because of the seawater, so I actually applaud the effort, esp. the faked bubbles and the swirling hair achieved with fans even though it seemed too clear to look underwater.

I'm only repeating what others have said but - the volcano in YOLT. It just looks so out of place, like it was pinched from another movie! Then, DAF....... There's an explosion that we see taking place on the horizon and it just looks shocking. Also, the helicopter that Wint and Kid blow up - it disappears a frame before the explosion appears.

MilleniumForce · May 2016

Oh god, where to start with DAF!

The worst for me is during the final battle, the helicopter that explodes is still flying - it's an explosion animated over the flying helicopter!

Then there's the man on fire, and the red missiles - the third act of DAF is just terrible in terms of effects.

Oddjoblofeldraxorin · May 2016

The Goldfinger getting sucked out of the plane effect is pretty amazing for 1964, but hilarious to look at now.

heartbroken_mr_drax · May 2016

- Cellophane windows on GF jet.
- Wings on Vulcan when landing fluttering.
- YOLT spinning around of lander.
- DAF explosions and heating up.
- GE crashing of MiGs and Alec/Onatopp in helicopter from train.
- TWINE helicopter explosion.

Golrush007 · May 2016

heartbroken_mr_drax wrote:

- Cellophane windows on GF jet.
- Wings on Vulcan when landing fluttering.
- YOLT spinning around of lander.
- DAF explosions and heating up.
- GE crashing of MiGs and Alec/Onatopp in helicopter from train.
- TWINE helicopter explosion.

I won't argue with any of the first four in your list. I don't remember feeling that the GE or TWINE examples stood out as poor effects. I'll have to give those another look.

heartbroken_mr_drax · May 2016

Yeah the final two are very similar to the first two where it's obvious that they're models.

MilleniumForce · May 2016

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the helicopter crash after the bike chase in TND - tpyou can tell it's a model, the figures don't even move!

The worst practical effects in Bond

Comments