No Time to Die Without CGI! [SPOILER ALERT]
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 сер 2024
- Get some cool drag & drop VFX here! ? www.famefocus.... ?
The 'Bond' Film mantra is "Get as much as "in-camera" as you can and use VFX for what you can't", this meant filming in 7 different countries, including Italy and Jamaica, building some complex sets and rigs, and executing some incredible stunts and special effects. But even so, No Time To Die still required 4 different VFX vendors and 1487 VFX shots. VFX FTW!
Support me by getting it on any of these sites :P
Get it on iTunes: ► apple.co/2ENGfu9 ◄
Listen on Spotify: ► spoti.fi/3boTfCl ◄
Buy it on Amazon: ► amzn.to/2QVJZfk ◄
We hope this video left you "shaken and not stirred" (Yes! I finally got that in there!)
Please give us a like if you enjoyed this video, don't forget the links to the music in this video are right here:
Read more here: www.famefocus.com
Follow us on Twitter: / focusfame
This is the perfect example of: the best cgi are the ones you "can't" see.
Öhm...die beste Lüge ist, die man nicht bemerkt - ist das jetzt ein kompliment?
Um...the best lie is one that goes unnoticed - now is that a compliment?
@@isabelladestegonzaga5529 This has nothing to do with lying tho..... Its about movie effects.
@@tjeerdtrekkie1030 ;
Wenn man Effekte von realen Bildern nicht mehr unterscheiden kann - wo ist der Unterschied ?
If you can no longer distinguish effects from real images - what's the difference?
Ist das eine Vorbereitung für die Leute, die
sich mit den Tricks der zukünftigen Politik abfinden mässen?
Is that a preparation for the people who
have to put up with the tricks of future politics?
Mit diesen Filmen wird Geld verdient!
Durch sie werden einige Leute sehr reich.
Das ist verlockend - auch für andere, die nicht in der Filmbranche arbeiten.
These movies make money!
It´s make some people very rich.
Thats tempting - even for others who don't work in the movie business.
@@isabelladestegonzaga5529 Can you stop using 2 languages? You replies are unreadeble Im sorry. Just choose 1
@@tjeerdtrekkie1030 ,
:D Okay )
At this point it's almost certain to me, that there are absolutely no boundaries for nowadays cinematography. Also the budget of some movies seems to be only a little lower than infinite. Just wow!
@@ohio that's actually quite right and You've got a point. But I guess that one's on the fans. People are always gonna look for something (like money) or someone (like celebrities) to worship. It's kind of a 'herd' thing...
So, if tomorrow’s actors will become 100% Computer Generated, I doubt the audience will ever be informed of their heroes’ full virtuality. After all, haven’t all Gods always been a mere illusion perpetuated with the complicity of the highest priests (whatever the religion)? It’s the very people, the helpless community of common men and women, who do want - and possibly need somehow - to keep worshipping idols, i.e. iconic models - ….Supermen. I’ve never been a believer, personally, but it’s the way I’d kind of put it in the end, at age 66.
@@ohio When I am a fan of a fictional character like James Bond, why shouldn't I be a fan of the actor who plays him?
Worshiping is maybe a lot more than being a fan... But without people who are really into those fictional characters the movie making itself will be worthless
and yet nearly 90% of the movies are horrible
@@ohioAI vtubers, and some AI Singer in Japan, people still like them
The level of detail to get things " just right" is mind boggling, especially when a lot of work is involved to alter something seemingly trivial that the viewer won't notice anyway. Fascinating.
yeah it's almost like they get paid for it...
@@alexrekzu4079 Or maybe they care? You dont do a good job just because you get paid.
@@simonrockstream you have a point. take care
The whole point in most of these examples is so that you _don't_ notice. It wouldn't seem so trivial if you could see what was originally shot. It would be laughable.
@@simonrockstream Sadly, you're right, and bad CGI is often seen even in AAA Blockbusters.
That's why there's this rumor that practical effects are better than digital ones, which is not true. Because if the digital effects are done well, you can't tell them from reality.
Imagine if they spent half as much energy on the story as these awesome effects.
That only we can imagine
Exactly! My god it was an awful film.
@@arthurlongshanks cry more
This reminds me of when Peter Jackson waited hours for a cloud to cover the sun over a wreath-covered statue head for the Lord of the Rings shoot.
The shoes is what really stood out to me Lol
This movie is basically "Nevermind, the CGI guy will fix it".
if only they had spent half as much on writing...
Facts.
Yep, plot was so mediocre, maybe due to them k!lling off a white straight man to replace him with a short-haired black chick. 😑😑
yep
@@henryjohnson-ville3834 very dissapointing overall
@@jmdeking I was thinking if they wanted to go woke but NOT full woke, they should have casted Idris Elba, he's a buff handsome black dude from UK.
@2:09 Bond DOES fire his gun in the NTTD gunbarrel sequence.
There's clearly a puff of smoke that comes out of his Walther.
And you can see the shell eject after the bullet is fired.
@@eddiepasa4173 Yes, but he misses ☺
@@Ricks_Shorts This is one way to interpret that, but I wouldn't be so sure it was meant as a hidden spoiler. Having blood trickle down the screen would need a different transition to the opening scene - I think it is fair to say that this was at least one reason they did it that way.
Yeah, plus he says there's no blood or gun wobbling in NTTD unlike all the other ones. But there's no gun wobbling in ANY of the Craig gunbarrels; and the no blood part is obviously to do the reflection effect transition into the opening shot.
This gives you a much different perspective of the production's grandeur... I'm speechless! Seeing that something so realistic it possible but we still get bad CGI is just a mere representation of the motion picture's budget and/or talent. The tech for ultra realism is already here!
@@CalebBerman doesn't exist. Don't waste your time with cults
I think VFX today is just awesome, unfortunately film makers rely far too much on visuals over story however, that is why you end up with films like this where no amount of VFX will save it from being instantly forgettable.
IT: How much of CGI you want?
Director: YES
I must say the CGI looks pretty good.
Honestly while watching the movie i had no idea how much CGI was in it. Maybe i wasn't looking for it but damn that's incredible they integrated it so well.
So principle photography has become a sketch for CG artists. That is, if you have the budget.
It would seem so, as if sketching a basic outline of how the director wants to film, and then use CG to color it in. The works are amazing!
This, Dune and Free Guy were nominated for best cgi and it has me thinking about how to value special effects.
The best CGI is the CGI the audience don't know is there
Special effects and CGI aren’t the same thing
AFAIK there is no Oscar's award for CGI, only special effects.
@@panzerveps Wrong, the Oscar is for ‘Visual Effects’, not special effects.
Special effects is generally regarded as stuff done in camera, on set. Visual Effects is post production and usually CGI, although it can also be optical effects.
@@TheBroz Yep. Special Effects are like explosions, car crashes and so on that are done in the real life.
Extraordinary. I worked as a compositor for a BAFTA winning post studio and had no clue as to the extent and complexity of VFX in this movie.Thanks for such an interesting and informative video.
I just found your channel and I'm loving the recognition the post crew get here! A really important one to cover, in my opinion, will be Everything Everywhere All At Once. Post visual effects were handled by a team of 5 people over the course of a year and a half, I'd love to see as much about the post of this film as possible! Also highly recommend the film to anyone!
Does this mean they can redo the ending and not kill Bond? That would be great.
There is an alternate ending that he escapes on a raft.
That would undo the endless attack on everything traditional and good.
@@SHNASTTV So have they actually killed off the James Bond character, then?
As in, James Bond, agent 007?
To be replaced by a what?
Black, trans, dyslexic, non lethal Mary Jane?
wait, they killed the Bond?
@@occasionalmotorcycling you b*stards!
It becomes less and less filmmaking and more and more video game footage.
The thumbnail is legendary. This is what I thought as a younger me haha
In no time to die 007 gets bombed, James bombed
Wish they could have spent a part of the VFX budget on a good story
Ha ha, so true!
In "The man with the golden gun" the jump over the creek was made by a real car and driver! They needed no fakes at that time! In "The spy who loved me" the ski scene was made by real skiers. The same in "For your eyes only"!
Completely agree. CGI is the end of cinematic thrills and real action!
Yeah, and all driving scenes were accomplished by much more convincing rear projection technique, who the hell invented blue screens?
And as mentioned in this video, a lot of the stunts in No Time To Die were really done.
It's just some parts were too dangerous (martial arts in heels), too expensive to redo (waiting for the grass to regrow or wait for perfect snow), or just not practical (reshoot one shot with a Land Rover instead of a motorbike).
@@andrewaboulton that was one of the fun things with bond film, if you see it on screen, the was a real one in front of the film camera somewhere , it some cases it may have only been a model, probley a fully working prop car / gun, that did everything need for that seen in the film? 😞
The CGI makes for amazing scenes of course, but since James Bond was killed off, that leaves a huge question mark whether I will be interested in the franchise going forward.
As someone who is studying CGI in my own time for future game ideas. I love the heavy research ya cover in this channel. Interesting stuff to take notes on. :) if ya haven't covered it already i'd love for ya to tackle practical effects on the Now You See me Franchise if possible.
I also studied CGI for videogames, now I’m in the part of making them. Don’t be too perfectionist is the best I can recommend. ¡Keep working hard! 👊🏻
Okay that car rig is genius
And the Oscar goes to after effects…
Yes. I did enjoy this video.
I miss real films that look legit like it was actually believable and the stunts were legit all gone a bit mental now. I find myself going “yeh ok 🙄” a lot
Movies like the new top gun!
Really didn't realize it was car CGI. Wow!
Your thumbnails make me laugh every time. Cheers from LA
Wow, that was really impressive to watch. It's crazy how much work goes into all this.. Such a pity that an interesting story is missing.
What do you mean??? Duckface had a duckling he didn't know he had then failed to duck!
@@____uncompetative 😂😂
(1:15) They may well have overlaid CG snow on real trees but in the example shown they clearly replaced the whole trees.
Good thing the movie spent so much time and money on special effects, so they don't spoil the story, where James Bond dies.
I had a photography professor who once said "CGI is not art" Yeaahhhh.... that holds up well lol
Professors usually stay locked in their time period, and say all kinds of ignorant things.
Aaaand it all looked a bit naff IMO. It didn't help that it was a poor Bond film, but the overuse of CGI- even when it's just replacing grass or adding snow to trees- gives films a strange, unearthly quality that makes everything seem a bit weightless. Don't get me wrong, CG can be used well and I don't have anything against it per-se, but that kind of augmented cinematography can go overboard and ruin in the action, for me at least.
The problem with the grass is it would be very difficult to create without CGI: sure, you could use motion capture rigs and film a clean plate before the vehicles arrived, but then you've got the problem of the initial churning up - and you can't guarantee the vehicles will execute the stunt perfectly on the first take.
Director: Ah we'll just do it in post with CG
VFX staff: Groan
"But its the subtle details like this that really immerse the audience into the scene making the story even more believable" If they had spent the same amount of time on the script, as they did putting snow back on the trees, maybe then this film wouldn't have been the complete waste of time, as a "Bond" film I completely disown it, as a stand alone thriller its nothing more than average common Hollywood fare.
I was under the impression that the Bond movies tried to shoot everything in-camera. But I guess a lot has changed over the years.
I;ve heard it said that the best use of CGI is when you don't notice it was ever used and this shows some great examples. Although it also shows why the budgets of the Bond films has ballooned enormously since Goldeneye back in 1995.
The one that surprised me was the high heels.
Now this is how CGI should be used unlike the jarring visual mess that was _Die Another Day_
Also 2:04 🤯
Well, it was…….2002, but, still, yes, maybe the cloaked car was the only good CGI in that film..
Looks like they forgot the detail of human breath in the cold environment though? I have a feeling Bond will not be Bond as we know it in the next one. I think this last film was an exercise in pushing the reset button.
This is Marvel level of VFX in a Bond movie! I'm impressed, and more so that I didn't notice it!
That Land Rover chase sequence never felt settled and understand now
I would like to see the digital effects for The Batman.
The law of diminishing returns was in full effect in this movie.
I had to watch this movie on Christmas Day a year or two ago. My old lady said we'd just be going to her gran's for Christmas dinner and we'd only be there an hour or two. Well, no, they all decided to watch this movie BEFORE dinner and I ended up being at her gran's house for FIVE FREAKING HOURS. That's a deal breaker for me. I would have dumped her on the spot, but I can't because she pays half of the rent and the rent is too damn high.
Your real life story was x100 better than this movie's story! Oh and I appreciate your honesty regarding your wife 💀🤣.
"No Time to Die" turns into plenty of time for CGI.
I hate that they overuse CGI in most films now. even though i might not notice it here and i can feel something is off especally in chase scenes cause the cars never look like they are reacting weill with the speed and damage etc
yeah one scary bad guy is more scary than 15. after the good guy kills number 10 the remaining 5 should give up and regroup.
The way you pronounced CG I got me a laugh😂
2:20 now play it with 0,25x speed, and it will become obvious: first rocket fall into the first cave, second into the second, and finally third into the third, Bond persists secure, he only sees a blast...
Daniel Craig and the filmmakers have said that they made it as obvious as they could that he is indeed dead and had absolutely no way to survive. We never actually see where the third one lands and even then the shot is filled with fire right where he's standing You're obviously totally entitled to believe he survived. I'm just saying the filmmakers themselves have said that he didn't in interviews.
@@ben8692 Yeah but you can see on Q's screen that his heart stops beating. I think that this is clear enough
If you don't 'see' him die, then that's a stylistic choice not to be explicit. Death by rocket explosion is at best going to be undignified (flung through the air like a rag doll) and at worst extremely gory (dismembered body parts flying about). That wouldn't have been any way to present the demise of a heroic superspy.
@@miked1869 What I was trying to say the first time is that Bond basically becomes toast. You see the explosion rip through where he was standing. It's not an R-rated film so there's nothing explicit like dismemberment. I was basically saying that comment was reaching as far as his survival goes.
@@ben8692 I'm agreeing with you.
No Time To Cgi would have been a good final film...
But it felt cheap knowing 'Bond Will Return'
Howard Weber says > I`d love to see some of the rear ( and front ) projection in the older Bond films improved by CGI.
Imagine being the stunt rider who was just edited out of the forest scene. ugh I can't imagine.
Very interesting video! Thanks for telling about how it was done!
It's just a toilet roll gun barrel. Amazing
I think Top Gun Maverick makes good use of CGI when absolutely necessary (like when a missile strikes a plane) but you can't beat practical in camera photography. Movies using CGI like No Time To Die may look fine but I always tend to notice that the snow on the tree's etc isn't actually life-like because these things ALWAYS tend to have a fake sheen to them. The previous Bond movie SPECTRE with it's ridiculous amber colour correction completely ruins the look of the movie. Particularly when you see the original shots before the colours being added. Movies like Moonraker and Thunderball look far better and far more natural than the usual CGI fog we get in modern movies. I think CGI has ruined cinema to a degree. Over reliance on it in the most ridiculous ways when actually just filming a scene would look better most of the time. The chase scenes in Live And Let Die and The Living Daylights would be punctuated with CGI now. No majestic Glastron speedboat flying through the air. Just a CGI rendered lifeless model. Cinema is losing it's wonder.
If you're putting that much effort into analysing the background of a scene instead of enjoying the movie then there's something wrong with the movie, or you need to chill out
If you think that Top Gun Maverick only used CGI for missile strikes & ‘when absolutely necessary’ then you know zero about the making of Top Gun Maverick or the more subtle use of CGI in general
@@nathanthomas5133 Who said that?
Nice Video! love it.
Never knew it was so heavily CGI. No wonder 007 is more more and more unbelievable.
One problem I had with this film is that the bomb blast at the cemetery would have seriously injured him, if not kill him outright.
@Atomic Tulip And the same could be said about the grenade that landed on his feet.
You didn’t notice? He was wearing just enough plot armour underneath that suit.
CGI when implemented well can do magical things and save companies - Iron Man, 2008.
Whats a shell casting?
2:53
What's "d'breeze"? 🤣🤣🤣
I can imagine some cgi debris.
Shell castings?
aight imma head out.
If only they could funnel some of the cgi money to write a good script… simple, entertaining, coherent script…
Well, with all the delays they had allll the time in the world to do all of this. Big fan of the outcome :)
Is that a toilet paper tube? Upcycle, Rad
Incredible video and thanks for sharing. The only thing bad about it was the short clip insert at 1:32 with the guy on his cell phone in a movie theater, the biggest villain of them all. Recommend it be removed as also no one cares and in deflects from the video. Wish there were more videos like this of the Bond films. Thanks for sharing.
I don't think I noticed any of the CGI in this movie, and I have a keen eye for it through decades of video gaming. I love the advances in cinematography!
Unless the cgi is moving or in shot for extended periods you won't notice it. Cg snow for example isn't noticeable.
I wonder if actors have realised that one day CGI will soon render them obsolete as the technology will become good enough to facilitate this, no retakes required, no need to suffer over inflated egos and personality clashes, you can have Bruce Willis, John Wayne and Marilyn Monroe all starring in the same movie, you only need to write up the contract to use the likeness.
Honestly, I don't think so, at least not that soon. Have you seen the last Star Wars with digital Princess Leia?
It won't, unless we get bored of live action movies. People like to know they are watching real humans in those. I doubt actors will be megapaid superstars in the future though.
@@User87145 You have to follow the money though. It's the same as footballers, basketball players etc etc. The reason some actors get paid so much is because they are almost guaranteed to earn the production company a boat load of money. I get paid about 25% of my annual client billings. The really big actors are probably more like 5 or 10% of their box office earnings. I know their numbers are big, but everyone should be rewarded based on the money they earn for their bosses to an extent.
No Land Rovers were hurt in the making of this movie.
Really the " Truth is ugly".
Nicely done!
Loved the video. But I'm wondering where we can watch this VFX Breakdown from Framestore? Is it available anywhere?
This was hilarious 😆
Great video at a great tempo
Thats so awesome what cgi all can do.
or ruin
I didn't understand anything, but it was very interesting...🤣🤣🤣
insane video
wow, the difference between CGI and real is indistinguishable.
With CGI only the budget and imagination are the limits.
Killer CGI.
2:02 Untrue, for those who actually WERE paying attention, Craig literally fires the gun at 2:07.
Use CGI all you want to clean up a shot, but when you start using it to cover up the fact you faked the stunt, you've crossed a line. I love James Bond and other hard action movies for their great stunts. If I want fantasy, I'll watch a superhero movie.
Lighten up man it’s just a movie
Thats crazy
so its all "we'll fix it in post"
Well, that proves it: James Bond is still alive. The secret services were short on financing, so they had to create their own news footage through CGI showing how the world really does have these huge ominous threats, like, all the time.
Amazing!
How do you know so much about all these behind the scenes? Did you work on all the projects?? 😮
This dude was fired on set
All that amazing work and it was still a v poor jb.
3:45 gras? oh boy
@00:14 "C G...... EYE"
thumbnail: No time to die without CGI
me: is there lot of time to die with CGI???
I love how channels watermark content that isn't theirs.
"Don't steal the content I've stolen!" Hilarious.
With all of those CGI in modern movies it's another type of art, then it used to be. If people still call modern movies (with all those CGI) an art, then it's fair to say that video games is an art too.
I honestly thought those Range Rovers were real 😲
Good to know this.
Im guessing this is the main reason most outdoor shots had a very distracting 'smear' to them.
the breakdown shows the 3d models of the car, in the final shot are they all CG then or are they just using the cg reflections or something like that?
I'm a bit confused because I saw that footage of the Land Rover flipping in the behind the scenes material, I think they did it in reality.
Honestly, I think this video is overrepresenting the CG effects a bit
@@marcokrueger3399 You're right, the Land Rover flip did indeed happen, I've seen the same footage from multiple angles. It could be that the commentary wasn't specifically referring to that moment, but if so it makes the 'before/after' visual segments false and misleading