Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Bond 23 will be in 3D

This is topic Bond 23 will be in 3D in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=006018

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 01-12-2010, 06:13 PM:

Link

--------------------

The next instalment in the British spy movie franchise - which stars Daniel Craig as 007 - has been delayed because bosses reportedly want the movie to utilise new three-dimensional technology.

An insider said: "The 23rd Bond movie has been put back a few months and that has given them the time to prepare to film it in 3D. Everyone involved in the project is really excited because it will take the franchise in a new direction."

The as yet untitled project had already been delayed due to issues surrounding the impending sale of MGM Studios.

Producer Michael G. Wilson previously said: "Our timeline's a little up in the air, so we have to be flexible. We just don't know enough about the situation to comment, but we know it's uncertain."

Sam Mendes - who won an Oscar for his debut feature American Beauty - is also reportedly set to direct the film.

Sara Keene, Mendes's publicist, confirmed he had met representatives of the Bond franchise to discuss the possibility of him helming the movie but is adamant nothing has been finalised.

She said: "I can confirm that he has had a meeting, but Sam always has lots of projects on the table that he might direct next. Sam's method is to have a number of projects as possible next films and at some point confirm which film he's going to do."

BANG Showbiz

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-12-2010, 08:18 PM:

quote: John Wilson
it will take the franchise in a new direction

Oh good, because it really needed help...it was bombing out in 2-D. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Hillary Charles (Member # 769) on 01-12-2010, 08:31 PM:

It's good they didn't make the last one in 3D. Imagine what that opening car chase would have been like. [puke]

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 01-12-2010, 10:38 PM:

I refuse to ever see Bond in 3D.

Cubby Broccoli is spinning in his grave.

AJG

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-12-2010, 10:40 PM:

What make you think the next one will not have a car chase scene, Hillary? [Smile]

-Claude

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 01-12-2010, 11:23 PM:

quote: Aaron Garman
Cubby Broccoli is spinning in his grave.

Didn't he produce MOONRAKER? No Bond movie could be tackier than that. I don't care how many dimensions it's in.

What's wrong with 3D? Didn't AVATAR just shatter all of those misconceptions?

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 01-12-2010, 11:34 PM:

What misconceptions?

Posted by Jeremy Jorgenson (Member # 2989) on 01-12-2010, 11:43 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
What misconceptions?

Joe, look again, it's right there:

quote: Mike Schindler
all of those

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 01-13-2010, 01:12 AM:

That it's a gimmick, that it has no artistic merit, that it can only be used for certain movies... All of those misconceptions that lead people to believe that 3D somehow inherently makes a movie worse.

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 01-13-2010, 02:07 AM:

Just that they gotta do something with the "multiplane" look on the screen being the results on live action 3D movies..

Even the opening sections of "AVATAR", that were in live action, looked so "layered" as if these sequences where shot using the multiplane animation process...only gimp that got me with "AVATAR"

..they really need to perfect this section of 3D photography so it would look more natural ...

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 01-13-2010, 02:13 AM:

I just hope they pull the camera back from the action. I get annoyed by the tight camera work that is so popular in action movies right now. I have a hard time imagining how those same shots would look in 3D. I'm also nervous about the shaky cam techniques.

Posted by Phil Blake (Member # 2012) on 01-13-2010, 03:42 AM:

well it was just a matter of time, 3d the way of the the future ???

bond has tried to keep pace with technology cubby would have looked at all avenues to keep the bond $$$ rolling in.

we need to ask the question is avatar doing so well because of 3d or because of the story or both , in my case the all want 3d not 2d so this could be a good move for the bond franchise.

Posted by Michael Barry (Member # 237) on 01-13-2010, 06:17 AM:

I hope they choose to shoot it in dual 35MM so that it matches the lush visual look that is the hallmark of all the Bond films.

If they shoot on dual-video then when the movie is viewed in 2D it will have that slightly flat, video look that those cameras produce. That won't really be keeping the franchise in line visually.

Posted by Elise Brandt (Member # 5552) on 01-13-2010, 08:39 AM:

I don't know exactly what it is that makes my hackles rise thinking of Bond in 3D. I love 3D, I do... but... maybe it's the tight camerawork mentioned, I dread seeing that in 3D it's hard enough to watch as it is. It will take some skill, lots of it in fact, to get the feeling of seriously doing a film in 3D and not just adding the 3D as an afterthought. I can't explain it, sorry. Just feels... wrong.

Posted by Mike Schindler (Member # 1309) on 01-13-2010, 10:04 AM:

Theoretically speaking, shouldn't this movie be devoid of the visual problems associated with QUANTUM OF SOLACE? Since CASINO ROYALE didn't look like that, it seems relatively safe to assume that this is something Marc Forster brought to the table. Now that he's gone and Mendes is here, maybe it'll look more like ROAD TO PERDITION than the last movie.

Posted by Sam Graham (Member # 2889) on 01-13-2010, 10:46 AM:

A Sam Mendes Bond movie?

A Sam Mendes 3-D movie?

(Just thinking out loud...)

They could call the movie "23-D", which still wouldn't be as suggestive as "Octopussy" was...

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 01-13-2010, 11:06 AM:

I'm already hearing the trailer in my head. "It's 007...in a whole new dimension."

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 01-13-2010, 11:28 AM:

I wonder if Woody Allen will make his next movie in 3D.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 01-13-2010, 11:51 AM:

---and with DTS, SRD and possibly SDDS stereo Sound. [Smile]

-Claude

Posted by Jeremy Jorgenson (Member # 2989) on 01-13-2010, 07:36 PM:

Well, Woody could in fact do that - like mixing the digital soundtrack to mono, perhaps he could make a 3D film that happens to look 2D. [Big Grin]

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 01-13-2010, 08:00 PM:

The heck with Bond... I wanna see another Bourne movie in 3D, directed by Mr Shakey Cam... I wonder how many people will survive that?

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 01-13-2010, 11:07 PM:

Jeremy, in order to do it it true Woody style, it'd have to be a 2D picture, but require the glasses to see and it would flat just behind the surface of the screen, making it seem blurry without the glasses. Claude, all of the recent Woody Allen films I've handled have been SRD with stereo music.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-14-2010, 12:15 AM:

Nah, it would be in 3D, glasses required, but the 3 dimensional space would be in 2d "behind" the screen, so it just looked like a 2d movie with the screen about 200 feet from the viewer.

Posted by Jeremy Jorgenson (Member # 2989) on 01-14-2010, 12:50 AM:

Aren't you guys saying pretty much the same thing?

Anyway, I'm down for it, anybody have Woody's number? He could re-release Annie Hall and Manhattan 3D when the 6 Star Wars episodes and Titanic are released in 3D. Oh, actually The Purple Rose of Cairo might be a better option. [Smile]

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 01-14-2010, 01:01 AM:

[sleep]

Posted by Cameron Glendinning (Member # 3516) on 01-14-2010, 01:20 AM:

If only those zzz's were in 3D! [Big Grin]

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 01-14-2010, 03:19 AM:

Brad - yeah that's pretty much what I was saying, though it looks like I have a typo in my post. 3D 2D would be awesome.

Phil: 'sup?

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 01-14-2010, 03:26 AM:

Put your 3D glasses on Cameron.

[sleep]

Much better.

Posted by Hillary Charles (Member # 769) on 01-14-2010, 05:44 AM:

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
What make you think the next one will not have a car chase scene, Hillary?

-Claude

Oh, just about any car chase from the series would work in 3D (especially the older movies when they still respected the value of the camera mount), but NOT that chase from QoS!

I would hope that be taken into account should this rumor prove true.

quote: Jeremy Jorgenson
Oh, actually The Purple Rose of Cairo might be a better option.

The scene in which Jeff Daniels walks off the screen is actually one where 3D would actually be justified for narrative effect.

I WISH THE WHOLE WORLD WAS 3D!!!!!! [Big Grin]

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 01-14-2010, 03:09 PM:

Yeah, I'm sick of the world being 2D, especially when driving!

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 04-20-2010, 05:47 PM:

Delays, delays, delays...

James Bond film suspended amid MGM woes
April 21, 2010

Producers say work on the next James Bond film has been halted indefinitely because of uncertainty about the future of distributor Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc.

Producers Michael Wilson and Barbara Broccoli said development of the movie was suspended after MGM failed to find a buyer. They said late on Monday they did not know when work would resume.

MGM put itself up for sale after a slump in DVD sales and a lack of hits left it unable to manage a $US3.7 billion ($4 billion) debt.

Wilson and Broccoli's EON Productions has produced 22 Bond thrillers since 1962. The new film, known only as Bond 23, had been due for release in 2011 or 2012.

Bond actor Daniel Craig says he has confidence in the producers and looks forward to production resuming.

AP

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 04-21-2010, 05:07 PM:

quote: John Wilson
MGM put itself up for sale after a slump in DVD sales and a lack of hits left it unable to manage a $US3.7 billion ($4 billion) debt.

If they owned half their film library, you know, the one Warner owns now, I bet that could help pay off that debt.

AJG

Posted by Martin McCaffery (Member # 37) on 04-21-2010, 05:27 PM:

quote: Aaron Garman
If they owned half their film library, you know, the one Warner owns now, I bet that could help pay off that debt.

According to last week's Variety, the value of studios library have dropped about 50% in the last few years. Another bad sign for classics.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 04-21-2010, 06:48 PM:

Yep, all due to dropping DVD sales.

Now that theatrical is "king of the hill" again, how about some "exclusive content" for us? HAHAHAHAHAHA like that'll ever happen.

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 04-22-2010, 10:44 AM:

Bond in 3d conjurs up images of The Stewardesses in 3d. Louis

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 04-22-2010, 12:10 PM:

How can one of the most successful film franchises in history, which is still going strong worldwide, become dead in the water by its studio's financial problems? Wouldn't they be scrambling to get this movie made some way so they'd have some fresh income?

Posted by Hillary Charles (Member # 769) on 04-22-2010, 12:42 PM:

I'm not worried. There was a six year gap between "License to Kill" and "Goldeneye." Things will get sorted out, and I have every confidence in the words at the end of every one of those movies, "James Bond Will Return."

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 04-22-2010, 09:25 PM:

Louis B. Mayer and Cubby Broccoli are spinning in their graves.

AJG