BOURNE IN WATERLOO

Strangeways

I saw Bourne III over the weekend. WOW! Awsome, that's all I can say.

Can anyone tell me if they actually filmed the Waterloo set piece in the station or on a stage in a studio. Sure looked real to me, but if it was then how the hell did they get permission for that? Fantastic!

My only complaint.....the UK police were portrayed as using whistles! I mean, I know they don't have guns, but they are not the Keystone cops!!!

taity

No no, that was filmed at the real station. Shot around 10 am when the least number of people were there. It's a very impressive sequence. On the DVD they have a small featurette about how they filmed it - watch it.

My one problem with Bourne is that when they film somewhere like London or Paris they make it look so dreary. The producers say somewhere or other that thats the intention, to make locations like that look real. I feel that its kinda pointless going to some impressive location and not making it look impressive. They may as well have filmed in an LA backlot

Moonraker 5

taity wrote:

My one problem with Bourne is that when they film somewhere like London or Paris they make it look so dreary. The producers say somewhere or other that thats the intention, to make locations like that look real. I feel that its kinda pointless going to some impressive location and not making it look impressive. They may as well have filmed in an LA backlot

Precisely the opposite with me, I have to admit.

London, Paris, Moscow; they all have iconic landmarks and impressive cityscapes, as well as glamour and tradition. But 99% of the people who live and work in these cities interact with next to none of that. London and Paris (and I'm quite sure that this applies to most if not all 'impressive' cities) are historic capitals, but also functioning financial and industrial centres, with a considerable commuter population and derelict, run down areas just yards away from some of the major landmarks. That's what I like about Bourne, it shows the grubby underbelly of these cities that everyone who lives and works there sees everyday.

Sure St Paul's Cathedral and St Mary's Axe might be on the impressive London skyline, but in the Bourne films you see it how he would see it.

The glamourous, colourful and exotic; that can be left to Bond.

Lazenby880

Moonraker 5 wrote:

That's what I like about Bourne, it shows the grubby underbelly of these cities that everyone who lives and works there sees everyday.

The glamourous, colourful and exotic; that can be left to Bond.

Agreed 100 per cent Moonie. As much as I enjoy seeing the Eiffel Tower in A View to a Kill, I also enjoy the fact that the Bourne films portray the *real* cities of London, Paris, Berlin, Madrid and Moscow. Those cities are great and historic capitals, however the welcome realism in the Bournes dictates that we see them as the ordinary people do.

taity

I suppose it's an agree to disagree situation. I do think that the Bourne movies have a place in cinema showing how unappealing major cities are.

That said, whenever I watch Bond's arrivial in Venice in Casino Royale, I think to myself "damn, that looks like a place I want to go to." Now while I know that the producers probably made it look better than it really was, it was still nice to see on film.

Bourne has some great action scenes and is a very nice film, but at the end of the day I want a glamourous location.