That's very true, on telly Brosnan's films have made for TV vibe, in particular TWINE simply because of the number of TV actors: Carlyle, Coltrane, Cleese, Dench, Brosnan himself and even Sophie M is a bit muted.
When I watch Brosnan going over the cliff off the motorcycle, I notice that the plane does not go into a straight down nose dive, and that Brosnan did not jump off that far away from the plane. His head down dive seems as though it would have allowed him to catch up to the plane in the time frame in the film (and I noticed that the angle of the plane and his descent are still at an angle in the shot of him getting hold of the cockpit entrance, and not straight down). Since the plane's engine is running and it's still under power and has not stalled, it is basically diving at a powered angle of flight into the mountain ravine and not doing an uncontrolled spiralling nose dive, as it has only been off the cliff for almost twenty seconds and Brosnan has already caught the door opening at this moment in the fall. It then only takes him around fifteen seconds or so to get in the seat and pull the plane out of it's dive (and though from his POV shot out the window it appears he is heading straight down, he is actually still following the angle of the mountain, otherwise the plane would have crashed into the mountain side before getting near the bottom). Given how this sequenced is filmed, it never seemed to me too far out for a Bond action scene. For it to have worked, the runway and dam would have to be at least eight or nine thousand feet above the valley floor, given the thirty second or so time of the fall and recovery scene. The heightest altitude dam is the Grande Dixence Dam in Switzerland (8600 ft). If the Russians had something similar, I could see how this sequence would work. It would have been more plausible if Bond had used a base jumping parachute dive to escape (doesn't it look like he is wearing a base jumping pack on his back when he does the bungee jump?). As far as the Alex shooting - I always thought it had been a loaded blank too, and that the general had a real round chambered in front of it in order to fool Bond into thinking he was actually killing his friend. He could have planned on shooting at Bond with the first round and have it hit something, but since the soldier fired off his weapon, he found it a better opportunity to make it took like his whole pistol was loaded with live rounds by killing the soldier.
I know my whole article sounds like an irrational attempt at explaining how the PTS could really work, but I'm just trying to say that in the context of a Bond film and how they shot it, I didn't have a lot of problems with it. My main fault is when Brosnan goes from inside the plane door to the pilot seat, he ceases to be in free fall. I would have had him still floating inside the cockpit and shown him pull himself over to the seat and grabbing the stick, then cut to the plane heading down the mountain, then back to him strapping the seatbelt on and struggling with the stick.
Just for the sake of trivia, the plane is a Pilatus PC-6, which is noted for it's short take off and landing abilities, as well as its holding the world record for highest landing by a fixed wing aircraft, at 18,865 feet (5,750 m), on the Dhaulagiri glacier in Nepal.
Silhouette ManThe last refuge of a scoundrelPosts: 8,865MI6 Agent
When you look back at Goldeneye, there are serious issues/flaws within the PTS, yet seem to go unnoticed in many fans reviews. The opening despite having suspense and action is almost enough to fail the film! What with Trevelyan being shot at point-blank with the facility blown up - survives for later in the story. Also the most stupid scene ever with Bond flying into the plane, literally impossible. total nonsense. I mean granted the sky-dive on the dam was a great stunt. But why is this film liked by so many? For me it is not even a top-10 Bond film.Probably 14th on my list. I actually prefer TWINE to this film. Goldeneye is a middle of range action film.
This theme could apply also to Skyfall. What goes around comes around, as they say!
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
When you look back at Goldeneye, there are serious issues/flaws within the PTS, yet seem to go unnoticed in many fans reviews. The opening despite having suspense and action is almost enough to fail the film! What with Trevelyan being shot at point-blank with the facility blown up - survives for later in the story. Also the most stupid scene ever with Bond flying into the plane, literally impossible. total nonsense. I mean granted the sky-dive on the dam was a great stunt. But why is this film liked by so many? For me it is not even a top-10 Bond film.Probably 14th on my list. I actually prefer TWINE to this film. Goldeneye is a middle of range action film.
Are you kidding? Goldeneye has one of the best precredit sequences ever!
My big problem with the Goldeneye PTS is that Bond jumps thousands of feet down into a dam, and ends up escaping the facility which is built into the top of a mountain. Geographically, the two exteriors don't really match up. It's not impossible, but he would have had to do a lot of traveling. IIRC, Campbell jokes about it during the audio commentary.
My big problem with the Goldeneye PTS is that Bond jumps thousands of feet down into a dam, and ends up escaping the facility which is built into the top of a mountain. Geographically, the two exteriors don't really match up. It's not impossible, but he would have had to do a lot of traveling. IIRC, Campbell jokes about it during the audio commentary.
Actually this is explained in the opening video to Goldeneye Reloaded. game He jumps down the damn and makes his way up through the facility in the mountain. I've always though this.
Like the previous posts have pointed out, the main flaw in the Goldeneye PTS is how the location at the end when Bond is in the plane is completely different to when he jumps off the dam haha
In answer to your question it survives "such a flawed opening" because the rest of it is awesome. The action scenes are amazing, Brosnan is perfect as Bond whilst the supporting cast are also superb. In my opinion anyway )
"You are about to wake when you dream that you are dreaming"
Like the previous posts have pointed out, the main flaw in the Goldeneye PTS is how the location at the end when Bond is in the plane is completely different to when he jumps off the dam haha
In answer to your question it survives "such a flawed opening" because the rest of it is awesome. The action scenes are amazing, Brosnan is perfect as Bond whilst the supporting cast are also superb. In my opinion anyway )
Maybe repeated viewings have showed some faults in the PTS of GoldenEye but I'd rather remember the great time I had when I first saw it in the cinema. After 6 years Bond was back and he was back with a BANG! The bungee jump was fantastic (and a world record at the time) and Brosnan's introduction was pretty good. However I do think that the second shot of Brosnan's face should have been the first and they'd filmed around the fight in the toilet. The scenes with 006 are fast and brutal (the way 006 kills in cold blood shows he is different from Bond in the first minutes of the film). All of a sudden Alec is killed and we go into another action scene. I remember that the cinema audience on opening night had quite a laugh about the squeeky wheel. Bond goes after the plane, catches up with it and climbs in, "ahh all good, he'll throw out he pilot and fly off". But no, 007 is thrown out by the pilot and both are back on the runway while the plane drives towards the cliff. Bond grabs a bike and there he goes! Even Ourumov is laughing, he can't win. <<Fast forward>> Plane crashing..... silence...... plane pulling up towards the sky while the plant explodes. Huge cheer from the audience.
Yes, I understand the PTS is a piece of nonsense, but it is a great piece of nonsense!
I, for one, am consistently amazed that people pick the GE PTS as the one they can't believe. CmdrAtticus is right, Bond approaches the plane at an angle and it is there fore no harder to understand than a linebacker catching a running back going down the sidelines.(For the Europeans here, like one soccer player catching another. Sorry, don't know the position names!) It's not just about terminal velocity but angles and acceleration. The plane would have had flaps extended for take off, which would increase drag as well. All Bond did was attempt an intercept course. And succeeded, BTW.
As for Trevelyan's faked death, did no one notice the scars on his face at his reappearance? A glancing bullet wound to fool Bond with a blood puddle. Yes Ourumov was in on it, but Bond wouldn't be fooled by a blank. No blood spray.
As for the geographic's of the base, sure seemed like a lot of stairs. Who knows how many levels there are to a place like that. And we assume he entered the dam directly into the men's room, but he wouldn't have to. He could have followed passages for miles which were edited out of the film.
One more thing. IT'S BOND!!! Why do people whine about GE but are fine with all the other ridiculously impossible stuff he does. Isn't that the point? That it's not real but fun to watch?
I think Goldeneye is overrated because a lot of younger fans (Such as myself) grew up with the video game which ultimately lead us to watching the film and becoming Bond fans because of that film.
Quite honestly I enjoyed most of Connery and Moore's films over Goldeneye. I rank it pretty low although it was probably Brosnan's best film and probably the best Bond film from 95-06
As for the opening scene I agree with a lot of what is said here the plane bit was incredibly stupid and some of the geography doesn't make sense. Ourumov also by right should of killed Trevelayn with the bullet like he did to his own soldier
This theme could apply also to Skyfall. What goes around comes around, as they say!
Yes, let's open a 2011 topic to slag off Skyfall... 8-)
Don't get me wrong - I loved Skyfall. I've not criticised it - only pointing to a similarity between difficulties with the PTS. I'm sure you understand.
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
I watched GE on its opening night while I was in Cyprus and the bit in the opening where Bond gained control of the plane was greeted by thunderous applause
This theme could apply also to Skyfall. What goes around comes around, as they say!
Yes, let's open a 2011 topic to slag off Skyfall... 8-)
Don't get me wrong - I loved Skyfall. I've not criticised it - only pointing to a similarity between difficulties with the PTS. I'm sure you understand.
But I don't understand why you revive another old thread with a one line comment.
However, like I said in my previous post, the GE PTS might have been a bit far fetched, but I didn't notice it the first time.
it's no way a top-5 Bond film. that's ridiculous. If anything TWINE is arguably his best Bond film - and that is hardly known as one of the best in the series. Brosnan's films are fun, action-packed 90's films. But they do not compete with the classic films (1-16) or Casino Royale with Craig.
That is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. But I have GE as #3overall. And I know others who count it best overall.
It was cheered when bond gets the plane when I saw it in the cinema. Now if the OP says "He jumps off a dam, then is on top of a mountain - yea, that is a issue. It happens to be my fave bond film, and a lot of folks top five, as it has everything that most folks look forward to a bond film - A Dashing girl or two, neat gadgets, exotic locations, humor, great action sequences, and a James bond is the suave assassin who saves the world for Queen and country.
Yes, let's open a 2011 topic to slag off Skyfall... 8-)
Don't get me wrong - I loved Skyfall. I've not criticised it - only pointing to a similarity between difficulties with the PTS. I'm sure you understand.
But I don't understand why you revive another old thread with a one line comment.
However, like I said in my previous post, the GE PTS might have been a bit far fetched, but I didn't notice it the first time.
Because I was actually searching for something else entirely and I stumbled across this thread, the opening popst of which reminded me rather of the current criticisms of Skyfall PTS (which I don't necessarily share, by the way). You make reviving a thread sound like a criminal offence, but it happens all of the time here on AJB.
"The tough man of the world. The Secret Agent. The man who was only a silhouette." - Ian Fleming, Moonraker (1955).
Aside from the airplane and an instance of poor editing (I believe Ourumov's gun actually changes when he "shoots" Alec Trevelyan, but that would be giving away a bit too much, wouldn't it?), I didn't mind the PTS. The rest of the movie makes up for a great deal of it, as well.
The first bullet Ourumov fires ("killing" Alec) is out of a Makarov PM with red plastic wrap-around grips. The second bullet he fires (killing the soldier) is out of the same model of gun (a Makarov PM) with something that has a black backstrap. It's difficult to determine exactly what grips he's got on there (wood? black plastic?), but whatever they are, they do not have the gun's red backstrap. We only see that during Trevelyan's mock execution. Hence why I chalk it up to awkward camerawork. I'm convinced they intentionally switched the guns, but never made it clear.
Okay, from the video, here are pictures of Ourumov's two Makarov PM automatic pistols. Oddly, the "Trevelyan Gun" is the one you'd expect him to use. It's a stock Soviet Makarov with no design alterations whatsover...
Take note of the dark red plastic wrap-around grips. If you watch the scene for a bit, you can tell the grips wrap-around completely.
And here's the gun he uses to shoot the rather unfortunate Soviet Army Private...
Yes, I realize it's, umm, slightly out of focus (3:42 on the video if you don't want to take my word for it), but hold on. Why is the gun's backstrap behind the brown-colored grips very clearly black? Ourumov is wearing a leather glove, so telling the color of the grips is actually kinda difficult. Still, from this photo, you can tell they're the same dark red they were in the photo above. So why does the backstrap not match that? Why is it black? You'd have to paint it black, but that's not unheard-of. Heck, go halfway down on wikipedia's page on the Makarov and you can see that very modification! You can barely...and I do mean barely...make it out in this photo, too. For further confirmation, watch at 3:42 on the youtube link I posted above. Watch as Ourumov fires the gun and the soldier goes down. You can CLEARLY tell the backstrap is painted black.
I'm guessing that the second gun is Ourumov's personal sidearm...who's to challenge him from modifying it as he sees fit?...and the first gun was merely one he procured from a quartermaster and loaded with one blank and one squib load. I imagine they probably intended for the gun to "jam" and for him to draw another gun...the second one loaded with real bullets...until they figured out that this would PROBABLY stick in the audience's mind.
interesting. the filmmakers should have made the switch a tad more obvious.
aren't blanks also lethal at close range ?
kind of an elaborate plan to fool Bond since they weren't expecting him to leave the facility alive ? Or was Ourumov trying to fool all the Russian guards as well ?
At any rate, the Facility Level was so fun on Nintendo 64 that it makes up for any short comings of the film itself.
My current 10 favorite:
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
Basically what chrisisall said, but it also depends on the load. If it didn't, there'd be a whole lot of dead actors...
Or was Ourumov trying to fool all the Russian guards as well ?
Okay, so you're a Soviet Colonel who already is being carefully monitored. Presumably, the KGB and/or GRU has somebody (or multiple people) in the ranks to make sure you're loyal if you're in charge of a facility as secret as the one Ourumov was heading up. Do you really wanna screw that up? I honestly don't think it was even designed to fool Bond alone (although it was a great contingency plan in case he did make it out...something Trevelyan had to be counting on knowing Bond's capabilities).
interesting. the filmmakers should have made the switch a tad more obvious.
Possibly. But then don't you start suspecting something's amiss with Alec Trevelyan? If I'm a moviegoer and Ourumov's gun jams on the second round and he just happens to take a new one out, there's a reason that happened. It is a bit ironically called Chekhov's Gun in literary theory. There has to be a reason as to why the gun jams; it has to be revisited. I'm guessing they were caught between a rock and a hard place: don't make the switch obvious and Trevelyan turning out bad comes as much more of a surprise. Make the switch obvious and the audience starts thinking.
Comments
Roger Moore 1927-2017
I know my whole article sounds like an irrational attempt at explaining how the PTS could really work, but I'm just trying to say that in the context of a Bond film and how they shot it, I didn't have a lot of problems with it. My main fault is when Brosnan goes from inside the plane door to the pilot seat, he ceases to be in free fall. I would have had him still floating inside the cockpit and shown him pull himself over to the seat and grabbing the stick, then cut to the plane heading down the mountain, then back to him strapping the seatbelt on and struggling with the stick.
Just for the sake of trivia, the plane is a Pilatus PC-6, which is noted for it's short take off and landing abilities, as well as its holding the world record for highest landing by a fixed wing aircraft, at 18,865 feet (5,750 m), on the Dhaulagiri glacier in Nepal.
This theme could apply also to Skyfall. What goes around comes around, as they say!
Are you kidding? Goldeneye has one of the best precredit sequences ever!
Actually this is explained in the opening video to Goldeneye Reloaded. game He jumps down the damn and makes his way up through the facility in the mountain. I've always though this.
In answer to your question it survives "such a flawed opening" because the rest of it is awesome. The action scenes are amazing, Brosnan is perfect as Bond whilst the supporting cast are also superb. In my opinion anyway
Maybe repeated viewings have showed some faults in the PTS of GoldenEye but I'd rather remember the great time I had when I first saw it in the cinema. After 6 years Bond was back and he was back with a BANG! The bungee jump was fantastic (and a world record at the time) and Brosnan's introduction was pretty good. However I do think that the second shot of Brosnan's face should have been the first and they'd filmed around the fight in the toilet. The scenes with 006 are fast and brutal (the way 006 kills in cold blood shows he is different from Bond in the first minutes of the film). All of a sudden Alec is killed and we go into another action scene. I remember that the cinema audience on opening night had quite a laugh about the squeeky wheel. Bond goes after the plane, catches up with it and climbs in, "ahh all good, he'll throw out he pilot and fly off". But no, 007 is thrown out by the pilot and both are back on the runway while the plane drives towards the cliff. Bond grabs a bike and there he goes! Even Ourumov is laughing, he can't win. <<Fast forward>> Plane crashing..... silence...... plane pulling up towards the sky while the plant explodes. Huge cheer from the audience.
Yes, I understand the PTS is a piece of nonsense, but it is a great piece of nonsense!
As for Trevelyan's faked death, did no one notice the scars on his face at his reappearance? A glancing bullet wound to fool Bond with a blood puddle. Yes Ourumov was in on it, but Bond wouldn't be fooled by a blank. No blood spray.
As for the geographic's of the base, sure seemed like a lot of stairs. Who knows how many levels there are to a place like that. And we assume he entered the dam directly into the men's room, but he wouldn't have to. He could have followed passages for miles which were edited out of the film.
One more thing. IT'S BOND!!! Why do people whine about GE but are fine with all the other ridiculously impossible stuff he does. Isn't that the point? That it's not real but fun to watch?
Yes, let's open a 2011 topic to slag off Skyfall... 8-)
Quite honestly I enjoyed most of Connery and Moore's films over Goldeneye. I rank it pretty low although it was probably Brosnan's best film and probably the best Bond film from 95-06
As for the opening scene I agree with a lot of what is said here the plane bit was incredibly stupid and some of the geography doesn't make sense. Ourumov also by right should of killed Trevelayn with the bullet like he did to his own soldier
The only bad bit is the opening bits of the sex with onnatop with the naval officer, which goes for laughs.
I'd happily pass a couple of hours watching it again, and again, and again ...........
Don't get me wrong - I loved Skyfall. I've not criticised it - only pointing to a similarity between difficulties with the PTS. I'm sure you understand.
But I don't understand why you revive another old thread with a one line comment.
However, like I said in my previous post, the GE PTS might have been a bit far fetched, but I didn't notice it the first time.
That is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. But I have GE as #3overall. And I know others who count it best overall.
Because I was actually searching for something else entirely and I stumbled across this thread, the opening popst of which reminded me rather of the current criticisms of Skyfall PTS (which I don't necessarily share, by the way). You make reviving a thread sound like a criminal offence, but it happens all of the time here on AJB.
These threads are getting hilarious.
PS - Bond is not real
As far as SILHOUETTE MAN reviving an old thread...he can do whatever he wants. His contributions to AJB are most welcome!
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTYDYMLVPb0&list=HL1363311038&feature=mh_lolz
The first bullet Ourumov fires ("killing" Alec) is out of a Makarov PM with red plastic wrap-around grips. The second bullet he fires (killing the soldier) is out of the same model of gun (a Makarov PM) with something that has a black backstrap. It's difficult to determine exactly what grips he's got on there (wood? black plastic?), but whatever they are, they do not have the gun's red backstrap. We only see that during Trevelyan's mock execution. Hence why I chalk it up to awkward camerawork. I'm convinced they intentionally switched the guns, but never made it clear.
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Being the gun (and car...) nitpicker guy in movies, I try.
Take note of the dark red plastic wrap-around grips. If you watch the scene for a bit, you can tell the grips wrap-around completely.
And here's the gun he uses to shoot the rather unfortunate Soviet Army Private...
Yes, I realize it's, umm, slightly out of focus (3:42 on the video if you don't want to take my word for it), but hold on. Why is the gun's backstrap behind the brown-colored grips very clearly black? Ourumov is wearing a leather glove, so telling the color of the grips is actually kinda difficult. Still, from this photo, you can tell they're the same dark red they were in the photo above. So why does the backstrap not match that? Why is it black? You'd have to paint it black, but that's not unheard-of. Heck, go halfway down on wikipedia's page on the Makarov and you can see that very modification! You can barely...and I do mean barely...make it out in this photo, too. For further confirmation, watch at 3:42 on the youtube link I posted above. Watch as Ourumov fires the gun and the soldier goes down. You can CLEARLY tell the backstrap is painted black.
I'm guessing that the second gun is Ourumov's personal sidearm...who's to challenge him from modifying it as he sees fit?...and the first gun was merely one he procured from a quartermaster and loaded with one blank and one squib load. I imagine they probably intended for the gun to "jam" and for him to draw another gun...the second one loaded with real bullets...until they figured out that this would PROBABLY stick in the audience's mind.
aren't blanks also lethal at close range ?
kind of an elaborate plan to fool Bond since they weren't expecting him to leave the facility alive ? Or was Ourumov trying to fool all the Russian guards as well ?
At any rate, the Facility Level was so fun on Nintendo 64 that it makes up for any short comings of the film itself.
1. GE 2. MR 3. OP 4. TMWTGG 5. TSWLM 6. TND 7. TWINE 8.DN 9. GF 10. AVTAK
#1.TLD/LTK 2.TND 3.GF 4.GE 5.DN 6.FYEO 7.FRWL 8.TMWTGG 9.TWINE 10.YOLT/QOS
Basically what chrisisall said, but it also depends on the load. If it didn't, there'd be a whole lot of dead actors...
Okay, so you're a Soviet Colonel who already is being carefully monitored. Presumably, the KGB and/or GRU has somebody (or multiple people) in the ranks to make sure you're loyal if you're in charge of a facility as secret as the one Ourumov was heading up. Do you really wanna screw that up? I honestly don't think it was even designed to fool Bond alone (although it was a great contingency plan in case he did make it out...something Trevelyan had to be counting on knowing Bond's capabilities).
Possibly. But then don't you start suspecting something's amiss with Alec Trevelyan? If I'm a moviegoer and Ourumov's gun jams on the second round and he just happens to take a new one out, there's a reason that happened. It is a bit ironically called Chekhov's Gun in literary theory. There has to be a reason as to why the gun jams; it has to be revisited. I'm guessing they were caught between a rock and a hard place: don't make the switch obvious and Trevelyan turning out bad comes as much more of a surprise. Make the switch obvious and the audience starts thinking.