I would imagine there would have been a similar "uproar" when it was announced that St Albans would double for Hamburg in Tomorrow Never Dies...
... and Brent Cross. Hampshire as the Korean DMZ (typecasting) in DAD. Rural Sussex as the Hayward fault in AVTAK.
I would be very pleased for Bond to be back in Sussex (even though it will be pretending to be somewhere else again).
To be honest, this all smacks of the producers simply sending a second unit down to cut the scene-setting shots while the talent stay within easy reach of the restaurants and theatres of the west end. Why ever not?!
Hope the budget hasn't been cut back too much. Just been to see MI4 with a budget of something like $165million, and leaving aside Tom Cruise's astronomical salary, it is all up there on the screen - Moscow, Dubai and Mumbia. These are the kind of locations Bond needs to be in.
On another note it was nice to see India looking like a modern country rather than the Rudyard Kipling fantasy as shown in Octopusssy.
MI4 looked Fantastic some great locations, and I think I remember reading
T Cruise took a pay cut to make sure it got made. ( I'm sure he got a big cut
of the profits though ) )
"I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
The more I read about these "budget cuts" the more I believe it to be a total fiction made up by the Tabs. There is nothing unusual in Bond films when it comes to mixing and matching real location footage, substitute locations and studio footage...
As usual and maybe even more so, EON is very tight lipped about "Skyfall"other than the title, the cast, and the thinest plot synopsis ever. None of the actors appear to be having affairs with each other so the tabs really don't have anything to write about...so they wil take nothing and try create a story about it.
I don't agree with those who said that a smaller budget will be better because it would force them to be more creative. It will just take some of the realism and exoticism of local shooting (Bali, etc).
I think it's sad, but hopefully it's going to be a good movie.
Maybe they just figured that they don't need to spend that much since everybody will still go see the movie...
If you can't trust a Swiss banker, what's the world come to?
Well they are certainly shooting the big city shots on location in Shanghai etc according to MI6. The actors won't be traveling there but I'm sure when blended into the "on the street" actor footage we will all be fooled like we have been in the past.
In terms of budget cuts... Halle Berry and Hugo Weaving had a week's worth of filming in Glasgow city centre for Cloud Atlas, doubling for early 70's San Francisco. No Golden Gate, no tram cars, but plenty of sharp hills. Ship in some American cars of the time, replace the street signs, load the shops with false signage and window displays, spray the roads wet to make it look like it had been raining (I know, in Scotland...) and is anyone going to know? George Square in the centre of the city was also overhauled to look like Philadelphia when Brad Pitt was in town a month prior filming major action sequences for World War Z. The attention to detail, on stop lights, newspaper stands, street names, bus stops, was incredible. Will anyone notice bar the residents of the city it was filmed in? Don't think so.
Both reasons? For World War Z, it was cheaper to make up Glasgow to look like Philadelphia than to film in the actual city because of tax. For Cloud Atlas, it's a German production and filmed entirely in the UK and Germany to save on costs rather than globe trot.
Die Another Day was let down with poor 'locations'. Hong Kong looked like the cardboard cut out it was, Halle Berry's dive into the ocean from Los Organos was against a cardboard blue sky background, and the ice palace locations looked like polystyrene...and that's not even starting on 'that' surfing scene. Yes, ropey set pieces and awful CGI, but then Casino Royale came along. That Skyfleet aircraft was complete CGI. Much of the villa collapsing into the Venice canal system was CGI, and Daniel Craig didn't set foot in Montenegro or Miami. But it was all there on the screen. It's HOW it's done, is what's important.
Moonraker 5, I agree entirely, that's a six Vesper thumbs up from me.
I just thought it an interesting cut in budget, and Bognor an interesting town to choose (good on you, to the locals and businesses of Bognor Regis though) after the press conference saying "it'll all be up there on the screen and does it look like we are cutting budgets…" I suppose that cast doesn't come cheap even for Eon.
In a combination of tributes to Bond, I am currently polishing my Church's for a mate's wedding tomorrow, and giving the Rolex a quick rinse.
Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much.
Oscar Wilde
Comments
... and Brent Cross. Hampshire as the Korean DMZ (typecasting) in DAD. Rural Sussex as the Hayward fault in AVTAK.
I would be very pleased for Bond to be back in Sussex (even though it will be pretending to be somewhere else again).
To be honest, this all smacks of the producers simply sending a second unit down to cut the scene-setting shots while the talent stay within easy reach of the restaurants and theatres of the west end. Why ever not?!
http://youtu.be/p2_YtTBhQMo
On another note it was nice to see India looking like a modern country rather than the Rudyard Kipling fantasy as shown in Octopusssy.
T Cruise took a pay cut to make sure it got made. ( I'm sure he got a big cut
of the profits though )
http://youtu.be/PhuAh43sYZ8
we'll have Bond being chased by a string of Bond girls.
As usual and maybe even more so, EON is very tight lipped about "Skyfall"other than the title, the cast, and the thinest plot synopsis ever. None of the actors appear to be having affairs with each other so the tabs really don't have anything to write about...so they wil take nothing and try create a story about it.
I think it's sad, but hopefully it's going to be a good movie.
Maybe they just figured that they don't need to spend that much since everybody will still go see the movie...
Both reasons? For World War Z, it was cheaper to make up Glasgow to look like Philadelphia than to film in the actual city because of tax. For Cloud Atlas, it's a German production and filmed entirely in the UK and Germany to save on costs rather than globe trot.
Die Another Day was let down with poor 'locations'. Hong Kong looked like the cardboard cut out it was, Halle Berry's dive into the ocean from Los Organos was against a cardboard blue sky background, and the ice palace locations looked like polystyrene...and that's not even starting on 'that' surfing scene. Yes, ropey set pieces and awful CGI, but then Casino Royale came along. That Skyfleet aircraft was complete CGI. Much of the villa collapsing into the Venice canal system was CGI, and Daniel Craig didn't set foot in Montenegro or Miami. But it was all there on the screen. It's HOW it's done, is what's important.
I just thought it an interesting cut in budget, and Bognor an interesting town to choose (good on you, to the locals and businesses of Bognor Regis though) after the press conference saying "it'll all be up there on the screen and does it look like we are cutting budgets…" I suppose that cast doesn't come cheap even for Eon.
In a combination of tributes to Bond, I am currently polishing my Church's for a mate's wedding tomorrow, and giving the Rolex a quick rinse.
Oscar Wilde