What Was The Point Of The Invisible Car

Bodie

I have just watched DAD again (indulging my masochistic tendencies I know) and couldn't help wondering just exactly what was the point of having the Astin Martin being capable of going invisible. It is visible practically for the whole chase scene with Zao. From the time when the ski bike collides with it it is only invisible for a few minutes. Zao machine guns it which knocks out the adaptive camaflage and it is visible from then on until Bond reverses it up the slope in the melting ice palace. The exact same result could have been achieved by Bond reversing a visible Astin at the last minute causing Zao to crash into the water below.

The invisibility doesn't help Bond progress his mission, it doesn't save his life. Here we have a gadget which has been met with howles of derision as one gadget to many by most fans and reviewers yet it serves no useful function within the film.

Its as if the producers thought we had gadget filled Astin's before so we have to come up with something new and spectacular, but then didn't quite know what to do with it.

welshboy78

Yup - pure silliness and I'm sure EON prob regret it since its been ridiculed so much!

The end of the Brosnan era really makes me appreciate DCs Bond, I would not like to thnk what another few Brosnan Bond flicks would have resulted in (I'm not blaming Pierce here but they certainly went the comic book route with him the more the films went on)

ZorinIndustries

I felt that way too, but i realized it is just a movie from the world's favorite secret agent. I was only eight or nine when i saw DAD in theaters and i found the V12 "Vanish" pretty cool (likely because i was 8 or 9 ) ) It is a little far fetched, but i think that it gives the film a bit of a twist; something you don't see everyday. Personally, I don't have a problem with it.

minigeff

This is one of the reasons why I left the kiddies over at mi6.co.uk; the same old rehashed DAD bashing threads.

Yes, we all know that there's errors in the invisibility (ie when bond hides behind the vanish, he would have been in full view as cameras on one side would have seen bond and displayed him on the other side of the car) and we know it was a bit of a gimmick AND we know it was probably a bad idea.

I guess someone's gonna say it was all PB's fault next.

IMO yes it was daft, but not the worst thing about DAD. I mean, big baddy space laser? I'm mr kil?! So what doooo owls do at night?!

Thunderpussy

The Bonds do have a history of going a little overboard at times, From YOLT and Moonraker.
It might annoy some fans But I don't think the public really care too much. After all, All most
people want is a nights entertainment. DAD did almost as much Business as CR ( two very different
approaches to Bond ) Give it time and Even some of the Moments in the Craig series, Might be
some what cringe worthy.
There are quite a few Parodies of "Muscle bound chaps coming out of the sea in skimpy trunks " )
On youtube etc.
I still find it hard to believe a Top intelligence officer would depend on an antique car as Transport
and still use an antiquated firearm as a personal protection weapon.

Moore Than

Thunderpussy wrote:

The Bonds do have a history of going a little overboard at times, From YOLT and Moonraker.
Give it time and Even some of the Moments in the Craig series, Might be
some what cringe worthy.

Many will disagree but I think the defibrilator scene in Casino Royale is cringeworthy. What with seemingly half of MI6 on hand and then Bond's instant recovery (after Vesper's intervention) and victory in the Poker game only an hour later.

They certainly went overboard with the fantasy element in Die Another Day. The CGI parasurfing sequence easily the worst. It was compounded by a poor script with some poor acting and direction. The car chase on ice would have been great fun if it wasn't split between that and Jinx trying to escape from the Ice Palace. Having said that, the first half of the film is mainly enjoyable.

We all know what happened next but I think a well written and much more realistic story along the lines of For Your Eyes Only after Moonraker starring Pierce Brosnan would have been successful. Probably not as successful as Casino Royale though.

Napoleon Plural

Like a lot of DAD, they could have set it up brilliantly. Like, if the film had an eerie, unworldly feel about it. Introduce then the invisible car, talk it up, Bond all excited. Then, as soon as it unveils, the whole concept is shown to be a nonsense and just doesn't work, except fleetingly. Back to the drawing board. So you have all this set up, then a humorous dismissal.

welshboy78

Napoleon Plural wrote:

Like a lot of DAD, they could have set it up brilliantly. Like, if the film had an eerie, unworldly feel about it. Introduce then the invisible car, talk it up, Bond all excited. Then, as soon as it unveils, the whole concept is shown to be a nonsense and just doesn't work, except fleetingly. Back to the drawing board. So you have all this set up, then a humorous dismissal.

Thats an interesting concept and prob would have worked well especially since Cleese took over, with Cleese on board you knew things couldn't be too serious!

thesecretagent

Oh come on! It's a pretty good gadget, no we don't see it in use much, but we want to see that beautiful Vanquish. At the end it deploys and Bond escapes Zao T-boning him in the ice palace. Alright, it's a bit silly - but I saw tests using projections and cameras on APC's and tanks when I was in the army years before DAD.
All the gadgets are daft really, in all the Bonds. But it's part of why we love the films isn't it? The original gadgets were meant to scare the Russians into thinking the west had the technology to beat them. Each film escalated he gadgets and they became more spectacular and unbelievable. In the espionage world a real gadget is as simple as a pen gun, a hypodermic syringe on an umbrella tip, a tiny camera or a silencer that works really well without sacrificing muzzle velocity. But at least over the years we've had ejector seats, oil slicks, laser watches, xray specs and invisible cars...

oscar rubio

Military intelligence and especially James Bond has always been distinguished by using the latest gadget, the soldiers use camouflage clothing, tanks are green, have always sought the blend with the landscape.
There are different tests used by armies in the main tank and war material which make it virtually invisible to the human eye, and James Bond was ahead of his era.
This is in Spanish, but if you want I will translate it
http://elcomercio.pe/tecnologia/1275507/noticia-tanques-invisibles-arma-letal-seria-realidad-proximos-dos-anos

Bodie

I don't mind outlandish gadgets. The original Astin in GF is an all time favourite, and the gadgets don't come more outlandish than the ejector seat. Afterall if you could fit one in a car it would incinerate the driver if it was used. But I like them to fulfill some usefull function in the story. The ejector seat allowed Bond to escape (at least for a while), Little Nellie allowed him to take out 4 Spectre helicopters, but the invisibility on the car did nothing.

Napoleon Plural

Not sure it was an ejector seat in that sense. All you saw, from a distance, was the seat rise up suddenly so the fella would fall out, not shoot 30 feet up in the air.

oscar rubio

The goldfinger aston martin, was for the 60's was too extravagant, too FX, for the time