cuts and bruises...

Hoagie

Something I noticed were conspicuous by their absence were the cuts and brusies Bond usually gets during the fight scenes. Nothing on display at all in Spectre, even after a beating from Mr Hinx, a relatively comprehensive kicking hanging from a helicopter and falling through a collapsing building. All of these things would have left a lasting mark in the other DC movies, although not in any of his predecessors films.

Was this deliberate in Spectre, to make the film feel more like the older movies? So we now we see the 'superhuman' Bond of previous incarnations...a visual indication of him becoming more impervious? I can't imagine the battle scars weren't included without thought and simply forgotten about.

HatThrowingHenchman

I believe not. In CR, when Bond fights Carlos, he suffers from a pretty scratched up face.Once in the Bahamas (only a few days later), they've healed pretty good and once in Montenegro, they've vanished. All of that in no time at all.

The filmmakers want Bond to look as good as possible in every scene, so they will leave the bruises out of course.
so it's nothing new really

Hoagie

HatThrowingHenchman wrote:

I believe not. In CR, when Bond fights Carlos, he suffers from a pretty scratched up face.Once in the Bahamas (only a few days later), they've healed pretty good and once in Montenegro, they've vanished. All of that in no time at all.

The filmmakers want Bond to look as good as possible in every scene, so they will leave the bruises out of course.
so it's nothing new really

I agree, to a point, but I thought in Spectre more than in any of the other films it was more noticeable that the scars, bruises hadn't even occurred at all. In the Skyfall casino scene, which was shot beautifully, and in which Bond looked great, he still had a small cut above his eye. Just seems to me there's a slightly different tone for Spectre.

HatThrowingHenchman

I didn't even notice their missing

Maybe, since we're getting back more elements of the classic Bonds, the producers will be a bit easier in the realism

Higgins

I've had the same thought after the train fight.

I mean, that was brutal and he did not suffer a scratch.

Some will reply: "But he's James Bond!"

Hoagie

Higgins wrote:

I've had the same thought after the train fight.

I mean, that was brutal and he did not suffer a scratch.

Some will reply: "But he's James Bond!"

yeah, I think that's what I took from it, 'we now have James Bond'...I do think it was deliberate on the directors / writers part.

MilleniumForce

Bond would have been covered in cuts and bruises after his fight with Mr Hinx, but would the production team want to apply all that make up to Bond on so many days of shooting? And then it makes it harder because that has to be done to the stunt doubles, and then I presume there would be problems with lighting and heat of the actor - so would it be worth it for a couple of cuts and bruises?

Thunderpussy

I agree, that it was a deliberate change. -{

welshboy78

I had the very same discussion with the Mrs the other day when we watched it.

Compared to CR (and some extent QoS) where he visibly has had a damn good pasting!

Im sure this is not an oversight by Mendes and co and done for a reason. I would say "family friendly" but Hinx at the board meeting discounts this theory! Maybe they just want 007 looking "cool" throughout

Its a pity in my opinion and one of the things I love about CR

Higgins

Maybe Mendes just thought that Craig's face aged awfully enough and it's no point to make it any worse with bruises and blood? ) )

welshboy78

Higgins wrote:

Maybe Mendes just thought that Craig's face aged awfully enough and it's no point to make it any worse with bruises and blood? ) )

Think you just earned life membership to danielcraigisnotbond.com )

Higgins

8-) that's not hateful enough
I'll stick with the MEFC

Matt S

welshboy78 wrote:

Higgins wrote:

Maybe Mendes just thought that Craig's face aged awfully enough and it's no point to make it any worse with bruises and blood? ) )

Think you just earned life membership to danielcraigisnotbond.com )

All you have to do here to join that is say something positive about Pierce Brosnan.

welshboy78

Higgins wrote:

8-) that's not hateful enough
I'll stick with the MEFC

How about

www.daltonisthegreatestbond.com

HalfMonk HalfHitman

Hoagie wrote:

Something I noticed were conspicuous by their absence were the cuts and brusies Bond usually gets during the fight scenes. Nothing on display at all in Spectre, even after a beating from Mr Hinx, a relatively comprehensive kicking hanging from a helicopter and falling through a collapsing building. All of these things would have left a lasting mark in the other DC movies, although not in any of his predecessors films.

Was this deliberate in Spectre, to make the film feel more like the older movies? So we now we see the 'superhuman' Bond of previous incarnations...a visual indication of him becoming more impervious? I can't imagine the battle scars weren't included without thought and simply forgotten about.

Much as the cuts and bruises were very conscious decisions in the past three films, making him more resilient and unflappable in SPECTRE was an equally conscious decision. At the end of the PTS, he's just a little dewy )

Thunderpussy

As Bond is no longer burnt out, he heals much quicker
Also I think his use of homeopathy helps.

HatThrowingHenchman

let's not forget one scene from QoS:
Bund has cuts and bruises after the boat chase in haiti but when in Bregenz (a couple of hours later) his skin is like a baby bum

Thunderpussy

He does moisturise, you know !

CmdrAtticus

Yes, that whole healing almost as quick as Wolverine always bothers me in Craig's films so I'm almost glad they eliminated his "now you see them now you don't" wounds in this film. It's nit picking to be sure and I do understand that creating such makeup effects and then maintaining their continuity is a first class nightmare. However, if they can't maintain the reality then why even introduce it? I was thrilled when I first saw CR and Craig showed the aftermath of going through the meat grinder of the action scenes. It made him more like Fleming's character and more human. Then a few scenes later and it's supposedly only the next day and he's spotless? Sorry, doesn't wash. Either do it right or just leave it out.

chrisisall

CmdrAtticus wrote:

Either do it right or just leave it out.

Absolutely.
Raimi's Evil Dead 2/Army of Darkness hilariously had Ash's cuts meticulously recreated in every scene throughout the duration of the films. In such ridiculous movies the facial heal time was actually fairly realistic. The hand is another story. )
But yeah, if you don't commit to the make-up just don't do it.

Thunderpussy

For years it was an established maxim in Hollywood movies. That
after a huge fight, the only wound on the hero. Would be a cut lip.

HalfMonk HalfHitman

CmdrAtticus wrote:

Yes, that whole healing almost as quick as Wolverine always bothers me in Craig's films so I'm almost glad they eliminated his "now you see them now you don't" wounds in this film. It's nit picking to be sure and I do understand that creating such makeup effects and then maintaining their continuity is a first class nightmare. However, if they can't maintain the reality then why even introduce it? I was thrilled when I first saw CR and Craig showed the aftermath of going through the meat grinder of the action scenes. It made him more like Fleming's character and more human. Then a few scenes later and it's supposedly only the next day and he's spotless? Sorry, doesn't wash. Either do it right or just leave it out.

Where was it established that he was on the train to Montenegro the next day?

Gassy Man

I watched the train fight again, and actually, so far as I can tell, Hinx does not land a blow to Bond's face, nor the type of hit that would cause that sort of damage. Bond's hands and neck could have been scraped up, I suppose, but mostly he's just thrown around.

To the larger issue, though, Casino Royale (and to some degree, Quantum of Solace) worked hard to establish Bond as more recognizably human than we've seen him since the Connery days. But that left by and large when Mendes took over. The little visceral details were replaced by the broader sentimental ones.

zaphod99

Gassy Man wrote:

I watched the train fight again, and actually, so far as I can tell, Hinx does not land a blow to Bond's face, nor the type of hit that would cause that sort of damage. Bond's hands and neck could have been scraped up, I suppose, but mostly he's just thrown around.

To the larger issue, though, Casino Royale (and to some degree, Quantum of Solace) worked hard to establish Bond as more recognizably human than we've seen him since the Connery days. But that left by and large when Mendes took over. The little visceral details were replaced by the broader sentimental ones.

I know it's Heresy, but I was disappointed a little by the Train fight. For me it lacked drama and was as you say a lot of being thrown around.

Thunderpussy

Different folks, I loved the train fight. Two guys fighting for their lives. Bond
looking like he's lost, as everthing he tries, seems to have no effect on Hinx.
In my opinion ( like all good movie fights) it doesn't look choreographed. -{
They look like they're trying moves as they think of them.

bryno92

I wasn't sure why Hinx didn't just shoot Bond from behind. I know that they added the table flip for an added effect, but imo it would've been better if Bond saw his reflection from the glass and dodged a bullet somehow in a neat way. It also got annoying how they broke through wall after wall (or should I say cardboard). Fight scene was still decent, but they could've added more suspense to it.

MilleniumForce

^ I don't think Hinx was supposed to kill Bond. Then again, Hinx shouldn't have even touched them anyway - Blofeld wanted them at his lair!

HatThrowingHenchman

Hinx will be back!

welshboy78

Thunderpussy wrote:

Different folks, I loved the train fight. Two guys fighting for their lives. Bond
looking like he's lost, as everthing he tries, seems to have no effect on Hinx.
In my opinion ( like all good movie fights) it doesn't look choreographed. -{
They look like they're trying moves as they think of them.

Is this not where Daniel Craig bust his knee?? It was a pretty vicious looking fight and I really enjoyed it!!!!

If anything was disappointing about the whole thing etc it was the lack of time Bond had with Swann at the table to develop their attraction a bit more.

HalfMonk HalfHitman

That train fight is preceded by seven - SEVEN - dialogue scenes between Bond and Swann. I was so thankful once it arrived. It's an oasis of something in a sea of not-anything.

Gassy Man

zaphod99 wrote:

Gassy Man wrote:

I watched the train fight again, and actually, so far as I can tell, Hinx does not land a blow to Bond's face, nor the type of hit that would cause that sort of damage. Bond's hands and neck could have been scraped up, I suppose, but mostly he's just thrown around.

To the larger issue, though, Casino Royale (and to some degree, Quantum of Solace) worked hard to establish Bond as more recognizably human than we've seen him since the Connery days. But that left by and large when Mendes took over. The little visceral details were replaced by the broader sentimental ones.

I know it's Heresy, but I was disappointed a little by the Train fight. For me it lacked drama and was as you say a lot of being thrown around.

I thought the choreography was good -- it seemed more like a real fight. But it's another script issue; there was no real build up to it. It wasn't like Bond and Hinx had really interacted much before, nor was there a plot moment that led to it in some meaningful way.