Viewpoint: James Bond fails the tech test in Skyfall

Gerald · 12-02-12, 07:49 PM

In real life Bond's first conversation with Silva might have been hard to hear.

Quote:

As a self-confessed technology geek, there have been numerous occasions when my enjoyment of a movie has been marred by technological impossibilities. For example, Independence Day was ruined for me when Jeff Goldblum used an Apple Mac to transfer a virus to the alien mothership and thus saved mankind, all at a time when it was a miracle if you could get your Mac to talk to a printer via a cable.

Quote:

So, for all you out there with similar sensitivities planning to go and see Skyfall, the latest in the Bond franchise, be warned! I have been to see this movie (expect spoilers below) and if you like your technology on the realistic side then you should see a different show...

One of the most glaring errors occurs in what is perhaps the most crucial scene between the cyber-terrorist bad guy Raoul Silva, played by Javier Bardem, and Bond, who is tied up throughout to a chair.

In the scene, the large room is dominated by the racks of computers that allow Silva to conduct his cyber-attacks.

What is striking to a geek like me however is the complete absence of background noise!

Bond,licence to kill....

Note: 2 December 2012 Last updated at 00:44 GMT

soopaman2 · 12-02-12, 08:09 PM

Could it be because real life tech has progressed so much, that we are not impressed by some of the things we saw in skyfall? Not like when we saw a Roger Moore, Bond/ Connery, who had to deal with crappier effects, and more acting to get by.

Yes I said Daniel Craig is a crappy actor.

Loved the Skyfall flick personally, despite it.

Gerald · 12-02-12, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soopaman2

Could it be because real life tech has progressed so much, that we are not impressed by some of the things we saw in skyfall? Not like when we saw a Roger Moore, Bond/ Connery, who had to deal with crappier effects, and more acting to get by.

Yes I said Daniel Craig is a crappy actor.

Loved the Skyfall flick personally, despite it.

Skyfall,is a good kick.

the_tyrant · 12-02-12, 09:04 PM

Well I mean, lets be honest here, there is so much tech in our lives that it is hard to impress us.

If you watch the 80s bond movies, back then Q's monochromatic computer was "super high tech" and could impress your average viewer. People in the 80s would probably even be easily impressed by a WYSIWYG text editor like Microsoft word.

Thus of course they would have to exaggerate the technology, or else people won't be impressed at all.

Gerald · 12-02-12, 09:18 PM

Well,the technology used in films are usually commonplace in my everyday life.

soopaman2 · 12-02-12, 09:30 PM

It was still one of the best Bond flicks in my lifetime, I was just simply stating why the tech did not impress,

Daniel Craig is fine, but I am forever expecting Connery or even Brosnan.

I heard Sir Roger Moore very recently on a radio show (Opie and Anthony), he refused to be called sir, he specifically told them to call him Roger, what a stand up guy! He gave insight on being knighted, and how to behave upon recieving the honor, I was impressed.

Classy beyond words.

12-02-12, 08:09 PM	#2
soopaman2 Der Alte Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: New Jersey, USA Posts: 3,316 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 0	Could it be because real life tech has progressed so much, that we are not impressed by some of the things we saw in skyfall? Not like when we saw a Roger Moore, Bond/ Connery, who had to deal with crappier effects, and more acting to get by. Yes I said Daniel Craig is a crappy actor. Loved the Skyfall flick personally, despite it. __________________ If Hitler invaded Hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons. -Winston Churchill- The most fascinating man in the world.

12-02-12, 09:04 PM	#4
the_tyrant Admiral Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Canada Posts: 2,272 Downloads: 58 Uploads: 0	Well I mean, lets be honest here, there is so much tech in our lives that it is hard to impress us. If you watch the 80s bond movies, back then Q's monochromatic computer was "super high tech" and could impress your average viewer. People in the 80s would probably even be easily impressed by a WYSIWYG text editor like Microsoft word. Thus of course they would have to exaggerate the technology, or else people won't be impressed at all. __________________ My own open source project on Sourceforge OTP.net KGB grade encryption for the rest of us

12-02-12, 09:18 PM	#5
Gerald SUBSIM Newsman Join Date: May 2008 Location: Close to sea Posts: 24,254 Downloads: 553 Uploads: 0	Well,the technology used in films are usually commonplace in my everyday life. __________________ Nothing in life is to be feard,it is only to be understood. Marie Curie

12-02-12, 09:30 PM	#6
soopaman2 Der Alte Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: New Jersey, USA Posts: 3,316 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 0	It was still one of the best Bond flicks in my lifetime, I was just simply stating why the tech did not impress, Daniel Craig is fine, but I am forever expecting Connery or even Brosnan. I heard Sir Roger Moore very recently on a radio show (Opie and Anthony), he refused to be called sir, he specifically told them to call him Roger, what a stand up guy! He gave insight on being knighted, and how to behave upon recieving the honor, I was impressed. Classy beyond words. __________________ If Hitler invaded Hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons. -Winston Churchill- The most fascinating man in the world.