2021 – No Time to die
Well, I know your first question is going to be, “Why only three stars?” It isn’t because the effects weren’t good. In fact, they were very good. But I’ll be honest, I’ve seen them all before. It was a typical Bond film. There were car and motorcycle chases, lots of gunfire, and a lot of things blowing up. But there was nothing I haven’t seen before. It was an action/spy thriller, and the action was certainly thrilling to watch. But I’ve been trying to think of an effect that I haven’t seen in some other movie, and I can’t think of one.
In fact, I did a little looking on the internet for a reason why No Time to Die was nominated in the Visual Effects category. What I found was an article written by Edward Douglas on Goldderby.com, and a video on Youtube that offered a short breakdown of the film’s effects. Here is what Douglas had to say. “Their visual effects work on “No Time to Die” is so seamless that few people will realize how much of the movie relied on those VFX. In order for director Cary Joji Fukanaga to pull off his movie’s stunts without putting his actors or stuntmen in danger, the VFX team could digitally place actors’ faces on stunt performers, which has become the norm in action movies, and save some elements of explosives and gunfire for post-production. The VFX were also used to create and enhance the movie’s real world locations, either adding or removing elements as needed.”
So basically, my assessment was right. There was some masterful digital compositing and some seamless face replacements. There were explosions and gunfire, and there were stunts and car chases. But if that was all, then it wasn’t enough for me. The two and a half minute video showed some of those things, but not much else. Although, there was one thing the video revealed that I found interesting. The scene where the American CIA agent, Paloma, wearing high heel shoes, is karate kicking a bad guy, apparently her legs were CGI. Who knew?
There were also a few other interesting digital effects, but nothing spectacular or flashy. There was the shot of a bomb-like device plummeting down an ele4vator shaft, spraying electromagnets onto the walls in a spiral pattern, an effect which lasted about a second and a half. That looked interesting. And there was the shot of a super-spy glider deploying its retractable wings, and that was cool. But again, the effect was brief. There was just, in general, nothing new or innovative here.
But I have to ask, since there is no category at the Academy Awards for Best Stunts, are stunts essentially folded into the Visual Effects category? I imagine they are, and that brings up an argument that I have heard before, more than once. Should Best Stunts have their own category? There are arguments for and against, and everyone seems to have a valid point. But I don’t know the answer.