Talk:Gun barrel sequence

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
inactive.James BondWikipedia:WikiProject James BondTemplate:WikiProject James BondJames Bond articles
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Not Original Idea

First used in the 1948 Western "Yellow Sky" with Anne Baxter and Gregory Peck. Unfortunately someone will always remove facts like this from the article claiming it needs to be verifiable, well, watch the movie, what more proof do you want. Wikipedia is so badly flawed that revisionists can just opionionate articles till they become worthless. Gunter (talk) 18:53, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The concept of having a character shoot directly at the screen has been used many, many times (before and since). The Great Train Robbery is cited because it is the first known example. Otherwise we'll just have a useless and trivial list of films that feature characters shooting at the screen.

A bright cold day in april (talk) 11:32, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actual CG?

Just a though, but should the word "actual" in, "...introduced an actual CG bullet being shot..." be taken out? That's sort of like saying, "A real faux diamond".--Lewk_of_Serthic 21:57, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see that it has been taken care of already.--Lewk_of_Serthic 19:39, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Change in Casino Royale?

Quote the article: It will differ from every previous film by not opening the film with the sequence, but instead ending the pre-title sequence with it where the viewer actually sees the assassin about to shoot Bond before he turns to fire on the assassin.

Just because the trailer shows that does not mean the film will start in that way. I mean, why would they change it? --TonicBH 17:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They changed it. I can personally confirm this first hand. The gun barrel in CR is meant, to a certain extent, to be a sort of acknowledgement that Bond is now "007". Bond 22 will see it go back to the way it's been for years. Some may see the scene as a sort of origin to the gun barrel, but that's not the point. K1Bond007 20:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check this videos:

These videos were supposed to be early versions of the CR gun barrel? David Pro 18:52, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More pics....

How about getting some images of the Connery & Moore shot in there? I'd do it but I dunno how. Tommyt 02:03, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestion is to have one image of each gun barrel sequence in the end (or any part) of the article, in order of appearance.

Pinhole camera?

Was the sequence really done with a pinhole camera in an actual gun barrel until the mid-'90s? Because, for one thing, the Dalton image in this article very clearly looks like a gun barrel element was "matted" to the film, and, for another, I don't think a pinhole camera would pick up the interior contours of an actual gun barrel. Max22 07:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no way was this sequence done with a pinhole camera. First off, shooting through a pinhole requires a tremendous amount of light to get any image at all, even at a slow shutter speed of about 1/15 of a second or so, never mind the standard 24 fps at which a motion picture camera shoots. So never mind illuminating the inside of a gun barrel, you'd have a tough enough time filming anything.

And all of the barrel sequences up to and including License to Kill show telltale signs of compositing.

If anyone can actually reproduce the barrel sequence with a pinhole camera as described here, I will saw off my own foot and eat it.70.72.14.12 (talk) 20:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The gun barrel dissolves to a white dot, often roving randomly"

I kinda doubt that it's random. I think it's just moving side to side... But I only saw the Tomorrow Never Dies movie and played the GoldenEye 007 game. --Addict 2006 22:16, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, I don't know if the whole gun barrel fades off to a white dot. My next guess is that the blood spills in and the background around the center dot thing fades once it starts moving side to side. --Addict 2006 22:17, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, after peeking at the gunbarrel sequences in a few other movies through the

Ultimate Edition DVDs
, I'd say they're not just going side to side but they were random at first, and that was changed. Nothing about Casino Royale though. --Addict 2006 15:53, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

The interesting question, then, is with which movie did they switch to moving the white dot directly to the lower right corner?
Wahkeenah 17:06, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply
]
Another question is, if this is a gun barrel, why are we seeing blood running down the screen like raspberry syrup, which really doesn't make logical sense? The answer, I would say, is "artistic license".
Wahkeenah 17:09, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply
]
First, in the Simmons, Connery and Lazenby barrels, the barrel started swaying after the blood had reached the bottom of the screen; in the others, it sways mid-way through the blood trickle. The blood and the barrel riflings disappear as the hole fades into a white dot and moves into the lower right corner (in some movies, it goes into a different corner). In Dr. No, this transitions into the credits sequence of animated dots, and the same is the case for From Russia With Love and Goldfinger except that the movie simply goes into the pre-credits sequence. In Thunderball and all Bond films after that (except for Casino Royale, natch), the white dot irises into the first scene of the movie, though this transition is instant in For Your Eyes Only. (To answer your question, Wahkeenah, I think the blood itself is just supposed to emphasize 007's "licence to kill".) Tony Myers 07:00, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the good and detailed info... and it occurs to me that the article is "almost there", in terms of what it maybe could do: List all the films in order, and describe what happens with the dots in each one, just as you have started to do here. The "trivia" could be merged into the main writeup. I think that would make the evolution of this iconic sequence a bit clearer than it is now. One factor is the underscore of the scene, which is discussed in some of the trivia points. It's kind of hard to describe in words what's going on in the music... but for many of them, it would start out with the DA-DA-da, DA-DA-da, DA-DA-DA-DA-DA ..., if you get my meaning. In Dr. No, there was a bit of electronic music, like chimes or beeps or something (kind of late 50s-early 60s "outer space" music), then the gunshot, and then the theme, kind of jumping into the loud part of it, skipping over the intro that's in the "full" recording carried on the soundtrack album. I don't think any of the films actually played the "full" recorded version of the theme from beginning to end in the intro... they used segments of it.
Wahkeenah 07:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

I'm not quite sure if this is possible, both technically and copyright-wise, but perhaps the best way to illustrate the gun barrel sequence would be to put a video the sequence into the article, and set it playing on a loop? Editus 16:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure it would be a copyright violation, and besides it's still subject to interpretation. Someone with lots of time on their hands and with access to all 20-plus films could watch the intro for each and note precisely what transpires. That would be verifiable and would save everyone else the work. :)
Wahkeenah 16:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Grammar Grammar GRAMMAR

UGH!! How did this article get soooooooo bloated & incoherent? I could hardly understand anything in it. Made some corrections but let's all keep a sharp eye on this one, we have too many attempts to add semicolons, colons, commas, etc along with unnecessary details & observations. Let's keep this one simple, folks. Tommyt 15:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Casino Royale's teaser trailer

Can someone give me the link for the teaser trailer of Casino Royale in which Craig appears peforming the sequence in the same grooves of the gun as did appear in the Brosnan films? --David Pro 01:11, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLxC0Qizd8U --David Pro 19:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, thats not even the real trailer. This is it here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LozaiZBdji0 Flamingtorch372 20:56, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spongebob

Who saw the

Spongebob Squarepants episode Spy Buddies? Superjustinbros. 21:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

I did, but this is general discussion. Please talk about how to improve the article. Thank you.--Editor510 drop us a line, mate 15:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Radical Redesign

I propose this as a radical redesign. There it can remain until it is good enough shape to move over. Most of the fragmented comments about the particular films will become bullet points in the production notes column. I would appreciate any contributions anyone wanted to make, in keeping with the tabular nature of the concept. --Tbmorgan74 21:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:CasinoRoyaleGunbarrel.jpg

fair use
.

Please go to

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline
is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:11, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Moore's pic

What pic of Roger Moore's gun barrel we need to use in the article, the one from Live and Let Die/The Man With the Golden Gun era, or the The Spy Who Loved Me/A View to a Kill era? David Pro 14:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the most appropiate image must be something as this. David Pro 20:55, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:George lazenby.png

fair use
.

Please go to

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline
is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:George lazenby.png

fair use
.

Please go to

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline
is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

talk) 06:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply
]

Fair use rationale for Image:Kleinman gunbarrel.jpg

fair use
.

Please go to

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline
is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

talk) 20:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Major copy edit

I've done what I can, but I still feel that an image for each actor's sequence is over the top, and leaves some awkward gaps. Chris 42 (talk) 22:34, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I actually like the idea of an image for each of the gun barrels. I don't see any harm in it and there is a clear rationale for using the images.M&m enterprises (talk) 16:02, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


With regard to a recent reversion, the previous edit contained way too much POV, repetition and statements of the obvious. If you read my edit, you will see that nothing has been lost and I also added the Costume section and the info on Daniel Kleinman. Chris 42 (talk) 13:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:DALTONGUNBBAREL..JPG

fair use
.

Please go to

Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline
is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

talk) 21:30, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Is it in Dr. No or not?

The section about the first appearance of the gunbarrel opening is incredibly incoherent. The Dr. No credits BEGIN with the gunbarrel bit before going straight into the geometric patterns of dots. To claim the film didn't use a pre-credits sequence because of its low budget is moronic, it's a stylistic decision which could have no impact on a film's budget. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.112.189.136 (talk) 00:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Parodies

The Gunbarrel Sequence has been parodied scores of times. Probably hundreds of times throught international media. It seems silly to list them all. I suggest altering this section to a brief paragraph summarising the fact that the sequence has been oft-parodied and maybe listing the most notable ones in prose. A bright cold day in april (talk) 01:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to have been resolved a few months ago, but the list of parodies appears to be making a return (an unwelcome return, in my opinion). I've reverted to prose, but I'd like to state for the record that I agree that a trivial and half-comlete list of parodies (some notable, some not) is comletely unsuitable for this page. Furthermore, there is a link to the WP entry for james Bond parodies, so the section is doubly redundant. I say remove. 195.224.113.189 (talk) 11:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The list is still, 4 years later, here. It's still trivial and still half-complete. I agree with this to remove
A bright cold day in april (talk) 11:34, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Title Change

I suggest changing the title of this article to Gun Barrel Sequence. This is the name that the sequence is commonly called by / referred to by. And the addition of James Bond at the beginning of it seems unnecessary. Any thoughts? A bright cold day in april (talk) 01:30, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've been looking through sources in order to add citations to this article and have come across a problem. There seem to be no references to the "James Bond Gun Barrel Sequence", but there are plenty of references to the "Gun Barrel Sequence". I therefore suggest that this page be moved to either "Gun Barrel Sequence" or "Gun Barrel Sequence (James Bond)" because, at the moment, the title itself is original research.A bright cold day in april (talk) 01:01, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will move this article to "Gun barrel sequence" tomorrow, unless anyone offers any objections? Or if anyone thinks "Gun barrel sequence (James Bond)" would be better? A bright cold day in april (talk) 22:01, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just a comment, of the two, "Gun barrel sequence (James Bond)" would be more descriptive. DonQuixote (talk) 22:19, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks DonQuixote, I'll action this now and use "Gun Barrel Sequence (James Bond)" as you recommend.A bright cold day in april (talk) 17:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Room for improvement

There is some room for improvement in this article. Whilst there is plenty of information in here and some improvements have been made since Quantum of Solace was released in the UK (although it seems as though some of this has been reverted). There is a very large trivia section at the bottom of the page, related to parodies, which is hideousley bloated. There is also vague, sketchy and misleading information in the article itself. The Costume section also contains information which would be more sensibly put in the "Evolution" section (as, indeed, some of it already is).

I would suggest removing the parody section as the first port of call (or, at least, condensing it considerably) M&m enterprises (talk) 14:59, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would also suggest charting the evolution of the sequence by the different versions, rather that the different actors used (it would make more sense that way, as that's what we're discussing). M&m enterprises (talk) 15:53, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I made this change (although with the actor's name in the subheading) but the change was undone. How about "1962 - 1964", "1965 - 1967" etc.? A bright cold day in april (talk) 18:12, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Another thought - I think the article needs far more references. At the moment there's a lot of original research. M&m enterprises (talk) 16:11, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted a lot of bad edits to this article, specifically non-MoS and much repetition. With regard to the Costume section, some editors seem intent on repeating its content wherever possible, e.g., Roger Moore is the first not to wear a hat, etc. The section as it stands is concise enough and we don't need to know chapter and verse about the QoS sequence since in all respects it is 'traditional', except for its place within the film. I don't think splitting it into 'year' sections would help as Connery effectively has a 'gap year' and it makes more sense as it stands. The different versions are for the most part necessitated by a change of actor and only occasionally by technical constraints (such as aspect ratio). I have two issues with the article: a.) having a picture for each sequence, since in the cases of Connery, Moore and Lazenby there isn't enough text to go alongside, which makes for uneven coverage; b.) yes, it needs references. Chris 42 (talk) 22:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with most of that and think most of your reverts have been fine. Especially the problems with repeated information. I'd add a few points:
If Connery's gap year is considered a problem for sorting by date (although I'd suggest "1965-67, 1971"), then how about just "First Gun Barrel (1962)", "Second Gun Barrel (1965)" etc.? I have to agree that the current system - charting the evolution of the sequence by actor's era - is a little muddled. Especially now that we have nine gun barrels for six actors.
I think it would be a real shame to lose the pictures.A bright cold day in april (talk) 23:41, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, if it is to be changed to years, then how about section headings and subheadings like this:
==Sequences==
===1962–1964===
1971 could then be incorporated into its own subsection, with just a sentence or two explaining that the DAF sequence was reused. I don't like "First gun barrel", "Second gun barrel", etc. as that gets very repetitious. Chris 42 (talk) 13:19, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're right about "First gun barrel" etc being repetitive, so I'll have a go at doing the headings / subheadings in the manner you suggestA bright cold day in april (talk) 18:36, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gun Barrel or Gunbarrel

The usage is inconsistent throughout the article and a uniform style ought to be adopted. I'd suggest gun barrel.A bright cold day in april (talk) 23:43, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The word "gunbarrel" doesn't appear in the Oxford English Dictionary (at least) and it shouldn't be capitalised: it's not a film, book, play, etc. Moreover, the Wiki MoS states that lower case should be used for headings, excepting the first word and proper nouns. Chris 42 (talk)

Quantum of Solace gunbarrel sequence

Are there any sources for the gunbarrel sequence being at the end of the movie? I've seen a lot of editing around this but no references have been supplied. Spleep (talk) 22:19, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've found one from a website called "ReelzChannel". I'd imagine there will be plenty more once the film has been released internationally. A bright cold day in april (talk) 18:20, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The gun barrel looks dirty and has imperfections; exactly what a used gun should have. The other CG barrels were just too clean to appear real. --IViking (talk) 19:21, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alternate sequences

Details are often added regarding unused gunbarrel sequences (e.g. those that are filmed but not used in the movies). I suggest a separate section - "unused sequences". I can think of at least five - Roger Moore in 1973 (used in several of his trailers), John Gavin in 1971, Pierce Brosnan in 1986 (mentioned in numerous reference works), Pierce Brosnan in 1995 (used in Goldeneye trailer), Daniel Craig in 2008 (as mentioned in the ReelzChannel interview).

I think such a section should be kept fairly brief, but it would stop irrelevant materieal being added to the main sections. Thoughts? A bright cold day in april (talk) 12:09, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image of the Quantum of Solace gun barrell

Wikipedia's fair use rules only allow an image to be used once within an article; for that reason, since the QoS gunbarrel is used as the main image for the article, we can't have it used a second time in the list, so I have removed the second use. If another main image is used (for example, should Bond 23 use another gun barrell) then the QoS image can me moved down to the list again. 23skidoo (talk) 18:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

7 grooves

Apparently there were seven grooves in the gun barrel. They added the eighth one in Goldeneye.

89.73.229.189 (talk) 16:26, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do people even begin to track this kind of detail?? ;> 83.251.170.27 (talk) 23:14, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why the copyright tag?

Someone added the "improper use of copyrighted material" tag, but of course never bothered to add a rationale to the talk page. If the concern is over the use of images of the gunbarrel sequence, then it's obvious the editor who added the tag never read the article otherwise he/she would realize the use of the different images is appropriate for the topic and completely defendable under any sane interpretation of fair use/copyright. The only non-gunbarrel images I see is an image from the Great Train Robbery film, which is public domain as it predates 1923, and an image from the opening of Never Say Never Again which is once again acceptable and is also important for verification purposes in showing no gunbarrel was used in that film. So is there any need to keep the tag? 68.146.81.123 (talk) 16:58, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a
requested move
. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv (talk) 16:14, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gun barrel sequence (James Bond) → Gun barrel sequence – Unnecessary disambiguation. relisted--Mike Cline (talk) 21:05, 24 December 2011 (UTC) Powers T 19:44, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

Support, per nom. --The Evil IP address (talk) 14:30, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move
. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Dr No trailer.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Dr No trailer.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is
    non-free
    then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no
    fair use rationale
    then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --

talk) 15:06, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

Poorly sourced edit

Gunter, Do not insult editors in your edit summaries, please try to remain

^ • @) 18:46, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply
]

Black and white

When Sean Connery returned to the role of Bond for Diamonds Are Forever (1971), the gun barrel sequence filmed for Thunderball was used. As with You Only Live Twice, the sequence was rendered in black and white, but was given a bluish tint. As in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, the barrel is awash with prismatic splashes of light, which this time ripple through it. Unlike On Her Majesty's Secret Service, the splashes of light are erased by the descending blood. This was the last time the sequence was rendered in black and white until Casino Royale (2006)

The last time when B&W sequence was used was "A view to kill" with Roger Moore. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jFAwZYk6Zw 178.176.101.18 (talk) 12:05, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

could someone update costume and music section from Skyfall

Could anyone update the section for the film "Skyfall"?

-Costume -Music

greetings,

If you can provide a reliable source that discusses the information, then yes. -
talk) 10:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply
]

1967 Casino Royale variant

Years ago I read a contemporary review of the 1967 film (i.e. in a magazine or newspaper published in the late 60s) that mentioned that Casino Royale began with a spoof of the gunbarrel in which Peter Sellers does the walk, but instead of his gun firing, it makes the sound of a pop gun instead. I've never seen this, and I've never seen anything else to suggest this was ever actually filmed, but if someone can track down a source, it might be worth noting it. Similarly, I once read that Never Say Never Again was supposed to start with a gunbarrel-like sequence but they went with the screenfull of 007's instead. Without sourcing, neither of these, obviously, can be added to the article; I mention them here in case they ring a bell for anybody. 136.159.160.8 (talk) 20:58, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Two gun barrel sequences in No Time To Die.

I’ve recently watched No Time To Die, there’s a moment in the last island base shootout when Bond shots at an enemy facing the camera, in which the tunnel resembles a gunbarrel and the scene itself is overall shot very similarly to the gunbarrel sequence. (I think it’s also shown in some of the trailers). Does it count? Sanhok (talk) 02:30, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gun_barrel_sequence&oldid=1156549206"