18 replies to this topic

[DLibrasnow]

For all those people who scoffed when I said the military was working on making a tank invisible, here is an article on it from Wired news.....

http://ad.doubleclic...20x300;ord=0108?

More than a few filmgoers will stumble out of the new James Bond movie, Die Another Day, muttering, "Yeah, right!" about the latest splashy technological gadget in Bond land: a disappearing car.

But they ought to talk to Maurice (Joe) Langevin of Tracer Round Associates in Maryland before they laugh too hard about the implausibility of it all.

Working with his partner, Philip Moynihan of Cal Tech, Langevin conceived a plan to use plasma screens hooked up to cameras to offer a tech method of camouflaging vehicles.

This so-called "adaptive camouflage" -- since it can shift constantly to meet conditions -- is now under development by the U.S. Department of Defense, and also by private industry.

"I just dream up these items to a point where the technical feasibility is validated, and then I just let them go," Langevin explained in a phone interview.

As playful as the Bond films have often been with their technological gadgetry -- and as reckless as various Bonds have been with the goods themselves -- the series has in many ways shown remarkable respect for technology.

"Obviously the most interesting device in the new film is the cloaking device on the Aston Martin," said John Cork, coauthor with Bruce Scivally of James Bond, The Legacy.

"The thing that's interesting to me is that it's inspired by real technology, although it's certainly not shown. The Bond films were the first films to embrace technology. This was a hero who was of the technological age."

That was anything but the rule when the Bond series started, back in 1962, with Dr. No.

Back then, technology was seen as sinister in many films, Cork said.

"There was a way that the computer would always be breaking down and spewing out cards or the home-cleaning device would be malfunctioning," he said. "But in the Bond films, they embraced the technology, and in the context of the film, the technology worked."

That's not to say every Bond gadget could work in the real world. Take the famous underwater breather, barely fountain pen-sized, that Sean Connery pulled out in Thunderball in 1965 and breathed through for about four minutes.

It makes a return appearance, along with other great Bond gadgets of the past, in the new film. So far, nothing like it has been designed. The only thing that comes close is a device the size of a Coke can that would give you maybe two minutes of breathing.

But the overall record is respectable. In the 1971 film Diamonds Are Forever, the character Q -- played in the first 19 Bond films by Desmond Llewelyn -- makes fake fingerprints out of latex, which Bond uses to fool a security device. It turns out that fake prints really can do that.

Or how about the jet pack Bond used in Thunderball? That's real, too. In fact, it was developed by the U.S. Army.

Alan Stephenson, a Bond expert in Santa Cruz, California, has a collection of more than 5,000 Bond objects, including a replica of the gun in "The Man With the Golden Gun" and an Instamatic camera that switched into a pistol.

He said the Bond mystique has been hard to maintain as the cool gadgets the films showcase become more and more popular with the general public.

"In Never Say Never Again, Sean Connery has a laser watch, and people were kind of thinking, 'Come on, how could you have a laser in a wristwatch?' and today I own a wristwatch with a laser," he said. "I can't cut through steel, but it makes a good laser pointer."

He adds, "That's one of the things about the series: It's so hard to come up with anything that isn't going to show up at Sharper Image for $39.95 next month. Can you look enough forward that reality isn't going to catch up to it in a matter of months?"

That gets pretty hard when Bond films are there to show the way.

"The army created this thing called the smart truck," said John Cork, the Bond author. "The way they came up with the gadgets for the smart truck was they sat down and watched a Bond film."

[Jim]

So...

1. This technology prevents frost settling on "the invisible car" overnight
2. This technology ensures someone who isn't invisible can hide behind the invisible car (Mr Brosnan, Iceland) despite the fact that otherwise one can "see through" it (Mr Cleese, London - and all other moments involving said car)?

[ray t]

come now, jim...

theres no evidence you can hide behind the car

and

theres no evidence you can see through it...the image of Q was distorted

in the end...its a bloody movie!

[marktmurphy]

No evidence you can hide behind it, apart from the bits where JamesBonddoubleoseven hides behind it. Also:how can a 2D screen in front of something appear to be invisible- imagine if the monitor you are looking at now was showing a picture of the wall behind it. Your eyes would still be able to focus upon the screen and tell you that bit of wall is too close. When you move your head from side to side the parallaxing would tell it is right in front of you.
So in conclusion: is fun in the film, but don't try to say it could really work as the technology as described in the film could not work in the circumstances it finds itself in (presumably these tanks are designed to be invisible from a long way away when viewed from only one direction). Plus the fact that you can quite clearly see it makes it almost useless:
"Look over there; an invisible car!".

[DLibrasnow]

The James Bonds are famous for taking almost-possible technology and running with it. I remember during the promotion of AVTAK when the Bond producers noted it "could almost work" also in MR are we supposed to believe that a few of those globes could wipe out the population of the world. I could go on and on.
Like I said previously, the invisible car is based on technology the military is working on.

[Jim]

Originally posted by marktmurphy
No evidence you can hide behind it, apart from the bits where JamesBonddoubleoseven hides behind it.

Yes, apart from those bits

An utterly transparent concept. The faults can be clearly seen through

Blah blah.

[DLibrasnow]

Did you even read the article Jim???

[Jim]

Yes, I "even" read the article.

Read it.
Sung it.
Adapted it as a short piece of kubuki theatre.

Some of the above might be a lie.

OK - read the article and still think that, however "real" the concept, it was executed in a flawed manner in a very silly film.

[ray t]

Originally posted by Jim
Yes, I "even" read the article.

Read it.
Sung it.
Adapted it as a short piece of kubuki theatre.

Some of the above might be a lie.

OK - read the article and still think that, however "real" the concept, it was executed in a flawed manner in a very silly film.

you are a true glutton for punishment, old chap.

ps, wheres the old "review", jim?

[Jim]

Originally posted by ray t


you are a true glutton for punishment, old chap.

If I were, I would have watched Die Another Day a second time

[ray t]

Originally posted by Jim


If I were, I would have watched Die Another Day a second time

u never fail to amuse me in some fashion or other...i think u may have missed your true calling:)

seriously, you have to give it a couple of more viewings to TRULY APPRECIATE its nuances and subtext:D

[DLibrasnow]

Originally posted by Jim


Some of the above might be a lie.

I'll pass along your sentiments to my colleagues at WIRED...Don't worry Jim, I'm sure they will suitably offended.

At least EON based the concept on real technology, unlike earlier movies like Moonraker.

Hmmm....globes sent from a space station with orchids in them to annihilate the population of earth, yeah I can buy that NOT!!

[marktmurphy]

Whats the point of a four minute rebreather anyway? You can hold your breath for almost that long (I'm sure jamesbond007 can anyways).

[marktmurphy]

Originally posted by DLibrasnow
I remember during the promotion of AVTAK when the Bond producers noted it "could almost work"

Theres nothing like optimism when promoting a film; shame it didn't really work when it got released. Bit boring towards the end (although I quite liked Grace Jones. And Big Ron 'out of Eastenders)
Arf.

[General Koskov]

If the car can accurately display it's surroundings onto the opposide side (even with curved sides), why does Q's leg get distorted?


Here's what would work:

The colour changing Jag that Benson dreamt up. The whole point of camouflage is to break up the object's shape so that people looking for it do not recognise it, therefore Bond could change the paint to white with black stipes to break up the AM's lines.

[Jim]

Originally posted by ray t



seriously, you have to give it a couple of more viewings to TRULY APPRECIATE its nuances and subtext:D

...and adverts

[Dmitri Mishkin]

I'll believe it when I see it.

But within the context of the film, it worked. Much more than a Bondola anyway.

And Jim, let's see that review

[WhiteKnight]

Originally posted by Dmitri Mishkin
I'll believe it when I see it.  

But if it IS true..then you won't be "seeing" it now, would you?

[DLibrasnow]

Originally posted by WhiteKnight


But if it IS true..then you won't be "seeing" it now, would you?

Quite true...