Can anyone explain to me how they did the motorcycle-off-the-cliff-into-the-explosion-of-flames? That stunt/shot was friggin' unbelievable (not to mention hilarious)! I've got theories, but would really like to know how they did that.
"But, hey, that's me, I could be wrong."
That's a cool scene in the film...this is where Bishop's luck turns the corner so to speak. Later that day he's summoned by "The Man" ...and we all know how that worked out!
I've never really thought too much about how this stunt was achieved, but I'm sure Michael Winner and his stunt coordinator thought of something cool. I like this stunt better than the "Boat Explosion". If you freeze on the boat right before it explodes its obviouly a miniature model and not even a good copy of the real boat at that.
My favorite "stunt" is the car over the cliff scene aided by the very resourceful Mr. Bishop's imaginative use of a bulldozer. One take, one camera..that cameraman was worth his pay for that one shot alone.
Anyways..what are your theories on the motorbike over the cliff stunt?
I never realized that Winner had a thing for putting things over a cliff until now!
At first, I figured this was done with a dummy strapped onto the bike and they just plunged it off the cliff, rigging it with explosives so it would blow up on impact or a well-timed push of the button. But I was completely off on this, upon closer viewing there is NO WAY that was a dummy. Even if they used advanced puppetry, there would have been no way to pull off the shifting of weight or (and I found this to be uproarious) the way he locks in his position before crashing. And if it were some sort of animatronic wonder, I doubt the technology was even around at this time, and there'd be no way could they afford this. And if it did exist and they could afford it, no way would they justify the cost of this thing for one shot (let alone blowing it to smithereens). So out went that theory.
Then I figured, maybe it was clever editing, this too was wrong. How the hell would they get the bike that close to the ground without it completely decimating both man and machine? And they would have probably gotten a much bigger KA-BOOM if it were going to be that set-up in that matter. So that went out the window as well.
Then I briefly worried that they might have actually killed a stuntman for this shot. This was discounted quickly (though this isn't unheard of. Rumor has it The Road Warrior ended a few lives. And let's all remember the Milo and Otis scandal!), not only did it seem sadistic and unreal, but if it were the case, this movie would have a controversial Cannibal Holocaust cloud of notoriety surrounding it. If Michael Winner had done that, he'd most likely never would have worked again, let alone ended up doing TV commercials, not to mention the definite arrest of all those involved. So I felt a bit stupid even considering that and dismissed it.
So here's how I think they pulled it off. I think they dug a huge hole into the ground (which would also explain the bulldozer. Hey, if you're going to spend the money to rent one anyway, might as well get the most use out of it!) and filled it with water. Then I figured they did a test run where they could see where the driver could land the bike into the makeshift lake. They then pulled a tarp over the hole and covered it with a thin layer of mud and dirt to make it look like the actual ground, even adding puddles to it for realism. The tarp would also block any possible splashback spilling into the shot. They then put a few cuts into the estimated landing spot and put a few fire effects around it, possibly using either firebars or a few hoses or whatever it is they use for a good fireball (hey, if I knew anything about this special effects stuff, I'd know how they did it right off the bat). And put a few items around it to spice it up like the helmet and a few motorcycle pieces. So the stunt driver put on some flame retardant material underneath his suit for extra protection, though this wouldn't be too much of a worry seeing how he'd be immediately hitting the water (well, maybe that the wrong choice of words, "wouldn't be too much of a worry" is an easy thing to say when you're not the person about to take a dirtbike off a high cliff through a ring of fire into a muddy lake). So then he plunged the bike off the cliff, went through the spot and at the moment he hit the tarp, they ignited and/or detonated the fire effect, and thankfully everyone pulled it off without anyone getting (too) hurt. But it was probably a do-or-die deal where if they didn't get it the one time, they'd be stuck splicing something together in editing, which would have been a lot less effective. Or maybe they did it a few times and used every bike they had on the set, and this was the best out of the four (if my count's right).
Of course, this is all a complete guess! I THINK that's how it happened. If anyone knows the real story, I'd love to hear how they did that. Amazing shot!
"But, hey, that's me, I could be wrong."
It was a dummy that was tied down to the bike. The Dummy was tied down very well in all the right spots, so when they launched it from the top of the cliff it gave the illusion of the man bracing for impact, but it was really just the dummmy lifting from the bike.
shareI don't see how a dummy could lock itself into a crash position. But, hey, your guess is as good as mine.
"But, hey, that's me, I could be wrong."
[deleted]
The mystery continues....I have no clue as to how this was done. I'm sure someone will come forward with this interesting piece of Mechanic minutae...
share[deleted]
If you freeze frame it as the bike explodes you can the crash helmet roll out of the explosion on fire - Its a very good stunt, the way the dummy looks round is very realistic. I think it must be a dummy on the bike, but then i think how did it hold the bike so well on the way down - very good stunt scene -no CGI there. The explosion is pretty instant, compared to the car that goes off the cliff (no explosion) - so prehaps that hides a clever edit of the dude landing the jump, which is then replaced with the explosion, giving the illusion that it blows up on impact.
Im still going to say dummy though, with a bit of old school movie magic sprinkled on it.
You wanna eat that outside?
[deleted]
While I fully agree that things have gotten too CGI, it's only fair to say due to the deadly combo of litigation, insurance and safety concerns, it's kind of understandable for a producer to say, "You know? Why risk it? Plus, think of how much time and money we'll save!" The cost to do just one shot of a body falling off a building is probably a third of the rent for the crane to hoist him up and drop him repeatedly.
But on the other hand, if they want quality, I think that overusing CGI on a movie makes it look obvious and, while technically ingenious, still looks chintzy. I mean, did you see Transformers? Everything is SO overloaded with CGI you can barely tell what the hell you're supposed to be looking at?! I get the possible argument that it's giant robots in disguise, CGI is the only way to do it. Which is true, but if everything is moving and sliding (even when they're not transforming) in a nonstop fury with glints and gleams from nonexistant light sources and crowding up 95% of the screen, it just becomes a very sleek and busy blur of motion. Plus, there was the movie itself, which only proved that Michael Bay is too incompetent a director to adapt a children's cartoon show. I know it made a load of money and everything, but in this day and age, that really doesn't prove anything about a film except it's huge ad campaign.
Another casualty in the CGI war is the use of makeup and puppets. In Spider-Man 2, Dr. Octopus looked great and as realistic as it could get. I think this was due to how the director used puppets for everything except when CGI was the only method to get a shot. No way they could get the footage for that train fight in real life, but if the shot is just him talking to the tentacles, puppets make it look real. (Of course, all the great effects in the world aren't going to save crap like part 3.) But I hope movies like the Lord of the Rings and Hellboy movies showed studios that doing everything CGI just doesn't work!
And we want REAL car chases and crashes back! More people talk about the last twenty minutes of Death Proof more than all four Fast and Furious movies for a reason! The last really epic car smash 'em up movie was Ronin, and that was a WHILE ago.
"But, hey, that's me, I could be wrong."
[deleted]
I worked for many years as a Hollywood extra, but not on this movie. I now make a lot of videos for YouTube and I do use some special effects with low cost editors for the videos. My guess from watching the movie again on DVD and going through that scene as slowly and carefully as I could, is that it is indeed a real person on the bike and not a dummy. I watched the head and body moving and there is nothing jerky or puppet like in the motorcyclist's flying off the cliff into space. That has been done in many movies before, so the early part of the stunt is probably the real thing. The bike then goes down a long, long way, which could be enhanced somewhat by a telephoto lens and slow motion with a speeded up camera, or it actually was just one very long fall. The bike could have fallen into a pool of water or onto an airbag or both but it very likely fell into a hole of some kind where we see the ground. The explosion could have been added later by doing an overlay with an explosion scene that might have occured days before or after and thousands of miles away and maybe on a stage with a blue or green screen. It does not look like a blue screen fake shot, but it could be. It could also be a matte where a section of the explosion scene was inserted into an existing picture. I have a video at YouTube called Drink Smokers Coffee which has an explosion overlay on top of an existing scene. It is very low cost and it doesn't look too bad. My user name there is Featureman. I will admit that scene is the most amazing action scene in this movie. The motorcycle completely disappears when the explosion begins. A mystery for sure.
shareThis was an enjoyable thread, nobody started trolling or name calling.
share