Podcasts about Ken Adam

India Mahdavi dessine des endroits dans lesquels on se sent bien, plein de rondeurs, de couleurs, de sensualité, de chemins de traverse aussi. A l'image de son Bishop, ce tabouret inspiré par la pièce du fou au jeu d'échecs, qui est devenu une de ses signatures. Cette architecte d'intérieur et designer est parmi les plus reconnues de notre époque. Elle a notamment créé les décors de l'Hôtel Townhouse à Miami et de The Gallery at Sketch à Londres et les espaces de boutiques Ladurée.Parmi ses réalisations récentes, la rénovation des chambres de la Villa Médicis, à Rome, ou encore les intérieurs du Musée PoMo, qui, à Trondheim, en Norvège, vient d'ouvrir ses portes. Au sujet de cet ancien bureau de poste, elle explique : « J'ai beaucoup travaillé sur des fragments du bâtiment qui sont des lieux interstitiels, comme une salle de lecture où on a voulu renouer avec la tradition de l'ornementation folklorique norvégienne. »Elle accueille « Le Goût de M » rue Lacaze, dans le 7e arrondissement à Paris, où elle a recréé tout un écosystème : un studio de création, une boutique, un showroom et deux espaces d'exposition. Celle qui est née en Iran a connu plusieurs domiciles dans son enfance, aux Etats-Unis, en Allemagne, mais aussi en France. A Saint-Paul-de-Vence, elle goûte à la pédagogie libre de l'école Freinet et s'émerveille de l'architecture contemporaine de la Fondation Maeght. En allant au cinéma, elle découvre des réalisateurs comme Stanley Kubrick, Federico Fellini, Luchino Visconti, pour qui les décors sont des personnages à part entière. Elle confie aussi son admiration pour le chef décorateur britannique Ken Adam, qui a œuvré sur de nombreux James Bond.Depuis six saisons, la journaliste et productrice Géraldine Sarratia interroge la construction et les méandres du goût d'une personnalité. Qu'ils ou elles soient créateurs, artistes, cuisiniers ou intellectuels, tous convoquent leurs souvenirs d'enfance, tous évoquent la dimension sociale et culturelle de la construction d'un corpus de goûts, d'un ensemble de valeurs.Un podcast produit et présenté par Géraldine Sarratia (Genre idéal) préparé avec l'aide de Diane Lisarelli et Juliette SavardRéalisation : Emmanuel BauxMusique : Gotan Project Hébergé par Audion. Visitez https://www.audion.fm/fr/privacy-policy pour plus d'informations.

Si tratta di un film storico che trae il proprio soggetto dal romanzo Le memorie di Barry Lyndon di William Makepeace Thackeray. Nonostante all'uscita nelle sale non abbia prodotto incassi cospicui, Barry Lyndon è oggi considerato uno dei migliori film di Kubrick e una delle più importanti opere cinematografiche di tutti i tempi. Per creare un'opera il più possibile realistica, Kubrick trasse ispirazione dai più famosi paesaggisti del XVIII secolo per scegliere le ambientazioni dei set. Le riprese vennero effettuate nel Regno Unito, Irlanda e Germania. Le scene e i costumi vennero ricavati da quadri, stampe e disegni d'epoca; grazie a questa attenzione ai dettagli, il film ottenne i premi Oscar alla migliore fotografia (John Alcott), alla migliore scenografia (Ken Adam) e ai migliori costumi (Milena Canonero e Ulla-Britt Soderlund) nel 1976. Le riprese vennero invece eseguite con l'ausilio della sola luce naturale o, tutt'al più, delle candele e delle lampade a olio per le riprese notturne. Questa scelta implicò l'utilizzo di lenti rivoluzionarie, studiate dalla Zeiss per la NASA (come lo Zeiss Planar 50mm f/0.7, uno degli obiettivi più luminosi mai realizzati nella storia della fotografia), e di nuove macchine da presa messe a punto dalla Panavision. Il film di questo episodio è “Barry Lyndon”. Con la partecipazione di Lucia Pareti (Cast), Mariangela Ungaro (Colonna sonora), Fernanda Cherubini (Cast), Giulio Tiezzi (Critica), Marco Pieroni (Trama), Bruna Iacopino (Copertina).

Ben Rousseau is multi disciplined designer and award winning lighting artist specialising in the relationship between material, light and form. Born in Australia, but having spent his childhood in England's oldest recorded town, Colchester, Ben always had a desire to create and shape the future.   An early interest in the styling of futuristic films such as Blade runner and the work of visionary concept artist - Syd Mead, Star Wars and the early James Bond film sets created by Ken Adam.   This conceptual outlook for our world in the not too distant future gave Ben a hunger to create exciting and innovative work that remains a staple in his creations today. Having a desire to learn about high tech machinery and manufacturing processes that would allow him to create art and high tech designs that would help move the modern world forward.   With a broad portfolio of work that includes artistic installations at London's prestigious V&A museum, taken him from the arctic wilderness creating rooms of illuminated Ice at the Ice Hotel Sweden to the Nevada desert creating installations at Burning Man.   Bens work now heavily focuses on the relationship of time and light with his Tempus Horology collection and how we can improve our experiences with time and learning to appreciate more than ever living in the now.   www.benrousseau.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/benrousseaudesign/ https://www.instagram.com/ben_rousseau_studio/   Timestamps:   [1:30] Give us the context of your artwork [5:05] How long have you had your business for? [12:20] If you had a magic wand what problem would you solve in your business right now? [15:00] How do you measure your pipeline? [17:00] Do you have an assistant? [25:00] If you were to pick just one market to work with, which one would it be? [31:15] Have you got a business manager? [40:25] There's a few people I'm going to introduce you to…     #tricres #fyp #businesscoaching  #kickassculture #businesscoachtraining  #entrepreneur #sme #consulting #businesscoaching #business consulting Find the whole podcast at: https://tricres.com/podcasts/   Subscribe to Tricres! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCX0EUHMC2CckN6amdXL2F3Q?sub_confirmation=1   If you're a coach or consultant, subscribe to hear our podcasts and see how we coach clients.   If your passion is about making it happen for SMEs you need to listen to our podcast to see business coaching in action!

Hey everyone! Welcome back to the podcast. I'm so excited to share this conversation with Ben Rousseau, an award-winning lighting artist and luxury product designer based in Hove, UK. Ben's creative journey is nothing short of inspiring, and today, we dive into his story, his work, and his passion for designing with light. Ben's story starts in Colchester, England's oldest recorded town. Growing up surrounded by ancient castles, he dreamed of shaping the future, fueled by the imaginative worlds of James Bond and Star Wars. His fascination with lighting began early, as he marveled at the dramatic, futuristic sets of Ken Adam's Bond films.   This passion led him to study film special effects and model making, where he discovered the emotional and transformative power of light. Over the years, Ben's career has evolved into a multidisciplinary exploration of lighting, art, and design. From furniture for nightclubs to high-tech timepieces and sculptural chairs like his stunning “California Chair,”   Ben infuses every project with a sense of drama and innovation. His work is all about creating connection—whether it's through the cozy glow of a lamp or the mesmerizing patterns of light on a wall. Ben's philosophy is rooted in the idea that lighting isn't just functional; it's emotional. He wants his designs to help people pause, appreciate the moment, and reconnect with their surroundings. Whether he's designing for a sleek modern home or a dramatic Bond-villain-esque interior, his work is always about pushing boundaries and telling a story. In this episode, we also chat about the challenges of conveying the magic of lighting to clients, how Ben builds trust with them, and the collaborative process that brings his visions to life.   Ben shares some behind-the-scenes insights into his design process, including how he considers the interplay of light, space, and materials to create environments that are as practical as they are beautiful. Finally, we touch on the importance of having fun with design and how creativity can turn even the most stressful projects into memorable experiences. Ben's passion for innovation and his commitment to lighting up people's lives shine through every part of our conversation. If you're ready to be inspired by the power of light, don't miss this episode! And be sure to check out Ben's work on his website—it's something you truly have to see to believe.    Podcast Website and Resources: Get more info about our year-long mentorship and coaching program: https://www.designedforthecreativemind.com/business-bakery   Text BESTIE to 855-784-8299 for business tips, encouragement, and all our DFCM updates.   SIMPLIFY YOUR MARKETING, SIMPLIFY YOUR LIFE. Sidemark is an all-new, all-in-one software that organizes sales, marketing, and business services all in one convenient location. Join mysidemark.com to help grow your interior design business. Stay in touch with Michelle Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/designedforthecreativemind/  Join our Free Facebook Community: https://www.facebook.com/groups/idbizlaunchpad  Get clarity on your next best step today! https://www.designedforthecreativemind.com/reviewguide   Have ideas or suggestions or want to be considered as a guest on the show? Contact me! https://www.DesignedForTheCreativeMind.com/contact   A Podcast Launch Bestie production  

Gonzalo (@ggl007) presenta el podcast acompañado de Daniel (@bonsan) y Ester (@RubyRuby), con el que rendimos homenaje a Ken Adam (1921-2016), uno de los diseñadores y decoradores más míticos de la historia del cine. Además, nuestras secciones habituales:: 00:00:00 Prólogo 00:06:58 Saludo a bonsan 00:16:22 Opiniones de los oyentes 00:20:30 Promo Taller Skywalker 00:21:09 El espontáneo 00:25:31 Noticias del mes 00:30:46 La noticia del mes 00:34:40 Efemérides Bond 00:36:53 Promo Ian Fleming y James Bond: Conexión España 00:38:12 Debate Ken Adam con RubyRuby 02:01:02 Promo Club Archivo 007 02:16:04 Despedida 02:17:45 Tema final

Gonzalo (@ggl007) presenta el podcast acompañado de Daniel (@bonsan) y Ester (@RubyRuby), con el que rendimos homenaje a Ken Adam (1921-2016), uno de los diseñadores y decoradores más míticos de la historia del cine. Además, nuestras secciones habituales:: 00:00:00 Prólogo 00:06:58 Saludo a bonsan 00:16:22 Opiniones de los oyentes 00:20:30 Promo Taller Skywalker 00:21:09 El espontáneo 00:25:31 Noticias del mes 00:30:46 La noticia del mes 00:34:40 Efemérides Bond 00:36:53 Promo Ian Fleming y James Bond: Conexión España 00:38:12 Debate Ken Adam con RubyRuby 02:01:02 Promo Club Archivo 007 02:16:04 Despedida 02:17:45 Tema final

In this thrilling second episode of the WN MOVIE TALK PODCAST's "007 Project," we dive deep into the iconic world of James Bond, focusing on his very first cinematic adventure, "Dr. No" (1962). This episode is packed with Bond-related insights, perfect for die-hard fans and curious newcomers alike.Join us as we uncover the fascinating creation of "Dr. No," the groundbreaking film that introduced Sean Connery as the legendary 007. We discuss the challenges and limitations faced by the filmmakers, from budget constraints to the bold decisions that would define the future of the franchise. We'll take you behind the scenes, exploring the casting of Connery, a relatively unknown actor at the time, who would go on to embody the suave and lethal British spy.The episode delves into the visionary work of director Terence Young, whose influence on the Bond films can't be overstated. We examine how Young, alongside production designer Ken Adam, created the stylish and enduring look of the 007 universe, from the sleek and modern MI6 headquarters to the villainous lair of Dr. No. The film's exotic locations, memorable villains, and the introduction of Bond's trademark gadgets all play a key role in this discussion.We'll also talk about the impact of "Dr. No" on the world of cinema, its critical and commercial success, and how it set the stage for one of the most successful and longest-running franchises in movie history. The legacy of "Dr. No" is undeniable, and its influence can still be seen in modern spy thrillers and action films.Tune in to the WN MOVIE TALK PODCAST as we celebrate the birth of a cinematic icon, exploring the secrets and stories behind "Dr. No," the film that started it all for James Bond. Whether you're a seasoned Bond aficionado or new to the series, this episode is a must-listen for anyone interested in the history and legacy of 007.4o Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to the second of our shows which discuss the James Bond films of the 1960's – a time when the ever-innocent Neil thought Pussy Galore was a gang of cats As a reminder back in 2020 we had a number of episodes with our American friend Elijah discussing these very Bond films.  Elijah had never seen a Bond film before we started that series and it was interesting to get his perspective of a series of films that are over 50 years old.  Judging from the correspondence we received, those shows were a hit with you, our listeners.  To conclude that series we were going to bring in a James Bond aficionado to give us his view on those auspicious beginnings for James Bond.  A big thank you to Jon Yates for his time and knowledge in the episodes which follow. In this second episode, we talk John Barry, Ken Adam and George Lazenby.  We also give Jon a challenge to design his personal choice of a 60's Sean Connery Bond film that never was. Like the films we hope our sometimes-irreverent talk amuses and entertains you. A brief word about Mr Jon Yates.  Not only is he a James Bond superfan, he is also a novelist.  His first novel Subliminal Roots, a murder mystery,  poses the fascinating question “How can one man kill two other men in the same way in different places at the same time?”  Check it out, a link for the novel is below. Also below is a link to Q The Music who provided the music you hear throughout the podcast.  Q The Music are on tour again this year and well worth going to see. Thank you Jon and Warren.  And to everyone else, see you on the next show or At The Flicks

After bringing us Ronin, The Quiller Memorandum and The Bourne Identity in previous years, 00-Chapman returns to the "3-Non Bonds" stage for one final showcase. This time, Harry Saltzman's 1965 thriller, The Ipcress File, is under investigation. Deemed by some an "anti-Bond" film for its calculated, artistic economy and unlikely hero, this jazzy spy thriller nevertheless had a good helping of James Bond talent behind the camera. The creative fingerprints of Ken Adam, John Barry, Peter Hunt and Norman Wanstall are all on show throughout this Michael Caine caper, set amidst the cool gloom of a not-yet swinging London.

Director, guionista y productor argentino. Es director de la productora Argentinacine. Rosenfeld fue premiado como director novel en la Competencia Oficial de Venecia, es también coproductor de sus películas y de varios proyectos. Licenciado en Comunicación Audiovisual, estudió montaje con Miguel Pérez, puesta en escena con Augusto Fernandes, interpretación con Julio Chávez, y realizó seminarios con Krysztof Kieslowsky, Stephen Frears, Jorge Goldenberg, Lita Stantic, Ken Adam, Alessandro Baricco, Antonhy Mingella y Abbas Kiarostami. Antes de dirigir, trabajó en varios largometrajes como ayudante de dirección de Alejandro Agresti. Ha dirigido cinco largometrajes premiados (documentales y ficción) estrenados en Berlinale, Competencia Oficiar del Festival de Venecia, Festival Internacional de Cine de San Sebastián, y Fid Marsella, entre otros. Ha coproducido nueve títulos con Francia, Dinamarca, España, Países Bajos, Japón, Alemania.

"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the war room!"REBROADCASTStanley Kubrick didn't do comedy often which is a shame because “Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb” is arguably one of the funniest films ever made. What's interesting is that Kubrick intended on making a serious film about one of his greatest fears at the time: the threat of nuclear war. But after several attempts at finding the right way to tell the story seriously (including one involving aliens watching us from above, discussing our penchant for destruction), he hit on the idea of making it funny. And his dark comedy classic was born.Join us – Andy Nelson and Pete Wright – as we wrap up our brief vacation challenge with Andy's choice of his favorite end-of-the-world comedy, Kubrick's 1964 film “Dr. Strangelove.” We talk about how we were introduced to this film and why it may not be a film that one connects to immediately but a film that one has to find the humor over time. We discuss the actors – Peter Sellers, George C. Scott, Slim Pickens, Sterling Hayden, Keenan Wynn, even James Earl Jones in his first screen role – and the level of comedy brilliance they all achieve individually and how it ties to the overall film. We single out Sellers, of course, as we discuss the three roles he played in the film and what makes them all so unique. We touch on the look of the film, shot by Gilbert Taylor with impeccable production design by Ken Adam, pointing out just what it took to make the war room one of the most iconic sets ever made. We mention the sequel that Kubrick wanted to make with the help of Terry Gilliam. And we argue about its placement on our Flickchart, as we inevitably do every week. It's one of the best films out there and well worth a discussion. Haven't seen it? Give it a try. Just be aware that you may not connect on the first viewing. This is one of those movies that may need a few shots. But it'll be well worth it. We promise you.Film Sundries Check out our Watch Page to get links to rent or buy this movie and everything else we've covered Script Transcript Original theatrical trailer Original poster artwork Art of the Title Red Alert by Peter George Flickchart Letterboxd Dr. Strangelove — Internet Movie Firearm Database Find source material for The Next Reel's family of podcasts – and thousands of other great reads – at Audible! Get your free audiobook and 30-day free trial today.Learn more about CODA and how it can work for you! Read more about the results of the WGA strike here. Read more about the results of the SAG-AFTRA strike here. Join the conversation with movie lovers from around the world on The Next Reel's Discord channel!Here's where you can find us around the internet: The Web Letterboxd Facebook Instagram X YouTube Flickchart Check out poster artwork for movies we've discussed on our Pinterest page Pete  Andy We spend hours every week putting this show together for you, our dear listener, and it would sure mean a lot to us if you considered becoming a member. When you do, you get early access to shows, ad-free episodes, and a TON of bonus content. To those who already support the show, thank you. To those who don't yet: what are you waiting for?Become a Member here: $5 monthly or $55 annuallyWhat are some other ways you can support us and show your love? Glad you asked! You can buy TNR apparel, stickers, mugs and more from our MERCH PAGE. Or buy or rent movies we've discussed on the show from our WATCH PAGE. Or renew or sign up for a Letterboxd Pro or Patron account with our LETTERBOXD MEMBERSHIP DISCOUNT. Or sign up for AUDIBLE.

"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the war room!"REBROADCASTStanley Kubrick didn't do comedy often which is a shame because “Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb” is arguably one of the funniest films ever made. What's interesting is that Kubrick intended on making a serious film about one of his greatest fears at the time: the threat of nuclear war. But after several attempts at finding the right way to tell the story seriously (including one involving aliens watching us from above, discussing our penchant for destruction), he hit on the idea of making it funny. And his dark comedy classic was born.Join us – Andy Nelson and Pete Wright – as we wrap up our brief vacation challenge with Andy's choice of his favorite end-of-the-world comedy, Kubrick's 1964 film “Dr. Strangelove.” We talk about how we were introduced to this film and why it may not be a film that one connects to immediately but a film that one has to find the humor over time. We discuss the actors – Peter Sellers, George C. Scott, Slim Pickens, Sterling Hayden, Keenan Wynn, even James Earl Jones in his first screen role – and the level of comedy brilliance they all achieve individually and how it ties to the overall film. We single out Sellers, of course, as we discuss the three roles he played in the film and what makes them all so unique. We touch on the look of the film, shot by Gilbert Taylor with impeccable production design by Ken Adam, pointing out just what it took to make the war room one of the most iconic sets ever made. We mention the sequel that Kubrick wanted to make with the help of Terry Gilliam. And we argue about its placement on our Flickchart, as we inevitably do every week. It's one of the best films out there and well worth a discussion. Haven't seen it? Give it a try. Just be aware that you may not connect on the first viewing. This is one of those movies that may need a few shots. But it'll be well worth it. We promise you.Film Sundries Check out our Watch Page to get links to rent or buy this movie and everything else we've covered Script Transcript Original theatrical trailer Original poster artwork Art of the Title Red Alert by Peter George Flickchart Letterboxd Dr. Strangelove — Internet Movie Firearm Database Find source material for The Next Reel's family of podcasts – and thousands of other great reads – at Audible! Get your free audiobook and 30-day free trial today.Learn more about CODA and how it can work for you! Read more about the results of the WGA strike here. Read more about the results of the SAG-AFTRA strike here. Join the conversation with movie lovers from around the world on The Next Reel's Discord channel!Here's where you can find us around the internet: The Web Letterboxd Facebook Instagram X YouTube Flickchart Check out poster artwork for movies we've discussed on our Pinterest page Pete  Andy We spend hours every week putting this show together for you, our dear listener, and it would sure mean a lot to us if you considered becoming a member. When you do, you get early access to shows, ad-free episodes, and a TON of bonus content. To those who already support the show, thank you. To those who don't yet: what are you waiting for?Become a Member here: $5 monthly or $55 annuallyWhat are some other ways you can support us and show your love? Glad you asked! You can buy TNR apparel, stickers, mugs and more from our MERCH PAGE. Or buy or rent movies we've discussed on the show from our WATCH PAGE. Or renew or sign up for a Letterboxd Pro or Patron account with our LETTERBOXD MEMBERSHIP DISCOUNT. Or sign up for AUDIBLE.

This week we're celebrating the genius of Ken Adam, the production designer behind cinema's most iconic sets and the man who created the visual flare the Bond movies have become known for. Films referenced:Dr. Strangelove, or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) dir. by Stanley KubrickChitty Chitty Bang Bang (1968) dir. by Ken HughesMoonraker (1979) dir. by Lewis GilbertBarry Lyndon (1975) dir. by Stanley KubrickSources and resources:Ken Adam's sketches, wallpaper.comKen Adam on working with Kubrick on Barry Lyndon on youtube.comKen Adam in his own words By Fionnuala Halligan Ken Adam on his finest sets by Ian Christie for BFIDr Strangelove: The Darkest Room by David Bromwich for criterion.comThe Ken Adam-inspired Reishstag on youtube.comJonathan Glancey on Ken Adam for The Guardian-----------If you love what we do, please like, subscribe and leave a review!Produced and edited by Lily AustinMusic and sound by James BrailsfordLogo design by Abby-Jo SheldonFollow usEmail us

Willkommen zu den Bond-Nachrichten! Heute mit folgenden Themen: Erste Informationen zur Reality-TV-Show von Amazon Prime Video Bond-Reisen von Black Tomato Wir berichten von der Vorstellung von "The Ken Adam Archive" Charlie Higson schreibt einen 007-Roman zur Krönung von King Charles III. Das Besetzungskarussell dreht sich munter weiter --------- Infos zu "The Ken Adam Archive" TASCHEN The Ken Adam Archive Christopher Frayling In Zusammenarbeit mit der Deutschen Kinemathek Hardcover, in changierenden Bicolor-Stoff gebunden, mit 4-Phasen-Hologramm, 36 x 36 cm, 3,88 kg, 360 Seiten, mit graviertem Buchständer aus Acryl Edition von 1.200 nummerierten und von Ken Adam signierten Exemplaren 850 Euro Zum Buch: taschen.com --------- SPRECHT MIT UNS! Twitter: @007PodcastDE Facebook: @007PodcastDE Instagram: instragram.com/007podcastde Mail: podcast-007@outlook.de Sprachnachrichten: https://www.speakpipe.com/mdavs Website: https://www.mdavs.de/im-gehoergang-ihrer-majestaet-james-bond-podcast/ Einladung-Link zu Discord (5x gültig) https://discord.gg/GWspJfGAyY --------- UNTERSTÜTZT UNS! Bei Ko-Fi: https://ko-fi.com/igim007 Bei Steady: https://steadyhq.com/de/im-gehorgang-ihrer-majestat-der-james-bond-podcast/about

Terence Young's 1962 James Bond debut spy film DR. NO is on deck this week. We talk the birth of one of Hollywood's most successful franchises and the iconic James Bond staples that were born out of the film. We also get into Sean Connery, the Production Design of Ken Adam, and much much more. We also pick our Top 7 Spy Films in this week's SILVER SCREEN 7.

Recorded 21st December 2022 Published 8th January 2023 Be careful younger listeners as this has an explicit tag. The Pokémon Professors Ken & Adam (Ken Pescator & Adam Tuttle Hosts of Lured Up) join us to take a close and detailed look at our first year together. This is the season 1 finale & it is a doozy. Familiar voices from our first year together unite for this entertaining show. Sit back and enjoy the show and don't forget to reach out @wayspotters on Twitter! Our Twitter: https://twitter.com/wayspotters/ Niantic Wayfarer Twitter: https://twitter.com/NianticWayfarer Our Website: http://wayspotters.com/ Support Us: https://www.patreon.com/PokemonProfessor Wayfarer Discord: https://discord.gg/niawayfarer Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/pokemonprofessornetwork Coal of the Week Arrangement: Lachlan Firth - Sampling Murray Gold. Intro Music - Game Over - Danijel Zambo - Music Vine Break Music - Hard Trap Samples, Heavy Trap Drum Loops ... - Loopmasters Outro Music - Itty Bitty 8 Bit - song by Kevin MacLeod - Spotify – Web Player Vocal recording Copyright of Pokémon Professor 2023. Pokémon And All Respective Names are Trademark and © of Nintendo 1996-2023 Pokémon GO is Trademark and © of Niantic, Inc. Wayspottters is not affiliated with Niantic Inc. or The Pokémon Company --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/wayspotters/message

When "Star Trek: Planet of the Titans" was in development, legendary designer Ken Adam was briefly employed to reinvent the Enterprise along with other conceptual pieces for the big screen. This week, The Trek Files welcomes longtime Trek expert Ben Robinson to discuss the rocky development cycle for "...Titans" and the lasting legacy of Adams' designs. See the documents: facebook.com/thetrekfiles Visit the Trekland site for behind-the-scenes access and exclusive merchandise.

When "Star Trek: Planet of the Titans" was in development, legendary designer Ken Adam was briefly employed to reinvent the Enterprise along with other conceptual pieces for the big screen. This week, The Trek Files welcomes longtime Trek expert Ben Robinson to discuss the rocky development cycle for "...Titans" and the lasting legacy of Adams' designs. See the documents: facebook.com/thetrekfiles Visit the Trekland site for behind-the-scenes access and exclusive merchandise.

When "Star Trek: Planet of the Titans" was in development, legendary designer Ken Adam was briefly employed to reinvent the Enterprise along with other conceptual pieces for the big screen. This week, The Trek Files welcomes longtime Trek expert Ben Robinson to discuss the rocky development cycle for "...Titans" and the lasting legacy of Adams' designs. See the documents: facebook.com/thetrekfiles Visit the Trekland site for behind-the-scenes access and exclusive merchandise.

Internationally acclaimed James Bond expert and author Steven Jay Rubin joins the podcast to celebrate the 60th anniversary of “Dr. No” and the James Bond film franchise.We start with a discussion of his newly updated “The James Bond Movie Encyclopedia,” the ultimate resource for Bond fans and collectors.  Then we discuss the early development of the first Bond film before getting into a detailed discussion of “Dr. No,” which was released in the UK on October 5, 1962.  Steven provides background on the casting of a fairly unknown Scottish actor by the name of Sean Connery as James Bond and his collaboration with director Terence Young to establish the character.  We also discuss the importance of Joseph Wiseman's portrayal of the first filmed Bond villain, Dr. No, and how it established the tone of the villains that followed.  And we discuss the other cast, including then-unknown actress Ursula Andress in one of the most iconic introductions in film history. We also discuss the importance of composer Monty Norman, the opening titles created by Maurice Binder, Peter Hunt's fast-paced editing style, and production designer Ken Adam's incredible sets.  We bookend the discussion with a detailed review of the most recent film, “No Time to Die” starring Daniel Craig in his last role as Bond. We review the rocky start of the film and the controversial ending of the movie.  We also discuss Craig's impact on the Bond legacy and some of our favorite stunts and scenes in the films.   We finish up the celebration with a fun rapid-fire sequence where we learn which films are fan favorites, the most popular Bond actor, and what the future holds for the franchise.Purchase on Amazon:The James Bond Movie EncyclopediaDr. No Blu-ray No Time to Die 4KGuest Linkswww.stevenjayrubin.comFacebookOtaku Media produces podcasts, behind-the-scenes extras, and media that connect creatives with their fans and businesses with their consumers.  Contact us today to see how we can work together to achieve your goals.  www.otakumedia.tv

This week, Adam introduces Nate to You Only Live Twice (1967), perhaps the most ridiculous James Bond film of the Connery era and fodder for the beloved Simpsons episode, “You Only Move Twice” (S8E2). Come for Roald Dahl's wacky take on the James Bond formula, stay for the tremendous amount of cringe!Also in this episode:• Some of Bond's most outlandish gadgets, including an autogyro named “Little Nellie”• A case of yellowface that rivals even The Simpsons• A deep dive into the legacy of Ken Adam's iconic volcano lair, from The Simpsons to Austin Powers to The Incredibles • A roundup of favorite James Bond moments from The Simpsons• A few thoughts on parody mashups and how parodies work when viewers don't know the source materialNext week, Nate invites Adam to watch The Karate Kid (1984) for the first time.Follow us @simpsonsfilmpod on Twitter and Instagram! Find bonus content at SpringfieldGoogolplex.com

Join Impact team members Ken Adam and Ron Cansler as they interview Scott McInnis on his work with Crossroads Church and how he connects to the culture through his ministry with the "Five Doors" outreach strategy. Read more about this model on the blog: https://impactdisciples.com/the-five-door-church/.

Really, 007! give tribute to legendary production designer Ken Adam about his 17 years creating the look of the James Bond franchise, which spanned 7 films from Dr. No to Moonraker... Host Tom Pickup is joined by fellow Bond enthusiasts John Kell, Chris Goldie and Math Pickup. Thanks for listening - we think you'll love it too! Disclaimer: Really, 007! is an unofficial entity and is not affiliated with EON Productions, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. and Danjaq, LLC. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This episode is also available as a blog post: https://hmssweblog.wordpress.com/2022/01/28/dr-nos-60th-anniversary-part-v-ken-adams-magic/

Imprint Companion is the only podcast on the Australian Internet about "DVD Culture."Hang onto your slipcases because Alexei Toliopoulos (Finding Drago, Total Reboot) and Blake Howard (One Heat Minute) team up to unbox, unpack and unveil upcoming releases from Australia's brand new boutique Blu-Ray label Imprint Films. This is episode is all about the pick of the October British Batch, The Harry Palmer Collection.  FOR THE FIRST TIME, ALL THREE ORIGINAL 1960S FILMS ARE BROUGHT TOGETHER IN ONE COLLECTION, WITH BONUS FEATURES WORTHY OF FURTHER INVESTIGATION.The Ipcress File (1965) – Imprint Collection # 75Starring Michael Caine, Nigel Green, Guy Doleman, Sue Lloyd, and Gordon Jackson.Based on Len Deighton's bestselling novel, the realistic, landmark spy thriller of espionage and counter-espionage centres on Harry Palmer, an intelligence agent assigned to investigate fears over British security. Produced by 007's Harry Saltzman, with music by John Barry, The Ipcress File provides a downbeat, yet realistic and exciting portrayal of 1960s espionage.  Special Features and Technical Specs:1080p high-definition master from a restored 2k scan by ITV StudiosAudio commentary by director Sidney J. Furie and film editor Peter Hunt (1999)Audio commentary by film historian Troy Howarth and film historian/filmmaker Daniel Kremer (2020)Michael Caine is Harry Palmer – interview with Michael Caine (2006)The Design File – interview with production designer Ken Adam (2006)Locations Report with Richard Dacre (2021) Through The Keyhole – interview with 2nd assistant director Denis Johnson, Jr. (2021)Counting The Cash – interview with assistant production accountant Maurice Landsberger (2021)Isolated Music & Effects audio track Textless Material, Theatrical Trailers, U.S. Radio Spots and Extensive Photo GalleriesDTS HD 5.1 surround / LPCM 2.0 Mono Optional English subtitlesFuneral in Berlin (1966) – Imprint Collection # 76Starring Michael Caine, Paul Hubschmid, Oscar Homolka, Eva RenziHarry Palmer is sent to Berlin where he is to extricate a Russian general who wants to defect. Director Guy Hamilton's follow-up to The Ipcress File is the second in the film series based on Len Deighton's novels. Special Features and Technical Specs:1080p high-definition transfer by Paramount PicturesAudio commentary by Rob Mallows of The Deighton Dossier (2021)Fun in Berlin – interview with editor John Bloom (2021)Afternoon Plus – interview with Len Deighton (1983) Candid Caine: a self portrait by Michael Caine – documentary (1969) Michael Caine: Breaking the Mold – documentary (1994)Theatrical Trailer and Photo GalleryLPCM 2.0 Mono Optional English subtitlesBillion Dollar Brain (1967) – Imprint Collection #77Starring Michael Caine, Karl Malden, Ed Begley, Oscar Homolka, Francoise DorleacHarry Palmer is blackmailed into working for MI5 again on his wildest – and most dangerous – assignment yet as he pits his wits against an insane billionaire and his supercomputer. From 007 producer Harry Saltzman and acclaimed director Ken Russell come the final film in the 1960s Palmer trilogy. Special Features and Technical Specs:1080p high-definition transfer by MGM Audio commentary by film historians Vic Pratt and Will Fowler (2021))Interview with Rob Mallows of The Deighton Dossier (2021) Photographing Spies – interview with cinematographer Billy Williams (2021)Billion Dollar Frame – interview with associate editor Willy Kemplen (2021)This Week – excerpt of Michael Caine discussing the British film industry (1969)Theatrical Trailers LPCM 2.0 Mono Optional English subtitlesBlake Howard - Twitter & One Heat Minute Website Alexei Toliopoulos - Twitter & Total RebootSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/one-heat-minute-productions/exclusive-contentAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Imprint Companion is the only podcast on the Australian Internet about "DVD Culture."Hang onto your slipcases because Alexei Toliopoulos (Finding Drago, Total Reboot) and Blake Howard (One Heat Minute) team up to unbox, unpack and unveil upcoming releases from Australia's brand new boutique Blu-Ray label Imprint Films. This is episode is all about the pick of the October British Batch, The Harry Palmer Collection.  FOR THE FIRST TIME, ALL THREE ORIGINAL 1960S FILMS ARE BROUGHT TOGETHER IN ONE COLLECTION, WITH BONUS FEATURES WORTHY OF FURTHER INVESTIGATION.The Ipcress File (1965) – Imprint Collection # 75Starring Michael Caine, Nigel Green, Guy Doleman, Sue Lloyd, and Gordon Jackson.Based on Len Deighton's bestselling novel, the realistic, landmark spy thriller of espionage and counter-espionage centres on Harry Palmer, an intelligence agent assigned to investigate fears over British security. Produced by 007's Harry Saltzman, with music by John Barry, The Ipcress File provides a downbeat, yet realistic and exciting portrayal of 1960s espionage.  Special Features and Technical Specs:1080p high-definition master from a restored 2k scan by ITV StudiosAudio commentary by director Sidney J. Furie and film editor Peter Hunt (1999)Audio commentary by film historian Troy Howarth and film historian/filmmaker Daniel Kremer (2020)Michael Caine is Harry Palmer – interview with Michael Caine (2006)The Design File – interview with production designer Ken Adam (2006)Locations Report with Richard Dacre (2021) Through The Keyhole – interview with 2nd assistant director Denis Johnson, Jr. (2021)Counting The Cash – interview with assistant production accountant Maurice Landsberger (2021)Isolated Music & Effects audio track Textless Material, Theatrical Trailers, U.S. Radio Spots and Extensive Photo GalleriesDTS HD 5.1 surround / LPCM 2.0 Mono Optional English subtitlesFuneral in Berlin (1966) – Imprint Collection # 76Starring Michael Caine, Paul Hubschmid, Oscar Homolka, Eva RenziHarry Palmer is sent to Berlin where he is to extricate a Russian general who wants to defect. Director Guy Hamilton's follow-up to The Ipcress File is the second in the film series based on Len Deighton's novels. Special Features and Technical Specs:1080p high-definition transfer by Paramount PicturesAudio commentary by Rob Mallows of The Deighton Dossier (2021)Fun in Berlin – interview with editor John Bloom (2021)Afternoon Plus – interview with Len Deighton (1983) Candid Caine: a self portrait by Michael Caine – documentary (1969) Michael Caine: Breaking the Mold – documentary (1994)Theatrical Trailer and Photo GalleryLPCM 2.0 Mono Optional English subtitlesBillion Dollar Brain (1967) – Imprint Collection #77Starring Michael Caine, Karl Malden, Ed Begley, Oscar Homolka, Francoise DorleacHarry Palmer is blackmailed into working for MI5 again on his wildest – and most dangerous – assignment yet as he pits his wits against an insane billionaire and his supercomputer. From 007 producer Harry Saltzman and acclaimed director Ken Russell come the final film in the 1960s Palmer trilogy. Special Features and Technical Specs:1080p high-definition transfer by MGM Audio commentary by film historians Vic Pratt and Will Fowler (2021))Interview with Rob Mallows of The Deighton Dossier (2021) Photographing Spies – interview with cinematographer Billy Williams (2021)Billion Dollar Frame – interview with associate editor Willy Kemplen (2021)This Week – excerpt of Michael Caine discussing the British film industry (1969)Theatrical Trailers LPCM 2.0 Mono Optional English subtitlesSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/imprint-companion/donations

„Der Spion, der mich liebte“ gilt gemeinhin als gelungenster Bond-Film der Roger-Moore-Ära: Set-Design von Ken Adam, ein Lotus Esprit als Dienstwagen, Barbara Bach als potente Partnerin, Curd Jürgens und der „Beißer“ als Bösewichte. Wie macht sich der Film 44 Jahre später? FFK urteilt.

Moores bester Bond? Mal schauen! „Der Spion, der mich liebte“ gilt gemeinhin als gelungenster Bond-Film der Roger-Moore-Ära: Set-Design von Ken Adam, ein Lotus Esprit als Dienstwagen, Barbara Bach als potente Partnerin, Curd Jürgens und der „Beißer“ als Bösewichte. Wie macht sich der Film 44 Jahre später? FFK urteilt. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hello Interactors,Most of you probably heard about Bill Gates’ recent over the top 66th birthday celebration. The images conjured up visions of a Bond film. It got me thinking about Bezos and Musk and how they could easily be cast as villains in a Bond film. Maybe real-life really is stranger than fiction. Or maybe they’re one in the same. As interactors, you’re special individuals self-selected to be a part of an evolutionary journey. You’re also members of an attentive community so I welcome your participation.Please leave your comments below or email me directly.Now let’s go…BOND MEETS ELONThe scene opens in Monaco with the bay crowded with boats. James Bond has just climbed aboard a private mega yacht and is snooping around. With a single hand he pulls open a glass sliding door on the upper deck and steps inside an opulent room filled with fine furniture.He glances out a window to reveal a long gray military frigate docked at shore with a helicopter perched on top. Speeding toward it is a motor boat that mysteriously vanishes under water 10 meters shy of the hard chined towering frigate.Bond squints with suspicion. He then notices a reflection in the shiny brass compass housing just in front of the window. Somebody is approaching him from behind. He quickly grabs a towel and somehow manages to kill his assailant with piece of white cotton terry cloth fabric that he then uses to dab the sweat from his brow.The scene cuts to a celebration on the French frigate. The military’s top brass and dignitaries arrive in chauffeured Mercedes Benz sedans as a Navy brass band plays in the background. We cut briefly to see a closeup of two identification cards being swapped by black leather gloved hands. Back to Bond on the boat and he’s just stumbled across a dead man that stiffly falls from a closet stripped of all his clothes – presumably the previous holder of one of those ID cards we just saw.We cut back to shore and are introduced to an attractive woman who just arrived for the ceremonies. And now back to Bond who puts two and two together and jumps from the super yacht onto a high speed tender. The camera zooms in on the throttle as we’re treated to the throaty roars of a muscular V12 engine. Bond shoves the throttle forward and jets towards the celebration.We cut to a speech by a French bureaucrat standing on the frigate. He’s spouting off the technological features of a new helicopter that is about to be demonstrated. He calls it “Europe’s answer to the electronic battlefield.” The Tiger helicopter, he says, uses “stealth technology.” It’s “hardened against all forms of electronic interference, radio jamming, and electromagnetic radiation.”We then cut to two pilots making their way toward the helicopters below deck on the frigate. But, they’re interrupted by the beautiful woman we were just introduced to. After some flirty back and forth dialog, she raises her gun and kills them both.Next we see her wearing one of their helmets and uniform as she’s joined by her companion Bond saw dip below the surface in the motorboat moments earlier. They make their way out onto the helicopter pad where the Tiger awaits. The announcer says, “Please welcome the pilots!” They climb in and start the propellers whirling as we cut to Bond making his way up the steps of the dock and through the crowd. He runs toward the frigate to stop them, but is halted and thrown up against the wall of the ship by two French navy officers. A gun is held to his sun soaked face as he watches the Tiger helicopter whir away.I couldn’t help but recall this scene from the 1995 Bond film, GoldenEye when I read reports and saw pictures of Bill Gates’ rented yacht docked in a remote bay somewhere in Turkey shuttling guests by helicopter to his beachside 66th birthday bash.There’s no question Bill lives the life similar to those mega rich and powerful international men of mystery that Bond films cast as antagonists. He lives in a sprawling high tech compound on Lake Washington with a Bond-like subterranean garage. When he’s not around to commute by car to his nearby office, he has a barge tugged into a secluded cove where his helicopter can land. A small boat shuttles him to shore. He escapes up a mysterious private elevator in a midrise office building overlooking the lake and the Seattle skyline.For his Turkish birthday bash, Bill paid upwards of $2 million dollars a week to rent one of the world’s largest yachts, “Lana”. One of his guests, Jeff Bezos, also rented a yacht. Some speculate he actually owns it, but the “Flying Fox” rents for over $3 million a week. It too had helicopters shuttling people to the beach party.The world’s richest man, Elon Musk, wasn’t there but we can imagine he would not have been out done. Perhaps there was a shortage of yachts to rent. Or maybe he was in the Space X control room rattling off all the technological wonders of his new rocket perched on the platform outside. I can imagine the scene cutting to 007 careening down the tarmac in his Tesla Cybertruck. Flying just above him, a bodacious, musclebound, blond bombshell leaning out of an unmanned drone. She’s firing rounds of thermonuclear plasma from her space pistol as the countdown clock to launch ticks toward zero. Will 007 make it to Musk in time, or will the double agent vixen sabotage the launch?THE INDIVIDUALISTIC TRIUMPHANT SEXISTThese three men have more in common than being billionaires, they’re all science fiction junkies who pursued a path of technocratic, world dominating, capitalistic monopolies. They’re also rational egoists. They believe their selfish actions to be perfectly rational. In fact, in their estimation, any action on the part of any human is only rational if and only if it maximizes one's own self-interest. The libertarian darling philosopher and writer Alice O’Connor, or better known as Ayn Rand, a favorite of theirs I’m sure, said “it’s not only irrational to act against your own self-interest, but it’s also immoral.”She was a big fan of 007 books, but not the films. She didn’t like how the humor diminished the glory of individualism. She said the movies “undercut Bond’s stature, to make him ridiculous.” At least she wasn’t alone. The inventor of the character, Ian Fleming, thought he was ridiculous too. He believed Bond as a “blunt instrument wielded by a government department who would get into bizarre and fantastic situations […] he’s always referred to as my hero. I don’t see him as a hero myself. On the whole I think he’s a rather unattractive man.”Billionaires today are villainized as rather unattractive men. Like Bond movies, they celebrate and flaunt the excesses of mass-consumption and capitalism. We can track the rise of this behavior with the rise of the Bond franchise. From the early books in the 1950s to the most recent Bond flicks, we are offered superheroes of a technologically driven mass-consumer society. But it’s not a society of the masses. It’s a glamorized vision of a small exclusive society that props itself up so it can look down at the rest of the world’s global population. Without whom, through their toils and disenfranchisement, the elite exclusive little society would not exist. Nor would villainous billionaires. Or maybe not as many.Bond films divide the world into workers, buyers, and capitalists. All three of those characters are presented in that single helicopter scene in GoldenEye. Two navy pilots (workers) killed point blank by a hired villain (worker) so she could fly a technologically advanced machine built with blue-collar labor (workers) and purchased by the government (buyer) from a corporation (capitalist) using tax dollars collected largely from workers. And it was Bond’s job to represent the public’s interest, squash the entire operation, and save capitalism.And the audience cheers him on. The audience, of course, is made mostly of people who have a vested interest in a government secret agent protecting the laws that maintain their private ownership of property, consumption of goods, and privilege over those tasked with serving them. They give permission to Bond to do things that go against the grain of Western democracy and its Christian roots. He’s allowed to break the law, promote misogyny, destroy property, and even commit murder. So long as the dominant social order is upheld, mass-media consumers turn a blind eye.Social scientist, Toby Miller calls it a “popular endorsement of overt governmental processes through the publicly-ratified rule of law.” It’s exactly what many in Europe and America want.The former New York Times movie critic, Vincent Canby, wrote in 1971 that Bond is a “steadfast agent for the military-industrial complex, a friend to the C.I.A. and a triumphant sexist.”  In 2012 the American Conservative magazine said “Bond’s Britain is relevant, wealthy, and influential, still a beacon of Western ingenuity.”Gates, Bezos, and Musk are all beacons of Western ingenuity. But they’re also cartoons of capitalism, just as Bond is a cartoon of Western hegemony. Film critic and painter, Manny Farber wrote that Bond films are “a catalogue of posh-vulgar items for licentious living.” The former Head of Media at The Guardian and now professor, Jane Martinson said in 2012 that “feminists were sick of a long-running multibillion-pound franchise that left a series of beautiful women as little more than roadkill in the path of the spy we never loved.” History professor Theodore Roszak called Bond the “embodiment of technocracy.”  These critiques could have just as easily been leveled against Gates, Bezos, or Musk and their lifestyles and beliefs. And for most of the effects of neoliberal economics for that matter.  LORDE EDGE TAKES AIMGoldenEye was filmed 26 years ago. Bill Gates would have been 40 years old. That’s about the same age the actor playing Bond, Pierce Brosnan, would have been. Pierce was born in Ireland. His father abandoned him and his mother at infancy. At four they moved to London where he was raised by his grandparents while his mom worked as a nurse. When they died he was put in a boarding house. He was ridiculed by British kids for being Irish. He went on to learn commercial illustration at 16, then acting, and worked as a busker breathing fire on street corners. Not exactly the path of a true 007.Gates was born into wealth and privilege and admits to reading his fair share of science fiction. But unlike Bezos and Musk, he isn’t that interested in taking up life on Mars. His mom instilled a strong since of philanthropy in Bill as a young boy that many have benefited from today. His wealth created my own, so I can’t be too hard on him.He’s unquestionably the smartest men I’ve been around, but he can’t be the world’s 007. He’s not that smart or ingenious. And while his giving is commendable, I can’t help but wonder if Seattle would have a homeless crisis had a larger fraction of his billions been siphoned off over the last 40 years for the public good. Maybe had the government taken more of his income to circumvent global problems, he wouldn’t have to spend as much money trying to solve them.Bezos comes from a broken family. He excelled at math, computer science, and engineering. He built an alarm as a kid that would sound should someone try to enter his room. Sounds like a budding 007 to me. Upon graduating as valedictorian, Bezos told a local paper that he hoped "to get all people off the earth and see it turned into a huge national park." Bezos loves the Iain M. Banks science fiction novels, Culture series. They’re about humanoid aliens occupying artificial habitat on planets strewn across the Milky Way.But what was lost on Bezos, a fierce libertarian, is that Banks was a committed socialist. In a recent New York Times article, Jill Lepore quoted Banks as saying the books were about “’hippy commies with hyper-weapons and a deep distrust of both Marketolatry and Greedism.’ He also expressed astonishment that anyone could read his books as promoting free-market libertarianism, asking, ‘Which bit of not having private property and the absence of money in the Culture novels have these people missed?’Musk was born into wealth, but his parents divorced when he was nine years old and he lived with his dad. A decision he came to regret calling him “a terrible human being.” He was teased as a young boy and was hospitalized once after being thrown down a flight of stairs. He wrote and sold his first software at age 10, when on to graduate from the University of Pennsylvania with a Bachelor of Science in economics and a Bachelor of Arts in physics in 1989. He was accepted at Stanford to do a PhD in materials science, but opted to ride the internet startup wave instead.He too was a fan of Iain Banks. Jill Lepore also noted that Musk once tweeted, “If you must know, I am a utopian anarchist of the kind best described by Iain Banks.” That makes two renowned libertarian brainiacs who somehow missed Iain Banks’ socialist agenda.Last weekend Musk changed his Twitter name to “Lorde Edge.” The speculation is that it’s a derivative of the word edgelord which is “Someone, especially posting on the internet, who uses shocking and nihilistic speech and opinions that they themselves may or may not actually believe to gain attention and come across as a more dangerous and unique person.” It’s a character trait you might expect in a Bond anti-hero.Pierce Brosnan saw his first Bond movie, Goldfinger, in 1964 when he was 11 years old. His stepfather took him to see it in London. I wonder what the 11 year old Brosnan thought of Pussy Galore and her band of merry lesbian aviators. The movie ends with Bond and Pussy Galore on the ground having just survived parachuting from a plane. Helicopters are coming to rescue them, but he leans over her and says, “This is no time to be rescued” and pulls the parachute over himself and Pussy Galore as they kiss.I can imagine Brosnan’s stepdad leaning over and whispering to the young Pierce the words of the character’s creator, Ian Fleming, “Pussy only needed the right man to perform the laying on of hands to cure her psycho-pathological malady.”The discrepancy between Brosnan’s life and the fictional life of the character he played is metaphorical. England had long played the leading role in world power and dominance but it had been cracked by the U.S. and the fire breathing working class identity was starting to show through. Ayn Rand’s biggest fear was coming true. The grand singularly focused empire was becoming diminished by the tragedy and comedy of the commons. The talented set designer for the Bond films, Ken Adam reflected in 2008 that Goldfinger was a time when “when the British took off their handcuffs and said: ‘F**k, the Empire doesn’t exist any longer. Now, we will take over.’” Pussy Galore not only signaled liberation, she provided proletariat comic relief.Gates, Bezos, and Musk all play the leading role of the enterprising, multi-national capitalist. They’re protagonists to many and antagonists to most. Either way, they’re flawed and troubled humans with troubled beginnings but also brilliant and talented men who have brought much good – an allegory for neoliberal economics.Modern neoliberal economics has brought, and continues to bring, unmatched prosperity to underprivileged people around the world. But, it’s also created historic income disparities, social strife and anxiety, and it’s destroying the planet. The real psychopathological malady isn’t in the form of lesbianism, it’s in unbridled capitalism.Truth be told, my entire family love watching Bond movies. Pre Daniel Craig, anyway. I can’t handle the glorified violence in mainstream movies anymore. My daughter laughs at the misogyny, but relishes the moments women rule over men. My son loves the chase scenes, but is outraged by the sexism. My wife rolls her eyes at the absurdities, but cheers on the fleeting female power. I marvel at the set design and gadgetry, but wonder how my teenage kids are interpreting these messages. My daughter summed it best when I asked her why she like Bond films. She said, “Sometimes it’s entertaining to watch something you know is just classically bad.”There are people outside the United States, and some inside, who think that as they watch the absurdities of American gluttony. Perhaps we’ve reached that point England did in the 60’s when the masses realized the empire doesn’t exist anymore.Many are entertained watching Bill, Jeff, and Elon fly and float as they falter, flaunt, and philander. They are what French philosopher Jean Baudrillard would call the hyper-competent US businessman: “part James Bond, part Henry Ford.” But what their exploits do, just as Bond films do, is perpetuate a particular cultural narrative that substantiates a societal norm. They lead most members of the dominant ruling class to believe that Bill, Jeff, and Elon’s unique individual contributions, be it corporate or philanthropic, are benefitting society as a whole when in reality they’re mostly benefitting themselves and the dominant ruling class.Or maybe the joke’s on us and Musk really is casting himself as a real-life sociopathic anti-hero, “Lorde Edge.” After all, the objective for Bond in GoldenEye was to circumvent a space weapon that was destined to blow up the planet with an electromagnetic pulse. Let’s hope the battery in that Tesla Cybertruck 007 is driving down the Space X tarmac doesn’t run out of juice. That rocket Elon is about to launch just may contain a space weapon he plans to aim back at the planet; fulfilling Jeff’s sadistic boyhood dream of a planet earth free of humans.ReferenceToby Miller. Paradoxical Masculinity: James Bond, Icon of Failure. From the book The Cultural Life of James Bond. Subscribe at interplace.io

“The Chinese Have A Saying; Before Setting Out For Revenge, You First Dig Two Graves.”  This is where we will start our journey into the 1980's with our favorite 00.  After 1981's ‘For Your Eyes Only' it would mark a full ten years since Sean Connery left the iconic character and over the course of 4 years and three films EON Productions made close to $600 Million dollars (give or take) with Roger Moore at the helm.  Never in movie history had an actor stepped in so gracefully to redefine the undefinable and make it his own.  Gone were the days of Guy Hamilton, Terry Young, Lewis Gilbert, and Ken Adam.  In were the days of John Glen, Peter Lamont, and Michael G. Wilson.  Over the years many will draw a line from this film through the decades to Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan (who would make an appearance on set), and eventually Daniel Craig.  Did you know that despite Roger Moore's epic run through the 1970's his return as 007 in ‘For Your Eyes Only' would be in doubt?  Did you also know that Cubby Broccoli would use this film as the ultimate opportunity to settle a legal score and to once and for all flush an iconic character down the drain or down the smokestack?  Alright, keep your hair on!  Because It's Time, To Sit Back And Relax Mom & Dad Won't Be Back For At Least An Hour!  And Welcome To The Latch Key Kids Presents “Breaking Bond Part XIV: For Your Eyes Only”. 

On this episode of The James Bond A-Z Podcast hosts Tom Butler, Brendan Duffy, and Tom Wheatley do a deep dive into the making of Sean Connery's final official outing as James Bond: 1971's 'Diamonds Are Forever'. In this wide-ranging show you'll learn about: The context in which this film was made, how Sean Connery was lured back to the role, and the other actors they considered for 007. How the script was developed, who worked on the film, and why the majority of it was shot in America. The team do a deep dive into the cast, the locations and the set pieces. They also look at the work of production designer Ken Adam, composer John Barry, and of course, the film's iconic Shirley Bassey theme song. Finally they explore the release of the film, its promotional art, premiere, box office, awards, and its 007 legacy. Please rate this podcast and leave a review wherever you listen. James Bond will return... in next week's James Bond's A-Z Podcast. Find us on Twitter: twitter.com/jamesbondatoz Find us on Instagram: instagram.com/jamesbondatoz Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Jeder Held braucht seine Welt. Die er dann retten kann. Die einzigartige Welt des einzigartigen Geheimagenten James Bond hat Sir Ken Adam erträumt und erschaffen.

Jeder Held braucht seine Welt, die er retten kann. Die einzigartige Welt James Bonds wurde von Sir Ken Adam erträumt und erschaffen. Zwei Mal hat er für seine Szenenbilder den Oscar gewonnen. Nur wenige wissen, dass der berühmte Set Designer als Klaus Hugo Adam in Berlin geboren wurde und wegen seiner jüdischen Herkunft aus Nazi-Deutschland fliehen musste. Christian Buckard hat Ken Adam 2013 in London getroffen.

In Episode 1 of The James Bond A-Z Podcast, your hosts Tom Butler, Brendan Duffy, and Tom Wheatley cover the first part of the letter A. In it the team shine a spotlight on legendary production designer Ken Adam, two-time Bond woman Maud Adams, You Only Live Twice's Aki, The Spy Who Loved Me's Agent XXX, 'The World Is Not Enough' director Michael Apted, and long-serving 007 stunt performer and action director Vic Armstrong. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Welcome to The James Bond A-Z Podcast. Hosted by three lifelong James Bond fans – film journalist Tom Butler, journalist Tom Wheatley, and improviser Brendan Duffy – the show takes an encyclopaedic deep dive into the making of the world's greatest spy film franchise. Each episode covers the key creatives and characters from every James Bond film from 1962's 'Dr No' to 2021's 'No Time To Die', talking about Ken Adam to Max Zorin, and everything in-between (and yes, that includes Never Say Never Again). The show will shine a light on every aspect of the filmmaking process answering many of the questions you always wanted to ask about the 007 films. The James Bond A-Z Podcast is brought to you by Tom Butler, Brendan Duffy, and Tom Wheatley with art by Hélène Dollie and music by Tom Ingamells. Follow us on Twitter and Instagram @jamesbondatoz. This podcast is not affiliated with the James Bond brand. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Cinematographer Todd Norris joins us to talk about minutes 77-84 which begin with Bond weirdly walking away from his captors and ends with some guy walking weirdly toward Bond. Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/alienminute)

Let’s go inside Netflix’s Space Force - #106 The Spy. We’ll look at what it took to get this show off the ground, the blast they had on set, and hear exclusively from Ben Schwartz about setting F. Tony Scarapiducci apart from Parks and Rec’s Jean-Ralphio. Production Designer, Susie Mancini joins to talk about how Greg Daniels brought her on board and the work that goes into designing Space Force! Inside Joke: Space Force Netflix, 2020

The 00 Files go rogue! Again! Yes, it sounds like the tagline from a Daniel Craig James Bond film, but it is the God honest truth. We take a little side step from the 007 film franchise and have a look at another 1960s British spy thriller: The Ipcress File (1965). Interestingly enough many Bond alumni have worked on The Ipcress File, such as Harry Saltzman (producer), Peter Hunt (editor), Ken Adam (production design) and John Barry (composer). The Ipcress File is based on a novel by Len Deighton and stars Michael Caine - with glasses - as Harry Palmer. In many ways this film is quite the opposite of the Bond films. And in many ways this podcast review is also the opposite of the usual reviews from The 00 Files… Are you intrigued yet? Come and have a listen! If you like our podcast, please share it with others! You can follow us on social media, contact us at moneypenny@the00files.com or our website www.the00files.com. The 00 Files are counting on you being an insubordinate bastard…

What can we learn from the No Time To Die trailer? What might be the reaction of a wider audience?  This week we assemble a large panel to dissect the No Time To Die teaser trailer that debuted on 4th December 2019. Each panelist offers their hot take to the first good look at the 25th James Bond film and we all concede this is no mere teaser trailer. Then we jump into the minutiae - dissecting the characters, sets, photography, and what we learned about the plot – before chatting through the launch strategy of Good Morning America. Along the way we discuss the villain’s lightsabers, the time that passed between SPECTRE and No Time To Die and pitching the trailer at a more general audience, where you might find the gun barrel, a grotesque villain in a politically correct era, a possible flashback in the snow, more homages to Dr. No, Blofeld’s preposterous age, Bond’s new reading habits, the nature of Safin’s scheme, films that don’t feel like Bond films, a missing wedding guest, para-military chic, and that Ken Adam vibe. The recording took place on December 4th 2019 in the UK, USA, Spain, and New Zealand. James Page and Paul Atkinson are co-founders of MI6-HQ.com and the magazine MI6 Confidential Calvin Dyson Reviews Bond channel can be enjoyed at youtube.com/calvindyson Phil Nobile Jr is Editor-in-Chief of Fangoria magazine, former Bond correspondent for Birth.Movies.Death Joseph Darlington is Head of Section at beingjamesbond.com David Leigh runs thejamesbonddossier.com Bill Koenig runs the Spy Command at hmssweblog.wordpress.com This podcast is copyright Pretitles LLC © 2019 Music credit 'Spy & Die' by Jay Man

The build-up to the our 40th-anniversary celebration concludes with an exploration of Star Trek in the 1970s. This decade saw a lot of social changes. The transforming science fiction genre that started with Soylent Green but ended with Close Encounters challenged Star Trek and Paramount as they tried to figure out the best way to … Continue reading "Episode 51 – Dreaming of a Ken Adam Star Trek"

"Playlist - Part 9: When Your World Is Caving In", Given by Ken Adam in Newnan, GA., on 11/03/2019.

"Playlist - Part 8: Lessons from the Wilderness", Given by Ken Adam in Newnan, GA., on 10/27/2019.

The full Bond Daft team assemble once again for this epic evaluation of Bond's fifth cinematic outing as MI6's luckiest super spy. In this episode we delve deep into our thoughts on Ken Adam's beautiful sets, our favourite moments and a plot that inexplicably involves 007 trying to pass as Japanese. Welcome to 1967 cinema! Oh, and stay for our 'impressions' of Connery's performance. This one was stirred, but not shaken - we got that right, yeah?

It was only a matter of time before Roger Moore's trend-jumping Bond wound up on a spaceship. Hoping to cash in on the sci-fi craze of the late 1970s, "Moonraker" remains, to many fans, one giant leap too far in narrative and canonical credibility. Still, few can deny the impact of the awe-inspired Ken Adam sets, the ethereal punch of John Barry's score and the location hopping that unlocked the inner-adventurer in us all. With so much crazy packed in to one film, you'd be excused for needing a guided tour! So zip up your spacesuit and hop inside the "good shuttle BBN" - we've got your first-class voyage covered!

Is Roger Moore a good James Bond? Would a wrist-mounted dart gun be effective? And how did they film that skydiving stunt sequence? Listen now to find out! Scott Croco and Jay Holavarri unhack Moonraker (1979). When a space shuttle is stolen by a wealthy entrepreneur with plans to recolonize Earth, only James Bond can save the planet. Roger Moore stars in Lewis Gilbert's Moonraker (1979)! Episode Log: Bond films trivia (1:50) Director Lewis Gilbert bio (6:25) Summary of Moonraker's story (9:40) Movie adheres to traditional screenplay structure (15:50) Movie Review (23:55) Jaws - everyone's favorite henchman (29:55) Roger Moore as James Bond (34:10) Cable car action scene (46:15) Skydiving cold open scene (49:50) Space station design reminiscent of 2001: A Space Odyssey (56:20) Bond gadgets (1:02:55) Budget, box office, and critics (1:21:20) Ken Adam, art director (1:22:45) Episode 033 - Moonraker (1979) unhacked! Full Shownotes: https://www.moviesunhacked.com/2019/moonraker/ Movies Unhacked compares technology in movies to technology in real life. We analyze everything from Hollywood blockbusters and television shows, to sci-fi, horror, and classic cinema. A podcast for fans of cinema and technology! Online: moviesunhacked.com Twitter: @moviesunhacked Facebook: facebook.com/moviesunhackd Music by Sean Haeberman Copyright © 2019 Movies Unhacked. All rights reserved.  

När mästerregissören Stanley Kubricks kostymfilm "Barry Lyndon" hade premiär på 70-talet blev den betraktad som vacker - och tråkig - filmjournalisten Mårten Blomkvist hänfördes dock redan från början! Många filmer har omvärderats i filmhistorien, och uppvärderats efter att ha fått ett ljumt mottagande vid premiären. Men ska en utnämnas till filmens egen den fula ankungen så är det Stanley Kubricks "Barry Lyndon". När den kom beskrevs den som lång och tröttsam. Idag tycks alla tala om den som en svan, majestätisk, nästan den perfekta filmen. "Barry Lyndon" hade svensk premiär 1977. Det var perfektionisten Kubricks tionde film. Hans senaste film innan "Barry Lyndon" hade varit "Clockwork orange", en av 1970-talets mest omskrivna filmer. Det var en våldsam och omstridd framtidsvision. "Barry Lyndon" var något helt annat. Den byggde på den engelska 1800-talsförfattaren William Makepeace Thackerays roman om en irländsk äventyrare, eller streber, som tar sig upp i samhället i slutet av 1700-talet. Redmond Barry - som först efter halva filmen gifter sig och blir Barry Lyndon - spelades av amerikanska stjärnan Ryan O'Neal. Unge Redmonds irrfärder i Napoleonkrigens Europa börjar då han måste fly från hembyn efter att ha deltagit i en duell. Duellen i filmen utspelar sig i ett underskönt landskap vid en sjö. Man hör fåglar i bakgrunden. Det dova, klassiska stycket fortsätter att ljuda medan de två duellanterna höjer sina pistoler för att döda varandra. Den säger mycket om hur "Barry Lyndon" är upplagd. Det är en film som berättar om passioner, utan att själv någonsin röja några känslor. Ni hörde hur sjuttonhundratalskompositören Händels "Sarabande" följde sitt eget spår. Den fick ligga på samma volym, oberörd av att två män i bild ses försöka döda varandra. Så innehållet svallar av känslor men allt berättas med ett stort lugn. Allt är så vackert. Varenda bild är som en tavla. Allt är inspelat på plats, i riktiga slott och herresäten. Fotografen John Alcott inspirerades av 1700-talsmålningar. Han lyckades filma scener ljussatta enbart med stearinljus. Kubrick fick tag i en lins som tillverkats för NASA, att användas vid rymdfärder. Med den gick att filma i miljöer där ljuset var så svagt att man knappt såg att läsa. Alcott fick en Oscar. Kläderna är fantastiska. Den svenska kostymören Ulla-Britt Söderlund fick tillsammans med kollegan Milena Canonero en Oscar för bästa kläder, och scenografin av Ken Adam fick Oscar den med. Men annars hade "Barry Lyndon" inte mycket för sin skönhet. Recensionerna var negativa. Eller, de var respektfulla, men utan entusiasm. Vackert men livlöst var omdömet. Alla visste att filmen kostat fruktansvärt mycket att spela in och att den tagit enormt lång tid att göra. Det fanns nog en förväntan på något mer eftertryckligt. Det var traumatiskt att tycka om "Barry Lyndon" när den kom. Folk sa att den var tråkig. Ofattbart, tyckte vi som föll för den. Vi såg ett underverk: en total konstnärlig triumf. Hur kunde man ha tråkigt på en film som i varje stund pulserade av skönhet? Vi kunde inte få nog av "Barry Lyndon", fast var tre timmar lång och hade paus. Kubrick gjorde det inte lätt för sig, i sin ambition att berätta en historia som fängslar fast han inte ansträngde sig för att grabba tag i tittarna. Berättelsen var ju tvärtom väldigt gammaldags melodramatisk. Knappt har Barry stuckit hemifrån så råkar han ut för landsvägsrövare. Han tar värvning i brittiska armén. Han deserterar. Han blir tvångsrekryterad till Preussens armé. Han räddar ett befäl ur ett brinnande hus och får kunglig belöning. Han blir spion. Han blir medhjälpare till en korthaj, han ställer sig in hos en rik, gift kvinna. Ja, ni hör. Det är packat. Och allt berättas långsamt och tydligt. Och långsamt. I en scen säger en överste att Barry är en lymmel. Barry försvarar sig och säger att han skulle göra allt för regementet. Fast det är inte så att det glöder om replikföringen. Musiken var inte heller hetsig. Det är nästan bara klassisk musik i filmen. Som allt annat är den utvald med precision. Schubertmusiken spelades förförelsescen. Där kniper Barry sin lady Lyndon, spelad av Marisa Berenson, amerikansk fotomodell och skådespelerska. Det är hennes förmögenhet Barry vill åt. Hon har en mycket äldre vars död det bara är att vänta ut. Planen går i lås. Så fort Barry är tryggt gift, och bytt namn från Redmond Barry till Barry Lyndon, slutar han hyckla intresse för sin hustru. Hon får sitta ensam medan han festar vilt. Men Lady Lyndon har en son, lord Bullingdon, som älskar sin mor. Han blir Barrys dödsfiende. Efter att ha blivit brutalt utjagad ur hemmet kommer han tillbaka för att kräva "satisfaction" - det vill säga han utmanar Barry på duell. "Barry Lyndon" är en svart diamant. Här tecknas en mörk bild av människan. 1700-talet är en tid då det talas mycket om tapperhet, ära och heder. Men det är rå egoism som styr. Nästan alla Barrys känslor är spelade. Vid de få tillfällen då han visar äkta känslor straffar det sig. Människan är ett rovdjur i vackra kläder, säger "Barry Lyndon". Under åren efter premiären har "Barry Lyndon" sakta men säkert stigit i aktning bland filmintresserade. Idag är uppfattningen helt enkelt att Kubricks tionde film underskattades och att det är en av hans bästa. Kanske rentav den bästa. Allteftersom åren gått har det blivit tydligare och tydligare: ingen kommer att göra en sån här film igen. Ett hantverk i jätteskala - ingen kommer att få pengar till det, ingen kommer att orka. När filmregissörer talar om "Barry Lyndon" får dom något drömmande i rösten. "Barry Lyndon" är den fula ankungen som blev en svan. Mårten Blomkvist kulturnytt@sverigesradio.se

In the season finale, Ken & Adam reflect on the first year of the Chicago Coaching Center, look to the future, and make some announcements! We will be on summer break for the next few months, but don't worry...we'll be back in the fall!  

Break out those laser guns because we are getting galactic in Episode 7 of The Words Are Not Enough!In this episode Griffin (@griffschiller) and Brody (@brodyserravalli) discuss the following:Tomorrow Never Lies* Daniel Craig wants Monica Bellucci (AKA MILF CITY) to return as the Bond girl for Bond 25 * An anonymous source at the Mirror claims that Daniel Craig wants Monica Bellucci to return as Lucia Sciarra in Bond 25, stating, "He wants Monica Bellucci back, that's for sure.”* Bond 25 is getting galactic and Daniel Craig loves it * Once again coming from the Mirror, rumour has it that tech billionaire noted Bond fan, Elon Musk, has pitched taking Bond 25 into the stratosphere and is said to be developing ideas for a spacecraft; and reportedly Daniel Craig loves it. The anonymous source said the following: * "Bond needs to keep up with the times and will be looking into Elon Musk's world – spacecrafts, planes that can fly across the earth in an hour, cars turning into submarines. That's what we need to include now. Daniel's stunts are going to move to a new level and have to include things shown in space movies like Interstellar. He is involved every step of the way, as he always is, and is bursting with enthusiasm and excitement.” * Speculation that Bond 25 is looking to film in South Africa may also corroborate Musk's involvement.* Christopher Nolan being eyed to take Bond 25 in a “Completely Different Direction” * An "insider" at Hollywood Life has reportedly caught wind that EON wants to take Bond in a radically "different direction" in Bond 25. And apparently, despite various big names being circulated for the covered directing role, Christopher Nolan is producers' Barbra Broccoli and Michael G Wilson top pick to steer the franchise down this new path. The source added that “The producers don't want him to be the ladies' man he has been known for and actually want him to get married. Everyone feels Christopher would be the best to steer the film in the direction they are seeking.” * This is contrary to comments Nolan has previously made regarding a timeline for joining the franchise. * Quantum, Skyfall and Spectre Production Designer returning for Bond 25 * In an interview with ICG magazine, Dennis Gassner, production designer for every Bond film since Quantum of Solace, let slip that he would be returning to the franchise once again in Bond 25. * With franchises, you have to honor the established elements while meeting audience expectations. I'm about to do my fourth James Bond film, and acknowledging the efforts of Ken Adam and others is a big part."* Rory Kinnear OUT for Bond 25? * It seems Rory Kinnear's role as MI6 Chief of Staf Bill Tanner isn't as locked in as one would have thought. In an interview with The Times, Kinnear said, "Each film they make they say yay or nay. But it's been great fun, and an utterly unexpected element of my life. I don't know if I am in the next one, and I never have done until they give you the call." * * Roger Moore's 90th Birthday * October 14th was the late, great Sir Roger Moore's birthday. Rog would have been 90.Q-Branch* Roger Moore honored at Pinewood Studios * To commemorate Sir Roger's birthday, The Roger Moore State was officially opened at Pinewood on Sunday. * Close friends of Moore, including Dame Joan Collins, Sir Michael Caine, and Stephen Fry attended the opening, along with producers Michael G Wilson and Barbara Broccoli.* James Bond Funko Pops coming this December * Discuss the figures, other Bond characters we'd like to see given the Funko treatment, etc.* James Bond Collection coming to Hulu * If you don't own all the Bond movies on blu-ray, never fear, Hulu is getting 21 Bond movies this November — basically all of the official EON... --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/the-words-are-not-enough/support

BLADE RUNNER 2049: Who's Your Daddy? Do androids dream of lethargic sequels? In his latest LA story, Ryan Gosling stars as a replicant desperately searching for his origins. Denis (Sicario, Arrival) Villeneuve delivers every sci-fi geek’s wet dream of a follow-up to Ridley Scott’s iconic portrait of a not-too-distant dystopia – and upholds the tradition of atmosphere and ambiguity. So is he or isn’t he?  Is this a brilliant reboot or humdrum homage? The gloves come off as your good doctors trade blades for scalpels in this epic dissection of this long-imagined sequel and the original 1982 film. Hear where more humanity lies… (If you’ve never seen the original film and/or just want to get to 2049, zip ahead to 38:09, although we do reference points made over the original film.)   Tags: Blade Runner 2049; Blade Runner; Ridley Scott; Jerry Goldsmith; George Lucas; Star Wars; Victor Wong; Sean Young; The Sixth Sense; Planes, Trains & Automobiles; Edward James Olmos; M. Emmet Walsh; Harrison Ford; Stanley Kubrick; 2001: A Space Odyssey; Alien; Terry Gilliam; Brazil; Time Bandits; Bruce Willis; Ryan Gosling; Quentin Tarantino; Westworld; Westworld (TV); Jurassic Park; River Phoenix; Shia LaBeouf; Dave Bautista; Guardians of the Galaxy (2014); Spectre; Robin Wright; The Princess Bride; What’s Love Got to Do With It?; Angela Bassett; How to Get Away With Murder; Hidden Figures; Octavia Spencer; Taraji P. Henson; Kirsten Dunst; Viola Davis; Frank Sinatra; Elvis Presley; Marilyn Monroe; Prometheus; Alien: Covenant; Hugo Weaving; The Matrix; Jared Leto; Ken Adam; Aliens; Denis Villeneuve; Sicario; Arrival; Crazy, Stupid Love; The Place Beyond the Pines; The Nice Guys; La La Land; Ana de Armas; War Dogs; Sylvia Hoeks; Rutger Hauer

I höstens första podd går vi bakom kulisserna (och mellan raderna) på Bondfilmerna. Regi, foto och ljud avhandlas, med mera! Dessutom kliver den femte poddmedlemmen in för första gången och vi får också höra vad Ken Adam tycker om det brittiska imperiet. Det har blivit tid för filmteknik!

BondCast is back with our review of 1977's "The Spy Who Loved Me", a film many consider to be Sir Roger Moore's best Bond film. We talk about the Moore's passing and discuss some of the things that made him such a great Bond. Jonathan recently saw "Spy" on the silver screen and he shares his experiences seeing it again for the first time. Then we take a deep dive into the film itself. From the villainous Stromberg to Ken Adam's set design to even the fashion seen in the film, we talk about it all. We also discuss all of the Star Wars actors who made cameos and appeared as extras in the film and more.

Well, it’s our last ever Rodgecast, and we couldn’t be more upset to see him go. (Although he only appears in this film for about five minutes: in most scenes he is played by one of a team of about three dozen stuntmen.) To console ourselves, we share a few bottles of bubbles, while we discuss flirting grandparents, pranking Roger in bed, the absence of Ken Adam, the worst actors to play Bond villains, the curse of Goldfinger, and the terrible disappointment of a flaccid zeppelin.

It's time to welcome Oscar winner Peter Lamont to JBR this week. As someone who worked on a total of 18 Bond films from Goldfinger to Casino Royale, we could have made 100 podcasts based on Peter's stories alone. In today's episode we hear what it was like to work on some of cinemas all-time classic movie sets. We hear all about his time working alongside Ken Adam, taking over the top job on For Your Eyes Only, the terrifying story of being held onboard a hijacked plane during the filming of Octopussy and a whole lot more. We're truly honoured to have Peter on the show this week, a truly lovely man and an  undisputed all-time Bond legend.

Star Trek: Planet of the Titans. When Bryan Fuller revealed the ship for the new television series, Star Trek: Discovery, it looked familiar; but not in the way you'd think. Only seven months after The Animated Series was canceled, Gene Roddenberry was back at Paramount working on something new: a Star Trek movie. The project died in development, but a year later he was piecing together another concept. For a big-screen adventure, you need a big-screen Enterprise. So he recruited Ken Adam, who designed the classic villains' lair in Goldfinger and Thunderball—as well as the war room in Dr. Strangelove, and illustrator Ralph McQuarrie, who was fresh off the soon-to-be-released Star Wars. What they created was a unique design that never got to be the hero it was meant to be. But now this design gets a second chance at life in Star Trek: Discovery. In this special bite-sized Saturday Morning Trek, join host Aaron Harvey on a quick journey down the road not taken … to a movie never made … Star Trek: Planet of the Titans. Chapters Intro (00:00:50) Take 1: The God Thing (00:02:15) Take 2: Planet of the Titans (00:03:36) Redesigning the Enterprise (00:04:29) The Titan Enterprise in Later Trek (00:5:42) Take 3: Star Trek II? Phase II? (00:06:09) Closing (00:06:34) Host Aaron Harvey Production Aaron Harvey (Editor and Producer) C Bryan Jones (Executive Producer) Charlynn Schmiedt (Executive Producer) Matthew Rushing (Executive Producer) Norman C. Lao (Executive Producer) Eric Extreme (Associate Producer) Mike Bovia (Associate Producer) Joo Kim (Associate Producer) Richard Marquez (Production Manager)

"Gentlemen, you can’t fight in here! This is the war room!" Stanley Kubrick didn’t do comedy often which is a shame because “Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb” is arguably one of the funniest films ever made. What’s interesting is that Kubrick intended on making a serious film about one of his greatest fears at the time: the threat of nuclear war. But after several attempts at finding the right way to tell the story seriously (including one involving aliens watching us from above, discussing our penchant for destruction), he hit on the idea of making it funny. And his dark comedy classic was born. Join us – Andy Nelson and Pete Wright – as we wrap up our brief vacation challenge with Andy’s choice of his favorite end-of-the-world comedy, Kubrick’s 1964 film “Dr. Strangelove.” We talk about how we were introduced to this film and why it may not be a film that one connects to immediately but a film that one has to find the humor over time. We discuss the actors – Peter Sellers, George C. Scott, Slim Pickens, Sterling Hayden, Keenan Wynn, even James Earl Jones in his first screen role – and the level of comedy brilliance they all achieve individually and how it ties to the overall film. We single out Sellers, of course, as we discuss the three roles he played in the film and what makes them all so unique. We touch on the look of the film, shot by Gilbert Taylor with impeccable production design by Ken Adam, pointing out just what it took to make the war room one of the most iconic sets ever made. We mention the sequel that Kubrick wanted to make with the help of Terry Gilliam. And we argue about its placement on our Flickchart, as we inevitably do every week.  It’s one of the best films out there and well worth a discussion. Haven’t seen it? Give it a try. Just be aware that you may not connect on the first viewing. This is one of those movies that may need a few shots. But it’ll be well worth it. We promise you. Film Sundries Watch this film: iTunes • Amazon Script Transcript Original theatrical trailer Original poster artwork Art of the Title Red Alert by Peter George Flickchart Letterboxd Dr. Strangelove — Internet Movie Firearm Database Trailers of the Week Andy's Trailer: Anthropoid — "Maybe it’s because we just discussed several WWII films, or maybe it’s that I’ve never heard of this particular true story, but it looks intense and like a bit of history I’m excited to learn more about." Pete's Trailer: Outlaws and Angels — "I may have a woefully skewed view of this film — judging by Andy’s reaction, I’m way off base. But something about Eastwood’s turn in this trailer hooked me so I’m hoping for redemption!"

"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the war room!" Stanley Kubrick didn't do comedy often which is a shame because “Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb” is arguably one of the funniest films ever made. What's interesting is that Kubrick intended on making a serious film about one of his greatest fears at the time: the threat of nuclear war. But after several attempts at finding the right way to tell the story seriously (including one involving aliens watching us from above, discussing our penchant for destruction), he hit on the idea of making it funny. And his dark comedy classic was born. Join us – Andy Nelson and Pete Wright – as we wrap up our brief vacation challenge with Andy's choice of his favorite end-of-the-world comedy, Kubrick's 1964 film “Dr. Strangelove.” We talk about how we were introduced to this film and why it may not be a film that one connects to immediately but a film that one has to find the humor over time. We discuss the actors – Peter Sellers, George C. Scott, Slim Pickens, Sterling Hayden, Keenan Wynn, even James Earl Jones in his first screen role – and the level of comedy brilliance they all achieve individually and how it ties to the overall film. We single out Sellers, of course, as we discuss the three roles he played in the film and what makes them all so unique. We touch on the look of the film, shot by Gilbert Taylor with impeccable production design by Ken Adam, pointing out just what it took to make the war room one of the most iconic sets ever made. We mention the sequel that Kubrick wanted to make with the help of Terry Gilliam. And we argue about its placement on our Flickchart, as we inevitably do every week.  It's one of the best films out there and well worth a discussion. Haven't seen it? Give it a try. Just be aware that you may not connect on the first viewing. This is one of those movies that may need a few shots. But it'll be well worth it. We promise you. Film Sundries Watch this film: iTunes • Amazon Script Transcript Original theatrical trailer Original poster artwork Art of the Title Red Alert by Peter George Flickchart Letterboxd Dr. Strangelove — Internet Movie Firearm Database Trailers of the Week Andy's Trailer: Anthropoid — "Maybe it's because we just discussed several WWII films, or maybe it's that I've never heard of this particular true story, but it looks intense and like a bit of history I'm excited to learn more about." Pete's Trailer: Outlaws and Angels — "I may have a woefully skewed view of this film — judging by Andy's reaction, I'm way off base. But something about Eastwood's turn in this trailer hooked me so I'm hoping for redemption!"

Auffallend an den Krisen der Neuzeit ist der durchgängig schlechte Geschmack der Mächtigen, Superschurken und Potentaten. In diesem Zusammenhang ist noch einmal das beispielgebende Wirken von Ken Adam zu würdigen. Der vor kurzem verstorbene Architekt…

Interview begins at: 28:15This week we'd like to welcome Alan Tomkins to the show. An art department legend, his contribution to the Bond series stretches from Dr. No all the way to Casino Royale. If that wasn't enough for you, his film credits include The Empire Strikes Back, Saving Private Ryan, Batman Begins and many more classic films. Be sure to tune in to today's episode of JBR for some amazing on-set stories.   

Brendan, Nathan, Richard and James have each been paid £1.25 million to appear in this episode of Bondfinger, which means that we have no money left to pay Ken Adam, John Barry or any of the makeup girls. Sorry about that.

Matthew Sweet meets Ken Adam, the 92-year-old designer of iconic sets from Dr No and Goldfinger to Doctor Strangelove and the Ipcress File.

Bond is back! This time, the film makers mine the depths of Fleming's short stories and cobble something together that is... pretty dang good, actually. There are no gadgets, the girls are not great, and there are no fantastic Ken Adam sets, but there's also nothing much to really hate—except the idiotic Blofeld appearance at the beginning. I examine the construction of the plot, defend it against those who say it's too much like From Russia with Love, and complain that Locque isn't much of a villain. I lament the birth defect that left Carole Bouquet with a non-functioning forehead and a mustache nearly as luxurious as Topol's, as well as whatever it is that makes Lynn-Holley Johnson so annoying and seven years too old to be to young for James Bond. And I lament the fact the Roger Moore is just too old to run up all those steps.

Jaws is back, and Bond fights him! (again and again...) It's the eleventh Bond, and I admire the sights, the women, the stunts, the women's revealing wardrobe, the model shots, the model-actresses, and the incredible Ken Adam sets. I don't do much car spotting or gun spotting because Bond drives boats and fights hand-to-hand pretty much the whole movie. *sigh* The comedy is slapsticky (vaudevillian, to be exact), and the story is a loose collection of great set pieces connected by cardboard arrows. (Venetian glass? Go to Venice! Crates that say "Rio"? Go to Rio! Toxin from the Amazon? Go to the Amazon! Space shuttles? Go to space!) Plus, the villain's plan is basically the same as in the last movie (kill everyone, clean up the corpses with bulldozers, repopulate). Still, I don't think it's the worst Bond of them all. (Your mileage may vary.)

Rencontre avec Ken Adam, Marisa Berenson, Michel Ciment, Nigel Galt, Jan Harlan, Christiane Kubrick, Tim Heptner, animée par Serge Toubiana.

Rencontre avec Ken Adam, Marisa Berenson, Michel Ciment, Nigel Galt, Jan Harlan, Christiane Kubrick, Tim Heptner, animée par Serge Toubiana.

• Our exclusive PodKISSt interview with Adam Black, artist and writer for the “KISS4K” online comic, conducted by our good buddy Ken • Adam’s insights into his experiences working in and around the KISS world • And, of course, plenty of great music!!! Make sure to check out our links and keep us posted on […]

Sue Lawley's castaway this week is the man who's designed some of the most famous film sets ever made. Sir Ken Adam was the production designer on seven of the James Bond films - including Dr No, Goldfinger and Diamonds Are Forever. His bold designs skilfully created the lairs of a string of arch villans, perhaps best typified by the headquarters of Blofeld in You Only Live Twice - which was built inside an extinct volcano with an artificial lake placed on top.Sir Ken Adam began life as Klaus Adam, born into a middle class family in 1920s Berlin. As Hitler rose to power the Adam family were forced to flee to Britain. Klaus adopted the name Keith during the war when he became a fighter pilot and the only German to fight for the RAF. He became known as Heinie the Tank Buster in recognition of his daring raids across the continent. After the war he changed his name again to Ken and trained as an architect. This led to work in the film industry; first as a draughtsman, and then as an art director and eventually as a production designer. He won two Oscars: the first for Barry Lyndon, which he made with Stanley Kubrick in the 70s, and The Madness of King George.[Taken from the original programme material for this archive edition of Desert Island Discs]Favourite track: Java Jive by Inkspots Book: Propylaen Kunstgeschichte - The History of Art Luxury: Sketchpad and felt pens to design

Sue Lawley's castaway this week is the man who's designed some of the most famous film sets ever made. Sir Ken Adam was the production designer on seven of the James Bond films - including Dr No, Goldfinger and Diamonds Are Forever. His bold designs skilfully created the lairs of a string of arch villans, perhaps best typified by the headquarters of Blofeld in You Only Live Twice - which was built inside an extinct volcano with an artificial lake placed on top. Sir Ken Adam began life as Klaus Adam, born into a middle class family in 1920s Berlin. As Hitler rose to power the Adam family were forced to flee to Britain. Klaus adopted the name Keith during the war when he became a fighter pilot and the only German to fight for the RAF. He became known as Heinie the Tank Buster in recognition of his daring raids across the continent. After the war he changed his name again to Ken and trained as an architect. This led to work in the film industry; first as a draughtsman, and then as an art director and eventually as a production designer. He won two Oscars: the first for Barry Lyndon, which he made with Stanley Kubrick in the 70s, and The Madness of King George. [Taken from the original programme material for this archive edition of Desert Island Discs] Favourite track: Java Jive by Inkspots Book: Propylaen Kunstgeschichte - The History of Art Luxury: Sketchpad and felt pens to design

Discuss this episode in the Muse community Follow @MuseAppHQ on Twitter Show notes 00:00:00 - Speaker 1: I think designing is just the process of picking the best option that you have gone through, but you need to go through that process. The more time that that process takes and the more expensive that process is, the less you experiment and you just fall back and you default to what we know. But that’s not where great ideas often come from. 00:00:24 - Speaker 2: Hello and welcome to Meta Muse. Muse is a tool for deep work on iPad and Mac, but this podcast isn’t about Muse the product, it’s about the small team and the big ideas behind it. I’m Adam Wiggins here with my colleague Mark McGranaghan. Hey, Adam. And today we’re joined by Dan Lacivita of Play. Hey guys. And Dan, in addition to your duties as co-CEO of a startup, I understand you also have a particular management challenge this summer. 00:00:53 - Speaker 1: Yes, I have two boys, 9 and 7. They just got out of school. So we are thinking of outdoor physical labor activities for them over the summer. The last one was actually cleaning the garage floors, my son. was squeegeeing the water out and he’s like, Dad, this is really satisfying. I was like, yeah, you know, you have to do the other side of the garage too, and then it became immediately less satisfying for him. Yeah, so, we’re coming up with a lot of ideas for those activities. 00:01:21 - Speaker 2: For some reason, I’m reminded of a beloved 80s movie on male mentorship, which is the Karate Kid, and the famous doing chores as a way to learn to be a martial artist, so maybe there’s some angle like that. 00:01:34 - Speaker 1: Yeah, life lessons through chores. I don’t know if they’ll like that, but that’s the, you need to do this in order to play video games, so that’s the model we’re going with. 00:01:43 - Speaker 2: And tell us about the journey that brought you to play. 00:01:46 - Speaker 1: Yes, so 42 years old, father of two boys, prior to play starting play with my other three co-founders, June, Michael, and Eric. We all worked together at an agency called Firstborn. It’s a design and technology agency. We’re headquartered in New York City. I actually started there in 2004 as a flash developer, for anyone who remembers the good old Flash days. And when I left, I was CEO. June was our chief creative officer, Michael was our founder, Eric was one of our lead engineers. And yeah, we were designing and building websites, mobile products, AR experiences for our clients. We actually sold the business to Dentsu about 10 years ago now and through the process of creating all of those products for our clients, especially mobile products, we’re just always thinking about the tools that we were using, and this is when Sigma was very early days as an agency, we just moved over to Sketch and, you know, my partner June was just always talking about how we’re using the same input devices, you know, for our design tools, but we’re using our phone as a creation device in many other areas and so that kind of kernel of the idea led us to leave Firstborn and then start play. 00:03:02 - Speaker 2: And I feel this is quite a unique angle. I guess there are plenty of places where you use a phone to create content, typing out a quick email or something like that, but something like a design or especially an interactive prototype, you know, we think of that as something where you really got to be at a desk, mouse, keyboard, big screen, and doing that on the phone, which is really optimized to be a consumption device. It’s unusual. How is that borne out so far in your product to date? 00:03:29 - Speaker 1: I thought it was a crazy idea initially too, when June initially talked to me about it, and I was like, how are we gonna create a design tool on a phone with that real estate. And so the interesting and probably there’s many aspects of the entrepreneurial journey that are fun, but I think the early days of just watching the team. Create different UI patterns. We landed on sort of this, I think, unique slider UI that allows you to design on the phone while not having the interface getting in the way of what you’re actually designing. So I think that was a really interesting part of the process in the early days. And I think what’s been more exciting and maybe a little unanticipated is As we started to design a design tool for the phone on the phone, we realized, oh, we have this whole sort of sandbox of things that Apple has created, all of these native controls, native gestures that we can now tap into and then layer our GUI on top of, if you will, and give designers the ability to design with the real things, right? The real materials that engineers will ultimately use to make the product that they’re designing. So, it’s been A fun journey so far, you know, it’s unlike traditional design tools that require you to context switch and stimulate the mobile experience plays really the first tool to make contextual design for mobile possible, so there’s no proxies or simulations or syncing to mirror apps. You are sort of getting your hands into the clay immediately and beginning to craft inside of the final medium that the users will ultimately experience things on. 00:05:07 - Speaker 2: And that speaks to me for sure because I’ve written about creative process as being largely about the feedback loop, the iteration loop, how quickly can you try something and see the results of the value of, for example, what you see is what you get editing and word processors, direct manipulation. I’ve written about this in developer tools where you very often have a long compile run. Cycle and the closer you can get to instantly make a change and see the results sort of the better, even though in many cases that’s not fully practical and so in some senses you’re designing it on the device and so there isn’t some switching, as you said, to some other location. It’s all kind of right there in the same context. 00:05:49 - Speaker 1: Yeah, it was one of the things that June had talked about early on, is like, you know, let’s say I’m designing something for a client to review, it’s, you know, mobile app screens or prototype for a mobile app. I have to get all those designs on my phone, like through a mirror app, right? Or just save JPEGs. This is even before mirror apps were, I mean, they’re still not really that great. It’s like, but then I want to look at that when I’m not at the office. Like, I want to look at that when I’m walking through the park, or maybe we’re designing for a certain persona and they’re going to use this app in a grocery store. Like, I should look at these designs when I’m in the grocery store and I’m in that environment, and then I’m going to see things that I want to change, but I can’t change them in that moment. I have to like write it down or take a voice memo, wait until I get back to the computer or back to the office the next day, then make those changes. And then if I want to see those changes back in that, you know, sort of environment, I have to go back to the grocery stores like, I just want to make that change right there in that moment. And then see how that feels, or maybe have a few different versions of that and then see how that feels. And so, I think for him and as we talked about it, there’s this unique magical moment when you’re looking at something in your phone, like a design that you’ve created, and then you’re like, oh, I wonder what would it look like if this was changed, and then you could just change it just directly on your phone and it’s kind of a very cool and empowering moment. 00:07:07 - Speaker 3: That’s interesting to me because as an early phone user, I was surprised by the extent to which the mobility and ubiquity of the phone was an advantage. I think that’s kind of obvious in retrospect, but for someone who grew up with a desktop computer, you know, everything was there. You had a big screen, you had a keyboard, it seemed great. Just being able to access a thing all the time turned out to be amazing in ways that I didn’t anticipate. I hadn’t thought previously to apply it to design. Again, I’m back at the square of, oh, it’s design work, you gotta be at your desktop to do it, right? But not so much. 00:07:34 - Speaker 2: You mentioned needing to come up with new kinds of interactions because the phone doesn’t have a big command vocabulary or established precedent for, well, I think sort of creation activities in general, but certainly design work in the specific and in my brief experiments with the app like one that certainly catches your eye right away, maybe this is what you were referencing is you kind of see the prototype filling most of the screen, but you swipe to the right, which sort of spatially speaking drags in the left hand. Side of layer list which will look very familiar to a sketch Photoshop type person and indeed those are often on the left, but here they’re just sort of off screen they’re sort of in the spatial metaphor of the mobile world they’re sort of hovering off to the side until you slide them in and then there’s another one on the right that you sort of pull in that actually. It gives you adding horizontal and vertical stacks, buttons, all that sort of thing, and then there’s sort of a properties panel that slides up from below that lets you edit stuff. So that certainly speaks to us where, you know, working on the iPad trying to make a thinking tool we do end up having to like invent a lot of stuff from whole cloth, which is a pretty big hassle or a lot of work or takes a lot of time relative to working in the more known space, but it’s basically a lot more fun as a designer and engineer and product builder because you do have this open frontier that Now that all possibilities are open. 00:08:53 - Speaker 1: Yeah, I agree. I think it’s certainly fun in the creation process. And then when you design those small magical moments, it’s fun for the user too. And I think even tools that exist for creating something or have a purpose behind what I’m doing can also still have those moments of fun or you know, sort of interesting interactions that smile, right? That say, wow, that was actually a cool thing that I experienced and so. When we were designing the slider, Eric, you know, our lead engineer and my partner was like, oh, well, maybe we can just drag the slider vertically as well. So like I’m actually moving the knob on the slider horizontally, but if it’s in the way of something on the screen, I could just move that entire slider up and down. And it was just those little moments and as they compound, then the UI starts to come together and actually becomes something far more functional and usable and interesting to use for the user as well, I think. 00:09:51 - Speaker 2: So our topic today is designing with real materials, and longtime listeners of Meta Muse will know this is something we’ve we’ve touched on with past guests. Andy from Not Boring Software has a great post called Honor the Material where he talks about basically furniture and how you can design using whatever the particular material is, whether it’s wood or molded plastic or steel that you can use. That in a way that fits the material and then in the digital realm we’ve spoken with David from Webflow who talks about how Dreamweaver and other kind of past visual website builders maybe one reason they didn’t kind of quite ever seem to click is because they don’t respect the underlying materials of the web, that’s HTML, CSS, the box model, URLs, pages, links, etc. So, Dan, what does designing with real materials mean to you? 00:10:44 - Speaker 1: So, designing with real materials is something that I think early on for us, we realized was possible because we have access to, as I mentioned before, this sandbox that Apple has created. So even the most basic example of a button. I’m gonna design a button in FigMA or sketch, and the buttons are gonna have different properties, right, color properties, there’s probably text in there, maybe there’s an icon, probably has some padding, maybe a corner radius that has all these different properties. And even when an engineer looks at that button in a FIMA file or a sketch file or XD file, there’s actually a significant amount of code that needs to be written just to get that button to look exactly the same. When I’m writing it in X code, when I see it inside of a design, and that’s just a button. So then if you zoom out of that and think, well, OK, well then what do I need to do for a card or a stack of cards or an entire page or a multitude of pages that then have different states and interactions, it becomes a lot. And so, we realized that Why would I design a button and play when I could just use the native UI button, for example, that Apple creates, which is how an engineer is probably going to build the actual product. And this is the most basic example, right? So I could just add a native button to my page, and when I’m designing that button and play, I’m actually manipulating all of the properties that exist. In that UI button that an engineer is going to either include or choose to not include when they code it. So we’re doing a couple of things. One is where Giving, I think, more power to designers to, instead of writing a bunch of SWIFT UI code or UI code to, you know, create that button, we’re surfacing all those same properties, but in a way where they can design with them. And then when they communicate that, Perhaps with a developer handoff or collaboration feature, that engineer isn’t just looking at a vector-based rectangle on a page, they’re looking at the same real materials that they’re actually gonna build with. And if you further that, then you start to get into live maps or input text fields or UI collection view or, you know, how stacks are used. And so what we do is we say, well, what are all of the things that I’m gonna use to build a real application. Let’s surface those up as real materials for a designer to use when designing, instead of using replicas of those materials. 00:13:17 - Speaker 2: And I’ll argue it flows both ways. There you’re talking about the engineer has to do this effort to kind of, you know, replicate what’s in the design mockup that comes out of the more general purpose designing vector editor tool, but it actually flows back the other way too, which is you see that. There’s big libraries and components that are here’s your iOS system components, here’s your Android system components, those need to be updated every time a new version of the OS comes out where you’re essentially simulating all of those things inside the design tool and then you go back to the ultimate target. Someone needs to build that button and then they need to kind of extract from your vector drawing what parameters are going to go into that button. So it seems like that could have the ability to short circuit a lot of that back and forth. 00:14:02 - Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. And I think our general purpose design tools do a lot of things really well, but a lot of their strength lies in that what I would call generality, right? Like I can use a tool like FigMA or Sketch to design a website or an app or a wedding invitation or a poster or a business card or anything, which is incredible. So I think in the context of designing products, they’re great for designing. A blueprint for the house, but they don’t really get us closer to designing the actual house, cause they’re not using the real materials that are gonna be used designing that end product. So, I think the closer designers can get to that point, not only does it make it better for engineers, but to your point, it educates the designer, and I think it empowers them to design with those real materials. 00:14:48 - Speaker 2: When we spoke earlier, you pointed out that the sketches and figmas of the world are general purpose vector editors, whereas what you’re building is a specific tool for mobile app design and as you said, there’s many benefits to being general purpose, but there’s also a lot of benefits to being purpose built for this specific task at hand. And funny enough, one of our recent guests was a fellow by the name of Paolo who works at Sketch, and he actually made that exact point when I was kind of teeing up what sketches or talking about the history and I said, well, obviously it’s really focused around UI design, and he actually stopped me and said, well, That’s true that it found some good traction in that vertical, but actually it’s way more general purpose than that. It’s a general purpose vector editor, and he talked about that they need to serve a huge number of use cases. Engineers use it to make flow chart diagrams, salespeople use it to make stuff for their slide decks, as well as yeah design many different kinds of design app icon design and graphic design and mobile apps and websites and desktop apps and so forth. So that’s interesting, which is it’s just not good or bad, it’s just a difference and if you want to do something very specific, then you’re making a thing that’s very suited to that specific task. 00:15:58 - Speaker 1: Yeah, I think one of the things we, when talking with our users, product designers, UX designers is, I don’t think people are really happy, generally speaking, with their UI design tool, whether it be FigMA or Sketch. And those tools are very powerful, I think very early on in the design process, the design workflow, when I’m really just translating ideas in my head down on paper or on the screen. Then there is a moment when I want to make the thing that I’m designing more real. It’s a higher fidelity of design, it’s a higher fidelity prototype. I like the direction it’s going, and then that’s when we see a lot of people, they’re reaching for another tool. Could be origami, could be protoy, usually to do higher fidelity prototyping. But I think what’s interesting there is, so if you think about, I’m spending all this time in a UI design tool. many, many, many weeks. And then I’m reaching for a secondary tool, spending time in there. The feedback loop between those two tools is very arduous as well, right? Because then if I want to make changes, I have to go back to my design tool and make changes, reimport to the prototyping tool. You don’t get tight feedback loops, which is the whole point of prototyping. I think there’s an inherent flaw there. But then at the end of all of that, what do you hand to your engineering team? Like a figMA file and some videos of a prototype. And it’s all reference points. It’s all just a blueprint. There’s nothing that they can truly use. They’re starting from scratch. And so we sort of look at it and we’re like, well, we should like spend time in your UI tool, in your design tool. I think is an incredible tool. Sketch, these are really powerful tools. But when you reach that point in your workflow when you want to make your design more real and reach a higher level of fidelity, That’s the moment where there’s a benefit in thinking about how to design it with real materials, right? And so, even your interactions, why not use a native modal instead of simulating what a modal is gonna look like? Why not use real haptics so you can feel what those haptics are gonna feel like. And then there’s a lot of, I think, if you get to that point where you’re doing higher fidelity prototyping, the input that you give a user, the higher the fidelity and the better that is. Most likely the better your feedback is going to be, again, when you’re at that higher fidelity prototyping moment. 00:18:22 - Speaker 2: Yeah, I feel like transitions and motion design are an area where mobile is in a whole new class, right? Desktop, typically you’re lucky if you get even like a button animating to a depressed position when you click it with the mouse for the most part, you click on something, the thing just happens. Whereas mobile introduced this whole world of very sophisticated high frame rate transitions that illustrate something spatial or maybe even be a little bit 3D or a fade or something like that. Every design team I’ve ever worked with, and this includes Muse, you know, you do the static mockups and then you have some text that basically says, OK. This should probably transition by this kind of a thing with an ease in curve and probably take about half a second and then really it’s up to and on our team that’s Julia who loves this kind of work and in a way she ends up being kind of our transition and motion designer because she’s turning those static screens into the actual interaction. So yeah, allowing the designer to do more of that in their tool and thereby get again something that’s closer to the finished thing and let the programmers be more focused on logic, I think seems pretty logical. 00:19:30 - Speaker 1: And there’s some engineers that are really gifted at motion design and transitions and interactivity. It’s designers that have had an opportunity to work with those engineers. Usually get something great from that collaboration because the designer has the vision, and the engineer then takes it even a step further, but that’s not every engineer. And even sometimes designers, I think, don’t know exactly what that interaction’s gonna feel like until they make it and until they feel it. And I think that’s the other piece in the design process that we don’t talk about a lot is to what level of conviction do I have as a designer, that the thing I’ve designed looks right and feels right. Am I just relying on my experience or what I have seen to be true in other apps? Maybe for simple things, that’s fine, but how do we then get different interaction patterns? How do we surprise and delight users with new things? We need to try it. And I think the closer you can get a designer to trying new things and making them feel real in their hands, instead of just trying to explain it to an engineer, they have more conviction. They’re like, oh, not only have I designed it, but they can hand, you know, a phone to an engineer and be like, what do you think? Like, play with it. Like how does that feel? You think we can make it better? And I think that’s one of the things we’re trying to do with play is get designers to that point where they can have that conviction. Of what they’ve designed, not just from a visual standpoint, but from an interactive standpoint, feels and functions well, marrying those two things. I think the whole thing of interaction design, it’s visual design and interaction design together, those things should be married together and not be separate from one another, or be in a waterfall type of uh approach. 00:21:20 - Speaker 3: Yeah, another way to articulate that is that the better your tooling is for rapid and cheap experimentation, the more experiments are correct to do. So if it is in fact very expensive to implement a working prototype, the correct decision is often to actually waterfall it because it’d be too expensive to do it twice. But as it gets infinitely cheap and infinitely quick to implement a prototype, the correct decision becomes more and more just try it, which is great. 00:21:48 - Speaker 1: That’s a great point. It’s the cost of doing something wrong and spending too much time doing the wrong thing. If you can get to the wrong thing quicker, then you’re able to get to the right solution at some point quicker as well. June talks a lot about that. He’s like, I think designing is just the process of picking the best option that you have gone through, but you need to go through that process. The more time that that process takes, and the more expensive that process is, the less you experiment, and you just fall back and you default to what we know. But that’s not where great ideas, you know, often come from. 00:22:24 - Speaker 2: Yeah, enumerating the options and then choosing from among them based on your design constraints and tastes and things like that, I think that gets pretty close to at least part of the core of the design process. And one of my favorite Walt Disney quotes that he would always tell his designers, who only brought him one proposal, was he’d say, Well, it’s hard to choose between one. You know, your chance to exercise your taste is really when you can look at several things, ideally as many as possible, that kind of explore the space and then really see which one is inspired or solves the problem in a unique way or just feels right. 00:23:00 - Speaker 3: Yeah, Ricky has made similar statements about design in the context of programming languages. He said something like, if you’re looking at one option that’s not a design decision, right? It also reminds me of this book called The Principles of Product Development Flow, which I constantly go back to. And one of the insights from that book is that building something like software, something creative, is fundamentally about eliminating risk. If you eliminate all of the risk in a project, by definition, you win. And so one way to look at the creative process is how do you find and systematically eliminate risk. And again, if it becomes cheap and quick to do that, you more quickly and more certainly move towards winning. 00:23:37 - Speaker 1: That’s a great perspective. 00:23:39 - Speaker 2: Mark, what does designing with real materials mean for you? 00:23:44 - Speaker 3: Well, it’s interesting when you wrote that up in our notion doc, I had one thing in mind, but I think we’re actually talking about something else. So I had in mind the idea of doing a design with an eye towards eventually building it using a quote unquote real material. So for example, designing a piece of furniture to eventually build the production version out of solid hardwood instead of particle board, for example. But there’s also the notion of designing with real materials as doing the design of the chair with an actual hardwood prototype versus doing it with a particle board prototype, which might be cheaper, but it has less fidelity to the eventual production version. I think they’re both interesting, by the way, and you can imagine the same thing in software with taking the example of the button. If you’re eventually going to ship a native iOS button widget, you might want to do your design with a native iOS button implementation. There’s also separately, the choice of you can ship in your production version a native iOS button or like a transliterated HTML version that mostly looks the same, but actually the the covers isn’t exactly the same. I think those are both interesting discussions. But since the thing that Adam, you originally meant to talk about is more the Designing and prototyping with the actual thing that you’re eventually going to be shipping, in this case, the real iOS button. I would point out that I think that goes both ways, in the sense that you could choose to extend your prototyping technology to get closer and closer to production software. You could also pull in your production software and make it easier to iterate with, and people do mixes of both, of course. 00:25:12 - Speaker 2: Yeah, well, maybe another thing I had in mind was going back to Andy’s article on honoring the material. There it’s less about in the process of figuring out what the end product is going to be. You’re making a chair, you’re doing a sketch, you’re maybe using some software to lay it out. It’s less about are you designing with the same material and more understanding the material that you want to make it for. And so perhaps this is, well, I guess that’s in the word honor or respect, but I think it’s maybe authentic is another word that comes to mind a little bit, which is thinking in terms of I’m going to make, coming back to the web flow example, I’m making a web page, so it should use the qualities of the web in a particular way. I shouldn’t try to obscure that I’m making a web page and try to give someone a thing that feels like Photoshop because that’s wrong. I’m going to make a thing that feels like a static image that doesn’t feel like the web. And perhaps there’s a similar comparison to me made for mobile app design. If I’m doing that for a mobile app, I’m mocking up all of the elements in a vector editor, I’m just may not be fully really understanding and respecting what the material can do. 00:26:22 - Speaker 3: Yeah, I think that makes sense. So you might say designing with the real material in mind and honoring that. I do think there’s two subtle variations of this though. There’s one variation which is, OK, I think honoring the material is a good word for this. This is where you deeply understand the traditional and ingrained use of the material. It’s almost like a moral argument of this is the way the web is, respect the web, this is the way it should be. And then there’s also the Saying, OK, design is how it works. So you, as a part of that, you need to understand deeply the materials that you’re working with as part of the design and fully understand all the parameters and possibilities. And given that you’re gonna come up with certain approaches and designs. Now, typically, these circles are gonna almost perfectly overlap, but it’s not necessarily the case that they do. I think FIMA is a good example of Figma does embrace some elements of the traditional web. You can go to a URL and you can load the page, but the way the app is actually implemented is completely different. It’s like this wild C++ to WebGL, you know, graphics pipeline, because there they said, OK, here are the properties of the web. We read the fine print. You can do this thing where you transile C++ or JavaScript or whatever, and you can combine that with the traditional, you know, on the material sense of the web should have URLs you can go to, and we’ve produced this great result. So I think there are two interesting and different meanings of that. 00:27:32 - Speaker 1: It’s something we talk about internally as a team is how much time do you spend on different parts of the creative process. So, if I was Going to sculpt something out of clay. Maybe I have an idea. And maybe I sketched that idea, so I’m doing a 2D sketch of this three dimensional object. And I think that there’s value in that because I’m visualizing my initial idea, but if I spend too long sketching my sculpture, In 2D in an entirely different medium. I’m not getting to that real formation as early as I want to, versus somebody that gets their hands in the clay sooner rather than later is going to find new things that they wanted to sculpt. It’s probably not going to look the same as that 2D sketch. And it’s, I think a question of where do I invest my time and how much of that time do I invest at different parts of the creative process. And I think right now, our tooling. Does a really good job at that, get an idea from my head down to a sketch on a piece of paper or a vector in a browser. It does it really well. But then there’s that moment where I want to make it more real. And what’s interesting in hearing you guys talk about the real materials from your perspectives as well is There’s value in honoring those real materials, so the button, like we talked about. But then there’s also a moment where I think the working with real materials unlocks potential that you previously didn’t have. So, how do I create an interactive map with pins that are connected to a carousel of cards in a vector editing tool? I can’t really do that. Maybe somebody can create some crazy hacky thing, you know, prototype inigma sketch, but I can’t do that. I certainly can’t do that in a native way. Or haptics, or a picker. Like how many times do we use a picker in an app, a little dial, right at the bottom of our screen. I can’t make that for real in a vector editing tool. But in a tool like ours, I just tap picker and then it appears on my page, and then I just get to use it, like the real thing. So there’s the moment where real materials unlock this. Potential that I previously didn’t have, not using those real materials, because I had to create ways around using those real materials. 00:30:07 - Speaker 2: Another real world metaphor that comes to mind. I’m reading a biography right now of a fellow named Ken Adam, who was a very talented production designer, so I think in film, this is the person whose job is to basically come up with the sets and a lot of the objects and things that are on screen that are not the actors, and probably his most famous work was Doctor Strangelove, which has these really dramatic war rooms and things like that. But he’s a brilliant artist. He does these amazing sketches of these scenes, but he makes the point in the book it’s kind of this interview format. He makes the point that the sketches are not the finished thing. No one’s going to see them except some years later if someone happens to be interested and wants to read about it in a book. The sketches just get you to the end thing. So he really liked to get to working with in this case, the carpenters as soon as possible, and for him, a lot of that was about not just the way the space will feel, but also the way the materials. Will look so the way that the light will reflect off the metal and by the way this is film and this is film in the 1960s or whatever they’re trying to do things cheaply, you know, they’re doing a period piece. There’s supposed to be a big marble column or a big metal banister. You can’t actually do that with real marble or real metal, so you’ve got to use some various tricks of the trade to kind of do a faux version of that, but what’s that actually going to look and feel like in practice? So on one hand, yeah, he’s a huge fan of sketching and obviously from the muse perspective we like that early ideation. Don’t go and try to build a set before you’ve figured out what the concept is and what you’re trying to convey and what the feel it will evoke will be, but also you could spend too long on that ideation. It’s a safe place. You can make your beautiful pictures and in the end, once you get your hands on the clay, and the sculpture metaphor, get your hands on the whatever the painted wood you’re using for your set, then you start to discover the fine details that will really make or break the end result of your artistic endeavor. 00:32:01 - Speaker 3: I feel like a lot of things we’re talking about here are circling around our overall model of gradual enhancement and the creative process. So we’ve talked about how the creative process fundamentally has this flow, just to simplify a little bit. Say you go from an idea to a sketch to a prototype to a finished product. Now, it’s important to Progress along that appropriately. Otherwise you’ll make decisions and choices that are inappropriate for where you are. So obviously if you jump right to implementation and production without knowing what you’re actually doing, that’s a bad idea. And conversely, if you stay around protyping forever without ever confronting the reality of the actual production material, that’s also a bad decision. And there’s a theory about how you should do that whole progression that we can talk about if you want. But kind of bringing it back to tools. I see a few issues that we typically have with tools to facilitate this process. One is that there are sometimes outright gaps. So for example, we thought that there was a gap, at least in the digital realm with the thinking and sketching piece, which is where we introduced Muse to be a tool for that spot. There can also be a problem with the gaps or the extent of the gaps. So you might, for example, to use the example we’re talking about before with buttons, if there’s a huge gap to go from your protyping tool to your production tool, that introduces a bunch of costs. And by the way, you’re at least going to do one jump from the direction from prototyping to production, but you may well want to go back and forth many times, and that has implications which we can also talk about. 00:33:30 - Speaker 2: One thing I’d like to get your take on Dan, is how you think about the mediums or devices of the phone, tablet, and desktop. This is something we’ve spoken about and written about somewhat extensively and wanting to design fairly differently, for example, between tablet and desktop as we did with the news for Mac versus new for tablet, even though in some ways those are closer than, say, phone and desktop. How does your team think of those and particularly why you want to start with the phone? 00:33:59 - Speaker 1: Yeah, so starting with the phone. We decided to start with the phone, primarily because it was the medium that you were designing for. So let’s use the same medium we’re designing for as the primary input device. And the other reason was, we realized that it was the most challenging medium to design for if you were going to create a design tool. So let’s start with the hardest, and then extrapolate out from their UI to other platforms. So, we always believed that play would be a multi-platform product. One of the early pieces of feedback from users was, hey, can I have this on tablet? And we had always thought that we would create an iPad version to design iPad apps, right? Again, using the medium for its intention. 00:34:46 - Speaker 2: Yeah, that’s the thing that comes to mind immediately is that you want to make a phone app, you use the phone, you want to make a tablet app, you use a tablet, you want to make a desktop app, use a desktop. 00:34:54 - Speaker 1: Yeah, and that was in our first medium article, our launch article, we actually said that we’re going to release an iPad app to design iPod apps. 00:35:03 - Speaker 2: I’ll link that in the show notes for historical interest. 00:35:06 - Speaker 1: And then we got feedback from users saying, can I have this on an iPad? Like, I want to be able to design iOS apps, but I want to be able to do it on my tablet. It would be nice to have a little bit more real estate, so I can work for longer periods of time. And I think in our early testing, we realized this too, but there is a cognitive load when you’re doing certain design tasks that coupled with working on the device exclusively, gets to a moment where you fatigue sooner. So we realized, OK, well, maybe we should accelerate our multi-platform vision quicker. So we released the iPad app a few months ago, and what was interesting there is a lot of users were using it with their keyboard and mouse and Apple pencil. So the vast majority of people using peripherals, which wasn’t too surprising, but the percentage of them was surprising to us. And at the same time we had launched Play Web, so browser based. It’s really more of an admin tool and asset panel, so I can easily drag photos, images, SVGs, custom fonts, again, doing these things that are going to be way more challenging on the phone. Let’s use each medium for what they may be best at. And I think as we’ve gotten feedback from users, there’s certainly A role for the desktop in the design process. I think the unique opportunity we have now is because we have a design tool on the phone and on a tablet. Well, what does that then look like on a desktop? Because now we don’t need to create a traditional desktop tool. We can create something that marries and complements the other platforms in a way that is more meaningful. And I think more innovative. So that’s a space that we’re actively pursuing right now, that’s pretty exciting. 00:37:12 - Speaker 2: Use each platform for its strengths is absolutely singing our tunes, so I’m glad to hear you say that. I also wonder too, I think your product caught my attention partially because there’s something really provocative about design on your phone, you know, it kind of has a little bit of this counterintuitive head explode emoji like what? No, like phones, you know, for consumption, you’re trying to picture the precision that you need for, you know, moving a thing, 3 pixels to the left or whatever that you associate with design tasks. And so it’s sort of attention grabbing, but in the meantime you’re also just building a modern specialized just well made design tool, and I wonder, I guess I’m thinking of this because of your users and customers who are on a tablet with maybe a trackpad and a keyboard and a stylus, even if they’re designing for the phone, that indeed maybe they just like a lot of the things about the tool and the core concept of designing on the exact same device that’s sort of your target. It is very interesting and provocative, but at the same time you can take some of the things that are just good about the tool and generalize them in this way. 00:38:18 - Speaker 1: Yeah, it creates an opportunity for people to harness the unique features or capabilities, I would say, of the product on iOS, but on a different medium. And whereas the output would be the same, you’re designing a mobile product, how you do that on different mediums may be slightly tailored to that medium. And I think that’s been a really fun pursuit for the team, because how do I Carry enough of the UI from medium to medium, so it’s familiar, but adapt it in a way that also respects that medium, right? We have fundamentals of how we use right click context menus and things like this and hot keys for keyboard shortcuts. We would be silly not to incorporate those into a desktop product, right? So, how do we think about those things in conjunction with how a user would design on the phone and make it a cohesive experience across all mediums, but also unique enough where we’re taking advantage of Innate behaviors that have been ingrained in our activities and how we’re working for so long. 00:39:31 - Speaker 2: One thing I think we briefly mentioned earlier is developer handoff, code export, that sort of thing. And as I think about the full creative process and going from kind of medium to medium for what’s appropriate for the stage, so you start with that could be a literal envelope sketch, you know, in my case, I would start in muse and I would gather user research and screen scouts to the current product and sketch some new ideas and what are the problems to solve. And once I roughly know what I’m doing, then maybe I go from there to the vector editor. And then maybe you go from there to, OK, now I really have a pretty concrete idea of the flow and the solution, but now we need to get in there with the real materials and design all the interactions and how does the spatial model work and feel and let me quickly do user tests and essentially iterate on it right on the spot where something doesn’t feel right and I can just grab the phone. Back and make a couple of changes in play. So there’s a nice progression there of increasing fidelity, but I know in that kind of little vignette in that little story that I’ve just told, it’s sort of all one person up until the point where they’re doing the prototyping and play and then Usually, not always, but usually at that point you’re not only changing between tools, but you’re actually changing between people, so there’s sort of a knowledge transfer, what was the intention here? What kind of role do you expect to play in that part of the process? 00:40:53 - Speaker 1: Yes, so it’s something we’ve thought about from the onset and I’m air quoting now, but developer handoff has been something that so many teams and companies have tried to solve. It’s a very challenging space for, I think all the reasons we all know to be true. Engineers work in different ways, existing code basis for products that already exist, incorporating code that’s generated from a tool, maybe challenging to incorporate. Quite honestly, a lot of the code generated from tools is just garbage, and engineers don’t want to use it. So, we’ve thought about it in a way where we wanted to start with the basics and also talk to engineers about what would be valuable. And there’s a lot of opinions is one thing that we’re realizing, but We want to get to a place where it’s usable for both the designer and the engineer. What I mean by that is, I don’t think all designers want to be educated as to how their designs are going to be written in code. I just don’t think all designers care about that, and that’s OK. The force feed that is not gonna be something that they’re gonna value in a tool. But maybe we could Give them the option to view what the code would look like for the thing that they’re designing in real time, and as they make changes to their design, maybe those properties are changing in the code. So they see that as I make changes in my design, it’s obviously gonna have an effect on the code that my engineer is going to have to create. I think the pursuit of this for us has been something where We want to get to a point where an engineer, or anybody, quite honestly, could take code generated by play platform, put it into X code, and render the exact same thing that I’ve designed in play. It needs to be 1 to 1. So what would the use of this be? Well, one of the things we hear from engineers that we’ve talked with, for those engineers listening, I would love feedback on this as well. Is the moment when an engineer, they have to look at a FIMA file or a sketch file. And then just lay out views. I have to take everything visual that I’m looking at, and I have to start writing code to just make that same visual thing in code. And that’s an arduous process. It’s not that much fun for engineers to do, especially the more senior they are. So if we could take that pain point away from them, it would give them, quite honestly, the thing that is most valuable, which is time. If we could say to a designer, by the way, with certainty, what you’ve designed here in play is going to look exactly the same as what your engineer is gonna code because we’re going to give them that code, then there’s value for the designer. And it, again, gives them both back this thing that is very important, which is time because there’s less back and forth. Oh, I didn’t mean 16 point pad. Oh no, the corner radius wasn’t supposed to be this, it was the. There’s no confusion because at the end of the day, they’re just gonna have a straight line into what I’ve designed, and it’s gonna render the same thing in X code. So, This is some of the work we’ve been doing on the developer collaboration feature, as we’re calling it, because this really shouldn’t be a handoff. And I think that’s the other thing I can note quickly is how often does a designer design something and hand it to an engineer and then never touch it again. Never. So it’s really more how can we create a feedback loop of collaboration. What if there are ways where as I’m designing something, my engineer is beginning to develop it, and then I want to change spacing properties? Do I need to slack that to my engineer? Oh, by the way, like the 16 point gap is now a 20 point gap, or could I just make that modification in the design and my engineer knows that through maybe an endpoint that we allow them to hit, and then those properties are just updated for them. So I think there’s a lot of work that can be done in this space. When we answer the question, what value can we deliver to a designer and what value can we deliver to an engineer? And I think a lot of it is about giving them their time back to focus on other tasks. 00:45:14 - Speaker 3: This idea of a designer and engineer collaborating is really interesting. It reminds me of a bit of a pattern we developed in the lab and have used Muse to facilitate this collaboration. So say a designer comes up with a design and there are certain architectural elements that they believe are basically set, and then there are parameters that they want to experiment with. Now, the classical way to do this is you eject the code from the design tool and then the designer looks at the real app and they say, oh, the font’s too small. Slack the developer, please make it bigger. And then you’re recompiling everything, and half a day later the build shows up. A cool pattern that we’ve used is identify the key parameters and put those parameters as configurable sliders in the code. And so that the designer can show me the debug panel, slide these things around, see them happen in real time, and then once everyone feels good about it, and nail those values into the code base where they’re more solid, but also harder to change. Sounds like a different way to implement the same. Logical flow that you’re suggesting for this collaboration. 00:46:16 - Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. 00:46:18 - Speaker 2: Now how do you picture it working in the sense of does the engineer have a copy of play? And kind of the play, I’m not even sure what you call the app prototype document loaded up and then they can take those steps to export as this a place where the web version, I’m thinking of, you know, early kind of hand off tools, Zeppelin, I think was one that had pretty good traction for a while, and they don’t need to know or care about the design tool the designer is using potentially they just get this webpage that has a bunch of assets they can download and kind of screenshots and maybe even some copy pasteable code. Increasingly nowadays I tend to see more either people engineers have a copy of sketch so they can load up the sketch file or they just click on the FIMA thing and they can kind of go through there, and in that sense they’re not in some kind of separate handoff mode, they just are getting different things from being in the same tool. How do you picture it working for play? 00:47:12 - Speaker 1: Yeah, I think this would be certainly an area where the desktop seems like an appropriate medium for this type of workflow for an engineer. So I think that’s probably the medium where this lives. 00:47:25 - Speaker 2: So then you can only use play for desktop in engineering mode if you have a sufficiently loud mechanical keyboard. That’s the right medium for programming. 00:47:33 - Speaker 1: Exactly, exactly. That’ll be the criteria that you that you need to fulfill in order to get a seat. So it’s interesting, one of our engineers on our team, accidentally or whatever was updated to an editor role in FIMA. We use FIMA, you know, for a lot of the design work that we’re doing as well. And he was like, this is too much. Like, can you downgrade me? Because I don’t need all this stuff. I just, like, go back to my other view. It’s sort of an interesting moment and we were like, well, why? Like, what was overwhelming about this? And I was like, wow, there’s just all this thing that I don’t need, I don’t need to see all this, I just need what I need. So I think for us as we’re designing this is, maybe an engineer would want this code that we’re able to generate, or maybe they just wanna have a High functioning inspector tool as well that gives them the opportunity to click on different components, be able to see the different states of those components, be able to see the different properties that have changed in those states, and then maybe if there are interactions, let them know what the interaction is. Oh, it’s a pan gesture. Here are some of the key parameters. And in some of the engineers that we’ve talked with, that’s actually very helpful, versus here’s a few 100 or more lines of code to create this entire interaction that I’ve created. It’s like, well, no, just give me the different states, the properties that have changed, what type of gesture you’re using, what type of easing there is, and that’s actually really helpful for me. So, I think it looks very similar to what a designer would view, but as an engineer clicks on different objects on the page, we will probably serve up information that’s more relevant to them in a way that is not impaired by other panels, let’s say that a designer may need. 00:49:31 - Speaker 2: So we can see that you can already make pretty powerful interactions in play, and I noticed also as I was poking around the interface there’s a panel where you can create variables, global variables, and that pretty quickly leads my mind to think about, OK, so there’s state, and once there’s state, now you’re talking about a pretty sophisticated program. And so that makes me wonder how you think of yourself as being similar to in competition with or in a different part of the stack than no code or low code builders. You mentioned origami earlier as one example, or even these full fledged outbuilders. How do you see yourself in relation to those? 00:50:09 - Speaker 1: When we started play, the vision was to create the first design tool that was purpose-built for mobile product designers. And that’s still the vision that we are fulfilling today. A lot of users have asked us, I’d be amazing if I could just submit what I made to the app store, something similar to an Adalo or Glide or these app builders, whether they’re native apps or whether, you know, they’re cross-platform applications. I think for us, the vision is something where we want to build a professional grade design tool in a market where I think product designers are underserved at a moment in their workflow that’s really important. However, because of how we’re building this tool, it isn’t impossible for us to go the route of a more quote unquote app builder approach. The web flow for apps, for example. It’s just a slightly different market and a different business to build. And I think that’s the fun part of the journey is We are building towards our vision. We have traction with users. We haven’t even launched much of the product ecosystem that we have road mapped, and we’re working to fulfill that vision. But there is an interesting Opportunity could be a secondary business. It could be a separate business of using the technology that we’ve created to then build an app a builder. Of course, it then requires We’re back in integration, commerce, etc. But it’s not something that we’re setting out to build right now, so I wouldn’t call play an app builder because there isn’t a published to App Store button. But the closer that we get to, again, as we’re designing with real materials and as we are creating things that can generate usable code. There is an opportunity for that path to be pursued at some point in the future, should that be one that we want to go down. 00:52:11 - Speaker 3: Yeah, I think you can also think of app builders in terms of the ease with which one progresses down the development continuum versus the eventual limit on one’s ability in terms of the complexity of the app. So the base case would be, you open up your plain text editor and you type out the apps from the very beginning of the prototyping all the way to the end. Therefore, you can definitionally do anything you want that could be accomplished in the programming language at least, but it’s gonna be very expensive to do the initial prototyping. Uh, and then you could use a tool that facilitates the initial prototyping, but Jeff’s code. And then you still have the full runway towards the eventual fully complex app. When I think of app builders, I tend to think of tools to make a trade-off of making it even easier to do the prototyping and limited capability phases by walling off the future of eventual fully sophisticated, fully general apps. And in some cases, that’s the right tradeoffs to make if you have a very basic use case, but a lot of reasonably want the option of the full power of the programming language eventually and And for that reason, they tend not to choose those tools in those cases. You can think of it as a sort of technology problem in the sense of a technology frontier from economics where given a level of technology, which is your tools, you face a certain trade-off frontier, but perhaps with improved tooling and techniques, you can bring that frontier in so you have less of a fundamental trade-off. It can be arbitrarily easy to develop an arbitrarily complex product. That’s the dream. But for now in our world with our limited technology, we have to make a bit of a trade-off there. 00:53:33 - Speaker 2: And I would agree that it isn’t that something is better or worse because it is an app builder with a limited ceiling but easier to get started, maybe can be done by a kind of non-programmer all the way through FileMaker Pro is one of my favorite examples for kind of clunky and old school as it is. It really has enabled a lot of businesses to build custom software built by domain experts that they just wouldn’t be able to get or afford otherwise, or Hypercard is obviously a kind of one that almost has a Mythical quality to it now and you know was used to make things like games and simple content presentation but you couldn’t do sophisticated logic and I actually almost wonder in the mobile app domain, I think setting aside games, I feel like websites you mentioned the web flow example, there there is a big class of websites which are really just content. And there’s certainly logic in making sure you know it’s responsive on different screen sizes and so on, but for the most part it really is just content. So once you’ve done the design and copywriting, you’ve essentially done all of it, which is very different from a web app which has sophisticated logic and state and all that sort of thing, and I feel like mobile apps. are more often something that has more sophisticated logic and state, and so therefore, a team with dedicated designer and or a motion designer and a dedicated engineer or engineers is more likely to be needed. So they’re just different domains without kind of different end states. 00:55:01 - Speaker 1: You see some of the other tools that are app builders, the capability of the tool is such that you generate a fairly straightforward app, and it begs the question, does this need to be an app, or could this just be a mobile website? And a lot of what we’ve talked about in the past is If we went this route, we wouldn’t necessarily change things dramatically from a technical perspective, but we would need to simplify the interface, almost hide more things for users, and then almost have a expert mode or an advanced mode where we would then give the user the opportunity to uncover more of these properties if they were inclined to update them, but If they were a novice, they can build something really sophisticated and great looking without having to tap into those properties. So I think, Mark, to your point before, I think those are some of the trade-offs, like it would need to be easy enough for a novice in order to make the thing they wanted to make, but have the advanced capabilities of somebody that wanted them if they wanted those things exposed. And that’s the balancing act, I think, of a tool like that. 00:56:16 - Speaker 2: which I think does come back to the gradual enhancement concept you mentioned earlier, bitmark, which is we’ve given the example in the past of LiveJournal and and Friendster, and so on, where you had these things where you would make this very, you know, basically fill out a form, build a profile, but then eventually you can unlock the secret code where you can type in a little bit of CSS into a box, and then from there, you know, there’s the deep rabbit hole of going into full web development. It’s pretty infrequent that things are set up that way in computing, but I think it’s a very laudable thing when you can have that low floor but high ceiling. 00:56:52 - Speaker 3: Yeah, not only that, but minimal discontinuous jumps. With gradual enhancement, we use the example of, you start with a blank page, you write something out by hand, and you eventually want to end up with a typed document. Often that requires Two or 3 steps, you know, you write it out by hand and then you type it up in your brainstorming app and then you type it up again in your word processor. It would be amazing if you could actually smoothly evolve that in one document. Similar to how we’re talking about smoothly evolving the design in a way that kind of preserves the underlying code. Now, it’s a very hard engineering problem to get all that into one app. That is the dream, and I think it’s important to keep that ideal in mind and not blindly settle for constant discontinuous jumps in our tooling that jolt our creative process. 00:57:36 - Speaker 2: So you’ve had play in a waitless private beta state for quite some time, and I think that’s a really good way to quietly iterate on something we did the same from use in the early days. What can we expect in terms of a general release or whatever is next for the product? 00:57:53 - Speaker 1: Yes, so plays available for iOS and iPad on the App Store. Anyone could install it now. There’s still, as you mentioned, an access gate route of beta in the beta sense. I think we’ve got a really stable product right now and we’re letting more users in, but we will be lifting that access gate relatively soon. So we’re excited about that and it will be open for all to use. It will be a free tier for everybody to use as well, which we’re excited about and Well, I can’t speak too specifically about some of the bigger things we’re working on. We have be more features for iOS and iPad over the coming months this year. We’re excited about the charts and graphs for SWIFTUI and iOS 16, so when that comes out, we’ll be releasing some updates there and then some larger platform additions and work that will be rolling out in beta later this year. 00:58:53 - Speaker 2: We’re excited to see it, and certainly as a creator, it’s always a little bit, even if you’ve tested really thoroughly with lots of beta testers kind of a little bit behind closed doors, I think that there is always this act of vulnerability to come out into the world and kind of lift the curtain and say ta da, hope you like it. And of course, you get a huge variety of reactions from folks on the internet, but it can also be a very powerful moment and uniting for the team as well to feel proud about what you’ve put out into the world. Yeah, great, we’re excited. Well, let’s wrap it there. Thanks everyone for listening. If you have feedback, write us on Twitter at museAppHQ by email, hello at museapp.com. And Dan, I’m so glad that you’re pushing forward design tools in this interesting and provocative new way. Can’t wait to see what comes out of play next. 00:59:43 - Speaker 1: Thanks guys. I appreciate you having me.