'Skyfall' re-ignited me as a fan. What about you?

2456713

Comments

  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe Still waiting for the Jena Malone Batwoman movie that's never going to be made.Moderator
    Posts: 11,969
    Blimey! And coming off the back of the likes of TND and DAD, that's some statement to make. I was apoplectic by the time DAD came around. I was desperate for changes and I am in a far happier place now than I was ten years ago. Bond had gone stagnant and was going nowhere (not Brosnan's fault granted) but if EON had carried on in the same manner as they had been, I could easily have seen the series die a slow, horrible death.

    Well I like TND, irrespective of it being my first big screen Bond. And despite it's mostly gaudy content, DAD isn't all bad. With the recent films, it feels like EON have gone too far to make this era different. They just don't feel like Bond films to me.
    You're wasting your breath Willy. Ignore and move on.

    Well, I guess that's better than the feel of a pitchfork at my throat.
  • JrW_008JrW_008 The North
    Posts: 112
    Honestly I really like where EON are headed with Skyfall and onwards, it was Dalton's two appearances that didn't feel like Bond to me, along with Lazenby's one.
  • Posts: 11,119
    Just to be clear........'Skyfall' only made me more fan than I already am :-)!! It's not that I found the previous Bond films utter shit and that 'Skyfall' made me a fan again. The film merely enhanced my already big fan craziness :-).
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded Riding a white swan to Matera
    Posts: 12,230
    Yep I think many of us can say that; gotcha.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,210
    JrW_008 wrote:
    Honestly I really like where EON are headed with Skyfall and onwards, it was Dalton's two appearances that didn't feel like Bond to me, along with Lazenby's one.
    I can understand where you're coming from regarding LTK but how did OHMSS and TLD not feel like Bond?
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 4,622
    SF didn't ignite me as a Bond fan, the opposite actually. I wasn't enthusiastic about the future of the series before SF, i'm less so afterwards, especially now as the series continues in it's increasingly pretentious direction. Also, for what it's worth, I've been a fan since I was 11 (10 to be precise), having watched a VHS copy of YOLT, this was back in 1996.
    I echo the Major's sentiments. I saw SF originally in a crowded theatre on a Saturday night. You could hear a pin drop, for virtually the duration. The only exception being the cheeseball, hamfisted, non-sensical homage to Goldfinger, which was also the only time the actual James Bond theme was brought up full.This diversionary interlude got cheers. But I guess it was ok to bring the Theme up in this scene, because here the franchise's glory years were being given a token nod, but God forbid the actual theme, contaminate the precious main body of the film. Better it be compartmentalized. The Craig era of re-booted Bond is "serious" dramatic filmmaking. Best not to be too directly associated with the tone and vibe of the original series.
    Compare the sombre SF theatre experience, with the cinema viewing of the original-series Bond films being shown at the Tiff Designing Bond exhibit, which was playing locally at the same time. Here audiences cheered, laughed, gasped, and thrilled in the visceral excitement of watching a Bond film. We walked out happy and excited. It didn't matter which of the original 20 films was showing. Some of the Connery films even got standing ovations.
    What makes the Craig films so "pretentious", the last two in particular, is that the filmmakers seem so very self conscious about making a "Bond" film.
    I know, cue all the example of how SF has Bond-like moments scattered liberally throughtout its run, but that's exactly the point - the fact that such moments need be isolated and cherry picked, as opposed to the broader work being readily and distinctly recognizable as a Bond film in it's own right.
    If Craig, Mendes, Forster, Haggis, Logan...etc are your cuppa Bond, all the power. Free world.
    I do thank the Major for his comments though. Welcome, to have a senior moderator of these august boards, on "board" with the respectfully dissenting voice of dedicated Bond fans, not enamoured with the new "direction."
    Craig fans, do enjoy!!! This is your time!
    Meanwhile, I've got the pending Man From Uncle film to get pumped about. Should be the best Bond film of the past 10 years!

  • Posts: 5,767
    Samuel001 wrote:
    People keep using the word pretentious but shouldn't Bond have the best talent available? Shouldn't every film have the best they can afford, for that matter.
    So far exactly two persons used that term, and they didn´t explain if they mean the cast at all or something else, psychological ideas for instance.

    As for the best talent, I instantly have to think of TSHLM: Very big differences in talent, but very cleverly used for the purpose of highlighting the major characters. It´s gonna be difficult to have Ralph Fiennes as M and give him such small corner parts as Bernard Lee had.

  • Posts: 1,052
    Skyfall has made me love the films I already loved even more and also made me look at some of the Brosnan films in a better light.
  • LicencedToKilt69007LicencedToKilt69007 Belgium, Wallonia
    Posts: 523
    Yes, it did. QOS was so disappointing I even considered the end of the serie. And as said before, it made me love more the previous "classical" films too.
  • DragonpolDragonpol The Crazy World of David Dragonpol
    edited August 2013 Posts: 14,765
    I'm always a Bond fan and and I therefore don't jump on the bandwagon (or should that be "bondwagon"?) every time a new Bond film is released I know that some more casual fans do, but I'm not one of them. I'm always on the wagon exploring the esoteric aspects of the literary and cinematic James Bond for my blog.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,305
    boldfinger wrote:
    Samuel001 wrote:
    People keep using the word pretentious but shouldn't Bond have the best talent available? Shouldn't every film have the best they can afford, for that matter.
    So far exactly two persons used that term, and they didn´t explain if they mean the cast at all or something else, psychological ideas for instance.

    Many others have used that term in the past, I wasn't just referring to this thread or those members.

    As for the psychological ideas presented in the films, I personally think this is a good idea if presented in the right way and can be in keeping with Fleming.
  • Skyfall reignited me as a fan for Timothy Dalton....
  • Posts: 1,548
    Diet Another Day nearly killed my interest in the franchise. And then the best Bond ever bar none entered the fray! Dan Craig IS Bond. IMO of course.
  • Posts: 1,817
    SF didn't re-ignited me as a fan but Bond 23 did!
    By that I mean that the waiting and expectation for Bond 23 really got my into the world of Bond. Though I've seen most of the movies previously and read a couple books, in the time between QOS and SF I got all the movies (and saw a few I haven't ever seen like TMWTGG, FYEO and TLD), I read all Fleming and, most important of all, I joined MI6 Community!
    Now I consider myself a true Bond fan!
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 3,494
    @Timmer- Well, I would like to present a somewhat different point of reference in the matter but before I do, thanks for at least presenting a coherent opposing point of view because you have always been very fair in that when it comes to acknowledging this era has good points as well in other threads.

    timmer wrote:
    I saw SF originally in a crowded theatre on a Saturday night. You could hear a pin drop, for virtually the duration. The only exception being the cheeseball, hamfisted, non-sensical homage to Goldfinger, which was also the only time the actual James Bond theme was brought up full.


    I'm afraid that both times I saw Skyfall in the theater, it was quite the opposite of this reaction. For the first time since 2006, and before that 1999 because I've NEVER seen a worse reaction to a Bond film including QOS than the boos hurled at the screen for DAD. People were once again enjoying themselves during a Bond movie. Again, not once but twice. Lots of laugh out loud moments and none in a bad way, people murmuring how good the film was, and genuine tears when M died. EON's concern for the general public's reaction will always outweigh those of hardcores like ourselves, and whether we agree or not, it's the right approach for business.

    timmer wrote:
    This diversionary interlude got cheers. But I guess it was ok to bring the Theme up in this scene, because here the franchise's glory years were being given a token nod, but God forbid the actual theme, contaminate the precious main body of the film.


    Regarding the lack of Bond theme, it was the "almighty savior" of the anti-Arnold crowd in Thomas Newman that was responsible for this. The reports are out there. If it had been up to him, we wouldn't have gotten any nod to the title theme and he wasn't planning to much use the Bond theme either. Even in QOS, which was a bit light on the Bond theme itself, I can recall more instances of it's use than I can in SF. Newman took the "Serra approach", for which Serra can at least be excused to a degree as he wasn't given direction regarding following Barry's legacy of franchise music. Now while I'd be the first to say as a musician that Newman's effort was easily better, he admits that he understood said legacy when he mentioned that "Severine" was a nod to Barry, yet consistently failed to bring it into it's proper focus, giving us a paltry (not to say that it wasn't well done) reference to the theme in "Komodo Dragon", and of course "Breadcrumbs" during the reintroduction of the classic DB5. It's more fair in this instance to point the blame squarely in Newman's direction in thinking he could reinvent the wheel, than hang it on EON or their approach. They made it clear to Newman when they dropped in to hear his mostly completed work that these themes had to be there, and they were only added at the last minute. Very good reason for Newman's future as a Bond composer to be up in the air, he's not bigger than the Barry legacy.

    timmer wrote:
    I know, cue all the example of how SF has Bond-like moments scattered liberally throughtout its run, but that's exactly the point - the fact that such moments need be isolated and cherry picked, as opposed to the broader work being readily and distinctly recognizable as a Bond film in it's own right.


    If I recall correctly, and I do, we were told by EON to expect lots of tributes to the series within the film because of the golden anniversary. The GF nod was in your face, that's true, but there were many more subtly done and enjoyable ones that should be acknowledged and applauded, including some of the characterizations. These instances thus should be no surprise let alone a reason to complain. There was also a story here these tributes did not distract me from noticing, M's mistakes coming back to haunt her, Bond, and MI6, and Bond's defense of that. And his world weary approach to her and these decisions was right out of the pages of Fleming. Some groaned about the idea at the initial announcement of the planned anniversary theme that went along with that, and rightfully so after, speaking of "cheeseball, hamfisted, non-sensical homages" we got DAD. It was hard not to trust in EON let alone those geniuses P&W after allowing that clusterf**k, but this time there couldn't have been a bigger and better difference in favor of Skyfall in this respect. I saw nothing in Skyfall that remotely approached the level of stupidity we saw such as the retired gadget room. Of course, for those currently wearing the Craig blinders so proudly that they would actually prefer Brosnan's last two films to anything in the Craig era, let alone Brosnan's performances in the role, this must be just fine. Whereas most everyone else with a modicum of fair play towards Craig think these folks have their heads up a particularly smelly orifice.

    For me, in many ways Craig's performance in Skyfall recalled a lot of Connery's finest moments in the manner in which he played it. And you know that I'm a Connery die hard regarding his first 5 films and if I can see it, so should everyone else who hasn't taken a unwavering hardline towards Craig. There was a very reminiscently done level of humor and dry wit, not full of ultra lame one liners and sight gags more fitting for a bad porn film. And most of the classic character traits were there. Craig was Bond right down to the humor, multiple women shagging, vodka martinis, fine clothes, save for the accident and M's unresolved trust issues for which Bond clearly and rightfully thought were behind him that evoked Fleming's world weariness, he very much played Bond like he should be played.

    timmer wrote:
    Better it be compartmentalized. The Craig era of re-booted Bond is "serious" dramatic filmmaking. Best not to be too directly associated with the tone and vibe of the original series.


    I've said this before and it bears repeating. Some of the early Connery films and both of Dalton's were serious, dramatic filmmaking. EON's philosophy is to change with the times and with public demand. That is why the Moore era differed from Connery's first 4, while Dalton's differed from Moore's in swinging back to the serious, while Brosnan's was a anti-reaction to Dalton, and why Craig is the same anti-reaction to Brosnan. It's very clear that Craig's approach resembles the Connery and Dalton eras in tone much more than those of Moore and Brosnan, and with Skyfall we indeed do once again have a Bond film that resembles prior tone and vibe in significant ways.


  • Posts: 6,396
    @Timmer- Well, I would like to present a somewhat different point of reference in the matter but before I do, thanks for at least presenting a coherent opposing point of view because you have always been very fair in that when it comes to acknowledging this era has good points as well in other threads.

    timmer wrote:
    I saw SF originally in a crowded theatre on a Saturday night. You could hear a pin drop, for virtually the duration. The only exception being the cheeseball, hamfisted, non-sensical homage to Goldfinger, which was also the only time the actual James Bond theme was brought up full.


    I'm afraid that both times I saw Skyfall in the theater, it was quite the opposite of this reaction. For the first time since 2006, and before that 1999 because I've NEVER seen a worse reaction to a Bond film including QOS than the boos hurled at the screen for DAD. People were once again enjoying themselves during a Bond movie. Again, not once but twice. Lots of laugh out loud moments and none in a bad way, people murmuring how good the film was, and genuine tears when M died. EON's concern for the general public's reaction will always outweigh those of hardcores like ourselves, and whether we agree or not, it's the right approach for business.

    timmer wrote:
    This diversionary interlude got cheers. But I guess it was ok to bring the Theme up in this scene, because here the franchise's glory years were being given a token nod, but God forbid the actual theme, contaminate the precious main body of the film.


    Regarding the lack of Bond theme, it was the "almighty savior" of the anti-Arnold crowd in Thomas Newman that was responsible for this. The reports are out there. If it had been up to him, we wouldn't have gotten any nod to the title theme and he wasn't planning to much use the Bond theme either. Even in QOS, which was a bit light on the Bond theme itself, I can recall more instances of it's use than I can in SF. Newman took the "Serra approach", for which Serra can at least be excused to a degree as he wasn't given direction regarding following Barry's legacy of franchise music. Now while I'd be the first to say as a musician that Newman's effort was easily better, he admits that he understood said legacy when he mentioned that "Severine" was a nod to Barry, yet consistently failed to bring it into it's proper focus, giving us a paltry (not to say that it wasn't well done) reference to the theme in "Komodo Dragon", and of course "Breadcrumbs" during the reintroduction of the classic DB5. It's more fair in this instance to point the blame squarely in Newman's direction in thinking he could reinvent the wheel, than hang it on EON or their approach. They made it clear to Newman when they dropped in to hear his mostly completed work that these themes had to be there, and they were only added at the last minute. Very good reason for Newman's future as a Bond composer to be up in the air, he's not bigger than the Barry legacy.

    timmer wrote:
    I know, cue all the example of how SF has Bond-like moments scattered liberally throughtout its run, but that's exactly the point - the fact that such moments need be isolated and cherry picked, as opposed to the broader work being readily and distinctly recognizable as a Bond film in it's own right.


    If I recall correctly, and I do, we were told by EON to expect lots of tributes to the series within the film because of the golden anniversary. The GF nod was in your face, that's true, but there were many more subtly done and enjoyable ones that should be acknowledged and applauded, including some of the characterizations. These instances thus should be no surprise let alone a reason to complain. There was also a story here these tributes did not distract me from noticing, M's mistakes coming back to haunt her, Bond, and MI6, and Bond's defense of that. And his world weary approach to her and these decisions was right out of the pages of Fleming. Some groaned about the idea at the initial announcement of the planned anniversary theme that went along with that, and rightfully so after, speaking of "cheeseball, hamfisted, non-sensical homages" we got DAD. It was hard not to trust in EON let alone those geniuses P&W after allowing that clusterf**k, but this time there couldn't have been a bigger and better difference in favor of Skyfall in this respect. I saw nothing in Skyfall that remotely approached the level of stupidity we saw such as the retired gadget room. Of course, for those currently wearing the Craig blinders so proudly that they would actually prefer Brosnan's last two films to anything in the Craig era, let alone Brosnan's performances in the role, this must be just fine. Whereas most everyone else with a modicum of fair play towards Craig think these folks have their heads up a particularly smelly orifice.

    For me, in many ways Craig's performance in Skyfall recalled a lot of Connery's finest moments in the manner in which he played it. And you know that I'm a Connery die hard regarding his first 5 films and if I can see it, so should everyone else who hasn't taken a unwavering hardline towards Craig. There was a very reminiscently done level of humor and dry wit, not full of ultra lame one liners and sight gags more fitting for a bad porn film. And most of the classic character traits were there. Craig was Bond right down to the humor, multiple women shagging, vodka martinis, fine clothes, save for the accident and M's unresolved trust issues for which Bond clearly and rightfully thought were behind him that evoked Fleming's world weariness, he very much played Bond like he should be played.

    timmer wrote:
    Better it be compartmentalized. The Craig era of re-booted Bond is "serious" dramatic filmmaking. Best not to be too directly associated with the tone and vibe of the original series.


    I've said this before and it bears repeating. Some of the early Connery films and both of Dalton's were serious, dramatic filmmaking. EON's philosophy is to change with the times and with public demand. That is why the Moore era differed from Connery's first 4, while Dalton's differed from Moore's in swinging back to the serious, while Brosnan's was a anti-reaction to Dalton, and why Craig is the same anti-reaction to Brosnan. It's very clear that Craig's approach resembles the Connery and Dalton eras in tone much more than those of Moore and Brosnan, and with Skyfall we indeed do once again have a Bond film that resembles prior tone and vibe in significant ways.


    Pretty much in agreement with you there although I am one of the few who really liked Newman's score for which I apologise ;-)

  • @Willy- no need for apologies mate. Newman's score wasn't bad at all, technically quite good and superior to Arnold in this respect, but as I've said it's ultimately about the Barry legacy and creating recognizable franchise music. Arnold's music, save for QOS where he showed real growth in technique and personal style, can fairly be called a "Barry pastiche" but that's what a Bond composer should be doing with franchise music. It should be thematically similar yet allow the composer to espouse some original ideas within that context, in Arnold's case it was electronica but just not particularly well done. Newman did better with that. To ignore these principles is not what EON wants and not how Bond music should be, they want the music to sound like Bond music. In this sense, Newman's soundtrack is an inferior effort and why Arnold is still preferable because he understands this all important aspect. Newman is capable of doing better than Arnold but he's got to take his ego out of the equation to do that, and this effort showed an unwillingness to do so.
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 6,396
    @Willy- no need for apologies mate. Newman's score wasn't bad at all, technically quite good and superior to Arnold in this respect, but as I've said it's ultimately about the Barry legacy and creating recognizable franchise music. Arnold's music, save for QOS where he showed real growth in technique and personal style, can fairly be called a "Barry pastiche" but that's what a Bond composer should be doing with franchise music. It should be thematically similar yet allow the composer to espouse some original ideas within that context, in Arnold's case it was electronica but just not particularly well done. Newman did better with that. To ignore these principles is not what EON wants and not how Bond music should be, they want the music to sound like Bond music. In this sense, Newman's soundtrack is an inferior effort and why Arnold is still preferable because he understands this all important aspect. Newman is capable of doing better than Arnold but he's got to take his ego out of the equation to do that, and this effort showed an unwillingness to do so.

    Well I'm guessing Newman will be used by Mendes on Bond 24 (I'd imagine bringing him and Deakins back into the fold would have been one of his requirements to signing up) so let's see how he gets on second time around and if he address the problems you have posed. I must admit I yearn for the Bond theme to be used more in the next film. It appreciated that there lies a fine balance between underscore and overkill (Michael Kamen being the obvious example) but there were moments in both QoS and SF when it was crying out for the theme and we didn't get it. On the whole though I liked Newman's work and I did think it was as good for Bond as well as for Arnold that someone else had a crack at scoring the film. Like Barry before him, I think the break could be the motivation for Arnold to come back for Bond 25 and deliver a belting soundtrack.
  • @Willy- Mendes, Deakins, and all the technical people they want back. Newman is another story from what I've read and heard rumors of privately from some industry insiders. Hopefully no one will ask me who. Mendes and EON will have to sort that out among themselves, and as mentioned earlier and elsewhere Newman will have to be flexible and understand more is expected of him. I'm sure from what I've read that he gets those expectations of franchise music as he's never been a part of something like this in the way a John Williams or Hans Zimmer is familiar with, but if he's not there it will be because he doesn't want to compromise.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded Riding a white swan to Matera
    Posts: 12,230
    Personally, I hope Newman does willingly compromise, because with his talent he could do much better - and I am interested enough to see what he could do, if he really let himself shine and embrace the Bondian touch music, a bit of Barryesque weaving of the theme song into the soundtrack,etc. Because of his already demonstrated restraint, I do not fear it would be too much, overcompensated ... so maybe it would be lovely and just right. That would be great. I am all for Arnold coming back, too, at some point.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,305
    I just can't believe when asked "where are you going to put the theme?" Newman only put it in once for the entire film! Why would you do that with such a great track? It doesn't make sense.
  • Posts: 6,396
    @Willy- Mendes, Deakins, and all the technical people they want back. Newman is another story from what I've read and heard rumors of privately from some industry insiders. Hopefully no one will ask me who. Mendes and EON will have to sort that out among themselves, and as mentioned earlier and elsewhere Newman will have to be flexible and understand more is expected of him. I'm sure from what I've read that he gets those expectations of franchise music as he's never been a part of something like this in the way a John Williams or Hans Zimmer is familiar with, but if he's not there it will be because he doesn't want to compromise.

    I DEMAND you name your source ;-)

    Sorry, couldn't resist :-)
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 3,494
    Personally, I hope Newman does willingly compromise, because with his talent he could do much better - and I am interested enough to see what he could do, if he really let himself shine and embrace the Bondian touch music, a bit of Barryesque weaving of the theme song into the soundtrack,etc. Because of his already demonstrated restraint, I do not fear it would be too much, overcompensated ... so maybe it would be lovely and just right. That would be great. I am all for Arnold coming back, too, at some point.

    Your way of looking at the bright side of things is a refreshing and always welcomed POV in a place that all too often reeks of negativity. This view often reflects mine, which is to say if you can't present a positive view towards a Bond actor, movie, or in this case a composer, because they are there to be found, you are missing what being a good fan is truly all about. If that's lost on you, time has passed your fandom by.
    Samuel001 wrote:
    I just can't believe when asked "where are you going to put the theme?" Newman only put it in once for the entire film! Why would you do that with such a great track? It doesn't make sense.

    And the Bond theme as well. That's exactly why it's clear the concept of Bondian franchise music was lost on Newman, why the SF soundtrack failed as such, and why I view several of Arnold's efforts as better.
  • Posts: 6,396
    Samuel001 wrote:
    I just can't believe when asked "where are you going to put the theme?" Newman only put it in once for the entire film! Why would you do that with such a great track? It doesn't make sense.

    And the Bond theme as well. That's exactly why it's clear the concept of Bondian franchise music was lost on Newman, why the SF soundtrack failed as such, and why I view several of Arnold's efforts as better.

    Are composers reluctant to use the title track in their scores if they haven't had any involvement in writing them? I only ask this as LTK, TND, DAD, QoS and SF's tracks were written independently and none of the composers used them in their scores.

    Is it because the theme song is written and recorded in tandem with the main score and so it's too late to use any of the cues?
  • There's no pat answer for your very valid first question friend, it's case by case. Here's how I understand it based on the material I have available but I would mention the Burlingame Bond music book, which I really do need to have, may shed further light on this. GE also fits your question as there is no trace of the Turner/Bono/The Edge title effort to be found there as far as I ever heard.

    LTK- Originally Eric Clapton and Vic Flick were working on the title theme but EON decided against what they had heard and went with what we got. This was the first time we ever heard the title song entirely missing from the soundtrack. I don't know why Kamen didn't include it, unfortunately he can't answer that question as he's deceased.

    TND- Arnold had composed the Surrender theme and it was used throughout, which tells me he expected the song to be the title song like Barry would have also assumed, and Crow's song was a late minute and ill advised Hollywood selection. Just consider Surrender the true theme song like pretty much everyone else does.

    DAD- Anything related to the planned Arnold/Black theme "I Will Return" is likely within the soundtrack. It was never finished, only they could answer if and where.

    QOS- "Officially", the Arnold/Black penned "No Good About Goodbye" which was later recorded by Dame Shirley Bassey was never considered, but unofficially there was a 2010 article in the Guardian that stated this in contradiction- "Black and Arnold wrote a song for Quantum of Solace earlier this year, and Black says Amy Winehouse was approached to sing it, amid rumours she and Mark Ronson were also working on a track. Neither worked out". You can hear this melody is prominent enough that you'd have to give the quote creedence. Only in the boat chase do you hear the staccato section of AWTD, so like the SF theme it was probably a last minute shoehorning. Thus it's pretty clear to me that the official EON/Arnold statement is at odds with what Arnold intended according to this article, and like the others clearly a case of studio meddling gone wrong.

    SF- The fact that Barb and Mike insisted the Adele song be part of a Newman soundtrack that to that point in his compositions didn't include it, and were upset about it to the point that these rumors of their unhappiness with him began, makes me say what I have about Newman's intentions not to use it. I'm sure he had heard it and thus had time to use it more prominently based on the above.

    Your second question is equally valid, and again I don't have a definitive answer to that either regarding exact turnaround time between the title theme being chosen and the composer going to work on the soundtrack with the theme's use in mind. If like Arnold and other composers save Serra and Newman, you subscribe to Barry's franchise style of creating the soundtrack to play off the title theme, then this should always be the plan and ample time to do that should be allotted to the soundtrack composer regardless of if he wrote the theme or not. Too little turnaround time in the decision of the title song would obviously limit if not preclude it entirely.





  • edited August 2013 Posts: 6,396
    @SirHenry. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

    It does smack of hypocrisy from M&B though at their insistence of Adele's song being incorporated into the SF score when they never previously seemed too bothered about the inclusion of Another Way to Die or Die Another Day into the soundtrack.

    I'm guessing this is purely down to the very positive critical reaction Adele received as opposed to the mauling that White/Keys & Madonna took for their efforts.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,491
    Using the theme's cue throughout the soundtrack is about as Bondian as it gets. It's a format point, if you will. It seems like a minor detail but it is in fact one that adds a touch of class to proceedings IMO. It's certainly become more difficult over the last 20 years as no one has had quite the same influence as Barry. I personally think it should be par for the course, whomever signs up for the title song should work directly with the composer. To be fair to Adele she seemed very reverential to the Bond universe, whereas those like Crow seem ambivalent and Madonna, well, I'm not sure an ego has had such an influence on a Bond film, before or since.
  • Posts: 11,119
    RC7 wrote:
    Using the theme's cue throughout the soundtrack is about as Bondian as it gets. It's a format point, if you will. It seems like a minor detail but it is in fact one that adds a touch of class to proceedings IMO. It's certainly become more difficult over the last 20 years as no one has had quite the same influence as Barry. I personally think it should be par for the course, whomever signs up for the title song should work directly with the composer. To be fair to Adele she seemed very reverential to the Bond universe, whereas those like Crow seem ambivalent and Madonna, well, I'm not sure an ego has had such an influence on a Bond film, before or since.

    A few years ago I was thinking exactly the same. I also miss the creative freedom John Barry brought to Bond. It mostly resulted in near-perfect to perfect scores that were blending so well with the overall Bond theme song.

    BUT.....Movie music in general has changed considerably ever since Barry quit working on Bond. Nowadays movie scores are following the action, but also the plot and storyline, way more tighter. The result is that the actual movie score sounds less unforgettable and melodical compared to Barry (....but also compared to Jerry Goldsmith and many others of his generation).

    One actually needs to see the movie to enjoy the score, but it also goes the other way around. One needs to hear the score to enjoy the movie as well. Barry's music is for that part unforgettable and I'm afraid no one will ever match that kind of talent. For me it's still delightful to listen to Barry's music without watching the film.

    I must say this though: Thomas Newman is nearing this particular craftmanship better than David Arnold did. What I missed a bit was the mentioning of Thomas Newman in the main titles as 'MUSIC COMPOSED AND CONDUCTED BY THOMAS NEWMAN'. That kind of honour David Arnold could not have.

    I also think that, like John Barry, Thomas Newman knows how to give a Bond film a certain 'exotic atmosphere/feeling'. I for instance love to listen Newman's atmospherical sound....and they are for me more crisp and clear than Arnold did.

    Still, I do agree that Newman is no Barry. But he's at least better than Arnold if you ask me.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,491
    For me it's still delightful to listen to Barry's music without watching the film.

    Yes. It's testament to the man that I find myself on the tube each morning listening to his work, some of it 45+ years old. It's utterly timeless.
  • Posts: 11,119
    RC7 wrote:
    For me it's still delightful to listen to Barry's music without watching the film.

    Yes. It's testament to the man that I find myself on the tube each morning listening to his work, some of it 45+ years old. It's utterly timeless.

    Sadly, we live in a much faster moving society, in which all people are prone to social media....
Sign In or Register to comment.