It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
I think at the time I really did prefer the TLD song and played it over and over; nowadays I think AVTAK just tips it for me and has aged better, but hey: they're both Barry so neither are bad! :)
It helps that those are two of Barry's finest scores overall.
Funny how minor adjustments can completely change the experience.
My favourite Barry score changes, but for these two in particular, I think the music of both films is fantastic despite the frosty relationship between Barry and the bands (I think he had issues with a-Ha as well?)
I believe it was actually fine and quite good with Duran and they all came away happy, it was a-Ha that he hated working with. 'A barrel of monkeys' I remember him describing the situation as when I saw him in concert a few years back! :)
Of course it was! Got my facts mixed up. I remember that interview where a-Ha said something to the effect of "we had no problem working with Barry, it was him who didn't want to work with us" and Barry had similar words to say about a-Ha.
From what I understand, the sour experience, and money, prevented him from working on Bond since Goldeneye
"Breadcrumbs" is one of my least favourite musical cues in the entire series. If you're going to eschew the classic, Vic Flick-type Bond theme entirely from your score, that would be a better decision than playing 16 bars of it and suddenly cutting it off at the knees. Either include the full piece (and no, reusing Arnold's arrangement in the end credits does not count and instead further illustrates the problem) or don't use it at all.
2. Sam Mendes was totally wrong for Bond. He's very stagey and obsessed with capturing pseudo-iconic images as opposed to telling a story. There's no excitement or tension in his Bonds. Everything is very theatrical and showy, and there's no substance to anything. Also, I don't believe he directed Craig as well as Campbell or even Forster did.
3. Craig didn't get to just be James Bond, he was always the guy becoming Bond. CR was so successful that the producers felt they had to re-do it over and over by doing a "Bond Begins" movie that would end with him becoming Bond, only to knock him back to square one in the next movie so that he has to re-do it all over again.
4. Having said that, I think QOS is underrated and is successful in placing Bond into a more realistic world. If only the plot had been developed further. It does not in any way lead into SF or SP, which seem more like movies about Bond movies than actual Bond movies.
5. TMWTGG works well as a "comedy" Bond and Moore is great playing a more rogue-ish 007 in it. Barry's score is under-appreciated.
6. FYEO is overrated. It's better than MR but it has serious pacing issues (the entire underwater sequence should have been removed, all it does is make the movie longer).
7. Brosnan is underrated as Bond. His character is consistent throughout all 4 films despite how different they are, though he is a bit colder in GE. I don't buy the "he was all the previous Bonds combined" criticism, at least not totally. He's different from the other Bonds in that he's the only one who seems to really enjoy the action and excitement around him, kinda like an adrenaline junkie in expensive clothes. I like that aspect of his Bond.
8. Erica Serra's score for Goldeneye works very well in that movie, but it would be interesting to hear what David Arnold would have done with it.
I’m not a big fan of Arnold, but if that rumor is true I have great respect for him turning that down. Also, it’s nice he actually appreciated a score as polarizing as Serra’s, and he’s a genuine Bond fan too. That’s pretty cool.
Loads of the films use parts of the Bond theme in isolation, I’m not sure what’s different about this one?
I don’t think I buy that one: I don’t think Arnold was on their radar in ‘95 and I’m not sure there would have been time for a rescore. Plus if they’d wanted it done someone would have done it.
I love ALL Bond films including the earlier adaptations of CR and the legendary NSNA. Therefore it stands to reason I'll probably love NTTD.
I even massively enjoy DAD (although it usually ranks at the bottom).
The others tend not to do so much buildup of the full, iconic arrangement blaring loudly in the film only to suddenly cut to nothingness before the "chorus," in addition to being part of a score that has shockingly little of the theme in it. Again my point was that it should not have been used that way if that was all we were going to get of it.
There is not a single Eon film that I dislike. They all have their qualities and they are all, in their own very different ways, very watchable.
On the other hand I don’t really like NSNA, and CR with David Niven I do not ‘get’ at all. Its alleged ‘humour’ just flies straight past my head.
Hmm, okay; I can't really agree with that, it's a bog, grand statement of the theme and works brilliantly in the scene, plus the score quotes the Bond theme in quite a few places- more so than Quantum of Solace does. It's like criticising the tank chase in GoldenEye for not using the guitar riff part of the theme.
It's not very funny (apart from a couple of the slightly madder gags) but I do rather enjoy its absolute mad excess :D
I agree that I like all of them too (although I guess perhaps Dr No comes the closest to being one I don't find much to enjoy in, just because it's not really found that style yet) and even NSNA has enough to pass the time happily enough for me, even if it's one of the clunkier efforts.
To clarify, this was AFTER his TND score. Supposedly for the DVD Special Edition release.
Which reminds me, John Williams wanted to re-score the first STAR WARS film for the Special Edition in 1997 (so he could include cues like the Empore march), but thankfully Lucas turned that down. Though he would allow Williams to re-score the ending of RETURN OF THE JEDI.
I do wish EON could have had John Barry re-score DN. I would have been all for that.
That would have be amazing, but I do like the charm of DN in its current state.
Hmm, that sounds unlikely to me. I can imagine it was possibly a pie in the sky idea but I'd be surprised if it were seriously considered. Where would the budget come from?
I can believe that; that's a bit of a shame I think. A chance for a new Williams score of anything is always good and we'd still have the original.
Yes indeed, that would have been great.
I agree, they don’t repeat themselves as much as later movies. The closest movies too them in small scale are OHMSS, LALD and TMWTGG. The later two being too silly.
EON never would have done it, and I can’t blame them for not doing it, but I would have liked the last 20-30 minutes resemble more like the last few chapters of Fleming’s novel with the downward spiral between Bond and Vesper before the suicide. Probably unrealistic, because Bond FILM fans and audiences in general expect the big climaxes, so it would have been jarring to see the last stretch of the film be a melodrama.
But it would have been ballsy if it went that way. Could the relationship between Bond and Vesper been strong enough to keep audiences engaged and accept a non-action stretch ending? It’s an esoteric Bond story, even for the novels which typically ended with Bond getting the girl (aside from notable exceptions).
I agree with this.
And me.
It was by no means obvious in the 1970s that the series could survive without Connery.
If LALD had bombed then I don’t think we would be here today talking about film no 25. Instead everyone would have said “it was a Connery thing, so that’s that.”
Moore demonstrated that the series could function without Connery. That was a tremendously important thing to demonstrate.
Absolutely correct. I wonder what it would have been like if Lazenby had taken the series into the '70s.