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
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.
Well, I guess that's better than the feel of a pitchfork at my throat.
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!
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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 ;-)
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.
I DEMAND you name your source ;-)
Sorry, couldn't resist :-)
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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....