584 replies to this topic

[Sn007py]

The coldest blood runs through my veins.

Honestly, I think it's more likely "the coldness burns through my veins" as G.S. had it. It's especially clear when he sings it right before the bridge.

I must agree with Wade. It seems fairly obvious to me that the lyric is:

'The coldest blood runs through my veins'.

110%. It is NOT coldness burns.....that makes no sense.

Dirty Love meets Live And Let Die. With a bit of Whitesnake thrown in.

No the best description is that it is James Bond meets Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me by U2.

[Robert Watts]

I don't see why some people here have been associating Arnold with the Die Another Day title song and the Tommorow Never Dies title song. He had no role in the writing of these songs what so ever.



I think, like any song, this one has its fair share of lovers, likers and haters. I hardly think that is anything abnormal. I've been showing it/playing it to my friends, they've liked it, I like it. Some people here and in other places hate it. It is simply a matter of taste.

Edited by Robert Watts, 22 September 2006 - 09:12 AM.

[ACE]

Dirty Love meets Live And Let Die. With a bit of Whitesnake thrown in.

No the best description is that it is James Bond meets Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me by U2.

Oh yeah, I like this one better. Cool.
The Bond song is now a rock anthem.

[DamnCoffee]

Fantastic Song - IMO the best in the series

[pgram]

Dirty Love meets Live And Let Die. With a bit of Whitesnake thrown in.

No the best description is that it is James Bond meets Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me by U2.

Oh yeah, I like this one better. Cool.
The Bond song is now a rock anthem.

Actually I thought of both HMTMKMKM and Whitesnake when I first heard it. And a bit of Led Zeppelin, I guess (like Whitesnake's Judgement Day). Still, I think it is 100% wrong.

[Kneyber]

Absolutely boring, very middle-of-the-road, seems to be music one hears in dressing rooms, very pale.
Completely out-of-place with the potential of the movie.

[saltnpepper]

Just heard a part of it - it seems to be very different from the last ones they did - I like the attempt.

[PeteJ2811]

Hmm... illegal file sharing... I wonder if that might just violate the forum's policies... tricky one, ain't it?

Well, I'm not really up on file sharing, so I don't know what legal vs. illegal is. I don't share files. However, since the reviews of the song are pretty good, I figured SONY wouldn't care

Sony hasn't officially released the song. It leaked therefore we can't link to it. That's why it's illegal.

That's not legally correct. The release of the song has nothing to do with how lawful it is to link to it. In fact it is not an offence, civil or criminal to listen to it. It may well be to retain the file on your computer, certainly in the UK it is, however linking to it or listenning to it are two things that break no laws, civil or criminal, in the UK.

So there you have it. Now enough of this nonsense. Don't put the link up as those with backsides-tight won't like it but do post what to search for on google to find it.

Pete J

To those yet to find it, if you search for 'Chris Cornell You Know My Name' on Limewire then you should find it.

Remember folks, file sharing is illegal, as is downloading copywritten material.

You could get a fine or go to prison.

[Lounge Lizard]

I have been raving about almost every aspect of Casino Royale up to this point: the adaptation of Fleming's first novel as a reboot, the hiring of Martin Campbell and Paul Haggis, the casting of Daniel Craig, Eva Green and Jeffrey Wright, the pseudo-noir pre-titles sequence, the emphasis on hand-to-hand combat, etc. Rightly or wrongly, I am expecting to see the best Bond film since OHMSS this November.

But how does this extremely lame song fit in?

There's a thin line between 'brave departure' and 'tragic mismatch', and I think they've crossed it here. You Know My Name sounds like a poor garage band demo - all over the place, going nowhere. Powerless. Madonna's Die Another Day may not have been for everyone either, but it was adventurous at the very least. The same goes for Eric Serra's GoldenEye score, which I liked tremendously. You Know My Name is an aural vacuum.

I'm not going to let my disappointment with the Cornell song spoil my appetite for Casino Royale however; looking forward to it as much as before.

[avl]

That's not legally correct. The release of the song has nothing to do with how lawful it is to link to it. In fact it is not an offence, civil or criminal to listen to it. It may well be to retain the file on your computer, certainly in the UK it is, however linking to it or listenning to it are two things that break no laws, civil or criminal, in the UK.

Hmmm. Linking to a copyright work without authorisation is likely to be a breach of copyright. The act of listening obviously isn't, but the streaming/downloading of the work is.

[Stephenson]

Read the front page review. It made me laugh. I was entertained. But then again, I'm (disturbingly) interested in seeing the new movie. (Edit: Okay, I'll try "Johnny Knoxville movie")

I can see the point that some other posters are trying to make regarding the reviews suitability as "front page" material. The story on the French poster, while positive, hardly compared it to the works of Monet. It was subjective, but (IMHO) reasonable. However, by comparison, Dunph's work, while amusing, was subjectivity to the extreme (comparisons to excrement?). Regularly, members (and especially the mods) post to remind us of the risks of extreme views in these threads. Over the last few weeks I've seen members banned or leave because their views (which were deemed extreme and repetitive) would not be tolerated. I guess I just find it hypocritical that the same people would choose to promote an extreme opinion (which, as one poster has already pointed out, uses language that is banned in the forums)by placing it promotely on their front page. As far as I know (AND I KNOW VERY LITTLE ), no one offered other posters, with an extremely positive or negative view of Daniel Craig, the same opportunity to air their opinions in this manner.

I've never heard anyone at CBn claim the site was on a par with AP, Reuters, or even Fox news. No promise of maintaining a standard of "professional journalism" has ever been given. I guess I always assumed that it was unwritten here. Like it or not, CBn is used by the media as a research tool when writing about James Bond; what does that article say about our collective feelings towards the movie? Of course, if the hard working and responsible journalist looks around, he/she will find lots of positive things about Casino Royale ..... So, for me, Dunph's work would have made an entertaining post in the forums, but I don't see the need to have made it a front page item. Only writing 'cause I care

Edited by Stephenson, 22 September 2006 - 02:03 PM.

[avl]

I think the thing with the article (which I enjoyed) is that it looks like an Editorial, when it is actually an Opinion piece, if you think of it in newspaper terms.

[Blunt Instrument]

Meh... nothing too interesting...
a little catchy, but you can tell the "You know my name" title was forced in there...

[Doctor Shatterhand]

Hmm, where does one start when one was reared on the likes of Shirley Bassey, Tom Jones and Nancy Sinatra.

This song is Bond on speed mixed with acid and nails. The opening chords is the equivalent to a brick smashed into my face; which is not a bad thing. Allow me to explain.

I have to keep an open mind on this song too. We are also listening to this outside of the actual film and away from the narrative. Similar to Madonna's DAD, the song only works when it is accompanying the images it was intended for. We may be in for a surprise with the opening credits after all.

It is similar to AVTAK, a song released in 1985 that I was completely shocked when it premiere on MTV. But after hearing that song over and over, I began to like it. It is, however, NOT similar to LALD. That song I could appreciate from the first sitting.

But after hearing Cornell's song twice, the theme is slowly winning me over. However, Cornell's voice is too heavy and raspy to sing anything that does not have a point where he can scream his way through the lyrics. Bottom line, he cannot sing.

The song is a new departure nonetheless for the series, and the bottom line is: 'try not to alienate the younger generation'. Like LALD, the producers are trying to bring in younger audience members.

I can remember, in 1973, being blown away in the theater with LALD and humming the song all the way home in my parent's car. On the other hand, my parents were not impressed and complained that there were no lyrics. Well now I understand, music continues to evolve, but people's taste do not.

Thirty years from now when the new age rock group 'AlqaedaBaghdad' (like that one?) performs the song to the newest Bond film "The Undertaker's Wind", the 12 year olds to the 20 somethings people of 2006 will sit back in total shock and say, "That song is the worse song in the last ten years. Why don't they go back to a true and tried formula like Cornell's 'You Know My Name'?"

On a scale from 1 - 10 (10 being the highest) I would give this song a 5. It is not great but it is not the worse either. My taste is more towards the songs of the earlier films like You Only Live Twice and Nobody Does It Better, but that was the culture back then and I cannot do anything about it since I don't make the decisions.

However, I don't have to buy the soundtrack either.

I'm sure my own kids, (13 and 15 years of age) will think the song is awesome and life will go on from there. People my age will be shown the proverbial backdoor and I will fade from this life. A sad commentary, but all true. I just hope someone will know my name.

[Bondian]

Read the front page review. It made me laugh. I was entertained. But then again, I'm (disturbingly) interested in seeing the new movie. (Edit: Okay, I'll try "Johnny Knoxville movie")

I can see the point that some other posters are trying to make regarding the reviews suitability as "front page" material. The story on the French poster, while positive, hardly compared it to the works of Monet. It was subjective, but (IMHO) reasonable. However, by comparison, Dunph's work, while amusing, was subjectivity to the extreme (comparisons to excrement?). Regularly, members (and especially the mods) post to remind us of the risks of extreme views in these threads. Over the last few weeks I've seen members banned or leave because their views (which were deemed extreme and repetitive) would not be tolerated. I guess I just find it hypocritical that the same people would choose to promote an extreme opinion (which, as one poster has already pointed out, uses language that is banned in the forums)by placing it promotely on their front page. As far as I know (AND I KNOW VERY LITTLE ), no one offered other posters, with an extremely positive or negative view of Daniel Craig, the same opportunity to air their opinions in this manner.

I've never heard anyone at CBn claim the site was on a par with AP, Reuters, or even Fox news. No promise of maintaining a standard of "professional journalism" has ever been given. I guess I always assumed that it was unwritten here. Like it or not, CBn is used by the media as a research tool when writing about James Bond; what does that article say about our collective feelings towards the movie? Of course, if the hard working and responsible journalist looks around, he/she will find lots of positive things about Casino Royale ..... So, for me, Dunph's work would have made an entertaining post in the forums, but I don't see the need to have made it a front page item. Only writing 'cause I care

I can see the point that some other posters are trying to make regarding the reviews suitability as "front page" material. The story on the French poster, while positive, hardly compared it to the works of Monet. It was subjective, but (IMHO) reasonable. However, by comparison, Dunph's work, while amusing, was subjectivity to the extreme (comparisons to excrement?). Regularly, members (and especially the mods) post to remind us of the risks of extreme views in these threads. Over the last few weeks I've seen members banned or leave because their views (which were deemed extreme and repetitive) would not be tolerated. I guess I just find it hypocritical that the same people would choose to promote an extreme opinion (which, as one poster has already pointed out, uses language that is banned in the forums)by placing it promotely on their front page. As far as I know (AND I KNOW VERY LITTLE ), no one offered other posters, with an extremely positive or negative view of Daniel Craig, the same opportunity to air their opinions in this manner.

I've never heard anyone at CBn claim the site was on a par with AP, Reuters, or even Fox news. No promise of maintaining a standard of "professional journalism" has ever been given. I guess I always assumed that it was unwritten here. Like it or not, CBn is used by the media as a research tool when writing about James Bond; what does that article say about our collective feelings towards the movie? Of course, if the hard working and responsible journalist looks around, he/she will find lots of positive things about Casino Royale ..... So, for me, Dunph's work would have made an entertaining post in the forums, but I don't see the need to have made it a front page item. Only writing 'cause I care

There's certainly some D

[Loque]

It's an okay rock song, nothing special though. The biggest danger I feel in doing a 'genre' song is isolating people not fans of that genre. To bombard an audience with something that the majority might not like doesn't exactly set up the following two hours too well. IMHO. At least with a middle of the road Bassey type thing, it is a bit harder to really turn people off.

[Stephenson]

[quote name='Bondian' post='611674' date='22 September 2006 - 09:09']

There's certainly some D

[VisualStatic]

For me, the jury is still out. Until I hear it in context of the movie, I'll reserve final judgement. However, on first listen its no better or worse them most of the last say 5-6 themes. Very lack luster for the most part.

For now, it just does not invoke the same feeling as DAF, FRWL,GF, etc...

Most of the recent songs, I don't remember as well as the older ones. Maybe cause none of them have been the memoriable. The last Bond theme that I really remember in any way is LALD.

My 2 Cents.

[Bondian]

[quote name='Stephenson' post='611678' date='22 September 2006 - 15:12']
[quote name='Bondian' post='611674' date='22 September 2006 - 09:09']

There's certainly some D

[Stephenson]

Well at the very least:

"Thank you God, for teaching me humility."

Lesson learned: Check the soapbox before I step on up ...

[delfloria]

Well said Shatterhand. As a fan who was introduced to Bond when GF was released I whole heartedly agree with you.

[HellIsHere]

I'm a bit sad how some guys at CBn treat the forum users. Comments are banned, topics closed... disturbing. Maybe they want us to quit being Bond fans after all...

[Jim]

I'm a bit sad how some guys at CBn treat the forum users. Comments are banned, topics closed... disturbing. Maybe they want us to quit being Bond fans after all...

Yes. That's why we do it.

[Bondian]

Well at the very least:

"Thank you God, for teaching me humility."

Lesson learned: Check the soapbox before I step on up ...

LOL. We all like to have our say, so don't think you've said too much.

Actually. Paul's (Dunph) front page article read like one of my posts. I sincerely hope the poor chap hasn't contracted Bondianitus.

I have to say though, that it suprised me too. Usually we get a glossy article that is very well written and to the point without much 'personal' opinion. However. Paul's article showed a more human approach. In fact, the guests "must have found it quite titillating".

I would like to see more articles whereby the author can show more of their character, as opposed to sticking to posting the facts only.

Paul Can we have your version of the lyrics to 'You Know My Name'. I can send you

[The Admiral]

[quote name='Bondian' post='611725' date='22 September 2006 - 16:31']
[quote name='Stephenson' post='611701' date='22 September 2006 - 15:56']
Well at the very least:

"Thank you God, for teaching me humility."

Lesson learned: Check the soapbox before I step on up ...
[/quote]
LOL. We all like to have our say, so don't think you've said too much.

Actually. Paul's (Dunph) front page article read like one of my posts. I sincerely hope the poor chap hasn't contracted Bondianitus.

I have to say though, that it suprised me too. Usually we get a glossy article that is very well written and to the point without much 'personal' opinion. However. Paul's article showed a more human approach. In fact, the guests "must have found it quite titillating".

I would like to see more articles whereby the author can show more of their character, as opposed to sticking to posting the facts only.

Paul Can we have your version of the lyrics to 'You Know My Name'. I can send you

[Bondian]

Paul's version of YKMN - oh that'd be great! I'd pay millions for that.

I just need to find the balance of

[The Admiral]

You may be lucky - he may be cheap and just accept your fiver.

Cross your fingers!

[Spurrier]

It's OK. It's certainly better than Madonna's DAD. It grows on me as I listen to it more. The style reminds me of Duran Duran's AVTAK, and that's the only Bond song to reach number 1. The thing is though that I don't like being shouted at. I give it a grade of C.

[Bondian]

You may be lucky - he may be cheap and just accept your fiver.

Cross your fingers!

One can always hope.

The thing is though that I don't like being shouted at. I give it a grade of C.

I think he's shouting because everyone keeps asking his name. LOL

[Publius]

And I realise I'll probably get stabbed for this, but there is such a thing as 'good music' and 'bad music'.

I'm sure that feels nice to say. Especially if you group music you like in the "good" group. But it doesn't make it so. I think most mainstream music is crap, but unfortunately there's no way to objectively measure that.

We can detail the technical components of a song, like the notes or instruments used, but value judgements such as "bad" by definition cannot be calculated. You can pan a song by going into every specific, but then someone else can come along and say that those same specifics sound good to his ear, and it's therefore good to him.

but can any of you same people actually see anyone playing air guitar and screeching to YKNM thirty years from now?

I can't see people "rocking out" to AVTAK, and that's pretty popular (I like it). Same thing for LALD, which is 2/3 bizarre voodoo-inspired orchestra, and the rest is split between Paul McCartney's weird lyrics and the background singers. Yet the song is still awesome.

It is similar to AVTAK, a song released in 1985 that I was completely shocked when it premiere on MTV. But after hearing that song over and over, I began to like it. It is, however, NOT similar to LALD. That song I could appreciate from the first sitting.

Very well said, Doctor Shatterhand. And I have to agree with this particular point; YKMN sounds like the AVTAK of our day. I can only imagine the bloodletting that would have gone on in 1985 had there been an Internet.

I give this song an 8 out of 10, although it started as a 6 or 7 for me. If they make the changes I'm hoping they do for the big screen version, it can easily be a 9.