584 replies to this topic

[Publius]

It does seem venomous but as you're someone who always writes things that make sense and that I respect, I won't be rude or sarcastic in my usual unpleasant fashion.

Yeah, reading it now, I could have thrown some smilies in there to dilute the sarcasm.

What exactly are the standards and how does this song not meet them? Just curious...

MUSICAL standards. Purely and strictly musical ones.

And then you go on to elaborate, all of which I read and appreciated, but the problem is IT WAS STILL OPINION. Issues of complexity, originality, etc., do not make a song objectively good. They're simply what you use to judge a song's quality. I could say "Chopsticks" is good music and Beethoven's Fifth (or whatever) is bad, and I would not be "wrong" in any way.

Why can't some of you at least acknowledge that YKMN's musical qualities are mediocre? Is that a sin or something?

Perhaps because I don't consider it mediocre? Is a painting or sculpture inherently worse because it's simpler, or even if it looks too "conventional" (or "unconventional"), or has some other similar "shortcoming"? The fact is, the answer is a resounding NO.

Do I have to be called "sitting on a high horse", just because I have slightly more musical knowledge than some of you? I don't force anyone to hate it, for crying out loud.

And I don't force anyone to like it. But claiming opinion as fact is sitting on a high horse, as is to now claim that your advanced "musical knowledge" carries enough weight to deem subjective matters as incontrovertible fact.

I can't understand why you insist on arguing that something as vague as value judgments (which are personal and unmeasurable by definition) can indeed be quantified. They flat-out can't. So why don't we just agree to disagree on whether YKMN is a "good" song or not?

Edited by Publius, 26 September 2006 - 05:20 AM.

[DaveBond21]

I didnt realize that I was into Spoiler territory, hence the snafu. Personally, I hate spoilers too.
BTW havent you read the novel?

No I haven't. I don't want to know what happens in a Bond movie before I see it. That is one of the reasons I think the Bond producers are reluctant to make movies from novels, in the future, because people know the endings.

I hope I was wrong about your post but I think you gave away something major, and I am shocked about the news. I will try to forget it.

[DavidSomerset]

I hope I was wrong about your post but I think you gave away something major, and I am shocked about the news. I will try to forget it.

I read the book about 2 years back much before they decided to make it into a movie. Otherwise, as you say even I would not have read the book. But do read it after the movie. It is really one of the best Fleming books.

If you want I can send you the portable Men In Black zapper.

[spynovelfan]

gkgyver

Just like you can distinguish a cubistic painting from an impressionist's one by numerous rules and ideas each period developed and represents, you can distinguish a Bond score from a Superman score, you can distinguish Elfman and Williams, Goldsmith and Horner and so on and so forth.
And just like you can tell the difference between a real impressionist and a wannabe, you can tell the differece between a Bond song and a song that tries to be one.

Who's you? Why couldn't EON tell that with Sheryl Crow's TOMORROW NEVER DIES, then? Why couldn't Sheryl Crow? There is no objectivity in art.

And this logical blueprint on paper, more precisely the chord progression, defines whether a song or a piece of music in general is inventive and complex or double- standard, dull musac. Whether we find a piece of music engaging and thoroughly interesting depends on that construction.

Who is we? Some people think Bob Dylan's a musical genius, and some people think he's dull and unengaging. There is no objectivity in art.

YKMN features guitars, which is Bondian. But it has become a cliche. Heck, even Barry himself rarely used them in later films. And the Brosnan era used them so heavily that I can't help but cringe at the relentless string pounding in YKMN.

'You can't help...' This is your opinion. There is no objectivity in art.

And experience plays a role. Someone who doesn't listen to music regulary or someone who doesn't pay much attention to it inevitably must perceive a simpler construction as more complex than it actually is. But that doesn't actually make it more complex, it's only more complex for the individual person.

If you tried to be any more patronising than this, I don't think you could be.

It's simply an objective observation by someone who deals with writing, arranging and editing music almost every day.

Take that back. This is worse.

There's nothing objective about your observations. It is your opinion that guitars in a Bond song are clich

[ACE]

I have slightly more musical knowledge than some of you?

Talking about music is like dancing about architecture, gkgyver.

What your views of the other Bond songs?
Which are "good" and which are "bad"?
It would be interesting to hear from an expert.

[ACE]

I didnt realize that I was into Spoiler territory, hence the snafu. Personally, I hate spoilers too.
BTW havent you read the novel?

No I haven't. I don't want to know what happens in a Bond movie before I see it. That is one of the reasons I think the Bond producers are reluctant to make movies from novels, in the future, because people know the endings.

You're probably right, DaveBond21. That's why the films are considerably different from the books. BTW, someone should have told Peter Jackson. He made 3 very expensive films but, unfortunately, based them very faithfully on books. No wonder no-one went to see them...

Which Bond novels have you read, DaveBond21?

[spynovelfan]

ACE, could you change your signature, please? It's ruining the film for me.

[DavidSomerset]

Maybe they should create a time machine and stop Ian Fleming from writing the Bond novels. This will stop the spoilers from getting printed 50 years ago.

They should do the same for Stan Lee ( Spidey - Please dont tell anybody that a spider bites PP), Bob Kane (Batman - please dont reveal that his parents die), Joe Shuster and Jerry Siegel ( Superman - Please dont reveal the origin of Supes and the kryptonite).

But wait then how will the movies be made?

[ACE]

ACE, could you change your signature, please? It's ruining the film for me.

LOL. I don't suppose you see many spy films, snf, because you keep reading the wretched novels. Stoppit - and pony up some more green for Eon.

Maybe they should create a time machine and stop Ian Fleming from writing the Bond novels. This will stop the spoilers from getting printed 50 years ago.

They should do the same for Stan Lee ( Spidey - Please dont tell anybody that a spider bites PP), Bob Kane (Batman - please dont reveal that his parents die), Joe Shuster and Jerry Siegel ( Superman - Please dont reveal the origin of Supes and the kryptonite).

But wait then how will the movies be made?

LOL. Darn you, DavidSomerset, I was looking forward to a superhero movie fest this weekend, and you've just gone and ruined it for me.

Comic books would be even worse than novels. Because novels have no pictures, you need the visual medium. But with comics, we've seen Superman, Hulk etc. Perhaps the next film should be called "Batman, Already"!

[DavidSomerset]

LOL. Darn you, DavidSomerset, I was looking forward to a superhero movie fest this weekend, and you've just gone and ruined it for me.

How about Da Vinci Code? Hope no one told you that the movie is based on the book which is about the marriage of Jesus and Mary M? Wouldnt want to spoil that for you.

[ACE]

Yeah, and the most successful film ever (inflation adjusted) is Gone With The Wind (you know the one where he leaves her at the end. Ooops! "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn"). But I guess everyone who went to see that did not buy or read the bestseller it was based on.

DVC - I saw that. But because I couldn't read the book. I tried to, but just couldn't.


(scrapped lyrics to scrapped title song found. Allegedly.)

Casino Royale

lyrics by D*n B**ck and D*n H**l*y

Oh, Le Chiffre, let me come to my senses
Hittin' my defences for so long now
Oh, you're a bad one
But I know that you've got your reasons
These things that ain't pleasin' you
Are hurting me now

Don't you draw the queen of diamonds boy
You'll beat me while you're able
No, the queen of hearts is always your best bet
Now it seems to me, some fine things
Have been laid upon your table
But you only want the cash you can't get

Oh, Le Chiffre, oh, your plans have been foiled
Here at Casino Royale, they've drivin' you home
And Vesper, oh Vesper well, that's just what I've been drinkin'
Some girl I've been thinkin' means you're not acting alone....

Don't your chips get cold in the winning time?
The cards won't show and the luck don't shine
It's hard to tell the night time from the day
You're losin' all your highs and lows
Ain't it funny how the feeling goes away?

Oh, Le Chiffre, your plans have been foiled
Here at Casino Royale, leave by the gate
It may be rainin', but there's a rainbow above you
A whisper of love you
(let sombody love you)
A whisper of love you
A whisper of hate

[Thunderfinger]

It is a fact that even experts disagree among themselves as to the quality of a piece of art.
To say if something is good or bad, you need to compare it to something.
It is also a fact that every film or piece of music isnt equally good,if you consider it based on craftmanship criteria.

[gkgyver]

Who's you? Why couldn't EON tell that with Sheryl Crow's TOMORROW NEVER DIES, then? Why couldn't Sheryl Crow? There is no objectivity in art.

"Don't you feel you shouldn't smoke?"
"No, it's harmless. That's what the tobacco industry says."
"Well, obviously they must know what they're talking about."

'You can't help...' This is your opinion.

That's why I actually wrote " *I* can't help ..."

Take that back. This is worse.

In how far is it patronising to point out that I'm dealing with music every day? I said that because some people apparently think I'm some sort of lunatic who has no experience with the subject.

No, I think you need to realise that your opinion is not fact.

Notes on paper ARE fact. That's not me speaking, that's music theory. Of course music is in a constant state of flux. It's possible that 10 years from now, YKMN may be considered unusual and fresh, just like a bold, completely orchestral score was considered fresh again in 1977.

Mine could be that the Star Wars score is musically unevocative, derivative and trite. Ben Jonson thought Shakespeare too prolix.

... and yet both had a major influence. That at least nobody can deny.

How do you know you do? I could be an Oscar-winning composer, for all you know.

Would that make me good or bad, musically?

Oh boy ...
well, can you explain to me the tritone substitution? The neapolitan sixth, where it comes from, what it's used for? German sixth, French sixth? What makes a major scale different from a minor scale? The difference between natural minor, melodic minor and harmonic minor? Do you know what is meant by Ionian, Dorian, Lydian, Mixolydian, Aeolian? Dou you know what a supertoic is? Does the term I-IV-V mean anything to you? I-II7-V7-I? Can you explain to me the balances within the brass section? How woodwinds are combined to get the best sound?

Being an Oscar- winning composer doesn't make you good, it makes you an Oscar- winning composer.
That's the point. Which you don't seem to get.

By your radical definition of "opinion", supporting the ideals of Hitler would be just fine.
Treating all opinions equally is more problematic than you might think. I just have to look in the paper to realise that.

[spynovelfan]

Nice work, ACE. Didn't they do HOTEL SPLENDIDEFORNIA, too?

It is also a fact that every film or piece of music isnt equally good,if you consider it based on craftmanship criteria.

That is also a matter of opinion, though. What are the craftmanship criteria of Damien Hirst's works? Some he didn't even make! How about James Joyce? Laurence Sterne? Malcolm Lowry had a long rejection letter for UNDER THE VOLCANO from William Plomer (later Ian Fleming's friend and editor, of course). Lowry strongly objected to it and wrote back at great length. I feel that novel is a masterpiece - Plomer didn't. Critics remain divided, and the craftmanship is part of the reason they do. Some people have said that Mark Rothko, Jackson Pollock and Vincent Van Gogh were technically poor painters - many others have since disagreed. Some have felt that Leonard Cohen has not mastered the craft of singing, that Jimi Hendrix was simply desecrating his guitar and that Miles Davis had no idea how to play the trumpet properly. Equally, you could probably find someone who would claim that my three-year-old daughter's scribbles are technically brilliant variations of Cubism, if you looked hard enough.

All opinions on art are subjective.

[Santa]

OK, when Hitler gets brought into the discussion, things have got a little out of hand. gkgyver, you're on a hiding to nothing here. I see your point (I see their point too, but you do have a valid point) and I'm sure some others do too, but I think it's time to agree to disagree. Oh, and it's still a crap song

[spynovelfan]

[quote]That's why I actually wrote " *I* can't help ..." [/quote[
So you accept, at least, that it was your opinion, then? You seemed to be stating it to back up the idea that there could be objectivity in art.

[quote]well, can you explain to me the tritone substitution? The neapolitan sixth, where it comes from, what it's used for? German sixth, French sixth? What makes a major scale different from a minor scale? The difference between natural minor, melodic minor and harmonic minor? Do you know what is meant by Ionian, Dorian, Lydian, Mixolydian, Aeolian? Dou you know what a supertoic is? Does the term I-IV-V mean anything to you? I-II7-V7-I? Can you explain to me the balances within the brass section? How woodwinds are combined to get the best sound?[/quote]

Can Paul McCartney? Does that mean LIVE AND LET DIE was crap? And the rest of his work?

[quote]Being an Oscar- winning composer doesn't make you good, it makes you an Oscar- winning composer.
That's the point. Which you don't seem to get.[/quote]

Sorry, no, I don't get it. Whp's doing the judging then, of what is 'objectively' good and bad? What if someone disagrees with them. Is there a book somewhere where it's written down which Bond themes are objectively good pieces of music and which ones aren't?

Or is it all opinion? (Rhetorical question.)

[quote]By your radical definition of "opinion", supporting the ideals of Hitler would be just fine.[/quote]

We're talking about art, but if you want we can go all the way there. I loathe Hitler's ideals - but that's still just an opinion. Some people feel he was a good man. There is no objectivity about morality, either. Some people believe that George W Bush is evil, too - it's only your opinion if he is or not.

[avl]

[quote name='gkgyver' date='26 September 2006 - 16:33' post='614843']
[

Notes on paper ARE fact. That's not me speaking, that's music theory. Of course music is in a constant state of flux. It's possible that 10 years from now, YKMN may be considered unusual and fresh, just like a bold, completely orchestral score was considered fresh again in 1977.

Hence, all opinions on music are relative, and subjective

[/quote]

Oh boy ...
well, can you explain to me the tritone substitution? The neapolitan sixth, where it comes from, what it's used for? German sixth, French sixth? What makes a major scale different from a minor scale? The difference between natural minor, melodic minor and harmonic minor? Do you know what is meant by Ionian, Dorian, Lydian, Mixolydian, Aeolian? Dou you know what a supertoic is? Does the term I-IV-V mean anything to you? I-II7-V7-I? Can you explain to me the balances within the brass section? How woodwinds are combined to get the best sound?
[/quote]

Thats is all technique and theory. How people employ technique and theory to create music which is "good" or "bad" is essentially subjective

[ACE]

Nice work, ACE. Didn't they do HOTEL SPLENDIDEFORNIA, too?

LOL.

gkgyver, please can you tell us which are the good Bond songs and which are the bad ones based on your musical knowledge? I'm sure the thread would really appreciate your input because of your technical musical knowledge and ability to measure music.

[Thunderfinger]

I

[SecretAgentFan]

Okay, here

[Sir Charles]

I Like the song as was pleasently surprised by it. I just went on a trip this past weekend and listened to it multiple times and think it's quite good, though perhaps more suited to the end credits as a sort of "pick-me-up." Does having an almost continuously fast theme mean a slow teaser? I'm analysing more than nessesary, I guess.

[ACE]

I have no problem recognizing that e.g. THE GODFATHER is superior craftmanship compared to those.

Is The Godfather better than
A Bout de Souffle?
Lawrence of Arabia?
To Kill A Mockingbird?
Star Wars?
Citizen Kane?

[Santa]

Is The Godfather better than
A Bout de Souffle?

Definitely

[Thunderfinger]

I have no problem recognizing that e.g. THE GODFATHER is superior craftmanship compared to those.

Is The Godfather better than
A Bout de Souffle?
Lawrence of Arabia?
To Kill A Mockingbird?
Star Wars?
Citizen Kane?

Sorry.I was never involved in those films.

[gkgyver]

[quote]It does recycle the garage band sound of 90

[Publius]

Oh boy ...
well, can you explain to me the tritone substitution? The neapolitan sixth, where it comes from, what it's used for? German sixth, French sixth? What makes a major scale different from a minor scale? The difference between natural minor, melodic minor and harmonic minor? Do you know what is meant by Ionian, Dorian, Lydian, Mixolydian, Aeolian? Dou you know what a supertoic is? Does the term I-IV-V mean anything to you? I-II7-V7-I? Can you explain to me the balances within the brass section? How woodwinds are combined to get the best sound?

Thats is all technique and theory. How people employ technique and theory to create music which is "good" or "bad" is essentially subjective

Bingo. As gkgyver himself pointed out, "good" and "bad" are abstract notions and not musical definitions. By saying as much, he's conceding the point I've been making all along: "good" and "bad" are personal value judgements. They cannot be measured scientifically. If they could, utilitarianism would have caught on by now, don't you think?

Although one has to wonder what "agree to disagree" means once you try to practice it. As soon as all agree on a subject, you might as well shut down the thread because it's no discussion anymore.
Actually, it isn't much of a discussion now because all I get in response to my lengthy posts is "art is subjective", which is a little cheap, really.

To "agree to disagree" means that we can accept the fact there are differing opinions on a subject and that there is no absolute answer to be reached, and hence arguing in circles could be construed as pointless. It does not mean we have to actually agree on the matter.

If you want to lay out your reasons for why you think this is a bad song, fine, feel free to do so (this is a discussion forum), and I'm sure plenty of people will engage in that debate. But proclaiming yourself an authority on music and declaring subjective tastes to be quantifiable fact is nothing short of immature egotism and you can expect to be rightfully criticized for that. But on a personal level, I'm only faulting you for a lapse in judgment, gkgyver.

[Mr_Wint]

No one has to scientifically prove that the song is crap... just listen to it and convince yourself.

[DaveBond21]

So, have a few people decided to put spoilers in here?

Maybe I should not go in the Music Forum?

[spynovelfan]

Actually, it isn't much of a discussion now because all I get in response to my lengthy posts is "art is subjective", which is a little cheap, really.

It's not cheap to say that art is subjective - that is a fact. It's also a fact that Chris Cornell sings this song. A fact that it features guitars. A fact that it's the theme song for the new Bond film. A fact that it was leaked on the internet. But it's only opinion that it's a bad song.

Think that's about it, really.

[Publius]

No one has to scientifically prove that the song is crap... just listen to it and convince yourself.

Clever, but if you've read over the discussion you're referencing, you'd know the issue is not whether you, I, or anyone else thinks that song is crap or not. It's if it can be objectively "proven" to be of a certain subjective quality. Which it can't. By definition. And common sense.