552 replies to this topic

[marktmurphy]

Michael Wilson diplomatically said that Winehouse "could" do an interesting job. She and her producer are working on a theme, that hasn't even been commissioned [a la Pulp (Tomorrow Never Lies) and Blondie (FYEO)], and without any contact with the filmmakers.

Marc Forster has brought David Arnold in during shooting much earlier than normal, to develop a score and to get the mood and feel for the movie. This will translate to the theme song as well.

Amy Winehouse will not be doing the theme for QOS.

So they asked Amy to do a demo (as Ronson said) without having any contact with her? That's a neat trick.

[marktmurphy]

Don't get me wrong- I am all for Ronson, a real tried and successful chart music producer who knows what he is doing keeping David Arnold out of the booth. Arnold has needed someone to translate his Bond music themes into pop, so let's hope this happens! However, I think it's deluded, short-sighted nonsense that somehow Amy Winehouse is some stand alone, dynamite, revelatory gift to current pop music, and that she somehow measures up to some wonky idea that a hard edged music genre and Craig's Bond are mutually exclusive. Winehouse and Ronson are great pop guys who could do a great Bond, but there are others too of equal talent.

They just are a bit more credible than Leona Lewis- it's beyond just the pure pop that she is turning out. Winehouse is a very good songwriter; I'm not really sure what your point is. Yes, so are other people, but we're talking about her.

Eh, when are we gonna see Stevie Wonder and David Bowie do their Bond songs? I would also love to see Bassey return, but not just her and Arnold ala Cornell and Garbage (it would no doubt sound like her overblown PINK "Party Started" cover).

Wonder is past the point of doing anything as fresh and interesting as Back To Black. He just is. Bowie is still doing interesting stuff (although again, it seems that his most creative years are behind him) but he doesn't like Bond- I can't see it ever happening. Much better to get someone young, vital and of the now to do the theme. John Barry, Tom Jones and Shirley Bassey weren't exactly long established 60-year olds when they were doing their Bond themes in the 60's.

[Zorin Industries]

Yes, which is a little more in keeping with the cinematic musical heritage of Bond, rather than some R&B clone like Leona Lewis - a genre of which has killed good pop music years ago. Northern Soul has a point to it. It has a style, a dress sense, a sense of self years removed from some cheesy listening monstrosity like Micheal Buble.

Mark Ronson is a superb force in British music at the moment who understands the rich heritage and history of British music. He brings that to every track he has recorded with Amy Winehouse.

Oh Puhleazzzzzzzzzzzze,

Ronson "understands the rich heritage of British music"?? What, by covering a Zutons and The Smiths track while sonically recycling decades old Northern soul and Skapop for designer sheep who think THE SPECIALS is some pub meal soup of day? How is this in ANY way elevated above Buble saluting the masters of lounge with beautifully accurate musical arrangements? Lounge has no point to it? So what about Matt Munro and Nancy Sinatra then? Tom Jones even? Newley and Bricusse (whose work Buble has covered)? What about Bond of the 1960s??? How are you going to argue yourself out of this corner??!

If there's any "cheesy listening" throwback we don't need it's definitely what Arnold did to Garbage. Urrrgghhh, let's all try and forget about that pop chart repellent dud...

As for the notion of Sheena Easton having "edge"- have any of you actually heard MORNING TRAIN (9-5)? The song that got her the Bond gig? It's a WORLD removed from the classy adult contemporary Bond ballad, and is on the same level of cheese WHAM occupied. Check it out:




You are telling me that has more "Bond credibility" than a Leona Lewis song?? All of Sheena's records at EMI were in the cheese and adult conteporary vein, just like Lewis, right until she got interesting with Prince (LONG after FYEO, by the way).

Don't get me wrong- I am all for Ronson, a real tried and successful chart music producer who knows what he is doing keeping David Arnold out of the booth. Arnold has needed someone to translate his Bond music themes into pop, so let's hope this happens! However, I think it's deluded, short-sighted nonsense that somehow Amy Winehouse is some stand alone, dynamite, revelatory gift to current pop music, and that she somehow measures up to some wonky idea that a hard edged music genre and Craig's Bond are mutually exclusive. Winehouse and Ronson are great pop guys who could do a great Bond, but there are others too of equal talent.

Eh, when are we gonna see Stevie Wonder and David Bowie do their Bond songs? I would also love to see Bassey return, but not just her and Arnold ala Cornell and Garbage (it would no doubt sound like her overblown PINK "Party Started" cover).

Call it "short sighted nonsense" to rate Amy Winehouse, by all means. But let's not do so from the same corner that sees someone defend the likes of Michael Buble (!!). Buble is crooner-lite, a housewives pin-up and a singer with about as much edge as a balloon. Mark Ronson on the other hand is taking his decades old inspirations and putting a new, contemporary and relevant spin on them. He is also a grand producer of his own making (which is why he is producing the Kaiser Chiefs new album).

You ask "how are you going to get yourself out of this corner?". Quite easily actually. Tom Jones, Anthony Newley, Matt Munro, Nancy Sinatra.....premium perfomers all, granted (and ones I have a greater affection and shelf space for than you'd realise). But they are also part of Bond's heritage which - since CASINO ROYALE - we have all seen is not solely about its future. I would love Bassey to return, but we are not in that era any more. Bond has moved on. He has upped his game. The music has to as well. "Saluting the masters of lounge" via the likes of Michael Buble would be terrible.

Okay - Sheena Easton is not the most edgy of performers. I will retract that. But I will not take back my opinion that she was very much part of a musical movement (i.e. early 1980's pop) in a way Leona Lewis would only dream of. There is nothing decade defining about Leona Lewis. Easton also got the Bond gig very quickly after winning her British TV talent show (though not because of it - Bond producers don't just make films for Britain). Leona Lewis has been knocking about for two years now and has cracked America granted, but hardly the public's mindset. She has no cache to her. She is bland beyond bland.

And for the record, David Bowie hates the Bond films. He's been asked to not only sing a title tune but also play a villain (MAX ZORIN), examples of two invites he turned down immediately.

[DamnCoffee]

[box]

[tim partridge]

Call it "short sighted nonsense" to rate Amy Winehouse, by all means. But let's not do so from the same corner that sees someone defend the likes of Michael Buble (!!). Buble is crooner-lite, a housewives pin-up and a singer with about as much edge as a balloon. Mark Ronson on the other hand is taking his decades old inspirations and putting a new, contemporary and relevant spin on them. He is also a grand producer of his own making (which is why he is producing the Kaiser Chiefs new album).

Goodness, do you immediately buy a new carton of DAZ every time they remarket it on TV? :\

David Foster is to Buble what Ronson is to Winehouse, and I think you will find that both Foster and Ronson have been (respectfully) recreating a bygone sound. The difference is that one has working class British pretensions, the other purely Las Vegas.

"new, contemporary and relevant"

Er, no. Maybe to vaccuous students and heroin pin up wannabes.

By the way, I DO rate Amy Winehouse and Mark Ronson, both of whom I think would be fantastic for Bond. I just don't agree with this nonsense that they sit on this untouchable pedestal of pop, or the equally deluded notion that they have some genuinely "new contemporary and relevant" sound when, like Buble and Foster, it's all just (good) throwback.

You ask "how are you going to get yourself out of this corner?". Quite easily actually. Tom Jones, Anthony Newley, Matt Munro, Nancy Sinatra.....premium perfomers all, granted (and ones I have a greater affection and shelf space for than you'd realise). But they are also part of Bond's heritage which - since CASINO ROYALE - we have all seen is not solely about its future. I would love Bassey to return, but we are not in that era any more. Bond has moved on. He has upped his game. The music has to as well. "Saluting the masters of lounge" via the likes of Michael Buble would be terrible.

Don't take my words out of context, please. Although I'll play along:

But saluting the masters of just as old Northern Soul is the way to go?

And what's all this about Bond moving on and out of his heritage? They've hired Dennis Gassner to ape Ken Adam of the 1960s- they got Arnold to ride as close as possible to the classic Barry Bond sound on the last movie. Isn't the pretitle sequence and gunbarrel returning too? Sure they've sold off Moneypenny, Q and clearly have an eye on pandering to the Bourne crowd. However, this "heritage is solely not about future" thing is iffy at best.

Okay - Sheena Easton is not the most edgy of performers. I will retract that. But I will not take back my opinion that she was very much part of a musical movement (i.e. early 1980's pop) in a way Leona Lewis would only dream of. There is nothing decade defining about Leona Lewis. Easton also got the Bond gig very quickly after winning her British TV talent show (though not because of it - Bond producers don't just make films for Britain). Leona Lewis has been knocking about for two years now and has cracked America granted, but hardly the public's mindset. She has no cache to her. She is bland beyond bland.

The only reason Easton got the job is because she cracked the States with Morning Train (9-5). That's it. Plus she got that through a snowball from the TV show. Ever hear her first song, MODERN GIRL? It tramples all over 9-5 but it flopped in the UK before the TV show carried her. Plus, I never thought MORNING TRAIN (9-5) defined the 80s at all, not by Sheena standards. Try SUGAR WALLS or U GOT THE LOOK with Prince!

As much as you hate it, Leona is in exactly the same spot now that Sheena was in circa 1981. Both are just pop voices, and no doubt if Leona was surrounded by a team like Bill Conti, Mick Leeson and (especially) Christopher Neil she'd have an instant classic Bond like FYEO (assuming you like that song as much as I do).

And for the record, David Bowie hates the Bond films. He's been asked to not only sing a title tune but also play a villain (MAX ZORIN), examples of two invites he turned down immediately.

Our loss.

[marktmurphy]

From what I've heard of Buble, he seems to exist purely to do impressions of Sinatra and the like by doing exactly the same songs. That's not what Ronson does at all- he's done one single album of covers; a one-off, and they were all a new spin on old classics using a plethora of new artists. I've no idea what this 'working class British pretensions' stuff you talk of is- you know he's a New York DJ and producer, yeah? He does use a retro sound on Version and Back To Black, but it's own spin on it and he does it with imagination- not just to try and sound exactly like what's gone before. He's not pretending that he's in the past. No-one's putting him on a pedestal- he's just rather good at what he does.

[Zorin Industries]

"David Foster is to Buble what Ronson is to Winehouse, and I think you will find that both Foster and Ronson have been (respectfully) recreating a bygone sound. The difference is that one has working class British pretensions, the other purely Las Vegas".

And Buble's sound isn't pretentious?! That lounge sound has to be earnt, not learnt. And worked at rather than bought - problems that will no doubt limit Leona Lewis's career.

"new, contemporary and relevant"

Yes. That's what Ronson and Winehouse are to the British music scene. Sorry. That's what a Bond song CAN be looking for (not exclusively mind - but this is a British-centric cinematic vehicle).

"By the way, I DO rate Amy Winehouse and Mark Ronson, both of whom I think would be fantastic for Bond. I just don't agree with this nonsense that they sit on this untouchable pedestal of pop, or the equally deluded notion that they have some genuinely "new contemporary and relevant" sound when, like Buble and Foster, it's all just (good) throwback".

The only one putting Winehouse and Ronson on a pedestal here is you - in order to knock them off it via your argument. Ronson has a rich history of music beyond Amy Winehouse by the way. She is just one of his collaborators.

"And what's all this about Bond moving on and out of his heritage? They've hired Dennis Gassner to ape Ken Adam of the 1960s- they got Arnold to ride as close as possible to the classic Barry Bond sound on the last movie. Isn't the pretitle sequence and gunbarrel returning too? Sure they've sold off Moneypenny, Q and clearly have an eye on pandering to the Bourne crowd. However, this "heritage is solely not about future" thing is iffy at best".

Q and MONEYPENNY haven't been axed to pander to the BOURNE crowd. Please. That demonstrates a poor understanding of the series to even assume that might be the case. And they haven't hired Dennis Gasner to "ape" Ken Adam. Already his take is to use existing locales, when Adam was a studio set-maestro. And if you'd seen Gasner's sets in any depth you might realise that.


QUOTE(Zorin Industries @ 29 April 2008 - 14:58)
Okay - Sheena Easton is not the most edgy of performers. I will retract that. But I will not take back my opinion that she was very much part of a musical movement (i.e. early 1980's pop) in a way Leona Lewis would only dream of. There is nothing decade defining about Leona Lewis. Easton also got the Bond gig very quickly after winning her British TV talent show (though not because of it - Bond producers don't just make films for Britain). Leona Lewis has been knocking about for two years now and has cracked America granted, but hardly the public's mindset. She has no cache to her. She is bland beyond bland.


"The only reason Easton got the job is because she cracked the States with Morning Train (9-5). That's it. Plus she got that through a snowball from the TV show. Ever hear her first song, MODERN GIRL? It tramples all over 9-5 but it flopped in the UK before the TV show carried her. Plus, I never thought MORNING TRAIN (9-5) defined the 80s at all, not by Sheena standards. Try SUGAR WALLS or U GOT THE LOOK with Prince! Asmuch as you hate it, Leona is in exactly the same spot now that Sheena was in circa 1981. Both are just pop voices, and no doubt if Leona was surrounded by a team like Bill Conti, Mick Leeson and (especially) Christopher Neil she'd have an instant classic Bond like FYEO (assuming you like that song as much as I do)".

Relax! Your knowledge of Sheena Easton can remain just that. Though I will stand by my statement that Easton was a greater part of 1980's iconography than Leona Lewis will ever be in this decade. And er, no Lewis is not in the "same spot" as Easton. They might share similiarities in terms of their talent show success, but Easton at least had a bit of character and awareness of her musical heritage. The great voiced Lewis is competent, but that's all. And that's not enough in my book to be that worthy to sing a Bond song. Which is all I was saying originally on this thread.

Can I ask who you would suggest to sing the theme tune?

[Zorin Industries]

There's no such thing as bad publicity in the entertainment world.

Er...

But every journalist wanted to interview him at the time. Publicity is publicty. It doesn't always matter if it is classed as bad or not.

[tim partridge]

From what I've heard of Buble, he seems to exist purely to do impressions of Sinatra and the like by doing exactly the same songs. That's not what Ronson does at all- he's done one single album of covers; a one-off, and they were all a new spin on old classics using a plethora of new artists. I've no idea what this 'working class British pretensions' stuff you talk of is- you know he's a New York DJ and producer, yeah? He does use a retro sound on Version and Back To Black, but it's own spin on it and he does it with imagination- not just to try and sound exactly like what's gone before. He's not pretending that he's in the past. No-one's putting him on a pedestal- he's just rather good at what he does.

Again, why are you comparing Buble to Ronson?? It should be Ronson to Foster, Buble to Winehouse.

Buble isn't a covers only artist, and not an exclusive lounge covers guy at that. He has original material too, not all of it fake swing either, he just happens to be a crooner.

Working class British pretensions refers to the Northern Soul/fake skapop sound that Ronson has imitated and passed off as new to the student sheep on many of his tracks (Winehouse and Lily Allen for example). The compositions may be new (or Zutons/Smiths covers) but the arrangements are not. They ARE exactly what went before, and decades before most of the posters on this forum were born! No he's not pretending he's in the past, as he's made a fortune pretending the recycled sound is "new". By the way, Ronson was born in the UK.

Edited by tim partridge, 29 April 2008 - 06:12 PM.

[Zorin Industries]

From what I've heard of Buble, he seems to exist purely to do impressions of Sinatra and the like by doing exactly the same songs. That's not what Ronson does at all- he's done one single album of covers; a one-off, and they were all a new spin on old classics using a plethora of new artists. I've no idea what this 'working class British pretensions' stuff you talk of is- you know he's a New York DJ and producer, yeah? He does use a retro sound on Version and Back To Black, but it's own spin on it and he does it with imagination- not just to try and sound exactly like what's gone before. He's not pretending that he's in the past. No-one's putting him on a pedestal- he's just rather good at what he does.

Again, why are you comparing Buble to Ronson?? It should be Ronson to Foster, Buble to Winehouse.

Because more people have heard of Mark Ronson perhaps? Because Mark Ronson is a performer in his own light (as his tenancy at this year's Glastonbury testifies) and because Mark Ronson is YEARS cooler and crisper than anyone associated with Buble.

From what I've heard of Buble, he seems to exist purely to do impressions of Sinatra and the like by doing exactly the same songs. That's not what Ronson does at all- he's done one single album of covers; a one-off, and they were all a new spin on old classics using a plethora of new artists. I've no idea what this 'working class British pretensions' stuff you talk of is- you know he's a New York DJ and producer, yeah? He does use a retro sound on Version and Back To Black, but it's own spin on it and he does it with imagination- not just to try and sound exactly like what's gone before. He's not pretending that he's in the past. No-one's putting him on a pedestal- he's just rather good at what he does.

Working class British pretensions refers to the Northern Soul/fake skapop sound that Ronson has plagarised and passed off as new to the student sheep on many of his tracks (Winehouse and Lily Allen for example). The compositions may be new (or Zutons/Smiths covers) but the arrangements are not. They ARE exactly what went before, and decades before most of the posters on this forum were born! No he's not pretending he's in the past, as he's made a fortune pretending the recycled sound is "new". By the way, Ronson was born in the UK.

So what - he was born in the UK...?! How does that further anything?! And are you seriously making a claim that Buble's turgid swing sound does not "recycle", "plagarise" or "pass off"? Personally, I don't even know why Buble is being mentioned in the same breath as anyone who has already sung a Bond theme tune.

[tim partridge]

"David Foster is to Buble what Ronson is to Winehouse, and I think you will find that both Foster and Ronson have been (respectfully) recreating a bygone sound. The difference is that one has working class British pretensions, the other purely Las Vegas".

And Buble's sound isn't pretentious?! That lounge sound has to be earnt, not learnt. And worked at rather than bought - problems that will no doubt limit Leona Lewis's career.

OK, so Ronson/Winehouse CAN purchase an old sound for whatever amount they like then? Even to the point of directly sampling (which Buble/Foster do not).

"new, contemporary and relevant"

Yes. That's what Ronson and Winehouse are to the British music scene. Sorry. That's what a Bond song CAN be looking for (not exclusively mind - but this is a British-centric cinematic vehicle).

What, recycled Northern Soul and Skapop? Like I said, you must own a lot of DAZ.

"By the way, I DO rate Amy Winehouse and Mark Ronson, both of whom I think would be fantastic for Bond. I just don't agree with this nonsense that they sit on this untouchable pedestal of pop, or the equally deluded notion that they have some genuinely "new contemporary and relevant" sound when, like Buble and Foster, it's all just (good) throwback".

The only one putting Winehouse and Ronson on a pedestal here is you - in order to knock them off it via your argument. Ronson has a rich history of music beyond Amy Winehouse by the way. She is just one of his collaborators.

"Rich" as in he's dressed up Lily Allen, Christina Aguilera and a few others in a decades old sound passed off as new too.

"And what's all this about Bond moving on and out of his heritage? They've hired Dennis Gassner to ape Ken Adam of the 1960s- they got Arnold to ride as close as possible to the classic Barry Bond sound on the last movie. Isn't the pretitle sequence and gunbarrel returning too? Sure they've sold off Moneypenny, Q and clearly have an eye on pandering to the Bourne crowd. However, this "heritage is solely not about future" thing is iffy at best".

Q and MONEYPENNY haven't been axed to pander to the BOURNE crowd. Please. That demonstrates a poor understanding of the series to even assume that might be the case. And they haven't hired Dennis Gasner to "ape" Ken Adam. Already his take is to use existing locales, when Adam was a studio set-maestro. And if you'd seen Gasner's sets in any depth you might realise that.

Yeah, especially all of the 60s modernist location choices, massive modernist architecture, 60s modernists patterns and colours and Michael Wilson's "post modernist view of modernism" comment. That art gallery with all of the stylised retro patterns for example. Plus, none of YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE was shot outside of a soundstage. Yeah, well off the mark I am.

Okay - Sheena Easton is not the most edgy of performers. I will retract that. But I will not take back my opinion that she was very much part of a musical movement (i.e. early 1980's pop) in a way Leona Lewis would only dream of. There is nothing decade defining about Leona Lewis. Easton also got the Bond gig very quickly after winning her British TV talent show (though not because of it - Bond producers don't just make films for Britain). Leona Lewis has been knocking about for two years now and has cracked America granted, but hardly the public's mindset. She has no cache to her. She is bland beyond bland.


"The only reason Easton got the job is because she cracked the States with Morning Train (9-5). That's it. Plus she got that through a snowball from the TV show. Ever hear her first song, MODERN GIRL? It tramples all over 9-5 but it flopped in the UK before the TV show carried her. Plus, I never thought MORNING TRAIN (9-5) defined the 80s at all, not by Sheena standards. Try SUGAR WALLS or U GOT THE LOOK with Prince! Asmuch as you hate it, Leona is in exactly the same spot now that Sheena was in circa 1981. Both are just pop voices, and no doubt if Leona was surrounded by a team like Bill Conti, Mick Leeson and (especially) Christopher Neil she'd have an instant classic Bond like FYEO (assuming you like that song as much as I do)".

Relax! Your knowledge of Sheena Easton can remain just that. Though I will stand by my statement that Easton was a greater part of 1980's iconography than Leona Lewis will ever be in this decade. And er, no Lewis is not in the "same spot" as Easton. They might share similiarities in terms of their talent show success, but Easton at least had a bit of character and awareness of her musical heritage. The great voiced Lewis is competent, but that's all. And that's not enough in my book to be that worthy to sing a Bond song. Which is all I was saying originally on this thread.

Where is Easton's greater character and awareness over Lewis'? I'm not buying this. Both were talent show stars who got a UK and US number one. That's it.

Can I ask who you would suggest to sing the theme tune?

Is this a joke?

[tim partridge]

From what I've heard of Buble, he seems to exist purely to do impressions of Sinatra and the like by doing exactly the same songs. That's not what Ronson does at all- he's done one single album of covers; a one-off, and they were all a new spin on old classics using a plethora of new artists. I've no idea what this 'working class British pretensions' stuff you talk of is- you know he's a New York DJ and producer, yeah? He does use a retro sound on Version and Back To Black, but it's own spin on it and he does it with imagination- not just to try and sound exactly like what's gone before. He's not pretending that he's in the past. No-one's putting him on a pedestal- he's just rather good at what he does.

Again, why are you comparing Buble to Ronson?? It should be Ronson to Foster, Buble to Winehouse.

Because more people have heard of Mark Ronson perhaps? Because Mark Ronson is a performer in his own light (as his tenancy at this year's Glastonbury testifies) and because Mark Ronson is YEARS cooler and crisper than anyone associated with Buble.

You are comparing, as far as this context is concerned, a singer(/occassional songwriter) to a songwriter/producer. Aas this is ultimately about Winehouse in relation to Bond, surely you should be comapring David Foster to Ronson as oppose to Buble, and you won't argue that Foster can hold his own there.

From what I've heard of Buble, he seems to exist purely to do impressions of Sinatra and the like by doing exactly the same songs. That's not what Ronson does at all- he's done one single album of covers; a one-off, and they were all a new spin on old classics using a plethora of new artists. I've no idea what this 'working class British pretensions' stuff you talk of is- you know he's a New York DJ and producer, yeah? He does use a retro sound on Version and Back To Black, but it's own spin on it and he does it with imagination- not just to try and sound exactly like what's gone before. He's not pretending that he's in the past. No-one's putting him on a pedestal- he's just rather good at what he does.

Working class British pretensions refers to the Northern Soul/fake skapop sound that Ronson has plagarised and passed off as new to the student sheep on many of his tracks (Winehouse and Lily Allen for example). The compositions may be new (or Zutons/Smiths covers) but the arrangements are not. They ARE exactly what went before, and decades before most of the posters on this forum were born! No he's not pretending he's in the past, as he's made a fortune pretending the recycled sound is "new". By the way, Ronson was born in the UK.

So what - he was born in the UK...?! How does that further anything?!

It was you who was trying to inform me that Ronson is oh so New York when I mentioned British (in relation to Northern Soul).

And are you seriously making a claim that Buble's turgid swing sound does not "recycle", "plagarise" or "pass off"? Personally, I don't even know why Buble is being mentioned in the same breath as anyone who has already sung a Bond theme tune.

Buble's swing covers do for sure, but like I said, he's done lots of non-swing material where only his voice has anything to do with that lounge genre. My point is that Ronson/Winehouse and Foster/Buble do more or less the same thing with their retro throwbacks, they just come from seemingly different directions.

Just to remind you (again) this is not me putting Ronson/Winehouse and Foster/Buble into a fighting ring. I like both parties and would be equally as pleased if either got the Bond gig.

Edited by tim partridge, 29 April 2008 - 05:31 PM.

[Fro]

It's pretty much a slam dunk if the song's any good (and somewhat fits the film), as I've said.

You got a very talented artist and producer who are commercially and critically successful together. Could be a classic-sounding Bond theme without being a straight lift from Barry and Bassey, like Arnold's been trying to do for years.

And any press for the film is good press on the music front. The theme song doesn't effect the movie's box office.

Edited by Fro, 29 April 2008 - 06:02 PM.

[Zorin Industries]

From what I've heard of Buble, he seems to exist purely to do impressions of Sinatra and the like by doing exactly the same songs. That's not what Ronson does at all- he's done one single album of covers; a one-off, and they were all a new spin on old classics using a plethora of new artists. I've no idea what this 'working class British pretensions' stuff you talk of is- you know he's a New York DJ and producer, yeah? He does use a retro sound on Version and Back To Black, but it's own spin on it and he does it with imagination- not just to try and sound exactly like what's gone before. He's not pretending that he's in the past. No-one's putting him on a pedestal- he's just rather good at what he does.

Again, why are you comparing Buble to Ronson?? It should be Ronson to Foster, Buble to Winehouse.

Because more people have heard of Mark Ronson perhaps? Because Mark Ronson is a performer in his own light (as his tenancy at this year's Glastonbury testifies) and because Mark Ronson is YEARS cooler and crisper than anyone associated with Buble.

You are comparing, as far as this context is concerned, a singer(/occassional songwriter) to a songwriter/producer. Aas this is ultimately about Winehouse in relation to Bond, surely you should be comapring David Foster to Ronson as oppose to Buble, and you won't argue that Foster can hold his own there.

From what I've heard of Buble, he seems to exist purely to do impressions of Sinatra and the like by doing exactly the same songs. That's not what Ronson does at all- he's done one single album of covers; a one-off, and they were all a new spin on old classics using a plethora of new artists. I've no idea what this 'working class British pretensions' stuff you talk of is- you know he's a New York DJ and producer, yeah? He does use a retro sound on Version and Back To Black, but it's own spin on it and he does it with imagination- not just to try and sound exactly like what's gone before. He's not pretending that he's in the past. No-one's putting him on a pedestal- he's just rather good at what he does.

Working class British pretensions refers to the Northern Soul/fake skapop sound that Ronson has plagarised and passed off as new to the student sheep on many of his tracks (Winehouse and Lily Allen for example). The compositions may be new (or Zutons/Smiths covers) but the arrangements are not. They ARE exactly what went before, and decades before most of the posters on this forum were born! No he's not pretending he's in the past, as he's made a fortune pretending the recycled sound is "new". By the way, Ronson was born in the UK.

So what - he was born in the UK...?! How does that further anything?!

It was you who was trying to inform me that Ronson is oh so New York when I mentioned British (in relation to Northern Soul).

And are you seriously making a claim that Buble's turgid swing sound does not "recycle", "plagarise" or "pass off"? Personally, I don't even know why Buble is being mentioned in the same breath as anyone who has already sung a Bond theme tune.

Buble's swing covers do for sure, but like I said, he's done lots of non-swing material where only his voice has anything to do with that lounge genre. My point is that Ronson/Winehouse and Foster/Buble do more or less the same thing with their retro throwbacks, they just come from seemingly different directions.

Just to remind you (again) this is not me putting Ronson/Winehouse and Foster/Buble into a fighting ring. I like both parties and would be equally as pleased if either got the Bond gig.

I tire greatly when such quotes become quotes within quotes within quotes. It does not make for good reading and eventually lets things slip into tit for tat (or Buble and Foster as they are now known...!).

I'm leaving this particular argument now. I've made my point and time will tell. It may or may not be Amy Winehouse. It certainly will not be Michael Buble. That would be a backward step in all sorts of ways. And no - I was not joking when I asked who you would like to sing the song (in an ideal world). Most people know when I am joking (!).

To lay my cards on the table, I would put the following into the mix:

GOLDFRAPP
DEPECHE MODE
AMY WINEHOUSE (!)
MARK RONSON
DUFFY
MASSIVE ATTACK
PORTISHEAD

[marktmurphy]

From what I've heard of Buble, he seems to exist purely to do impressions of Sinatra and the like by doing exactly the same songs. That's not what Ronson does at all- he's done one single album of covers; a one-off, and they were all a new spin on old classics using a plethora of new artists. I've no idea what this 'working class British pretensions' stuff you talk of is- you know he's a New York DJ and producer, yeah? He does use a retro sound on Version and Back To Black, but it's own spin on it and he does it with imagination- not just to try and sound exactly like what's gone before. He's not pretending that he's in the past. No-one's putting him on a pedestal- he's just rather good at what he does.

Again, why are you comparing Buble to Ronson?? It should be Ronson to Foster, Buble to Winehouse.

Buble isn't a covers only artist, and not an exclusive lounge covers guy at that. He has original material too, not all of it fake swing either, he just happens to be a crooner.

Working class British pretensions refers to the Northern Soul/fake skapop sound that Ronson has imitated and passed off as new to the student sheep on many of his tracks (Winehouse and Lily Allen for example). The compositions may be new (or Zutons/Smiths covers) but the arrangements are not. They ARE exactly what went before, and decades before most of the posters on this forum were born! No he's not pretending he's in the past, as he's made a fortune pretending the recycled sound is "new". By the way, Ronson was born in the UK.

You're just looking to hurl abuse- I can't be doing with you. Neither can I work out what your point is.

And yes, I know he was born in the UK, but he's a New York DJ. I think you know that too, and you know what I mean, you're just here to pick as many holes as you can and start fights. There's really no point in you being here with that attitude.

Basically it boils down to: Buble is for old people who liked listening to Michael Parkinson's radio show and hearing to old stuff, Ronson/Winehouse are popular and contemporary because they are contemporary. Who ya gonna choose? Tough choice, I don't think.

[col_007]

don't want that smackhead anywhere near bond thanks very much

I do

Me, too. And why, pray tell, does it matter what she gets up to her her private life? She could sh*g sheep for all I care. All I'm interested in is whether she is talented, which is beyond question, and if the song is good. Anything else is none of my, or anyone else's, business.

don't want that smackhead anywhere near bond thanks very much

I do

So do I. But then I judge Winehouse on her voice and much needed talent in the British music scene, not what some Daily Mail headline tells me about her just because stories on missing child Madeleine McCann are FINALLY no longer selling. Whilst not suggesting we all get crack habits, I really think some people should get their own personal life before commenting on others, especially people they only know through the morning papers.

Yet again, Zorin, yours is the voice of common sense cutting through all the silliness. I agree with you 100% on this.

i just dont like her apart from a few of her cover songs

[Head of S]

Michael Wilson diplomatically said that Winehouse "could" do an interesting job. She and her producer are working on a theme, that hasn't even been commissioned [a la Pulp (Tomorrow Never Lies) and Blondie (FYEO)], and without any contact with the filmmakers.

Marc Forster has brought David Arnold in during shooting much earlier than normal, to develop a score and to get the mood and feel for the movie. This will translate to the theme song as well.

Amy Winehouse will not be doing the theme for QOS.

So they asked Amy to do a demo (as Ronson said) without having any contact with her? That's a neat trick.

You are obviously better informed than I am, mtm. Perhaps you can confirm who "they" are, and provide a sourced quote from the company or individual who actually commissioned the demo.

[bond 16.05.72]

I would say that Zutons cover is easily the worst thing Winehouse has done yet, can't stand the bloody Zuton's anyway, generic Indy pap.

If Ronson is working with the Kaiser Chiefs I ask why, their last album was dire and the 1st was vastly overrrated, though I suppose Nigel Godrich can produce jewels like OK Computer and In Rainbows and also work with Travis and Coldplay.

As someone has said Back to Black proved to me Amy & Mark could do a great Bond theme, they have the spirit of Barry in their work they don't Xerox it like some certain film composer.

Any way in an ideal world Portishead would get the job, hell let them do the whole damn score, they've updated the 60's spy sound better than anyone else and still sound unique.

[marktmurphy]

Michael Wilson diplomatically said that Winehouse "could" do an interesting job. She and her producer are working on a theme, that hasn't even been commissioned [a la Pulp (Tomorrow Never Lies) and Blondie (FYEO)], and without any contact with the filmmakers.

Marc Forster has brought David Arnold in during shooting much earlier than normal, to develop a score and to get the mood and feel for the movie. This will translate to the theme song as well.

Amy Winehouse will not be doing the theme for QOS.

So they asked Amy to do a demo (as Ronson said) without having any contact with her? That's a neat trick.

You are obviously better informed than I am, mtm. Perhaps you can confirm who "they" are, and provide a sourced quote from the company or individual who actually commissioned the demo.

Don't get shirty: I'm quoting Mark Ronson who said that Winehouse was asked to do it by 'them', and she then thought that he was the guy to do it with. Of course there's a variety of ways that one can ask someone to do something, but unless you can prove that Ronson is lying (and I'm guessing that he's slightly more involved in the whole thing than either of us) or talking about Winehouse being asked by someone who isn't involved in the film, then I see no reason to disbelieve him.

I would say that Zutons cover is easily the worst thing Winehouse has done yet, can't stand the bloody Zuton's anyway, generic Indy pap.

If Ronson is working with the Kaiser Chiefs I ask why, their last album was dire and the 1st was vastly overrrated

I dunno, it's pretty superior pop, I'd say. Good, fun tunes.
And of course, they've worked with David Arnold too...

Any way in an ideal world Portishead would get the job, hell let them do the whole damn score, they've updated the 60's spy sound better than anyone else and still sound unique.

Maybe- they've moved on a bit since then (it was ten years ago). They do still sound great, though, yes.

The Last Shadow Puppets (probably better known as having the front man from the Arctic Monkeys) would be rather interesting: a retro sound whilst not getting bogged down, and very clearly inspired by Scott Walker/Jaques Brel/60's Westerns/James Bond. They were even on the radio last week saying how much they'd like to do a Bond theme. That could be a stunner.

[littlenellie]

before anyone else regurgitates the same old complaint about arnold cheesing up Garbage, rememebr that the track was produced by both Garbage and Arnold and mixed by Butch Vig.YKMN was produced by Cornell and Arnold and mixed by an American mixer( dont recall name) Aside from that the only pure Arnold productions were Surrender and Only Myself to Blame,both were fairly classic sounding tracks and interestingly not meant to be used for a sinlge or radio release.
I think Winehpuse would be great if she can deliver.I have no problem with Ronson either, his influences are obviously older but no problem with it from here

[tim partridge]

before anyone else regurgitates the same old complaint about arnold cheesing up Garbage, rememebr that the track was produced by both Garbage and Arnold and mixed by Butch Vig.YKMN was produced by Cornell and Arnold and mixed by an American mixer( dont recall name)

"Regurgiates" what?? Neither Vig nor Cornell are accomplished, full time music producers for a variety of different artists. Both have merely self produced their own work. Both of those tracks were lacking an experienced, pop interface as producer, and the less said about ONLY MYSELF TO BLAME, the better. Plus bringing Don Black (the cheesiest Bond lyricist) back so frequently kept everything stone dead and a self concious Bond in-joke to alienate it from the pop charts.

I agree about SURRENDER, which is dynamite, but between everything else and let's not forget the traumatisingly painful SHAKEN NOT STIRRED album (which sounded out of date when it was released), Arnold has been in severe need of a pop interface for the title songs since the beginning. Barry was the same (most of his self produced Bond output pales to the stuff that had a qualified pop producer there), so I have no idea why Arnold hasn't aped that neccessary side of him too.

Here's to someone experienced like Ronson being the middle man.

[Captain Tightpants]

As much as I don't like the idea, that actually makes sense. If only there were some way we could keep Ronson and ditch WInehouse.

[littlenellie]

I guess Butch Vig producing Nevermind by Nirvana and Garbages Albums doesnt count ??

As for Only Myself to Blame, I rather love it.
Surrender is ' dynamite'......... lyrics by your favourite Bond lyricist Don Black??
That only leaves YKMN which didnt appear to perform commercially much better than Sheryl Crow ( produced by Mitchell Froom ) or Goldeneye ( produced by Nellie Hooper )
By your arguement, surely all these proven succesful producers should have delivered a 'hit' .Arnolds songs feel like they belong to their films and the worlds that those films created.good enough for me

[baerrtt]

As much as I don't like the idea, that actually makes sense. If only there were some way we could keep Ronson and ditch WInehouse.

I doubt Ronson would do it without Winehouse to be honest.

[Zorin Industries]

before anyone else regurgitates the same old complaint about arnold cheesing up Garbage, rememebr that the track was produced by both Garbage and Arnold and mixed by Butch Vig.YKMN was produced by Cornell and Arnold and mixed by an American mixer( dont recall name)

let's not forget the traumatisingly painful SHAKEN NOT STIRRED album (which sounded out of date when it was released), Arnold has been in severe need of a pop interface for the title songs since the beginning.

I don't think many Bond music fans would agree with you on that one - not that that is the reason why you have your opinions. I would argue vehemently mind that SHAKEN NOT STIRRED was not at all painful. It was the most dynamic reworking of Bond music ever and one which left John Barry mightily impressed. It is not enough to just re-do the Bond tunes. Anyone can do that. What David Arnold did on that album was to achieve a standard of homage that, I believe, he hasn't always fed into his own work on the franchise (with the exception of CASINO ROYALE which saw him mature somewhat - with the title tune AND score). SHAKEN NOT STIRRED is far from traumatising. It is also one of the key albums of the 1990's - for sales, profile and longevity. I agree with you though that SURRENDER is a storming track, and that ONLY MYSELF TO BLAME is one of the worst 3 minutes committed to a wax cylinder ever....

I would urge anyone to check out Arnold's reworking of YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE with Natasha Atlas on singing duties. That should have made it onto SHAKEN NOT STIRRED too.



And Bjork had a crack at it too (with Arnold on mixing / producing duties too).

[bond 16.05.72]

before anyone else regurgitates the same old complaint about arnold cheesing up Garbage, rememebr that the track was produced by both Garbage and Arnold and mixed by Butch Vig.YKMN was produced by Cornell and Arnold and mixed by an American mixer( dont recall name)

let's not forget the traumatisingly painful SHAKEN NOT STIRRED album (which sounded out of date when it was released), Arnold has been in severe need of a pop interface for the title songs since the beginning.

I don't think many Bond music fans would agree with you on that one - not that that is the reason why you have your opinions. I would argue vehemently mind that SHAKEN NOT STIRRED was not at all painful. It was the most dynamic reworking of Bond music ever and one which left John Barry mightily impressed. It is not enough to just re-do the Bond tunes. Anyone can do that. What David Arnold did on that album was to achieve a standard of homage that, I believe, he hasn't always fed into his own work on the franchise (with the exception of CASINO ROYALE which saw him mature somewhat - with the title tune AND score). SHAKEN NOT STIRRED is far from traumatising. It is also one of the key albums of the 1990's - for sales, profile and longevity. I agree with you though that SURRENDER is a storming track, and that ONLY MYSELF TO BLAME is one of the worst 3 minutes committed to a wax cylinder ever....

I would urge anyone to check out Arnold's reworking of YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE with Natasha Atlas on singing duties. That should have made it onto SHAKEN NOT STIRRED too.



And Bjork had a crack at it too (with Arnold on mixing / producing duties too).

I'd agree Shaken is easily the best thing Arnold has done associated with Bond, not being able to rely on the JB theme did DA alot of good but I'm still not convinced. I hope i can be proved wrong in Nov but I feel like CR with exceptions that it will be the weakest element of the film.

No more big brass moments like that moment the super plane comes in to view at miami, it sounds so Barry rip off like GF.

Arnold needs to find his own sound and he was touching on it in CR but Barry's never likely to be bettered so I guess it will always be a gripe amoungst us Bond fans.

Though new blood is required if DA's 6 month's doesn't bring forth is most exciting Bond score to date.

[blueman]

Never liked Easton, very pedestrian sounding. Don't know who Lewis is (I've probably heard a song of hers without knowing who she is), or Buble.

Winehouse has the pipes for a Bond tune, very signature voice, no doubt. Wouldn't mind Manson back either, her first go was a bit of a muff. I'm sure there are others, but Winehouse would be a very good choice IMO. If she's working on something hope it's a good one.

[DaveBond21]

If the rumour is true, I'd love to have a listen to what Amy and Mark have come up with for Bond....

I think it would have a real Bondian flavour to it. They're both obviously 007 fans.

[Zorin Industries]

BBC News is reporting that Mark Ronson is about to collaborate with Duran Duran....


http://news.bbc.co.u...ent/7377847.stm

[Qwerty]

BBC News is reporting that Mark Ronson is about to collaborate with Duran Duran....


http://news.bbc.co.u...ent/7377847.stm

Sounds like a really interesting mix. Can't wait to hear what they come up with.