352 replies to this topic

[DominicGreene]

Hey guys. Ive been wondering about the opinions of others about the rumor...or was it confirmed that David Arnold would be coming back as composer. I think personally he has had a good run but we need something completely fresh for Bond 23.

What do you think?

(If he was confirmed composer that early, I think Eon was just being lazy )

[Quantumofsolace007]

Yes Night at the opera is the most beautiful peice of work he heas done YES YES YES

[Orion]

Definitly loved the man's work so far and i look forward to hearing more.

[sthgilyadgnivileht]

I would like to him take a breather for a film, so long as the replacement is a suitable one.

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

He's a great composer and he's done a good job with most of his films. So yes, I would love to see him return.

[MicroGlobeOne]

Yes. Yes, I want David Arnold to return. He's exceptionally talented, I've always appreciated his work on the series, particularly his clear versatility, and I'm very much looking forward to hearing his score for the next film.

[Skudor]

As much as I’d like to be rid of Arnold, I fear what the replacement would be. I love some of his stuff, but really detest the saccharine themes he sometimes comes up with. If I had a clear replacement I’d be much firmer in wanting him gone.

[trs007]

AB SO LUTE LY!!!!!!!!! The more I listen to Arnold, from TND to QOS---like a fine bottle of wine---keeps getting better with age.

[The Shark]

No, definitely not. Bring in some new talent, who could provide a new atmosphere to the Craig films. Arnold is just a leftover relic from the Brosnan films, who should have been dropped when they tried to wipe the slate clean.

He's not particularly versatile, lacks imagination, poor orchestrator, dull harmonies, banal love themes - only with occasional great tracks - Inside Man, Night at the Opera. Even these are either cut off short, or are too repetitious giving rise to monotony.

Give the job to someone who doesn't construct their action themes entirely out of tired clichés and synth beats, and has a more advanced musical understanding.

He's like a carton of semi-skinned milk, not particularly interesting at first, and now he's passed his sell-by date a long time ago.

Edited by The Shark, 21 October 2009 - 04:14 PM.

[lu galasso]

I agree...Arnold's pretty solid. Wouldn't mind seeing him at the musical controls for a while longer. Plus, it gives the movies nice continuity.

[David_M]

Bring on Michael Giacchino, already.

[FlemingBond]

I don't know. I liked his music at first, but it doesn't really stick with me. A lot of it plays more like sound effects than music. If he admires John Barry so much, why can't he be more like him??

[RJJB]

Get rid of Arnold. His scores are completely interchangable from movie to movie. He lacks the ability to give each movie an individual character. With a talented composer, a movie's soundtrack can have a music style that possesses an oveall quality that identifies it as belonging to a certain series of movies. John Barry's Bond work certainly is recognizable, but is varied enough from movie to movie that individual cues can be identified as belinging to a particular movie.

Arnold's work is simply derivative and repetitive. Many of his music cues are too short and do not work as quality stand alone music. Arnold's work for DAD was terrible and was the last Bond soundtrack I bought. I do not want him back. Music is too important to the BOnd movies, and he simply does not have the talent.

Edited by RJJB, 21 October 2009 - 04:49 PM.

[Jose]

I'd like to see David Arnold return, and maybe shake things up a bit and experiment, take a few risks, etc. I do admit that some of his stuff comes off as... generic, for want of a better term, but a good amount of what his music is pretty good.

Edited by Jose, 21 October 2009 - 04:48 PM.

[PPK_19]

He's done an ample temp job, but besides a couple of good compositions in QOS his music isn't that memorable. As RJJB just said, he lacks the ability to give each movie an individual character. Mix it up a bit, take a few risks, and try someone else!
Like they did for the main title design, switching to MK12 from Kleinman. It was a risk, but it worked (though not as good as Kleinman's, admittedly ). But music is such an important aspect, im sure they'd choose someone worthy.

[Qwerty]

Yes. I thought his work on Quantum of Solace was his best yet.

[tdalton]

I'm honestly as ambivalent on this subject as I possibly can be. Arnold's scores have been OK (perhaps "serviceable" is the right word), but none of them have been outstanding. Since he's been fairly consistent in his quality, I can see the argument for keeping him on. But I also can see the argument for going with someone who might deliver a more dynamic score.

[marktmurphy]

I didn't think Quantum was very strong but he certainly didn't upset me. I wouldn't have a problem with him returning. He writes a whistlable tune for every film.

[Solex Agitator]

I must admit that I was a not fan of Arnold's initial work. Too many bells, whistles, and wacha-wachas. His work during the Brosnan era was unremarkable at best. That was then.

Having said that...

Arnold's work on CR and QOS has been most excellent and is well-suited to the temper of the current direction. I would love to hear more lyrical work ala "Night At The Opera" emerge in the next film. Could his recent collaboration with John Barry lead to a similar collaboration for Bond 23? Here is hoping!

[Wade]

As someone who fell in love with the Bond films BECAUSE of John Barry's music, I would not be upset if David Arnold didn't continue. He's qualified and skilled, but his music lacks imagination. I mean, when I hear a John Barry score, I KNOW it's a John Barry score. I don't get that from Arnold. I get a lot of disjointed cues and filler bulking up what good work he does. I'd love to see what Michael Giacchino could do, especially after "The Incredibles" soundtrack.

[The Shark]

The problem I have with nearly all of the answers here is this. They're saying he should stay because his scores are serviceable... But shouldn't we aim much higher than "serviceable" when it comes to Bond scores? To me it's insult to the timeless work of John Barry, and the greats of film composition to practically ignore the power and magnitude of a GREAT soundtrack, not just a GOOD one.

That's the problem these days, no body really listens or cares about the soundtracks, because 1. much thought or guile isn't put into them in the first place resulting in the score being immaterial, dull, and un-listenable without the film, and 2. because of this the lost art has become defunct and nobody really treats the release of a soundtrack like a special evident, comparable to the premier of a film, musical, symphony, or opera, as they used to, say 30-60 years ago.

By doing this your depraving soundtracks, their place in the world, and the very need for them, and you're also contributing to the problem.

Settle for a great soundtrack, or settle for nothing.

Edited by The Shark, 21 October 2009 - 06:35 PM.

[Wade]

The problem I have with nearly all of the answers here is this. They're saying he should stay because his scores are serviceable... But shouldn't we aim much higher than "serviceable" when it comes to Bond scores? To me it's insult to the timeless work of John Barry, and the greats of film composition to practically ignore the power and importance of a GREAT soundtrack, not just a GOOD one.

That's the problem these days, no body really listens or cares about the soundtracks, because 1. much thought or guile isn't put into them in the first place, and 2. because of this the lost art has become defunct and nobody really treats the release of a soundtrack like a special evident, comparable to the premier of a film, musical, symphony, or opera, as they used to, say 30-60 years ago.

By doing this your depraving soundtracks, their place in the world, and the very need for them, and your also contributing to the problem.

Settle for a great soundtrack, or settle for nothing.

Yeah! What HE said!

[RJJB]

I liked the use of the term "disjointed cues" to describe Arnold's work.
Exactly the term I wanted to use, but could not find the proper words. Well done.

[tdalton]

The problem I have with nearly all of the answers here is this. They're saying he should stay because his scores are serviceable... But shouldn't we aim much higher than "serviceable" when it comes to Bond scores? To me it's insult to the timeless work of John Barry, and the greats of film composition to practically ignore the power and magnitude of a GREAT soundtrack, not just a GOOD one.

That's the problem these days, no body really listens or cares about the soundtracks, because 1. much thought or guile isn't put into them in the first place resulting in the score being immaterial, dull, and un-listenable without the film, and 2. because of this the lost art has become defunct and nobody really treats the release of a soundtrack like a special evident, comparable to the premier of a film, musical, symphony, or opera, as they used to, say 30-60 years ago.

By doing this your depraving soundtracks, their place in the world, and the very need for them, and you're also contributing to the problem.

Settle for a great soundtrack, or settle for nothing.

Agreed. I think that when I wrote my first post, I left it with the impression that I was behind Arnold returning, which isn't necessarily the case. I understand the EON thought process behind keeping him on board, because he has been a "serviceable" film scorer and they don't want to revisit their "mistake" with Eric Serra (I loved Serra's GE score, but recognize that I'm one of about five who did), and would rather play things safe. With that said, I'd most definitely welcome a new, more exciting composer into the fold.

[Tybre]

Yes.

[DamnCoffee]

As much as a I love Arnold, I really do think he isn't exciting anymore. Yes, his work on Bond is good, but he really hasn't delivered a BRILLIANT soundtrack yet. Die Another Day is great, but would've been so much better with all the tech-no removed.

I'm saying this from a completely editorial point of view, but he really doesn't deliver any great tracks that can be used in fan made Trailers and TV Spots.

I would love to hear John Williams take on a Bond movie. But that will never happen.

[Tybre]

Ugh, please no John Williams. He's more than passed his prime.

[DamnCoffee]

At least he's exciting!

He comes up with some brilliant soundtracks.

[The Shark]

Here are a few suggestions - Howard Shore, Thomas Newman, David Newman, Alexandre Desplat (this is an interesting one), Elliot Goldenthaal and James Horner.

Anyone got any others?

Edited by The Shark, 21 October 2009 - 07:30 PM.

[Tybre]

At least he's exciting!

He comes up with some brilliant soundtracks.

Imo, Williams has never been "brilliant". He has some very good work, mostly the Indy films, but I just don't care for any Williams score I've heard all that much. Some make an occasional decent listen, but never anything terrific. Now sure, Arnold for the most part isn't brilliant either, but honestly I prefer TND-QoS over any John Williams score I've heard.

Personally my number one vote for a replacement is still Harry Gregson-Williams, but I wouldn't want to see anyone new come in just yet. My opinion about Arnold is the same as Dench. Keep 'em til the new Bond comes in.