Well, I wouldn't make this suggestion as someone as a permanent replacement for Arnold, but rather for a one-off deal. If they ever get around to filming the Garden of Death location in a Bond film, I'd love to see Charlie Clouser come on board for that film (and that film alone). The way that I envision the Garden of Death sequences fitting into a Craig film (which, I'll admit, from reading suggestions from other posters here over the years, is quite different from most peoples' take on it), Clouser's style would be a near-perfect fit, as his style is more suited for horror films, which is what I'd like to see them do with a "faithful" adaptation of YOLT.
I prefer TND-QoS over any John Williams score I've heard.
Blasphemy!
Though in all seriousness even his orchestration alone (forgetting melody, harmonic language and every other musical element) - his use of wood winds, harps, glockenspiel, is far greater per average individual score, than ANYTHING Arnold has ever done. He simply neglects most of the orchestra and focuses on a few select instruments, giving his scores a thin, over-polished sound, which is one of the main reasons why he digitally doubles most of the instruments, and adds intrusive synth beats.
To add "depth" to something that isn't there in the first place.
I prefer TND-QoS over any John Williams score I've heard.
Blasphemy!
One could easily argue Beethoven was a better composer than Chopin, and yet I love Chopin's music more than any other classic composer, and I can't stand to listen to a lick of Beethoven. It's all personal taste, really.
I prefer TND-QoS over any John Williams score I've heard.
Blasphemy!
One could easily argue Beethoven was a better composer than Chopin, and yet I love Chopin's music more than any other classic composer, and I can't stand to listen to a lick of Beethoven. It's all personal taste, really.
I guess, though it helps that Beethoven and Chopin are at least comparable in the range and breadth of their work. Arnold, who's only been going for about 16 years, to John Williams who's works spans 40+ years and has received countless acclaim and awards, doesn't seem like a fair comparison. At least theoretically. Though again it's all down to taste.
Anyone got any others?
Well, I wouldn't make this suggestion as someone as a permanent replacement for Arnold, but rather for a one-off deal. If they ever get around to filming the Garden of Death location in a Bond film, I'd love to see Charlie Clouser come on board for that film (and that film alone). The way that I envision the Garden of Death sequences fitting into a Craig film (which, I'll admit, from reading suggestions from other posters here over the years, is quite different from most peoples' take on it), Clouser's style would be a near-perfect fit, as his style is more suited for horror films, which is what I'd like to see them do with a "faithful" adaptation of YOLT.
I'd say something like this would be a near perfect fit for a Garden of Death type sequence, with a more romantic yet horrific edge, without relying on electronics at all.
Arnold is the only other Bond composer in my opinion; his work on the Brosnan films post-TND was uneven but the last two have seen him really raise his game - QOS is the best score the series had since OHMSS IMO (goes for the films too but that's for another thread.... ); so yes he should stay.
Howard Shore is an interesting idea if it must be someone else but only if he's in David Cronenberg rather than Lord of the Rings-mode.
I prefer TND-QoS over any John Williams score I've heard.
Blasphemy!
One could easily argue Beethoven was a better composer than Chopin, and yet I love Chopin's music more than any other classic composer, and I can't stand to listen to a lick of Beethoven. It's all personal taste, really.
I guess, though it helps that Beethoven and Chopin are at least comparable in the range and breadth of their work. Arnold, who's only been going for about 16 years, to John Williams who's works spans 40+ years and has received countless acclaim and awards, doesn't seem like a fair comparison. At least theoretically. Though again it's all down to taste.
Anyone got any others?
Well, I wouldn't make this suggestion as someone as a permanent replacement for Arnold, but rather for a one-off deal. If they ever get around to filming the Garden of Death location in a Bond film, I'd love to see Charlie Clouser come on board for that film (and that film alone). The way that I envision the Garden of Death sequences fitting into a Craig film (which, I'll admit, from reading suggestions from other posters here over the years, is quite different from most peoples' take on it), Clouser's style would be a near-perfect fit, as his style is more suited for horror films, which is what I'd like to see them do with a "faithful" adaptation of YOLT.
I'd say something like this would be a near perfect fit for a Garden of Death type sequence, with a more romantic yet horrific edge, without relying on electronics at all.
Something along those lines would be the way to go if EON felt like they wanted to keep things in the realm of the more traditional.
The reason that I would go with Clouser for a film that featured the Garden of Death would be, first and foremost, because I think that he's talented. Secondly, I think that his sound (and his use of electronics) would help to create a sound that would be so different and (judging from his work on SAW) so unsettling when compared to all of the other Bond music, that it would create the desired effect that a Garden of Death film would necessitate. EON would never go in that direction, and given the negative reaction to Eric Serra's score for GOLDENEYE, maybe they shouldn't. But I think that, at least in relationship to the idea that I've always had for a Garden of Death Bond film, Clouser would be a perfect choice for the conductor's job on just that film.
I prefer TND-QoS over any John Williams score I've heard.
Blasphemy!
One could easily argue Beethoven was a better composer than Chopin, and yet I love Chopin's music more than any other classic composer, and I can't stand to listen to a lick of Beethoven. It's all personal taste, really.
I guess, though it helps that Beethoven and Chopin are at least comparable in the range and breadth of their work. Arnold, who's only been going for about 16 years, to John Williams who's works spans 40+ years and has received countless acclaim and awards, doesn't seem like a fair comparison. At least theoretically. Though again it's all down to taste.
It's not down to taste; this is a masterpiece of an ending (on par with QOS's), and it's all from John William's music:
Yes, most definitely yes. David Arnold is great and has done a terrific job scoring the Bond films. Is he as good as John Barry? No. But then, who is? Would I like Arnold to score the films more along the lines of Barry (i.e. each film having an identifiable theme(s) throughout)? Sure. But apparently that is not Arnold's style. Regardless, I have greatly enjoyed Arnold's work throughout his tenure on 007 and would like to see him continue in his position.
Were Arnold to take a break for a film, my #1 wish to score a Bond film would be John Williams. I would love to hear what he would do with Bond. My number two choice would be Lalo Schifrin (love his Mission: Impossible theme) and my third choice would probably be Michael Giacchino, but I don't have a strong feeling toward him (although The Incredibles score was good).
I've said this a couple of times, the problem with the Arnold sound is that it isn't memorable and instant reconizable. No one leaves the theatre singing one or two of it's themes. The John Barry sound was memorable and instantly reconizable.
In my opinion David Arnold is great composer. Because of these reasons:
- he's very good.
- he's very young in comparison to other great composers like John Williams for instance.
- he knows exactly how he needs to compose a Bond-soundtrack.
John Williams is indeed one of the best composers but hís music is very fantasy/sciencefiction like. Yes even the most serious films like Schindlers List.
- and he's a Bondfan which means he'll be James Bond composer for ever:P
n my opinion David Arnold is great composer. Because of these reasons: - he's very good.
Foolproof reasoning there.
- and he's a Bondfan which means he'll be James Bond composer for ever:P
You could be the biggest fan on earth but not have a clue to compose a sountrack, let alone a James Bond one.
Yes, most definitely yes. David Arnold is great and has done a terrific job scoring the Bond films. Is he as good as John Barry? No. But then, who is?
I see where your coming from, but again it's a flawed and tired argument, that just because Barry was a master at what he did, doesn't mean his successor should at least try, rather than aiming for the gutter as has been the standard until a slight improvement recently with QOS.
It's not down to taste; this is a masterpiece of an ending (on par with QOS's), and it's all from John William's music:
Well you can't convince everyone, no matter how hard you try. They'll always been some guy out there who'll prefer the sound of electronic buzzes and squeaks to the sound of a bass clarinet.
Something along those lines would be the way to go if EON felt like they wanted to keep things in the realm of the more traditional.
The reason that I would go with Clouser for a film that featured the Garden of Death would be, first and foremost, because I think that he's talented. Secondly, I think that his sound (and his use of electronics) would help to create a sound that would be so different and (judging from his work on SAW) so unsettling when compared to all of the other Bond music, that it would create the desired effect that a Garden of Death film would necessitate. EON would never go in that direction, and given the negative reaction to Eric Serra's score for GOLDENEYE, maybe they shouldn't. But I think that, at least in relationship to the idea that I've always had for a Garden of Death Bond film, Clouser would be a perfect choice for the conductor's job on just that film.
Again it also depends on the way the Garden of Death would be shown of film. In the book it wasn't just a horrific place, it was a beautiful hell on earth, a safe place to commit suicide. The electronic approach while unique, and in Clouser's case takes a lot of talent at the keyboard and computer, doesn't capture the strong romantic and exotic aspect which remained in Fleming's prose.
I've said this a couple of times, the problem with the Arnold sound is that it isn't memorable and instant reconizable. No one leaves the theatre singing one or two of it's themes. The John Barry sound was memorable and instantly reconizable.
Tell me the last time you let the cinema singing the theme of the movie...
It's not up to David Arnold. Movies are different now and i guess it's the fault of the producers / studio. They don't want big bold theme for a hero like we had for Indiana Jones or something like that.
We know Arnold is capable of doing this. I mean, look at Stargate. isn't it one of the Best theme ever ?
Arnold is simply trying to do the best he can. If Barry is not working on the bond is that he doesn't have full creativity on the theme. Yeah i said John Barry. imagine for Arnold or the current composers.... I'm sure Arnold would love to do that but most of the time they won't let him do what he wants with the theme (TNS, DAD, QOS) Only twice out of 5 he had the possibility to do the theme and the score. it's such a shame. Listen to TWINE and CR to see how great the theme was implemented through the score. It's the same with TND and the surrender song. Arnold is the one for the job, they should just let him do his job. Also Arnold is not like the rest of the composers. Like barry he is not only making soundtrack. he is working a lot with current artist for their album, like Massive Attack, dame shirley Bassey, etc. So he knows how to write a song, that's for sure.
I really like David Arnold and for me QOS is even better than CR, specialy on CD where QOS is a great listening experience. CR is too long.
i want Arnold back for two reason: - I want him to develop the Qunatum them in the next movie. - i'm sure Bond 23 will be a bit more traditionnal and we will hear a bit more of the Bond theme.
And please don't tell me Michael Giacchino or Ed Shearmur woudl be better. i love their work on The incredible and Johnny English, but making a parody of bond music is much much easier for me than continuing the legacy of the bond music.
Arnold is the one for the job, they should just let him do his job. Also Arnold is not like the rest of the composers. Like barry he is not only making soundtrack. he is working a lot with current artist for their album, like Massive Attack, dame shirley Bassey, etc. So he knows how to write a song, that's for sure.
That's wrong there. John Barry wrote countless hits for many acts in the 60s including Adam Faith and various others. Marvin Hamlisch has worked with many artists, most famously with Barbara Streisand for The Way We Were. And of course George Martin is famous for producing The Beatles.
I've said this a couple of times, the problem with the Arnold sound is that it isn't memorable and instant reconizable. No one leaves the theatre singing one or two of it's themes. The John Barry sound was memorable and instantly reconizable.
Tell me the last time you let the cinema singing the theme of the movie...
It's not up to David Arnold. Movies are different now and i guess it's the fault of the producers / studio. They don't want big bold theme for a hero like we had for Indiana Jones or something like that.
We know Arnold is capable of doing this. I mean, look at Stargate. isn't it one of the Best theme ever ?
Arnold is simply trying to do the best he can. If Barry is not working on the bond is that he doesn't have full creativity on the theme. Yeah i said John Barry. imagine for Arnold or the current composers.... I'm sure Arnold would love to do that but most of the time they won't let him do what he wants with the theme (TNS, DAD, QOS) Only twice out of 5 he had the possibility to do the theme and the score. it's such a shame. Listen to TWINE and CR to see how great the theme was implemented through the score. It's the same with TND and the surrender song. Arnold is the one for the job, they should just let him do his job. Also Arnold is not like the rest of the composers. Like barry he is not only making soundtrack. he is working a lot with current artist for their album, like Massive Attack, dame shirley Bassey, etc. So he knows how to write a song, that's for sure.
I really like David Arnold and for me QOS is even better than CR, specialy on CD where QOS is a great listening experience. CR is too long.
i want Arnold back for two reason: - I want him to develop the Qunatum them in the next movie. - i'm sure Bond 23 will be a bit more traditionnal and we will hear a bit more of the Bond theme.
And please don't tell me Michael Giacchino or Ed Shearmur woudl be better. i love their work on The incredible and Johnny English, but making a parody of bond music is much much easier for me than continuing the legacy of the bond music.
There's too much to disagree with or correct here...so I will pass (!).
I prefer TND-QoS over any John Williams score I've heard.
Blasphemy!
One could easily argue Beethoven was a better composer than Chopin, and yet I love Chopin's music more than any other classic composer, and I can't stand to listen to a lick of Beethoven. It's all personal taste, really.
I guess, though it helps that Beethoven and Chopin are at least comparable in the range and breadth of their work. Arnold, who's only been going for about 16 years, to John Williams who's works spans 40+ years and has received countless acclaim and awards, doesn't seem like a fair comparison. At least theoretically. Though again it's all down to taste.
It's not down to taste; this is a masterpiece of an ending (on par with QOS's), and it's all from John William's music:
Maybe it's because of overexposure, lord knows Family Guy, Robot Chicken and so forth haven't helped, but I strongly dislike the scores from the Star Wars films, especially the main theme. I find them/it pompous and overbearing.
Again it also depends on the way the Garden of Death would be shown of film. In the book it wasn't just a horrific place, it was a beautiful hell on earth, a safe place to commit suicide. The electronic approach while unique, and in Clouser's case takes a lot of talent at the keyboard and computer, doesn't capture the strong romantic and exotic aspect which remained in Fleming's prose.
Totally agreed in that it does depend on how the Garden of Death would be shown on film. There are instances in Clouser's work, though, that would lead me to believe that he could be capable of delivering a more "traditional" score when moments in the film would call for it, such as some moments of decent "string instrument" work (I say that knowing that the string instrument sounds in his work are most likely created by a keyboard or synthesizer) layered in with the electronic sounds.
The way that I would see such a film working out, though, would lend itself more to the depiction of the garden being a horrifying place and rely less on the more "glamorous" aspects of the location. I think that one potential way to do this (short of a full-on, faithful adaptation of YOLT, which I would find to be impossible to do unless they remade OHMSS as well, but would still prefer to see over anything else) would be to have a story line in which Bond and MI6 are duped into thinking that Shatterhand's garden is actually some kind of scientific experiment aiming for some kind of greater good (such as curing diseases, ending world hunger, or something along those lines), but as Bond's investigation into QUANTUM continues, he learns about connections the Garden has to QUANTUM and its members, and finally ends up there after being captured and subsequently drugged, which would make him susceptible to falling victim to the garden himself while also seeing it as a far more visually horrifying place than it might otherwise appear to be to clearer eyes. In this approach, I see Clouser as a fantastic choice, and I think that he could be a bit more traditional towards the beginning of the film to match the visual styling of the film, which would deteriorate throughout the film as Bond gets closer to the garden, as would the music to the point that it would sound very much like trademark Clouser music.
Again it also depends on the way the Garden of Death would be shown of film. In the book it wasn't just a horrific place, it was a beautiful hell on earth, a safe place to commit suicide. The electronic approach while unique, and in Clouser's case takes a lot of talent at the keyboard and computer, doesn't capture the strong romantic and exotic aspect which remained in Fleming's prose.
Totally agreed in that it does depend on how the Garden of Death would be shown on film. There are instances in Clouser's work, though, that would lead me to believe that he could be capable of delivering a more "traditional" score when moments in the film would call for it, such as some moments of decent "string instrument" work (I say that knowing that the string instrument sounds in his work are most likely created by a keyboard or synthesizer) layered in with the electronic sounds.
The way that I would see such a film working out, though, would lend itself more to the depiction of the garden being a horrifying place and rely less on the more "glamorous" aspects of the location. I think that one potential way to do this (short of a full-on, faithful adaptation of YOLT, which I would find to be impossible to do unless they remade OHMSS as well, but would still prefer to see over anything else) would be to have a story line in which Bond and MI6 are duped into thinking that Shatterhand's garden is actually some kind of scientific experiment aiming for some kind of greater good (such as curing diseases, ending world hunger, or something along those lines), but as Bond's investigation into QUANTUM continues, he learns about connections the Garden has to QUANTUM and its members, and finally ends up there after being captured and subsequently drugged, which would make him susceptible to falling victim to the garden himself while also seeing it as a far more visually horrifying place than it might otherwise appear to be to clearer eyes. In this approach, I see Clouser as a fantastic choice, and I think that he could be a bit more traditional towards the beginning of the film to match the visual styling of the film, which would deteriorate throughout the film as Bond gets closer to the garden, as would the music to the point that it would sound very much like trademark Clouser music.
Is an interesting choice. As a composer myself, I had in mind a while back of scoring a soundtrack for a non-existent "Bond movie", with a very detailed scene by scene description and plot written by a talented fan writer, based on YOLT and several other of Fleming's works - TSWLM, TPOAL, FRWL, DN and TB. Unfortunately I'm too busy in work at Uni right now to compose, conduct, and record a 2 hr long soundtrack with the college orchestra, so I've given up for now in hope of doing it sometime perhaps in the next two years.
The cut a long story short, I envisaged the villain - "Shatterhand" being a deranged, Samurai armour-wearing ex-Quantum recluse, with his own "castle" in Borneo. Here he conducts experiments on humans, and numerous animal specimens to try and find the answer to the unresolved question of an afterlife. Bond is his perfect living specimen, has statues and paintings of him, and can't wait to perform tests on him in his giant lab-rat maze. When Bond arrives there undercover as a entomologist investigating his vast collection of insects, he discovers a Nunnery, set up by missionaries to convert the indigenous population. After a couple of nights dining with the staff and heads of the laboratory, Bond begins to investigate the island for the rumoured "Shatterhand" death cult after finding a centipede in his bed causing him to vomit. He becomes increasingly unbalanced, and begins to suspect the drinking water, at one point chasing away some native children from a fountain. At the same time, he begins to experience sightings of a "double" of himself, in near perfect likeness more and more frequently. Him and his partner, Vivenne Mitchell, are eventually arrested for possessing heroine, after having it stashed in their rooms by someone. Deemed mentally unfit and a hazard to themselves and others, they are sent to the mental asylum on the island, attached to the nunnery. Both are straightjacketed and are subjected by Shatterhand via an speaker systems, and sadistic nurses, to electrical torture, insulin injections, various psycholigcal and physiliocal tests. Finally they are confined to a pure white, heavily padded, human version of a laborary maze designed to test human behaviour. Along with this they find themselves in a Garden of Death where various deadly specimens roam free, and Bond finds a way to escape...
Of course there's much more to this, but this is the central focus.
It’s safe to say that Arnold’s best Bond work to date has been his work in QOS. Two ways to look at that:
1) He’s breaking out of his shell. He’s expanding, improving. He should be kept on so that his potential can continue to be tapped.
2) He’s peaked. The next effort(s) might be as good as QOS, but they might just as easily revert back to the same ol’, same ol’, functional but increasingly tired quality of his pre-QOS work.
My guess is that we’re looking at #2 as our reality. I think we’ve probably seen (heard) Arnold at his best. If “good enough” is truly good enough, then no harm in keeping him. However, if we’re looking for greater expansion and tonal darings in the score to match what will hopefully be the same philosophy applied to the rest of the films’ productions, I think a replacement is necessary.
Yes, David Arnold should come back. But not for Bond 23.
It's time for another composer to take over for a few films. However, I am totally against using a popular composer for a one-time score for the sake of experimenting. I don't think it would be good for the series, in the long run, to end up in a situation where every new director brings a new composer along. It's better to find a new upcoming (and promising) composer who can stay with the series for a while and develop his own style.
As for Arnold, I was a strong supporter after TND/TWINE. After his last three scores I am not so sure anymore. Arnold, at his best, is very good at emulating Barry's style. As soon as there is time for a location change, he totally nails it. Sometimes, Arnold's music is the only thing that reminds us that we are watching a Bondfilm.
I would also say that Arnold is extremely talented when it comes to finding the right sound to a particular scene. Watching a Bondfilm on the premiere sometimes feels like a second viewing if you have already heard the score. Ironically, this is his strength but also his weakness. Sometimes, it is simply too much frame-by-frame scoring, especially when it comes to the action scenes. To quote Film score monthly:
"One of the most common functions of a score is to parallel the action of the film, also known as underscoring. Instead of the composer taking the general route of composing a suite of music that would represent the mood of an entire scene, he/she would maintain a frame by frame musical match to the visuals. Not all current composers are well trained in music theory, so they take advantage of the fact that paralleling the visuals is a weak function in that musically, it gives the viewer what is already known by watching. Its only job is to tell a viewer what he already sees; development of commentary on the scene is unnecessary. The fact that a musical parallel is a weak function sometimes leads to the creation of a weak score."
Yes, David Arnold should come back. But not for Bond 23.
It's time for another composer to take over for a few films. However, I am totally against using a popular composer for a one-time score for the sake of experimenting. I don't think it would be good for the series, in the long run, to end up in a situation where every new director brings a new composer along. It's better to find a new upcoming (and promising) composer who can stay with the series for a while and develop his own style.
As for Arnold, I was a strong supporter after TND/TWINE. After his last three scores I am not so sure anymore. Arnold, at his best, is very good at emulating Barry's style. As soon as there is time for a location change, he totally nails it. Sometimes, Arnold's music is the only thing that reminds us that we are watching a Bondfilm.
I would also say that Arnold is extremely talented when it comes to finding the right sound to a particular scene. Watching a Bondfilm on the premiere sometimes feels like a second viewing if you have already heard the score. Ironically, this is his strength but also his weakness. Sometimes, it is simply too much frame-by-frame scoring, especially when it comes to the action scenes. To quote Film score monthly:
"One of the most common functions of a score is to parallel the action of the film, also known as underscoring. Instead of the composer taking the general route of composing a suite of music that would represent the mood of an entire scene, he/she would maintain a frame by frame musical match to the visuals. Not all current composers are well trained in music theory, so they take advantage of the fact that paralleling the visuals is a weak function in that musically, it gives the viewer what is already known by watching. Its only job is to tell a viewer what he already sees; development of commentary on the scene is unnecessary. The fact that a musical parallel is a weak function sometimes leads to the creation of a weak score."
Very fair observation and I agree. It’s a very safe approach to scoring, and Arnold is nothing if not a ‘safe’ composer. I do feel though that after CR, and especially after QOS, EON has committed themselves to unprotected film production. I’m not sure that Arnold and his spermicidal condom-sheathed conductor’s baton are the right fit anymore.
Yes, David Arnold should come back. But not for Bond 23.
It's time for another composer to take over for a few films. However, I am totally against using a popular composer for a one-time score for the sake of experimenting. I don't think it would be good for the series, in the long run, to end up in a situation where every new director brings a new composer along. It's better to find a new upcoming (and promising) composer who can stay with the series for a while and develop his own style.
As for Arnold, I was a strong supporter after TND/TWINE. After his last three scores I am not so sure anymore. Arnold, at his best, is very good at emulating Barry's style. As soon as there is time for a location change, he totally nails it. Sometimes, Arnold's music is the only thing that reminds us that we are watching a Bondfilm.
I would also say that Arnold is extremely talented when it comes to finding the right sound to a particular scene. Watching a Bondfilm on the premiere sometimes feels like a second viewing if you have already heard the score. Ironically, this is his strength but also his weakness. Sometimes, it is simply too much frame-by-frame scoring, especially when it comes to the action scenes. To quote Film score monthly:
"One of the most common functions of a score is to parallel the action of the film, also known as underscoring. Instead of the composer taking the general route of composing a suite of music that would represent the mood of an entire scene, he/she would maintain a frame by frame musical match to the visuals. Not all current composers are well trained in music theory, so they take advantage of the fact that paralleling the visuals is a weak function in that musically, it gives the viewer what is already known by watching. Its only job is to tell a viewer what he already sees; development of commentary on the scene is unnecessary. The fact that a musical parallel is a weak function sometimes leads to the creation of a weak score."
Very fair observation and I agree. It’s a very safe approach to scoring, and Arnold is nothing if not a ‘safe’ composer. I do feel though that after CR, and especially after QOS, EON has committed themselves to unprotected film production. I’m not sure that Arnold and his spermicidal condom-sheathed conductor’s baton are the right fit anymore.
What's worse is that he doesn't even conduct, let alone orchestrate his scores. Though I have seen a video of him conducting live with a breadstick.
I've always been (a relatively) big Arnold defender, and I do agree with all those who say that his scores have got better. Both CR and QoS showed some maturity in and some restraint (in comparison to say, TND). And I think the whole Arnold-Barry comparison is a little overplayed. Barry established the Bond sound (and to an extent, the Bond-style, as important as SC, Cubby, Harry, Maibaum etc in setting the whole thing up) so NO-ONE is going to fare well in the "comparison with Barry" stakes.
And to be fair to Arnold, Barry had some relatively poor scores as well, if not repititive. OP is forgettable, and DAF, TMWTGG, and AVTAK have one or two memorable moments which are then propped up with variations of the theme song, repeated, in DAF's case especially, ad nauseum. I'm not a huge fan of the TND score, but the only one I've found "bad" is DAD, and Arnold, unlike Barry, didn't even have his own theme song to help bail him out(IMHO, QoS is good enough not to be hampered by this).
I know that everyone lists a lot of names that would be good (and I agree with many of those listed), but the proof is in the pudding. Of all the non-Barry's, Hamlish is still the only one that nailed it, and so switching to switch doesn't necessarily guarantee an improvement.
Sure, Arnold has had more than a fair run, but in CR and QoS there are moments that I think are as good as anything as Barry did (oft-mentioned Night at the Opera, and the way he used the theme song throughout CR).
So do I want him to return? I'll let you know when he doesn't....!
He has an extremely rare talent amongst composers for identifying exactly what's appropriate to compliment the images of a particular scene in front of him - ultimately the best composer's true responsibility.
He's very conscious of what a Bond score is, past and present, and what the fans expect to hear out of one.
He has an incredible knack for sustaining a narrative with his music.
His musical attitudes, including both those demonstrating a sense of danger and a sense of humour, gel perfectly with Bond and the contemporary Bond films.
He understands that a Bond score in and of itself needs to be an "event" for various reasons outside of the film - because he's a fan, much like we are. And he's yet to disappoint with effort.
His approach - a foot in the 60s and a foot in the new millenium - is exactly appropriate.
I dread the day Arnold leaves the franchise, for however long. I fear the followup attempt will be hardly recognizeable as a Bond score, as I can see someone really wanting to "shake it up" or "put their stamp on it." IE, Eric Serra.
Arnold may be a Bondfan, yes. But that doesn't make it easier...
OP is forgettable, and DAF, TMWTGG, and AVTAK have one or two memorable moments which are then propped up with variations of the theme song, repeated, in DAF's case especially, ad nauseum.
Of all the non-Barry's, Hamlish is still the only one that nailed it
Sure, Arnold has had more than a fair run, but in CR and QoS there are moments that I think are as good as anything as Barry did (oft-mentioned Night at the Opera, and the way he used the theme song throughout CR).
The examples mentioned are some of Arnold's best, but definitely not up to Barry standards.
He has an extremely rare talent amongst composers for identifying exactly what's appropriate to compliment the images of a particular scene in front of him - ultimately the best composer's true responsibility.
That's his problem, a track that Barry hardly ever fell into. Due to his lack of proficient understanding of music theory, his action tracks are cut up into numerous clichéd brass crescendos and string ostinatos, so his tracks are little divided into segments, each change chosen to coincide with an explosion, car crash, or setpiece segway to the point of boredom and monotony. It's like a formula car chase with the cars having to stop at traffic lights every time something major happens on-screen. That isn't talent, that's just laziness and a lack of imagination.
He's very conscious of what a Bond score is, past and present, and what the fans expect to hear out of one.
He's far too conscious, to the point of restriction. He's got a limited understanding of Barry's Bond sound, or how to set a strong mood, to him it's just wailing brass, lush strings and synth beats. There's much more than that.
He almost simultaneously tries to be too modern and trendy to the point of betraying the Bond sound.
He has an incredible knack for sustaining a narrative with his music.
That doesn't mean anything. It's just equivocal padding.
OP is forgettable, and DAF, TMWTGG, and AVTAK have one or two memorable moments which are then propped up with variations of the theme song, repeated, in DAF's case especially, ad nauseum.
I'd agree to some extent with OP and especially TMWTGG, but DAF and AVTAK IMO are top Barry soundtracks. Maybe not the best, but easily up there with MR, and the various 60s scores. DAF is a sheer pleasure to listen to, unlike the Arnold's scores which need to the the context of the film in order stop you from falling asleep.
That's his problem, a track that Barry hardly ever fell into. Due to his lack of proficient understanding of music theory, his action tracks are cut up into numerous clichéd brass crescendos and string ostinatos, so his tracks are little divided into segments, each change chosen to coincide with an explosion, car crash, or setpiece segway to the point of boredom and monotony. It's like a formula car chase with the cars having to stop at traffic lights every time something major happens on-screen. That isn't talent, that's just laziness and a lack of imagination.
Barry never 'complimented' the picture? That's seriously your anti-Arnold point?
.
The very definition of complimenting an image is to create music that both responds to and supports it (at least that's all I meant). Of course Arnold's (and Barry's) tracks follow structurally what's happening onscreen. That's what I'm saying good action composing is. Highlighting that relationship and providing melodic and rhythmic drive that contributes to the entire sensual experience.
And how could you, personally, have any idea about the level of knowledge David has regarding musical theory? I'd think if he couldn't transpose between keys and understand scales, they likely wouldn't have put him in charge of scoring multiple films with budgets combining to form something near to or over $1 billion.
No proficient knowledge. Come on. At least some have an abundance of pretentious knowledge, it seems.
He's far too conscious, to the point of restriction. He's got a limited understanding of Barry's Bond sound, or how to set a strong mood, to him it's just wailing brass, lush strings and synth beats. There's much more than that.
He almost simultaneously tries to be too modern and trendy to the point of betraying the Bond sound.
You've got to be kidding on this one. Now he's not just 'unproficient' in terms of musical theory, but you want to suggest he's limited in his understanding of Barry's "sound"? What else can he possibly do (aside from producing Shaken & Stirred, and scoring 5 Bond films in the obviously referential yet progressive style) to acquit himself of another subjective load of whooey like that?
He has an incredible knack for sustaining a narrative with his music.
That doesn't mean anything. It's just equivocal padding.
You're just equivocal padding.
And it does mean something. It means that, in conjunction with my earlier point on his ability to compliment the image with the appropriate sound, his music stands alone as narratively driven and interesting to listen to. He tells the story through the score. It's not a REQUISITE for film scores, but it's impressive to me when it's pulled off.
He doesn't drift off into "what would sound pleasant here" or leave the film behind to focus on the music. His score remains tightly connected to the story and the image throughout the duration. He scores everything very specifically. In other blockbuster films you'll often hear the same tracks re-used multiple times (think Spider-Man, or something) almost as if the studio had said "we like that piece, use it again. And again." That rarely seems to happen with Arnold.
It's why I listen to scores repeatedly, long after I've seen the film.
I don't mind to sound harsh with this, but we've got to be realistic in discussing it. Arnold isn't some dullard who just hums out redundant melodies, adds a techno beat, and then tells Nicholas Dodd to orchestrate and conduct it.
Granted, his Brosnan scores weren't as differentiated as Barry's and he does borrow from himself quite often - but it's not like Barry himself didn't have similar trappings (using "007 theme" verbatim as action music, for example). I've never said Arnold was better, but I think he's by far the best alternate choice.
