The BJMDDS General Discussion Thread......

[The Sweeney]

I think the Adele track shows promise. I'm guessing it will be a huge ballad sounding song, with a big build up to the end, where Adele will sing SKYFAAAAAAALLLLL at the very end of the song, accompanied by sweeping orchestra sounds.

OK, I'm being optimistic here, but I do think from the small sample heard, this could be a good song. Much better than most of the recent Bond songs (not hard, I know).

[Capt. Sir Dominic Flandry]

The Skyfall theme is a rather bland song similar to TWINE and TND. The last three themes were quite radical so Eon have decided to try a more Bondian theme again.

[Mazer Rackham]

Was this snippet official or was it leaked? If it was the latter, then it makes it more likely that it could have been heard prematurely in HMV Guildford.

Naaah....forget that Kris. Just spoke to my mate now and made him listen to it while I was on the phone, and guess what?? It WASN'T the song he heard......

I told him he better get on Twitter now and start apologising......

Well he owned to it lesser men after this kind of attention wouldn't .

[Mazer Rackham]

Much better than most of the recent Bond songs (not hard, I know).

Mate that's fishing in a shallow pond!

Bland and safe is better than the alternatives I suppose.

[James]

The Skyfall theme is a rather bland song similar to TWINE and TND. The last three themes were quite radical so Eon have decided to try a more Bondian theme again.

I think that sums it up. It's pleasant enough if somewhat generic and safe. I think the biggest worry is that Eon continue their new tradition of having Daniel Craig's mug in the title sequence. Ugh.

[Kristatos]

I hate using words like "bland", "generic" and "safe", as those are the words that Craigskis use to describe anything in a Bond film that actually resembles a Bond film. Whereas "bold" and "challenging" means "nothing like Bond/ripped off from Batman or Bourne".

[The Sweeney]

I hate using words like "bland", "generic" and "safe", as those are the words that Craigskis use to describe anything in a Bond film that actually resembles a Bond film. Whereas "bold" and "challenging" means "nothing like Bond/ripped off from Batman or Bourne".

I'm seeing obvious moves by the producers to bring Skyfall back in line with the traditional Bond elements. The only real danger is, this could become like another Brozza flick, which tries to ticks lots of boxes to please as many fans as possible (dark one minute, comedy the next, serious the next, gadgets the next, etc.) and ends up resembling a film similar to TWINE, which I didn't particularly like.

This tune definitely sounds like something from the Brosnan era.

[The Saint 007]

There are people who dislike the fact that certain classic Bond elements are returning. When I see people on the forums making comments about how they're disappointed with things like Q or gadgets returning in Skyfall, it seems to me that a lot of Craig fans really didn't care about Bond to begin with, and only got into the series with the rebooted films.

Quantum Of Solace strayed too far from traditional Bond, which upset many people. So it's obvious that the producers are going to bring back more classic Bond elements in Skyfall. The only trouble is that it will upset the people who prefer the rebooted style Bond films over the classic ones. It's a vicious circle. The rebooted films bring in a new audience, but upset the older audience, with some of them even giving up on the series altogether. So the producers take notice and try to please/win back the older audience by bringing back classic Bond elements, which then upsets the new audience that doesn't care for all those things.

To me, this reboot was pointless, and should have never been done in the first place. The fan base is now split in two because of it, and the producers are going to have a difficult time with trying to keep both the old and the new audience satisfied. But that's what you get when you try to fix something that isn't broken in the first place.

[Dr. No]

I hate using words like "bland", "generic" and "safe", as those are the words that Craigskis use to describe anything in a Bond film that actually resembles a Bond film. Whereas "bold" and "challenging" means "nothing like Bond/ripped off from Batman or Bourne".

I'm seeing obvious moves by the producers to bring Skyfall back in line with the traditional Bond elements. The only real danger is, this could become like another Brozza flick, which tries to ticks lots of boxes to please as many fans as possible (dark one minute, comedy the next, serious the next, gadgets the next, etc.) and ends up resembling a film similar to TWINE, which I didn't particularly like.

This tune definitely sounds like something from the Brosnan era.

If this were a new movie featuring a new Bond with the promise of returning to the old formula I'd be optimistic because the song sounds more like Bond than any in 10 years. It can't help it with the Bond theme interwoven every five bars. I can see where Sweeney sees real hope the producers got it in gear this time. I don't cause it's a Craig's spy movie and it's going to have a strange catch somewhere. Hopefully the Bourne Redundancy is over and they are on to Batman, Mission Impossible, or something better. Maybe this can be considered a win for everyone.

I'm not hopeful we'll see Bond anytime soon, the name but not the man is what it's about now.

[Dr. No]

There are people who dislike the fact that certain classic Bond elements are returning. When I see people on the forums making comments about how they're disappointed with things like Q or gadgets returning in Skyfall, it seems to me that a lot of Craig fans really didn't care about Bond to begin with, and only got into the series with the rebooted films.

Quantum Of Solace strayed too far from traditional Bond, which upset many people. So it's obvious that the producers are going to bring back more classic Bond elements in Skyfall. The only trouble is that it will upset the people who prefer the rebooted style Bond films over the classic ones. It's a vicious circle. The rebooted films bring in a new audience, but upset the older audience, with some of them even giving up on the series altogether. So the producers take notice and try to please/win back the older audience by bringing back classic Bond elements, which then upsets the new audience that doesn't care for all those things.

To me, this reboot was pointless, and should have never been done in the first place. The fan base is now split in two because of it, and the producers are going to have a difficult time with trying to keep both the old and the new audience satisfied. But that's what you get when you try to fix something that isn't broken in the first place.

Well said!!

[Greg Haugen]

Who cares what the song is like if Craig is in the film.

[bjmdds]

Exactly Greg, not Cr-egg Bond songs have ZERO to do with the film. They are add ons for publicity. If DC remains, who cares if Beethoven would write it "The aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks brought a change of tone. Craig's Bond, who made his debut in "Casino Royale" in 2006, is a darker, tougher spy who harkens back to Fleming's original, restoring sadism and self-loathing to Bond's emotional arsenal. Although the Broccoli family won't comment, media reports say Craig has committed to two more films after "Skyfall," with Bond 24 due for release in 2014 or 2015 — that is, if 007 continues to cheat death."

[FormerBondFan]

Who cares what the song is like if Craig is in the film.

I hope the song doesn't get any attention (as in NO nominations) from the American movie awards. Otherwise, send in the weirdos as Bond when DC retires.

[Blowfeld]

Who cares what the song is like if Craig is in the film.

I hope the song doesn't get any attention (as in NO nominations) from the American movie awards. Otherwise, send in the weirdos as Bond when DC retires.

Honestly even if it does it will not change a thing. I know what you're saying and why, honestly I admire your unwavering dedication. I simply do not think we should invest too much of our well-being in outcomes we have no control over.

The Jedi will return until then we have to wait our turn in the meantime we'll weather the oncoming storm together. Besides how could it get any weirder than Daniel Craig.

[FormerBondFan]

Honestly even if it does it will not change a thing.

What I'm saying is if DC's Bond can get nominations from big American movie awards whether it's for Best Song or anything in the technical category, why not Bond films starring Carrot Top, Blue Man Group, Lucky Diamond Rich or some other weirdo as Bond?

Besides how could it get any weirder than Daniel Craig.

Carrot Top, Blue Man Group, Lucky Diamond Rich, you name them. If this is too over-the-top, then we'll go for Vinnie Jones as Bond.

[Kristatos]

Honestly even if it does it will not change a thing. I know what you're saying and why, honestly I admire your unwavering dedication. I simply do not think we should invest too much of our well-being in outcomes we have no control over.

What Blowfeld said. You can withold your own money so as not to improve Skyfall's box office performance, but beyond that, there's very little you can do about it, other than defending the classic Bond films where you can. Even then, there is a saying - I forget the exact words, but it goes something like "don't turn up the volume, get better arguments". If a lot of people think that Daniel Craig is the best Bond ever, you are unlikely to change their minds by screaming about zombies and Death Stars and viruses, and posting endless streams of hideous pictures. We need to be able to defend the first 20 Bond films through force of argument, against those who claim that CR rendered them redundant. Consensuses can change over time, if a good argument is repeated often enough.

I'll give you an example. It used to be the received wisdom that John Lennon was the real talent in The Beatles, and that Paul McCartney was just a hanger-on who dragged them towards middle-of-the-road light entertainment. About 10 years ago, articles started to appear in the press defending McCartney, showing that he was every bit as clever and artisitic as Lennon, but less obtrusively so, so that he didn't get the full credit for his musical innovations. Now, this version of events seems to be the consensus among Beatles fans. So the pendulum can swing if good quality arguments in defence of the Classic Bond series in general, and Brosnan in particular, since he seems to be the whipping-boy for the Classic series' detractors.

[The Sweeney]

There are people who dislike the fact that certain classic Bond elements are returning. When I see people on the forums making comments about how they're disappointed with things like Q or gadgets returning in Skyfall, it seems to me that a lot of Craig fans really didn't care about Bond to begin with, and only got into the series with the rebooted films.

Quantum Of Solace strayed too far from traditional Bond, which upset many people. So it's obvious that the producers are going to bring back more classic Bond elements in Skyfall. The only trouble is that it will upset the people who prefer the rebooted style Bond films over the classic ones. It's a vicious circle. The rebooted films bring in a new audience, but upset the older audience, with some of them even giving up on the series altogether. So the producers take notice and try to please/win back the older audience by bringing back classic Bond elements, which then upsets the new audience that doesn't care for all those things.

To me, this reboot was pointless, and should have never been done in the first place. The fan base is now split in two because of it, and the producers are going to have a difficult time with trying to keep both the old and the new audience satisfied. But that's what you get when you try to fix something that isn't broken in the first place.

There should be a decent compromise, a middle ground. OHMSS, FRWL and LTK had very few of the traditional Bond elements, replaced with a more serious tone, yet still retained enough to keep traditional Bond fans happy (moreso with OHMSS and FRWL, less with LTK, I know). If Skyfall manages to mix that kind of blend, I'd be happy, but I fear it will be more of the Brosnan type, which for me didn't work as Bond movies.

[Kristatos]

John Glen interviewed by Den of Geek. Fairly predictable (everything was wonderful and Skyfall is going to be fabulous), but there' some interesting behind the scenes stuff there.

[The Saint 007]

There are people who dislike the fact that certain classic Bond elements are returning. When I see people on the forums making comments about how they're disappointed with things like Q or gadgets returning in Skyfall, it seems to me that a lot of Craig fans really didn't care about Bond to begin with, and only got into the series with the rebooted films.

Quantum Of Solace strayed too far from traditional Bond, which upset many people. So it's obvious that the producers are going to bring back more classic Bond elements in Skyfall. The only trouble is that it will upset the people who prefer the rebooted style Bond films over the classic ones. It's a vicious circle. The rebooted films bring in a new audience, but upset the older audience, with some of them even giving up on the series altogether. So the producers take notice and try to please/win back the older audience by bringing back classic Bond elements, which then upsets the new audience that doesn't care for all those things.

To me, this reboot was pointless, and should have never been done in the first place. The fan base is now split in two because of it, and the producers are going to have a difficult time with trying to keep both the old and the new audience satisfied. But that's what you get when you try to fix something that isn't broken in the first place.

There should be a decent compromise, a middle ground. OHMSS, FRWL and LTK had very few of the traditional Bond elements, replaced with a more serious tone, yet still retained enough to keep traditional Bond fans happy (moreso with OHMSS and FRWL, less with LTK, I know). If Skyfall manages to mix that kind of blend, I'd be happy, but I fear it will be more of the Brosnan type, which for me didn't work as Bond movies.

I personally thought that GoldenEye was the last really balanced Bond film, but everyone will have their own opinion on that. It's difficult to please everyone, understandably. The goal is to try to keep as many of your old audience happy, while trying to gain new ones, which I thought GoldenEye did a pretty good job of. The problem with the rebooted films, as I've mentioned, is that they've brought in a different type of audience, ones who really didn't care much for James Bond before the reboot. Now I'm not saying they're all like that, but there is a great number of Craig fans who don't care much for the older Bond films, which is why they'll express their disappointment about how classic Bond elements are returning in Skyfall.

Now that the fan base is spilt into two groups, the producers are going to be in real mess with trying to please both the old and new audience. My biggest fear is that the elements of classic and rebooted Bond will get mixed together in a way that could result in a bizarrely mutated Bond film, which will therefore upset both audiences. Once again, this is why you shouldn't fix something that isn't broken.

[shaken not stirred]

Just heard skyfall theme, whilst it has a pretty good build up, I think it lost it at the main chorus, even if I'm not a fan of adele and she's trying here the main chorus when she says skyfall just sounds really flat and uninspired to Me, there's no real impact to it, unlike when shirley bassey sang gold finger, from russia with love, tina turner goldeneye and even garbage the world is not enough, this just doesn't have the same strong influence imo, it's definetly trying to be a classic bond song but it just doesn't work that well imo, it's a hell of a lot better then quarks song and casino royales song and it's on the right track in that respect but it just feels pretty flat and lifeless imo & I'm not just saying that because I hate creggs bond I just think the song was rushed and the chorus really needs to be worked on better for it to have a much better impact imo especially if you want to make it a memorable bond theme.

The theme's just too bleak for Me, no different to the bond films today, live and let die had some of this but it also had energy and built up for a great main chorus after saying live and let die, the bond tracks imo shouldn't be a depressing affair throughout, sf theme's almost on par with a radiohead song ie it doesn't make Me happy it just makes Me even more miserable.

Sorry sweeney and to anyone else who loves the theme but it feels like it was rushed for the most part & with all thngs if you want something great you need to take your time, this almost feels last minute to Me, instead of something that should've been done way back in October or earlier last year.