 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the series has just started its 7th decade, so there's that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bring back the cold war! Remember when WWIII wasn't hanging in the balance? Remember when 007's job was to steal a decoding machine? Remember when a gadget was a metal detector? Remember when the music could be ballsy one minute then sly and seductive the next?
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've always loved the Bonds for giving each film its own unique musical identity, while still tying them all together with the hero's motif.
The approach taken by the SUPERMAN and STAR WARS sequels, and probably INDIANA JONES (I don't remember those sequels) to carry on with one main title, is valid and it works for them, sure. I never stop with the SUPERMAN plays, and just yesterday I was really digging the Charles Gerhardt STAR WARS performances. What's not to like?
But I get a special thrill from a Bond score as it weaves a new yet timeless musical world into existence to define this one adventure. The unique title melody comes in during an action scene, or sweeps in majestically to highlight a picturesque vista, and sometimes it becomes a gentle love theme (AVTAK of all things, gorgeous!!), and you feel like this one story is immersive, this score creates the world of James Bond anew, and it's a great, stylish world just for this film.
Even a lesser film like THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN lives in its own musical universe and gives you a passport to tour the place.
This is why the Bond films don't play like sequels. They come off as self-sufficient, stand-alone works. It's the music.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the series has just started its 7th decade, so there's that.
Amazing it has lasted this long. It is such a product if the cold war era, it already felt passe by the early 70s. IMO.
That's because the Bond series did not remain in it's cold war origins but adapted through the decades while staying true to formula.
The Bond films never really had more than just a loose connection and practically no story arc, so they do indeed not play like sequels but individual works with no particular chronology. But in the age of long stories and story arcs, the Bond movies adapted even there, and the Craig Bonds now actually DO have a story arc and DO play like sequels, even though they can still stand on their own.
That's because Bond is easily reduced to some simple basics (it's basically pulp fiction), about a suave but deadly if necessary super agent with seemingly unlimited expense accounts and beautiful women wherever he goes (even in space!), fighting it out with some cool mastermind villains. That's it. I think Bond will outlive us all here, as that's a very flexible concept that can be adapted anew for each generation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
May 20, 2020 - 7:37 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
OnyaBirri
(Member)
|
Well, the series has just started its 7th decade, so there's that.
Amazing it has lasted this long. It is such a product if the cold war era, it already felt passe by the early 70s. IMO.
That's because the Bond series did not remain in it's cold war origins but adapted through the decades while staying true to formula.
The Bond films never really had more than just a loose connection and practically no story arc, so they do indeed not play like sequels but individual works with no particular chronology. But in the age of long stories and story arcs, the Bond movies adapted even there, and the Craig Bonds now actually DO have a story arc and DO play like sequels, even though they can still stand on their own.
That's because Bond is easily reduced to some simple basics (it's basically pulp fiction), about a suave but deadly if necessary super agent with seemingly unlimited expense accounts and beautiful women wherever he goes (even in space!), fighting it out with some cool mastermind villains. That's it. I think Bond will outlive us all here, as that's a very flexible concept that can be adapted anew for each generation.
To each his own. I check out after Diamonds. The series makes no sense to afterwards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Deep State is a reality.
Welp, I'm out!
|
|
|
|
|
|
To each his own. I check out after Diamonds. The series makes no sense to afterwards.
Same here, although I do enjoy some of the scores for the Moore films (Moonraker!).
Alex
I agree. I really only like the first 7 Bond-films. However I do like all the Barry scores. The last two films (Skyfall/Spectre) are the worst for me.
To each his own indeed. Over the years, I have seen all the Bond movies except for Dr. No (for some reason I have always missed that one). A Bond film is like a casual entertainment for me, I take it if it's there and have fun while watching it. Though I have not collected them on Blu-ray etc.
I enjoyed the Craig Bonds more than most, I like the grittier edge and the "modern" Bond style. Though I like the Connery Bonds for their high camp and 60s flair as well. GOLDFINGER is probably THE Bond classic. But overall the current Bond movies are actually the ones I like the most.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
