Music in film: The Master and Skyfall

Feature Ivan Radford 14 Nov 2012 - 09:35

As two of the year’s biggest films hit cinema screens, Ivan examines the soundtracks to The Master and Skyfall…

How do you sum up a nation in a single piece of music? Jonny Greenwood did an excellent job of it in There Will Be Blood, composing a sparse country of unease, greed and determination. The Master conjures up that same sense of unease – and then plays with it like a puppet.

"America," screams the opening chord, a happy few seconds of harmony and belief. Then, something happens. Other notes come creeping out, violins and flutes clashing and questioning that powerful chord. The confidence gives way to uncertainty and the orchestra falls to pieces. It’s like the whole of the US tuning up before the main show. And there you have it: the sound of post-war America encapsulated in about 30 seconds.

That’s the kind of scale you can expect from Jonny Greenwood’s score. A perfect match for Paul Thomas Anderson, the two writers have an eerie knack for epic, sprawling and ambitious compositions. And while the movie itself may leave some viewers frustrated, or even bored, the music’s ambition pays off in dividends.

Combining Greenwood’s traditional discord with America’s familiar standards, The Master’s score is a graceful balance of nostalgia and confusion. And it sure knows how to pick ‘em. Slap Ella Fitzgerald on any soundtrack and you instantly evoke of a bygone era, but The Master is about the lyrics as well as the tunes; the words of Get Thee Behind Me Satan carry the kind of subtle meaning usually reserved for the end credits of Mad Men.

A few tracks later, we hear Freddy (Joaquin Phoenix)’s old flame, Doris, singing Don’t Sit Under the Apple Tree, an a capella number that moves from strong to vulnerable as her wavering voice is undercut, then swamped, by flutes singing their own repeating riff; in the film, that scene is distorted by The Master (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) humming over the top, seeping into Freddy’s memories. Here, Greenwood exacts the same undermining effect. The flutes play the same three chromatic notes over and over, never going anywhere. That intrusive loop bleeds into the next track, Atomic Healer, only to be followed by a second flute, which adds its own pattern. They go at it for 83 seconds, a bewildering din that sounds like Ron Burgundy after one too many scotches. By the end, your ears have no idea what’s going on, but it’s creepy as heck.

It’s a superb demonstration of Greenwood’s use of rhythm and isolated instruments to unsettle a listener. But the Radiohead guitarist, like the recovering 1950s America, is only just tuning up. The main show? A track called Able-Bodied Seamen (a direct quote from Freddy). On-beat chords drive the tune forwards, a low fifth that leaves a gap for Greenwood to slowly fill in.

Offbeat wood blocks directly challenge that first rhythm, a manual metronome that fits Freddy’s practical description of himself. But then everything switches. On-beat becomes offbeat. Quavers become semi-quavers. Pairs become triplets. You start trying to count the notes, to find the pattern, but it never stays the same. All the while, wild clarinets distract you, fluttering around your head so you only have that spiraling bass riff to cling onto.

It may look like the secret of The Master’s control stems directly from his impressive moustache, but the music is where the real hypnosis happens. And Greenwood keeps that hypnotic tone going all through the album. Tracks such as Alethia seduce you with its rising and falling organ motif, and that unsettling opening chord comes back to haunt you several times.

The whole album is a bizarre collection of wrong notes that might take some getting used to, but the sound of The Master is enthralling, impressive stuff. Greenwood has the reach and scope to capture an entire country adrift, but the strength comes from its narrow, psychological focus; the noise of one man’s stranded mind as The Master takes it apart bit by bit to see what makes it tick, then puts it back together again in a different order.

There Will Be Blood’s score raised eyebrows when it didn't get an Oscar nod back in 2008 because it reused other bits of music. The Master’s musical powers of persuasion could see it win the whole contest. Just make sure you never listen to it while operating heavy machinery.

Skyfall

By the time the world has stopped singing about Adele's apple crumble, the new Bond score has already been and gone - a fleeting effort with little to make it stick in the mind. Not even a hot pudding. It's a tough job to write the 23rd Bond score. With 22 before you, where's left to go? To his credit, Thomas Newman comes up with an answer. It's just not always a good one.

The whole album's tone is set from the first few bars of the opening number, Grand Bazaar, Istanbul: a brassy chord, full of 007 promise, which then splutters into a load of electric guitar. A taste of Bond, shaken, not stirred, into something else entirely.

From then on, it’s mostly a digital show. Synths push the tracks along, while guitars carry the tune instead of the orchestra. It's the kind of electronic-heavy composition that brings to mind two ominous words: Eric Serra. Fortunately, Sam Mendes' regular collaborator brings more depth to his score than GoldenEye’s disappointing effort.

Grand Bazaar wins points for its native percussion, which keeps the Bond flavour alive, but while it captures the geographical vibe well enough, where’s the tune? Compared to African Rundown, David Arnold’s opening to Casino Royale, it’s surprising how unmemorable this is. The brass section finally turns up near the end, introducing the 007 theme, but the rhythm always seems to take priority over the melody – a trend that continues for a lot of the film.

When Newman was announced as the Skyfall composer, it was obvious that the man behind American Beauty could handle the quieter moments. Tracks such as Voluntary Retirement have gorgeous long phrases, as French Horns hover on the peak of Bond’s iconic three-note riff before uneasily stepping down a semitone. But even that’s over swiftly: one minute in and the electronic instruments arrive again, turning everything into a world of tuned percussion and guitars.

The sound works well enough, particularly on New Digs, which suits the technology theme of the film’s plot; you could listen to that going into work in the morning and feel just like Tanner at MI5. The question is whether that’s what you want from a Bond score. Should it be a John Barry fest, symphonic and tuneful, or should it be something else?

Thomas Newman certainly manages the something else. Heavily building on his work on The Debt, his plucking riffs and dynamic pacing are solid complements to Skyfall’s action. Shanghai Drive’s distorted loops are atmospheric, repeating Voluntary Retirement’s two-chord shift, but it doesn’t feel like 007, or even that distinctive. Jellyfish and Silhouette almost border on Hans Zimmer with their furious low arpeggios, loud timpani, and trumpets jumping minor thirds. But just as things start to become bland, the score gives way to a pretty spell of piano – this is where Newman finally shines through.

That’s the irritating thing about Skyfall. Despite the score’s inconsistencies, there are parts where Newman nails the balance between his own voice and the franchise, delivering on the promise shown in WALL-E’s Rogue Robots or Lemony Snicket’s Hurricane Herman. Day Wasted gives Monty Norman's chord sequence a modern spin, reverberating it round a guitar. Someone Usually Dies lends it a quavering tremor we haven’t heard before. The Bloody Shot (the opening’s other, better, track) boldly holds on one note for 10 seconds as trumpets pile on top of each other in a brilliant crescendo. Brave New World and Severine even offer a brief taste of romance, giving moments to both the harp and the cellos.

All those flourishes come together on Komodo Dragon, the most Bondy track on the album. As Daniel Craig sails into a Shanghai casino, Newman adds swooning strings, brooding brass and a splash of the 007 theme. But what really makes the track work is the way it incorporates an inverted version of Adele’s tune. What Bond scores have always done well is integrate the title song into the mix. Skyfall does it rarely.

The titular 23rd track on the album, where you might expect it most of all, conveys all the loneliness of the Scottish highlands, but seems to have no connection with the rest of the soundtrack at all. That lack of a consistent theme only adds to the jarring atmosphere; those two repeated chords from Voluntary Retirement come back again and again, but it’s not quite enough to hold the score together.

The result is an uneven album that, like the film, is bold enough to take Bond in a new direction. The frustrating thing is that for half of the time, it manages it beautifully. The other half risks becoming forgettable corridor-walking music. And whether you want your 007 music to sound like Barry or not, that’s a slight shame.

As reports circulate of John Logan and Daniel Craig both jumping on board the next 007 outing, it leaves you with one question: who should get the Bond baton next? Newman again? Alexandre Desplat? Alberto Iglesias?

Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook chum here.

Disqus - noscript

**************SPOILERS!!! DONT READ IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN SKYFALL YET OK??? I WARNED YOU!! ***************************
You know what? I watched Skyfall last night. And I was bored stupid. I expect to get flamed for this post but hear me out. The film was very dull and did not feel like a Bond film should for the following reasons. The opening was great motorbikes, action, trains, diggers and so on. But that was the most exciting part of the whole film! It was obvious by the end of the movie that they had spent the whole budget on this one part. The rest of the film felt like a BBC1 Friday night spooks meets Bourne Identity drama. DRAMA! It felt like a drama and not a Bond film. Nothing much happens for ages. And when it does its over in a flash. Did anyone else not notice that they had lifted huge sections of the plot from The World is not Enough? MI6 gets blown up, Bond is hurt at the start and has to get fit again and get back out there. Bond girls...nothing much there either. Eve was good, that was ok, helping Bond out etc at the start and in the casino, but then nothing else. I could not even tell you what the other girl was called. The vilain...ah the vilain. What the HELL? A creepy, gay, freak weirdo who looks like a cross between Buffalo Bill from Silence of the Lambs and that weird villain from No Country for Old Men. And what does he want to do? Take over the world? Steal some Gold? Steal anything? No...he wants to kill M. Q was good. But the whole bit on the Tube and all the stuff in London, you could tell they had no money for anything, so it was all done on the cheap, thats one of the reasons why it looked like a BBC Drama and not a Bond film. Then we get to the ending....It was Home Alone. It was...people have said that before, and after all that trouble and setting traps etc, in order to save M, she still gets killed. DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! And there was no reason for it other than to try to add dramatic impact and because Judy Dench is retiring. There was so many things wrong with this film I could not list them all. The Scotland section, its wet, rainy foggy, no snow. And yet the lake they go on is frozen enough to walk on? With no snow on the grass around it? No frost anywhere else? The grass around the lake would be white with frost if it was cold enough to freeze the lake like that for Gods sake! I know its only a Bond film, I know its far fetched, but if they are going for gritty realism as in this film, why overlook something that obvious!!!???? The music...GRahhhhhhh!!! Utter utter UTTER tripe. Bum , bum bum bum bum bumbbbbb boooom bom bom bom boom boom boom. Then in the middle of it, the odd hint of James Bonds theme. occasionally..about twice I think in two hours! It sounds like the music from Batman / Dark Knight. The only bit that made me smile was the Aston Martin, and then out comes the proper Bond music....YEAHHHHHH!!!!! But thats over in a moment or two and just reinforces whats missing! The ending with the new M, the office and Moneypenny was great...back on the money and that felt like James Bond, but so much of it did not it was a wrench. Was I watching a Bond film, or Jason Bourne with some characters called James Bond and M???? I just cant understand why everyone is raving about this film!!! Is it because they are so glad to see it back after so long they will accept anything at all even if its dull, slow, and plodding? Daniel Craigs face is looking more and more like a crumpled Yorkshire pudding with ice blue eyes, he carries that action stuff well, but lacks all the charm of Pierce Brosnan and even Roger Moore. I am old, old fashioned and out of touch. I am sorry if I am upsetting people but I had to vent! I wanted Blofeld style villains, epic schemes, glamourous locations, cars, guns, more chases and action and a big set piece at the end, and not a tour round Londons underground, and Home Alone in Scotland. But thats just me. I know some early reviews from America are describing the film as "gloomy" amongst other things. I agree it is gloomy. Not glam. If they are going to bang another one of these out in a couple of years I hope they get some money to spend on it and go to some exciting places in the world for some fun adventures. I just kept thinking about the glamours locations in For your Eyes Only, Moonraker, You only live Twice etc.....good old Roger Moore jet boating up a jungle river and fighting Jaws and boats with mine launchers and a hang glider in the roof that he uses to fly off the top of the waterfall...that was FUN!!!!! Skyfall was not. Sorry if I have upset anyone ok? I love James Bond, and I have the box set blu ray collection of all the films. I suppose I will have to go back and watch some again!

Not going to flame you for your opinion. You didn't like it and that is fair enough but you are incorrect about the allocation of the budget.

A quick look at various bits of the promotional material that has been shown in preparation for the release of Skyfall showed that a sizeable chunk of the budget actually went on the chase through the London underground (and the tube train crash), the casino, Silva's Island and the destruction of the house in Scotland (lots of model work, pyrotechnics etc). The motorbike chase and the fight on the roof of the train in the intro were pretty cheaply made in comparison (almost all real stunts, captured in a minimal number of takes, sparse use of CGI - in fact all the bike stunts were real and only a small amount of the train stuff was CG - Daniel Craig even did several of his own stunts).

You criticise the lake scene but I have spent a lot of time in the Highlands of Scotland and can tell you it was actually very accurate. Around Glencoe, where a lot of it was filmed, we often had bodies of water freeze thick enough to walk (or skate) on without any snow appearing quite frequently when the temperature dropped rapidly to around -15c or less. Snow only really comes when there is an increase in temperature and then a settling at around 0c. In fact - when the snow appears the ice thins and you can't go out on it any more (although they do tell use to stay off them even when thicker, for obvious reasons). One warning sign that the ice may be too thin was the appearance of snow. It can (and has) snow in colder conditions but it is very rare in these parts - much more likely to do it closer to the sea or over a heavily populated area where the temperature differentials are greater. Also - frost only forms when air temperature, humidity, the dew point, the constancy of barometric pressure and even the elevation above sea level meet a specific set of requirements all at the same time - and in the Highlands these are normally met at around dawn rather then the early evening when the lake scene was set. Once again, it's not impossible, but very unlikely in this region. It's fairly basic meteorology and the film got it dead right.

So I understand that you did not like the film and that is fine but do not criticise it for getting it's science wrong just because it does not conform to how you think things should work.

I agree that the music was not great. A shame David Arnold was not invited back again because his Bond scores have been amazing.

Spoilers. DAVROS01 I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU, EVERY SINGLE WORD. You are not out of touch, you are a Bond fan. We were promised a celebration of 50 years of our hero, and some f@cker decides to make a Bourne drama. Then an American composer completely irradicates any trace of Britishness or Bond or grand spectacle, and we are left with a poor imitation of Bond. The worst thing is that because it's set before Connery's Bond, they think they have a license to experiment with anything they can think of, to get another 10 years out of the franchise.
The score is beautiful, but it's not a Bond score. Most definitely not. I like it, but it's not Bond, it's just modern thriller music, with a lot of filler. They didn't need to include half the tracks on the CD, just an extended suite of Severine/Brave New World would be worth the money alone! I like Adrenaline, Voluntary retirement, and The Bloody Sho. However, Grand Bizarre is just disappointing, as is the climax battle music.
You're absolutely right about the budget, they only cobbled together £150 million, don't you dare tell me all of that went on the film either. £10 million to the director, Craig, Dench and Fiennes. £5m to Newman. £40million on promotion. £10 million cast and crew, transport. £70 odd on set design at pinewood, the house in scotland. Which was utter rubbish, should of been a castle!
This was filmed on the cheap. It was filmed lovely, but there's nothing to look at. The finale was just awful, completely wrong tone. It was indulgent, reflective, boring. Some thugs turn up and blow your house up, you run into the chapel, your boss gets killed, you go back to work and expect everyone to turn out for the next film in two years if we can be bothered by then.
I'm not interested in his feelings on the job, if he doesn't like it he can quit. What would of been worth it was going the whole way and having complete backstories for Silva and Bond, and M. A dark knight interrogation scene would of been intriguing.
Instead we get some mild pouting from Bond, a grumpy M as her comfy chair is blown up, and a mildy amused Silva. Why wasn't he more terrifying? Sod the gay weirdo, go all Joker on us please! You've ripped off Batman a lot so far, just commit to it and finish the job!
The world is not enough is probably Pierce's best. It was close to home, relevant, but exciting and globe trotting as well. M was put in jeopardy, and you knew Robert Carlyle meant business. He is utterly convincing and sympathetic too.
This film is a post modernist virginia woolf conversion, Ian Fleming would be beside himself! You fools! Where's the fun?! I would of killed him off long ago! mwhahahaha!
Please, please, bring back Arnold. Bring back Quantum (itself a terribly muddled film with lots of adrenaline and no place to go). A modern day spectre, its cultrally relevant as it taps into our distrust of politicians and tycoons. Reinvent Blofield for the modern age, like Q has successfully been translated in SkyFail, and we have an interesting villain. Drag out the plot over two films, kill off Bond ala You Only Live Twice style, and then put him back in the box for ten years until somebody buys the rights, and has a good vision for him. He needs a fallow period now, I've had enough of being disappointed. I just wish that I was born in Bond's golden age, fun every 2 years!
It's just a film at the end of the day, unfortunately SkyFail isn't the sum of its parts.

There
wasn't a fight with the baddie at the end, there should have been a
more emotional reason for going to the lodge - I'm all for Bond
resolving his childhood
nightmare by burning it down (even if it was poor Albert Finney's home)
but his near-death at the beginning should have made him re-evaluate
his existence and face his past, thus returning to the lodge, instead of
just using the place as a bolt-hole. That whole last reel has been seen
in other films like 'Witness', 'Firewall', 'Shooter', 'Safe House' and
even 'Home Alone'. There was a little too much exposition in the
dialogue (we know the agents' covers being blown puts them in danger
without M saying so); the 'girl' wasn't delineated well enough and I
can't even remember where she went; Bond got captured and escaped too
easily somewhere in the middle section; the Eve shaving him scene was
boring and could have been cut; and despite indications to the contrary
humour still isn't prevalent. When he was dangling that guy off the
building he should have said, "He was a hanger-on." And when Bond was
exercising while being debrief by Tanner - who I'm glad we've kept -
Bond should have conveyed his annoyance. But I liked Q - although why
they met in a gallery I have no idea, presumably to make it a little
different - and the tube scene and the court scene were amazing and I
liked how the latter made it clear where the hitherto ambiguous
Mallory's allegiances lay. I also liked how Bond wasn't acting at full
capacity - it added tension as it indicated that he could easily fail.

THANK YOU!!!! So it was not just me thinking a lot of it was off!!! My faith in humanity is restored! I think the last time I was this disapointed in a film was when I first saw Jurrassic Park. If they spent £150 million on this, they were robbed!

I had no clue about the budget. To me it just looked cheap, all of it, and like some gritty drama. As for the iced up lake...I still dont know despite what you said. I have been around iced up lakes and rivers and there is always usually some evidence on the bank / grass etc, anyway not to worry about that, as I am just glad I was not the only one to dislike the film. Do you think everyone went to see it , fell for the hype etc, and then came out afterwards disaponted like I was? I wonder how many people are going back to see it again...Even my wife said it was dull and less "show off" than the other films. I just cant get into Daniel Craig as Bond either, and I have tried to like him, I really have. I dont hate him as an actor, and I have liked him in everything else I have seen him in, especially the girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Its just he does not feel like Bond, or look like I think he should look. Its so shallow of me I know. If he looked like Pierce Brosnan, or Roger Moore or Connery even a bit, in some way....I just suppose I always expect him to have dark hair. Stupid but there you are!

Yes..the ending was so flat. And despite everything he did and what happened M still dies, so it was all for nothing and a downer. I want to see the badies base blown up, not some cottage in the middle of nowhere. The whole film feels like its looking for something that it cant find and its a string of loose set pieces and scenes strung together with not a lot else. Its not as if the set pieces were that good either.The shaving scene was boring! Totally...I was really getting fed up by this point. The court scene was tense, but dull too. I mean its a Bond film for Gods sake, not Rumpole of the Baily!!! I just wish they had never bothered with it. The whole film, because its obvious they have run out of ideas and trying to do it on the cheap and filming it mostly in the UK was a bad idea. When I heard thats what they were doing because of budget cuts and lack of money I knew it would turn out badly. What I dont get is why everyone and the media etc are raving about it, and how its making so much money as its just a bad film. I only hope they will take all that money and put it into making a good Bond film next time, or at least one that feels like Bond, with proper music, girls, gadgets, fun and action and not something that looks like a by the numbers BBC Spooks style drama. After sitting through this one I dont have a lot of hope that they will though. I should have asked for my money back I was that angry when I came out. Its not even like I go to the cinema that often anymore either, and this just felt like a slap in the face. I wish I had saved my cash for the Hobbit. I hope thats not a crushing disapointment too, because after Prometheus and James Bored I am about ready to give up! Heheh.

The weather thing is not the case everywhere that lakes freeze - it's just certain places, the Highlands being one, where the water can freeze suddenly with very little snow or frost.

I prefer this Bond to Brosnan's to be honest. I liked Brosnan at the time but, having rewatched the lot, he seems a bit weak by comparison to the rest. The closest portrayals to the book version of Bond are Connery, Dalton and Craig. I would have liked to see Dalton go on into the 90s - shame he was dropped.

I dont think he was dropped. Dalton I mean. The whole thing was bogged down in who had the rights to make it again, and it was dragging on in the courts. Dalton kept asking what was going on, and no one could tell him, so after a couple of years of this, he quit to go and do other things, because he was fed up with waiting. It took them until 1995 almost to sort it out and thats when we got Brosnan. I still dont get the Craig thing though. Living Daylights was better than Skyfall, Goldeneye was better than Skyfall, World is not Enough is better than Skyfall etc etc.. I am right in the middle of watching them all again from the start and have just got through Dalton and started the Brosnan era, and even the worst of the Roger Moore films feel like James Bond, rather than Skyfail. I loved Connery as Bond, but I have only tried reading a few of the books and was bored silly, because I grew up watching Moore as Bond on Tv at Christmas etc, I suppose thats what I sort of expect from Bond. Happy days...I am now at the stage where I cant wait for Craig to leave. I am not going to bother with the next one, after the stupid reviews heaped so much praise on Skyfail I am not prepared to give him another go. I will wait until the next Bond turns up on Tv in about 2020 or something and I will watch it if it happens to be on in the room I am in at Christmas or something! Its a sad day when you give up on Bond because of the actor isnt it? I just hope they get someone I like next time, or at least someone who looks like the traditional "film" version of Bond and they bring back the glamour, spectacle and fun aspects.

I have to admit I have a soft spot for Moore having grown up in the 70s and 80s. I do always wonder what the series would be like now had Brosnan been able to accept the offer to take over as Bond from A View To A Kill onwards instead of having to wait until he had gotten out of his Remmington Steele contract.

I know...its such a shame that he could not take over when he was just a little bit younger. Having seen the Craig films I just wish they had kept him on for one more slightly less over the top Bond. I love Roger Moore. Moonraker was the very first Bond film I saw in the cinema. I just thought it was great fun. Jaws was an absolute scream in it. I was so glad he was happy and survived at the end. Where is the Jaws type baddie in the Craig films? Nowhere. No Bloefelds, no Big black Zulu warriors with bionic arms...heheheh. The Spy Who Loved Me had it all, great baddies, pretty locations, pretty girls, groovy car, smooth old Roger Moore with his "can you play any other tunes?" quips....Sigh...God Skfall was CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It was just so dull, depressing and boring. I want to come out of a Bond film punching the air, and going "Meeeseeer Bonnnndddddddddd....." and dreaming of Fiji or somewhere. I dont want to come out and be miserable, bored and depressed and wanting my money back, after seeing reviews that make it sound like the second coming. I have never seen much Remmington Steele...was it any good? If it was I might get some to watch. Anything is better than Skyfall....I think tonight I will watch either Moonraker, Spy who loved Me or For your Eyes Only again.....just to try to get rid of the boring horror of Skyfall from my mind....

What did you think of Quantum of Solace? I was more angry at that film than this oddly enough - it completely dropped the ball Casino Royale had successfully brought back to the playing field. Bond should be feel good entertainment. By all means put the whole cast through the wringer, but have a good ending! And possibly have something to say about the world while you do it...

What did I think? Heheh you really want to know? Well I did not like it much at all. Everyone hyped Casino Royale and I was pretty bored by that, most of it was just playing cards for Gods sake..all the tension etc fair enough and the fact it was a reboot and the first one, so I gave them the benefit of the doubt. And I hoped the next one would be better.

Then we got Quantum of Solace, which was just as bad if not worse. Is that the one with the free running section in it? I cant remember now as they all just blur together into one massive boring crapfest in my mind. Anyway if it had the free running bit in it with the crane etc, that was about the only bit of all three films that felt slightly like Bond of old to me. Then there was all the fire and explosions out in the desert...that was ok, at least it was a slightly exotic location. By the time Skyfall came along D Craig just looked tired and bored. And old and haggard and weird looking. Then there was all the hype about how great it was supposed to be. No sorry. I did not like any of them much. I gave Casino a chance because it was the first new one. I was not impressed with Quantum and Skyfall was utter crap that did not in any way deserve all the hype, praise and love it got. And because of that hype etc, we will just get another one similar next time.

So I am finished with Bond now until the recast it and re boot it again and get back to the sense of fun , action, adventure and glamour that the 60s and 70s films had in spades. I want something for Bond along the lines of Goldeneye. And not Skyfall.
Until that happens I am just going to stick with my Bluray collection of the classic "proper" James Bonds.

unfortunately, I do agree with you. craig's films are for a new audience i feel. goldeneye for me is just perfect - the blend of old and new. action, romance, credible yet bold plot, exotic locales, charming fun lead. the budget was bigger too! or at least everything was cheaper in 1995...

Sponsored Links