How long do the pros get to score?

[Jaibulu]

I was wondering how long do the professional composers in film get to compose the music on the average for a feature film? What are steps that they go through from beginning to the end to the complete the music.

[artsoundz]

Great question! I would like to add one or two of my own along those lines.
What is the arranging process like? I've often thought the arrangers's job to be just as important and powerful as the composer. What is the process? Are themes scored simply by the composer and sent to the arranger?I know that's sound so simplistic but any thoughts on that whole process would be great. Also, if it isn't taboo or PC what are some budgets like and how is the money used for the project? Do you guys make any dough? : )
Thanks in advance. Kevin

[Mike Greene]

Big name guys on major movies will get mid to high six figures per film. They don't even have to pay for the orchestra, the studio pays for that. But they do have their own staff expenses (programmers, etc) to deal with.

Small time guys get anywhere from $0 to $20k or so. I'll guess most guys on this board get around $10k/film.

Time can be anywhere from two or three weeks to several months, regardless of budget.

Most big names and a lot of smaller guys (myself included, but I'm strictly TV) have assistants handling orchestrations, programming and even ghostwriting. Unless you've got a lot of time, it's just not possible to pull off a no-excuses score without a support staff.

Ghostwriting in particular is way more common than you may think. Many of today's name composers did ghostwriting for other composers.

- Mike Greene

[Jaibulu]

what do you mean ghostwriting? I don't speak that kind of jive.

[Mike Greene]

Ghostwriting means the named composer (the guy who gets the credit) is really busy, so he hires someone else to compose some of the music for him. That way, the actual composer has a little more time to spend on the important themes and scenes.

Most of the time, the ghostwriter gets no credit for his efforts, but he does get paid. I'll confess to hiring ghostwriters on a few occassions. It's often a necessary evil with deadlines.

- Mike Greene

[artsoundz]

Jaibulu- Ghostwriting I believe is simply writing music for someone and the composer who hired the ghoster puts their name on it. ghost writing is most often done in literature. like the bible. political speeches.

Thanks, Mike for the response on the money angle. It sounds like my world-just get what you can. How about Jaibulu's question- typical time given for a typical feature? Thanks so much.

[Mike Greene]

I've heard of time periods as short as two weeks. That would be VERY short. A few months is a bit of a luxury. The average amount of time is around a month.

On a big feature, the last few days will be spent recording the orchestra, so subtract that from the number of days to compose.

- Mike Greene

[Houston Haynes]

Honestly, the bit that I've seen (as a guy picking up "feature film table scraps" - bumpers, small cues, etc) the calendar constraints vary with the project. By the time I get a call the primary composer is usually in some form of scheduling bind. However, I'm doing sound design and score for an indie feature, and have the luxury of several months lead time because my wife was the screenwriter and I've worked with the director before. That means that I can start doing the sound map based on the script, and will start with themes and such as soon as I get a chance. I'm also talking with a producer about scoring a slate of films for him, one of which is (again) a script written by my wife.

So, if you want more time - marry a good screenwriter. ;)

One other quick note - I don't do ghostwriting, I only write for credit. If I can't be credited on the crawl (i.e. in the production) I at least get the credit on the cue sheet. If neither of those things are an option, I'll take a pass and let someone else work for free (with little chance of advancing).

As far as pay rates go - I tend to massage it according to budget constraints on the project and my desire to work on it and/or work with the others involved. Sometimes it's worth "deferred" payment (i.e. probably never going to see a cent of money, but perhaps it's worth it anyway due to good exposure/exprience/professional relationship-building) and how much you charge if/when it sells, or you can take a lesser fee if you want to get paid upfront. At the top end of the scale, there are also pay scales you can set up that pay a "bump" of the picture sells a certain amount at the box office. It's like getting a percentage of the gross while letting the producers think of it like they're *not* paying you a percentage of the gross. ;)

There are lots of ways to slice it. This forum has a lot of history on it - check the search function - lots of pontification that's probably not entirely out of date. Also, check out Jeff Rona's "The Reel World". It was the second book I bought about film scoring (the first being the one from Berklee Press).

[JonFairhurst]

I was wondering how long do the professional composers in film get to compose the music on the average for a feature film? What are steps that they go through from beginning to the end to the complete the music.I recommend The Reel Word by Jeff Rona. It gives a good overview of the business and the process. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0879305916/qid=1124250719/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-4305218-8829506?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

I also own and enjoy Richard Davis' Complete Guide to Film Scoring
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0634006363/ref=pd_sim_b_1/104-4305218-8829506?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance

-JF

[Houston Haynes]

I recommend The Reel Word by Jeff Rona. It gives a good overview of the business and the process. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0879305916/qid=1124250719/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-4305218-8829506?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

I also own and enjoy Richard Davis' Complete Guide to Film Scoring
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0634006363/ref=pd_sim_b_1/104-4305218-8829506?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance

-JF

Yup - those are the ones - the first and only two books I have on film scoring. (OK - I hve two books on legal and one on mastering, but they don't really count)

:D

[KC]

Great question! I would like to add one or two of my own along those lines.
What is the arranging process like? I've often thought the arrangers's job to be just as important and powerful as the composer. What is the process? Are themes scored simply by the composer and sent to the arranger?I know that's sound so simplistic but any thoughts on that whole process would be great. Also, if it isn't taboo or PC what are some budgets like and how is the money used for the project? Do you guys make any dough? : )
Thanks in advance. Kevin


Budgets range from extreme to extreme. "A list" composers can make 7 figures on a film, although most would fall into the high 6 figure category. The structure of the budget can be, for example, an "all in" which would include both the composer fee and any and all costs of recording, orchestration, copying etc. It is also possible to negotiate a composer fee seperate from recording and music preperation costs.

The role of an arranger or orchestrator also varies widely, depending on several factors including time and the ability of the composer. In some instances a composer who has a good understanding with a collaborating orchestrator can simply provide sketches and allow the orchestrator to further elaborate upon and embellish the sketch. Other times, the orchestrator is simply proofreading and performing more secretarial jobs with the bulk, or all of the orchestation being provided by the composer.

Time is always an issue. Typically a composer can have anywhere from 6 to 12 weeks to score a film. Replacement scores often get 4 weeks or less, with a 2 week turnaround score not being unheard of. In some instances, for example Gabriel Yared's unfortunately rejected score for Troy, the composer was writing for the film for a year.

On the subject of ghostwriting, contrary to what has been stated in this thread, ghostwriting can be essential to a composer establishing him or herself. It allows you to gain experience and chops that you may not have acquired not working on real projects. It can help put you in touch with those who are working, and with schedules being what they are, those who will require more help. And it pays. Again contrary to what has been stated, ghostwriting can in fact pay very well. It does vary from project to project, however it can mean an excellent living for those putting in the time and utilizing these opportunities as a method to further their career. It is a good notion to try to work on projects that provide on screen and cue sheet credit, however in order to gain momentum, to get your name out there and most importantly, to gain experience by continually working, it is very important to explore ghostwriting opportunities.

Best wishes,

Kaveh Cohen

www.kavehcohen.com

[Tomke]

In most cases the music is only worked on 100% after the cutting is final - or "locked". After that, the music is the thing needed to be finished before audio mixing can take place, so the composer is really under the microscope there - forced into maximum speed. The sooner the music is finished, the better. It seems 'the Hollywood model' figures around 8-12 weeks for a 2h film.

[Houston Haynes]

On the subject of ghostwriting, contrary to what has been stated in this thread, ghostwriting can be essential to a composer establishing him or herself. It allows you to gain experience and chops that you may not have acquired not working on real projects. It can help put you in touch with those who are working, and with schedules being what they are, those who will require more help. And it pays. Again contrary to what has been stated, ghostwriting can in fact pay very well. It does vary from project to project, however it can mean an excellent living for those putting in the time and utilizing these opportunities as a method to further their career. It is a good notion to try to work on projects that provide on screen and cue sheet credit, however in order to gain momentum, to get your name out there and most importantly, to gain experience by continually working, it is very important to explore ghostwriting opportunities.

Kaveh - you're 100% right. I was speaking from two myopic perspectives - one was personal - "I" would not seek out ghosting opportunities. That's not to say the ghostwriting has no value. Secondly, I come to it from the perspective that most of the ghostwriting that I've been offered and turned down have been of the non-paying variety. I suppose that if the numbers were right, I'd consider it. I'm sure there's a sweet spot where you can be a ghostwriter and make enough money from it to make it the thing that puts groceries on your table. My thoughts on the matter was sharing my own perspective and prejudices - no one should construe that to mean that I think everyone in the industry should behave that way.

I was at an awards pre-party last week, and was in a conversation with some stuntmen - and one remarked that he started out in theater, and found more work as a stand-in and then stunt man as he had the same height, build, and general coloring of a much more famous actor. Another said that he came to it from construction, from falling off of a prop and having the AD ask him "can you do that again on camera?" So, the moral of the story is that there's as many ways into Hollywood as there are ways to get lost in Hollywood.

My entire point, which I hope was not missed, is that looking for the rulebook is a good idea before playing the game. However, there are ten exceptions for every rule, and shouldn't be ignored.

[Bruce A. Richardson]

Sometimes, if I am really smooth, I can score in just a few minutes.

Oh. Never mind.

[dpasdernick]

Bruce,

2 minutes to get to the score or two minutes including the score?

;)

[JonFairhurst]

How long do the pros get to score?

Into their seventies and beyond, if they're wealthy enough and have the right prescriptions. ;)

-JF

[kid-surf]

One thing I'd like to point out is ----


Deferred Payment ---- just in case someone doesn't know. They will "always" try and find a way to not pay you. Even big time studio films massage expenditures to try and keep people's bonuses from kicking in.

So if you're taking a deferred payment and think there is a chance in hell that the film will get distribution, make sure you have a good deal. One where you get paid a percentage from the first dollar made (first dollar gross), not after all "other" expenses are covered.

(p.s. obviously you don't want to use that specific wording as it's easy to wiggle out of, hire some one. ;) )


KID

[PeterRoos]

Time is always an issue. Typically a composer can have anywhere from 6 to 12 weeks to score a film. Replacement scores often get 4 weeks or less, with a 2 week turnaround score not being unheard of. In some instances, for example Gabriel Yared's unfortunately rejected score for Troy, the composer was writing for the film for a year.

And then Horner got a very short time to deliver a quick mix of his favorite scoring tricks :o

Pirates of the Caribbean was also done in a VERY short time, with multiple composers, orchestrators and programmers from MV working simultaneously. These are ALL credited (MV/Hans Zimmer policy, I believe). Klaus was really orchestrating the composing processes.

[artsoundz]

Thanks to all for a very informative thread. Kaveh, your insight, in particular, really encourages me. I had not considered the ghost writing angle. In our biz, work is a GOOD thing. Thanks again to all and Jaibulu for the great question. K

[Jaibulu]

Yeah thanks, all your input has given me a better idea of the film/tv industry.

[Jesse Hopkins]

John Williams and Danny Elfman usually score 1.5 to 2 minutes a day tops, and they usually work 6 days a week and nights for a few months on each score. Good vacation time, though! (compared to my job)

[Steve_Karl]

John Williams and Danny Elfman usually score 1.5 to 2 minutes a day tops, and they usually work 6 days a week and nights for a few months on each score. Good vacation time, though! (compared to my job)


Now that's encourging info!

S

[Ashermusic]

John Williams and Danny Elfman usually score 1.5 to 2 minutes a day tops, and they usually work 6 days a week and nights for a few months on each score. Good vacation time, though! (compared to my job)

But mind you, espescially in the case of Elfman, they also rely on orchestrators. John Williams 8 line scketches are so complete however that they could almost bypass the orchestrator and go straight to the copyist. Elfman's level of craft is not at that level, although he has a fine sense of how music works with picture.

[KC]

But mind you, espescially in the case of Elfman, they also rely on orchestrators. John Williams 8 line scketches are so complete however that they could almost bypass the orchestrator and go straight to the copyist. Elfman's level of craft is not at that level, although he has a fine sense of how music works with picture.

This no longer stands as true. These rumours of Elfman's total reliance on orchestrators stem from his early days as a film composer -- 15 or 20 years ago. It is no longer the case. Although Elfman, like almost all composers, uses orchestrators, his understanding of the orchestra along with his ability to write for it and write his work down has come a long way -- more than he is given credit for. The phrase " ... that's mostly Steve Bartek" has gotten quite old...

Best,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[Ashermusic]

This no longer stands as true. These rumours of Elfman's total reliance on orchestrators stem from his early days as a film composer -- 15 or 20 years ago. It is no longer the case. Although Elfman, like almost all composers, uses orchestrators, his understanding of the orchestra along with his ability to write for it and write his work down has come a long way -- more than he is given credit for. The phrase " ... that's mostly Steve Bartek" has gotten quite old...

Best,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

I never said that. But I have seen his sketches and they are not of the caliber of John Williams'. Nor can he conduct like John Williams. No disrespect to him but his craft is just not of that level and I doubt that he would say that it was.

[Bruce A. Richardson]

Man, you sure jump down a slippery slope when you start talking about who is or isn't on some "level."

Are the Beatles on John Williams's level? Is Stevie Wonder? Was Beethoven? Berio? Christina Aguilera? I'd rather hear her sing Come to Jesus in whole notes than listen to a John Williams score.

I'm being only partially facetious. Is Duke Ellington cool enough to be on John Williams's "level?" Eminem?

[KC]

I never said that. But I have seen his sketches and they are not of the caliber of John Williams'. Nor can he conduct like John Williams. No disrespect to him but his craft is just not of that level and I doubt that he would say that it was.

In my opinion, there isn't a composer working in film today who is on Williams' level -- it would be somewhat unfair to compare most compoers to Williams.

Best,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[Ashermusic]

Man, you sure jump down a slippery slope when you start talking about who is or isn't on some "level."

Are the Beatles on John Williams's level? Is Stevie Wonder? Was Beethoven? Berio? Christina Aguilera? I'd rather hear her sing Come to Jesus in whole notes than listen to a John Williams score.

I'm being only partially facetious. Is Duke Ellington cool enough to be on John Williams's "level?" Eminem?

This argument is off point because these people that you mention are not competitors as they are not film scorers.

Anyway the "level" talking about was not an artistic level but a craft level. Evaluations of artistry are inherently subjective, but craft is more measurable.

I.E. one could reasonably argue the following if they believe it to be so:

1. Elfman writes more interesting/original music than John Williams.
2. Elfman's music works better with the picture.

While I disagree with these 2 statements they are subjective.

The following statements about craft are objective and cannot logically be argued and I would be willing to bet you that Danny himself would concede them:

1. John Williams is a better trained and more experienced orchestrator and this is refelected in the quality of his 8 line sketches.
2. John Williams is a better trained, more experienced, and technically more proficient conductor than Elfman.

I come from a generation of composers who were trained to do it all: compose, orchestrate and conduct. The guys who couldn't used to be referred to as "hummers."

Many successful film/tv composers today cannot do all that and yet get the help they need and do terrific work. I am not dissing them. Let me reiterate that I mean no disrespect to Danny Elfman whose work I admire.

And some composers really are project managers. Fine.

But it doesn't change my original point, which is that how much time we get to score a film can be either generous or stressful partly based on how much help we are getting.

Now, just for fun, some of my subjective opinions: :)

1. The Beatles and Stevie Wonder are on a far higher level than Eminem.
2. Aretha Franklin and Natalie Cole are on a far higher level than Christina.
3. Luciano Berio is on a far higher level than John Adams.
4. Massachusetts is a much better state and turns out much better presidents than Texas.

Peace, my brothers and sisters.

[Bruce A. Richardson]

I came from the same background of "do it all" musicianship.

But I really differ in my estimation of Williams. I don't care how technically good he is, or what his level of "craft" is. I can't agree that there is "no one on his level" working in film, in fact, I think that is a false statement.

Because what matters is touching people's hearts...that is the craft of music, not turning a clever phrase. I would agree that Williams is a good composer. I feel, in fact, that he is a better "composer" than he is a "film composer."

And that's why I'd rather hear, say, Christina Aguilera sing a mournful solo line over a given "touching" scene than to hear some emotional orchestral thing. Sometimes the path to the heart is narrow...too narrow for an orchestra to fit through.

Few films need epic orchestral music. Yet, so many of them have it, for some bizarre reason. Most that have it suffer for it. That's not Williams's fault, that he gets caught up in those situations, but then again, he's supposed to be a very well rounded composer. So, why doesn't he ever say, "Know what? Epic orchestra is too much for this scene. Why don't we try a smaller hybrid approach?"

[Bruce A. Richardson]

But I will definitely concede that I'd rather have the president from Massachusetts than the idiot from Texas. Don't judge Texas or Texans by him, though. He's not worthy of the label.

[Ashermusic]

I came from the same background of "do it all" musicianship.

But I really differ in my estimation of Williams. I don't care how technically good he is, or what his level of "craft" is. I can't agree that there is "no one on his level" working in film, in fact, I think that is a false statement.

Because what matters is touching people's hearts...that is the craft of music, not turning a clever phrase. I would agree that Williams is a good composer. I feel, in fact, that he is a better "composer" than he is a "film composer."

And that's why I'd rather hear, say, Christina Aguilera sing a mournful solo line over a given "touching" scene than to hear some emotional orchestral thing. Sometimes the path to the heart is narrow...too narrow for an orchestra to fit through.

Few films need epic orchestral music. Yet, so many of them have it, for some bizarre reason. Most that have it suffer for it. That's not Williams's fault, that he gets caught up in those situations, but then again, he's supposed to be a very well rounded composer. So, why doesn't he ever say, "Know what? Epic orchestra is too much for this scene. Why don't we try a smaller hybrid approach?"

I NEVER said, "there is "no one on his level" working in film." I only said that as a craftsman Elfman isn't. In fact here is what I posted:
"But mind you, espescially in the case of Elfman, they also rely on orchestrators. John Williams 8 line scketches are so complete however that they could almost bypass the orchestrator and go straight to the copyist. Elfman's level of craft is not at that level, although he has a fine sense of how music works with picture."

Of course, there are many fine film composers who have that level of craft. And many fine ones who don't have that level of craft. Bruce, you need to read more carefully before you respond.

First of all, IMHO many more films nowadays, could benefit form orchestral music than get it instead of just sticking pop songs in. But clearly we have diffeernt aesthetic sensibilities, which is fine.

You are entitled to your opinion of Williams of course. He doesn't need me to defend him.

[KC]

I came from the same background of "do it all" musicianship.

But I really differ in my estimation of Williams. I don't care how technically good he is, or what his level of "craft" is. I can't agree that there is "no one on his level" working in film, in fact, I think that is a false statement.

Because what matters is touching people's hearts...that is the craft of music, not turning a clever phrase. I would agree that Williams is a good composer. I feel, in fact, that he is a better "composer" than he is a "film composer."

And that's why I'd rather hear, say, Christina Aguilera sing a mournful solo line over a given "touching" scene than to hear some emotional orchestral thing. Sometimes the path to the heart is narrow...too narrow for an orchestra to fit through.

Few films need epic orchestral music. Yet, so many of them have it, for some bizarre reason. Most that have it suffer for it. That's not Williams's fault, that he gets caught up in those situations, but then again, he's supposed to be a very well rounded composer. So, why doesn't he ever say, "Know what? Epic orchestra is too much for this scene. Why don't we try a smaller hybrid approach?"


Hi Bruce,

I'm not sure what your definition of "epic orchestral" music is, however in my opinion most films benefit from orchestral scores, not suffer from it as you suggest. If the path to the heart is sometimes narrow, even the narrow path is oftentime best filled with the very "orchestral thing" you summararily dismiss.

Speaking of narrow, to mention Christina Aguilera in the context of film music is a curiosity indeed. The use of pop music in films is, as you very well know, nothing more than a marketing scheme to sell soundtracks. Very few films benefit from it, particularly those that sport custom orchestral scores that weave in and out of incessant selections of forgettable and "narrow" pop songs. I would go so far as to say it has regrettably become an epidemic. One that I personally will be happy to see brought to an end.

Fortunately, the better and best filmmakers -- read: filmmakers not music video directors making the equivalent of a pop song movie -- continue to use composers to write the real emotional and dramatic content which films require, and they will always continue to do so.

As far as hybrid music goes, I personally am not that enthused. The advent of technology has resulted in a dramatic and painfully evident drop in musicianship and the quality of music, both commercial and in film. This same technology has also clearly affected the movie making industry. This is of course not to say that there aren't great examples of hybrid music. There are several great examples of hybrid scores which work very well to picture.

On the topic of Williams -- it's interesting that you don't care about the composers' level of craft nor his technical ability. Not to mention his incredible melodic and harmonic abilities, his orchestration skills and his unparalleled consistent output over the last 40 years. These attributes, which I can safely assume are strengths most composers would strive for, along with his extraordinary sensibility when scoring to picture ensure his continued position as the best film composer working today and one of the most popular, important and influential composers of the last half century. Even in the pop world, it is attributes like these, albeit on a far smaller and less accomplished scale, that separate the Aguileras from the next seasonal offering.

I completely disagree that the only thing that matters is touching people's hearts. If that were the case then most 20th century techniques would be out of the window. Orchestral film music plays a far greater role than simply pulling the emotional heart strings. That's easy to do. The best film music does far more - providing the intelligent, reflective, thought provoking 3rd dimension that shallower and more predictable selections cannot provide. That is why "epic orchestral music" continues to be used. There is nothing bizarre about it.

Best wishes,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[Ashermusic]

Hi Bruce,

I'm not sure what your definition of "epic orchestral" music is, however in my opinion most films benefit from orchestral scores, not suffer from it as you suggest. If the path to the heart is sometimes narrow, even the narrow path is oftentime best filled with the very "orchestral thing" you summararily dismiss.

Speaking of narrow, to mention Christina Aguilera in the context of film music is a curiosity indeed. The use of pop music in films is, as you very well know, nothing more than a marketing scheme to sell soundtracks. Very few films benefit from it, particularly those that sport custom orchestral scores that weave in and out of incessant selections of forgettable and "narrow" pop songs. I would go so far as to say it has regrettably become an epidemic. One that I personally will be happy to see brought to an end.

Fortunately, the better and best filmmakers -- read: filmmakers not music video directors making the equivalent of a pop song movie -- continue to use composers to write the real emotional and dramatic content which films require, and they will always continue to do so.

As far as hybrid music goes, I personally am not that enthused. The advent of technology has resulted in a dramatic and painfully evident drop in musicianship and the quality of music, both commercial and in film. This same technology has also clearly affected the movie making industry. This is of course not to say that there aren't great examples of hybrid music. There are several great examples of hybrid scores which work very well to picture.

On the topic of Williams -- it's interesting that you don't care about the composers' level of craft nor his technical ability. Not to mention his incredible melodic and harmonic abilities, his orchestration skills and his unparalleled consistent output over the last 40 years. These attributes, which I can safely assume are strengths most composers would strive for, along with his extraordinary sensibility when scoring to picture ensure his continued position as the best film composer working today and one of the most popular, important and influential composers of the last half century. Even in the pop world, it is attributes like these, albeit on a far smaller and less accomplished scale, that separate the Aguileras from the next seasonal offering.

I completely disagree that the only thing that matters is touching people's hearts. If that were the case then most 20th century techniques would be out of the window. Orchestral film music plays a far greater role than simply pulling the emotional heart strings. That's easy to do. The best film music does far more - providing the intelligent, reflective, thought provoking 3rd dimension that shallower and more predictable selections cannot provide. That is why "epic orchestral music" continues to be used. There is nothing bizarre about it.

Best wishes,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

Standing ovation!

[Tomke]

Williams certainly has skill, but also he has had the fortune of being very exposed, and that means alot. Being skilled doesn't get you exposed automatically.
Ringo starr (drummer of beatles) is one of the worlds most reknowned today, but did his drumming/musicianship have the ability to gain him that name in its own? No. That's not to say he's not interesting to listen to, but it is saying that he may very well not have been exposed if he wasn't a part of one of pop/rock history's most successful acts. I don't think Williams is any big exception from that.

Williams is, in a way, a 'David Foster' to me. His most known work really embodies the lush hollywood thing and that can be tiring.
His greatest strength - in my opinion - is the emotional depth his music seems to invoke, in the roles that his music gets to play. Talk about the scene where Luke watches out towards the twin sunset in Star Wars ep 4 for example - the french horn thing. You immediately get such a stinging emotion in your chest, a longing for an unknown past, the future and the vastness of eternity and how small we all are - right away. And if we look at what he fits in for during the past 30 years, it is just those kinds of films too: Close Encounters, E.T. Star Wars, Superman, Harry Potter, Empire of the sun, Indiana Jones etc.

Some say those movies became that emotionally stirring and captivating mainly because of williams presence. I'm not so sure I agree all the way with that. He my very well have been the right guy to put that idea there, on indirect orders from the creators or by the story/script. As an alternative, nearly the same thing could possibly have been provided by other composers in a rather similar way. Alan Silvestri did that in "Back to the Future" for example, and Ken Thorne did it for Superman 2.

But take away that deep emotionally captivating ability, and Williams thing may loose much of it's magic to me. An electrician's job is to know all the basics of his job, and the same goes for a composer. A great electrician on the other hand, is possibly rather the guy who gets much more done with less effort, by stepping outside of the frame which the average electrician works wihtin. William's score to "Catch me if you can" for example, which is non-orchestral, didn't catch much of my attention at all - although fine. It's sort of the job of the average good electrician. I think Williams actually does what many of todays composers is striving not to do: namely using 'the entire brass section' to get a big feeling across. Variation to the standard things is a big key to feeling good about things, and sometimes Williams does not seem to be allowed to do variations - he may be a victim of too much success :rolleyes:

[Nick Batzdorf]

1. The Beatles and Stevie Wonder are on a far higher level than Eminem.

I'd have to agree with that, because those two are on a far higher level than any other "pop" musicians I can think of.

On the other hand, I think Eminem is the wrong guy to single out for the path it looks like you're going down, because he's incredibly talented. He and Elton John completely stopped the show at the Grammys...was it three years ago? "Stan" isn't bull~~~~ at all.

As a matter of fact, Christina Aguilera isn't the right person to point up either - she's a good singer, and she grew up acing auditions or talent shows (I forget) since early childhood. I don't consider her a fluke at all.

Beyoncé would be a better example of the model du jour, in my opinion. She's Itself, but I can't remember any of her songs three minutes after hearing them.

[Ashermusic]

One thing that some people don't get is that a film/tv composer's job, first and formost, is to serve the picture. If it sounds interesting on a CD or in a concerrt hall well so much the better but its job is to serve the picture.

In my own experience some of my cues that are on my demo reel because of the way they sound are not necessarily the ones that worked best witth the picture. Conversely, some of the cues that work great with the picture IMO are not that interesting to listen to.

It is a fine line to walk.

[Bruce A. Richardson]

Speaking of narrow, to mention Christina Aguilera in the context of film music is a curiosity indeed. The use of pop music in films is, as you very well know, nothing more than a marketing scheme to sell soundtracks.

Did I say that? No. I described using her as a solo voice on a scene.

But some scenes are better served with songs. MANY scenes are better served with songs than underscoring. How horrid would The Big Chill have been with a huge orchestra score? Dreadful.


Fortunately, the better and best filmmakers -- read: filmmakers not music video directors making the equivalent of a pop song movie -- continue to use composers to write the real emotional and dramatic content which films require, and they will always continue to do so.

REAL emotional and dramatic content? Versus simulated emotional and dramatic content? Require? Sorry man, but I don't see how you can support that argument, that an orchestra and a classically trained composer would have exclusive dominion over the "required" emotional and dramatic content.

What about Zappa? Could he have scored a film? Could Carla Bley? Gil Evans?


On the topic of Williams -- it's interesting that you don't care about the composers' level of craft nor his technical ability. Not to mention his incredible melodic and harmonic abilities, his orchestration skills and his unparalleled consistent output over the last 40 years. These attributes, which I can safely assume are strengths most composers would strive for, along with his extraordinary sensibility when scoring to picture ensure his continued position as the best film composer working today and one of the most popular, important and influential composers of the last half century.

You read me a bit literally. Let me expand. I care about craft. I just define it more fully than "chops." I think all the composer's craft in the world, plus one dollar, will buy you donut. You have to have more. You have to have juice, for lack of a better word. I think John Williams has some juice, but he's best applied to a certain kind of film, and not all the films he has scored are films that benefitted from him.

Hans Zimmer has a different kind of juice. He has far less "chops" than Williams. But some of the things he has done scene for scene are a lot more successful.

My favorite scores of late have been the score for Waking Life (Glover Gill and the Tosca Tango Orchestra) and the lovely score for Crash, by Mark Isham. Each very taut, each sized appropriately to the scenes, nothing overblown, no gratuitous epic scale. Just the absolute right music at the right moment.

I would not rate Williams an "extraordinary sensibility when scoring to picture." In fact, that is his only weakness in my book, as he is a supremely gifted composer with his own voice. It is his occasional tendency to oversaturate (emotionally and aurally) that sometimes make me wish someone else (or a few someone elses) were getting some of those films.

What would Williams have done to Waking Life? Ruined it, probably. Some perfectly good films that make you think, and that are as visually stunning and well crafted as any ever made, would be utterly destroyed by putting an orchestra on them. And as I argued earlier, many of the films which DO have an orchestra superimposed on them are just as destroyed. It's the wrong tool for the job...it's a stylistic choice, period. Not a choice of artistic merit. An orchestra is not an inherently better tool for expressing music than any other tool.


I completely disagree that the only thing that matters is touching people's hearts. If that were the case then most 20th century techniques would be out of the window.

Haha. Aren't most 20th century techniques indeed out the window? I would argue that the best of modern orchestral music has been made by people who used all that power--and did not forget that touching people's hearts is what one needs to do to be successful.

I came up through music school right in the heyday of the "squeek and squawk," read plenty of scores that were squiggly lines and hieroglyphics and stopwatch indicators. Once performed in a tree. I'm not dismissing any of that.

But if music does not **touch** on some level, then it fails just as surely as a painting or sculpture which does not "touch" fails. There is the alchemy of "juice" once again to contend with. This intangible thing that artists who are effective possess, which cannot be bought, sold, learned, or taught. That critical last ingredient that makes the potion "magic." All the craft in the world, old world, new world, other world, falls flat without that bit of lifeforce that creates the "touch."


Orchestral film music plays a far greater role than simply pulling the emotional heart strings. That's easy to do. The best film music does far more - providing the intelligent, reflective, thought provoking 3rd dimension that shallower and more predictable selections cannot provide. That is why "epic orchestral music" continues to be used. There is nothing bizarre about it.

I would never limit "touching people's hearts" to "pulling the emotional heart strings." That's your expansion, not mine. I loathe cheap sentimentality. Which is **precisely** why I say that sometimes orchestral music is completely wrong. Sometimes conveying intense emotional passages is a lot less syrupy with a more compact tool. Sometimes a great song with words, played by a great band, is a far less "shallow and predictable" way to create a perfect atmosphere than to write this kind of passage orchestrally.

[Bruce A. Richardson]

...a film/tv composer's job, first and formost, is to serve the picture. If it sounds interesting on a CD or in a concerrt hall well so much the better but its job is to serve the picture.

In my own experience some of my cues that are on my demo reel because of the way they sound are not necessarily the ones that worked best witth the picture. Conversely, some of the cues that work great with the picture IMO are not that interesting to listen to.

It is a fine line to walk.

I concur with this.

[KC]

But some scenes are better served with songs. MANY scenes are better served with songs than underscoring. How horrid would The Big Chill have been with a huge orchestra score? Dreadful.

As you mention here, this really depends on the film. Sure... pop culture films like your example of The Big Chill are better served with songs. "Many" scenes better served? Most definitely not. Just take a look at Shrek or Shrek 2...


REAL emotional and dramatic content? Versus simulated emotional and dramatic content? Require? Sorry man, but I don't see how you can support that argument, that an orchestra and a classically trained composer would have exclusive dominion over the "required" emotional and dramatic content.

This comment is quite clear, as is the argument. It's not about exclusive domain. It's simply about an orchestra having infinitely more dynamic, more color and more textural possibilities than a pop song. For this reason, other than perhaps The Big Chill, you'll find most films -- the very films whose scores you find bizarre -- continue to use orchestral scores.


What about Zappa? Could he have scored a film? Could Carla Bley? Gil Evans?

I couldn't tell you as it would be speculation. A good musician certainly does not necessarily make even a decent film composer. BT is an example of this.


You read me a bit literally. Let me expand. I care about craft. I just define it more fully than "chops." I think all the composer's craft in the world, plus one dollar, will buy you donut. You have to have more. You have to have juice, for lack of a better word. I think John Williams has some juice, but he's best applied to a certain kind of film, and not all the films he has scored are films that benefitted from him.

Perhaps you are not familiar with all his films. As far as all his films not benefitting from his scores, the same argument can apply to all composers including both you and me as this is entirely subjective.


Hans Zimmer has a different kind of juice. He has far less "chops" than Williams. But some of the things he has done scene for scene are a lot more successful.

You state this as though it's anything other than your own subjective opinion. How do you begin to compare how some of Zimmer's scenes are "more successful" than any other composers'? Because you like it? Again, this is entirely subjective and doesn't support your argument. I can make several examples of Zimmer scores that have been completely inappropriate.


My favorite scores of late have been the score for Waking Life (Glover Gill and the Tosca Tango Orchestra) and the lovely score for Crash, by Mark Isham. Each very taut, each sized appropriately to the scenes, nothing overblown, no gratuitous epic scale. Just the absolute right music at the right moment.

The right music at the right moment for you. It's pretty evident that most orchestral music, particularly that of "epic" scope is not in your taste -- even if it is indeed "right music at the right moment." This conversation is simply about what works for the individual. Crash is a good example as I found Isham's score, like almost all his scores, to be ineffectual and dull. I don't like his scoring sensibilities and find the majority of his scores forgettable.


I would not rate Williams an "extraordinary sensibility when scoring to picture." In fact, that is his only weakness in my book, as he is a supremely gifted composer with his own voice. It is his occasional tendency to oversaturate (emotionally and aurally) that sometimes make me wish someone else (or a few someone elses) were getting some of those films.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion.


What would Williams have done to Waking Life? Ruined it, probably. Some perfectly good films that make you think, and that are as visually stunning and well crafted as any ever made, would be utterly destroyed by putting an orchestra on them. And as I argued earlier, many of the films which DO have an orchestra superimposed on them are just as destroyed. It's the wrong tool for the job...it's a stylistic choice, period. Not a choice of artistic merit. An orchestra is not an inherently better tool for expressing music than any other tool.

You're speculating. It's safe to assume that Williams would turn down Waking Life. His body of work suggests that he is more than aware of what he is best suited for.


Many of the films which DO have an orchestra superimposed on them are just as destroyed. It's the wrong tool for the job.

This is borderline ridiculous. So you're suggesting that almost films would benefit from a pop song score? Or a hybrid only score? Using your own methodology, what would The Lord Of The Rings, The Mission, The Omen, Aliens, Apollo 13, Star Wars, Harry Potter, Glory, Ben Hur, The Shawshank Redemption and literally THOUSANDS of other films over the last 50 years alone have been like if directors chose to use pop or hybrid scores? They would have been ruined. They would have been absolute artistic disasters. They are undisputable examples of why an orchestra is the ONLY tool for the job -- and will continue to be. For this reason, the majority of films use composers and an orchestra. The minority rely on pop and hybrid -- touting their wares as a "stylistic choice." If it works for some films... fine. It does not work for all films and thankfully never will.


Haha. Aren't most 20th century techniques indeed out the window? I would argue that the best of modern orchestral music has been made by people who used all that power--and did not forget that touching people's hearts is what one needs to do to be successful.

Categorically untrue. There are other ways to "touch" a person other than their heart. As I mentioned, that's easy to do and not all films set out to simply "touch people's hearts ... to be successful." You may have noticed that there are many, many genres of film and not all of them pull on your heart string to move you.


I came up through music school right in the heyday of the "squeek and squawk," read plenty of scores that were squiggly lines and hieroglyphics and stopwatch indicators. Once performed in a tree. I'm not dismissing any of that.

But if music does not **touch** on some level, then it fails just as surely as a painting or sculpture which does not "touch" fails. There is the alchemy of "juice" once again to contend with. This intangible thing that artists who are effective possess, which cannot be bought, sold, learned, or taught. That critical last ingredient that makes the potion "magic." All the craft in the world, old world, new world, other world, falls flat without that bit of lifeforce that creates the "touch."

I agree that music should "touch" on some level -- whether it be to disturb you or to pull on your heart strings. Whether or not it succeeds is again, entirely subjective.


I would never limit "touching people's hearts" to "pulling the emotional heart strings." That's your expansion, not mine. I loathe cheap sentimentality. Which is **precisely** why I say that sometimes orchestral music is completely wrong. Sometimes conveying intense emotional passages is a lot less syrupy with a more compact tool. Sometimes a great song with words, played by a great band, is a far less "shallow and predictable" way to create a perfect atmosphere than to write this kind of passage orchestrally.

This comment is very different from your original set of comments. I don't disagree that "sometimes" an orchestral score is inappropriate. However, a few paragraphs ago you categorically stated that an orchestra is the wrong tool for the job and that films with orchestral scores are "destroyed." It is impossible to take this comment seriously when the majority of your argument revolves around the need to have an appropriate score for a film. There are far too many examples of films that undeniably require an orchestral score to warrant your argument. In fact, I would venture to say that films that require otherwise are in a small minority.

"Touching people's hearts" was not my expansion -- it was inferred from your original post. Orchestral music no more equals "cheap sentimentality" than some silly pop or rock song with lofty lyrics forced into the same scene. Those are the same scenes that I, like you, find have been utterly destroyed. So what's really appropriate? My taste or yours?


Sometimes a great song with words, played by a great band, is a far less "shallow and predictable" way to create a perfect atmosphere than to write this kind of passage orchestrally.

Well, this really depends on the film doesn't it? Perhaps for The Big Chill and a few other very particular films that would benefit from a song. But for most films, even those dismissable weekend blockbuster types, this will not be the case...

As always, my best...

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[Bruce A. Richardson]

As you mention here, this really depends on the film. Sure... pop culture films like your example of The Big Chill are better served with songs. "Many" scenes better served? Most definitely not. Just take a look at Shrek or Shrek 2...

How about the opening and closing scenes of Closer? How could an orchestra have matched the perfection of that song to those scenes, especially at the end where you realize the full journey Natalie Portman's character has taken (probably the only un-despicable character in the film)?

A track by a band can easily pack in all the artistry of an orchestral score. Is the musicianship in a great band any less than that of a composer? Is the performance of a great band any less artistically complex?

Sometimes the way a great player approaches a single note on his instrument can pack in more emotional and storytelling power than an entire section of orchestral instruments.

Look, we can disagree on matters of taste all day long. But I am not dismissing possibility here. Some films are great with orchestral scores. You mentioned many of them--big, epic films. Generally (not coincidentally) the kind of films I don't really like all that much. God, you couldn't drag me to see Lord of the Rings...I'd puke. Cinema Paradiso? Waking Life? You bet.

But I think my comment is perfectly valid. Too many films get scores that are too big, just because this is what people think a "big film" is supposed to sound like.

I am really curious why you'd think a hybrid electronic/orchestral/pop score would be of any less artistic value than an orchestral score. I can't figure that out. Shouldn't there be every bit as much potential? Wouldn't it depend upon the person making the calls?

[Bruce A. Richardson]

It's simply about an orchestra having infinitely more dynamic, more color and more textural possibilities than a pop song.

I wouldn't think this is true. A pop song could contain a complete orchestra. It could contain anything. It could easily contain all the textural possibility of an orchestra, and then in the flash of an instant go to a totally different place altogether.

When I speak of pop or hybrid scoring, I am not necessarily speaking of the "fad of the week" kind of sensibility. There are pop and electronica artists who are amazing musicians. That good musicianship is part of the deal goes without saying. I'm not suggesting Tony Orlando and Dawn singing "Knock Three Times" would be a great tune to accompany an alien attack. Although in the Dave Chapelle version of the scene, it just might work...

A great example of how a song works is that Closer example I mentioned above. It was a gorgeous way to start that film (and to end it). Not gratuitous or hearstring-tugging in any way. Just a way to put a person in touch with the right emotional space. In fact, I think it was an exceedingly clever manipulation...it sets up the viewer to get "hurt" a bit, along with the characters. Breaks the fourth wall.

[KC]

How about the opening and closing scenes of Closer? How could an orchestra have matched the perfection of that song to those scenes, especially at the end where you realize the full journey Natalie Portman's character has taken (probably the only un-despicable character in the film)?

I'm not in any way dismissing the validity of the use of songs. I'm disputing the broad stroke approach that songs always work -- and orchestra does not.


A track by a band can easily pack in all the artistry of an orchestral score. Is the musicianship in a great band any less than that of a composer? Is the performance of a great band any less artistically complex?

True. But this quite obviously depends on the band, the song, the composer and the score.


Sometimes the way a great player approaches a single note on his instrument can pack in more emotional and storytelling power than an entire section of orchestral instruments.

This same note could be played by a single solo member of an orchestra. That's not the conversation. You have on more than one occasion dismissed the orchestra as a whole as being too "epic" and for being the wrong tool. My preference for an orchestral approach to a scene can include a chamber size ensemble, a quartet and a solo player. I, like you, don't want to hear tutti orchestra in every scene...


Look, we can disagree on matters of taste all day long. But I am not dismissing possibility here. Some films are great with orchestral scores. You mentioned many of them--big, epic films. Generally (not coincidentally) the kind of films I don't really like all that much. God, you couldn't drag me to see Lord of the Rings...I'd puke. Cinema Paradiso? Waking Life? You bet.

I mentioned a few epic films off the top of my head. The few others I made mention of are not epic -- The Mission, The Shawshank Redemption, your example of Cinema Paradiso. All perfect examples of the need for, and appropriate use of an orchestra. What would Cinema Paradiso have been without Morricone's score?


But I think my comment is perfectly valid. Too many films get scores that are too big, just because this is what people think a "big film" is supposed to sound like.

We're back to the subjective issue here. As a film composer I recognize the need to satisfy the scene and provide any and all momentum, sense of scope and propulsion to best convey the picture to it's audience. With this in mind, it is impossible to determine whether too many films get scores that are too big. I have very seldom felt this to be the case. But this is in the end down to taste, the wishes of the production and what sells once the piece has left our studios.


I am really curious why you'd think a hybrid electronic/orchestral/pop score would be of any less artistic value than an orchestral score. I can't figure that out. Shouldn't there be every bit as much potential? Wouldn't it depend upon the person making the calls?

I am in no way suggesting that hybrid scores don't have artistic value. Nor am I suggesting that they don't have potential. I am suggesting along the lines of your conversation regarding appropriateness that they have a very particular place and that not all films will benefit from them. For every "Crash" there is another movie or two for which that approach won't work. I can't see for example "The Village" having a hybrid approach. It wouldn't be as organic, as earthy, as touching, and in the end as appropriate as James Newton Howard's score. To reiterate, I personally find that there are more movies that won't benefit from this approach than there are those that will.

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[KC]

I wouldn't think this is true. A pop song could contain a complete orchestra. It could contain anything. It could easily contain all the textural possibility of an orchestra, and then in the flash of an instant go to a totally different place altogether.

This is true -- in a way. The use of an orchestra in a pop song would still be constrained to the structure and progression of the song. An orchestral score does not suffer these restraints. I also don't agree that you find the wide range of possible orchestral textures put to use in pop as many of those devices including those that are atonal or aleatoric in nature would be simply inappropriate. Having said this, the use of an orchestra in pop is very limited. Not so when standing alone as a score.


When I speak of pop or hybrid scoring, I am not necessarily speaking of the "fad of the week" kind of sensibility. There are pop and electronica artists who are amazing musicians. That good musicianship is part of the deal goes without saying. I'm not suggesting Tony Orlando and Dawn singing "Knock Three Times" would be a great tune to accompany an alien attack. Although in the Dave Chapelle version of the scene, it just might work...

I understand.


A great example of how a song works is that Closer example I mentioned above. It was a gorgeous way to start that film (and to end it). Not gratuitous or hearstring-tugging in any way. Just a way to put a person in touch with the right emotional space. In fact, I think it was an exceedingly clever manipulation...it sets up the viewer to get "hurt" a bit, along with the characters. Breaks the fourth wall.

True. But this is one example. There aren't as many supporting examples as there are for the other side of this conversation.

Best,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[kid-surf]

I think it works when it works..........

....and btw Crash didn't work for me musically. IMO it could have been a better score. It didn't feel inspired "to me".


Also, I'd like to hear JW do something hybrid for the heck of it (all him, though, no colab with some electro hot shot --- just to see if it would sound cheesy. My gut tells me it would sound cheesy, but who knows?)

I do think there is an assumption that strings "need" to be in every film. IMO, sometimes even too much "melody" is wrong for certain films. So back to my initial point.


Although I consider Road to Perdition hybrid..........

OK.... carry on. ;)

[Daryl]

This has become a very interesting discussion. I too hate the current trend to use a commercial track in a movie just because it IS a commercial track. Thank goodness that the "song for the end credits" fad has started to wane.

In theory I also agree that there is nothing worse than an inappropriate orchestral score, however IMO there is either an appropriate score or there isn't. Whether or not it is orchestral is irrelevant, and furthermore I can't actually think of a score that uses an orchestra (whatever that is) that doesn't work simply because it uses an orchestra. A bad score is a bad score, period.

D

[PaulR]

This has become a very interesting discussion. I too hate the current trend to use a commercial track in a movie just because it IS a commercial track. Thank goodness that the "song for the end credits" fad has started to wane.

In theory I also agree that there is nothing worse than an inappropriate orchestral score, however IMO there is either an appropriate score or there isn't. Whether or not it is orchestral is irrelevant, and furthermore I can't actually think of a score that uses an orchestra (whatever that is) that doesn't work simply because it uses an orchestra. A bad score is a bad score, period.

D

Quite right and the song in and at the end of a film started back in the fifties more or less and went through. For instance, in the Hitchcock film The Man Who Knew Too Much, because Doris Day was starring, the producers convinced Hitchcock she should sing a song in it. Herrmann couldn't and wouldn't write songs, so they got in (I forget who now) 2 writers and viola! Que Sera Sera. Weird, in the context of the film.

That's the thing - appropriate or non appropriate. That's why I bang on about listening to film scores in isolation. Can't see the point of it most of the time.

[Bruce A. Richardson]

Quote:
Sometimes the way a great player approaches a single note on his instrument can pack in more emotional and storytelling power than an entire section of orchestral instruments.


This same note could be played by a single solo member of an orchestra. That's not the conversation. You have on more than one occasion dismissed the orchestra as a whole as being too "epic" and for being the wrong tool. My preference for an orchestral approach to a scene can include a chamber size ensemble, a quartet and a solo player. I, like you, don't want to hear tutti orchestra in every scene...



I understand that. But first, I don't think too many orchestra musicians are world class solo players. They're good, solid, gifted section players--but no one is recording them as solo artists.

On the other hand, Carlos Santana (just to mention an example) can play one note on a guitar, and you know who's playing.

I can't see why classical orchestral instruments are inherently more expressive, inherently of higher musical value. Sorry, can't see it. Won't see it, because I know it's not true. It's the witch, not the wand.

We will have to agree to disagree. I think the orchestra, on the whole, IS the wrong tool for the majority of films it is thrusted upon. I think that a film is a dramatic machine unto itself, and while on occasion an epic musical score is fitting, on MOST occasions, an epic musical score just ends up getting ducked under everything else in the mix--because it won't fit. It overloads the bandwidth of the machine. It overwhelms. There are places where being overwhelmed is good. Not many.

Now part of this might be my taste, granted. The last Star Wars film I enjoyed was circa 1977. I can't stand them any more. If you want to torture me, take me to Lord of the Rings, or force me to watch the wretched Signs again (where I actually booed at the cloying feelgood music and stupidly heart-tugging slow pan across pictures to the shaving Mel-becomes-priest-again ending). I cannot stand films like these--for all their "majesty," what the hell are they actually saying or doing?

Anyhoo...

In short, my basic point is that I do not believe that the orchestra is the do-all-end-all, and if pop or hybrid scores have fallen short, it is not because those approaches are inferior, but because the "witch" didn't properly wave the "wand."

[Steve_Karl]

It's the witch, not the wand.


And yer lil dog too! eeeeeeeheheheheheheh! <g>

Steve

[PaulR]

In short, my basic point is that I do not believe that the orchestra is the do-all-end-all,

No it's not- it's the effect any given music has, regardless of what instrumentation is used.

Dr Zchivago - the theme is a good one - but 50 million times throughout the film!!!!

Same composer - Maurice Jarre and Witness. Some really great scoring there, especially during the 'building the barn' scene.

Both films use standard orchestral scoring - one works and one gets on your nerves after while - sure, that is subjective.

Doesn't matter that it's an orchestra playing - could be anything. The question is - is it making this scene work?

Another quirky thing I find when musicians discuss film scoring is the difference between 'The Main Big Theme' and then the incidental music in the actual film. That's where John Williams always tends to score - the main theme. Say, Jurassic Park - magnificent theme and his technique allows this to recur in the movie.

Everyone always remembers main themes - but does the incidental music work? A lot of these films are not worth discussing anyway, so you can't always blame it on composers.

Is 'Signs' really bad? I haven't seen it.

[Ashermusic]

I understand that. But first, I don't think too many orchestra musicians are world class solo players. They're good, solid, gifted section players--but no one is recording them as solo artists.

On the other hand, Carlos Santana (just to mention an example) can play one note on a guitar, and you know who's playing.

I can't see why classical orchestral instruments are inherently more expressive, inherently of higher musical value. Sorry, can't see it. Won't see it, because I know it's not true. It's the witch, not the wand.

We will have to agree to disagree. I think the orchestra, on the whole, IS the wrong tool for the majority of films it is thrusted upon. I think that a film is a dramatic machine unto itself, and while on occasion an epic musical score is fitting, on MOST occasions, an epic musical score just ends up getting ducked under everything else in the mix--because it won't fit. It overloads the bandwidth of the machine. It overwhelms. There are places where being overwhelmed is good. Not many.

Now part of this might be my taste, granted. The last Star Wars film I enjoyed was circa 1977. I can't stand them any more. If you want to torture me, take me to Lord of the Rings, or force me to watch the wretched Signs again (where I actually booed at the cloying feelgood music and stupidly heart-tugging slow pan across pictures to the shaving Mel-becomes-priest-again ending). I cannot stand films like these--for all their "majesty," what the hell are they actually saying or doing?

Anyhoo...

In short, my basic point is that I do not believe that the orchestra is the do-all-end-all, and if pop or hybrid scores have fallen short, it is not because those approaches are inferior, but because the "witch" didn't properly wave the "wand."

I just did a film for Lion's Gate called "Hittin' It" which was a hip-hop comedy. Clearly even if I had had the budget for it, which I did not, an orchestral score would have been wrong.

On the other hand I am up for a romantic comedy that if I get clearly in my mind needs an orchestral score which I probably will not have the budget for so I will have to mostly use a silicon orchestra. But an orchestral score is what it needs.

Also, the "average" player in any major city's symphony is certainly capable of wonderful solo work. And the "average" guitarist is certainly not Carlos Santana, although I know many fine ones.

Bruce, you are a very bright guy but you frequently make broad sweeping statements that are only true for specific instances. You would do well IMHO to lose the hyperbole and perhaps be a little more intellectually disciplined.

Of course, you are free to call me 15 kinds of a**hole and tell me to go pound sand :)

[Bruce A. Richardson]

Bruce, you are a very bright guy but you frequently make broad sweeping statements that are only true for specific instances. You would do well IMHO to lose the hyperbole and perhaps be a little more intellectually disciplined.

Of course, you are free to call me 15 kinds of a**hole and tell me to go pound sand :)

Intellectual discipline is for pussies. God, if I have to be intellectually disciplined in here, then I quit. Is there not one place on this earth where I can just have fun, and not have to be disciplined at all?

I don't agree that most symphony section players are all that great. Listen to anything Gershwin...makes me want to puke every time I hear some symphony hack try to "stretch out and be jazzy." Monkeys with typewriters.

I record players often enough...it's not like I'm out of touch. Having the union-call-cello-player of the week in your studio ain't exactly like having a Chuck Rainey or a Cornell Dupree in. Nothing like it, in fact.

(now wasn't that more fun that "pound sand?")

[Ashermusic]

Intellectual discipline is for pussies. God, if I have to be intellectually disciplined in here, then I quit. Is there not one place on this earth where I can just have fun, and not have to be disciplined at all?

I don't agree that most symphony section players are all that great. Listen to anything Gershwin...makes me want to puke every time I hear some symphony hack try to "stretch out and be jazzy." Monkeys with typewriters.

I record players often enough...it's not like I'm out of touch. Having the union-call-cello-player of the week in your studio ain't exactly like having a Chuck Rainey or a Cornell Dupree in. Nothing like it, in fact.

(now wasn't that more fun that "pound sand?")

LOL! Typical f*8&^ing Texas cowboy.

The problem is Brucie that at times you seem to want your opinions to be seriously considered and that requires intellectual discipline. Other times I guess you are just goofin' so give us a disclaimer so we know the difference, OK? :)

[PaulR]

LOL! Typical f*8&^ing Texas cowboy.


Uh - oh!

:D

[JonP]

Listen to anything Gershwin...

Oh God....do we really have to?!

I'm from both sides of the field so I've got no preference musically speaking, but I've yet to meet one full-time jazzer capable of sightreading Boulez or Ferneyhough under the baton of a decent conductor just as I've yet to meet one full-time orchestral player who can swing in a small ensemble. How can you possibly compare the standard of musicianship between the two?. Its totally different. But I've known and worked with enough orchestral players to know that a great many of them are indeed world class musicians and can play as well as any other.

I couldn't agree more that the film world is absolutely riddled with over-blown big orchestral scores and it would be a great thing for the fad to die out and let things start getting innovative again. It can really ruin the experience.

[Bruce A. Richardson]

LOL! Typical f*8&^ing Texas cowboy.

The problem is Brucie that at times you seem to want your opinions to be seriously considered and that requires intellectual discipline. Other times I guess you are just goofin' so give us a disclaimer so we know the difference, OK? :)

I think people take me seriously enough.

Jon, I don't know about the reading thing. You have to read your ~~~ off on a big band gig, usually at insane tempos (and no conductor to pull it together if something goes awry). And almost always with no rehearsal. The first time you see the page is on the gig.

But my point isn't any of that. It is that exceedingly expressive musicianship is the domain of no particular assemblage of players, and that a film is no better served by one brand of music than another. The fact that so many films are orchestrally scored has a lot more to do with inertia than anything else. I think (and god, I hope) that the "golden age" mentality is in its last dying throes.

[PaulR]

I couldn't agree more that the film world is absolutely riddled with over-blown big orchestral scores and it would be a great thing for the fad to die out and let things start getting innovative again. It can really ruin the experience.

It can - and I think it's going to die out sooner rather than later hopefully.

[bruceup]

Food for thought: if any of you were the type of working feature film composers of which you speak, you wouldn't have the time to hang out on this board and engage in this kind of p*ssing contest.

[JohnnyP]

Food for thought: if any of you were the type of working feature film composers of which you speak, you wouldn't have the time to hang out on this board and engage in this kind of p*ssing contest.
he he he he:p

[JonP]

Food for thought: if any of you were the type of working feature film composers of which you speak, you wouldn't have the time to hang out on this board and engage in this kind of p*ssing contest.

Oh yeah...silly me. I almost forgot that quality is measured by the number of hours one spends in the studio churning out the same old done-before hack!.

At one point in his life, Schubert spent his mornings composing the ever extraordinairy Winterreise and went off to get high on coffee in the afternoon and rat-faced in the evening. He'd have had plenty of time to engage in a bit of discussion.

[PaulR]

Food for thought: if any of you were the type of working feature film composers of which you speak, you wouldn't have the time to hang out on this board and engage in this kind of p*ssing contest.

I haven't got time to waste on fkg film scores Bruce - I'm painting the outside of the house!

Whatever next! Sheesh!

:n:

[Bruce A. Richardson]

Food for thought: if any of you were the type of working feature film composers of which you speak, you wouldn't have the time to hang out on this board and engage in this kind of p*ssing contest.

I don't know. I have a new musical in production, three features lined up in the chute, a series coming up in the spring, a new five-venue theatre complex being constructed, and several more projects in various stages of formation.

It could be that people who have accomplished a lot simply find time to do a lot, couldn't it? That if people understood the true nature of time, they would see time expanding around the people moving the fastest, and others struggling like poor lost puppets, enevloped?

Food for thought...

[Nick Batzdorf]

The typical studio cellists working in Los Angeles are ~~~~ing great, Bruce.

They don't release albums as soloists - about five musicians in the world do - but that certainly doesn't mean they're losers who hide in the section. You can see just how good these players are if you go to a chamber concert, for instance the Green Umbrella series at Zipper Hall.

It's hard as hell to get into the L.A. Chamber Orchestra and certainly the L.A. Phil. These are all people who practiced 6-8 hours a day in college. Not all of them get into orchestras for whatever reason - generally not related to their skills - but they're all really high-level musicians who will dazzle you like a magician if you hear them up close. Seriously.

[jc5]

The competition to get a placement in even what can be considered a 'b' series orchestra is so fierce these days that 'average' standards are very high.
Even some of the hobbyist community orchestras in my area sport some very impressive personnel...

[KC]

I couldn't agree more that the film world is absolutely riddled with over-blown big orchestral scores and it would be a great thing for the fad to die out and let things start getting innovative again. It can really ruin the experience.

Orchestral scores are no fad. They are the norm. And of course an orchestral score can't be innovative, can it?

[jc5]

We all know how innovative pop is after all. :rolleyes: :n:

[KC]

The fact that so many films are orchestrally scored has a lot more to do with inertia than anything else. I think (and god, I hope) that the "golden age" mentality is in its last dying throes.

A film receiving an orchestral score has to do with a creative decision about what best serves the film -- not inertia.

The scoring environment today has anything but a "Golden Age" mentality. It is a far more innovative, cutting edge and fast moving industry than your comment gives credit for. Believe me when I tell you that despite even the best hybrid scores, the orchestral score is not in it's dying throes -- nor will it ever be. Bruce, you may have to be dragged kicking and screaming to see The Lord Of The Rings, but the majority of movie goers did not have to be. And films ranging in genre from LOTR to romantic comedies to action to thriller and everything else will continue to use the orchestra as an effective -- and irreplaceable way to underscore the picture.

The view that hybrid, pop or rock scores actually will serve most types of films -- a view that has been shared by several people in this thread -- is particularly interesting for me. As is the fact that we will inevitably see the demise of orchestral scores... an absurd notion indeed...

Best,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[JonP]

you may have to be dragged kicking and screaming to see The Lord Of The Rings, but the majority of movie goers did not have to be.

www.kavehcohen.com

If I'm reading your fundamental point here correctly then that's good corporate thinking. You should be a producer - its pretty much the reason why we hear the same sort of orchestral hack music played over and over and over again. "If it works once and the children don't give a crap, let's f****** murder it!".

The problem as I hear it, is that the tricks of some really decent orchestral scores get re-used ad nauseum in similar places in succeeding films until it becomes tedious to the ear, not to mention more and more difficult to tell composers apart. There are so many orch scores I love that I've heard cheapened by pale imitations, and the current fad (and I'd argue the number of wannabes trying to churn out the same stuff help to make it so) is to repeat those same tricks anywhere and everywhere. A consequence of creative lethargy, the 8 horns patch, or the cymbal roll cresc, or the glossy little glock are dragged out every other cue because its easy and known to work, even though its not necessarily the best and most creative solution.

Thinking back to Jarre's brilliant score for "Witness" that PaulR mentioned a while back, can you imagine the score to it if it was made today?. It would be pure orchestral, guaranteed. And Tron, and Westworld, and The French Connection.........

[KC]

If I'm reading your fundamental point here correctly then that's good corporate thinking. You should be a producer - its pretty much the reason why we hear the same sort of orchestral hack music played over and over and over again. "If it works once and the children don't give a crap, let's f****** murder it!".

You have quite clearly misunderstood my fundamental point. I'm not sure what examples of film music you're listening to but your comments of "orchestral hack" music played over and over again and it being "f****** murdered" fits like a glove in the pop and rock world. Comments like yours fail to mention that quality and innovation in the pop and rock world are at their lowest point. I should be a producer? Corporate thinking? Children don't give a crap? Have you ever turned on your radio? What do you suggest should replace what you claim is "orchestral hack music"? The B.S. pop and rock hack music? The electronica hack music? What is it you want to hear considering that at the end of the day, all entertainment industries are packaging a product and using formulas that work? As a working composer and avid score collector, with the exception of the occassional "summer blockbuster" and an odd romantic comedy, I don't hear scores "murdered" or played over and over again.


The problem as I hear it, is that the tricks of some really decent orchestral scores get re-used ad nauseum in similar places in succeeding films until it becomes tedious to the ear, not to mention more and more difficult to tell composers apart. There are so many orch scores I love that I've heard cheapened by pale imitations, and the current fad (and I'd argue the number of wannabes trying to churn out the same stuff help to make it so) is to repeat those same tricks anywhere and everywhere. A consequence of creative lethargy, the 8 horns patch, or the cymbal roll cresc, or the glossy little glock are dragged out every other cue because its easy and known to work, even though its not necessarily the best and most creative solution.

Thinking back to Jarre's brilliant score for "Witness" that PaulR mentioned a while back, can you imagine the score to it if it was made today?. It would be pure orchestral, guaranteed. And Tron, and Westworld, and The French Connection.........

I completely disagree that if Tron, Westworld, The French Connection and many others were made today they would utilize orchestra only scores. That is poor speculation at best. In fact there are more examples of hybrid scores now than there have ever been. Your comments reflect a lack of understanding about how the industry works. We don't work in an idealistic environment. If you get hired for a film and the production wants it to sound a particular way -- perhaps like another movie score -- then you choose to either keep your job and deliver the goods with your own twist -- or you leave or get fired. Naive and idealistic thoughts about it being otherwise don't apply here, especially as these situations arise all the time in the industry. With this in mind, realize why you might hear the formulas re-applied from time to time in different films. Contrary to comments made, this is NOT the case across the board.

The basic issue here is the continuing use of the orchestra as an important contributing factor in film making -- and not having it categorically dismissed as the "wrong tool" or as being somehow out of date or impossible to be innovative. Hybrid music, pop, rock or anything else non-orchestral does not equate to an automatic fit, innovation, quality or being necessarily appropriate. Making broad strokes statements like those that have been made on more than one occassion in this thread is the issue...

Best wishes,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[jc5]

A consequence of creative lethargy, the 8 horns patch, or the cymbal roll cresc, or the glossy little glock are dragged out every other cue because its easy and known to work, even though its not necessarily the best and most creative solution.


Well - this has more to do with the mediocrity of the individual, rather than with the medium itself.

For the record, I for one may never write a cymbal roll in any work, be it for film or otherwise, based out of similar feelings to yours. :|:

[KC]

A consequence of creative lethargy, the 8 horns patch, or the cymbal roll cresc, or the glossy little glock are dragged out every other cue because its easy and known to work, even though its not necessarily the best and most creative solution.

This is particularly interesting. So cymbal roll crescendos and glossy glockenspiels equal creative lethargy? Has it occurred to you that these are orchestration tools and not a quick and dirty way of filling space?

We weren't content with simply dismissing the orchestra as a whole. Now we're going to dismiss the validity of each individual instrument...

[MusicalMayhem]

Do all the big time guys use real orchestras?

[KC]

Do all the big time guys use real orchestras?

Almost all of the time, yes.

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[JonP]

This is particularly interesting. So cymbal roll crescendos and glossy glockenspiels equal creative lethargy? Has it occurred to you that these are orchestration tools and not a quick and dirty way of filling space?

We weren't content with simply dismissing the orchestra as a whole. Now we're going to dismiss the validity of each individual instrument...


I've not dismissed the orchestra whatsoever. I've questioned the way its being used time and again for the same predictable effect when there could be fresher and more innovative approaches. Here I was thinking specifically about the way certain effects are being used ad nauseum to try and conjur up an ersatz emotional response from the audience. Its cheap, tacky and hacky and if you don't know what I'm talking about then I question your sense of taste. Here comes that "happy fourth of july moment".....right, cymbal roll cresc....heavy brass out.....bang, that should get the patriots saluting. It really makes me want to puke into my popcorn bag.





I completely disagree that if Tron, Westworld, The French Connection and many others were made today they would utilize orchestra only scores. That is poor speculation at best. In fact there are more examples of hybrid scores now than there have ever been. Your comments reflect a lack of understanding about how the industry works. We don't work in an idealistic environment. If you get hired for a film and the production wants it to sound a particular way -- perhaps like another movie score -- then you choose to either keep your job and deliver the goods with your own twist -- or you leave or get fired.

www.kavehcohen.com

I've worked enough in the industry and I agree completely with your last point. If you want to earn money then you have to produce the hack (unless you're blessed with a partnership with a broadminded producer/director team). Cool. Doesn't make it pleasant for those that want something different and new does it. Doesn't expand the creative horizons. I'd argue the industry needs a touch more idealism these days.

Given the current desire to remake older films then it can only be a matter of time before Tron and Westworld etc are re-done so maybe we'll see. But I'd wager a fair amount that I'm right.

And what you call hybrid I would argue are all too often watered down eclectic mash. But then I'm obviously missing out on the good stuff.

[JonP]

Comments like yours fail to mention that quality and innovation in the pop and rock world are at their lowest point. I should be a producer? Corporate thinking? Children don't give a crap? Have you ever turned on your radio? What do you suggest should replace what you claim is "orchestral hack music"? The B.S. pop and rock hack music? The electronica hack music? What is it you want to hear considering that at the end of the day, all entertainment industries are packaging a product and using formulas that work?

www.kavehcohen.com

I couldn't care less about the pop and rock world.

If your last comment was true then we'd never hear anything new in films. That's clearly never been the case. But that's not the point. What I don't get is why the orchestra is being used to say the same thing over and over again.

The other day I was watching an old '60s film - The Ipcress File - and what struck me was the low key, small ensemble of the score. It had a very definite signature and some unusual instrumental combinations. Not an orchestral gimmick in ear-sight. It had character and not one bar tries to lead the viewer. But I'd venture that the character of the score comes as much from the restricted choice of instruments (maybe because of the budget back then?....I don't know) as the subtle manner in which they were used.

I can't think of many scores of recent times that are as effective. But I'll bet if it was re-made today it would be full orchestral with all the dripping fat trimmings ;)

[Bruce A. Richardson]

This is particularly interesting. So cymbal roll crescendos and glossy glockenspiels equal creative lethargy? Has it occurred to you that these are orchestration tools and not a quick and dirty way of filling space?

We weren't content with simply dismissing the orchestra as a whole. Now we're going to dismiss the validity of each individual instrument...

I think he was actually referring to all the tired cliches that litter every other orchestrally-scored film. Surely you can't say with a straight face that they don't make you crazy, too.

The funniest thing that I have seen in a theater in a long time is that fake "trailer" with the asian warrior guys, where every single cliche in the book is thrown at it, until they're about to kill each other--then a cell phone rings in the side channels, and the guys look out at the house and say "I think it came from the audience."

To me, that expresses the utter dull state of film scoring today--that all of this is so cliche that the industry actually makes fun of itself. And you're pretty much fooled until the cell phone joke. Yawn, another big bangy boomy overblown insert-screaming-choir-here epic sludgefest.

And what do I care about people flocking to see Lord of the Rings? People flock to see Britney Spears and The Backstreet Boys. People flock to WalMart.

[Bruce A. Richardson]

Actually, that's unfair to Britney. Her show smokes.

[PaulR]

The other day I was watching an old '60s film - The Ipcress File - and what struck me was the low key, small ensemble of the score. It had a very definite signature and some unusual instrumental combinations. Not an orchestral gimmick in ear-sight. It had character and not one bar tries to lead the viewer. But I'd venture that the character of the score comes as much from the restricted choice of instruments (maybe because of the budget back then?....I don't know) as the subtle manner in which they were used.


Wow! (Can I say Wow Nick?)

The amount of private conversations I've had with American film and TV writers about that film - I'm glad you bought this example up. Terrific example.
The Ipcress File score works so well - this would be a must study session for anyone who likes to waste their time seperating the score from a film.

That score just says atmosphere. A quirky film, because Sydney Furie was a maverick American film director at the time and used weird and wonderful camera angles - juxtaposed by Barry's great score. No big orchestral syrup in this - and Barry was quite capable of doing that btw. Just strumming guitar, flutes, some brass and a few strings and a bass. Works so well in the film, which is very funny in places even though it's a 60's spy film (in between Bond movie making for the Bond producers so they did a Bond alter -ego haha).

Incidentally Jon - I think you can see my old college in that one - just for a fleeting moment. :)

[Marcussen]

Out of curiosity Bruce (or someone else)... what are the John Williams scores that dont work, or what films would have benefitted from a non-John williams score?

[kid-surf]

1) I can't believe I'm reading all this...... ;)

2) I didn't see many (or "any", I think?) people saying a hybrid score could replace all other scores. Well, not me.

3) People, this is friggn Hollywood (not Europe ;) ). If you ever become a big shot composer your lead actor will have way less experience than you do, for one. Furthermore -- they are making 50 times what you're making. But try and realize that most likely "EVERYONE" involved with the film will have LESS experience than you. The director, the actors, the producers, the agents that put it together. None of the highest paid "most important" people were doing that stuff when they were a young kid. 90% of those people didn't even know they wanted to be IN the film industry till they were 20 something. Most every film composer started doing music at a fairly young age, even those that weren't classically trained. By comparison the composer is usually one of the most experienced guys on the whole friggn production. But are they treated as such? Not IMO .

Anyway......... Add that no studio will green light "anything" based on the dang composer, not even if JW is attached. (can he get a film "made"? I seriously doubt it). Attach Collin Farell and the film will get a start date of next week. --- I mean I remember about, what, like 4-5 years ago my wife took him to a premier, he was NOBODY back then. Now look at him. Look what little time it took him to "command" just about whatever he wants around this town. In just a couple years time from an unknown theater actor in Ireland to huge mega star. (know of any composers that went from a "no one" to doing A-list films in that short of time?)

A first time director will get a FAT studio deal off "ONE" good film, now they have the studio paying for their dang "production company" (w/staff). You'll have a well respected actor/director (yeah I'm talking about someone "specific") go around telling new film students that it's all about "the craft", yet when he's behind closed doors tells his agents that he want's to be a "leading man" a "star" (which would "seem" contradictory to the purist film maker "image" he has). So much smoke and mirrors going on in this town, and here we have composers on their pedestals talking about how you're a hack if you use a friggn cymbal roll. Gimme a friggn break!


Now "we" (the composer) are supposed to reinvent the wheel when no one "else" in Hollywood is doing so? Why? What for? To impress other composers? Good luck impressing cynical jaded composers. (BTW -- that's not my goal). And even more absurd, on many films that aren't even worth the trouble?????


Not to mention the complete disregard for an adequate time to score most films. Sure, composers will flip that into a puffy chested badge of honor. "I stayed up for two weeks straight and delivered the score on time......... oh it was nothin". They won't even admit that they are treated as second rate to everyone else in the production, especially compared to the star of the week. Then some composer on-line will presumably accuse them of such obviously "hack-ish" cliches (no way around that). Maybe these "purist" stances would make a whole lot more sense to me if anyone "really" gave a crap about the music in the first place. And more specifically if the majority of the films "meant" anything long term. Since when was a release date changed to accommodate the all so important marriage of the score and film? The top dudes get all kinds of time (on the "important" films). The other films, are they really that important? Not IMO..... so what the hell is wrong with getting the job done any way you see fit. No one is gonna care about the score two seconds after the film is out of the theater anyway. And they really didn't care about it even when it was. Not really, not like film composers care. (we're are on an island unto ourselves in that regard)


Those types of films are "get in get out" IMO..... if you're using cliches in "Aquaman II", well maybe that's about all that film "DESERVES". And yep, the "soundtrack" will most surly be a bunch of pop songs that weren't even IN the film. Such respect..... good thing you didn't use all those cliches, eh?


It's friggn Hollywood..... I think composers in general need to come back down to earth on occasion and realize that 90% (give or take) of the films they are scoring are crap. Or well, "quick entertainment" for some people in Idaho (or sure, Japan) that chose to see some film vs going bowling (or whatever).

Obviously if you know in your gut that the film you are on is one of those "special" ones, then sure, this other "out of the box" type thinking applies (it's warranted in fact). But otherwise, what's wrong with doing a "blue collar" score for a "blue collar" film?


Call me crazy, but sometimes "good enough" is all that is merited.............. on that level it works, and will continue to work.

Having said that ---------> I LOVE LA. ;)

Besides, i'd like a little of my life left over to surf and such. You know, the important things in life. ;)

That's my take on this crazy business.......... :cool: :D

[billygoat]

That's my take on this crazy business.......... :cool: :D

What a refreshingly honest and down-to-earth read. Finally somebody who seems to know what he's talking about. A welcome change from those who feel the need to post their CV to back up their elitist arguments.

Thanks kid-surf for sharing this with us.

[kid-surf]

Out of curiosity Bruce (or someone else)... what are the John Williams scores that dont work, or what films would have benefitted from a non-John williams score?

None, probably.............


But I can think of 100s' that would sound stupid with his sensibilities. (no disrespect)

No one is perfect..... oh well.

[kid-surf]

What a refreshingly honest and down-to-earth read. Finally somebody who seems to know what he's talking about. A welcome change from those who feel the need to post their CV to back up their elitist arguments.

Thanks kid-surf for sharing this with us.


My pleasure......... :)

[PaulR]

Kid - how you doing? :)

For the one millionth time - film and Tv score writers are the lowest of the low. They are generally an after-thought by a director who is basically dealing in salesmanship - selling the film - selling a scene to an actor - selling more budget requirements to a producer etc etc.

No one is saying anyone is a hack here - it's more to do with overdone cliches - your point about making money and temp tracks is well taken and already been mentioned.

[Bruce A. Richardson]

2) I didn't see many (or "any", I think?) people saying a hybrid score could replace all other scores. Well, not me.


Not me either. All I said was essentially that all this "purity" about an orchestra being the do all end all most expressive best musician filled wonder ensemble of film perfection is BS. And I don't genuflect when someone mentions the holy name of JW, so that makes me some kind of cretin.

[PaulR]

Not me either. All I said was essentially that all this "purity" about an orchestra being the do all end all most expressive best musician filled wonder ensemble of film perfection is BS. And I don't genuflect when someone mentions the holy name of JW, so that makes me some kind of cretin.

Yeah - and that's another thing. What is all this with John Williams? Someone please explain why this keeps coming up and is almost subliminally suggested that it's some kind of bench mark.

[kid-surf]

Paul ----- I'm doing well.... thanks for asking :) (hope you are too)

I got cha'......... Yeah, i guess I just wanted to say a few things "my way". :D

carry on...... it's my bedtime. :D

[Bruce A. Richardson]

You can see just how good these players are if you go to a chamber concert, for instance the Green Umbrella series at Zipper Hall.

I got yer zipper hall right here, bubba....

[Bruce A. Richardson]

Out of curiosity Bruce (or someone else)... what are the John Williams scores that dont work, or what films would have benefitted from a non-John williams score?

That's not the point (at least not the point I'm making). Although I think the second Harry Potter sounded totally cobbled together, but I wouldn't blame Williams. He was probably not responsible for that.

I just bristle at the idea that all this epic neo-romantic (and even that is a compliment) writing that accompanies so many films is some kind of highest and best expression of the medium. As an artist, I find it mostly tired and banal. I get excited when I hear someone engaging the dramatic machine in a different way. It makes me want to hear more of that.

[JonP]

Wow! (Can I say Wow Nick?)

The amount of private conversations I've had with American film and TV writers about that film - I'm glad you bought this example up. Terrific example.
The Ipcress File score works so well - this would be a must study session for anyone who likes to waste their time seperating the score from a film.

That score just says atmosphere. A quirky film, because Sydney Furie was a maverick American film director at the time and used weird and wonderful camera angles - juxtaposed by Barry's great score. No big orchestral syrup in this - and Barry was quite capable of doing that btw. Just strumming guitar, flutes, some brass and a few strings and a bass. Works so well in the film, which is very funny in places even though it's a 60's spy film (in between Bond movie making for the Bond producers so they did a Bond alter -ego haha).

Incidentally Jon - I think you can see my old college in that one - just for a fleeting moment. :)

I'd say Imperial but I'm guessing because you visit this forum then the Royal College?. Great scene that BTW, the Royal Albert Hall one. I live just a few of roads away from Prince Consort Rd and love the area so I'm always pleased to see it pop up in films. Yeah, Ipcress is a great film - like Alfie, one of the best of the era.

Kid - I honestly cannot begin to put up an arguement against your statement that 90% of Hollywood films are crap. You're right. It is a business. They deserve the music they get. The problem is that they are the ones sold worldwide at the expense of better films that don't get the exposure they deserve. Worse still is that too often the ones that are worth watching are saddled with scores that are typical of their lesser rivals. TV music is frequently innovative and fresh. Why not in films?. Maybe because the budget for TV stuff was less and so smaller ensembles were used resulting in a more identifiable signature?. But with the advent of these huge sample libraries it seems like a lot of documentaries and series are in danger of succumbing to the "Epic Orchestra" syndrome.

It maybe that I've seen a lot of really promising projects from directors and writers go down the pan because people wont take a risk or the funding nosedives or its considered too long or whatever and that has changed my view a little. It could be that we see endless films squeezed into the 90-120 minute format that could be summed up in 45 minutes (why not stage two films I ask?). Maybe I hate the McDonalds approach to it all - maybe I'm too cynical. Maybe I'm going off topic. Time to stop.

[PaulR]

I'd say Imperial but I'm guessing because you visit this forum then the Royal College?. Great scene that BTW, the Royal Albert Hall one. I live just a few of roads away from Prince Consort Rd and love the area so I'm always pleased to see it pop up in films. Yeah, Ipcress is a great film - like Alfie, one of the best of the era.

Yes Jon - Prince Consort Road - you got it in one. You're lucky to be living in that part of London, although that's a judgment I make on late sixties/early seventies nostalgia. I don't know what it's like today. :) hehe - a lot of friends went to Imperial, that's for sure and I was lucky enough to be taken to their college rock concerts.

Yeah - I agree with Alfie and while on the subject of Caine roles, I just got an email from an American writer regarding Get Carter (1971 ish). Again, the score in that is just about perfect and not overblown at all.


It could be that we see endless films squeezed into the 90-120 minute format that could be summed up in 45 minutes (why not stage two films I ask?). Maybe I hate the McDonalds approach to it all - maybe I'm too cynical. Maybe I'm going off topic. Time to stop.

That's interesting - I watched a good film (to me at least) the other night called The Limey - 1hr and 20 minutes approx. Works very well with an excellent score from Cliff Martinez that_makes_the _film_work.

[wilx]

Didn't John Williams score 'Sleepers'?
If I remember that was very low-key, and heavily eclectronic/synth dominated...

[KC]

People, this is friggn Hollywood...

Hey Kid,

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I couldn't agree more.

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[midphase]

Originally Posted by Marcussen
Out of curiosity Bruce (or someone else)... what are the John Williams scores that dont work, or what films would have benefitted from a non-John williams score?

I can think of two, but since this is (1) entirely subjective, and (2) completely speculative, I feel like it's kinda useless for me to comment further!

[KC]

A welcome change from those who feel the need to post their CV to back up their elitist arguments.

This was never an elitist argument and I'm sure no one felt any needs. This discussion began over broad stroke dismissals made in this thread. Defending the obvious validity of something while acknowledging the validity of the other side of the coin doesn't make for an elitist attitude. Furthermore if you read my quote below from several posts before Kids' you will see that I am in agreement with his points...


We don't work in an idealistic environment. If you get hired for a film and the production wants it to sound a particular way -- perhaps like another movie score -- then you choose to either keep your job and deliver the goods with your own twist -- or you leave or get fired. Naive and idealistic thoughts about it being otherwise don't apply here, especially as these situations arise all the time in the industry. With this in mind, realize why you might hear the formulas re-applied from time to time in different films.

[KC]

Didn't John Williams score 'Sleepers'?
If I remember that was very low-key, and heavily eclectronic/synth dominated...

Yes he did...

[PaulR]

Hey Kid,

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I couldn't agree more.

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

Hey Kaveh

Let me ask you a question if I may. What's your 3 favourite films in this world?

[KC]

Hey Kaveh

Let me ask you a question if I may. What's your 3 favourite films in this world?

Hi Paul,

I'm afraid I don't have 3 favorite films...

Best,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[PaulR]

Hi Paul,

I'm afraid I don't have 3 favorite films...

Best,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

How about one then.

[Nick Batzdorf]

Wow! (Can I say Wow Nick?)

You're also a cretin! You said wow!

I'm so happy you're one of us, Paul.

[PaulR]

You're also a cretin! You said wow!

I'm so happy you're one of us, Paul.

Urgghh! Well! Thank you for a wonderful evening Nick.

Or is afternoon over there in the...flatlands!!!!

:D :D

[Marcussen]

I can think of two, but since this is (1) entirely subjective, and (2) completely speculative, I feel like it's kinda useless for me to comment further!
Nah... I'm curious :)

I gave it some thought and could not really find one. So i'm asking about peoples opinions, not facts :)

[kid-surf]

Kaveh--- Yep, we're basically saying the same thing in that regard. And btw, if it wasn't clear, my rant isn't directed at you. I'm just yap'n. ;)


Wilx -- I'll have to check out the Sleepers soundtrack (never seen that film btw, or heard the music). Does anyone know if he had "help" with it (the electronic parts), or is it all him. I guess there's still a chance I don't like it, but I wasn't aware that he'd done a hybrid score. Thanks for the heads up.......


IMO -- JW amounts to a Steven Spielberg (ironically enough). I think those types are really good at what they do.... I just feel there is more than one way to make an interesting film(score).



JonP --- i hear you. But I'm on the fence about good films. On one hand I'd rather score a good film than a P.O.S. But on the other hand you make more money the worse the film is. :D And well, my wife is pretty respected for her choice of material to represent (agent), but I actually try to get her to take on more and more cash cows, well, because it's expensive to live here. ;) None of the good films make any money "usually". They look good on paper, but they don't usually pay the bills. It's a balancing act trying to attain both..... it's not easy for any of us.


Idunno, I guess my point is: I'm glad it's mostly crap. It makes the "great" films stand out that much more. But it's generally really, really hard to get people interested in good films --- studios or theater goers. So I think things are about how they're supposed to be...

[PaulR]

But I'm on the fence about good films. On one hand I'd rather score a good film than a P.O.S. But on the other hand you make more money the worse the film is. :D And well, my wife is pretty respected for her choice of material to represent (agent), but I actually try to get her to take on more and more cash cows, well, because it's expensive to live here. ;) None of the good films make any money "usually". They look good on paper, but they don't usually pay the bills. It's a balancing act trying to attain both..... it's not easy for any of us.
Idunno, I guess my point is: I'm glad it's mostly crap.

Kid -that's the kind of honesty I certainly appreciate. It's only a movie (Hitchcock).

Anyone thinks that they're going to write great works every time they sit in front of a computer is sadly misguided by there overblown sense of history.

95% of what we write is going to be crap - and that's only if we're lucky.

[Ashermusic]

Kid -that's the kind of honesty I certainly appreciate. It's only a movie (Hitchcock).

Anyone thinks that they're going to write great works every time they sit in front of a computer is sadly misguided by there overblown sense of history.

95% of what we write is going to be crap - and that's only if we're lucky.

Once again, for me it comes down to the difference between craft and art.

Film scoring is largely a craft and if I write a score that serves the picture well, whatever its merit, then in my mind I have not created crap. Nor have I created music for the ages and that is fine.

Every once in a while a great film composer will create a score that transcends craft and is art also, particularly if he is inspired by a great film. When that happens it really is special. While it is no more or less likely to necessarily happen with an orchestra, hybrid, electronic, songs, etc. historically it has been with an orchestra. However these other kind of scores are relatively new so that may change.

[PaulR]

Once again, for me it comes down to the difference between craft and art.

Film scoring is largely a craft and if I write a score that serves the picture well, whatever its merit, then in my mind I have not created crap. Nor have I created music for the ages and that is fine.

Couldn't agree with you more. Cues are a craft that serve the whole. I'd rather be a director than a musician any day.


Every once in a while a great film composer will create a score that transcends craft and is art also, particularly if he is inspired by a great film. When that happens it really is special. While it is no more or less likely to necessarily happen with an orchestra, hybrid, electronic, songs, etc. historically it has been with an orchestra. However these other kind of scores are relatively new so that may change.

Couldn't agree with you more. Name 3 films where the score becomes art as opposed to craft in your opinion. Orchestral scores tend to be the ones we remember.

[kid-surf]

I agree with those thoughts as well.... spot on IMO. :cool:

[KC]

Once again, for me it comes down to the difference between craft and art.

Film scoring is largely a craft and if I write a score that serves the picture well, whatever its merit, then in my mind I have not created crap. Nor have I created music for the ages and that is fine.

Every once in a while a great film composer will create a score that transcends craft and is art also, particularly if he is inspired by a great film. When that happens it really is special. While it is no more or less likely to necessarily happen with an orchestra, hybrid, electronic, songs, etc. historically it has been with an orchestra. However these other kind of scores are relatively new so that may change.

Very true...

[Bruce A. Richardson]

Am I missing something, or did this thread just go to opposite land?

[joaz]

Am I missing something, or did this thread just go to opposite land?
It would seem peace has broken out, kid-surf's outbreak of pragmatism, seems to have cooled the fires of everyones ardor. Call back those dogs of war and give them a biscuit. :)
As a disinterested observer, I must say I enjoyed this fascinating and robust debate. It had never honestly occurred to me before that all you film-score types gave a s**t. :D
regards

[Jaibulu]

Am I missing something, or did this thread just go to opposite land?

I guess it did. It modulated into Cmin I think.

[PaulR]

Am I missing something, or did this thread just go to opposite land?

What else can happen when no one is prepared to answer questions? ;)

[Bruce A. Richardson]

sly dog...

[vegas]

eternal sunshine of the spotless mind...jon brion. dont be so pestimistic people:|:

[KC]

What else can happen when no one is prepared to answer questions? ;)

That must be it...

[midphase]

I think the evolution of this thread (or de-evolution) constitutes of unaswerables and unwinnable arguments. We are talking about subjectivity at best....it's like we're arguing which one is the best color of the rainbow.

The only realization that can come out of this is that we all have to learn to accept that there are some who really don't like orchestral scoring, and some who really don't like pop/electronic. Is that so difficult to accept?

[PaulR]

I think the evolution of this thread (or de-evolution) constitutes of unaswerables and unwinnable arguments.

Hehe Midphase. There are no arguments or tricks from here at least. Just Q & A. One either partakes or one doesn't. No right or wrong as you say - simply different ideas and tastes. ;)

[KC]

Hehe Midphase. There are no arguments or tricks from here at least. Just Q & A. One either partakes or one doesn't. No right or wrong as you say - simply different ideas and tastes. ;)

Assuming your comment is directed toward me I'll just say that I've made both my ideas and tastes clear throughout this thread and on more than one occassion. With that in mind, it strikes me as redundant to partake as you put it, in an obvious Q&A such as "what's your favorite movie" designed to somehow validate your opposing view to my tastes and opinion.

Best,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[midphase]

Assuming your comment is directed toward me


Is that regarding Paul's or my comment? My comment was directed towards nobody in particular. To be quite honest with you I have only had time to scan this thread and get the general gist of what has been going on.

[KC]

Is that regarding Paul's or my comment? My comment was directed towards nobody in particular. To be quite honest with you I have only had time to scan this thread and get the general gist of what has been going on.

Regarding Paul's...

[PaulR]

Assuming your comment is directed toward me I'll just say that I've made both my ideas and tastes clear throughout this thread and on more than one occassion. Best,
Kaveh
www.kavehcohen.com

Hehe - that was so long ago Kaveh, I've forgotton. You need to show a little patience - I am getting old and my memory is failing. :confused:

[KC]

Hehe - that was so long ago Kaveh, I've forgotton. You need to show a little patience - I am getting old and my memory is failing. :confused:

It's alright... truth is I don't even remember what we were talking about...

[PaulR]

It's alright... truth is I don't even remember what we were talking about...

Humour an old man who only wishes to learn. I am very frail and don't think I can make to the temple of JW alone.

Please help.

:o

[KC]

Humour an old man who only wishes to learn. I am very frail and don't think I can make to the temple of JW alone.

Please help.

:o

That's pretty amusing Paul.

To quote you: If I call you a cretin - don't take it personally...

;)

[PaulR]

That's pretty amusing Paul.

To quote you: If I call you a cretin - don't take it personally...

;)

WHAT!!! You think it's amusing to be in this state! What kind of a person are you??? Have you any idea what it's like to forget how to switch on your computer or keyboard?? Huh? That's very uncharitable if you don't mind me saying so.

I'm very disappointed.

[KC]

WHAT!!! You think it's amusing to be in this state! What kind of a person are you??? Have you any idea what it's like to forget how to switch on your computer or keyboard?? Huh? That's very uncharitable if you don't mind me saying so.

I'm very disappointed.

I'm sorry Paul. You're right. I'll take 100 lines:

I MUST LIGHT THE PATH TO JW'S TEMPLE
etc.

[PaulR]

I'm sorry Paul. You're right. I'll take 100 lines:

I MUST LIGHT THE PATH TO JW'S TEMPLE
etc.

Oh.....bollocks to it. I'm bored now anyway. Perhaps you'll come out to play another time. I thought you might bite - you would have had fun. Anyway, what was Brighton like?

:D

[KC]

Oh.....bollocks to it. I'm bored now anyway. Perhaps you'll come out to play another time. I thought you might bite - you would have had fun. Anyway, what was Brighton like?

:D

Brighton was great... although I spent most of my time in school (Saturday school as well). I hear it's become quite a place to visit...

[PaulR]

Brighton was great... although I spent most of my time in school (Saturday school as well). I hear it's become quite a place to visit...

Don't take it the wrong way - but I never liked it although it spawned one of the great rock keyboard players of all time. The last time I was there was for a musical function - a bastard to get to by road - and it still had a dolphinarium.
The best fun I had there was when me and a bird from Roedean (sic?) got drunk out of our minds. I didn't even know there was a music education establishment there - but there again, we RCM types look down our noses at everything. :rolleyes: ;)

So how are you finding it in LA? Are they asking you to do JW soundalikes all the time?

[KC]

I didn't even know there was a music education establishment there.

There isn't to my knowledge. Brighton College is a regular school.


So how are you finding it in LA? Are they asking you to do JW soundalikes all the time?

Why the constant barrage of JW rhetoric? I happen to like his writing style and this thread was about orchestral and non-orchestral approaches to scoring - not John Williams.

To answer your question and to quote Randy Newman -- I love LA. And no, I don't do JW soundalikes all the time...

[midphase]

hmmm you two....have you ever heard is IM's? :p

[dpc]

Wow <cretin alert> quite a thread. I thought excellent points were made by everyone: Too many bad orchestral scores too often. Pop music at it's nadir. Different levels of craft in modern composers (including none.) Producers want generic sounding scores and don't know anything about film. John Williams is great and not so great. Still great films being made with great scores of all varieties.

My personal favorite: untrained composers with no craft that is orchestrated to the hilt to no relief whatsoever.

[Nick Batzdorf]

You people should have just asked me. The answer is that sometimes big orchestral scores are right ("Star Wars"), sometimes pop scores are good ("The Graduate," "Midnight Cowboy"). Some effective underscore doesn't stand alone. Some effective underscore kicks hiney ("Patton," for one example of many). Some effective scores are effects.

Some of the most effective scores have not been orchestral ("Oh Brother Wherefore Art Thou"). One of the most effective scores was tracked: "2001."

Scoring is both an art and a craft. John Williams is frikking great. So what if he out-Wagners Wagner too often.

Any other questions?

[PaulR]

Aw! You two clowns would have to come out with all that. :D

I had a fish on the line then and was about to reel him in. You two always ruin my enjoyment. :n: :D

[Ashermusic]

You people should have just asked me. The answer is that sometimes big orchestral scores are right ("Star Wars"), sometimes pop scores are good ("The Graduate," "Midnight Cowboy"). Some effective underscore doesn't stand alone. Some effective underscore kicks hiney ("Patton," for one example of many). Some effective scores are effects.

Some of the most effective scores have not been orchestral ("Oh Brother Wherefore Art Thou"). One of the most effective scores was tracked: "2001."

Scoring is both an art and a craft. John Williams is frikking great. So what if he out-Wagners Wagner too often.

Any other questions?

Actually he takes far more heavily from Richard Strauss, Ravel, and Holst than Wagner.

No less than Igor Stravinsky said, "Good composers borrow, great composers steal."

[Nick Batzdorf]

Nicolai Ivanovitch Lobochevsky was his name. HO.

[spectrum]

No it's not- it's the effect any given music has, regardless of what instrumentation is used.

Dr Zchivago - the theme is a good one - but 50 million times throughout the film!!!!

Same composer - Maurice Jarre and Witness. Some really great scoring there, especially during the 'building the barn' scene.

Both films use standard orchestral scoring - one works and one gets on your nerves after while - sure, that is subjective.

Doesn't matter that it's an orchestra playing - could be anything.

He-he....

The Barn Building scene in Witness is 100% created with electronics...although it sounds orchestral.

One of the best examples of an electronic score being very effective on a musical level first....so much so that it seems like it must be "orchestral".

Part of the reason for the success there is that although it is electronic, it is not actually sequenced via MIDI....that cue was performed to picture by an electronic ensemble of Nyle Steiner, Michael Boddicker, Judd Miller, Michael Fisher, etc....all excellent musicians, so the score has a real "life" to it that the typical sequenced score of today lacks.

Interesting....if you listen carefully to the cue now, you'll hear how far away from a realistic orchestral mockup it is....but the performances and the writing was excellent and perfectly matched to the film.

I agree with the other posters that said that it's highly unlikely that today you'd be able to score a film about the Amish community 100% with synths and no acoustic instruments!

And yet it's a classic score which was perfectly married to the film.

The unique "electronic performance ensemble" approach that Jarre used in the 80s really gave those films (Dead Poets Society, Witness, No Way Out, Mosquito Coast, Fearless, The Year of Living Dangerously, etc) a signature sound that is really unheard in any of today's scores.

Interestingly, the only other composer that I'm aware of that works this way is Thomas Newman...who works with a core group of electronic performers as well as traditional orchestra...the evidence of the unique results of this kind of approach are abundant in all of his scores.

Great case in point for the arguments here in the thread. :-)

spectrum

[midphase]

One more...Philip Glass, he uses live synth players as well.

BTW...I love Philip Glass, he is simply amazing and quite frankly I enjoy listening to his scores more than the big composer scores.

[PaulR]

He-he....

The Barn Building scene in Witness is 100% created with electronics...although it sounds orchestral.

One of the best examples of an electronic score being very effective on a musical level first....so much so that it seems like it must be "orchestral".

Yes exactly Spectrum. That's it entirely. Hence my 'regardless of what instrumentation is used.' Scoring simply means the actual style and notation if you will - could be scoring with a sampler using elephant snorts up and down the keyboard. As I said - doesn't matter that it's an orchestra playing - could be anything.

The key word for me is 'effective' and always has been. One of the reasons, that maybe this part of the movie sticks in our minds, is not so much whether it sounds like an orchestra or not, but because of style - it builds with the barn very contrapuntally. This type of scoring takes time and skill. Contrapuntal writing is usually associated with 'orchestral sound'.


Part of the reason for the success there is that although it is electronic, it is not actually sequenced via MIDI....that cue was performed to picture by an electronic ensemble of Nyle Steiner, Michael Boddicker, Judd Miller, Michael Fisher, etc....all excellent musicians, so the score has a real "life" to it that the typical sequenced score of today lacks.

Yes. That will nearly always be the case in most things musical.


Interesting....if you listen carefully to the cue now, you'll hear how far away from a realistic orchestral mockup it is....but the performances and the writing was excellent and perfectly matched to the film.And yet it's a classic score which was perfectly married to the film.

Yes - perfectly matched. How often does that happen today? You would need to drag a lot of the younger writers out of the Temple of JW kicking and screaming before they ever understood those magnificent words - perfectly matched. There's a world of difference between a storming theme and incidental film music. :D


Interestingly, the only other composer that I'm aware of that works this way is Thomas Newman...who works with a core group of electronic performers as well as traditional orchestra...the evidence of the unique results of this kind of approach are abundant in all of his scores.

The other well suited scoring that comes to mind is Thomas Newman's work in Shawshank. The 'traveling to the tin box under the tree' scene is one of the best examples in recent times of scoring that actually communicates, even to the dullest of audiences.

Although, there are times when Newman's scoring can be a victim of it's own success - not often though, fortunately. ;)

[Marcussen]

Funny... last time I saw Witness I was really dissaponted and distracted by what I thought was a terrible score.

I mean - in my view its poor selection to make a synth score in a movie about an amish kid... Some might argue that "that was the interesting contrast bla bla"... I just did not feal that way about it at all. Poor choice IMHO :)

Or how bout a hybrid score for Alexander. I guess I might be old fasion, but I just dont like excessive electronics mixed with period peices

[spectrum]

I agree that it's an unusual and often wrong choice to use electronics in a period piece...the worst 80s cases being some of the moments from Gallipoli, Legend and Ladyhawk!

Tangerine Dream for period pieces is a really weird thing!

The Alexander score was really odd and dissapointing too...so you'll get no argument from me there! Of course the film was pretty wretched as well!

V a n g e l i s seems to be a long way from his Bladerunner days in the 80's

But Witness wasn't a period piece. It was about the clash of the modern world and a group trying to preserve an old way of life, and how the two societies crashed into each other - so the use of the electronics I thought was very appropriate and moody.

A lot of people remember the Barn Building scene music too - musicians and non-musicians alike - which is usually a good indicator that it was a pretty effective cue.

I think what happened was a bit of an overdose of trendy electronic scores in the eighties, so you have a backlash now of directors/producers taking less chances...which is a shame, since electronic instruments are so much more powerful and wideranging in color now.

I think it's a shame that for major studios it's turned into film=orchestral and tv=electronic bias.

At least some of the independent films don't seem to have that prejudice.

spectrum

[KC]

Well... at the end of the day, this subject is still entirely subjective. To reiterate, a large part of this thread was based on the general dismissal of the orchestra as an effective tool. With this in mind, I personally have acknowledged the "effective" use of non-orchestral approaches in film -- and will continue to do so.

There are far too many examples of the inappropriate usage of both approaches for both sides of this discussion to be able to reach a common ground. "Young writers" and the "JW's temple" comments aside, this comes purely down to taste -- which oftentime won't be swayed. This ultimately is not a question of musicianship, type of instrument ensemble or whether it was live or sequenced. These factors don't necessarily make for a more interesting, compelling or appropriate score.

But I suppose the beauty of it all is what we as the audience take away from the experience...

Best wishes,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[Daryl]

Not wishing to become too embroiled in this OT discussion, but one problem with orchestral scores is that many of the composers writing them haven't a clue how to write for orchestra :>)

D

[JonP]

To reiterate, a large part of this thread was based on the general dismissal of the orchestra as an effective tool.



No it wasn't. Read again, a lot of it had to do with the way in which it was/is used and the fact that it is so heavily called upon when more effective ensembles could be employed.


"Young writers" and the "JW's temple" comments aside, this comes purely down to taste

Yep....good and bad.

I'd love to dig into this all further but I'm off to Peru in a few hours and am preparing myself for the onslaught of panpipes.

[dpc]

I agree as to one's likes and dislikes being subjective no matter the subject.

Would everyone agree however that there is well constructed music and poorly constructed music i.e. good and bad music? A trashy piece of music might be perfect for a scene but is crappy orchestral drivel ever good for a scene? Is it a coincidence that we never get this awful stuff from Korngold, North, Goldsmith and company? (Herrmann, Fielding, Morricone etc.)

We get lots of this stuff from a number of 1st call composers today. Many composers still display a high level of craft and musicianship (all the Newmans, Carter Burwell and others.) But some of these guys really stink up the joint.

Thoughts?

[jc5]

I agree as to one's likes and dislikes being subjective no matter the subject.

Would everyone agree however that there is well constructed music and poorly constructed music i.e. good and bad music? A trashy piece of music might be perfect for a scene but is crappy orchestral drivel ever good for a scene? Is it a coincidence that we never get this awful stuff from Korngold, North, Goldsmith and company? (Herrmann, Fielding, Morricone etc.)

We get lots of this stuff from a number of 1st call composers today. Many composers still display a high level of craft and musicianship (all the Newmans, Carter Burwell and others.) But some of these former record producer arrangers really stink up the joint.

Thoughts?

No argument here. There is a disturbing amount of composers (or should it be 'composers'?) who get a great deal of attention yet bring very little of value to the table...

[Bruce A. Richardson]

I am not sure anyone called the orchestra an ineffective tool. I called it a vastly overused tool, often detrimental to scenes where another type of musical expression might serve better.

I hate to get into calling out specific composers or scores. I would not want the same judgement lowered onto me. I think everyone can relate to projects that go superbly, and the flipside of those that we would rather quietly forget (and invent pseudonyms to disguise). There are so many variables in collaborative projects like films that no one except those most closely involved can ever really know the story.

[PaulR]

We get lots of this stuff from a number of 1st call composers today. Many composers still display a high level of craft and musicianship (all the Newmans, Carter Burwell and others.) But some of these former record producer arrangers really stink up the joint.
Thoughts?

Thoughts Dave? This conversation, while interesting, as far as I'm concerned can go nowhere because films, are not about writing scores to impress musicians.

I don't give a toss in hell about writing music that other musicians like or don't like, personally.

The important thing is the film. The film is what an audience wants to see - they're not generally in the slightest bit interested in filmscores. They have no idea who JW, BH or DE is in the first place.
Film scores are about enhancement - like you say, Herrmann once said a score can be either brilliant or rubbish and still be equally effective and of course he's right.

Audiences don't come out of a film that's regarded as great, talking about the score. Scoring should almost be subliminal - in that is suggests moods. That's what I can't stand about sound tracks - I just watched Blow - bloody soundtracks all the way through.

If people want to write like any of these composers, particularly JW, then it had better fit the scenes, or their career will go nowhere fast. Even really good technical scoring can drag you out of a film.

Knackered!

:|:

[musikman]

I am not sure anyone called the orchestra an ineffective tool. I called it a vastly overused tool, often detrimental to scenes where another type of musical expression might serve better.
True, but orchestral scores have a property that no other musical expression has: They never get old!
Just imagine what would have happened to Star Wars if the score was made by some disco composer from the 70´s or even by some eletroacoustic composer like Wendy Carlos! :eek:
No way that George Lucas could continue the saga almost 35 years later to complete the trilogy and still comunicate with the audience.

[dpc]

Thoughts Dave? This conversation, while interesting, as far as I'm concerned can go nowhere because films, are not about writing scores to impress musicians. I don't give a toss in hell about writing music that other musicians like or don't like, personally.The important thing is the film.:|:

Well Paul, I imagine anyone who sets out to impress musicians as any kind of priority when scoring a film is off on the wrong foot skiing down Mount Everest. I can't imagine any composer of quality would be so childish as to take that approach.

I'm referring to the pitiful non-music that has found it's way into many a feature film. It's not just awful but also completely ineffective. Probably because that level of unawareness musically translates directly to an unawareness of film.

I can't name a single score where the music is dreadful crap but a great score. I would love to see a list of such. I come down firmly in the serve the film with an effective score camp. Whether a very simple score or a very complex one matters not but the final total of the film experience. I'm not lobbying for impressive music but rather against trite and inane crap that is wholly ineffective in serving the film.

Where's my clown suit?

[Nick Batzdorf]

I can't name a single score where the music is dreadful crap but a great score.

That's actually a good point - which is surprising considering how totally outrageous a man dp is.

There have been lots of competent yet derivative scores, but total crap is total crap sliced any way.

[midphase]

No way that George Lucas could continue the saga almost 35 years later to complete the trilogy and still comunicate with the audience.

I disagree....Blade Runner is a good example of an electronic score which still holds up 20+ years after it was written. So does Chariots of Fire. V~~~~~~~' scores could be interpreted as having a certain 80's-ish type of sound, but they worked as well back then as they do today.

[midphase]

hmmm...ok, this puzzles me but why is V~~~~~~~ censored out?

V~~~~~~~? V A N G E L I S?

Has he become synonimous with a profanity? I thought only John Tesh achieved an insult status!

[Nick Batzdorf]

I've heard him called Vaginis before. Maybe that's why it's censored?

[spectrum]

True, but orchestral scores have a property that no other musical expression has: They never get old!

No way!!! Strongly disagree with that notion.

You can't honestly say that 99% of the film scores done in the 1930s to the 1950s don't sound old or dated today....and those are nearly ALL orchestral scores! (true for the majority of scores in the 60s/70s as well)

Some hold up much better than others do, but they pretty much all have a "period" type of writing and orchestrating style. Even the very best stuff, like Bernard Herrmann's, Elmer Bernstein's or Ernest Gold's work sounds very much a part of that era and not altogether "timeless".

Don't misunderstand me....I'm a huge fan of the wonderful scores of that era, but they almost universally sound like they belong in that era.

In fact, there are very few film soundtracks and scores that don't reflect the time period in which they were made...and in many ways, that's part of their charm:

• The Studio Orchestra sound of the 1940s
• The maudlin and richly orchestrated approach of Bernstein in the early 50s
• The influences of Cuban music and Jazz to the scores of the mid fifties/early 60s
• The Ennio Morricone Spaggetti Western music of the 60's
• The 20 century experimental approach to scoring 70s films like A Clockwork Orange, Taxi Driver, 2001, etc.
• The piano-based scoring of Dave Gruisin in the 80s

So the electronic-heavy scores of the 80s/90s fits right in to the pattern...not better or worse than other eras with a "signature sound"

I agree that JW is one of the very best at producing timeless scores, but there's still a big difference in the use of music from Episode 4 and Episode 3....listening to Episode 4, you can hear a great deal of more acceptance and space given for the more experimental side of JW's work.

My point is that producing a timeless work is a wonderful goal, but there's nothing inherently wrong with reflecting the music that is going on around you at the time....especially if that communicates a universal emotion.

Timelessness has less to do with the instruments used, and more to do with the emotional quality of the music itself. The better the emotional connection, (and the less it hinges on cliches of the era) the more likely it will hold up over time.

Electronic scores are far younger than orchestral scores, so I think it's really interesting to see which ones seem to hold up over time...and to try and discern what elements make them work and last longer. Electronics is a newer voice and vocabulary than the orchestra pallette, so it's interesting to see what connects with people and doesn't end up in the "trendy" category.

In a lot of ways, this discussion is turning into being more about when is a musical device, approach or tool a "cliche" and when is it a "classic".

...good question! :-)

spectrum

[dpc]

Well a '39 Cadillac is timeless but I wouldn't want to drive one around town every day. Each era has it's limtations but I can't imagine changing a note of King Kong or re-recording it to get a better sound.

These are very happy marriages: old movie and old-time movie score/recording. Citizen Cane sounds new to me everytime I hear Herrmann's commanding music. The recording is wonderful.

It's true certain genre's can sound trite and dated but sometimes that's half the fun.

[MikeGraybill]

I agree with spectrum's post 100%, very well said imo.

I've been looking, like everyone here probably, to discern those patterns that make something timeless since begining to write, and I expect I'll still be bouncing things around in my noggin' one day when I'm 90 or so. When I think I "get" something, I always write with plain english (or rapid-jibberish) the thought out onto staff paper in a binder, with a notational example of something I wrote or heard to demonstrate the thought. I've got a small collection of these notebooks and I'm hoping they'll come in handy in coming years, plus its like a musical journal documenting my developement. Anyway, I've noticed many things (ice berg tip's I'm sure) that seem to make a work "timeless," but the strongest link I've seen in establishing a lasting connection with people seems to be a good melody that gets your heart/mind (whole other notebook or 20 on what makes that :rolleyes: ...) and a non-condescending, "interesting" developement of that melody. Typically that developement will surprise a listener, whether a little or alot, and our minds seem to like things that do that, at least within some confines of expectation - that the thing which people latch onto, the melody, like a lead character in a book or story, will be present in some way throughout the work. The melody can be left in most all ways, so long as it is returned to in order to demonstrate by contrast to the first iteration where the music has gone, and imply by this movement where it may go next. Since the melody gives folks an easy handhold to grab onto, and using contrasted repitition, people seem to become fond of the work as a whole and find satisfaction listening. Being memorable is a natural consequence. At least I think anyway, I mean, how should I know? I haven't written anything close to timeless yet :) . Just sharing some of my thoughts on what makes a work timeless. Excellent music is very much to be found not following anything like this - without melody and in some cases little or no repitition of anything at all. Timeless is a genre I think, like any other, one I find gratification in pursuing.

Folks are easily offended by the "different for the sake of difference" approach, and surprising a listener requires dancing along a thin line. I think that's probably why many of the timeless works are very subtle with their surprises. I find much of JW's stuff to be this way, and honestly don't know if it was for sophistication's sake alone, or that he was just playin' it safe. For more exotic fare on the "omg did I just hear that?!?!?" side of music, we seem to have to turn to other composers. Barber wrote lots of stuff besides his Adagio movement, but there is something about that work that surprised the first time I heard it, and found a way to a place of timelessness imo. Wish JW would cut loose a bit and take some risks with some of his stellar melodies, as I'm not a huge fan of his concert works.

I think that of the cliche-tools that smack of "dated-and-non-timeless," the worst are developemental ones, as it seems they are easily abused and talk down to the listener, contriving to go exactly where the composer thinks the listener wants to go, instead of taking the lead and moving towards something while drawing the listener, willing or no, into a place that pleasantly (or otherwise) surprises.

In school, it took me forever to realize that I wasn't studying composers past and present and their compositional techniques to know what has already been done and therefore what to avoid - it was to take that palette and use the wealth of accumulated knowledge towards my own goals, and along the way either refine techniques that interest me, or maybe even contribute to that palette myself one day.

While my notebooks may be filled with non-sense (wouldn't surprise me, my mind often enough is...) I'd have a blast swapping thoughts on timeless works and what comprises them. Guess I'll save it for another thread. It's late - I just hope I'm making even a little sense :)

[musikman]

I disagree....Blade Runner is a good example of an electronic score which still holds up 20+ years after it was written. So does Chariots of Fire. V~~~~~~~' scores could be interpreted as having a certain 80's-ish type of sound, but they worked as well back then as they do today.
Ok, but put V a n g e l i s aside and what is left? :confused:
I do agree that orchestral scores produced in the 40´s sound old today. But it is just because the way they were recorded, and the way they were used in the final cut!
In the past, movies used to have longer scenes with fewer cuts. The soundtrack was used in a way to add dramaticity to the scenes, and to compensate the lack of sound design and video fx, that were very poor at that time! Just watch "Arsenic and Old Lace" and you will see that music is used almost 100% of the time... You can´t blame the orchestra for that.
Take the technical limitations of the recordings and the editing style away, and you will see that those soundtracks sound pretty much like they would if they were produced today, but even better because in most cases they were better orchestrated thay they are today. :p

Edit: Have you seen "Ladyhawke" lately? It ilustrates my point perfectly. The score sounds ridiculous for today´s standards, but the movie is great. I just wonder that if the soundtrack was diferent, the movie would still comunicate with the audience today.

Edit2: Just another example, listen to Wojciech Kilar´s soundtrack for Dracula (1992). Very contemporary. Now just imagine the same soundtrack recorded with the gear of 40´s, and used in black and white movie. Did you get the picture? ;)

[spectrum]

Ok, but put V a n g e l i s aside and what is left? :confused:

Plenty!

The collected electronic film scores of Wendy Carlos, Maurice Jarre, Mark Isham, Thomas Newman, Bernard Hermann, Hans Zimmer, David Holmes, Michel Colombier and many others for just a couple of examples.

Most importantly, if producers and studios hadn't given electronic composers a chance to experiment...there would be no Bladerunner score at all.

A JW could have easily done an orchestral score for that film that would have worked fine....but then we would wouldn't have something as unique and landmark as the V A N G E L I S score.

(Minority Report springs to mind. A good JW score that served the film well to be sure, but to me...a hugely missed opportunity for someone more adventurous to do something more contemporary...imagine what it would have been like with an Aphex Twin, Massive Attack or Squarepusher score! The film would have had way more impact.)

I think that's the point. A big orchestra will usually sound pretty decent on a film score, so that's the "old faithful" tool that studios rely on....instead of being open to trying new things and coming up with a new vocabulary.


I do agree that orchestral scores produced in the 40´s sound old today. But it is just because the way they were recorded, and the way they were used in the final cut!

The recording is only half of the equation. It's also the writing and orchestration styles as well. I can think of very few scores from the 40s or 50s that you could use lock,stock and barrel by simply re-recording them and putting them into a modern film. The style of the writing and orchestration was quite different than current film scores.

When that type of writing is used today, it's usually to evoke another era....for instance Howard Shore's score for "Ed Wood" or Elmer Bernstein's final score for "Far from Heaven".

In fact, Bernstein is a great example of musical style=period. Since he started scoring films in the 50s, many of his musical signatures became the "film score cliches" later on...because he was so influential to several generations of film composers. Even when he would score a more modern film like "My Left Foot" or "The Rainmaker" for example, it would have a very "old school" vibe to it...because of the writing style, not so much because of the recording technique or the way the music is cut into the film.


Take the technical limitations of the recordings and the editing style away, and you will see that those soundtracks sound pretty much like they would if they were produced today, but even better because in most cases they were better orchestrated thay they are today. :p

Nah....there's no one "best" way to orchestrate. Orchestration is simply a set of choices. The orchestration choices of the 40s and 50s films are very different than the choices used today by someone like James Newton-Howard for example...but, you wouldn't say that his scores are poorly orchestrated by any means...it's just a completely different style and era of orchestration.

Film scoring is influenced by the contemporary music of its time....and so it should be!


Edit: Have you seen "Ladyhawke" lately? It ilustrates my point perfectly. The score sounds ridiculous for today´s standards, but the movie is great.

Couldn't agree with you more on that one! The music is horrible, cliched and totally innappropriate.

However, a lot of people felt that way at the time the film was released as well...so that's not a great example of an electronic score that was once great, now sounding dated....it was pretty much always bad!


I just wonder that if the soundtrack was diferent, the movie would still comunicate with the audience today.

I'm sure....that's a great example of the film not being served by the music at all.

But there are plenty of examples of failed scores...regardless of the style or instrumentation.

I'm sure that most of you are like me, in that when you see any film, you often think about how you would do the score differently. ;-)


Edit2: Just another example, listen to Wojciech Kilar´s soundtrack for Dracula (1992). Very contemporary. Now just imagine the same soundtrack recorded with the gear of 40´s, and used in black and white movie. Did you get the picture? ;)

Sure....for certain genres, like horror films, the orchestration and writing style hasn't changed too much....and the classic way of doing it still really works. That's become part of the vocabulary of those types of films.

But to get to that point of finding a classic and timeless style requires experimentation and risk.

The studio system now is becoming more and more risk-averse to new ideas in so many aspects of film making....and scoring is no exception.

spectrum

[Daryl]

Minority Report springs to mind. A good JW score that served the film well to be sure, but to me...a hugely missed opportunity for someone more adventurous to do something more contemporary...imagine what it would have been like with an Aphex Twin, Massive Attack or Squarepusher score! The film would have had way more impact.

spectrum

But you see this is all a matter of perspective and personal likes or dislikes. I thought that the score Minority Report was very good and was extremely glad that it wasn't covered with the usual Media Ventures pap. I would rather not imagine what it would have been like scored by Massive Attack et al; it certainly wouldn't be sitting on my DVD shelf :>)

D

[spectrum]

But you must agree that the Minority Report score was not groundbreaking or very unique sounding. Regardless of personal taste of style, that would have been a very good film to have something a little more adventurous and challenging...regardless of whether it was electronic or not.

Science Fiction films are often the domain of the more groundbreaking scoring work...so that's why I see it as a missed opportunity.

I contend that there should be a place for groundbreaking work in scoring, really trying new stuff and it's getting more and more rare every year with the big studio films.

spectrum

[KC]

But you must agree that the Minority Report score was not groundbreaking or very unique sounding. Regardless of personal taste of style, that would have been a very good film to have something a little more adventurous and challenging...regardless of whether it was electronic or not.

Science Fiction films are often the domain of the more groundbreaking scoring work...so that's why I see it as a missed opportunity.

I contend that there should be a place for groundbreaking work in scoring, really trying new stuff and it's getting more and more rare every year with the big studio films.

spectrum

This also depends on your definition of "adventurous" and "groundbreaking." Personally I found Williams' score for Minority Report, like his score for War Of The Worlds, to venture into darker and more brooding ground than Williams typically visits. Furthermore, since this is again entirely subjective, it is extremely difficult to dismiss this score as a "missed opportunity."

Personally, it is the mating of Williams' and Spielberg's sensibilities that makes the particular experience one has when viewing a Spielberg film. Removing the Williams element and replacing it with Aphex Twin for example -- although interesting to some -- would no longer constitute a Spielberg experience for some others. It may have the "impact" for you, but it is quite probable that the very essence would be lost as there is a particularly symbiotic relationship between a Williams score in a Spielberg film that cannot easily be replaced. With this in mind, it is likely that what has been described as a "missed opportunity" would simply become yet another cool looking and sounding, new and contemporary music video movie -- not a Spielberg film.

It is also hard to accept that simply having Aphex Twin or some of the others mentioned score a film automatically makes for a "groundbreaking" score. This may reflect your taste in music, however it doesn't necessarily reflect the correct fit for an underscore, nor does it make it more interesting, appealing, appropriate -- or groundbreaking.

Best wishes,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[Daryl]

But you must agree that the Minority Report score was not groundbreaking or very unique sounding. Regardless of personal taste of style, that would have been a very good film to have something a little more adventurous and challenging...regardless of whether it was electronic or not.

Science Fiction films are often the domain of the more groundbreaking scoring work...so that's why I see it as a missed opportunity.

I contend that there should be a place for groundbreaking work in scoring, really trying new stuff and it's getting more and more rare every year with the big studio films.

spectrum

I do agree that there was nothing particularly new about Minority Report and I'm all for something groundbreaking and exciting. However, I think that this is unlikely to happen in mainstream movie scores until the temp score phenomenon is laid to rest.
The other thing to bear in mind (and I don't think that this was a factor in MR) is that composers, as commercial musicians, often have to keep an eye on the soundtrack CD option as well as possible further usage for their music.

D

[PaulR]

Science Fiction films are often the domain of the more groundbreaking scoring work...so that's why I see it as a missed opportunity.
spectrum

Yes - take Forbidden Planet and The Day the Earth Stood Still for example. It's worth remembering that Herrmann was always trying groundbreaking new things back in the 40's even.

Close micing techniques for example, whereby a live orchestra could never sound like that. Or the Devil and Daniel Webster - 4 violins played by the same guy, I think, to sound like one mercurial rendition. Weird techniques in Jason and the Argonauts much later.

There's nothing that new these days really.

[dpc]

Yes - take Forbidden Planet and The Day the Earth Stood Still for example. It's worth remembering that Herrmann was always trying groundbreaking new things back in the 40's even.

I was going to mention these two films, particularly Forbidden Planet with it's wonderful electronic score which still sounds great and not dated at all.

Also Goldsmith's (the master of the hybrid orchestra/synthensizer score) Logan's Run which is as fresh and vital today as when it was released ('70's?)
Talk about impressive music that stands on it's own and perfectly serves the visual.

Got the house painted yet there Paul? Stay off the Gdamn ladder son.

[spectrum]

It is also hard to accept that simply having Aphex Twin or some of the others mentioned score a film automatically makes for a "groundbreaking" score. This may reflect your taste in music, however it doesn't necessarily reflect the correct fit for an underscore, nor does it make it more interesting, appealing, appropriate -- or groundbreaking.

Correct fit? What?....JW is always the correct fit for a Sci-Fi movie and an electronic artist wouldn't be an option? I don't buy that.

Sci-Fi film scores have a very long lineage of scores that are considered interesting, appealing, appropriate AND groundbreaking by electronic artists and using electronic instruments.

Wendy Carlos score for a A Clockwork Orange was widely considered groundbreaking. She was a pioneering artist in electronic music at the time....a very good fit for a Sci-Fi movie in many people's estimation.

V A N G E L I S score for Bladerunner was widely considered groundbreaking. He was a unique artist in electronic music in the eighties....a very good fit for a Sci-Fi movie in many people's estimation.

So who is doing the most innovative, electronic, futuristic "Sci-Fi" electronic music of today?

We are living in a time when there are some amazing people doing incredibly innovative stuff in electronic music. Aphex Twin is widely recognized as one of them....and there are numerous others as well...just one example of many possibilities.

I don't buy the argument that one of these modern electronic innovators wouldn't do something potentially groundbreaking and innovative in a modern Sci-Fi film...it's very appropriate to do something unique and really different for a film about the future.

After all, the point of every Sci-Fi film is supposed to be revealing a vision of something unknown and unknowable.

Obviously, no artist's work is going to be "automatically" groundbreaking or interesting - and I'm not suggesting that- ....but the potential is certainly there when you pair innovative visuals with innovative sounds and music.

JW was a safe choice, and he produced a very competent, but also very safe score for that film. There's not really any unique elements in the score that haven't been used before. I like it....but it leaves me hungry. :-)

Sure...I very much like to hear things that haven't been done before!

That used to be something I'd find in film scores, but it's getting to be increasingly more rare to experience this and you have to go way outside the film medium to do so. I don't think it should be that way.

[spectrum]

I do agree that there was nothing particularly new about Minority Report and I'm all for something groundbreaking and exciting. However, I think that this is unlikely to happen in mainstream movie scores until the temp score phenomenon is laid to rest.
The other thing to bear in mind (and I don't think that this was a factor in MR) is that composers, as commercial musicians, often have to keep an eye on the soundtrack CD option as well as possible further usage for their music.

D
Very true....there are a number of recent factors like this that have changed the landscape in negative ways for composers.

What's nutty is that sometimes a temp track score is more innovative sounding than one done by a composer (I'm thinking of Michael Mann's films like The Insider or Collateral, which are mainly temp scores with a little underscoring to connect the song excerpts.) It really shouldn't be that way, that composers are so hamstrung to be really creative. A good "needle-dropper" like Mann shouldn't be able to do something more interesting than a good composer!

I'm glad that at least some projects are given the larger budgets and time schedules to allow for some experimentation. Composers like Thomas Newman are doing a great job of straddling the needs of keeping the traditional elements and adding some unique elements to each score.

So there is hope! :-)

[spectrum]

Yes - take Forbidden Planet and The Day the Earth Stood Still for example. It's worth remembering that Herrmann was always trying groundbreaking new things back in the 40's even.

Yeah...it's sort of weird to me that most film scoring students idolize him by copying his style, but not copying his spirit of invention!

He was always interested in trying new things....the Master!

One wonders what our hero BH would have thought of all of this stuff....:-)

[KC]

Correct fit? What?....JW is always the correct fit for a Sci-Fi movie and an electronic artist wouldn't be an option? I don't buy that.

Hi Spectrum,

That's not at all what I'm saying. You're original post stated that the Minority Report score was ...
...a hugely missed opportunity for someone more adventurous to do something more contemporary...imagine what it would have been like with an Aphex Twin, Massive Attack or Squarepusher score! The film would have had way more impact. This statement clearly assumes that this approach would be more "impactful" and more "adventurous" which quite clearly is not necessarily the case. You stating "imagine what it would have been like" is again a reflection of personal taste only and does not constitute the same movie going -- and score -- experience for everyone. I personally can't imagine Minority Report scored by Aphex Twin or Massive Attack, particularly since being familiar with their music, I couldn't envisage their contribution to a Spielberg movie as groundbreaking or appropriate. As with the contents of this entire thread -- this is ultimately subjective and whether anyone buys it or not, it's difficult to accept broad strokes statements.

As far as sci-fi films having a long lineage of interesting and innovative scores -- I think that is true to a extent. There are select examples of these scores however let's not forget "groundbreaking" scores such as Goldsmith's "Planet Of The Apes" which still stands as one of the most innovative uses of an acoustic ensemble. Electronic instruments aren't the only tools uniquely capable of innovative sounds ...

Best wishes,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[Daryl]

I'm glad that at least some projects are given the larger budgets and time schedules to allow for some experimentation. Composers like Thomas Newman are doing a great job of straddling the needs of keeping the traditional elements and adding some unique elements to each score.

So there is hope! :-)

Thomas Newman is "big" enough to be able to do pretty much what he likes, I would imagine. However I'm sure he could still be hamstrung by the "The film's crap! What can we do to save it? Get a new composer" nonsense that happens from time to time.

FWIW Newman is one of my favourite film composers, not only from the fact that his music always fits the film, but much of it is listenable away from the picture.

D

[KC]

What's nutty is that sometimes a temp track score is more innovative sounding than one done by a composer

And more than often than not, temp score tracks aren't more innovative and are inevitably replaced.


A good "needle-dropper" like Mann shouldn't be able to do something more interesting than a good composer!


Who says Mann's needle drops are more interesting? Michael Mann's films are grossly overpopulated with songs. Collateral would have greatly benefitted from James Newton Howard being able to craft a linear and more effective score for the entire film, rather than weave in and out of song selections. The same goes for Heat and a few of Mann's other movies.

If we're going to talk about the artistic usage of source music, let's at least talk about Martin Scorcese.

[spectrum]

Hi Spectrum,

That's not at all what I'm saying. You're original post stated that the Minority Report score was ... This statement clearly assumes that this approach would be more "impactful" and more "adventurous" which quite clearly is not necessarily the case.

I think it's safe to say that JW's music is not as adventurous than the more experimental electronic artists I mentioned.

That was just a few suggestions though...I can think of many others that would have been more interesting or unique choices.

A Sci-Fi film score should almost always be a good opportunity to explore some new territory sonically and musically.

To me...a more adventurous approach has more Impact! :-)



You stating "imagine what it would have been like" is again a reflection of personal taste only and does not constitute the same movie going -- and score -- experience for everyone.

Well...of course!

We're talking purely about music here...personal opinion and taste is what it's all about. Obviously this isn't a discussion of empirical evidence or anything like that.

Discussions about what music is better for this or that will always be personal....but that doesn't mean it's not worth expressing our opinions on the subject...simply because it's subjective.



I personally can't imagine Minority Report scored by Aphex Twin or Massive Attack, particularly since being familiar with their music, I couldn't envisage their contribution to a Spielberg movie as groundbreaking or appropriate.

Well...I could...which is why I mentioned those possibilities! :-)


As with the contents of this entire thread -- this is ultimately subjective and whether anyone buys it or not, it's difficult to accept broad strokes statements.

You don't have to...opinions about music ARE broad stroke statements! We don't need to censor them or be afraid to express what we think about various scores. You're free to disagree with me all you like! :-)


As far as sci-fi films having a long lineage of interesting and innovative scores -- I think that is true to a extent. There are select examples of these scores however let's not forget "groundbreaking" scores such as Goldsmith's "Planet Of The Apes" which still stands as one of the most innovative uses of an acoustic ensemble.

Couldn't agree more!

Goldsmith was awesome at taking the vocabulary of 20th Century composition techniques, and using that in the context of film scoring.


Electronic instruments aren't the only tools uniquely capable of innovative sounds ...

Absolutely!

And Orchestras aren't the only tools uniquely capable of conveying emotion and drama either.

All the best,

spectrum

[KC]

Discussions about what music is better for this or that will always be personal....but that doesn't mean it's not worth expressing our opinions on the subject...simply because it's subjective.

Absolutely.


...opinions about music ARE broad stroke statements! We don't need to censor them or be afraid to express what we think about various scores.

Of course not! I have never suggested censoring any opinions and you shouldn't take my comments any more as an attack on your opinion as I do yours. I, like you, am expressing my opinion.


And Orchestras aren't the only tools uniquely capable of conveying emotion and drama either.

This is very true. I use Atmosphere as a unique tool all the time! Seriously though, I haven't suggested that the orchestra has exclusive domain...

Good talking with you,

Best wishes,

Kaveh

www.kavehcohen.com

[spectrum]

Likewise....always fun to talk about music! :-)

spectrum

[PaulR]

Yeah...it's sort of weird to me that most film scoring students idolize him by copying his style, but not copying his spirit of invention!

That's because it's impossible Eric. Idolizing anyone that's gone before - that way leads to madness. Part of it has already been mentioned I think - you can't legislate for the actual 'time'. What I mean by that is - the 40's/50's/60s etc. Musicians are obviously affected by their 'time'.
Film scoring was still fairly new and exciting - much less jaded than it is now. Scoring to black and white films a lot of the time, for example. ;) Scoring to films where the effects are done in front of the camera Ray Harryhausen style for instance. Scoring to actors that had real characters on and off the screen. Hahaha!


He was always interested in trying new things....the Master!

That's probably due to frustration with Herrmann more than anything else. Didn't really want to be a filmscore writer first off - wanted to be a conductor of his own orchestra doing the concert scene.


One wonders what our hero BH would have thought of all of this stuff....:-)

Uhhh - difficult to say. Mostly crap, probably. Partly because he didn't recognize others achievements that were contemporaries most of the time.
Although he wondered into a recording for some film once and started shouting at a young Goldsmith - 'Whaddya doin'! - whaddya doin'! That's way too good for those a@@holes!

It's like everything else - very dependent on mood and subjectivity. :D

[PaulR]

Got the house painted yet there Paul? Stay off the Gdamn ladder son.

Nope - not yet! Place is way too big. I'm moving! :D

[PaulR]

Wendy Carlos score for a A Clockwork Orange was widely considered groundbreaking. She was a pioneering artist in electronic music at the time....a very good fit for a Sci-Fi movie in many people's estimation.

Yes - one of those rare occasions - very interesting score for an absolutely dreadful film.

[Daryl]

I think it's safe to say that JW's music is not as adventurous than the more experimental electronic artists I mentioned.

spectrum

In one sense I agree with you, but none of the artists that you mention have been in the least bit innovative harmonically or melodically; there is nothing that hasn't been done a million times before (and for nearly 100 years). However, it is the combination that could be considered to be innovative.

D