Clint Eastwood goes Shyamalan-y with "HEREAFTER"

IMDB says he isn't scoring it himself? I imagine that this film could inspire a composer to come up with some really cool stuff. Eastwoods own music is usually fine, though it seems almost without exception that his films could have had great scores had someone other than him written the music. That said, I really enjoy his guitar theme from Unforgiven - it's beautiful!

This film looks excellent - it's one of my most anticipated films for the rest of the year. I hope Eastwood gets his groove back after the lackluster Invictus.

UNFORGIVEN is a very good score, menacing and broody, Eastwood could do with a guiding hand like Lennie Niehaus.

Yeah, Niehaus is still orchestrating for Eastwood anyway.

Did you know that Zimmer tried to get the scoring job on Unforgiven, but was told by Eastwood himself that he's got a composer already?

No, I didn't know that? I'm glad Zimmer didn't get the scoring duties.

I can't imagine anyone further from Eastwood's own scoring sensibility! I wonder if the reason he does it himself is that he thinks a "proper" film composer would be too overbearing. I'm sure he'd find someone if he looked far enough.

You know it is his money that he puts up. Your like someone who has $20 to spend on a book and your telling them what to buy. Or your telling them what to eat when they go out with their own money. The man is a billionare. His pictures are wildly successful so why should he change. Now if 20 million people write to him and tell him that is a different story. Your answer is simple. Don't go see the movie, don't buy the score, and write a letter to Warner Brothers complaining that the soundtrack is so terrible it makes the film unwatchable. What about Woody Allen? No original material only classical. Tarentino similiar situation. Everything in the world doesn't have to be this complex frame by frame Lord of the Rings type soundtrack. Even one of my favorites Max Steiner had a way of too much music.
Thomas
Thomas

Well, depends. Zimmer can do an understated work (Frost/Nixon anyone?) if asked for it. Knowing the year when Unforgiven was filmed and release... Zimmer wasn't known as the overbearing composer he is known for being today. His only "properly" Hollywood action work by then was Backdraft, usually he was doing smaller dramas (Regarding Henry). OK, K2 is from that year.

I think something like Unforgiven would be interesting to hear from him. Broken Arrow doesn't really count as a western, now does it? (Even with all the Morriconian inspirations). I know that he *always* wanted to score a western. He would do something Morricone-inspired for sure.

True but his score to Changeling was probably one of the worst scores I've ever heard. While the theme was alright (when heard the first time at the beginning of the picture) Eastwood repeated it ad nauseum. It was completely the wrong tone for the film.

-Erik-

I thought The Changeling was an excellent film. Jolie gave an outstanding performance so much so I've forgotten the music. His pictures aren't about scores at all. The two pictures I remember that had outstanding themes that Clint acted in were The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly and Play Misty For Me. As far as thematic material is concerned it doesn't get any better.
Thomas

I agree that as a whole The Changeling was excellent but he nearly ruined it with his music. So much so that my wife would scream out "Come on, Clint!" every time the theme showed up. It was very distracting!

-Erik-

The Changeling is a very good film, well worth watching.

I don't remember the music at all.

You really believe that The Changeling turned off so many people because of the music that people that saw the film commented to others the music ruins it don't waste your money. It was all about the story and Jolie well worth the price.

Thomas

I couldn't disagree more. Quite the contrary, he knows very well what he's doing. OK, so he's not a traditional symphonic composer or whatever, but who says that every single film must have one of those? Thank God for versatility, I say, and for different approaches. Criticizing Eastwood's scores based only on the idiom of music is a bit like criticizing an Ingmar Bergman film for not having more explosions! You have to consider what the film wants to communicate, what its style is etc. and how the music resonates with that.

To be honest, I'm relatively indifferent to Clint's music. What annoys me like there's no tomorrow, though, is the narrow-mindedness that exists in evaluating a score based only on one's own musical preferences, as if there's only one valid approach, one valid style of film music etc. (not only referring to you, D, but the criticism in general).

I don't know about everyone else but when my wife and talked about the film to others who hadn't seen it we DID mention the annoying music.

-Erik-

Well, that's your opinion. However, as I already said, you can't judge a film score's quality purely by how it SOUNDS. Film music plays by a whole other set of rules. There are scores that are sound design, there are scores that are symphonic, some are electronic and yes, some are very simple in both melody and orchestration. BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN is another example - basically just a simple guitar motif repeated in various guises throughout the film. That probably qualifies as "childish and undeveloped" in your ears too. But oh how effective is, how much it gives the film its iconic status and identity.

Now, tell me how you feel Clint's music goes against the visuals and the moods/narratives he wishes to convey, and we might have a constructive discussion going. Otherwise, I'm just going to believe that you're judging it as if it were music composed for its own sake, and it happens to be a type of music you don't like.

In other words, tell me how you think his music fails as FILM music, not merely as music!