[Closed] Now Playing XLVII

Jackman wasn't scoring Bucky Barnes' character with that theme. He was scoring the terrifying feeling of being stalked by a mysterious, legendary, apparently-supernatural killer (i.e. he's been around for 50-60 years and still has the same description, so he can't just be a normal guy). And he captured that perfectly. Like all great film scores, the film and its tension are elevated drastically by that creepy music. In fact, if not for the way Jackman scored it, the Winter Soldier scenes would have lost most of their dramatic tension, because we already know that this supposedly terrifying character is just Bucky and we would just be waiting around for him to regain his sanity instead of being afraid of what he's going to do next. And continuing to use that music in the museum scene, well I agree that it could have been handled differently, but it's an attempt to continue to project an aura of horror around the character and the terror of having one's memories stripped away. I think the music in that scene particularly is a good reflection of how it felt to be Bucky at the time, don't you? All rage and fear and pain without even the dignity of really knowing why any of it is happening to you.

I see what you are saying and agree that your suggestions would have been a valid way to go. But I do think the way Jackman went is also valid and that's why the score works so well for me both in the film and as a standalone listening experience, where it's a roller-coaster of emotions achieved quite unconventionally. With sonic candy to sweeten it up!

Me too. For Timmer!

Well, it seems we've reached that point again.

As fans of filmmusic, we have, of course, a completely different approach to scores. We love certain styles and dislike others, and when we have favourites among the composers or have certain expectations about how this or that film should have this or that kind of score, we are usually getting upset if our expectations aren't met by the actual score.

But that doesn't change the fact that composers don't write a score to please their fans or the filmmusic community as a whole (although some try and/or are perfectly aware of that audience, not always to the benefit of the score), but to complement the movie they are hired for to score.

As such, it's our fault if we judge a score by listening to the album first, not liking what we hear, and then feel negatively about it when a certain disliked track appears in the movie whenever we actually get to see it. You have to keep in mind that it's meant to be the other way around: First you watch the movie, and then, if you dislike the score, you can say so and move on, and if you like the score and are blown away by it, you have the choice to buy it to enjoy it as a genuine experience. That's what the score album is for, for people who enjoyed the score.

If you first listen to an album and think it's bad just because you don't like what you're hearing and blame the composer, it's close to buying a death metal album although you know you don't like death metal, and then blame the band for playing death metal.

I know it's not that simple, but it surely is the basic premise a lot of you guys tend to forget. You don't like a score in a movie? Fine. Then don't listen to it, don't buy it, and move along. Accept that there are people out there who like it, and be done with it. But saying it's a bad score just because you don't like it is just a bit too much on the egocentric side for me to ever accept such an opinion.

Music is about taste, and if you don't like something because of your taste, that's perfectly fine. But that should be it, then. And, most certainly, don't judge a score by its album. The album is for those who liked the score in the movie.

Fact.

Well, I also had to post on their Facebook to get anyone to email me back, but they have said they are in the process of having the CD re-ripped, so hopefully this will soon be resolved for any future potential purchasers who might decide to check it out after reading these comments...

Absolutely. As I said, everyone is inclined to hate what (s)he wants. It's just when an opinion is based on an experience that's not meant to be the intended experience when the opinion becomes "faulty" (or any other version of "wrongly-based" you prefer). I'd compare it with watching a big cinemascope movie in 4:3 mode on a 2 inch cell phone screen for the first time and then saying it was bad. Well, that's an exaggeration, of course, but just to make it more clear what I meant: Never judge the OST first. Watch the movie, then make your choice whether you think it's a good score or bad, then, if you like it, go on and listen to the album. Of course most of us don't do that - but we hardly ever think about the fact that we're doing the opposite of how it's intended to be done.

A lot of scores need the images they were written for in your mind for you to appreciate the notes. There are so many scores I didn't care for at first which became favourites of mine after I saw the movie they were composed for.

But that's just it. How can you judge a piece of music in a presentation form as pure music if this music is not originally meant to be enjoyed as a pure musical experience? That's the genuine difference to any other music genre. Many people argue that it's sold as an album and should be judged as an album. I say "no" to this. This is the one genre where the album is not meant to be this single experience. I say the album is for the people who watched the movie and liked the music in it. They can afterwards go and buy the album.

You can, of course, say, the album is a bad representation of the score as it is used in the movie, or you can critizise some technical things or its length (cheers, Thor). But don't judge it as a pure musical experience. It's just not fair.

However - there are, of course, many, many scores which actually do provide a great stand-alone listening experience, where you don't need the movie to enjoy the music. Some scores are way better than the movies they were written for. We all know that. But that doesn't change the fact that a score doesn't aim to be a great stand-alone listening experience. It aims to be a great score for the movie. That's all. If you've seen the movie, and thought the music didn't enhance it, then you can say "That's a bad score". But then don't listen to the CD afterwards and say "That's a bad album", too.

And now, off to something funny:
Who can name a score that's actually a great stand-alone listening experience on CD, but a total crap score?

I'd risk saying quite a bit of Da Vinci Code. Some of the best music Hans ever wrote, but totally overdone for the film (save for Chevaliers).

NP: CINDERELLA (Patrick Doyle)

One of the best scores he's written in the last 5 years, especially if you program out all the polkas and waltzes midway.

Source music? I adore Doyle's original waltzes.

NP: Dragonheart 3 - Mark McMenzie

Unfortunately, it seems like McKenzie was instructed to write to a Game of Thrones temp track. Or something similarly Djawadi/Balfe-ish. I'm only part of the way through the album but it's far more Remote Control-ish than anything he's written before, and that of course is not his strength. It's still very competent but I hope it gets a bit more...beautiful later on.

Alan did you see my update on the Kaska situation?

NP: Star Wars I through VI - John Williams

My own time honoured playlist of the stellar hexalogy. Some 160 minutes of music.

Volker

The thing is, I listen to way, way more scores than I ever watch movies. I listen to (and love) tons of scores from movies that I have no interest in ever watching. Judging them based on their album (or, more accurately, in terms of how they work as standalone music) is the only way I can fairly assess all scores on the same level. Disagree with my "criteria" all you want, but that's just always how I'm going to look at film scores.

And seriously - of all the truly classic film scores, of all the ones that are remembered and loved and have stood the test of time - how many of them don't work as music? Not a single goddamn one is how many of them.

HRMPH!

Must.....resist.....getting....involved....

Yes, I did see your recent update. It's a shame that it takes the power of social media (and the negative exposure) to get them moving on things. I am a bit skeptical about their statement about re-ripping the CD: how long does it take to rip a CD and update their site? What they told you does seem to be at odds to what they told me - that they themselves are unable to remove/amend the details of an album...unless they have at last had a contact with the composer and Kaska is providing them with new rips.

I have not checked, but I wouldn't be surprised if CD Baby haven't yet updated their site to alert people to the issues with the digital tracks/album.

I hope that it gets sorted out to your satisfaction.