Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (Hans Zimmer & Junkie XL)

Yeah, exactly.

I once got into an argument about Bullitt. A guy claimed that the scene was scored due to a track title (Shifting Gears, if I remember correctly), but what is scored is the "prelude" to the chase.

Exactly, where he plays himself , in indies. All the same character, but does that very well. Other kinds of acting? not so much i think. Limited canvas.

Yeah music would've drowned out those amazing sound effects that Ben Burtt came up with for the speeder bikes flying through the forest. Great idea of everyone involved to not use Williams there.

I completeky agree on the writer's assertion of Snyder's vision of Superman. He does hate him.

Tell that a 12 year old.

It's Supes v Bats. I am compelled by forces outside my control to see it regardless of reviews.

I disagree with both of those assertions. Both film and score have weaknesses, but both also have great strenghts. I say it again -- it's an uneven affair with the good being really good and the bad being quite bad.

Wish it were easy to always boil it down to a black'n'white 'good' vs. 'bad', but sometimes things are just in the middle.

Thankfully, musical enjoyment isn't logical -- just pure gut/emotions!

That's not true at all. In fact, that assertion is mostly a result of ignorance (I'm not talking about you in particular, but in its general reception). If you've seen the film, you'll see that the score is perfectly matched throughout. A few pop beats in the tongue-in-cheek action/transportation scenes, which actually adds energy. The rest is straight-out, oldfashioned symphonic medieval in the style of Horner or Williams.

It's the victim of a kind of 'self-fulfilling prophecy', wherein it's mentioned in 'worst' threads so many times, people take it for granted that it's bad -- even if they have very limited knowledge of the score in the film; or taken the proper time to see how the score works (whether the score is enjoyable on album is another, in this case irrelevant, aspect altogether).

I see sorta the same thing happening now with BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN -- even if it's obviously a FAR weaker score than LADYHAWKE overall.



That's your opinion. I don't share it. I think he's proven both a) that he's able to use his electronica background for interesting textures (often better than 'traditional' composers who try to approximate what it sounds like) and b) traditional soundscapes (like the string writing in MAD MAX) that is surprisingly sophisticated.



Another contention I strongly disagree with, most recently exemplified by the extremely emotional INTERSTELLAR.



There are other ways to approach the film beyond the connection to the heroes. If you see it as an auteur piece, there are many fantastic Snyder elements in the first 2/3rds of the film. It's only in the last third that it goes generic/Marvel.

No, I think this -- both film and score -- is a victim of a special psychological/sociological phenomenon, wherein a majority is so vocal in their distaste, people on the "fence" join in. And I can say that even if I have several issues with both film and score. I just don't think the "criticism" I see is rational and fair.

(by the way, I take it for granted that you've actually SEEN the film?).

I just don't hear that many "interesting textures" with Junkie. I'm sorry. Cliff Martinez, who as you know I very much don't care for, has far more interesting textures than Junkie.

Actually, let me rephrase: yes, Junkie is occasionally capable of interesting textures. I liked some of the retro electronics he used in Divergent and Mad Max, even Deadpool. But in all those scores, he then goes on to drown them out in a sea of bad synths emulating orchestral sounds (that harsh synth brass he uses is just so ugly and cheap-sounding) and loud colorless drumming (seriously, compare the percussion writing in your much-hated Gods of Egypt...so many different types of struck instrument, so much color and variety!). And what exacerbates all of that (and squashes even further what textures he has) is his dreadful wall of sound mixing. I drag any of his action cues into Audacity and I see a big blue rectangle. No dynamics, no room for anything to breathe. I know that's not a problem exclusive to Junkie, but he's one of the worst, and it reduces the nuance level in his music from not-much to total zero.

I was just wondering, if I would like to see a film blending the talents of Richard Donner and Tim Burton, of John Williams and Danny Elfman? Good Lord, yes I would. Even so I like Zimmer's music.

Volker

I don't know what film you've watched, but it can't be LADYHAWKE. You're WAY off here, or you've COMPLETELY forgotten everything about it. I urge you to re-watch it, and tell me where this socalled "mis-match" is occuring.



Yes, we're rather opposite here. A lot of the 'hatred' in certain film music circles comes from people who only discovered JXL through his film scores in the last couple of years. But for those of us who have been following his career at least since the Elvis/"A Little Less Conversation" period, it's been fascinating to follow his evolution -- both in his non-film work and his film work. I think he's been very adept at using his existing specialty skills in a dramatic fashion, as well as tapping into the "zeitgeist" of whatever is relevant in the film score world. AND given us a few surprises in a more traditional, symphonic setting. Simply put, I love what he's doing.



I don't think it's an exception. I think he's constantly re-inventing himself -- especially if the source material is inspiring (to be fair, I don't think this particular film was, although I like some 30 minutes of the score regardless).



Excuse me, but that's nonsense. The source material has no relevance whatsoever. If you have certain trademarks as a director (as an auteur), you can apply that to ANYTHING -- whatever the source material. Are you saying Baz Luhrman shouldn't have done what he did in ROMEO & JULIET because Shakespeare is such an iconic writer? Only 14th century adaptations need apply?

Granted, it's a long, very long time since I saw it.
I'll try again as soon as the opportunity arises.



Of COURSE it does.
No one sees Luhrman's version (or West Side Story) as THE Romeo and Julia.
Just as none see David Niven's James Bond as THE James Bond.
These are more or less successful creative interpretations. They have their place and their worth...but they are in no way THE thing they interpret or represent.

If Supes vs. Bats was an "auteur" piece it would have had to step clearly outside of the existing canon and expectations and make clear from the start that this is not THE Superman and THE Batman, but an out-of-the-box take on them, a creative re-interpretation, if you will.
But it isn't.

It's clearly reported and clearly defined to be within established continuity.

Hence there is no way it can be an "auteur" piece: Snyder is not the author (and it's arguable if he even has a trademark style; compare Tim Burton's take on Batman that stayed within continuity, yet clearly bore a Burton signature. It still was in no way, shape or form an 'auteur piece').