• Categories

Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

 
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteven
    • CommentTimeJun 16th 2009
    biggrin

    Very subtle.
    •  
      CommentAuthordgoldwas
    • CommentTimeJun 18th 2009
    Last month composer Steve Jablonsky recorded his score to the highly anticipated summer action sequel, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. Directed by Michael Bay, the score for the film builds on the first film, with a 71-piece orchestra, choir and electronics - and ScoringSessions.com is thrilled to bring our readers the exclusive coverage from the sessions!

    http://www.scoringsessions.com

    Enjoy!
    I consider a project a success when Thor says he won't buy it
    • CommentAuthorColSharpe
    • CommentTimeJun 18th 2009
    dgoldwas wrote
    Last month composer Steve Jablonsky recorded his score to the highly anticipated summer action sequel, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. Directed by Michael Bay, the score for the film builds on the first film, with a 71-piece orchestra, choir and electronics - and ScoringSessions.com is thrilled to bring our readers the exclusive coverage from the sessions!

    http://www.scoringsessions.com

    Enjoy!


    An actual orchestra was used? You don't say!
    •  
      CommentAuthorBregt
    • CommentTimeJun 18th 2009
    O'rly?
    Kazoo
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeJun 19th 2009
    Banjos?

    -Erik-
    host and executive producer of THE CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO PODCAST | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
    •  
      CommentAuthordgoldwas
    • CommentTimeJun 19th 2009
    Erik Woods wrote
    Banjos?

    -Erik-


    Don't get me started!!!! wink
    I consider a project a success when Thor says he won't buy it
  1. Autobots take over MainTitles, steam away

    - Steamboy
    - Transformers
    - Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

    Autobot presence detected. Commence termination
    waaaaaahhhhhhhh!!! Where's my nut? arrrghhhhhhh
    •  
      CommentAuthorMarselus
    • CommentTimeJun 27th 2009
    Thomas Glorieux wrote
    Autobots take over MainTitles, steam away

    - Steamboy
    - Transformers
    - Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

    Autobot presence detected. Commence termination

    Good reviews Thomas punk Exactly my thoughts on the three of them.
    Anything with an orchestra or with a choir....at some point will reach you
  2. Marselus wrote
    Thomas Glorieux wrote
    Autobots take over MainTitles, steam away

    - Steamboy
    - Transformers
    - Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

    Autobot presence detected. Commence termination

    Good reviews Thomas punk Exactly my thoughts on the three of them.


    wow, must be doing something right today
    thanks Marselus wink
    waaaaaahhhhhhhh!!! Where's my nut? arrrghhhhhhh
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemonStar
    • CommentTimeJun 27th 2009
    Great reviews, Thomas! beer
    •  
      CommentAuthorMarselus
    • CommentTimeJun 27th 2009
    Any plans on reviewing more of Jablonsky´s works (Gears of War 2, D-War, The Island, both Texas Chainsaw Massacre)?
    Anything with an orchestra or with a choir....at some point will reach you
  3. Marselus wrote
    Any plans on reviewing more of Jablonsky´s works (Gears of War 2, D-War, The Island, both Texas Chainsaw Massacre)?


    The Massacre's I haven't heard yet. D-War and The Island were a long time ago and Gears of War 2 is the only one I have
    waaaaaahhhhhhhh!!! Where's my nut? arrrghhhhhhh
    •  
      CommentAuthorWilliam
    • CommentTimeJun 27th 2009
    Thomas Glorieux wrote
    Autobots take over MainTitles, steam away

    - Steamboy
    - Transformers
    - Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

    Autobot presence detected. Commence termination


    punk
  4. Those reviews are great!

    Transformers is pure fun on any possible level that a Bay movie has to offer, and Jablonsky´s score meets that in every scene, every track, and the album is a great listen.

    Coming back from seeing T:RotF this afternoon and having listened to the score just once, I agree with this being not so easily enjoyed, but it has its amazing highlights and will be played a lot in the next weeks and months to come.

    Steamboy is the one score I would recommend to anyone who has the patience to listen to the whole album in one run, without skipping forward or over uninteresting tracks, because you might miss the slow build-up of the themes that you will start to hum after listening to it. Steamboy is the kind of fun we used to have with scores back in the old days when they knew how to set up themes properly and you could just count on it that the best variations were coming at the end. Take your time with this score, and you´ll not be disappointed.
  5. well, I try to do my best wave
    waaaaaahhhhhhhh!!! Where's my nut? arrrghhhhhhh
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2009
    STEVE JABLONSKY | Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009)

    My capsule review, at: http://christodoulides.blogspot.com/200 … ge-of.html
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    • CommentAuthorTimmer
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2009
    Nice review, I'll watch the film when it's on DVD and then I'll hear the score too.
    On Friday I ate a lot of dust and appeared orange near the end of the day ~ Bregt
    •  
      CommentAuthorSunil
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2009
    Christodoulides,

    I never knew this before. You are highly talented. I just visited your blogspot. I say writing reviews is not an easy job. I really appreciate your work. You are a versatile person. I wish you prosperous and happy life forever. I envy you, buddy! (very friendly one). wink

    Have a nice day!
    Racism, Prejudices and discrimination exists everywhere.
    •  
      CommentAuthorRalph Kruhm
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2009 edited
    Nice review, just one thing, though.

    I consider myself a fan of classical filmmusic and the new stuff. I can, and do, appreciate both, and I see no need why a fan of classical filmmusic has to be turned away by this score.

    I think filmmusic has developed into different sorts of food. Just for the sake of the example, and because I know a lot of people will agree, classical scoring can be considered to be a rich menu, while the new stuff may be called junk food.

    My point is, there are times for the rich menu, and times for the junk food. I can enjoy both. BUT I will not like every menu, and I don´t like every sort of junk food. But for both kinds of food, there is a time and a place.

    Same with filmmusic.

    I would love to see the argument old vs. new going away, and people concentrating on which old music is good, and which new music is good, and stop discussing whether old music is better than new music. Because it isn´t. It´s just different. It´s evolution.

    I think new music has developed so far away from classical scoring that you can easily identify a different approach, style, maybe era. Is early music worse than music from the Renaissance era? Certainly not. It´s just so different that a comparison is not only impossible, but unnecessary.

    Of course, one can say, I don´t like early music. But that´s just taste, not a question of quality, or is it?

    Same with filmmusic. It happened before, I know a lot of people who won´t dig Golden Era Scoring, but love scores from the 80ies. I don´t think one of them would argue that one or the other is better. They are just different. Same with classical scoring as a whole vs. RC stuff.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSouthall
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2009 edited
    Ralph Kruhm wrote
    I would love to see the argument old vs. new going away, and people concentrating on which old music is good, and which new music is good, and stop discussing whether old music is better than new music. Because it isn´t. It´s just different. It´s evolution.


    Or devolution! smile

    I agree with your general point and there is no reason to dismiss a score simply because it doesn't sound like they used to. The key question is - is this score the best one that this film could have received? Given that the style of the score is probably dictated by the filmmakers - could a different score, but done in a similar style, have worked better? I think that's the question to ask. I suspect me and you would have different answers to the question in the case of this particular score!
  6. Possibly, but not necessarily.

    Do you like the score for the first movie?

    If not, which kind of stylistically similar score would you have chosen or preferred?

    If your answer is yes, do you think the score for Part 2 is better or worse than Part 1?

    I think in the movie, they are on par. There is some great stuff missing from the CD. The album itself is weaker than part 1, but it certainly has some good new stuff in it, especially the darker elements for the Fallen.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSouthall
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2009
    I thought Part I worked much better in the movie than on the album. It wouldn't have been the score I would have chosen for the film, but given the style is what the filmmakers wanted, I wouldn't criticise Jablonsky for his efforts (I don't think it makes a very good album, but that's an entirely different matter).

    I haven't seen Part II so unfortunately can't comment. (I think the album is worse than the first one though.)
  7. A very thoughtful and fair comment. beer
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2009
    Ralph, thanks for the comments, much appreciated If you what i wrote a bit more carefully though, you'll see that it's not an argument of the old vs new, but rather those who like Jablonsky/RC/Zimmer sound vs those who don't. Plus there's details on the 1st one vs the 2nd score too. smile
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorThor
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2009 edited
    Southall wrote
    I agree with your general point and there is no reason to dismiss a score simply because it doesn't sound like they used to. The key question is - is this score the best one that this film could have received? Given that the style of the score is probably dictated by the filmmakers - could a different score, but done in a similar style, have worked better? I think that's the question to ask. I suspect me and you would have different answers to the question in the case of this particular score!


    I don't think that's a very fruitful question to ask, to be honest (i.e. how it COULD HAVE been or SHOULD HAVE sounded).....would LORD OF THE RINGS have sounded better with 14 kazoos? No, I would prefer reviewers to discuss the actual item as it exists - either as independent album experiences or as how they worked in the movie, pros and cons.
    I am extremely serious.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSouthall
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2009
    Thor wrote
    Southall wrote
    I agree with your general point and there is no reason to dismiss a score simply because it doesn't sound like they used to. The key question is - is this score the best one that this film could have received? Given that the style of the score is probably dictated by the filmmakers - could a different score, but done in a similar style, have worked better? I think that's the question to ask. I suspect me and you would have different answers to the question in the case of this particular score!


    I don't think that's a very fruitful question to ask, to be honest (i.e. how it COULD HAVE been or SHOULD HAVE sounded).....would LORD OF THE RINGS have sounded better with 14 kazoos? No, I would prefer reviewers to discuss the actual item as it exists - either as independent album experiences or as how they worked in the movie, pros and cons.


    Of course you should discuss the item as it exists. I don't understand how you could read what I wrote and take from it that I was advocating reviewing Lord of the Rings by speculating how it might have sounded if scored with 14 kazoos. But if you're suggesting that you should list the pros and cons of the score without suggesting how the cons may have been avoided then I think you'd end up with rather pointless reviews. Surely the basis of any review should be constructive criticism. I wouldn't expect to read a review which said "this is rubbish because of X" unless it went on to suggest why Y would have been a better alternative.
  8. Christodoulides wrote
    (...) it's not an argument of the old vs new, but rather those who like Jablonsky/RC/Zimmer sound vs those who don't.

    If I may quote you: "via its particularly Zimmer-influenced sound it also managed to push the traditional film score fans away."

    1) If I may say so, traditional sounds much like classical scoring to me, and isn´t it always part of the discussion that Zimmer is made responsible for creating that different kind of scoring that makes traditional scoring more and more. obsolete in the ears of certain directors? So where´s the difference?

    2) But whatever you may call it, I consider myself a traditional film score fan, and I certainly wasn´t pushed away by it. So my point stays the same, in whatever variation you like. Traditional scoring is so different from RC scoring that it´s another style of music, as much as Golden Age scoring was compared to the scores of the inbetweens.

    Plus there's details on the 1st one vs the 2nd score too. smile

    I didn´t question that, which is why I said it was a nice review. wink
    •  
      CommentAuthorRalph Kruhm
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2009 edited
    Thor wrote
    I don't think that's a very fruitful question to ask, to be honest (i.e. how it COULD HAVE been or SHOULD HAVE sounded).....would LORD OF THE RINGS have sounded better with 14 kazoos?

    That was not the point. You can talk about variations of the same style without discussing the use of 14 kabufftas or whatever. Why not talk about what Goldsmith or James Newton Howard would have done with LOTR? It wasn´t about what Zimmer would have done with LOTR.

    I think the question whether Trasformers could have been scored in the new style but differently depends on what guys like Zimmer, Powell, or Gregson-Williams would have done with it. I´m certain a TF score by Zimmer would have been great, and it would still be quite different from what Jablonsky had done with it.
    •  
      CommentAuthorThor
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2009 edited
    Southall wrote
    Of course you should discuss the item as it exists. I don't understand how you could read what I wrote and take from it that I was advocating reviewing Lord of the Rings by speculating how it might have sounded if scored with 14 kazoos. But if you're suggesting that you should list the pros and cons of the score without suggesting how the cons may have been avoided then I think you'd end up with rather pointless reviews. Surely the basis of any review should be constructive criticism. I wouldn't expect to read a review which said "this is rubbish because of X" unless it went on to suggest why Y would have been a better alternative.


    No, I still feel that is a waste of constructive time. You're not a reviewer to speculate on what the better alternative would have been, you're a reviewer to tell us how you think it works AS IT IS (or don't work). Just because you don't think a given sequence works, doesn't automatically mean it's carte blanche to offer your own "hypothetical scoring scenario". That is of zero value to the reader, as it's only a scenario that exists in your head.
    I am extremely serious.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSouthall
    • CommentTimeSep 8th 2009
    Thor wrote
    Southall wrote
    Of course you should discuss the item as it exists. I don't understand how you could read what I wrote and take from it that I was advocating reviewing Lord of the Rings by speculating how it might have sounded if scored with 14 kazoos. But if you're suggesting that you should list the pros and cons of the score without suggesting how the cons may have been avoided then I think you'd end up with rather pointless reviews. Surely the basis of any review should be constructive criticism. I wouldn't expect to read a review which said "this is rubbish because of X" unless it went on to suggest why Y would have been a better alternative.


    No, I still feel that is a waste of constructive time. You're not a reviewer to speculate on what the better alternative would have been, you're a reviewer to tell us how you think it works AS IT IS (or don't work). Just because you don't think a given sequence works, doesn't automatically mean it's carte blanche to offer your own "hypothetical scoring scenario". That is of zero value to the reader, as it's only a scenario that exists in your head.


    It's becoming increasingly clear why you don't read reviews! How is one to assess the pros and cons of something without trying to answer the question (in one's mind, not necessarily in print) as to whether it is as good as it could have been? How can that possibly be a fruitless question to ask? You can't just pluck the opinion that something is bad out of a vacuum. There must be some frame of reference that has led you to that decision, and unless you share it with your readers then it's a waste of time saying it.