LEONARD ROSENMAN

Me too!

There's nothing like a "nearly sold out" notice to shift this last few copies and clear those shelves!!

It's good! Though I wouldn't have got it if I hadn't found it by accident for cheap!

It's good to be able to run a review site that way - writing about what you want to, rather than what release schedules dictate. The thing is, if you're not employed to write this stuff by a publication dependent on the advertising income, it's not about pushing the product (though that's an aspect of it), it's about expressing your feelings about it.

Oops, slipped into preaching mode. And to the converted too!

In some cases. Even with the considerably more limited supply of promos around today, I still don't have time to review them all. I think the labels (those that bother to check) understand that, and it would be difficult for me to keep going otherwise - a review site which only reviews the promos I get sent wouldn't be very interesting for me to do, and wouldn't be very interesting for anyone to read, I think.

Anyone read the interview with Rosenman on the FSM board?

I know you shouldn't speak ill of the dead but the man really talks shit!

Among other things.

http://www.filmscoremonthly.com/article … _Seven.asp

Ring any Horner-on-the-new-world bells?

I think if you think of yourself as a classical composer who dabbles in film (and this is undoubtedly what Rosenman liked to think of himself as), then Poledouris's score probably isn't that impressive, and possibly compositionally anonymous. Rosenman's sharp words are well at home in the world of modern classical sniping, where Cage can call Braca a 'fascist' for using electric guitars, Boulez can vocally hiss-and-boo at a Stravinsky work for its neoclassical indulgences, Alex Ross can moon Horner's plagiarism from his column, and all-and-sundry can mock Shostakovich's symphonies till the cows come home.

The reason why most people here struggle with the level of criticism is partly because few film composers are prepared to express their thoughts so readily, so this kind of lambasting seems unprofessional. John Williams probably has some pretty harsh judgements stored up in him that he doesn't voice. Film composers generally wouldn't speak out because they're one of the least 'untouchable' elements of a film's crew. Directors and actors can afford to be arrogant, but name composers are still very easily replaced. Only those who are righteously outraged (Yared, Adorno and Eisler, Danna) or who perceive themselves as untouchable (Goldsmith, Horner, Barry, Herrmann) ever dare to publicly attack others. And all of the latter have many more fans than Rosenman does now.

That lack of fans might be the other reason Rosenman's remarks outrage many. If this were Poledouris speaking of Rosenman's score, would anyone take issue with the remarks? (Of course not, because you'd agree.) And if ROBOCOP II were a more popular score, let's just say there'd be fewer objections to R's remarks in the first place.

That's bollocks, Michael, and I think you know it.
This is NOT a composer spurned or someone who had his score replaced or who is criticizing from the side lines: this is the follow-up composer in a franchise who blatantly slags his predecesssor off in the nastiest way. Had a more "popular" composer done the same, I would have been as disgusted (though indeed probably far more disappointed as indeed I have no emotional stake in Rosenmann, whom I have no preconceived notions about as far as his character goes. Something I do -right or wrong- with composers whose music I actuallly care about.).

The thing I find most stinging is not attacking a fellow-composer, or not thinking well of him (heck, everyone may have an opinion, however stupid) but suggesting that he, as the successor, will do a much better job. "Now watch the MASTER at work!".
That's the sort of blithering arrogance you better back up by huge deeds -which he didn't-, or which will get you in a lot of people's bad books, regardless of your opinions of either composer.



Let me put it very simply for you then:
Interesting = good
Arrogant, vain and stypid = bad



Can't argue with you there: you are.

However a preference for either score is completely besides the point.

If it's bashing that amuses you, there exist reality shows for that and crappy Tv. We don't need to hear it from musicians, artists and composers of their magnitude.

??? It's hardly amusing, it's just someone saying his opinion, and his opinion is no less valid than anyone else's. He didn't say "Poledouris is an idiot because his score for Robocop wasn't very good", he just said "his score for Robocop wasn't very good" and there's a huge difference. I'd much rather someone said their mind than just say the PC thing because that's what everyone else does.

Goldsmith said very similar things about Zimmer's music at a concert I attended in London.

Agree with them or not, surely it's better they speak their mind than churn out the same dull stuff that most of them do in interviews (which is perfectly understandable, by the way, it's just less interesting).

I don't think anyone is necessarily upset that Rosenman spoke his mind, it's the way in which he said it -- in a condescending, petty way. Constructive criticism is not only more helpful, it's also more civil than saying, you're score is "dopey and lousy" and mine is "a real piece of music".

As someone who works in a creative profession, I am always happy to hear why people don't like my work -- if they are polite about it and offer me suggestions that will help me improve. I have no use for blind, arrogant criticism. Its only accomplishment is inflating the ego of whoever spoke it.