Who is responsible for poor score releases?

It's the studio execs and album producers at the record company who decide all that. The scores you mentioned are all pre-2000 scores and that was a time of heavier re-use fees (money the studio must pay the orchestra, conductor etc to release the score) so that was also a factor in getting them the crappy releases they got. There was some rule passed which made it cheaper to release scores after 2000 I think. Of course, if the studio licenses the rights to another company to release the score, it can be done (Sony allowed La-La Land records to release the full score of Godzilla). May whoever at Disney has the rights of Lion King be hypnotized into following the same.

Sad, but true.

Would The Lion King and BTTF have sold zillions of copies if they'd been score-only? We all know the answer to that. There are only 3,000-ish people who buy film score albums in the world but those two have sold multi-millions.

considering score and songs are so important in these 2 movies, they should have released one long CD, with enough selections of both the songs and score, not all songs and a bit of score

I don't need a full score only release, because I know what the songs mean in the film. Like The Prince of Egypt, it are the songs that are a vital part of the movie's charm. But do not present a bit of score, just because you think people will not buy the album. Mainstream buyers will have bought it, if there was 5 minutes or 45 minutes of score on it, just because for them the songs were worth it.

They had plenty of room to give us extra score material and then, we would have never made such a fuzz over these 2 titles

I rest my case

I'm only playing devil's advocate really because I agree with you, but these things are recorded with union orchestras in California and paying for more score music is hugely expensive. If they're going to sell 15,000,000 copies of the album if they pay $1 per album sold for 20 minutes of score but 15,003,000 copies if they pay $2 per album sold for 40 minutes of score then that's why they make the decision.

Speaking of which, how fortunate that Disney dropped Narnia...or David Arnold's score to the next film would be stuck in download-only hell!

Oh yes! Now Fox has the rights so I'm pretty sure it'll get a good release.

As some of us have said before it's all about money. However, without the union in California you'd see the quality go downhill really fast. I for one don't want to hear a score performed by minimum wage help.

I'm sure there would. That change in union arrangement is the single worst thing that's happened to film music in the last decade. It just makes film music sound so much worse - for every decent score where we'd have all been frustrated with a 30-minute release, there are several dozen mediocre ones which may have sounded OK at half an hour but nobody will ever listen to twice at 70+ minutes.

The best you can hope for is sharks with freakin' lasers attached to their heads.

No, just a memorable quote. Now I got the sudden urge to listen to Goerge S. Clinton's score the to the first film.

I don't think that would certainly bring any difference on this issue. For instance, you take John Williams' Hook, still now there is no news on complete recordings or atleast extended version of that score. Many people adore this score but i say i am quite dissatisfied with the original release. There are several cues are left out. Even now, particular Music Company is not showing any interest in releasing the complete recordings of Hook. Don't you think it deserves for complete recording?

If my calculation are correct, maybe in the year 2015 we will get the complete score of HOOK.

Aren't you even a bit torn between your general yet outspoken disregard for extended releases and your hang for Williams completistismility?