[Closed] Now Playing XXXVII

You completely misunderstand; the issue is not that people state a different opinion. I'm entirely fine with people disliking scores and artists that I like.

Let's break down the word: overrated = over & rated. When you use the word you're saying that everyone who likes it more than you, rates it too highly (that's the meaning of "over" & "rated"). While the opinion is entirely subjective, the word itself has objective connotations. It's no better than saying "red is the best colour and everyone who likes blue is wrong". It's the type of thinking one would expect from a 5 year old. So this is my first problem, that people fail to distinguish between subjective and objective.

Problem number 2 is that usage of the word is placing the blame on everyone who likes it more than you, instead of acknowledging that it's a taste thing and that taste is personal. The word is basically communicating that everyone else is wrong, simply because you don't personally like it as much as they do. This is immature and arrogant thinking. A mature and healthy way of thinking is "if others like it and I don't, there must be something to it I'm not getting". This is how I can say that I can't stand Goldsmith's "Planet of the apes", but it's a masterpiece nontheless. It would be arrogant for me to conclude that it's overrated simply because I personally don't like it.

All this said, I don't claim that the people who use this word are necessarily childish and arrogant. Many are using it without thinking about the meaning of the word and they intend to communicate it entirely as an opinion. To others it often communicates arrogance and childish thinking.

Peter

People can say what ever they want but if they publicly dump on a score that I like then I'm going to defend that score with everything I got!

-Erik-

Oh I'm not insulted or angry. It's a pet peeve, and I fully acknowledge that I'm being a bit silly. I'm sure I sound a bit more fanatic when I explain my position in details, for what is really just a minor annoyance, but that's just how I sound when I get into debate-mode.

Peter

The King's Speech - Sandy Desplat

I'll be careful what I say here - I was just going to say "Excellent!" but I don't want to offend anyone who doesn't think that!

In my opinion, this is excellent.*

*This in no way implies that I think those who don't find it excellent are imbeciles.

Can't wait to get Star Trek V! An extended edition I'm genuinely excited about.

A question to the cognoscenti. Is what I take to be Beethoven pastiche within the body of the score (and there's a lot of it) real Beethoven, or is it as I assume, only pastiche?

While I'm on the subject, how come nobody's done a properly expanded version of Star Trek: TMP? If there's a market for things like Robocop and First Blood, both of which have had two (still widely-available) releases before Intrada's very slight expansions this year, then there must be for JG's masterpiece!

Here you go James. This comes from a blog post Lukas wrote back in August of '09

Is there possibly going to be other Star Trek soundtracks getting this kind of treatment?

There are always…possibilities. Let me explain the problem. Paramount Pictures actually does not own the soundtrack album rights to at least the first six Star Trek movies (the ones with the original cast). Every two or three years, when Paramount did a new movie, they licensed the soundtrack album to whichever record company they were working with at the time, or wanted it the most. Those contracts are still active today—Star Trek I and V are with Sony Music (due to Columbia and Epic Records), II is with Rhino/Warner Bros. Records (due to Atlantic Records), III is with EMI (due to Capitol Records), and IV and VI are with Universal Music Group (due to MCA Records). In order for us to do Star Trek II, we had to license the soundtrack album from Rhino, and then negotiate with Paramount in order to add all the previously unreleased music and get the liner notes, photos and packaging approved. It amounts to licensing the score twice—once from the record company, once from the film company. We are used to doing this from many of our projects (as with Superman: The Music, our 8CD box set of scores for the Christopher Reeve films—owned jointly by Warner Bros. the film company and Warner Bros. the record company) but it’s a lot of legwork.

My hope is that over time either we or some of the other soundtrack specialty labels—although we are ostensibly competitors, we all know each other and are fans of one another’s work—might be able to tackle the other scores. But I would be surprised if anything happened soon, and I would rule out categorically any kind of box set due to the split ownership.

Seems like if you want The Motion Picture released you'd have to strike a deal with Columbia Records.

-Erik-

It's the track called 'Card to Play'.

James: Me too. The original album was way too short and it's my second favourite Goldsmith Star Trek.
Erik: That just sounds too good to be true. I ordered it yesterday, so I await the day it arrives!

Well, I'm not a fan of the entire Starcraft II score anyway. I much prefer the style of the open cue to the rest of the album.

-Erik-

Just finished Broxton's review; we don't always agree (he wrote a ridiculous review for Munich a while back), but when it comes to Desplat, we're one in the same.

Yes.

It fits in my Top 15 but doesn't crack my Top 10.

-Erik-

Have a look
http://www.maintitles.net/profile/27/

-Erik-