PR: The Hobbit The Desolation of Smaug (Howard Shore)

Like I said: they may.
Or may not.

It's not a given by any means.

They do. Anyone who says otherwise is selling something.

I've yet to listen to it yet as I'm completing "Zulu Dawn." I've downloaded it.
Tom

Yeah, most people our age Sauron it.

How is a "musical idea" repeated not the same thing as a motif?

There are precious few "once-off concepts" in Shore's Middle-Earth music, as evidenced by the meticulously developed documentation in D's linked post, as well as Adams' gigantic writings on the subject.

The fact is, there are dozens of repeated musical ideas, whose number of repetition total far exceeds one hundred, in the new Hobbit score. What you want to call those repeated musical ideas is your business. But no one can say its not several orders of magnitude above nearly every other score written in 2013 in terms of depth of thoughtfulness, planning, complexity, and use of leitmotif as originally defined.

I feel like film music fans are becoming a bit lazy recently, as if they need to be handed Williams-style concert pieces on a simplistically-titled "Track 1: This Is The Main Theme And Its Awesome" platter, or tracks with the melody played as blatantly sonically emphasized as a pop lead vocal, in order to categorize something as thematic; at the same time as the history of film music is becoming so saturated with talent that real originality almost requires the use of extra subtlety in distinguishing your work from the vast hall of glory that's come before.

And yet at the same time I completely agree with the sweep of Demetris' disappointment with the new Hobbit score, I desperately want more sweeping, riveting themes like the Misty Mountain theme from the first score, I'm sad that I didn't hear anything like that in my first listen of Smaug, and I wonder why I can compose in my head better musical ideas with far more emotional weight than what John Williams himself wrote for some of his less stunning works of the past decade. The ridiculously sugary climax of War Horse and the over-the-top heroic sense of adventure of The Hobbit's "Roast Mutton" are some of the most moving and personally meaningful pieces of music I've heard in my life, and why the damn hell am I stuck listening to this stupid synthesizer nonsense of the first 80% of Gravity when Williams and Shore could be giving me 100 more pieces of music as awesome as those last?

In other words, I agree with both sides and I just offer counteracting viewpoints for the sake of argument

And that of course is fine and may make for interesting reading, but just to set the record straight: you are arguing against something I didn't actually say.



But that would be a motif!
I never said that a repeated idea wasn't.

We could go deeper into that and see to what level of abstraction that holds (for example, while it's relatively easy to peg -say- the idea of a harp arpeggio for a certain elf character as a motif, could the musical idea of a (random) ascending major for the concept of "action" still be considered a motif? Or simply a repeated stylistic? (which in itself could be considered a motif).

But to be honest, it would be an incredibly boring thing to me to figure out: the score simply doesn't mean that much to me to go and look at it on that molecular level of detail. I think D.'s link to that Page Of Incredible Waste Of Time may very much testify to that level of (over)commitment, and that very discussion of when a theme/motif STOPS becoming that and just becomes a musical stylistic.



I don't really find D.'s linked post "meticulously developed documentation": more a case of WANTING to see something, to the level of desperation. I'd take Doug Adams' writing well over it!



And again this stands or fails on the level of complexity and recognisability: how complex is the repeated idea and how consistently is it employed? Simply repeating three notes (in different order) and stating "leitmotif!" could also easily make Man Of Steel the most thoughtful, complex, planned and playful score of 2013.



And I argue EXACTLY the opposite: that composers (and maybe more to the point: studio producers) have become lazy by requiring a musical score to be easily editable and not too prominent, and generally against ridculous deadlines.

Believe you me, it is a zillion times harder creating a recognisable melody for a theme, that goes beyond a second or two, and still being able to cut it correctly to the film!



There's the rub: I'm not looking for originality. At all.
If anything, I'm hoping for a return to thematic, recognisable scoring.
It's what I enjoy.
I prefer Tchaikovsky over Ligeti. Dvorak over Stockhausen.
It's how I'm wired: I need to be emotionally invested! A score needs to resonate -if you'll forgive me a moment's sentimentality- in my heart. Not my mind.

But that's simply a matter of preference: if one values originality over -for lack of a better word- Romanticism, then my point crumbles (of course). But I think you do empathise up to a point, witness your next paragraph:

which exactly mirrors my own thoughts (except that the very fact that these pieces apparently work in hitting the right emotional button already strips away, for me, less positive epithets.
I don't care that every single emotional "effect" button (you know: lush strings for "sweeping" notions, double bass and timpani for suspense, massive brass for impression, electric guitar for "drive", etc., etc.) is used, as long as it WORKS! Being annoyed by the unoriginality of it is, to me, the same as being annoyed that chocolate suggests happiness simply because it causes the brain to release endorphines.

Yeah, It's not original.
Yeah, It's not subtle.
But it sure as hell does the trick.

And that's what I like.

But it actually IS, in my completely personal opinion that affects nothing and doesn't matter. Its even one of those scores that was 1000% more thoughtful than the film, script, screenplay, and directing.

*prepares for shower of scorn*

I would respond to more of your longer-response-than-I-deserve but another inmate needs to use our one asylum computer.

But seriously, I feel like I'm one of the only people in the film music community who actually bothered to listen to MoS more than a couple of times before judging it. One of the only people who knows it inside and out and can actually state from experience with it how deep and thoughtful and complex it is. And you know what? I was actually disappointed by it on my first few listens. It took me 5-10 listens to really fall in love with it and even more to realize how ingeniously written it was. I don't bother to listen to most scores that many times. But this one kept drawing me back. And NOT because I'm some insane Zimmer fan who would say "Greatest Thing Ever" upon hearing a symphony composed of each Remote Control employee flushing their personal toilets in succession. Rush was pretty boring to me and The Lone Ranger, while fun, was too inconsistent and lazy. But MoS is something special. To me its the pinnacle of Zimmer's career up to this point, while also giving me hope that even greater things are coming in the future.

To each their own, but I love when composers insert hundreds of quotes of "repeated musical ideas" in their score, and sometimes I love it even more when they're hard to find, makes for more rewarding listening that way. Its the same reason people study famous paintings for hours and hours, isn't it? I don't think its boring or a waste of time to study beloved works of art in depth.

But -aside from the fact I thoroughly disagree: a good melody is VERY hard to create- you left out the second, all-important part of my statement in your reasoning: it still needs to fit the film (editing)!

I'm not sure where you found that Williams "prefers" this style "because it's not as easy"?
I can't find any reference myself.

By all means Williams thoroughly deserves to enjoy his personal preference at this point in life, but I don't think composing great thematic music inherently is in any way "easier" than creating modernist music.

It may well be -as many composers (like Yared, Goldsmith, Powell (of all people)) before have stated- that film music per se is not considered to be much of an art form. I would (unsurprisingly) again not necessarily agree, as this thought seems to be driven more by the "lower art" status of supporting a cinematic vision (and being bound by the restrictions of the studio, temp track and time) than by any consideration of one genre of music being inherently more "higher art" than another.

Matt, it's a bit different. While Hans writes the suites and his movies are actually temped with them, there is scene-specific scoring when the film comes to the studio. It's either Hans doing the scenes himself (which, probably contrary to general opinion, DOES happen) or the additional composers doing it after getting specific outlines from him (which theme goes to which moment, etc.). So while the suite format is his (but also Mark Mancina adopted that process on at least Speed 2, according to the liner notes), he/they is/are still scoring to picture.

For me this was a hard one to get through. Not very keen on it at all.
Tom

You're right my friend. I fear once is going to be enough. But my choice for 1949, The Red Pony, I could conduct it.
Tom

I've listened to it 1.5 times so far, and the themes are already obvious, unless you just don't give a damn, which is certainly everyone's right. But I find it rather hypocritical that everyone whines and whines about how few truly thematic scores are being written these days, then when confronted with one that completely bucks the trend, craps all over it because its too long, or the themes aren't presented in concert suite form for easy digestion, or you don't like Shore's orchestrations, or whatever the hell reason no one seems to like The Hobbit scores. Well, enjoy your future where nothing on this level of depth and complexity will likely ever be attempted again, especially if almost no one appreciates it while its happening.

Hobbit bucks the trend? Man you need to expand your listening horizons:

Here's a list of amazing, thematic scores in 2013. No relation to Shore's Hobbit 2.

IZLER - Revenge
LAURENT EYQUEM - Copperhead
ATLI ORVARSSON - Colette
LAURENT EUQUEM - Winnie Mandela
PHILIPPE ROMBI - Jeune et Jolie
MAURIZIO MALAGNINI, The BBC Concert Orchestra - The Paradise
CRAIG ARMSTRONG - the Great Gatsby
BLAKE NEELY - SPACE SHUTTLE COLUMBIA: MISSION OF HOPE
PASCAL GAIGNE - AMAREN ESKUAK (LAS MANOS DE MI MADRE) / THE HANDS OF MY MOTHER
Abel Korzeniowski - Romeo and Juliet
Christopher Drake's batman: arkham origins
CHRISTOPHE HERAL - Rayman Legends
PINO DONAGGIO - Passio
JOHAN SODERQVIST - love is all you need
KEVIN RIEPL - Aliens: Colonial Marines
CHRISTOPHER GORDON - Adore
ATLI ORVARSSON - The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones
HENRY JACKMAN - this is the end
Bartosz Chajdecki - CZAS HONORU (Season 6)
Fabian Römer - UNSERE MÜTTER, UNSERE VATER
George Kallis - Gagarin: First In Space
Ennio Morricone - ULTIMO 4 lOCCHIO DEL FALCO
Brian Byrne - queen of carthage
Alex Heffes - Emperor
BattleStar Galactica: Blood and Chrome by Bear McCreary
BRIAN TYLER - iron man 3
BRIAN TYLER - Kobe Bryant return theme https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10 … mp;theater

These, are themes.

Now quit the looneys and go listen to some really good stuff, 2013 has been amazing! It bothers me that we overanalyze to death over and over again Hobbit 2 just because it was written by Shore.