JAMES HORNER

You don't hear development in "The Battle" or "Barbarian Horde" ?

Like you remember which cues these are

:slap:

s-you

Yours is a very common Ridley Scott-accusation, as I'm sure you're aware. Like with Tim Burton and other visually-oriented directors whose goal is just as much to communicate ideas through audiovisuals than to tell a story with a perfect script. That's why they're some of my favourite directors.

Interesting that you put Burton in that category. I'd never really thought of him that way (though I don't follow his films all that much - last one I saw was probably Sleepy Hollow, which didn't do much for me).

I like watching Scott's films because of the visuals, certainly. I don't go into any of them expecting to have to think (apart from about how awful the music is). Watching Body of Lies this weekend.

I should note that if I see GLADIATOR under good conditions (great sound, picture), I don't particularly care about the script. Scott's bracing enough to engage me. I even miss some of the scenes that were cut out of the film (e.g. the scene where Lucilla conspires with Derek Jacobi).
Until the very end, that is, where the man with all the power (Commodus) decides to throw his life away. That one bothered me at the time, and the post-death speech by the sister doesn't work at all either. But that isn't Zimmer's fault.

Really? I recognize Ridley Scott by his shot composition!

Ahhh.

Well put. Yes, I would agree with that.

-pause-sound out-enter dramatic music for great emotional effect.

Ah yes, the urban look.

To me also a quintessential look is a typical Ridley Scott close-up composition, which I can't find online...

I think Thor's suggesting his style is his substance.
It's that aspect to his work that has led to him attracting this sort of remark (from a film critic I know who saw American Gangster): "He's not very interested in personality, or even the motivations of conflicts. He just likes a good biff." (ie. a good fight) While extreme, it does suggest that the drama will rarely sustain in and of itself.

I must say that I liked how Gladiator worked in the movie, too. While there isn't the progressive thematic development ala LoTR, I really liked how Hans used Lisa Gerrard's vocals in the opening scene, the "Earth" scene, the dramatic underscore for the character's speeches. "The Battle" was slightly over-the-top for the scene but I loved the use of the battle music in the Battle Of Carthage scene ("Barbarian Horde"). And I'd like to mention I like how Zimmer chose some scenes to be devoid of music, that worked great too (some of the action scene before the final battle had little or no music). "Now We Are Free", of course, was really excellent.

And it's in your phrasing of the words "at the same time" that our difference lies, I guess. You probably think that visuals (and audio) should ALWAYS serve a given narrative or propel the story. Well, I'm not of that opinion. Film is an audiovisual medium, not a book, and can create ideas, symbols, moods, feelings through those means that are LESS narrative-driven EVEN THOUGH it's in a narrative Hollywood film. ALIEN is of course the quintessential example in Scott's canon - the essence of the story is paperthin ("people flee from monster in dark corridors"), but it's the execution of it and the revelling in Freudian metaphors and moods through mere audiovisuals that make it such a classic. Scott himself has said as much: "”To a large extent, Alien’s environment was a statement. And, I think, a great piece of art work”.

It's the same ideology at play in the other films I mentioned.

...except the fact that the ship's design apparently includes that when an emergency arises, the best way to make sure everyone can work as efficiently and quickly as possible is to cut all the lights and flood the hallways with smoke, stroboscopic red flashing lights and blaring sirens drowning out any other sound!

That always struck me as a bit of a design flaw.