part 2 - What would YOU like to see...............

It was a Rabin track...


And EVERYBODY I showed this told me "Wow I can't believe the synth version is in the OST"...


Except you...




A truely orchestral fan like you, I'm so disappointed...





And hey, Ant, can you explain what the Media Ventures sound is ? Technically ? Synths ? Heavy brass ? Maybe guitars ?

They would know he wrote Gladiator. Parallel example.

And most of you who are talking about how people know and whistle John Williams tunes out of memory, would be surprised if you actually didn't talk about people you know and who are directly or indirectly linked with you or film music and cinema but actually walked out on the streets and asked passing people who John Williams is, if they know him and if they can whistle a tune by him out of memory.

And also, she was very warm when recalling their collaboration and seemed rather grateful for Chicago Joe and the Showgirl. I guess orchestrating for Zimmer and Elfman got her a lot.

Truthfully, orchestrating Batman was the big thing, though Backdraft had its share of commercial success.

And they would all whistle something from Star Wars. We win!

-Erik-

So what do people here think about the (over?)use of choirs in film scores?

Oh, geez. And orchestra is overused, but I don't hear anyone complaining about that.

Yet you're are the one that continues to bring up the tired and dead horse beaten complete and chronological debate.

-Erik-

That's not really relevant. First of all, I only mention it in passing, whenever I'm talking of a newly released score (that I have a connection to) that comes in that format (hence when the criticism is relevant). Second, it's only a "pet subject" of mine (or a quirk, if you will), not some established topic that everyone in film music land raves on about over and over again, even thinking they're reinventing the wheel each time. Apples and oranges, in other words.

Oh Thor... come on! Any chance you have to bring it up you do. It's not Apples and Oranges. It's another topic that you continue to bring up, just like others bring up the Zimmer bashing, and it's ooooooooooooh so tiring!

-Erik-

Well, you're free to find it tiring, but it's still not the same thing. It's been a loooong time since I brought up that issue in general terms. I've only mentioned it if it's relevant to any given release and if it's a score I know somehow. It's only a passing comment. If the discussion takes off again after that, it's only because some people can't wrap their heads around the fact that someone listens to film music differently than they do; that my preference is somehow an "offense" to their own preference, and I'll have to answer to silly allegations. I find this defense as tiring as you do, but it's hard to avoid.

In any case, one person's particular listening preference is not a "dead horse" topic. It's just part of who I am. The Horner, Zimmer, Goldsmith vs. Williams debates, on the other hand, are GENERAL topics that somehow refuse to die and that everyone seems to participate in; yet that don't really have any relevance or anything new to offer anymore.

Yup, it is indeed apples and oranges (heh....I just got a hankerin' for fruit after all this talk!)

I agree 100% about wanting less use of cheap dramatic effects such as block voicing in choir vowals. Hopefully, this cliché will wear off soon.

I would also like to see less isolation between composers and editors. Ideally, the composer (and music editor) should be working as closely with the film editor as the director usually does. The idea suggested by Curtis Hanson (from an interview) that a film should be perfectly shot and edited to "not need music" before the composer comes in and "improves" it, or in Hanson's words, adds the "icing on the cake" - is flawed. When that is the case, what is left for the music to contribute? It is very limiting for composers, who in these cases are not expected to contribute anything of their own, but merely underline ideas, characters, and other establishments already present in the film. In this case the music must constantly unfold simultaneously with other important sound and graphical content and is hence never offered any crucual significance or foreground role. Although acceptable results are possible if the composer is talented, this philosophy is simply discriminating, and I hope younger film makers today are recieving a competent education in the possibilities of film music at film schools.

Actually, as much as I disagree with the Oscar success of Gustavo Santaolalla, in his films the music really does plays a vital part. I think his success is a tribute to good communication between composer/music editor and editor/director.

Edited to say: I also agree with those defending Hans Zimmer. I personally don't like the extension of his influence on the art, but that is something he can't be held responsible for. He is actually very good at what he does. The executives calling the shots however, who base their criteria on commercialism before art - they are the real bad guys.