James Horner: Comeback Player of the Year
Opinion by Jason Foster
We get many letters from people upset at "Horner bashing,"
which we actually don't do a lot of anymore, except people just think we
do. The following is one man's speculation as to the composer's current
and recent output. If you have a different opinion, and theories of his
work, send it it! Address below...
Who else, besides Jose Canseco, is worthy of such an award for 1998?
While there are a good many people who would argue that James Horner never
reached a place to "come back" from, I am one of a fair amount
of people who believe Horner's most productive and creative work was far
behind him-last seen around roughly 1985. However, after two consecutive
good experiences with his last two scores, it's appears as if the younger
version of Horner could quite possibly be coming back.
Since the mid-'80s, Horner's work has seen some bright spots such as
FIELD OF DREAMS (1989) and SNEAKERS (1992). But for the most part, his
work during the past 12 or so years was lacking in the richness and excitement
which adorned his music in his early films like STAR TREK II (1982), BRAINSTORM
(1983), and KRULL (1983). His scores and their orchestrations went from
absorbing and interesting to plain and boring. He averaged nearly five
films a year since 1985, something that could easily hurt someone's productivity/creativity.
In 1993 alone, Horner's name was found on ten different films, with several
of these scores (i.e.-SEARCHING FOR BOBBY FISCHER, THE MAN WITHOUT A FACE,
etc.) sounding interchangeable, with his mix of electronics and orchestral
ramblings. Seldom during this period did Horner compose a score with any
real identity of its own. These scores may have worked in the context of
each film, but that doesn't always insure good music.
However, despite all of this, Horner's appeal to a large group of the
film score appreciative community did not diminish. In fact, it grew. Around
the end of 1994 and through mid-1995, Horner's popularity seemed to explode.
His scores to films like BRAVEHEART and APOLLO 13 were well received by
both fans and industry types, as both scores resulted in a double Oscar
nomination for Best Original Dramatic Score.
But his detractors, myself included, still maintained that his work
was on the decline. My opinion held for the next two years before anything
really began to change.
When the CD to TITANIC was released in November 1997, something in me
decided I needed to buy it. My first impression was that it was mostly
bad, but with a few highlights. After further listens and a viewing of
the film I was able to gain more appreciation for the music, though I still
wasn't converted.
As we all know, Horner won two Oscars last March for his work on TITANIC.
This is where I think his "comeback" began.
My theory is that Horner's lack of creativity over the past decade or
so was at least partially the result of animosity. During his Oscar acceptance
speech, he mentioned how he'd been "so close" before. Though
it may seem outlandish, I think that Horner's previous Oscar losses may
have significantly affected his creative output. Perhaps I need to clarify.
I don't think his output was affected by a bruised ego or a lack of self-esteem
resulting from not winning previous Oscars. But it does seem totally within
the realm of possibility that his work could have suffered due to a certain
amount of apathy.
It's been said before by different people who are "in the know"
that Horner is under the opinion that he's good and isn't afraid to voice
this opinion. Call it what you want. But if this is true, isn't it possible
that Horner could've been resentful about his losses--feeling that his
talent wasn't ever rewarded--causing him to not "put his all"
into the work? Let me be absolutely clear about this: I'm NOT saying this
is what happened. It's merely one man's theory being offered up for consideration.
Whatever the case was, to my ears there is a considerable difference
in Horner's music written before and after winning the Oscars. Is it possible
that he now feels vindicated, causing him to care again?
With the exception of DEEP IMPACT (which was likely written before he
won the Oscars), a score that I found to be another uninspired Horner dramatic
effort, Horner's music in 1998 was a throwback of sorts to the way he used
to write. His scores to THE MASK OF ZORRO and MIGHTY JOE YOUNG are both
rich in orchestration and far more interesting than anything he's written
in recent years. Not to mention the fact that both scores contain much
more originality than I've gotten used to with Horner.
THE MASK OF ZORRO caught my attention from the beginning, with its flamenco
dancers, mariachi music, and rich main theme. It showed an overall level
of innovation I've never been used to with Horner. It left me with the
impression that a good amount of though went into this score. Perhaps mostly
composer thought, or maybe a good working relationship between composer
and director. Nonetheless, I found the end result highly entertaining.
MIGHTY JOE YOUNG also seemed written with the same amount of thought
and preparation. However, after films and scores like OUTBREAK and CONGO,
the use of Lebo M-type percussion and chorus has become something to expect
for a film that in any way involves a jungle. Not to say this kind of scoring
originated with these films because it obviously didn't. They've just made
this type of film score more popular. Horner also went that way with this
film. But he did it well--using interesting percussion rhythms and creating
well-constructed action cues, while managing to give the score an overall
warm feel. To me, it sounds like something he would've written in the mid-1980s
if such a film had presented the opportunity. Think something along the
lines of WILLOW with African influences.
I will point out, however, that both of these scores contain examples
of "Hornerisms" that have partially contributed to people like
me not liking many of his past scores. But the good thing is that these
passages are surrounded by some very interesting and entertaining music,
instead of it being the other way around. In short, Horner seems to be
slowly breaking away from the form of writing he's been in for the past
decade. In other words, the "good" Horner may be coming back.
I may be going out on a limb to say this after just two scores, but I'm
willing to venture out onto that limb.
One thing I've found odd is that a surprising amount of Horner fans
have not been as impressed with these two scores as one might have expected
them to be. However, much of the criticism has been aimed at MIGHTY JOE
YOUNG rather than THE MASK OF ZORRO. I've read posts to newsgroups and
message boards by usual Horner fans, who call the former boring and uninteresting.
However, the people who seem to like it the most are people like me who
are normally, for lack of a better term, anti-Horner. This says to me that
there are two types of Horner fans: those who like his early work (circa
1981-85) and those who like his later work (1985-1997). Many will argue
that the two styles are completely different and that it's really just
a matter of which one you like.
If the old James Horner is really back, many will be happy, but many
others may very well be let down. Something to consider is that both of
the 1998 films which have caused me give Horner the comeback award contained
ethnic elements, which may automatically warrant or force a not-so-standard
score. Perhaps the real test will be how he handles the next "regular"
film assignment. But I would like to think that it won't matter because
Horner has rediscovered the talent (or willingness to work) that made his
scores in the early to mid-1980s so wonderful. I hope I'm right because
I really don't want to have to eat my words at a later date.
MailBag@filmscoremonthly.com
| 
