Film Music Interesting? Responses

1M1: 7/21/99... Part 1!

Compiled by Jason Foster

Usually I dislike mail-bag-only columns, but I'm making an exception this time. I was overwhelmed by the amount of responses I got to last week's column on whether film music is still interesting. I must say that I was surprised with what many of the readers had to say. Some very valid points were made, and I wish I could include everyone's response, but that would take a long time to compile. Lots of people said about the same kinds of things anyway, so the letters below represent a good mix of everything.

>From <TheoristB@aol.com> (Corey Wills):

"I found your article very interesting. First I'll let you know what type of fan I am. I'm 17 and have been heavily in to film scores for the past... oh 4 to 5 years... In my opinion scores have become less interesting. I blame that on the lack of interesting movies. Other than a few movies here and there (Star Wars Episode 1, The Matrix) name a couple that really stick out in your mind. There's not many. Even composer who are usualy known for lively styles, all had score that were a little boring. That's no to say they weren't good scores. They were just dull. One example is Danny Elfman. I love his music. He is my favorite composer, but lately his scores have been a bit laid back and mellow. His score for A. Simple Plan was incredible and I listen to it quite a bit but it was still a little boring and didn't have the driving themes that some of his score have had in the past. The reason for this was that the movie A Simple Plan was well Boring. I thought it was a great movie form a great director but it was boring."

>From <logied@mediaone> (Dennis Logsdon):

"I am one of your old timers and as much as I basically agree with your article. I feel you have left out the time and place factor. That was then, this is now. The music reflects the movies and the times. You would be hard pressed to find an area that has more new music to listen to than the movies. Music across the board has changed and scores are part of that change. The movies have changed and the music reflects that change. There are no Ben Hur scores because there's no Ben Hur movies and no Miklos Roszas. This thread could go on forever but factor in, when was the last time the three tenors sang something NEW and INTERESTING. When was the last time you could turn on the radio and hear a THEME from a movie and have it raise up the charts for instrumental and melody lovers. Where are those orchestras that use to play music? I do believe there is interesting and good music in the Jazz and New Age area of music that would be good for the movies, and we need good and interesting movies to give the gifted composers we have now a chance to do good scores. One thing I do want to mention, listening on the net at CD buying areas is great. Being able to hear a score before buying is new and a boon for fans. Filmscores are still a Stepchild of the business but our selection is better than ever."

Well, as far as hearing a movie theme on the radio, look no further back than TITANIC. That had not one, but TWO cuts played on the radio -- the Celine Dion tune, as well as the 'Southampton' cue. But, yes, I know what you're saying.

>From <larrytuc@us.ibm.com> (Larry Tuczynski):

"I read your Film Score Monthly on-line article today and enjoyed it very much. I am 49 years old and have been collecting music of various types since 1962. According to your categories I probably fall between a Film Music Pro and Film Music Veteran. One big reason that you failed to mention about why a lot of newer film music is bland or unappealing is the record companies increasingly putting out CD's called Soundtracks that are actually nothing more than a mish mash of Rap, Heavy Metal, Alternative or other style of music aimed at young adults rather than actually putting out the score to the film. One good example would be last year's "Godzilla". The David Arnold score which isn't too bad (but no Akira Ifukube) has never been released to the general public and the so called Soundtrack CD they did release can now be found in bargain bins for as low as $1 because nobody wants it. I have seen a number of movies over the past few years where the music in the actual movie sounded pretty good but you couldn't find a recording of it anywhere, only the so called Soundtrack, or Music inspired by type CD's. Of course this isn't anything new but seems to be much more prevalent these days. Of course there have been bait & switch type scores put out in the past too. One of the ones that stand out in my mind is the score to the 1986 "Crossroads" by Ry Cooder. The blues music in the film was fantastic, the Soundtrack CD is horrible and not what I heard in the film."

Someone should do a study to see just how many "song" soundtracks actually make money for anyone involved. I know from time to time you get something that really sells (i.e. Prince's BATMAN album or CITY OF ANGELS, though that has a decent amount of score), but I know that most movies with song-dominated soundtracks perform poorly on the charts. Sometimes it astounds me that some of these studios and record companies expect some of this stuff to sell. There are lots of movies that I can think of where nobody even bothered to SEE the movie, much less by the CD. You'd think it would be easy to tell when you've got box office poison in your hands.

>From <sharol@jps.net> (Sharol):

"I am in your film veteran category and have been collecting film scores since the early 50's. Do I find film scores still interesting today? Yes! Last night I was listening to my CD of "Seven Years in Tibet" by John Williams and think it is an amazing score! I recently bought his "Stepmom" and "Phantom Menace" scores and enjoy those very much too. I love William's scores, he is a fantastic composer! I plan on purchasing the score to "Air Force One". After seeing the video, I was very impressed with Goldsmith's score. So, from the years of Dimitri Tiomkin and other composers of that era to present day composers, I think there are many "bright spots" in today's scores."

I'll admit that John Williams is one of a very few older composers who still consistently turns out great scores. That can probably be chalked up to the fact that he only scores two or three (or less) films a year, as opposed to five or six like some of the other composers.

>From <jjrice@email.unc.edu> (Jeff Rice):

"In response to why so many people raved about "The Mummy" when there are so many superior Goldsmith scores to listen to. "The Mummy" just made a lot of money, so a lot of people saw it. "The Wind and the Lion" might be the better score by far, but people don't know of it. They haven't seen the film, so just randomly listening to the score isn't going to happen. That's unrealistic. Most soundtrack buyers today go see the film, notice some cool music, and go out and buy the CD. There is a correlation between the film and the music. "Titanic" didn't become the biggest selling score ever by being the best music, but lots of people loved the movie and therefore the music that went with the film. Film music is always in a lull, except for those rare great years (recently 82,89). This was true fifty year ago, but no one remembers the bad years. In the spirit of this ridiculous millenium hayhem, I'd like to see FSM come up with a top ten list for each decade. I think each decade will hold its own. And, just one more thing, that breakdown of what to expect each year (one or two Williams, one or two Goldsmith, and a "surprise!" or two), but what about Thomas Newman, James Newton Howard, George Fenton, Danny Elfman, John Barry, Elliot Goldenthal, James Horner, Mark Mancina, Hans Zimmer, David Arnold, and I'm probably leaving out a few. The music is out there. You just have to find it. It's kind of a reverse situation. Back in the days some of the good stuff was released sometimes. Now more of the good stuff is released, even more of the mediocre stuff, a lot of the crap. But the good stuff is there, it's being written. Good luck finding it."

Well, I don't necessarily buy the argument about why people buy soundtracks. With song-oriented stuff, sure, I'll buy that. But, TITANIC aside, I would argue that most score CDs today are geared at film score fans rather than the general public. And in today's Internet world, it's no longer necessary to see a film to hear the score. In addition, I doubt labels like Varese Sarabande decide to release stuff like REGENERATION because they expect the general public will go see the film and like the score enough to buy the CD. Scores like that are almost certainly geared at us film music fans, as we are about the only people who would care about such things.

As for the composers you mentioned, yes, they have produced some good scores. But many of them work either too much or not enough, which can affect how they impact the film music world. For instance, if someone like Thomas Newman scores five films a year, the chances that all five scores will be great are slim. The one or two that are great will add to the positive aspects of today's film music, while the other three (while perhaps not bad scores) will fall into the rest of the scores that are mediocre, or not so interesting. This will be true of almost any composer who works too much. I wish it were easy to determine how much is too much for a composer to take on over a certain time period and just how much is a perfect amount.

>From <bill_cooke@hotmail.com> (Bill Cooke):

"I found your classification of film music fans amusing and, in my case, dead on target. I started collecting film music back in 1975 or 76, which puts me clearly in your veteran category; and it's true that I admire most the scores produced from the golden age to the seventies... and sometime in the mid-eighties my enthusiasm for new film music started to fizzle out. Even though pre-1988 I would purchase every new Jerry Goldsmith release with an almost unparalleled sense of excitement, today I don't even bother and go straight for the latest Stromberg/Morgan reconstruction.

What happened? When I "grew up," did my musical tastes mature? Or is film music today just plain bad? I think the answer is both.

At some point film music became less action-specific and more textural, due in large part to a generation of younger composers who simply lack the musical training to write complex music. Some would argue that there simply isn't enough time for film composers to write genuinely good symphonic music, but Hollywood's older generation had to work within these same tight time constraints and often produced masterpieces, so that argument doesn't hold water. I also think we're seeing a gradual aesthetic switch (or deterioration if you will) as each succeeding generation of film composer becomes further removed from those late-nineteenth century classical influences that became the standard when the art from was established. The film composer of today may be more influenced by pop music or minimalist composers like Glass or Gorecki than Wagner or Strauss. Textural music can fit today's filmmaking styles very well, but I find this to be, personally, a disappointing development because I find no joy in listening to endless electronic droning and simplistic repetition.

But there is a solution to the problem...

Music is a very important part of my life, so when film music ceased to be interesting more than a decade ago, I simply took the opportunity to start exploring 20th century classical music. And, you know, I've discovered some pretty amazing stuff -- music that is every bit as romantic, dramatic and terrifying as film music ever dared to be. Disgruntled film music fans should stop spending their hard-earned money on soundtrack releases that leave them dissatisfied; instead, support the independent classical labels that are currently releasing wave upon wave of rare and fascinating repertoire. With the audience for classical music waning every year, the industry is in desperate need of more converts, and what better place to pull from than young soundtrack fans who already have a moderate interest in orchestral music?

I realize that classical music can be intimidating to the novice collector, especially 20th century music where there are literally hundreds of composer names that "nobody ever heard of before." My suggestion is to support stores that allow you to open up and listen to a CD before purchasing. Also, read magazines like ramophone and Fanfare, and become more educated on the subject. A review from these rags might tip you off on a real 'gem.'"

>From <draiodoir_mna@yahoo.com> (Jennifer Greenfield):

"Although I have only been a film score fan for a few years now, I share many of your opinions. I do buy current film score releases but I am finding myself searching for older releases. I am just beginning to explore the 1980s film scores. I skipped the 60s and 70s and am getting my toes wet with Golden Age Scores. I haven't begun to explore the 60s and 70s film scores. Thomas Newman is my favorite film score composer mainly because his style is so different than other composers I have heard. I do cherish the music of Williams and Goldsmith and am searching for new ones all the time. Lastly, I remember some time ago, Lukas was editorializing about the state of film music today and he asked us to imagine what life was like back in the 1950s when Korngold, Waxman, Newman, and a few others were producing their music all at the same time. So, why can't we have that today? Is it the music industry and the bureaucrats who aren't interested in art but only in making money? That's another discussion entirely. Thanks for the discussion."

About why it can't be like the 1950s today, there are two arguments to this issue. Some would say that it won't happen because the overall talent of composers today is far less than people like Korngold, Newman, and Waxman -- primarily because of the amount of "rock" and "self-trained" composers working today. But even with those, every now and then you'll get someone like Danny Elfman, who has produced some very good and interesting music over his career. But then again, based on interviews I've read with him, he seems to have a respect for these older composers and will readily admit to their impact on him.

But there's yet another argument to this issue -- it's all very subjective. Since you can't really prove that the older composers were better, some think it's pointless to argue the point and feel that we should just learn to enjoy today's film music. It could be a matter of what you heard first or what you grew up on that decides what you prefer. It kind of reminds me of when sports fans say things like, "There's no way the 1998 Yankees could've beaten the 1927 Yankees." How do they know?

>From <jbr@cwsl.edu> (Joe B. Rixman):

"I wanted to respond to your article concerning the "blandness" of film scores today. There is a very good reason I believe. We have no further to look than the quality of FILMS being produced!! This of the 60's...with films like FREUD, A PATCH OF BLUE, PLANET OF THE APES, THE SAND PEBBLES and numerous others that delved into the talents of Goldsmith, Williams, Herrmann, Barry and others. The 70's brought a wave of science fiction films to the fore, with ALIEN, POLTERGEIST, THE BLACK HOLE, SUPERMAN, etc.. Although this is not the start of what I would call the BLOCKBUSTER mentality, it sure seemed to be the catalyst to a type of film that was Creative-by-Consensus...sometimes it worked...sometimes not. In the Reagan 80's, the birth of the Hacker-Slasher films brought names like Young, Badalamenti, Manfredini into the public eye. Of these, only Chris Young seems to have capitalized on his abilities. The 90's is EXTREMELY pivital in film history, in that it has become the decade of reinvention. BASIC INSTINCT tried, and in my opinion, succeeded in reinventing the psychological thriller, placing it into the contemporary forefront of filmmaking. Goldsmith mastered the technique in this film of creating something NEW to compliment something very old. Most other filmmakers have not succeeded in doing so. In fact, as much as I love Goldsmith, I think the man simply stopped creating anything new...Why? Because Filmmaking-by-Consensus became a standard practice...and we all know that when you get too many cooks trying to make a pot of stew, it's gonna come out tasting like it should have been left to just ONE person...thank you very much! The ONLY composer in the last four years that I can think of that has tested and pushed the boundaries of trying something NEW has been John Ottman. His take on HALLOWEEN H20 is a perfect example...as are the scores to GOODBYE, LOVER, INCOGNITO and APT PUPIL (THE USUAL SUSPECTS, while an amalgam of different scoring techniques, has perched itself in my top ten list of film scores, right next to Incognito and eight others by various artists). The point is this: film music may be bland nowadays, but then again, so are the movies coming out. No one seems willing to try anything new any more. Until that happens, movies and their scores are going to suffer, along with their fans."

>From <hessrichard@hotmail.com> (Richard Hess):

"I found your article quite interesting today on the FSM web site. I am 21 and have been collecting filmmusic since I was around 12, when I began Junior High School. I feel that I have quite a knowledge of the present day scores and the great work done by the masters during the 'golden age' of filmmaking. After staring with Williams, he led me to pick up Korngold, and that led to Rozsa, Waxman, etc.. I find the older scored richer in quality but that is not to say that everything now sucks. I feel that John Ottman and Patrick Doyle are ALWAYS interesting even if I might not enjoy the score. They both find the perfect score for their films while also trying to create a piece that can stand on its own.

It infuriates me when I go to see a film, like the Phantom Menace for example, and people say crap like--"It is the best film ever made!" For an advertisement on T.V. for the film, a lady comes out of the theatre and they ask her what her feelings were and her reply was, "It is the greatest film I have ever seen, anyone who doesn't think it was great is a critic for a living." You stupid moron, the last film she say was "Good Burger" and "Titanic." Sit in front of LAWRENCE OF ARABIA or A CLOCKWORK ORANGE and tell me THE PHANTOM MENACE is better."

To be continued tomorrow -- send your responses to jgfoster93@hotmail.com