Lukas vs. Composers

by Lukas Kendall

We have an article on the site called "So You Want to Be a Film Composer?" Here are two letters I just got about it:

From: Mark Ungar <moremoose@earthlink.net>

Wow, what a great article! It had me laughing and at the same time gave me a valuable perspective. Film scoring appeals to me and it's an idea I have been thinking about, but after reading your article I realised that I'm actually more interested in creating a certain kind of music than being an all-purpose film composer. If what I write happens to be suitable for a film, that would be great of course. Ry Cooder and Mark Knopfler come to mind as examples of this approach. Thanks for the information; it's helped me get a new focus.

You're welcome, but keep in mind, I think the article says that you should be able to do everything as well as one special thing. There's no either/or to it. The more the better.

From: Matthew Etzel <mjetzel@students.wisc.edu>

I must fervently take issue with your remark in the article "So You Want to be a Film Composer?" in which you write: "So many people, especially young people, want to be film composers because they love big, sweeping, beautiful orchestral romantic music--like the kind John Williams writes!...For one thing, John Williams is around 500 times smarter than most anyone reading this, and he can do these types of scores and make them great, instead of bloated and cliched."

First of all, your logic appalls me. What you are saying is that no one can ever be as smart or as good a composer as John Williams, so we drones should give up right now. You are reprimanding us for believing that we can rise to the top, and for that I scold you. So, according to you, no one should ever try to be good at anything, because there is an expert in every field comparable to John Williams. So, according to you, everything is futile. By your logic, too, John Williams should have never picked up a pen and started writing any of his music, because Beethoven and Bach were 500 times smarter than him.

Secondly, how exactly do you know that John Williams is 500 times smarter than "anyone reading this"? I realize that you are simply trying to kiss ass, but it takes a lot more character to develop one's talent and devote themselves to being the best, even though the battle will be uphill, than to sit there and be someone's monkey boy and put everyone else down as being inferior. You seem to think that John Williams is permanently affixed as the greatest composer of all time and can never be topped. Despite the fact that I am a Williams fan as is every other soundtrack music buff, I say that notion is stupid. That is what we live for: to see what is good and try to do better. Even though John Williams is 500 times smarter than me, if that is even possible, how do you know, sir, the boundaries of my talent as a musician? Even John Williams himself would never claim to be that smart and that invincible. I am sure he would readily admit that there is always someone out there who is better. I think you should reconsider the next time you put down everyone who is trying to be the best because even John Williams was at that stage once. Just because there are people at the top now doesn't mean others cannot hope for the same position if they posses the ability. Think before you type next time.

I stand by my remarks, but want to make clear that the argument is not, am I being harsh and probably obnoxious, because the answer is without a doubt yes, I am.

I have listened to so much bad "student composer" music you would not believe it. So many young people today want to be film composers and they write crappy music that nobody in his right mind would want for a movie. It sounds like really amateurish orchestral music and phew, is it bad. Even when the production values are good, the music is just empty filler. I honestly do not know what will become of these people, except that they'll mostly end up either in low-level TV/advertising/whatever or in some other job entirely.

Am I saying that Matthew Etzel at the University of Wisconsin is never going to amount to anything? Of course I'm not saying that. He could be the next Mozart. But much more likely, he's not. Whoa! I have a policy, never insult the readers (pretty good policy), and that's why I must make it clear I am speaking hypothetically. It's the "what's more likely?" game. More than likely, someone like Matthew Etzel who takes the time to write a snippy letter like the above, and actually get offended by an article on a web site, is not going to grow up to be as successful as John Williams. Which doesn't mean he shouldn't try. (Why should I care either way?)

I stand by my statement that John Williams is probably 500 times smarter than anybody reading this (musically, I mean). Of course, I made up "500 times." But to be sure, many times. It's like what old baseball managers tell their players: "I've forgotten more about baseball than you'll ever learn."

I do not think John Williams is the greatest composer who ever lived, contrary to Matthew's letter. I doubt that Williams himself thinks that. But as far as film composers working today -- and I don't unilaterally love all of his music -- he is #1. He is so incredibly smart. Here is someone who has been writing music for five decades -- who was a jazz pianist, arranger, bandleader, TV composer, concert composer, symphony conductor, and composer for some of the greatest movies of all time. He has a lifetime of musical experience and he is just so goddamn smart. Everything he writes is smart.

I am not saying that Matthew Etzel may not attain Williams's level of skill and intelligence -- although the fact that he wrote a letter like the above is not a good sign. So here, composers everywhere, swallow your egos and pretend for a minute that the following is all true, no matter how distasteful it may seem. Because I honestly believe it all is:

1) John Williams has had a lifetime of musical experience that has made him much more talented and successful than you. You will be hard-pressed to top him.

2) If you're under 30 and writing symphonic music, it probably sucks. (Williams scored Jaws at 42.) The good news is, there's not really any damage you can cause, so just write a lot of music and hang out.

3) Most people hate the film music that you love. (It's true!) These people will be responsible for your career, sad to say.

4) The vast majority of film scores in the immediate future will be in pop styles that you probably think are stupid -- specifically techno for the really cool crime files coming up that can make careers. There is a very small market for symphonic film music -- usually it is found in big budget spectacle pictures, in which case there a dozen of established composers (and many more less established ones) who will get hired before an unknown like you.

5) Most student and independent films you will work on will be terrible, because the people making these aren't smart or good enough to do other things. The exceptions to seek out are those bright people who are making their first film or two before getting "called up to the majors."

6) If you have never listened to Ennio Morricone's music, start. If you have never listened to pop music, start. If you think John Barry's music is stupid, you're wrong.

7) Learn everything under the sun.

8) You must be able to tolerate all forms of abuse; for example, this article. Almost all successful film composers today can suppress their egos in order to advance their careers. Which isn't to say that they're not eccentric and/or insecure, but they don't take things personally to the point of giving other people a hard time. Matthew Etzel, this means you!

9) Groom yourself. It's appalling, but beautiful people do better than weird, ugly people (unless they're really funny).

10) Get out of the head of someone who loves movie music, and get into the head of someone who doesn't. It's weird because I'm assuming anyone who wants to write movie music loves it, and I think it's true that you have to write what you love, and not compromise yourself. But at the same time, you have to study things like you're from Mars. I just caught the end of Cocoon on cable, and that's a great score by James Horner. I'm sure most people will agree with me, but stop being a movie music fan and start being a film composer. What's interesting about the end of that movie isn't Horner's big moments, but his little ones... I don't think people realize how much he drops down as far as pace and volume in many of the shots. I can't remember the specifics but it's intriguing. Most aspiring composers make the same errors in that they overwrite and overemphasize things. Don't be obsessed with making lots of noise. Watch all these great movies and see how the masters handle things with such simplicity. Don't copy their licks or style (another problem) but learn the language. And please, don't be obsessed with recreating elaborate symphonic music of the past just for the sake of it, and bemoaning the lack of taste in moviegoers and moviemakers today. That's quite obvious, thank you.

I'm convinced that being a historian of this nature is what propelled John Williams to the top. Nothing is sacred! That plus a lot of talent, which is what Danny Elfman has -- and Jerry Goldsmith, and James Horner, and on and on.

All right, enough of this crap for now. I'll be interested in seeing who gets blindly enraged by all of this, vs. who finds legitimate faults in my reasoning that I've probably overlooked.

MailBag@filmscoremonthly.com