 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I hate how the article is written. Why don't you trust your reader to know who Herrmann (spelled incorrectly in the article, naturally) and Stravinsky were? Or give them helpful parentheticals to note works they might be familiar with? No, they write "Let’s be honest — you probably don’t know what that classical musical reference means (neither do we)."
Also, this music is not great. The mix seems better, even with this sub-96kbps stream.
Most entertainment news are fluff pieces, probably written by the studios themselves. These people just copy and paste with perhaps a little rewriting so it has a personal touch.
Shhhhh#!
You want everyone to know!?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jun 7, 2018 - 11:59 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Spymaster
(Member)
|
I hate to harp on Giacchino so much, because he seems like a genuinely good and humble guy. He's not totally without merit (I'll defend most of JOHN CARTER any day, the closest thing he's written to a truly great score). But what people hear in his music, by and large, just totally escapes me. His career has been one disappointing missed opportunity after another. His STAR TREK theme is the elast inspried space-faring melody I've perhaps ever heard. His melodic sensibilities by and large are usually so clunky, the melodies awkward, obvious, trite or too limp to be remembered or noticed. Add to that fanboy-quality orchestrations and a total lack of harmonic creativity, and I'm really just left scratching my head as to why this guy keeps being handed amazing opportunity after amazing opportunity.
He reminds me of all these current crop of young film composers popping up who whorship Williams, Zimmer, Goldsmith, Silvestri, et al but don't know a damn thing about what came before them and who inspired THEM, never mind have any vested interest in crafting a unique voice devoid of references to their favorite film composers. Giacchino's entire career output has been hugely symptomatic of that trend toward employing "fanboy composers" versus inspired originals with unique voices and demonstrably unique techniques or compositional vocabularies.
He is literally the composer equivalent of J.J. Abrams. For better or worse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I really, REALLY don't understand all of the Giacchino-bashing on this board... I just listened to that track, and I hear nothing wrong with it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I really, REALLY don't understand all of the Giacchino-bashing on this board... I just listened to that track, and I hear nothing wrong with it!
If you think it's bad here, you should visit JWfan.com.
if they do that, then they are not worthy to be on that website. I hate that stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To give Giacchino a little credit, it does sound different from his first JW score so at least he got that part right.
Gee, I can't believe we can be so polarized!! This sounding different from his first JW score is precisely what I think he didn't got right. I think Michael nailed it brilliantly the first time and was expecting him to continue developing the music material in the same vein.
Now I feel exactly as I felt years ago when I heard The Lost World, which I found so distractingly different from the original that I just couldn't listen to, but many years later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boy, Bernard Hermann and Stravinsky had a baby who wrote some very unsurprising film music.
Entertainment Weekly follows up his comment about that approach with this idiotic statement:
"Let’s be honest — you probably don’t know what that classical musical reference means (neither do we)."
Morons. It's 2018. Use Google.
As for that cue itself - totally agree with you, Schiffy. Bland and dull music, unworthy (and in no ways evocative of) the two composers mentioned, never mind Williams' own work in this series.
I hate to harp on Giacchino so much, because he seems like a genuinely good and humble guy. He's not totally without merit (I'll defend most of JOHN CARTER any day, the closest thing he's written to a truly great score). But what people hear in his music, by and large, just totally escapes me. His career has been one disappointing missed opportunity after another. His STAR TREK theme is the least inspired space-faring melody I've perhaps ever heard. His melodic sensibilities by and large are so clunky, the melodies awkward, obvious, trite or too limp to be remembered or noticed. Add to that fanboy-quality orchestrations and a total lack of harmonic creativity, and I'm really just left scratching my head as to why this guy keeps being handed amazing opportunity after amazing opportunity.
When Williams was dealt that same hand, he really and truly MILKED the opportunity, each and every time, almost always without fail: A rare combination of formidable talent and copious opportunity to showcase that talent on a grand stage. Giacchino has been given the stage, but just doesn't have the chops.
He reminds me of all these current crop of young film composers popping up who whorship Williams, Zimmer, Goldsmith, Silvestri, et al but don't know a damn thing about what came before them and who inspired THEM, never mind have any vested interest in crafting a unique voice devoid of references to their favorite film composers. Giacchino's entire career output has been hugely symptomatic of that trend toward employing "fanboy composers" versus inspired originals with unique voices and demonstrably unique techniques or compositional vocabularies.
You crystallized what i also find lacklustre about Giacchino's output since say 2007. And not just him. There's an entire generation of film composers who either don't know the classical repertoire or are being asked to ape temp,scores by Silver Age composers, or probably a bit of both. Pity. As a soundtrack fan, the music of modern scores has turned me back to listening to classical masters like Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Mahler, Ravel, Bartok, etc. Much more interesting listening.
I listened to this track and nowhere did it suggest Hermann or Stravinsky. Not in the least.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jun 7, 2018 - 5:47 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
bobbengan
(Member)
|
You crystallized what i also find lacklustre about Giacchino's output since say 2007. And not just him. There's an entire generation of film composers who either don't know the classical repertoire or are being asked to ape temp,scores by Silver Age composers, or probably a bit of both. Pity. As a soundtrack fan, the music of modern scores has turned me back to listening to classical masters like Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Mahler, Ravel, Bartok, etc. Much more interesting listening.
If you're not familiar with them, check Japan's current juggernauts: Yoko Kanno, Michiru Oshima and Masamichi Amano, among others. REAL composers still writing glorious music, and while Amano tends to heavily 'reference' Hollywood scores of the silver age, these folks really, really know what they're doing:
http://filmscoremonthly.com/board/posts.cfm?threadID=118741&forumID=1&archive=0
http://www.filmscoremonthly.com/board/posts.cfm?threadID=109173&forumID=1&archive=0
That'll get you started.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jun 7, 2018 - 6:11 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
bobbengan
(Member)
|
I think part of the issue also, though perhaps to a lesser extent, is that most of the composers (MOST, not all) who worked in film during the Golden and early Silver age turned to film because it was the only real way to make a living as a composer at that time. We know Herrmann did this grudgingly (at least early on) and Andre Previn certainly had his gripes about working in film. Probably plenty of others would have been writing as they please for the concert hall instead and really only a few, like Rozsa, Korngold and Williams, have seen much cross-over success in the concert hall. Others like Horner and Robert Folk worked in academia first and then decided that wasn't fulfilling their need to write music, and the film industry beckoned. Others, like Conrad Pope or Kevin Kaska, are strong, trained "composer's composers" who've fallen - sadly and undeservedly - into primarily being known as orchestrators for others, despite holding formidable composing chops of their own. Neither of them, however, studied and trained to work in film - that's just what opportunities were afforded them.
While I'd argue a few composers who did specifically study to 'primarily' become film composers have yielded great success (Christopher Young, Basil Poledouris, Trevor Jones - the later two actually studied filmmaking as well), I think relatively few of the greats wanted film to be their primary gig. Finances, changing tastes in the concert hall that eschewed melodic form, and the sheer volume of opportunities available in film at the time dictated the career choice, and thankfully most of them milked that opportunity very fully and made the best of the situation.
The Giacchino's and McCreary's and Tyler's and Zimmer's [i.e. his entire arsenal of foot soldiers flooding the current Hollywood scoring scene] are probably mostly really nice guys and gals. They're team players, they're knowledgeable about film music history, they know how to work closely with directors and producers to unfailingly give them exactly what they ask for with no push-back or hiccups in the process. They write to the strength of mock-ups, immediately and tremendously limiting their own musical palette from fear of not landing the job or producing something that doesn't already sound 100% convincing to their employers. They're social-media savvy, they know how to sell themselves, they know how to look slick as hell (ahem, Mr. Tyler). In the case of Zimmer, they literally want to be rock stars.
And I'm not sure a single one of them will ever write a note of music that could ever truly be called great MUSIC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boy, this topic has sure brought out a lot of pontificating.
Some of it even makes a cogent point. Some.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry. I just can't resist.
THE BOBBENGAN FILIBUSTER
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
