Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 10:05 AM   
 By:   dan the man   (Member)

YOR IS WORST THEN A CAVEMAN.

 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 10:08 AM   
 By:   Basil Wrathbone   (Member)



As far as the original poster's question about the bonus tracks is concerned, I have to say I agree. Very often I'm not sure what the bonus cues are or where they fit into the film or sometimes even why they are bonus tracks and not in the main program etc etc etc.

 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 10:18 AM   
 By:   YOR The Hunter From The Future   (Member)

YOR IS WORST THEN A CAVEMAN.

YOR not a caveman.

YOR noble hunter from the future with superior intellect.

Anyone who saw the movie knows that.

YOR is aware that FAT was just trying to be rude, as always.

He must feel strong that way, yes?

YESSSSS! WE DO MY PRECIOUSSS!!

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 10:19 AM   
 By:   shane   (Member)

Thank you for understanding my intention. As someone who appreciates the great scores, I was just trying to find out if others agree that the art and copy could be upgraded so that we can appreciate the film--and the music more--placing the cues into the context of the score, the score into the framework of the film--and even touching on the period when the film was released.

I just wondered if others agreed with me. I was not trying to bash any one.

 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 10:24 AM   
 By:   gren99   (Member)

i find it ironic that someone screeching all over the place about signing his real name to ones posts, is in fact not using his given name at all. wtg, buford! smile

and lest people want to rub my face in the fact that this is my first post and whatnot -- i ask you this: given the absolutely vitriolic response some members here render when confronted with stuff they don't like (as opposed to, for example, a more civilized 'you are entitled to your opinions, but i think things are fine as is'), whats the point of ever even making a second post?

i feel dirty for just having de-lurked to post this because chances are i'll get crucified for it (not that much care, mind you) but when people called it bullying -- well, suck it up, buttercup. that's exactly what it was.

-gren99-

...who is Kurt F. Roithinger.
the 'F' stands for 'Franz'.

hopefully no one will bother to accuse me of not signing my FULL NAME as it appears on my birth certificate to this post!

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 10:27 AM   
 By:   Ford A. Thaxton   (Member)

Thank you for understanding my intention. As someone who appreciates the great scores, I was just trying to find out if others agree that the art and copy could be upgraded so that we can appreciate the film--and the music more--placing the cues into the context of the score, the score into the framework of the film--and even touching on the period when the film was released.

I just wondered if others agreed with me. I was not trying to bash any one.


No, you wanted an audience to inflate your ego and try and bully someone.

That's the cold hard truth of the matter.

Have you figured out yet the different between a EMAIL and a POST TO A PUBLIC FORUM yet?

Ford A. Thaxton

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 10:32 AM   
 By:   richuk   (Member)

edit - n/m. This won't go anywhere.

 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 10:34 AM   
 By:   YOR The Hunter From The Future   (Member)

Maybe FAT is the one who do the artwork for the label and got personally offended by the criticism?

YOR wonders...

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 10:43 AM   
 By:   deglialberi   (Member)

Maybe FAT is the one who do the artwork for the label and got personally offended by the criticism?

YOR wonders...


And maybe, being as he has produced quite a few soundtracks himself, he feels the sting of such open criticism more acutely. But please, don't let me try to bring some civility to all this. By all means, keep lifting up the board with more juicy personal attacks. Get it out there for all of us to enjoy! We just love to digitally rubberneck.

-Ned

 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 10:48 AM   
 By:   YOR The Hunter From The Future   (Member)

And maybe, being as he has produced quite a few soundtracks himself, he feels the sting of such open criticism more acutely. But please, don't let me try to bring some civility to all this. By all means, keep lifting up the board with more juicy personal attacks. Get it out there for all of us to enjoy! We just love to digitally rubberneck.

-Ned


Ned, the only one who did personal atacks was FAT!

No one is attacking Bruce Kimmel or FAT on a personal level.

The original poster just did some critics over the artwork and some other minor issues.

FAT was the one who jumped on the guy's neck and started call him names.

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 10:54 AM   
 By:   Doug Raynes   (Member)

Thank you for understanding my intention. As someone who appreciates the great scores, I was just trying to find out if others agree that the art and copy could be upgraded so that we can appreciate the film--and the music more--placing the cues into the context of the score, the score into the framework of the film--and even touching on the period when the film was released.

I just wondered if others agreed with me. I was not trying to bash any one.


The issue of liner notes has, of course, been raised several times in the past and I think Bruce knows full well my own preference for detailed liner notes. For me, film music is never “just about the music” because a score is inexorably tied with the film and for it to work best I maintain that it requires an appreciation of how it works within the film. However, I accept that not everyone shares this view and I don’t think we are ever going to change Bruce’s mind about this smile.

Not so long ago Bruce suggested that if people want track by track notes they should write their own and post them here. Maybe that’s the way forward! I did do that in a limited way for "One Eyed Jacks" and "The Strange Love of Martha Ivers" (although I posted on another website – not this Message Board).

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 11:00 AM   
 By:   deglialberi   (Member)



Ned, the only one who did personal atacks was FAT!

No one is attacking Bruce Kimmel or FAT on a personal level.

The original poster just did some critics over the artwork and some other minor issues.

FAT was the one who jumped on the guy's neck and started call him names.



You have done a fine job of speaking for the original poster and setting me straight. And I take full responsibility for any and all of my discretions.

But what of thee, Yor? Methinks Yor doth not beyond reproach.

 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 11:03 AM   
 By:   YOR The Hunter From The Future   (Member)

You have done a fine job of speaking for the original poster and setting me straight. And I take full responsibility for any and all of my discretions.

But what of thee, Yor? Methinks Yor doth not beyond reproach.


 
 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 11:05 AM   
 By:   Ford A. Thaxton   (Member)

Ford, I think he understands the difference, and he gave his reasoning for not e-mailing.


Reasoning? That wouldn't be the term I'd use...

You're the one who seems to be absolutely hell bent on the idea that posting something on a forum equals a huge ego, and must be quashed. Why can't you just let people discuss it?
Rubbish.

I've been on this forum for 15 years and I seem it before and I'll see it again.

This person didn't wish to discuss ANYTHING beyond feeling self-important.

If he wanted a dialog, he should have sent it to the label DIRECTLY FIRST!

It's not like Mr. Kimmel is hard to reach.

He posted it here just to get attention, PERIOD.


In fact, you do this to absolutely every thread which raises any issue on any label. Lighten up.

Youd be amazed at how gentle I have been..


Ford A. Thaxton

 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 11:17 AM   
 By:   soop.broth   (Member)

"Otherwise, suck it up and be grateful for what you have been given"

To be clear, we aren't being 'given' anything. We BUY these CDs, therefore we have a right to comment on them. The original poster was not rude.


Speaking of TUNE DEAF folks.....

If he really wanted to offer something worthwhile, he should have emailed Mr. Kimmel first.

Posting in a public forum to get others to help him "Bully" him is downright rude.

But I'm sure you'll be unable to grasp the concept.

Ford A. Thaxton



As usual, FAT is allowed to resort to personal attacks. Classing the place up.

If you think the original post was "bullying"', you truly don't understand the meaning of the word.

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 11:25 AM   
 By:   waxmanman35   (Member)

This person didn't wish to discuss ANYTHING beyond feeling self-important.Ford A. Thaxton

You are way off base. The poster was expressing his personal preference and asking for the opinion of others. There was no reason to respond in the rude, asinine manner that you did.

As for me, I'm satisfied to have the music without any pretty trinkets. The latest Kritzerland, "A Place in the Sun," is nothing short of a miracle of audio restoration, assuming that the source material was the same as that old boot CD. In addition, the liner notes provide background on the film and explain the reason for the composition of the "bonus" tracks. I'm interested in the music, not in collecting CD jewel case inserts.

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 11:29 AM   
 By:   BillCarson   (Member)

I love the sound of grinding axes in the morning.

In fairness to Ford on this occasion, as some of you may recall - periodically, we have had Bruce's trolls attack him on here in all sorts of thin disguises and newly-registered names. And strangely-quiet lurkers suddenly go to the defence of the troll. In fact I think we may have even had an 'open letter to bruce' before, or certainly something like it - and it was just this same offender pretending to "pose a seemingly innocent question" but basically slagging Bruce off and slagging off Kritzerland and its mother and its dog.

Quite why they would do this or who Bruce has upset I dont know, but it does seem a bit petty and a bit mean to slaughter a label on here when, by and large, they produce good scores and excellent CDs. Perhaps this person is a genuine poster but who is to say, it smacks very much of the previous attacks. Feigning innocence, but putting the boot in.

Given the complications involved in producing a score, the upfront money involved and the lack of profit at the end of the day, I think we need to cut the labels - whoever they are - a little bit of slack. Without them there would be nothing to buy, regardless of whether there are great liner notes or track listings or a free gobbling teasmaid with every CD.

 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 11:34 AM   
 By:   Basil Wrathbone   (Member)

As far as I can see, the original poster is a regular BUYER of the products he is praising/discussing and has every right to make suggestions on the board. His "Open Letter" framing isn't a very smart idea, but this isn't someone saying he's not buying something because of this or that. His general tone is that of praise for the releases, with observations he is entitled to. Some might disagree with him and say the notes and graphics and track listings and descriptions of bonus cues etc are wonderful. That's fine too.
At the end of the day, Kritzerland won't lose a single sale due to his posting and, if anything, might add a good few thanks to yet another reminder here of the excellent scores being released by that label.
As for Mr. F.A.T.'s intrusion, it's just another copy/paste set of personal attacks that have appeared almost word-for-word in any of a hundred previous threads he's disfigured with his presence.

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 11:37 AM   
 By:   haineshisway   (Member)

I love the sound of grinding axes in the morning.

In fairness to Ford on this occasion, as some of you may recall - periodically, we have had Bruce's trolls attack him on here in all sorts of thin disguises and newly-registered names. And strangely-quiet lurkers suddenly go to the defence of the troll. In fact I think we may have even had an 'open letter to bruce' before, or certainly something like it - and it was just this same offender pretending to "pose a seemingly innocent question" but basically slagging Bruce off and slagging off Kritzerland and its mother and its dog.

Quite why they would do this or who Bruce has upset I dont know, but it does seem a bit petty and a bit mean to slaughter a label on here when, by and large, they produce good scores and excellent CDs. Perhaps this person is a genuine poster but who is to say, it smacks very much of the previous attacks. Feigning innocence, but putting the boot in.

Given the complications involved in producing a score, the upfront money involved and the lack of profit at the end of the day, I think we need to cut the labels - whoever they are - a little bit of slack. Without them there would be nothing to buy, regardless of whether there are great liner notes or track listings or a free gobbling teasmaid with every CD.


Yes, by this time one does grow suspicious of these out of the woodwork posts and the people posting. We've had these threads before and we'll have them again, and they do tend to be about exactly the same thing, said in exactly the same way. Not saying that's the case here and not saying it isn't, because I don't know. However, I'm happy to respond point by point to his first post to the best of my ability.

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 28, 2013 - 11:39 AM   
 By:   Octoberman   (Member)

In the meantime, just vote with "the button", people.

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2014 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.