 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All else this year pales to it and all those who challenge that concept are fools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Dec 28, 2011 - 12:38 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
ian642002
(Member)
|
No, I've not seen War Horse and I can't say that I'm in a hurry to go and see it either, even though I admire Spielberg very much. But I read the UK Total Film magazine today and their biggest complaint with the film is none other than John Williams's score, in which they criticise it for swamping the story with it's reportedly relentless (and, in their judgement, unmemorable) presence, thus signifying an unspoken agreement with the Variety reviewer and a cue for film-music lovers to light the torches and scale the castle walls of the unbelievers.
But it's opinion. Simply that. The biggest fools around are those that follow and love an artist without allowing for the possibility that not only some of what they do is - yes - gubbins, but that there others who might think it's gubbins, too. Not because they dislike the artist, but that - in the case of John Williams - it may indeed be intrusive and annoying. You can admire and love the achievements of that artist while admitting that not everyone in the world will love what you love. The trick is handling that reality.
It's a profoundly obvious point to make, but it's worth making. I once read an online article about the electronic music artists, Autechre, who talked about film music and stated that thought the score for Alien was very good but were concerned that it may have been written by 'someone dodgy like Jerry Goldsmith'. Now Goldsmith is one of my all-time favourites and my initial reaction was to find their e-mail, contact them and tell them to look at his back catalogue. Then I thought, hold on a moment. It's their opinion. Who am I to make them change their minds? There are plenty of people who love Goldsmith's stuff like I do, why should I form a law against people who don't? Besides Goldsmith wrote his fair share of failures. Every artist doesn't produce a masterpiece continually. Goldsmith had flaws - which is why I like him. I'm learning to handle the possibility that, from time to time, someone won't.
That should apply to artists like Williams. The guy from Variety didn't like the way his score reportedly flooded the movie.
Some people think that's heresy. Nope. That's someone's considered opinion. Allow for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No, I've not seen War Horse and I can't say that I'm in a hurry to go and see it either, even though I admire Spielberg very much. But I read the UK Total Film magazine today and their biggest complaint with the film is none other than John Williams's score, in which they criticise it for swamping the story with it's reportedly relentless (and, in their judgement, unmemorable) presence, thus signifying an unspoken agreement with the Variety reviewer and a cue for film-music lovers to light the torches and scale the castle walls of the unbelievers.
But it's opinion. Simply that. The biggest fools around are those that follow and love an artist without allowing for the possibility that not only some of what they do is - yes - gubbins, but that there others who might think it's gubbins, too. Not because they dislike the artist, but that - in the case of John Williams - it may indeed be intrusive and annoying. You can admire and love the achievements of that artist while admitting that not everyone in the world will love what you love. The trick is handling that reality.
It's a profoundly obvious point to make, but it's worth making. I once read an online article about the electronic music artists, Autechre, who talked about film music and stated that thought the score for Alien was very good but were concerned that it may have been written by 'someone dodgy like Jerry Goldsmith'. Now Goldsmith is one of my all-time favourites and my initial reaction was to find their e-mail, contact them and tell them to look at his back catalogue. Then I thought, hold on a moment. It's their opinion. Who am I to make them change their minds? There are plenty of people who love Goldsmith's stuff like I do, why should I form a law against people who don't? Besides Goldsmith wrote his fair share of failures. Every artist doesn't produce a masterpiece continually. Goldsmith had flaws - which is why I like him. I'm learning to handle the possibility that, from time to time, someone won't.
That should apply to artists like Williams. The guy from Variety didn't like the way his score reportedly flooded the movie.
Some people think that's heresy. Nope. That's someone's considered opinion. Allow for it.
What is a "considered" opinion. My "considered" opinion, and I guarantee you I'm not a young person like Mr. Chang is - he looks all of about twenty-three - and know a lot more about film and music than he does (not that THAT means much), is that he is relentlessly incorrect about the score. You seem to be agreeing with him because some other publication agreed - see the film and then you, too, can make a considered opinion. The guy from Variety is clearly not a fan of real movie music in the classic sense. He likes the ambient film scoring of Dragon Tattoo - that's his young thing. That's not an opinion - that's his taste and his taste is clearly unable to appreciate anything other than what he's become used to or what's current and hip.
I will say it again - War Horse is Spielberg's best film in years (I agree with LeHah - since AI) and this is John Williams' best score in years. It is not laid on with a trowel, it does not overwhelm the images, it works in tandem with them and it is another part of the storytelling arsenal. But it's clear those of today don't want it anymore - they'd have loved it if it had some droning nonsense behind the whole thing, instead of FILM music doing what FILM music was designed to do - help tell the story, help understand the characters and the drama and the subtext, all of which this score does in spades. It make me nauseous to read "considered" opinions like this - and let me tell you, if a film comes out that does $500,000,000 at the box-office and that film has an old-fashioned movie music score, this same guy will be all over that, loving every minute and then bashing the OTHER kind of score. That's what these guys do, these flavor of the month boys.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Dec 28, 2011 - 10:34 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
joan hue
(Member)
|
Most of the time I can count on several things from a Spielberg movie. Some of his movies will be pure popcorn entertainment. We see these movies for the JOY. Some of his movies are very serious with important messages and themes relating to our humanity and to our history. One thing I can always rely upon is that somewhere in any Spielberg movie I will witness a MEMORABLE scene or a visual image that will be forever implanted in my mind. The second aspect in Spielberg movies that I look forward to is that he will in places take straight shots at one’s heart. He will pull on your heart strings if you have a heart.
War Horse had many many many Memorable scenes. It was a stunningly gorgeous movie. I swear my mouth fell open a few times as my eyes registered certain scenes. Also, only a stone would not be affected by some of the scenes in this movie. I felt that a few places were a bit manipulative, but overall, the movie required from me a heartfelt emotional INVESTMENT. And how better to enrich that emotional investment that the story and the visuals illicit than through Williams’ gorgeous music that dovetails so perfectly with various scenes.
Sometimes I wonder if critics remember what amazing scores this man has composed. Who doesn’t recognize Jaws, Indiana Jones, Start Wars, Superman, etc.? His themes are eternal, iconic and forever attached to the characters from those movies. At the same time, he can give us dissonant, alien ambient soundscapes that perfectly fit War Of The Worlds. Thank goodness he has the talent to leave such soundscapes and compose real themes with dynamic orchestrations (thick textured orchestrations for many instruments) when a movie calls for such compositions. War Horse is such a movie.
Oh yeah, I’d nominate that horse for an Oscar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's not hard to imagine what Mr. Chang would have to say about Williams' scores for ET and Close Encounters if those films came out today. And he'd be as wrong about them as he is about War Horse. Williams deserves the Oscar for this one, which is something I didn't think I'd be saying about his scores again - I really haven't been that fond of anything of recent vintage, but this thing is just Williams at his best and Williams at his best puts everyone else back in their place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No, I've not seen War Horse and I can't say that I'm in a hurry to go and see it either, even though I admire Spielberg very much. But I read the UK Total Film magazine today and their biggest complaint with the film is none other than John Williams's score, in which they criticise it for swamping the story with it's reportedly relentless (and, in their judgement, unmemorable) presence, thus signifying an unspoken agreement with the Variety reviewer and a cue for film-music lovers to light the torches and scale the castle walls of the unbelievers.
But it's opinion. Simply that. The biggest fools around are those that follow and love an artist without allowing for the possibility that not only some of what they do is - yes - gubbins, but that there others who might think it's gubbins, too. Not because they dislike the artist, but that - in the case of John Williams - it may indeed be intrusive and annoying. You can admire and love the achievements of that artist while admitting that not everyone in the world will love what you love. The trick is handling that reality.
It's a profoundly obvious point to make, but it's worth making. I once read an online article about the electronic music artists, Autechre, who talked about film music and stated that thought the score for Alien was very good but were concerned that it may have been written by 'someone dodgy like Jerry Goldsmith'. Now Goldsmith is one of my all-time favourites and my initial reaction was to find their e-mail, contact them and tell them to look at his back catalogue. Then I thought, hold on a moment. It's their opinion. Who am I to make them change their minds? There are plenty of people who love Goldsmith's stuff like I do, why should I form a law against people who don't? Besides Goldsmith wrote his fair share of failures. Every artist doesn't produce a masterpiece continually. Goldsmith had flaws - which is why I like him. I'm learning to handle the possibility that, from time to time, someone won't.
That should apply to artists like Williams. The guy from Variety didn't like the way his score reportedly flooded the movie.
Some people think that's heresy. Nope. That's someone's considered opinion. Allow for it.
What is a "considered" opinion. My "considered" opinion, and I guarantee you I'm not a young person like Mr. Chang is - he looks all of about twenty-three - and know a lot more about film and music than he does (not that THAT means much), is that he is relentlessly incorrect about the score. You seem to be agreeing with him because some other publication agreed - see the film and then you, too, can make a considered opinion. The guy from Variety is clearly not a fan of real movie music in the classic sense. He likes the ambient film scoring of Dragon Tattoo - that's his young thing. That's not an opinion - that's his taste and his taste is clearly unable to appreciate anything other than what he's become used to or what's current and hip.
I will say it again - War Horse is Spielberg's best film in years (I agree with LeHah - since AI) and this is John Williams' best score in years. It is not laid on with a trowel, it does not overwhelm the images, it works in tandem with them and it is another part of the storytelling arsenal. But it's clear those of today don't want it anymore - they'd have loved it if it had some droning nonsense behind the whole thing, instead of FILM music doing what FILM music was designed to do - help tell the story, help understand the characters and the drama and the subtext, all of which this score does in spades. It make me nauseous to read "considered" opinions like this - and let me tell you, if a film comes out that does $500,000,000 at the box-office and that film has an old-fashioned movie music score, this same guy will be all over that, loving every minute and then bashing the OTHER kind of score. That's what these guys do, these flavor of the month boys.
Hear, hear!!!
I hope WAR HORSE becomes a huge success and will win the Oscar for Best Score - just to set an example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Dec 29, 2011 - 2:17 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
ian642002
(Member)
|
What is a "considered" opinion. My "considered" opinion, and I guarantee you I'm not a young person like Mr. Chang is - he looks all of about twenty-three - and know a lot more about film and music than he does (not that THAT means much), is that he is relentlessly incorrect about the score. You seem to be agreeing with him because some other publication agreed - see the film and then you, too, can make a considered opinion. The guy from Variety is clearly not a fan of real movie music in the classic sense. He likes the ambient film scoring of Dragon Tattoo - that's his young thing. That's not an opinion - that's his taste and his taste is clearly unable to appreciate anything other than what he's become used to or what's current and hip.
I'm agreeing with his right to express his opinion even if it rubs people up the wrong way, not that John Williams ought to receive a critical drubbing. Yes, Mr. Chang may have considered the aspects of his review, even the score, and if he feels that the score detracted from the film then he's every right to say that. It is his opinion whether you like it or not, and that you feel he has no right to criticise the use of film music because he's young (and hasn't the faculty to have considered his own opinions) is a little dopey to say the least. To be a film critic doesn't mean he has to have a John Williams back catalogue on his shelves, or indeed a basement full of film music CDs enough to sink a ship. Times change, and as film changes, so do the tastes of critics and the way they express what they like and don't like. Mr. Chang is very clear in what he appreciates and to negate that on the grounds that he is - in your view - a clueless young whippersnapper whose critical hormones are as yet unformed, comes off as more than a little jaundiced and unreasonably so.
I will say it again - War Horse is Spielberg's best film in years (I agree with LeHah - since AI) and this is John Williams' best score in years. It is not laid on with a trowel, it does not overwhelm the images, it works in tandem with them and it is another part of the storytelling arsenal. But it's clear those of today don't want it anymore - they'd have loved it if it had some droning nonsense behind the whole thing, instead of FILM music doing what FILM music was designed to do - help tell the story, help understand the characters and the drama and the subtext, all of which this score does in spades. It make me nauseous to read "considered" opinions like this - and let me tell you, if a film comes out that does $500,000,000 at the box-office and that film has an old-fashioned movie music score, this same guy will be all over that, loving every minute and then bashing the OTHER kind of score. That's what these guys do, these flavor of the month
No, that appears to be your imagination, allied with the anger of a grumpy and combative senior citizen. Before you ask, I'm nearing 50 myself and yet I'm fully aware that the world of film will change and criticism along with it. Yesterday's sweeping orchestral score will become today's mass of chugging, overcooked violins - to the ears of some people, at least. Personally, I love the old-school style. Give me the emotional swirl of Steiner, Herrmann, Tiomkin, Goldsmith, Williams et al any day of the month, yet I'd be dumb to go into paroxysms of rage if some younger person - even if it did happen to be the film critic of Variety - dared to challenge the merits of an old-style film score. Does it really make you nauseous to think that someone would like the score to Dragon Tattoo over War Horse? Then it's ironic that you display the same kind of insularity you accuse Mr. Chang of. Why this young scamp likes all that electronic droning! I'd stick the lout into a room with a box set of Harry Potter scores! That'd set the little bugger right!
Come on. Like life itself, anything new can easily sit alongside and co-exist with the old (or old-style), and that applies to film music. The risk of film music is that you can easily love one style of such an art form while shunning another because it doesn't sound like the style you're used to. And not everyone can be urged or instigated to like what you like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It´s not about urging someone to like the same as one does.
It´s about a new generation of critics who ridicule film scores such as WAR HORSE and favor the not-melody-driven ambient underscores such as THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO.
If these critics were saying that they just do not like a Williams score then it would be perfectly fine. But to make constantly fun of those scores (remember the hatred Gabriel Yared had to endure for his wonderful AMELIA?) is to threaten them into non-existence since studio heads (and audiences) tend to react to this.
Granted, film scores are changing in cycles - and before JAWS and STAR WARS... yeah, yeah, yeah.
Still, when we get a score like WAR HORSE and critics forget that any score is manipulating you then it really rings my alarm bells.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Dec 29, 2011 - 8:15 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
ian642002
(Member)
|
It´s not about urging someone to like the same as one does.
It´s about a new generation of critics who ridicule film scores such as WAR HORSE and favor the not-melody-driven ambient underscores such as THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO.
If these critics were saying that they just do not like a Williams score then it would be perfectly fine. But to make constantly fun of those scores (remember the hatred Gabriel Yared had to endure for his wonderful AMELIA?) is to threaten them into non-existence since studio heads (and audiences) tend to react to this.
Granted, film scores are changing in cycles - and before JAWS and STAR WARS... yeah, yeah, yeah.
Still, when we get a score like WAR HORSE and critics forget that any score is manipulating you then it really rings my alarm bells.
I'm not entirely convinced by that. If old-school scores were in danger of being outlawed due to their floridly unashamed romanticism, then the Harry Potter scores would have been a threatened species a long time ago, along with other franchises (god, I hate that word) utilising classically-influenced music. Perhaps criticism was focused on Williams's music because of the opinions stated. Perhaps, to the ears of some critics, Williams's score did intrude upon the events onscreen. Perhaps it did flood with boundless emotion when, possibly, it could have pulled back.
The problem is that the love of film music like Williams's scores is so unabashed and all-embracing that perhaps a little perspective is lost, and that different critical outlooks are seen as heretical, especially when put in terms frowned upon by the posters here. Just because War Horse's score wasn't praised to the skies and even criticised doesn't mean studio heads will find a graveyard for old-school film music. In this instance, perhaps Williams's score wasn't the best one for it. It is, of course, the best for everyone here, because all of you awaited it like a form of Christmas present without hearing a note of it and were exhilarated when it sounded like the prime JW you say it is, unquestioning, uncritical. The danger there is no other viewpoint of criticism will be tolerated. Hence Mr. Chang - who won't be the ultimate cause of the death of old-school film music either now or in the future - gets it in the neck.
Strangely enough I don't recall Williams's score for Tintin being the cause of supposedly vindictive anti-orchestra sentiments probably because it was just the right music for that film. Perhaps - just perhaps - some critics thought that a different approach should've been taken by Williams other than the one he already took. Shall I say it again? I'm not against Williams's music for War Horse. I've only heard a moment during the trailers, why should I criticise? However, the strangely worrying reaction that if certain critics don't like it then we can all lay a wreath at the gravestone of orchestral film music, and that certain composers are so prized that they should be beyond question and all other viewpoints of criticism are not just dismissed but disliked from the moment they were written, does seem confounding.
If cinema's existence were dictated by critics, believe me, things would be a lot worse. A little cool detachment wouldn't go amiss here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I see what you mean and respect your opinion.
But I still think that critics have influenced audiences and filmmakers to doubt the importance of melody-driven orchestral scores.
This is due, IMO, to the age of irony we live in. Anything that is stated has to be questioned and made fun of in order not to be made fun of so easily by others.
Therefore a melody underscoring an emotional beat is very often considered as bland, pushy, on-the-nose - while rhythmic, sound effect-like background droning is hailed as unobtrusive, better scoring because it does not manipulate the viewer.
And that´s where I and obviously others beg to differ.
Manipulation is what the arts are about. They try to make you feel, see, understand something. And WAR HORSE is a perfect film for a grand, majestic orchestral score. If a critic fails to see that I wonder why.
Would THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO work better with a grand Williams score?
I don´t think so. The Reznor score fits the film very well.
Every film needs a certain voice. But I would not want to watch JAWS with a Hans Zimmer score. And I would not want to watch GONE WITH THE WIND with a Trent Reznor score.
But why do I have the feeling that some critics actually want to go in that direction - not with the old classics but with future films.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It´s not about urging someone to like the same as one does.
It´s about a new generation of critics who ridicule film scores such as WAR HORSE and favor the not-melody-driven ambient underscores such as THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO.
If these critics were saying that they just do not like a Williams score then it would be perfectly fine. But to make constantly fun of those scores (remember the hatred Gabriel Yared had to endure for his wonderful AMELIA?) is to threaten them into non-existence since studio heads (and audiences) tend to react to this.
Granted, film scores are changing in cycles - and before JAWS and STAR WARS... yeah, yeah, yeah.
Still, when we get a score like WAR HORSE and critics forget that any score is manipulating you then it really rings my alarm bells.
I'm not entirely convinced by that. If old-school scores were in danger of being outlawed due to their floridly unashamed romanticism, then the Harry Potter scores would have been a threatened species a long time ago, along with other franchises (god, I hate that word) utilising classically-influenced music. Perhaps criticism was focused on Williams's music because of the opinions stated. Perhaps, to the ears of some critics, Williams's score did intrude upon the events onscreen. Perhaps it did flood with boundless emotion when, possibly, it could have pulled back.
The problem is that the love of film music like Williams's scores is so unabashed and all-embracing that perhaps a little perspective is lost, and that different critical outlooks are seen as heretical, especially when put in terms frowned upon by the posters here. Just because War Horse's score wasn't praised to the skies and even criticised doesn't mean studio heads will find a graveyard for old-school film music. In this instance, perhaps Williams's score wasn't the best one for it. It is, of course, the best for everyone here, because all of you awaited it like a form of Christmas present without hearing a note of it and were exhilarated when it sounded like the prime JW you say it is, unquestioning, uncritical. The danger there is no other viewpoint of criticism will be tolerated. Hence Mr. Chang - who won't be the ultimate cause of the death of old-school film music either now or in the future - gets it in the neck.
Strangely enough I don't recall Williams's score for Tintin being the cause of supposedly vindictive anti-orchestra sentiments probably because it was just the right music for that film. Perhaps - just perhaps - some critics thought that a different approach should've been taken by Williams other than the one he already took. Shall I say it again? I'm not against Williams's music for War Horse. I've only heard a moment during the trailers, why should I criticise? However, the strangely worrying reaction that if certain critics don't like it then we can all lay a wreath at the gravestone of orchestral film music, and that certain composers are so prized that they should be beyond question and all other viewpoints of criticism are not just dismissed but disliked from the moment they were written, does seem confounding.
If cinema's existence were dictated by critics, believe me, things would be a lot worse. A little cool detachment wouldn't go amiss here.
Tintin didn't get criticized because it is action music scoring and had no real strong themes, at least for me. It was a big ol' disappointment, at least for me. War Horse wasn't. War Horse was a beautiful score to a beautiful film. You keep making a lot of suppositions here - "perhaps" it wasn't the right score, but you don't know that because you've neither heard it on its own or seen the film. I was, frankly, prepared to be disappointed by it, as I've been disappointed by several Williams' recent efforts and that includes Harry Potter (believe me, I know others love that and others of recent vintage) so I was not waiting for it "like a Christmas present." It's funny to be castigated as someone who used "young" as an epithet for Mr. Chang, only to be called a grumpy old man by the person doing the castigating. Yes, everyone can have an opinion. And when that opinion is published others can take issue with it, disagree with it, and, yes, horror of horror, CRITICIZE the critic and his criticism. It works all ways, you see.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
