 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I gave it another chance.
Very disappointed.
Ok, to each his own, and it is a matter of taste to a degree.
But I think there are really profund flaws here in terms of craftmanship.
Well, depends on the standards.
For today's Hollywood scoring it is eenough.
Sorry for the negativity, can't find anything positive here.
Mike, I think your analysis of Giacchinos compositional habits are right on the mark and are the reason why I too do not enjoy his music of late.
The difference between Giacchino or Tyler or whomever is the current hot commodity is that they clearly didn't learn how to write for orchestra in the formal way. Sorry to tell you all but orchestrating is a science as much as physics is. It's understanding frequencies and ranges of instruments and what works well in a specific part of their range with other instruments.
Jupiter Ascending touts a large epic orchestra. Nothing in it comes close to the power in Shostakovich's 11th Symphony which used less orchestral forces. How is that? Well, Shosty knew how to orchestrate. And guys like Williams, Goldsmith, North and Barry were all clearly influenced by him and their orchestrations were also pretty adept.
I won't blame Giacchino for being responsible for the awful trend of repetitive ostinatos in film music but I wish someone would incorporate some rhythmic variation like Adams or Reich did in minimalism in the 80s. Using a static figure only works for so long. Clearly Gia didn't study Beethoven on his use of sequencing (no, I'm not talking about MiDI- it's actually a technique used to modulate a repeating figure to keep the listener's interest). Frankly it's just lazy writing, because it ain't hard to transpose stuff on DAWS especially in DP8 which is what he uses (and a lot of us use because it's a very musical program).
Anyhow that's how I see it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jun 7, 2015 - 5:02 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
KeoNato
(Member)
|
Mike, I think your analysis of Giacchinos compositional habits are right on the mark and are the reason why I too do not enjoy his music of late.
The difference between Giacchino or Tyler or whomever is the current hot commodity is that they clearly didn't learn how to write for orchestra in the formal way. Sorry to tell you all but orchestrating is a science as much as physics is. It's understanding frequencies and ranges of instruments and what works well in a specific part of their range with other instruments.
Jupiter Ascending touts a large epic orchestra. Nothing in it comes close to the power in Shostakovich's 11th Symphony which used less orchestral forces. How is that? Well, Shosty knew how to orchestrate. And guys like Williams, Goldsmith, North and Barry were all clearly influenced by him and their orchestrations were also pretty adept.
I won't blame Giacchino for being responsible for the awful trend of repetitive ostinatos in film music but I wish someone would incorporate some rhythmic variation like Adams or Reich did in minimalism in the 80s. Using a static figure only works for so long. Clearly Gia didn't study Beethoven on his use of sequencing (no, I'm not talking about MiDI- it's actually a technique used to modulate a repeating figure to keep the listener's interest). Frankly it's just lazy writing, because it ain't hard to transpose stuff on DAWS especially in DP8 which is what he uses (and a lot of us use because it's a very musical program).
Anyhow that's how I see it.
You do realize Giacchino is a graduate of Julliard, correct? And Tyler Harvard?
As much as I hate many trends in modern film music, I hate even more this elitist tut-tutting that flows through our community some times.
Times have changed and sensibilities along with them. To each their own, but let's not talk about those with styles we don't care for as if they're simpletons. What's more, let's not call them lazy simply because they don't write music the way we wish they would.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Giacchino DOES have a lot of experience writing music pencil on paper.
And you think Shostakovich influenced Barry more than Giacchino? Ooookay...I'd stay far away from the classical music vs. film music thread where Barry was being called things like a glorified songwriter and in the 'light music' tradition.
Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike, I think your analysis of Giacchinos compositional habits are right on the mark and are the reason why I too do not enjoy his music of late.
The difference between Giacchino or Tyler or whomever is the current hot commodity is that they clearly didn't learn how to write for orchestra in the formal way. Sorry to tell you all but orchestrating is a science as much as physics is. It's understanding frequencies and ranges of instruments and what works well in a specific part of their range with other instruments.
Jupiter Ascending touts a large epic orchestra. Nothing in it comes close to the power in Shostakovich's 11th Symphony which used less orchestral forces. How is that? Well, Shosty knew how to orchestrate. And guys like Williams, Goldsmith, North and Barry were all clearly influenced by him and their orchestrations were also pretty adept.
I won't blame Giacchino for being responsible for the awful trend of repetitive ostinatos in film music but I wish someone would incorporate some rhythmic variation like Adams or Reich did in minimalism in the 80s. Using a static figure only works for so long. Clearly Gia didn't study Beethoven on his use of sequencing (no, I'm not talking about MiDI- it's actually a technique used to modulate a repeating figure to keep the listener's interest). Frankly it's just lazy writing, because it ain't hard to transpose stuff on DAWS especially in DP8 which is what he uses (and a lot of us use because it's a very musical program).
Anyhow that's how I see it.
You do realize Giacchino is a graduate of Julliard, correct? And Tyler Harvard?
As much as I hate many trends in modern film music, I hate even more this elitist tut-tutting that flows through our community some times.
Times have changed and sensibilities along with them. To each their own, but let's not talk about those with styles we don't care for as if they're simpletons. What's more, let's not call them lazy simply because they don't write music the way we wish they would.
Tyler did not get a degree from Harvard in music.
And to other poster who said Giacchino is influenced more by Shostakovich than Barry- clearly you don't know Shostakovich.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shostakovich is one of my favorite composers, and certainly my favorite Russian composer (though I love many). I have all of his major works that have been released and would buy a complete works set with glee if one were ever released. I have heard many live performances of his music, having worked for the Houston Symphony as well as the L.A. Philharmonic for years. When I managed Joel's Classical Shop for two years, I personally changed many people's minds about Shostakovich who thought they hated him (second movement of his second piano concerto usually did the trick for the doubters). I have continued to be an ambassador for his music since then. But I guess that all doesn't matter and I don't know his music, because I think I've heard more Giacchino music influenced by him than Barry music?
What Barry scores sound like what Shostakovich music, pray tell? The closest Barry got to the intensity of Shostakovich was probably parts of The Lion in Winter or The Last Valley, but it's still a stretch.
I think you must be pretty ignorant of Giacchino based on your comments but perhaps you can find some Call of Duty clips on YouTube and enlighten yourself?
Now if you were to argue that James Horner was more influenced by Shostakovich than Giacchino, you'd definitely be right.
Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barry is not as obvious as Horner or even North but there are compositional traits that he took from Shostakovich's slower movements as far as harmony goes. King Kong has some of this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You do realize Giacchino is a graduate of Julliard, correct? And Tyler Harvard?
As much as I hate many trends in modern film music, I hate even more this elitist tut-tutting that flows through our community some times.
Times have changed and sensibilities along with them. To each their own, but let's not talk about those with styles we don't care for as if they're simpletons. What's more, let's not call them lazy simply because they don't write music the way we wish they would.
It is known as The Snotnose Syndrome and sadly, it has become more and more common. The comments can be basically idiotic and insulting.
So it's wrong when someone says something critical about a score or composer but it's perfectly fine to call said person's views Idiotic or label them a "snot nose". I see, thanks for clearing that up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shostakovich is one of my favorite composers, and certainly my favorite Russian composer (though I love many). I have all of his major works that have been released and would buy a complete works set with glee if one were ever released. I have heard many live performances of his music, having worked for the Houston Symphony as well as the L.A. Philharmonic for years. When I managed Joel's Classical Shop for two years, I personally changed many people's minds about Shostakovich who thought they hated him (second movement of his second piano concerto usually did the trick for the doubters). I have continued to be an ambassador for his music since then.
Yavar
Please enlighten me with specific music examples where Giacchino has been influenced by Shostakovich. Please point out compositional aspects that both share like harmonic procedures, orchestrational techniques (don't spare the technical jargon- I didn't work for a symphony orchestra like you but I did take a few music courses in college a few years back) and large scale structural tendencies. Also would you be able to point out where Giacchino utilizes fugal writing or imitative counterpoint in any of his works that matches Shostakovich's in any one of his symphonies (the 11th has a particularly good fugal section)?
Admittedly Barry is less influenced than Horner who does evoke the late Russian composer's tedency towards non key related passing tones, atypical and atypical modulations (also a staple of Prokoviev's style) and appoggiaturas....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jun 8, 2015 - 5:28 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Broughtfan
(Member)
|
Mike, I think your analysis of Giacchinos compositional habits are right on the mark and are the reason why I too do not enjoy his music of late.
The difference between Giacchino or Tyler or whomever is the current hot commodity is that they clearly didn't learn how to write for orchestra in the formal way. Sorry to tell you all but orchestrating is a science as much as physics is. It's understanding frequencies and ranges of instruments and what works well in a specific part of their range with other instruments.
Jupiter Ascending touts a large epic orchestra. Nothing in it comes close to the power in Shostakovich's 11th Symphony which used less orchestral forces. How is that? Well, Shosty knew how to orchestrate. And guys like Williams, Goldsmith, North and Barry were all clearly influenced by him and their orchestrations were also pretty adept.
I won't blame Giacchino for being responsible for the awful trend of repetitive ostinatos in film music but I wish someone would incorporate some rhythmic variation like Adams or Reich did in minimalism in the 80s. Using a static figure only works for so long. Clearly Gia didn't study Beethoven on his use of sequencing (no, I'm not talking about MiDI- it's actually a technique used to modulate a repeating figure to keep the listener's interest). Frankly it's just lazy writing, because it ain't hard to transpose stuff on DAWS especially in DP8 which is what he uses (and a lot of us use because it's a very musical program).
Anyhow that's how I see it.
You do realize Giacchino is a graduate of Julliard, correct? And Tyler Harvard?
As much as I hate many trends in modern film music, I hate even more this elitist tut-tutting that flows through our community some times.
Times have changed and sensibilities along with them. To each their own, but let's not talk about those with styles we don't care for as if they're simpletons. What's more, let's not call them lazy simply because they don't write music the way we wish they would.
I wish you guys would get your facts straight about Giacchino's Juilliard education. He was never in a degree program, but took classes in the school's Evening Division program (and this is documented, all over the Internet). Reading through the Evening Division's course offerings there's no doubt he learned a lot (and incredibly affordable programs they are, even by NYC standards), but it's simply not the same as attending there as a regular student (the school accepts 8% of its worldwide applicants).
Have included a link to a page listing the school's ED course offerings (note prerequisites for entering beginning composition class). Check it out for yourself.
http://catalog.juilliard.edu/content.php?catoid=21&navoid=2290
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lehah, I would agree to a point. The fact is that Horner or Williams or North and other film composers, even in the past 20 years have managed to take 20th concert repertoire as inspiration and apply it in the same technically deft manner as the originators of this music. And yeah, it's not fair to compare the compositional prowess of someone like Shostakovich to Giacchino or Tyler, or anyone else for that matter- I respect Desplat but he also doesn't write like Shosty.
Perhaps I just didn't articulate my post well- regardless of the tools modern composers are using, there is still either composers who know and apply a breadth of musical technique in their scores or they don't.
For the record, I love Tyler's groove based scores like Fast Five or Now You See Me. They are terrific and fun. Giacchino I found exceptionally promising from his MOH days through Alias to Incredibles and Ratatouille. From that point on however, say post LOST, his style has moved away from interesting to a simple diatonic harmonically stripped down style. All of the dense chordal work from The Incredibles has been replaced by linear writing. I agree with Mike West on Giacchino's use of repeating figures for his action music. It's just not particularly interesting. Of course this is more of a question of personal taste and given the sensibilities of some forum members here, let's just leave it at that.
Hope that clears things up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Nov 4, 2015 - 1:13 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
EdG
(Member)
|
Just watched the film for the first time and it, uh, defies easy description so I'll restrict myself to the music.
First, there's a LOT of score in the film and much of it never made the two-disc set. The score as presented on disc seems to be constructed to a surprising degree from alternates. It also seems to be more heavily edited than I can recall from previous Giacchino efforts.
I would say that, personally, I regret the choice to leave off much of the intimate scoring. The disc favors the big chaotic set pieces and I've never felt that Giacchino is as successful there as he is in reinforcing character. Kunis and Tatum have exactly zero onscreen chemistry and so the score really has to sell the idea of a spark between them. Giacchino delivers, but clearly not with big-scale orchestral forces. My favorite cue, "The Titus Clipper," really channels the "Out Of Africa" vibe strongly and it got some lengthy development on the cd so I was surprised to find it cut down in the film to just a few seconds. The film was in post production for an unusually long time so I assume there were many changes made along the way.
Hearing more of the score really doesn't transform it for me (I liked it to begin with) but I miss the moments mentioned above as well as the percussive end title music that really ought to have been on the cd somewhere. With two different labels releasing the same album I wish someone had gone to the trouble to write some liner notes that may shed more light on the evolution of the music.
I'd love to hear responses from other that have seen the film; the dismal box office suggests few were persuaded. I can't say I like the film - it's a loud, indulgent, and poorly-written mess that really makes "The Matrix" feel like an outlier. If there's any logic in it I've yet to uncover it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
