|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I understand the point you are trying to make, but those two things are not the same at all. Costuming characters is dictated by the times and fashions of the particular period and setting. The score which accompanies does not have to conform to any such restrictions. I do not agree with anything you've said. Sure, we're a group of film score fans, so naturally we consider that a more creative field. But among a crowd of costume designers (and I know many), they would contend that the opposite is true. All of these fields are creative endeavors, with a lot more leeway than you're giving them credit for. Everyone wants the freedom to be creative. Any costume designer who doesn't read descriptions in a script is an idiot and deserves to be fired. That is a given. The matter of temp-tracking is, for me, not the same. Perhaps there are a handful who do it just as a way for a composer to hear the style, and then the composer is free to be completely creative within that style. But that is the rarity, I'm afraid. I know that too many times the composers are forced to completely emulate every cue in the temp track and they do so by orchestrating exactly as the temp-track does and by changing a few notes here and there. And it does not work and it results in aural pablum of the highest order, which is why, as someone who posted above, everything sounds the same. How many scores do I have to hear with a piano plunking out random notes or chords over sustained strings - they are ALL the same and they ALL suck. I just watched a film yesterday that had that - awful. Film music is, these days, not allowed to do what film music should do - it's just laid over the film as wallpaper and it really could be any music because it's not designed to actually be an integral part of the storytelling as all film scores should be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Dec 14, 2014 - 12:38 PM
|
|
|
By: |
SchiffyM
(Member)
|
haines, you know I respect your opinion. I suppose my knee-jerk reaction is to defend the concept of temping, which is not necessarily an evil and is generally necessary. In practice, as you say, it is too often abused, even if the director/producer/studio are well-intentioned. But the way films and television are made today, how could it be done without temps? In a perfect world, all directors would say "Here's what I've been thinking, but please surprise me with whatever you think best and maybe I'll love it." Also, I think it's facile to blame temp tracks for films sounding alike these days. I think that's a product of fear of bold creative choices and over-reliance on test audiences. To me, those are much more insidious than temp tracks.
|
|
|
|
|
As a composer, I like temp scores. Indeed, I find it a source of inspiration.
|
|
|
|
|
I would argue temp tracking is copyright infringement. How? Unless they license the music as their temp track (which would require getting permission, and probably paying a fee) their not authorized to cut their film to someone else's copyrighted protected intellectual property. Copyright holder controls how their work is distributed or used. I am pretty sure it's considered fair use unless it's for public consumption, at which point the filmmakers license the cue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|