 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 2, 2015 - 9:41 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ludwig van
(Member)
|
As a follow-up to some discussion in one of the threads on this year's Oscar win, I had a few lingering questions about the 1994 win that I thought would be more appropriate in a separate thread.
JohnnyG suggested that Zimmer won for Lion King that year on account of two things: the film's traditional animation, which was quickly becoming overtaken by digital animation, and the boost from the Elton John songs. Not that I disagree with any of this, but we could always add more nuance to our understanding of it, and it is here that I appeal to the FSM membership.
First, what do you believe it was about Zimmer's score - and I mean, considering only his music in the film - that gave him an advantage over the other nominees?
Second, if the songs had a big helping hand in the win, why didn't Forrest Gump win with the even larger number of songs it employed, especially given that the film was the darling of the Oscars that year? Is it perhaps something about them being clearly old songs while Elton's were obviously new and more able to be associated with the "original" portion of the Best Original Score category?
As inscrutable as the reasons for these wins are, I still wonder what the opinions of the people here are...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In my opinion, Elliot Goldenthal's score for Interview with the Vampire should have won the Oscar instead of Lion King. Hell in 1994 there were alot of great scores that were better than the Lion King. For example: Jerry Goldsmith's The Shadow, Danny Elfman's Black Beauty, Howard Shore's Ed Wood, Patrick Doyle's Frankenstein. The list could go on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree that there were other scores that year worthy of an Oscar, but this Zimmer win actually doesn't bother me too much because he (and Mark Mancina?) brilliantly integrated Elton John's songs with original score. Sure, some bits of it are mickey-mousey (hey it's Disney) but the highlights of Zimmer's score are amazing...particularly the moment when Mufasa and Simba are under the stars together and Mufasa is telling his son about the great kings of the past. That moment alone sends chills up my spine and makes this score worthy of an Oscar. The stampede sequence is brilliantly scored as well.
I am far from the biggest Zimmer fan out there but I don't begrudge him this win at all!
Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 4, 2015 - 2:53 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
leomichel
(Member)
|
[...]JohnnyG suggested that Zimmer won for Lion King that year on account of two things: the film's traditional animation, which was quickly becoming overtaken by digital animation
[...]
In 1994, Toy Story was still in the making (not released before the end of 1995) and nobody had yet heard of it. There was no reason, for general audience or professionals, to doubt that the dominance of what we now call "traditional animation" or, more correctly, "hand-drawn animation" would ever be challenged, much less that its Disney incarnation would ever become extinct. Even when Toy Story became a success, nobody could foresee that, 10 years later, computer animated films woud become the only marketable type of animation for the major studios.
So, sorry for this slightly off-topic post, but it was just to say that the kind of "nostalgia/tenderness" for traditional animation given as an explanation in the first post seems, to me, to come from an anachronistic perspective.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lion King was a good score, probably one of ZImmer's best.
I would have gone with Shawshank Redemption though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Mar 4, 2015 - 9:17 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ludwig van
(Member)
|
In 1994, Toy Story was still in the making (not released before the end of 1995) and nobody had yet heard of it. There was no reason, for general audience or professionals, to doubt that the dominance of what we now call "traditional animation" or, more correctly, "hand-drawn animation" would ever be challenged, much less that its Disney incarnation would ever become extinct. Even when Toy Story became a success, nobody could foresee that, 10 years later, computer animated films woud become the only marketable type of animation for the major studios.
So, sorry for this slightly off-topic post, but it was just to say that the kind of "nostalgia/tenderness" for traditional animation given as an explanation in the first post seems, to me, to come from an anachronistic perspective.
Not off-topic at all! Thank you for the clarification. So setting aside for a moment all the scores that could have been nominated, how do others here feel about Lion King's win? Was it one of those years where just about any of the five would have been well deserved? Just curious...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 4, 2015 - 9:27 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Solium
(Member)
|
[...]JohnnyG suggested that Zimmer won for Lion King that year on account of two things: the film's traditional animation, which was quickly becoming overtaken by digital animation
[...]
In 1994, Toy Story was still in the making (not released before the end of 1995) and nobody had yet heard of it. There was no reason, for general audience or professionals, to doubt that the dominance of what we now call "traditional animation" or, more correctly, "hand-drawn animation" would ever be challenged, much less that its Disney incarnation would ever become extinct. Even when Toy Story became a success, nobody could foresee that, 10 years later, computer animated films woud become the only marketable type of animation for the major studios.
So, sorry for this slightly off-topic post, but it was just to say that the kind of "nostalgia/tenderness" for traditional animation given as an explanation in the first post seems, to me, to come from an anachronistic perspective.
Here are the 25 Highest Grossing Animated Films of All Time, adjusting for inflation.
1. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs ($853 million)
2. 101 Dalmatians ($782 million)
3. The Lion King ($697 million)
4. Fantasia ($650 million)
5. Jungle Book ($576 million)
6. Sleeping Beauty ($569 million)
7. Shrek 2 ($556 million)
8. Pinocchio ($527 million)
9. Bambi ($498 million)
10. Finding Nemo ($441 million)
11. Lady and the Tramp ($436 million)
12. Aladdin ($410 million)
13. Toy Story 3 ($408 million)
14. Toy Story 2 ($374 million
15. Shrek ($370 million)
16. Shrek the Third ($367 million)
17. Beauty and the Beast ($355 million)
18. Monsters Inc. ($353 million)
19. Toy Story ($343 million)
20. The Incredibles ($312 million)
21. Up ($307 million)
22. Who Framed Roger Rabbit ($298 million)
23. Cars ($291 million)
24. A Bug's Life ($267 million)
25. Tarzan ($263 million)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UTSED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
