This is not intended as an attempt to bash Hans Zimmer.
There's a place for Hans Zimmer. He's a gifted man. But this article does astutely point-out the over-dominance of the "Zimmer sound" in movies today, and the way it has homogenized film scoring...
This is not intended as an attempt to bash Hans Zimmer.
There's a place for Hans Zimmer. He's a gifted man. But this article does astutely point-out the over-dominance of the "Zimmer sound" in movies today, and the way it has homogenized film scoring...
First it is a bit odd for the author of this piece, having sat through Dunkirk, to state that Zimmer shouldn’t score Blade Runner. The final two pieces of the Dunkirk score touch on the Vangelis sound. Second, Zimmer is a big fan of Vangelis, so I am sure he will do Blade Runner justice. As for Zimmer stepping away from projects, who do you think would replace him? It would most likely be Junkie XL or Balfe who are would end up aping the sound of Zimmer. The problem isn’t with Zimmer, it is with the industry, particularly producers who are wedded to temping films with Zimmer scores (especially Journey to the Line). Other issues with the industry are covered at a greater depth here: http://www.filmscoremonthly.com/board/posts.cfm?threadID=121056&forumID=1&archive=0 Only if there is a break in the current industrial trends will other composers such as Young, Newman (D) and Arnold, for example, get an opportunity to write for large scale films again. Even if Zimmer quits tomorrow there will be no change in the modern sound of film scores. You’ll just end up with a poor man’s Zimmer i.e. Junkie XL scoring every film.
And from the Guardian, no less. Also, very telling is the obvious though unstated reference to BRAAAM, which one of the commentators actually exaggerates in direct proportion to its widely accepted overbearing nature, at a point in the comments section of the article.
It's an interesting piece to read because one wouldn't expect the art form to interject within the public conscience to the extent that has obviously provoked the article itself. Thanks for posting.
We reached saturation of that sounds about 10 years ago, but by that time the audience and the studios had been enured to it, and then they could imagine little other sound than that sound - either from him or the baby Zimmer clones. The ability to differentiate types of scores was lost on the audience some time back, the same way human beings had their brains rewired by smartphone habituation the past 10 years - they cannot imagine not having that sound in the movies, or that phone in their hand all day long.
We reached saturation of that sounds about 10 years ago, but by that time the audience and the studios had been enured to it, and then they could imagine little other sound than that sound - either from him or the baby Zimmer clones. The ability to differentiate types of scores was lost on the audience some time back, the same way human beings had their brains rewired by smartphone habituation the past 10 years - they cannot imagine not having that sound in the movies, or that phone in their hand all day long.
reading this post was... kind of like when you have known (felt) something for a long time, without quite being able to nail it..and then it's just right there in front of you. so true, word by word. so sad , for a once great form of art. I think I am going to listen to some Velazquez or Wallfisch, just to keep myself hopeful.
We discussed this article and topic at length over on JWFAN, so I don't really feel like repeating myself here. For those interested, here's the thread. I have some opinions on the issue, as you can imagine:
Like I said, there is a place for Hans Zimmer. When he emerged in the 80s, I found him an interesting new talent with a unique sound.
However, a world where Hans Zimmer is one voice amidst a variety of styles (as he was in the 90s, when people like Williams, Bernstein, Horner, Jarre, Goldsmith, Kamen, etc. were active) is a very different context from the one we have today, where Zimmer and Remote Control are the dominant voice.
The "Zimmer style" isn't necessarily "bad", but isn't right for a lot of the films it is imposed upon. I mean, I love some of Vangelis' music -- but I certainly would not want every film scored in Vangelis' style.
Hans Zimmer has become the fast food of film music. His style is safely familiar, and easily digestible, drenched in "condiments" of blood-pumping rhythms and power chords -- and (like fast food) assembled by a team of people. The way that there is now a McDonald's (or competing clone) in almost every town, so too is there a Zimmer (or Zimmer-esque) score in most movies. And hey, I eat at Burger King sometimes too -- but after a while one starts to crave something more substantial (and just plain different).
And what's sad and frustrating is that filmmakers force composers who would normally write in a different style, to copy Zimmer's style, because "that's the way we do it". And this is a real problem when even John Williams is forced to do so (as he was in War Horse)...
We reached saturation of that sounds about 10 years ago, but by that time the audience and the studios had been enured to it, and then they could imagine little other sound than that sound - either from him or the baby Zimmer clones. The ability to differentiate types of scores was lost on the audience some time back, the same way human beings had their brains rewired by smartphone habituation the past 10 years - they cannot imagine not having that sound in the movies, or that phone in their hand all day long.
The sad thing is most ppl don't even notice the score regardless if it's orchestra, synth, or minimalist. So they're placating the wrong audience.
Hans Zimmer has become the fast food of film music. His style is safely familiar, and easily digestible, drenched in "condiments" of blood-pumping rhythms and power chords -- and (like fast food) assembled by a team of people.
This is a surprisingly uninformed opinion from you, Paul. As I discussed over at the JWFAN thread, let's not conflate the fact that Zimmer is influential and has many "copycats" (love 'em or hate 'em) with the fact that HIS OWN MUSIC is always in movement, always evolving into different things. A score like INTERSTELLAR does not consist of "blood-pumping rhytms and power chords". I'm constantly surprised by how often these two are conflated.
Like I said, there is a place for Hans Zimmer. When he emerged in the 80s, I found him an interesting new talent with a unique sound.
However, a world where Hans Zimmer is one voice amidst a variety of styles (as he was in the 90s, when people like Williams, Bernstein, Horner, Jarre, Goldsmith, Kamen, etc. were active) is a very different context from the one we have today, where Zimmer and Remote Control are the dominant voice.
The "Zimmer style" isn't necessarily "bad", but isn't right for a lot of the films it is imposed upon. I mean, I love some of Vangelis' music -- but I certainly would not want every film scored in Vangelis' style.
Hans Zimmer has become the fast food of film music. His style is safely familiar, and easily digestible, drenched in "condiments" of blood-pumping rhythms and power chords -- and (like fast food) assembled by a team of people. The way that there is now a McDonald's (or competing clone) in almost every town, so too is there a Zimmer (or Zimmer-esque) score in most movies. And hey, I eat at Burger King sometimes too -- but after a while one starts to crave something more substantial (and just plain different).
And what's sad and frustrating is that filmmakers force composers who would normally write in a different style, to copy Zimmer's style, because "that's the way we do it". And this is a real problem when even John Williams is forced to do so (as he was in War Horse)...
I certainly DON'T want the traditional symphonic score back, what I want is scores by all those recording artists that seldom or never score a film, from Jean-Michel Jarre to David Helpling, who sound nothing like Zimmer. And of course I would love to see an even more active return from the composers that were hot in the 80s. Even if I know it will probably not happen.
Food for thought:
Faltermeyer is credited as composer on 33 projects on imdb, Zimmer on 184. I feel that HF is discussed far more on these boards than he "should", taking into account how few things he did. Maybe it shows that what he did was more revolutionary than the masses of scores Hans does?
If art and music are subjective, how do you quantify this question? In whose opinion is it directed? Your opinion? My opinion? Popular opinion? Critical opinion? And are we quantifying in terms of CD sales? Digital sales? Box office results? Zimmer's paycheck amount?
I've also noticed that No Time For Caution has been spliced into just about EVERYTHING as a one size fits all solution, thereby calling into being the devilish Dawkins meme machine. They're unscrewing the doll's heads of other Nolan/Zimmer collaborations and replacing them with the Interstellar cue. People are doing it not only because they can, but because everyone else is doing it for the sake of doing it. If you don't believe me take a look on YouTube yourself. This is the true meaning of the information age - instant assimilation by The Thing from our own world!
What was it Bill Gates and Collins Hemingway said back in '99 - Business At The Speed Of Thought, which is derived from . . . wherever? We've come full circle: what high technology actually does, is it allows base humanity to thrive at a new plane of existence - the sharper one end of the weapon becomes, so does the other end become the bluntest of hammers. The sorcerer and the army of mops.
