 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The problem with the score relative to the movie is that people don't get it. Not because it's complex or deep or beyond them or anything like that. Like it or not, it takes them out of the movie. Whatever the argument that "Korngold or Williams are no more appropriate for this era than Powell" it's not the film language that people buy into.
The score is pretty much the only complaint that people have about this film. I heard that walking out of the theater in 1985. They like the setting, the story, the performances, everything.
Which is kind of painful because I've always loved this movie and this score. I saw it four times in the theater. Bought the LP on my way home from the second time seeing it. (Does anyone remember what a pain it was to ride a bicycle carrying an LP?)
Nobody complains about Labyrinth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, "Other" --
(I wonder how many Tall Guys the traffic will bear here at the wonderful world of FSM).
I find it curious that you admit the score "takes you out of the movie," but you love movie and score. Personally, I can't love any film score that takes me out of the movie. I may love it or hate it as music, but if it takes me out of the movie, as God knows LADYHAWKE's score did, then it does a disservice to the film and to me as an audience member. It's been many years now, but I well remember when the film was first shown in theaters: I admired the story, the cinematography, the actors, etc. -- admired, but COULDN'T ENJOY, because of that damn music. This was a movie I would gladly have seen again and again, but because of the score I've never once wanted to go back and it.
Now, that's just one man's opinion. I'm happy for those of you who liked and accepted this particular approach to this particular film. But as for me, I could do neither.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, "Other" --
(I wonder how many Tall Guys the traffic will bear here at the wonderful world of FSM).
I find it curious that you admit the score "takes you out of the movie," but you love movie and score. Personally, I can't love any film score that takes me out of the movie. I may love it or hate it as music, but if it takes me out of the movie, as God knows LADYHAWKE's score did, then it does a disservice to the film and to me as an audience member. It's been many years now, but I well remember when the film was first shown in theaters: I admired the story, the cinematography, the actors, etc. -- admired, but COULDN'T ENJOY, because of that damn music. This was a movie I would gladly have seen again and again, but because of the score I've never once wanted to go back and it.
Now, that's just one man's opinion. I'm happy for those of you who liked and accepted this particular approach to this particular film. But as for me, I could do neither.
Sorry, I wasn't clear: It never took ME out of the movie. But I know that for the people who don't like the score, that is exactly what it does (as you said).
Thor, I enjoyed your defense of the score and film very much. But I think you may underestimate the placement of those scenes with a more aggressive beat. They're largely right up front. I think a lot of people are lost at the opening titles. Again, NOT ME. Even at sixteen I thought "Oh! They're doing something different!" I was totally OK with that. And the movie was just a hoot.
Also: Leo McKern and John Wood are so so so terrific in this movie. (Aw. I didn't know Wood had passed away...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thor, you and I are obviously on the same page in respecting each other's right to differ -- you said I've a right to my opinion, and I said I'm happy for all of you who like (or love) the score -- and I thank you for directing my attention to your previous thread. Much as I enjoyed reading your reasoning, though, LADYHAWKE, like all film scores, either works for the individual viewer or it doesn't. For me, the use of this music in this film will have to remain an un-acquired taste.
Cheers,
PNJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nobody complains about Labyrinth.
While Labyrinth was fantasy, it was also a contemporary film with a modern protagonist, so I think it doesn't have the same “disconnect” most people have with the historical fantasy setting of Ladyhawke.
The biggest issue with the score I think is that it tries to combine the prog rock sound with what is essentially a traditional symphonic music score. The bulk of Andrew Powell's music plays out in the film exactly as you would expect for the genre until you get to the prog rock passages, and then, suddenly, music appears that is at odds with what you've been hearing up until that point in the movie.
When I first saw the film, I was warned about the score by the friend showing it to me (she was not a film music aficionado), and it is safe to say that my initial reaction to it was abject horror. I felt the prog rock passages ruined what was otherwise a pretty good, well acted low-key fantasy romance.
I've seen the film again recently on the beautifully rendered Warner Archives Blu-ray, and knowing what you're in for does help a lot, but I still feel that it is an odd, if bold choice. I feel if the score had gone prog rock all the way, it may have bothered some people, but it would have been more effective in the film because it would have been consistent.
On its own, I think that the score is a fantastic listen with great variation (and if you're going to have prog rock elements in your score, you can't get much more authentic than having actual members of the Alan Parsons Project perform them), and an absolutely gorgeous love theme.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Sep 5, 2015 - 10:19 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
SchiffyM
(Member)
|
Obviously, there is no one "correct" way to score a film, and certainly very little film scoring is actually period accurate to the 12th Century (and anything that would be would likely be ineffective). There are people on this board who consider it a given that this film was scored wrong, somehow. I find that odd.
That said, when I saw the film (a preview screening when I was in college), when the electric guitar kicked in, the audience howled… not because it was period-inappropriate but because, in 1985, it felt like the most patronizing possible choice.
Afterwards, my friends all complained that the music seemed like the work of studio executives condescending to their hoped-for youth audience. Donner would certainly say that wasn't the case, and I have no reason to disbelieve him. But I would guess that 80% of the conversation about the movie that night was about the score, and not in a good way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I remember when it came out, the local news used to interview people coming out of the theatre and ask them how they liked the movie. It was actually the first time I'd heard the general public even notice a film score. They all , to a one, hated the music. "The music didn't work." "The music was inappropriate." - Those were the kind and tactful comments. Others were less tactful.
And this was the general public, not film music nerds.
There were no previews for this were the audience could write down on little cards how the music sucked? Hard to fathom that they'd curl their noses at Yared's TROY, (one of the best scores of the decade!), and give this a pass. Sounds like it should be in a car commercial to me. Zippy, zesty, zee-licious!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
