The 83-year-old says that while his Star Wars themes are revered around the world, he doesn't consider them classics.
He went on : "I don't know. A lot of them are not very memorable and so on. It's probably the most popular music that I've done."
"So I'm a composer of music and I look at Mozart and I look at Beethoven and Bach, the greatest organizers of sound that we've ever had, and you need to be humble when the shoulders that we stand on are so great."
"Not that much, because, if I start listening to Haydn or Brahms, I realize immediately that it's much better than anything I will be ever able to do."
He loves classical music, contrary to some people here, and perfectly knows the qualities and the weaknesses of his own music.
If John Williams himself says that Johannes Brahms composed much better music than him, as well as many other classical composers, why people who listen to classical music should bother to listen to John Williams ?
And why would they be snobs while they say exactly the same as John Williams ?
Personally, I listen to both classical and film music, and really don't care about what other people think about what I like and what I don't like.
And I don't need to think that what I like is necessarily exceptional, just because I like it.
As much as I like John Williams' music, he is perfectly right.
That doesn't mean his music isn't good, and sometimes it's even great.
Which is great is the way how he unifies many musical influences and bring them to a wide audience.
Well, I appreciate the article and what the author is trying to say. Good is good, no matter the origin. For me, film music has been a very helpful stepping stone to classical music--and for others I'm sure. I'm not certain I would be able to listen to and/or appreciate classical without my exposure to film music and this discussions on this board. And it goes the other way, too. As I expand my horizons with classical, I feel like I'm gaining a deeper appreciation for other film music scores out there and able to recognize composer influences...and follow some of the discussions here. :-)
That was a more decent, less pretentious, article than I expected based on the comments. Every little bit of appreciation for film music helps. Don't knock it.
"Orchestral film music fan admits Hans Zimmer is good".
it's just the same.
Great point.
That would be the day. Can't believe he actually thought Williams' music was beneath him. How ****king pretentious are you classical music fans? And this is coming from a classical music fan myself.
He loves classical music, contrary to some people here, and perfectly knows the qualities and the weaknesses of his own music.
If John Williams himself says that Johannes Brahms composed much better music than him, as well as many other classical composers, why people who listen to classical music should bother to listen to John Williams ?
And why would they be snobs while they say exactly the same as John Williams ?
Personally, I listen to both classical and film music, and really don't care about what other people think about what I like and what I don't like.
And I don't need to think that what I like is necessarily exceptional, just because I like it.
As much as I like John Williams' music, he is perfectly right.
That doesn't mean his music isn't good, and sometimes it's even great.
Which is great is the way how he unifies many musical influences and bring them to a wide audience.
would you expect him to say is the greatest. He would be humble but he is WRONG!
As Rachmaninov said : "There is enough music for a lifetime, but not enough life for all the music." It is impossible to live long enough to listen to everything, study everything, enjoy everything, learn everything. I'm 81 and I barely touched the surface ! (John Williams)
The 83-year-old says that while his Star Wars themes are revered around the world, he doesn't consider them classics.
He went on : "I don't know. A lot of them are not very memorable and so on. It's probably the most popular music that I've done."
"So I'm a composer of music and I look at Mozart and I look at Beethoven and Bach, the greatest organizers of sound that we've ever had, and you need to be humble when the shoulders that we stand on are so great."
"Not that much, because, if I start listening to Haydn or Brahms, I realize immediately that it's much better than anything I will be ever able to do."
I've always been impressed with Williams' humility when it comes to his own compositional skills. I'd rather hear a composer talk lightly of his own music and praise the past masters than do the opposite.
Look, I've been listening to film music since James Bond was a new phenomenon--and jazz, classical, rock, gypsy, tango, chants, and just about everything in between. I've read, watched, or listened to countless interviews with film composers and most of them, if asked what they listen to, respond with a litany of classical composers, jazz musicians, pop artists, or classic vocalists. When asked what film composers they like, they'll mention a few, but I always get the impression they are just listing film composers they respect and admire for their passion, talent, creativity--and perhaps to keep in touch with what their peers are doing. But it's not their go-to listen. There's a reason for that. Film music is just different. It can be an enjoyable listen on record, but it's not designed for that purpose.
John Williams is the 20th and 21st century father of contemporary orchestral music. \
Mahler and Richard Strauss are the fathers of the contemporary orchestral music and their impact was just as significant upon Williams as it has been on most of the other great film composers mentioned here. In particular the Mahler orchestral set up and composition for same encompasses by far the most relevant advancements in orchestral music and orchestration since Wagner (19th century)...both Williams and Zimmer have admitted these things in interviews btw. They also know that they aren't anywhere near Mahler or Strauss as composers.
However, it's all good. It's not about being dead to be considered great, it's the fact that the required skill set for music has massively declined since Strauss' death (not because of his death, of course.) Much of the lowest common denominator pandering in music today had to do with the youth revolution of the 60s, when music became just as much about fashion as music (in the case of Pop, especially)
That said, Williams is one of the best film composers in the world today (though I can't say "best film composer today" because of the presence of Morricone). However, it's hard to set him up beside more groundbreaking, experimental, and just plain harmonically daring composers like Penderecki...Williams was always too "safe" to be compared one of the all time Greats like Beethoven or Bach. Goldsmith was closer in that respect.
As far as the article, I agree with the member who mentioned that any good words concerning film music should be welcomed, because there is a lot more to film music as an overall genre than novelty. However, does anyone really care anymore about a musicologist's opinions? The fact that there are people championing Kanye West as one of the Greats might answer that.
would you expect him to say is the greatest. He would be humble but he is WRONG!
Yes, you are right, John Williams does not know what he is talking about, you probably have a greater musical knowledge and experience than him.
thanks for the sarcasm. I do not have the musical knowledge he has but I can stand aside and listen to his and to other composers, a lot classical and I can hear greatness and uniqueness. He is tied to his music and possibly cannot truly hear how great he truly is. As an outsider I can.
Always amuses me that so many film music lovers crave acceptance from classical music listeners. I consider maybe a half of 1% of my film music collection (about 2,500 recordings) as suitable for a presence in a classical concert or a strictly classical radio program. And those would be by composers already noted for a "classical" leaning, whether Korngold or Glass or Prokofiev or maybe Moross or Herrmann. To me, the rest is simply what I enjoy and doesn't need to be labeled as "serious" or particularly substantial music. I don't mind admitting I have neither the patience nor intellect to sit through lengthy symphonies or concertos or operas time after time after time – I prefer the quick-fix shots of orchestral adrenalin or sentimentality that film music provides. It's popular orchestral music. Just because some of it mimics Ravel or Berlioz or Strauss doesn't raise its stature beyond what it is. When I hear Williams, I hear film music. Sometimes, with pieces like the Well of Souls or Fortress of Solitude material, I think "This stuff is great and sounds like it could be part of a serious concert piece". But it isn't. It's film music. It's the orchestral stuff I enjoy and like to listen to, just like the song in Gunfight at the OK Corral, or the mickey mousing in Adventures of Don Juan. I think some people like to think their film music tastes should be approved by classical critics simply to validate their own musical intellect. For my part, I'm happy to admit to having no great musical intellect whatsoever and so film music serves me just fine.
I really like this post from Razzle Bathbone. I'd also add that there are other styles of film music outside the symphonic field, and we should enjoy those for what they are too. Should we be upset if a jazz buff makes an offhand remark about a Lalo Schifrin score? And in which category do we put something like... say, Ron Grainer's "The Omega Man"? Why categorize and compare anyway? Most film music is a hybrid, and it almost has to be pastiche by nature. I think that's one of the reasons I love listening to it so much.
I also love the art of Frank Frazetta, and a long list of comic-book illustrators. John Bolton was tremendous, and somewhat underappreciated even in his field, but I would be a fool to feel offended just because they're never even mentioned - never mind disparagingly - in art books alongside Velázquez, Rubens and Goya. Interesting to note that those Old Masters inspired many 20th century comic book artists.
I'm going to play "Barbarella" now, which is one of the best soundtracks ever. I hope I don't start developing an inferiority complex.
For me, the heart of the matter is comparative criticism, the laziest crutch of critique.
...
...
However, it's all good. It's not about being dead to be considered great, it's the fact that the required skill set for music has massively declined since Strauss' death (not because of his death, of course.) Much of the lowest common denominator pandering in music today had to do with the youth revolution of the 60s, when music became just as much about fashion as music (in the case of Pop, especially)
I'd say it started in the 50s, when a burgeoning middle class allowed children access to disposable income, which gave rise to the proliferation of rock'n'roll (and the aegis of the Comics Code Authority).
would you expect him to say is the greatest. He would be humble but he is WRONG!
Maybe he was perfect to score Superman, because just like Clark Kent, he's got "bags of humility".
However, it's all good. It's not about being dead to be considered great, it's the fact that the required skill set for music has massively declined since Strauss' death (not because of his death, of course.) Much of the lowest common denominator pandering in music today had to do with the youth revolution of the 60s, when music became just as much about fashion as music (in the case of Pop, especially)
I'd say it started in the 50s, when a burgeoning middle class allowed children access to disposable income, which gave rise to the proliferation of rock'n'roll (and the aegis of the Comics Code Authority).
Really cool observation re the 50s.
For me, the Youth Revolution really started in gear after the Beatles (or so). But rock n roll and its attendant expression of youth were seven or eight years before that.
However, it's all good. It's not about being dead to be considered great, it's the fact that the required skill set for music has massively declined since Strauss' death (not because of his death, of course.) Much of the lowest common denominator pandering in music today had to do with the youth revolution of the 60s, when music became just as much about fashion as music (in the case of Pop, especially)
I'd say it started in the 50s, when a burgeoning middle class allowed children access to disposable income, which gave rise to the proliferation of rock'n'roll (and the aegis of the Comics Code Authority).
Really cool observation re the 50s.
For me, the Youth Revolution really started in gear after the Beatles (or so). But rock n roll and its attendant expression of youth were seven or eight years before that.
And Long Live Chuck Berry and Little Richard!!!
While I'm not sure of the film's content, I'm eager in seeing a certain documentary that may cover this topic:
The moral of this story is: if you don't want things to suck, stop giving out allowances!
