 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BTW- give a chimp access to the kind of gear Zimmer has and even they could come up with a masterpiece. Honestly, giventhe resources and contacts that he has, there are few people on this forum that would have carved out a very nice career for themselves. Sour grapes or the truth? Methinks the latter. And half of Zimmers lackies would be nobodies with marginal skills had he not employed them.
Clearly the words of a composer who ended up as a failure. Not everyone can have a good film music career, Mr. Coscina.
clearly the words of someone who has no clue about what they're talking about. Much more notable people think quite the contrary of my musical efforts.
Edit- I'm also curious as to your label of "failure". I don't consider myself that but you assume, again quite naively, that my irascible is a result of some feeling of inadequacy, like the two are always inextracably linked. Well, maybe I'm just that way regardless of the circumstances. You don't have to be a "failure" to be highly critical and a bit of a grouch. Herrmann and Goldsmith were very successful composers and that didn't stop them from being grouchy. My views have more to do with my personality and perspective rather than any shortcoming I feel I might have as a musician. And for what it's worth, I was NOT talking about myself when I referred to "people on the forum". I was illustrating that given all of the equipment and resources Zimmer has, it's not surprising that he has come up with some effective scores. Give a few people here the same resources and I think they too could be a very effective composer. Hand people on this forum the tools that John Williams or Howard Shore use (pencil, paper, and sometimes piano) and that's a whole different story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Come on now, David. Feel free to criticize his music, but I think it's beneath you to do personal attacks on the man.
For the record, I think Zimmer is one of the most entertaining and humourus to listen to, plus he's got lots of self-irony and doesn't take himself too seriously. Definitely a man I'd sit down to have a beer with.
I don't think it's an attack but an observation. My verbiage may be clouding that because it sounds like vitriol rather than a perspective. I used to think that he would be cool to chat with but, honestly, given the way he describes his creative process and the tinge of arrogance (not saying he's the only composer that has that mind you), I don't think I would enjoy such a conversation. I feel I would come away no richer for the experience. I don't mean to bring this up again, but the 10 minutes I had to chat with John Adams after a concert he gave years back was amazing. He never talked down to me and was amazingly conversant and friendly. I also mentioned I was a budding composer and he had some terrific advice. Would that I could, I would love to chat with John Williams as that would be a stellar experience. The man has so much knowledge. As well as people like Alex North, Jerry Goldsmith, David Raksin, and, yes, even Benny Herrmann. The composers I have spoken to have been amazing and I have gotten a lot from their experience and wisdom. Gabriel Yared is one of the most amazing, down-to-earth people. He's very generous and excited about every aspect of music. In various interviews with Zimmer, he dances around things either because he's just not familiar or confident with the vernacular of music or else he's in business man mode. Yeah, he's charming but any good salesman is too. I didn't care for his comment about Burlingham's article. And that he mentioned Horner although Jimmy is a grownup and is still reaping royalties from Titanic so he probably couldn't care less what Zimmer says.
My frustrations are perhaps a little to candid for a public forum such as this so I guess I should dial it down a touch. But I really don't care for the man Zimmer which makes sense because I'm honestly not enthralled with his music on the whole. Powell is a whole other case . I like much of his stuff. It interests me. I think he's the one strong composer that has come out of the MV system. But the law of averages states that this was bound to happen at least once, given how many people filter through there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My frustrations are perhaps a little to candid for a public forum such as this so I guess I should dial it down a touch.
You're always eloquent, informed, critical, real and unpretentious. Don't stop.
thanks Saul. I chalk it up to my passion for music and film music in particular.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Dec 21, 2009 - 10:26 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
DJ3J
(Member)
|
What has art got to do with it? Art is about expressing your own vision, not bolstering someone else's, and the principal function of a film score is to support the vision of the filmmakers. The best film composers are/were able to put something of themselves into their scores: Goldsmith did, Bernstein did, Williams does, Silvestri does, Horner used to, Barry still could if he wanted to. Many others are either suppressing their own voices for the sake of the film, or they've nothing much to express in the first place.
Does it matter that THE ROCK was written by four or five people? Does it matter that there are more additional composers on PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN than there were pirates? Yes, they may be corporate film scores, but they're corporate films, they're sure as hell not art. And the scores work in the films, even if on the most basic level. If they're any good to listen to in the car ten years later, that's a bonus. If they're still expressing your unique and individual personality, that's a bonus. But it's all secondary and tertiary to servicing the film and the filmmaker's intentions. If you tell them you want to use four bass harmonicas playing minor sevenths in an echo chamber because you want to artistically express in music the traumas of the Rob Schneider character, they'll look at you like you've grown a third leg or something. They're not looking for innovation or originality these days, they're looking for something that just does the job. And Zimmer (plus whoever) does the job. It might not be Rozsa, it might not be Korngold, it might not be North. But it doesn't have to be. That's why they hire him.
I think if you look at movies have been critically successful even in recent years, they all had an ensemble cast and crew who were allowed to be unique and have it serve the film. In fact, great films have hardly EVER suffered from the personal stamps of anyone. A director was allowed to direct his vision and he had uniquely talented individuals to help him or her. A composer should be no different. There IS a fine line between serving the film and serving only one's self. Some of the best in history like Williams and Goldsmith knew that line well and are and were the most respected and hired.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Dec 21, 2009 - 10:52 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
ahem
(Member)
|
I'm with Saul.
David,
I find it quite a paradox with what you say because it is not like Zimmer is musically uneducated, ignorant and soley disciplined in a sales background (regardless of what we think of his music). I find it incredible, especially as in the press it's hardly EVER mentioned, that Zimmer had an APPRENTICESHIP with the great Stanley Myers scoring art films in Europe, which is the kind of musical education I could only imagine a young composer would kill for. That said, I personally don't hear any Myers influence on Zimmer, and it seems the only extent to Myers influence on Zimmer was bringing on young helping hands to assist on his scores. Do you agree? I would be interested to hear a more informed musical ear cite any examples of influence.
I'd be so curious to know what Myers thought of Zimmer as his Hollywood career was taking off, and moreso what he'd make of Zimmer's career now had he still been alive today. They were socring European art films together through most of the 80s, very much the antithesis of the Hollywood popcorn sound of then or now. Even on the scores that Myers and Zimmer did together, the stuff credited to either composer I don't think sounds anything like the other before or after their collaborations. I don't hear powerchords, doubled orchestras, ethnic percussion and two note motifs in Myers scores, for example.
You often hear on this forum how the latest new talent at Media Ventures/Remote Control is a another Zimmer soundalike or whatever, with the assumption made that they are from a rock band and only know temp tracks, plug ins and stock scoring approaches of recent without any formal, classical grounding. Whether you wish to subscribe to that theory or not, it's not like Zimmer himself came from that environment when he was being mentored by Myers, was it? As a film fan I find that quite the bizarre elephant in the room.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Dec 21, 2009 - 11:13 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Thor
(Member)
|
I think there is plenty of musical critique, but it is also fair to criticize the man himself for his personality in interviews. As David pointed out, he tends to go on these tangents whether provoked or not and definitely seems a bit narcissistic at times. I certainly wouldn't turn down an opportunity to meet him again or spend time touring his studio, nor would I dismiss buying any of his releases simply because it is him. But there are very valid points here about him.
No, I don't think such criticism is valid at all - not only because I don't see the things that he is being criticized for (quite the contrary, he is one of the most humble and self-deprecating interviewees I've heard), but also because it has no bearing whatsoever on the music. Criticizing a composer's personality is counter-productive. God knows Bernard Herrmann, Leonard Rosenman, James Horner and others have come off as very arrogant and harsh in interviews, yet their music speaks for itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I would say I'm ostensibly an idealist trapped inside a very practical world, which leads to frustration. Zimmer did start off quite promising. I won't argue that. I liked what he did with synths, I liked how he approached films. As ahem mentions, his original path was scoring art house films under the wing of Stanley Meyers. Rain Man was so interesting because it was the antithesis of the common banality of '80s film scores- that were largely vacuous synths and drum machines [shudders at the thought]. Even Goldsmith's music suffer from being dated whether it's the LinnDrumm or FM cheese of the DX7's (love parts of Legend, abhor the awful synths). So, Hans comes along, and I am really digging his approach. I remember scouring the city for a copy of Electronic Musician or something that had a terrific 2 page spread on his equipment/studio because it was so cool. He follows up Rain Man with Black Rain and Driving Miss Daisy. Two very good scores and very different from one another. And, for me, his ultimate score, Thelma and Louise- a study of epic urban outlaws. Terrific score. To me, should have garnered him an Oscar.
Then, he starts going towards the orchestral route. This is where I see him diverging from his element and moving into a realm that he just doesn't know. Yes, he enlisted Shirley Walker. But Backdraft was my first disappointing Zimmer score. Then he follows that with Radio Flyer. Also really amateur. Lion King gets some good marks because he did do a good job but by then he had created Media Ventures and I know Mark Mancina helped out on that project along with a few other guys. This is where Zimmer the individual becomes Zimmer the institution. And his hallmark style is diluted and becomes generic, overdone, and overblown. With synths, Zimmer always seemed to balance bombast with subtlety. Even in something as recent as "A Hard Teacher" from LAST SAMURAI, one of my favourite cues from the last decade, he shows us restraint and thematic variation. So the guy IS capable of writing good music. I don't really care if he studied at a conservatory or not. It's whether his music sounds good or not. Just because I can analyze why it sounds bad in some cases doesn't negate the initial reaction of mine on a visceral level. The cerebral always comes secondary when I hear music. I like the uncover the mechanics of why something illicits a good or bad response in me.
So, to sum up, I would say that my inherent dislike of Zimmer is one based on continual disappointment in him. Disappointment in his lack of forward motion and development. I honestly don't think he's matured as a composer since he came onto the scene. If anything, he's regressed. His music doesn't challenge the listener. It operates on a very primal level which, sometimes, is fine for film. But, given the number of projects he's scored, he hasn't offered up something as mature as say, Williams' Close Encounters or even something more recent like Memoirs of a Geisha. Williams has evolved over the years. I really don't hear that in Zimmer. And his smaller art house works as well as his epic ones are compromised by the inclusion of far too many chefs in the kitchen. ZImmer has his Hollywood history wrong BTW. Yes, there were slews of copyists and orchestrators back in the Golden Age but the guys actually scoring the films like Korngold, Waxman, Rosza, Steiner and Newman all produced extremely detailed short scores and had very singular stylistic approaches that could be heard from score to score no matter who was orchestrating. This differs from Zimmer's rational because there is no stylistic difference between him and Gregson-Williams, or Jablonsky or any other one of his sidekicks. I'm not sure I'm articulating this right but hopefully you get what I am saying. Golden Age composers had the skills to write effective music and still put a stamp on their own style. Their scores did not sound homogenized even if they were using the same orchestrators.
Anyhow, I'm really sorry for highjacking this thread and making it about me. As much as a promote objectivity, it would seem this particular subject is way too personal from the standpoint of music for film.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Dec 21, 2009 - 12:11 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
DJ3J
(Member)
|
No, I don't think such criticism is valid at all - not only because I don't see the things that he is being criticized for (quite the contrary, he is one of the most humble and self-deprecating interviewees I've heard), but also because it has no bearing whatsoever on the music. Criticizing a composer's personality is counter-productive. God knows Bernard Herrmann, Leonard Rosenman, James Horner and others have come off as very arrogant and harsh in interviews, yet their music speaks for itself.
I don't think any composer is above that kind of criticism, including James Horner. In fact, if you listen to the Apocalypto commentary where Mel Gibson praises Horner, but states that you better like what he gives you the first time or else you are out of luck. Basically stating that after the gigantic success of Titanic Horner got a big head. No film composer, no matter the stature, is bigger than the film and THAT is the line that I talked about before which divides serving the film or serving ones self. One CAN serve the film and still be unique.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Dec 21, 2009 - 1:07 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Thor
(Member)
|
Hey David, that last post of yours is MUCH better! Constructive criticism and opinions about the music and your reaction/evaluation of it. Very good.
That said, I obviously do not agree with the majority of it. I don't think Zimmer has EVER done an orchestral score based on traditional symphonic rules, nor has he ever aspired to. That's not his thing. That's not what he does. Sure, there are orchestral elements, but they're only used for colourization in an idiom that is basically rock-based (prog rock, mostly). I think it is very wrong to judge his music according to the criteria you would apply to a Alex North or John Corigliano or Elliot Goldenthal. It would be a bit like criticizing Bob Dylan for not adhering to the orchestral sophistication of Igor Stravinsky.
Where Zimmer truly shines is in the genres that take advantage of his background and established sound, esp. action and ethnically-tinged films. I also think he's matured tremendously over the years, to the extent that he can now dish out more ambient and ethereal stuff like THIN RED LINE, DARK KNIGHT or THE DA VINCI CODE. I think he's very aware of his limitations AND his strengths.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey David, that last post of yours is MUCH better! Constructive criticism and opinions about the music and your reaction/evaluation of it. Very good.
That said, I obviously do not agree with the majority of it. I don't think Zimmer has EVER done an orchestral score based on traditional symphonic rules, nor has he ever aspired to. That's not his thing. That's not what he does. Sure, there are orchestral elements, but they're only used for colourization in an idiom that is basically rock-based (prog rock, mostly). I think it is very wrong to judge his music according to the criteria you would apply to a Alex North or John Corigliano or Elliot Goldenthal. It would be a bit like criticizing Bob Dylan for not adhering to the orchestral sophistication of Igor Stravinsky.
But that's the whole problem. If he enters the orchestral realm, there are things that composers for 200 years have adhered to, even the rebels like Stravinsky or Bartok. They aren't rules just arbitrarily.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
