 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. It looks to have been editorially created. "A New Man" is slated 2m1 while "Something's Different" is 2m2 and "Catching Bus" plays between them but wasn't anywhere on our material.
Speaking of which, out of curiosity is there a reason the "source" cue (if it is considered diegetic) during the Peter/Randy Savage wrestling match was omitted? If I recall correctly it's extremely short and looped several times in the film, so I'd assume that's a likely reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. It looks to have been editorially created. "A New Man" is slated 2m1 while "Something's Different" is 2m2 and "Catching Bus" plays between them but wasn't anywhere on our material.
Speaking of which, out of curiosity is there a reason the "source" cue (if it is considered diegetic) during the Peter/Randy Savage wrestling match was omitted? If I recall correctly it's extremely short and looped several times in the film, so I'd assume that's a likely reason.
It's not by Elfman and is a pre-existing track.
https://youtu.be/7XLUsEZW_fo
Oh wow, I never would've guessed that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No. It looks to have been editorially created. "A New Man" is slated 2m1 while "Something's Different" is 2m2 and "Catching Bus" plays between them but wasn't anywhere on our material.
Nice! This is helpful - like Kamen's X-MEN it's great to know which cues were created editorially so we can understand how they were assembled. It's very enlightening to see the process.
Also, now that I'm looking at this release more closely I realized it's for the FIRST SPIDER-MAN. But here on FSM I was reading it as "SPIDER-MAN 3" CD so I had originally thought it was the third one 
This is even better and a fantastic release! Thank you!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Film Score Monthly Forum proves time and again you can't do right.
Include the original album assembly and you're wrong! Don't include the album assembly and you're wrong!
Hey, folks, I can understand someone saying, "Hey, thanks. But could I express my personal preference that we don't include original album programs in future? I find it redundant, and I wanna keep my cost down."
And I'd reply and say, "Hey, I'm one for carrying on. Those programs often were a great play."
To which the labels might reply, "Well, in this case we were asked to and we felt it appropriate to say yes."
A reasonable conversation.
Something a bit less needy, entitled, back-handed, and snarky.
I mean, we're not teenagers. The very fact we collect CDs tells us that!
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Dec 1, 2022 - 3:45 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Rick15
(Member)
|
The Film Score Monthly Forum proves time and again you can't do right.
Include the original album assembly and you're wrong! Don't include the album assembly and you're wrong!
Hey, folks, I can understand someone saying, "Hey, thanks. But could I express my personal preference that we don't include original album programs in future? I find it redundant, and I wanna keep my cost down."
And I'd reply and say, "Hey, I'm one for carrying on. Those programs often were a great play."
To which the labels might reply, "Well, in this case we were asked to and we felt it appropriate to say yes."
A reasonable conversation.
Something a bit less needy, entitled, back-handed, and snarky.
I mean, we're not teenagers. The very fact we collect CDs tells us that!
Cheers
All well and good - but we’re talking about ten buck here.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Jack:
Again, throwing on the 2002 CD (which everyone already has) just to add ten bucks to the price.
Ah, no. Are you kidding me?
First of all: Things like this are sometimes contractual -- not up to the label.
Second: Sometimes "album" presentations include special edits, arrangements, and different takes of cues. Not only does not every one have it (or may have traded it away and later regreatted it), but this gives it a new mastering, so it's better than the old album (by some degree).
And thirdly: AFM re-use fees, as previously stated, are mechanical, and you pay more for each track you include.
Sorry, but to accuse La La Land Records or any [legal] specialty label or just trying to ring another ten bucks out of buyers, is absurd. You should apologize to MV and the LLLR helper who made this possible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
