Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 
 Posted:   Nov 4, 2017 - 8:57 AM   
 By:   Moonlit   (Member)

Just curious. Not to include Schifrin's rejected or Rabin's scores.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 4, 2017 - 9:33 AM   
 By:   Graham Watt   (Member)

Hmmm, not quite sure I understand the question. EXORCIST II is not THE HERETIC, I presume... You must be referring to 2004's EXORCIST: THE BEGINNING. I still don't understand the question though. Was Rabin's score rejected?

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 4, 2017 - 10:03 AM   
 By:   Octoberman   (Member)

"The Exorcist".
I do not like "needledrop" scores. So just on that basis, I should prefer the Morricone (and even more so because it's bizarre and idiosyncratic).
But I adore Friedkin's choices and I will choose that every time. I guess the biggest reason is that the pieces that he chose were so relatively obscure and NOT well-known that their "unfamiliarity" doesn't take me out of the movie in the way that, for example, the score for "2001" does.
Friedkin's choices fit the film like a glove.
So well, in fact, that just listening to the CD is a harrowing experience in itself.

Assuming, of course, that this is what your question meant!
big grin

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 4, 2017 - 10:13 AM   
 By:   ZardozSpeaks   (Member)

Not to include Schifrin's rejected or Rabin's scores.

Ah ... but can Giuliano Sorgini's 1975 "Exorcist n.2" (Un Urlo dalle Tenebre) be included?

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 4, 2017 - 10:39 AM   
 By:   nerfTractor   (Member)

I’m always thrilled at the end of THE EXORCIST when that Hans Werner Henze string piece comes crashing through the soundtrack. I generally prefer original scores but EXORCIST is a great example of a “temp” score that ultimately works.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 4, 2017 - 2:55 PM   
 By:   jenkwombat   (Member)

Exorcist. Although, the score to Exorcist II is actually a very good one, for a movie that is an absolute dud. smile

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 4, 2017 - 3:31 PM   
 By:   leagolfer   (Member)

Exorcist every time, then the sequel, Rabin score + film, I've never heard off, Its millennium, it don't mean much.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 4, 2017 - 3:52 PM   
 By:   Moonlit   (Member)

Hmmm, not quite sure I understand the question. EXORCIST II is not THE HERETIC, I presume... You must be referring to 2004's EXORCIST: THE BEGINNING. I still don't understand the question though. Was Rabin's score rejected?

Sorry just the original and Heretic were the choices.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 4, 2017 - 3:54 PM   
 By:   Moonlit   (Member)

Not to include Schifrin's rejected or Rabin's scores.

Ah ... but can Giuliano Sorgini's 1975 "Exorcist n.2" (Un Urlo dalle Tenebre) be included?



Haha I guess. So many sequels before sequels were well known.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 4, 2017 - 4:09 PM   
 By:   Morricone   (Member)

As much as I enjoyed much of what Morricone did for that weird sequel, Friedkin's choices are indelibly etched onto that classic original. EXORCIST

 
 Posted:   Nov 4, 2017 - 5:33 PM   
 By:   WagnerAlmighty   (Member)

The first is top three horror movies for me, definitely. But I have trouble watching it since I learned that Bernard was going to originally score it. I like Tubular Bells but the soundtrack in general was something I really never thought much of. It more than served the purpose.

Now I mess with Spitifre Bernard Hermmann Toolkit sample library and imagine what it would have been like if he had scored the film instead of what happened between him and Friedkin.

But, I'm a Herrmann fanatic, so ignore me.

The second movie I don't rate much (I liked the third). I am going to give the soundtrack another try something soon, I never really noticed it the three or four times I've seen the film.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 4, 2017 - 5:45 PM   
 By:   leagolfer   (Member)

The first is top three horror movies for me, definitely. But I have trouble watching it since I learned that Bernard was going to originally score it. I like Tubular Bells but the soundtrack in general was something I really never thought much of. It more than served the purpose.

Now I mess with Spitifre Bernard Hermmann Toolkit sample library and imagine what it would have been like if he had scored the film instead of what happened between him and Friedkin.

But, I'm a Herrmann fanatic, so ignore me.

The second movie I don't rate much (I liked the third). I am going to give the soundtrack another try something soon, I never really noticed it the three or four times I've seen the film.


Herrmann would of scored, if Friedkin wasn't a control freak, anyway, the next composer got a blast.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 5, 2017 - 4:33 AM   
 By:   Graham Watt   (Member)

Just curious. Not to include Schifrin's rejected or Rabin's scores.

Moonlit, what's Rabin got to do with it, if we're talking about the original EXORCIST and its direct sequel? "Just curious".

Anyway, I'm proud to be unique. I think I'm the only poor misunderstood nutter on the whole planet who prefers the sequel over the original.

THE EXORCIST is a film which I never liked, and I've seen it possibly six or seven times over the years, just to try to "get" what all the fuss was about. I dislike it intensely. Its presentation of the theological conflict seems to me overbearing in the extreme. And, crucially, I don't find it remotely frightening. It leaves me completely cold - and I'm not talking about its "chilling" status.

The musical choices are fine though. I don't think Schifrin's score would have added much to the film as it stands, but I imagine that personally I would have a sneaking feeling of pleasure just to see his name on the screen. But that's about it.

EXORCIST II: THE HERETIC is a film I have a lot of time for. I remember on its first release, I stayed in the cinema all day and watched it three times, just because it intrigued me so much. Then I went out and bought the "Making of" book. Yes, the ideas are all over the place, but that actually never bothered me. Boorman's vision still manages to shine through in many scenes, and I find it ultimately fascinating, with some extraordinary imagery.

The Morricone score is terrific. I can't clearly remember how it "works" with the film, but it's an amazing album. "Regan's Theme" is typically gorgeous, with all those trademark-Morricone overlapping layers of shifting sound. The one that starts off Side B of the LP ("Pazuzu"? I don't remember offhand) is an electrifying piece of God-knows-what, and the spooky bits with the vocal effects and chanting are downright, genuinely creepy. All in my humble opinion of course.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 5, 2017 - 5:57 AM   
 By:   moolik   (Member)

The first EXORCIST...I would consider it to be the greatest horror movie of all time.It opened a whole no era.
As much as I love Schifrin...his music probably would have harmed the movie a lot.
The second one is of no concern..though the music is of course a good choice.

 
 Posted:   Nov 5, 2017 - 6:03 AM   
 By:   WagnerAlmighty   (Member)

Interesting how III doesn't get brought up here much (though I understand this is about the 70s Exorcists). III blew II out of the water for me (though again, I really didn't notice either soundtrack much, promise I'll dig deeper next time).

I thought that III was a fine movie, with an excellent performance by George C. Scott. Billy Babbitt was righteously creepy in that as well imo. There isn't a scare in II that matches the best moments of III. But hey, that's just me, I should give them both a watch (more importantly, a listen) again, as mentioned.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 5, 2017 - 6:06 AM   
 By:   moolik   (Member)

Well...Herrmann ( and I love him just as much as Schifrinsmile)also would have had a bad impact on the film I think....this movie is of such intensity..music ( in a harmonic / disonnace way ) just would lower it to a " normal " experience of horror.
Just as I mentioned Benjamin Wallfishs score to the recent IT ( which I wouldnt dare to compare to such a masterpiece like the Exorcist which wrot e movie history)that ruined or better washed the movie down to a spooky BOOOH ! carnival...
The third Exorcist..which was the real and scary sequel didnt have music at all .. at least I recall none?

And it worked great.

 
 Posted:   Nov 5, 2017 - 6:55 AM   
 By:   WagnerAlmighty   (Member)

Well...Herrmann ( and I love him just as much as Schifrinsmile)also would have had a bad impact on the film I think....this movie is of such intensity..music ( in a harmonic / disonnace way ) just would lower it to a " normal " experience of horror.
Just as I mentioned Benjamin Wallfishs score to the recent IT ( which I wouldnt dare to compare to such a masterpiece like the Exorcist which wrot e movie history)that ruined or better washed the movie down to a spooky BOOOH ! carnival...
The third Exorcist..which was the real and scary sequel didnt have music at all .. at least I recall none?

And it worked great.


I keep thinking about his experiments on It's Alive and Taxi Driver. Both proved he could work in a more modern context while still more than retaining his identity.

Nooo, I think the organs Bernard wanted to add would have made the movie even better, and his presence would have brought something special...though if that would have happened the world would have indeed missing out on a very good sounding piece of music known as Tubular Bells.

I honestly can't recall a thing elsewise about the soundtrack to I. I doubt that would have happened had Bernard scored it.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 5, 2017 - 2:38 PM   
 By:   Octoberman   (Member)

So now I'm thinking that I misinterpreted the meaning of the thread.

Are we talking about the scores as strictly listening experiences, or how well they suit their respective films?

Because the most obvious aspect of the first film was that Friedkin's choices were, for the most part, rather unmusical.
I think they were chosen for their dramatic value as augmentation to sound effects, as opposed to any melodic value they have.
They are musical enough to me, but that's me--I can see melodic and harmonic value in the most chaotic and dissonant things.
Musique concrete pieces, one could say.

 
 
 Posted:   Nov 6, 2017 - 2:35 AM   
 By:   Graham Watt   (Member)

So now I'm thinking that I misinterpreted the meaning of the thread.


Yeah, Moonlit hasn't been back to clarify. And I still don't know what Trevor Rabin's got to do with all this.

Anyway, I went ahead and did a quick evaluation of the first two films and their scores. Oh, a thought has just come to me (and that doesn't happen a lot nowadays) - I'm surprised at how closely people relate Mike Oldfield's "Tubular Bells" to THE EXORCIST. It's even known in many quarters as "Theme From The Exorcist". My memory's a bit hazy here, but didn't it just appear once in the film, fading in for a short time as Ellen Burstyn walked along a street, and... eh... then just fading out?

 
 Posted:   Nov 6, 2017 - 3:03 AM   
 By:   Nicolai P. Zwar   (Member)

The original Exorcist featured music by some of my favorite composers. I love Penderecki, Oldfield, Webern, Henze... that said, I have never listened to the actual "soundtrack" of the Exorcist (though I should have these pieces used somewhere in my collection, albeit not in the context of a film soundtrack). I remember that the music worked well in the movie, though I have not seen it in a while.

The Morricone score for Exorcist II works well and manages to be both creepy and beautiful. I'm not sure on how to vote here or for what.

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2019 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.