# The Year of Hildur Guðnadóttir



## Reid Rosefelt

As I'm sure you know, Hildur Guðnadóttir just got a Grammy for her score for CHERNOBYL, to add to her Emmy. Guðnadóttir is only the second Icelander to win a Grammy, after violinist Sigurbjörn Bernharðsson. (Trivia: Bjork was nominated 15 times and never won.) 

Guðnadóttir also won the Golden Globe for JOKER and is nominated for a BAFTA and an Academy Award for JOKER. She's already picked up a slew of prizes for JOKER including the Broadcast Film Critics, Hollywood Critics Association, Denver Film Critics, Hollywood Music in Media Awards, among others. It will be quite an upset if she doesn't win the Oscar and the BAFTA.

She was also named Television Composer of the Year at the World Soundtracks Awards.

I have been thinking of her a lot because I'm immersed in the Icelandic noir TRAPPED, which is streaming now on Amazon. She collaborated on the brilliant score with Jóhann Jóhannsson and Rutger Hoedemaekers. She worked on those 20 episodes just before CHERNOBYL and JOKER.


----------



## fretti

I really liked what she did for Joker (really liked the movie in general) and given that (apart from Star Wars) the same scores are nominated for the Academy Awards as were for the Golden Globes, I think chances are good she'll win an Oscar this year


----------



## Beluga

Girl power!  Ladies welcome!


----------



## Consona

Loved the Chernobyl underscore. Those industrial sounds mixed with vocals. Like this scene, minimalistic but very effective.


Joker score had its moments, but sometimes I felt the sound-designy nature kept it from being more potent.

I fear these scores getting more and more awards cements them as the etalon for scoring and we will drift even further away from the symphonic compositions of the previous generations, which is happening already.

I was, again, listening to Herrmann's North by Northwest and Williams' Star Wars complete scores. We need people who can compose such things again, but is there any incentive really, beside some geeks on music forums wishing for it to happen? Even production companies and directors don't care...


----------



## Vin

Consona said:


> I was, again, listening to Herrmann's North by Northwest and Williams' Star Wars complete scores. We need people who can compose such things again, but is there any incentive really, beside some geeks on music forums wishing for it to happen? Even production companies and directors don't care...



There is room for both and there are plenty of composers who compose in those styles convincingly, such as Gordy Haab who's done marvelous work on Star Wars: Battlefront II:



Since two of my favorite scores of 2019 weren't nominated, I'm completely rooting for Ms. Guðnadóttir to get that Oscar!


----------



## Consona

Vin said:


> There is room for both and there are plenty of composers who compose in those styles convincingly, such as Gordy Haab who's done marvelous work on Star Wars: Battlefront II


But you know who will compose for those next SW films... Giacchino and the similar lot.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt

Ms. Guðnadóttir just won the BAFTA for JOKER. On to the Oscars...


----------



## givemenoughrope

TigerTheFrog said:


> Ms. Guðnadóttir just won the BAFTA for JOKER. On to the Oscars...



Obviously, she is better than the others.


----------



## Consona

Iswhatitis said:


> Giacchino is so talented as an orchestrator yet....here it comes, so if you can’t handle the truth don’t keep reading....🤮IMHO: I’m always annoyed by too many of his melodies and he seems to over orchestrate, in that, when in doubt overly orchestrate every bar when one cannot come up with a memorable melody. Don’t get me wrong, he’s a super super talent, but I think he should focus on orchestration not composition. I can’t remember most of his scores while I can easily remember scores by John Barry, John Williams, Jerry Goldsmith, Henry Mancini, Michael Kamen, James Horner.



A super super talent? Have you heard his music from all those franchises he inherited from Goldsmith, Horner and Williams? What a slump.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt

She won!


----------



## AEF

TigerTheFrog said:


> She won!



A joke that she did against the works that comprised her competition. A bunch of whole note drones by a male composer and nobody is remotely considering it. shameful.


----------



## Cat

Politics....



AEF said:


> A joke that she did against the works that comprised her competition. A bunch of whole note drones by a male composer and nobody is remotely considering it. shameful.


----------



## Soundlex

AEF said:


> A bunch of whole note drones by a male composer and nobody is remotely considering it. shameful.


You just gave me a big "But of course!" moment...
I was like: how can they give an oscar to basically 2 notes of cello...
Then I saw your post and realize that in fact, well...you know.


----------



## Nyran

Drones for clowns...
All jokes aside, I think her music worked really well for the film. But I understand the criticism.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt

@AEF @Cat @Soundlex You are all entitled to your opinions about her music.

At least some of the music was written before the film was made and Joaquin Phoenix has said repeatedly in interviews that he based his performance on her music. It’s easy to see what he means. The music sets the tone as somber, minimal, and very serious. So Phoenix knew that he couldn’t give an over-the-top comic book performance—it would have to be grounded in realism and the pain of this man. There are infinite ways he could have interpreted that role. I think it’s impossible to think of the film—in particular to think it’s a great film—without the music and Phoenix’s performance. Like it or not, they both give the film gravitas, or if you don’t like the film, grandiosity.

So in my opinion, when the “Joker” score causes the world to be conscious of the monumental value of music to enhance the moviegoing experience, it's a good thing for all composers, regardless of what style they work in. Even if it is a score based in sound design like “Chernobyll,” it makes the public pay attention. And when the public thinks that a soundtrack is important, then directors and studio executives have to listen. I believe that all her fellow nominees are happy for her.

For me there is not orchestral soundtrack music and “the rest,” there is only good soundtrack music that serves best the requirements of a particular film. To me, that's what the job entails. It starts with the film. You don't begin with the answer before you've heard the question.

To be fair, take a moment to listen to this brief extract from her "Joker" theme. "A bunch of whole note drones"? "2 notes of cello?" "Drones for clowns"? I'm starting the cue late, because I figure many of you have your minds made up and won't wait to hear the orchestral parts.

​

Finally, I get the strong impression that some of you believe that Guðnadóttir only won this because she is a woman. It’s all politics, right? The Academy Awards started in 1930, and, since that time only seven women have been nominated for score, and only three have won before: Marilyn Bergman (“Yentl,” with Michel Legrand and Alan Bergman), Rachel Portman (“Emma”) and Anne Dudley (“The Full Monty”). Greta Gerwig deserved to be nominated as director as much as any of them this year, but was not, so the idea that the Academy will automatically hand out the top prizes to people just because they are women is hard for me to believe. I think we have a long, long way to go before women even get an equal opportunity to be hired as composers, let alone automatically become undeserving Oscar nominees and winners.


----------



## Michael Antrum

I haven't seen the film Joker, and listening to the soundtrack without the picture doesn't work (at least for me). So I imagine that it must be one of those compositions that requires the picture for context for it to work.

So I'm going to make an effort to see the film. I'm of the generation that loves the symphonic score rather than sound design type scores, but I'm not so quick to dismiss that kind of work. (Though I don't see people queuing up to buy tickets in 20 years for a live performance, like Williams, Newton-Howard et al...)

However, I watched the Oscars live and saw her receiving the award, and it clearly meant a great deal to her, so I wouldn't want to take anything away from her triumph just because it's not exactly my cup of tea...


----------



## jbuhler

Joker was one of the few film scores in recent memory that convinced me to see the film. I found it immediately evocative. It really conjured up the world.

And yes of course the Academy Awards are political. They’ve always been political. I mean given the stakes how could these kinds of awards ever not be political through and through? But they are never just political. Or they are political in a very complex way that always attend when identity is at stake. Which doesn’t mean the Academy Awards yield anything like an objective measure of “best.” If they did we wouldn’t need to go through the ritual. Quite frankly I’m not even sure what “best” would mean in a truly competitive artistic field that must at the very least balance concerns for craft and tradition with concerns for originality and innovation. I also don’t think it’s a bad exercise for the Academy to go through this on a yearly basis and decide collectively what they want to present publicly as their “best” face.


----------



## Richard Wilkinson

*“To the girls, to the women, to the mothers, to the daughters who hear the music bubbling within. Please speak up, we need to hear your voices.”*

Anyone who sees that and thinks 'political speech', or 'agenda' or 'woke brigade' or anything other than 'that's a nice, positive message to send to women and girls who have relatively few role models in this industry' must have an insanely fragile mindset.

---

As an aside, even if she _did_ make a particularly political speech (she didn't) why would that matter? 

Ideology and politics and empathy and understanding is intrinsically linked to artistic endeavor.
It's crazy to see people respond to an actor/musician/artist's political message with 'stick to acting'. 
I mean, have they _seen_ any art? Do they understand what art is and how it's made? Almost all art is political in one way or another, and that's something which should be celebrated!


----------



## Soundlex

Cat said:


> Many people confuse equal opportunity with equal outcome


Absolutely.
And here is my thing, I was not even thinking about the gender thing until somebody mentioned it.
That's how unbiased I was and for example, when the brilliant Mica Levi was nominated in 2016 I was hoping for her to win because I thought she deserved it. So, in my head, the Academy is supposed to reward the highest craftsmanship or/and the most original work of the year. I hear none of that here.
Don't get me wrong, I'm happy for her and I loved the Chernobyl soundtrack but here...the soundtrack was out of place. It has nothing to do with being a woman and my first post was me saying that the result here is political in my opinion. Maybe, take away her cello and let's see how she write...


----------



## givemenoughrope

What Oscar Voters Are Voting For And Why


Here are some anonymous thoughts from Oscar voters on what their ballots looked like



www.nextbestpicture.com





*Best Original Score*
“Every time that ‘Joker’ ad comes on TV with that weird violin, I’m like, ‘Oh god, turn it off! Turn it off!’ But, I mean, come on, how many Oscars can John Williams and Randy Newman win? I know it’s so stupid to think like that but I’m sort of influenced by that. I might still vote for ‘Joker’ even though I can’t stand the score and haven’t seen the film because it’s the first time a woman would win.”

Just to clarify, I couldn't care less about awards or award shows.


----------



## AEF

The point is that she was competing with works that were so vastly superior in terms of composition and orchestration that it is a farce to say that her score deserved to be nominated let alone win. 

The fact that they made a point to have a woman conduct the nominations shows what the whole thing was about.


----------



## Reid Rosefelt

Cat said:


> Just so that there will be a "compensation" to the so-called injustice (which we do not have any proof of), there is this feminist extremist movement that impose that you hire women so - solely based on gender. So it pure discrimination!! It is exactly the evil that this movement accuses the industry of doing in the past to women. So at the moment, if I am a guy, I will be rejected purely based on my gender. Just to "compensate". Exactly that happened to me a few times so far (in Canada), I was not even accepted to send a demo, I was told "because you are not a woman", "they are looking for women as composers". Is this equal opportunity? No it is not!



Wow. I think you have a very personal axe to grind here. I'm sorry about what's happening in Canada, but do you think that dominates the entire Hollywood film industry? Then why are there so few Hollywood movies composed by women?



Cat said:


> I am not saying that this was the case with Joker, that Hildur did not deserve it and that she only got the Oscar based on politics (even though I did not think the score was great). When I replied "politics..." earlier in this thread I was refering to her political statement that she made at the end, supporting this "Women in Industry, Let's hire more women, etc" propaganda that I think it is so wrong. How it should be instead is: "let's hire the best for the role/gig, regardless of gender". Otherwise we will have, as I said, pure discrimination na injustice!



Gifted women don't need to be literally rejected by the industry. They can stop themselves. That's the reality--and it is a reality--that Hildur Guðnadóttir was directly addressing. 

Here's one example, but I'm sure there are hundreds of others. Maria Newman is the youngest daughter of Alfred Newman and the sister to Thomas Newman and David Newman. She is an award-winning composer, violinist, violist and pianist. She's a pretty well-known figure in modern classical music, and has performed in venues like Carnegie Hall and the Kennedy Center. She has 141 credits on IMDb as a performer. 9 credits as a composer, all documentaries and shorts, with the exception of one feature.

I don't think she is lacking in musical talent. From what I understand about her, she just didn't want to get into the Hollywood racket and make it her main life's work. But I don't think that would have been the case if she was a man. I think filmmakers would have sought her out if she was a man. 

So I think that what Guðnadóttir is saying to all the young women out there is: if you want to try to compose music for movies--just do it. Don't stop yourself. And I think that's a wonderful message. Let's have more women composers and see what they do. If you don't like what they write, come on VI:Control and critique it. But please, on the merits. You don't need to get into gender. 



Soundlex said:


> So, in my head, the Academy is supposed to reward the highest craftsmanship or/and the most original work of the year. I hear none of that here.


That would be cool, but I have worked on awards campaigns for 45 years and I have never once to be the case about any award. The awards are never about who or what gets the prize for "Best"--they are always about the voguish opinions of the people who give them. Very easy to manipulate, by the way, which is why hundreds of millions have been spent on Oscar campaigns. What is best will be decided by the long view of history. If I asked you to tell me what won prizes over the last 20 years you probably couldn't say, but you will remember the films that connected with you. 




givemenoughrope said:


> “Every time that ‘Joker’ ad comes on TV with that weird violin.



Umm... it's a cello.


----------



## Richard Wilkinson

AEF said:


> The fact that they made a point to have a woman conduct the nominations shows what the whole thing was about.



Why is having a women conductor 'making a point' but a male conductor isn't? Does that not kind of prove why representation and greater visibility of women in this industry is needed - because as soon as you see a woman doing anything your mind jumps to conspiracy theories and agendas?


----------



## givemenoughrope

I don't bothered by all these 'equality of opp. vs outcome' comments all over the internet. They just sound like that Jordan Peterson guy. But I will say that there are a TON of women composers out there with their own musical voice and their own take on things. I can think of a half dozen concert composers in recent years, young and old, that have turned my head around that just happen to be women. I would have liked to have heard what any one of them could have done with Joker or 1917.


----------



## AEF

Richard Wilkinson said:


> Why is having a women conductor 'making a point' but a male conductor isn't? Does that not kind of prove why representation and greater visibility of women in this industry is needed - because as soon as you see a woman doing anything your mind jumps to conspiracy theories and agendas?



Bc they specifically brought in a woman just for that moment and made an entire segment about how she was the first woman to do so. 

it is such blatant pandering its laughable.


----------



## givemenoughrope

Blatant pandering or a sad fact? The first albino Inuit dwarf might be blatant pandering.


----------



## AEF

givemenoughrope said:


> Blatant pandering or a sad fact? The first albino Inuit dwarf might be blatant pandering.



but she was randomly brought in specifically to conduct for the award that was about to go to the woman nominee. its all pandering. 

granted, ricky minor cant conduct a film score, but thats another topic entirely...


----------



## givemenoughrope

It's the Oscars ffs. The entire thing is pandering and celebrating pandering. Watch Columbo reruns if it bothers you.


----------



## Richard Wilkinson

AEF said:


> Bc they specifically brought in a woman just for that moment and made an entire segment about how she was the first woman to do so.
> 
> it is such blatant pandering its laughable.



So her being the first woman conductor at the Oscars shouldn't be commented on, in any way? We shouldn't celebrate progress of any kind? Such a bizarre thing to get so upset about.


----------



## AEF

Richard Wilkinson said:


> So her being the first woman conductor at the Oscars shouldn't be commented on, in any way? We shouldn't celebrate progress of any kind? Such a bizarre thing to get so upset about.



lol she was only asked to conduct that segment specifically bc she was a woman. the entire thing is a marketing ploy for suckers.


----------



## givemenoughrope

TigerTheFrog said:


> Umm... it's a cello.



That's a great review for the soundtrack album actually.


----------



## Richard Wilkinson

AEF said:


> lol she was only asked to conduct that segment specifically bc she was a woman. the entire thing is a marketing ploy for suckers.



Then what are they marketing? Equality? Could be worse, I suppose...


----------



## Richard Wilkinson

Cat said:


> I do not think this narrative is right



Would you have preferred this instead?
*“To the girls, to the women, to the mothers, to the daughters who hear the music bubbling within. Don't bother, you might offend some men on the internet.”*


----------



## sinkd

Cat said:


> Sorry, I totally disagree with this.
> 
> Many people confuse equal opportunity with equal outcome. I agree with the first (and it should always be like that) and I do not with the latter.


Jordan Peterson likes to say this, but it begs the question of what's an opportunity and what is an outcome and assumes the two are always clear and distinct. When she was hired to compose the score was that an outcome or an opportunity? Or both?. Almost everything is like that.


----------



## JJP

Cat said:


> There are more men than women in the music composing industry, I agree. It is a fact. But there is absolutely no proof that this is because women were rejected purely and exclusively on a gender basis as a mass phenomena. It could very well be that there was much less interest (as a percentage) in women to become composers so there were much fewer women applying for the gigs. Are we sure that this was not the case? Is it really because they were discriminated? There is absolutely no scientific proof that there was the case.



As a person who has a classical training, came up through the jazz world, has worked in Hollywood for many years, and a person who has been fascinated by the gender dynamics, I have to step in and say that this paragraph is incorrect from a few logical and factual angles.

First, there has been ample research on gender discrimination that easily can be applied to this situation.

Second, it fails to address the issue of why women don't become composers and assumes it's simply about interest without questioning the underlying cause. There are several more barriers to women becoming composers than there are for men. Those barriers are built into both the structure of how emerging composers are fostered and how women are perceived during hiring. This essentially weeds out most women before they get the opportunity to be considered for a major production in a way that men are not.

People, men or women, tend to show reduced interest in a career path when they perceive unreasonable barriers to success that target them disproportionately.


----------



## Richard Wilkinson

JJP said:


> People, men or women, tend to show reduced interest in a career path when they perceive unreasonable barriers to success that target them disproportionately.


 Perfectly put - and this is why we celebrate the first female conductor at the Oscars. Or the first of any historically disenfranchised group to do any notable thing - because it shows other people that this stuff is possible and achievable.


----------



## Will Blackburn

As i was reading this thread just saw this podcast on BBC 









Sound of Cinema - The Oscars - BBC Sounds


Matthew Sweet explores the world of film music.




www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## JJP

Cat said:


> "let's encourage women to apply and give them equal opportunities based on skills/talent/merits".



...And let's remove the barriers which prevent them from developing an interest or competing on an equal footing. One of those barriers to interest is visible role models to illustrate that there is a path to success.

Now if you want to have a debate about WHICH of the few women should be used as role models, that's probably a different discussion. While I may have my opinions, perhaps that's better left to women who actually do this work, of which I am not one. Otherwise we have a bunch of men dictating to women whom they should and should not admire.


----------



## jacobthestupendous

Richard Wilkinson said:


> Ideology and politics and empathy and understanding is intrinsically linked to artistic endeavor.
> It's crazy to see people respond to an actor/musician/artist's political message with 'stick to acting'.
> I mean, have they _seen_ any art? Do they understand what art is and how it's made? Almost all art is political in one way or another, and that's something which should be celebrated!


Art used to be about Love and Death and Beauty and God and sometimes also Politics. It would be nice to see important things other than just politics in art again. Politics can be important, but there's a lot that's way more important.

For sure, there are some great works of art that use just one color, but if you never use the other ones too, your work will grow tiresomely monochrome.


----------



## givemenoughrope

The academy has no room to celebrate these kinds of historic wins when they are as complicit as anyone for the way things have been. To most people it all just seems like the rich and famous patting themselves on the back for standing up for what most people have never had any problem with.


----------



## KEM

I personally thought 1917 should’ve won it, that score aided the film so much better than the Joker score did.


----------



## 5Lives

Firstly, the award isn't for "best composer", "best body of work", "best orchestration and melody". It is best score as in music for picture. Listening to it on Spotify without the context of the film not only does a disservice to the work the composer put in but also misses the ENTIRE POINT. Hildur's score certainly gave Joker the tone Todd Phillips was going for. Did you think 1917's score was better? Sure - valid point to make. That's where subjectiveness comes in - and surprise, the awards are subjective. Want to change that? Work on joining the academy instead of complaining on the internet.

Secondly, there's some ridiculous ignorance floating around here. They hired a female conductor because they knew the winner was female? Do you know how voting works? Nobody knows the results until the night of (except the audit company). Perhaps highlighting the fact that there was a female conductor may provide other women some hope to continue to pursue music and not be discouraged by threads such as this one. Hildur made a fantastic point in her speech - we need women's voices in the arts. Of course they should get jobs based on merit but just like somebody took a chance on John Williams so many years ago, it is NECESSARY for a male-dominated industry to enlighten themselves and look past their own egos to TAKE A CHANCE on introducing a different perspective. Art will be better for it (given that 50% of the population does not perceive the world the same as those with peanuts between their legs - and between their ears for that matter). You think Hildur was only talking to women out there? WRONG - she was also talking to the men in those seats and in the industry. Props to Todd Phillips and Bradley Cooper for taking a chance.


----------



## South Thames

Not making any particular comment on this year's contest (about which I have no strong feelings), but the Academy has often been a sucker for ephemeral novelty in the music category.

Hence Midnight Express won instead of Superman.

Or Round Midnight instead of The Mission.

Who remembers those winning scores now?

As an aside, I look back to winning speeches from the 1970s and 80s and gosh, how refreshing it is to have people just express their gratitude to their peers without an eye to getting plaudits on social media or 'going viral'. The sanctimony and dull, conformist, adulation seeking at these things now is [email protected] unbearable.


----------



## South Thames

> Jordan Peterson likes to say this, but it begs the question of what's an opportunity and what is an outcome and assumes the two are always clear and distinct. When she was hired to compose the score was that an outcome or an opportunity? Or both?. Almost everything is like that.



Kind of missing the point. Petersen was speaking against enforcing equality of outcome by mindless diktats that ignore naturally occurring disparities in what people choose to do -- that says that 50% of software engineers should be women (even if, say, only 20% of people who choose to study compute science are) and encourage organisations to hire preferentially on that basis etc. The anger at under representation in certain fields is curiously lopsided - the fact that construction and plumbing are male dominated seems to be a less of an issue.


----------



## givemenoughrope

South Thames said:


> Kind of missing the point. Petersen was speaking against enforcing equality of outcome by mindless diktats that ignore naturally occurring disparities in what people choose to do -- that says that 50% of software engineers should be women (even if, say, only 20% of people who choose to study compute science are) and encourage organisations to hire preferentially on that basis etc. The anger at under representation in certain fields is curiously lopsided - the fact that construction and plumbing are male dominated seems to be a less of an issue.



Right, but to be fair there may be a reason why only 20% choose that field. That's also worth investigating. Whether forcing the outcome will have some benefit or entice others to study it is also worth looking at. I don't think there are any definitive answers though.


----------



## South Thames

givemenoughrope said:


> Right, but to be fair there may be a reason why only 20% choose that field. That's also worth investigating. Whether forcing the outcome will have some benefit or entice others to study it is also worth looking at. I don't think there are any definitive answers though



True, but that would be looking at how to ensure equality of opportunity. But Peterson simply makes the point that one should accept that, given freedom of choice, it might well be that fewer women choose to become computer scientists, and cites the example of Scandinavia, a set of countries that have directed massive resources to gender equality yet, for example have fewer women taking STEM subjects than, for example, highly socially and economically coercive countries such as India.


----------



## jonvog

I think Hildurs win is very well deserved. It's clearly not my favorite score of all time, but I think it was the freshest score, that did the most for its movie.

And on a sitenote:
Thanks to those around taking the time to explain that structural sexism (and racism and so on) is indeed a thing, that there's a lot of research on the topic and that there is still a lot to do for both men and women to make this world a place with equal oportunities for every person. 
I am very happy to see at least a little bit of progress.


----------



## givemenoughrope

^^I don't know about all that, cmon. I like the sound and expression in her music but whenever I feel like it's going to go somewhere it usually doesn't. Much of that might stem (intended) from the way films are temped, decided upon beforehand or unceremoniously chopped up afterward.

And how old are these 5 people? 150?


----------



## jbuhler

These star chamber conspiracy theories are always entertaining and oh so convenient.


----------



## jbuhler

Iswhatitis said:


> It’s not a theory. My friend’s dad was a very famous actor who sat on that private committee for a long time. The Academy’s votes are meaningless. The world is not what one may think, it’s much more corrupt than anyone can fathom.


Sure ok. I’m going to trust your friend’s account of his dad’s tall tale all so you can be believe that the Academy doesn’t vote the way its vote is represented. If that’s what allows you to get up in the morning and do what needs to be done, sure fine.


----------



## Nova

I thought this quote from a voter in the article linked above was pretty damning.

“I have not nor will probably ever see ‘Joker’ or ‘The Irishman.’ I don’t have the time to watch them and I don’t like how those kinds of films make me feel. I don’t like Tarantino movies anyway. ‘Once Upon a Time in Hollywood’ was just weird and long. It was too fancy for its own good.”

Honestly, who doesn't roll their eyes at the Oscars? Some scores stand the test of time and we still revere them today, that is the true mark of excellence.


----------



## mscp

The Joker’s music worked perfectly for the picture. I listen to the OST from time to time, and it is quite a journey.

Well deserved, and I hope she gets a lot more work in the future.


----------



## visiblenoise

I listened to the Joker score before watching the movie, and thought it was a bit of a bore. Then I watched the movie and got it. I still have little desire to go back and listen to the score, but it worked well with the film, which is the only supposed point of a soundtrack. They could have picked a much worse winner.


----------



## brenneisen

visiblenoise said:


> which is the only supposed point of a soundtrack.



John Powell disagrees


----------



## KEM

I do agree that the most important aspect of a score is how it serves the picture, and that the Oscar should go to the score that best serves the film it’s written for, and this is exactly why I think 1917 should’ve won, I’m not saying that because I liked it more on its own, I really think it complimented the film itself much better than the Joker score did, the Joker score certainly had its moments, such as the dancing scene in the bathroom, that was great, but overall I felt like 1917 had so many more moments where the music elevated the picture.


----------



## jbuhler

Iswhatitis said:


> Personally, I could careless about award ceremonies or the Oscars. So whoever wins I don’t watch and don’t care. Just sharing info, that’s all. If you don’t want to believe it then you can pretend how democratic the world 🌎 is when it’s not. Peace ✌



Who said anything about democracy? I just doubt the existence of a star chamber. It's the Academy. It doesn't need a star chamber to make decisions that seem peculiar to the rest of the world. (For that matter, democracy doesn't either.)

For what it's worth last Thursday after playing excerpts from each of the nominated scores I did a poll of my History of Film Music class (150 students) and Joker won the poll with a plurality of votes for best score. It had maybe 30% of the vote. Surprisingly, the rest of the class was pretty evenly divided among the others, so it's really not like there is this popular uprising for one of the other scores, even if there is not universal acclaim for Joker. When I phrased the question as to what score they thought would win, the vote was about 60% for Joker, again not surprising when you look at how the awards before the Oscars turned out this year.


----------



## Drundfunk

I like the sound of her scores. I think her Chernobyl score is just awesome. The sound of that score just makes your skin crawl. It's insane. Joker also has a certain sound to it which I personally never really heard before and I think the score in itself is very organic. So I think the nomination is definitely justified. I watched Joker one time in cinema and while I can acknowledge the craftmanship behind this movie and I knew while watching it, that I'm watching something which was produced on the highest level, the movie itself didn't really click with me. There were also times (like 2-3 times) where I felt like the music isn't really fitting to what I'm watching. It ruined the immersion a little bit. However, I'd need to watch the movie a second time to actually be able to definitely judge it I guess (maybe I even like the movie more after the second watching. Who knows). Didn't watch the other movies with nominated score, but although the music for Joker didn't work for me throughout the whole movie, when it worked it was fitting (like for probably 90% of the movie) and created a certain atmosphere, which really helped the movie and even enhanced Joaquin Phoenix performance (imo). So I guess in general the music did the job, so congrats Hildur! (I'd love to write the last name but I have no idea how to write the letters on my keyboard xD)


----------



## visiblenoise

brenneisen said:


> John Powell disagrees


Hey we're not talking about ideals here!


----------



## ProfoundSilence

none of this matters. 

you won't build somebody up by tearing another down, and who wins the award doesn't change the quality of each work involved. 

if you think Powell's work or Newman's was better then you'll remember that - and it's great. The Joker OST winning doesn't change your level of enjoyment - and I'm pretty sure the reality is that our taste is MUCH different than the average person, and the taste of their judges is MUCH different than the average person's as well as ours and it was their award to give.

much like the mentioned Tarantino film, it's kind of just a hollywood thing, for people in Hollywood. it DOES give exposure, which I think most can agree would be more useful to Hildur than John or Randy. Those two dont need awards to get gigs. and dont need much name recognition at their stage in their careet(although the amount of Newman's might confuse people haha). 

live and let live. its hollywood, and its politics. Let them live in their ivory towers and pretend to be philanthropists in their little role playing game. Congratulate Hildur for doing a good job, or criticize it if you'd like - but this isn't worth much conversation. Entire genres of great moving films are snubbed from these awards despite actually being some of the best movies.


----------



## ThomasNL

I sometimes feel like we forget that film is a work of art, and everything is allowed. "The music has to serve the picture" gets interpreted as "We should not notice the music anymore" nowadays i feel like. In my opinion we as filmcomposers shouldn't be afraid to show what we can do, and yes, that means sometimes "using" the film medium to showcase our musical talent.

But that is also why it is so hard to judge filmmusic. Do you base it on how the music served the picture, or on if it is musically interesting and well crafted? And don't forget that the film itself has to be very well received too, ain't gonna get attention otherwise 

Now obviously the voting process for the oscars and similar awards is a joke, as the quote from Nova showed us. A lot of voters haven't seen the movie or don't have any idea how to choose a winner for a certain category. It isn't a coincidence that a lot of times films that win a lot of prices also have a nomination for best music, or in this case, more political reasons. (I'm nót saying she didn't deserve it, she did an amazing job)

I once was happily surprised to be awarded with best musical score for a film competition, only to find out it was based on a piano piece composed and played by the actress, not at all for the rest of the music, that I composed. That was a really awkward moment hehe.


----------



## Beluga

jbuhler said:


> These star chamber conspiracy theories are always entertaining and oh so convenient.



In a perfect world, they would go around and look for the best scores. Then nominate them themselves. Then choose the best one using strictly artistic criteria. However, that is unfortunately not how this business works. It's not a conspiracy but as written before (as everything in this business) it's about networking, knowing the right way in, having a certain way with certain people, financial backup, "sucking up" to the right people, power play, political influence/manipulation, and whatnot. They don't give out that kind of award: "You know you did a great job with the music there, here is an award for it."

And it doesn't matter. It's enough people believe it's about the music and artistic merit. No need for it to be the case.

That is absolutely NOT to say that I think the score didn't deserve it. I thought it was interesting and well done - and I'm happy a woman took that place for once.


----------



## Richard Wilkinson

Iswhatitis said:


> Personally, I *could* careless about award ceremonies or the Oscars




*couldn't


----------



## ProfoundSilence

I don't know why people make this more difficult but it should be oh, who decides the nominees? Who decides the winner? Was it you or I? Was it this community?

In reality all the score meant was it was the favorite score for that year by a certain group of people who happened to be on the committee, it doesn't reflect anything else even if we have similar tastes or complete opposite tastes.

20 people in Los Angeles do not pick the best score of the year, even if they call it that it really just means the favorite score of a certain prestiged 20 people in a room


----------



## dcoscina

Mark Korven’s score to The lighthouse is also a profound influence on the film. It was mixed up front and is a character as much as Dafoe and Pattinson. It should have been nominated at least if the point is to acknowledge the best music written for film medium. this is not to say Joker shouldnt have been by the way. Just showing the inconsistency of Oscar.


----------



## rpaillot

visiblenoise said:


> I listened to the Joker score before watching the movie, and thought it was a bit of a bore. Then I watched the movie and got it. I still have little desire to go back and listen to the score,* but it worked well with the film, which is the only supposed point of a soundtrack*. They could have picked a much worse winner.



That is the kind of affirmative statement that worries me about the future state of film scoring.
It is such a sad affirmation !

If your only goal as a film composer is to make it "work well with the film", then you can become a sound editor or a sound designer.
Virtually any film can be done with sound design only and no music, and it can work pretty well.
(I like such movies/ tv shows, plenty of examples)

Any action, drama, comedy, suspens, horror movie can be done with carefuly designed sound editing / sound design and NO music.

But we're missing a big part of the fun !


----------



## Reid Rosefelt

Turns out she is a Cubase user. I bet this video will get people even more pissed off. 



The "Joker" score was done partly with a custom instrument called a "feedback cello" which you can see behind her. It has pickups for every string and a speaker on the back. More info on this *HERE*. This article was written some time ago, as it mentions she was starting on a crime series with Jóhann Jóhannsson. This was "Trapped," which I'm watching now on Amazon.


----------



## rpaillot

Hildur winning an oscar, I think it's cool , objectively. (as a father of 2 daughters, gender equality is so important to me )

But we can also stay objective : does her work for Joker score really deserve a Golden Globe + Grammy + Bafta + SCL + ASCAP + XX + YY + ZZ
Clearly "not".
That's not what I call "diversity".

Even masterpiece of film scoring like Interstellar, How To Train Your Dragon, Schindler's list, The Village, didnt get so many awards in a row.

Many people I know who love cinema couldnt remember a note or a sound from Joker score.

Hildur has been "chosen" (no conspiracy here) as a symbol for all female film composers way before
the beginning of the awards season.
Somehow, she had to win all of these awards... truly undeserved and I'm not afraid to say it 
(Probably helped by the fact Joker is a great movie too)
We could have been more subtle and give her the oscar, newman the golden globe, Powell the Bafta... (the man only got 1 oscar nom, can you explain this to me? his work has influenced film scoring so much...)


----------



## jbuhler

rpaillot said:


> That is the kind of affirmative statement that worries me about the future state of film scoring.
> It is such a sad affirmation !
> 
> If your only goal as a film composer is to make it "work well with the film", then you can become a sound editor or a sound designer.
> Virtually any film can be done with sound design only and no music, and it can work pretty well.
> (I like such movies/ tv shows, plenty of examples)
> 
> Any action, drama, comedy, suspens, horror movie can be done with carefuly designed sound editing / sound design and NO music.
> 
> But we're missing a big part of the fun !


As I said up thread, I only saw Joker because I was so taken by the music.


----------



## jbuhler

rpaillot said:


> Hildur winning an oscar, I think it's cool , objectively. (as a father of 2 daughters, gender equality is so important to me )
> 
> But we can also stay objective : does her work for Joker score really deserve a Golden Globe + Grammy + Bafta + SCL + ASCAP + XX + YY + ZZ
> Clearly "not".
> That's not what I call "diversity".
> Many people I know who love cinema couldnt remember a note or a sound from Joker score.
> 
> Hildur has been "chosen" (no conspiracy here) as a symbol for all female film composers way before
> the beginning of the awards season.
> Somehow, she had to win all of these awards... truly undeserved and I'm not afraid to say it
> (Probably helped by the fact Joker is a great movie too)
> We could have been more subtle and give her the oscar, newman the golden globe, Powell the Bafta... (the man only got 1 oscar nom, can you explain this to me? his work has influenced film scoring so much...)


I mean it deserves it as much as anything deserves it. These kinds of awards promise an objectivity to the decision that will never be present due to the nature of the thing but I’m not convinced it’s a bad exercise to go through, for the Academy (and various other industry groups) to survey the industry’s production for the year and say of this year’s output these are the items we think are worth noticing.


----------



## mscp

rpaillot said:


> Hildur winning an oscar, I think it's cool , objectively. (as a father of 2 daughters, gender equality is so important to me )
> 
> But we can also stay objective : does her work for Joker score really deserve a Golden Globe + Grammy + Bafta + SCL + ASCAP + XX + YY + ZZ
> Clearly "not".
> That's not what I call "diversity".
> 
> Even masterpiece of film scoring like Interstellar, How To Train Your Dragon, Schindler's list, The Village, didnt get so many awards in a row.
> 
> Many people I know who love cinema couldnt remember a note or a sound from Joker score.
> 
> Hildur has been "chosen" (no conspiracy here) as a symbol for all female film composers way before
> the beginning of the awards season.
> Somehow, she had to win all of these awards... truly undeserved and I'm not afraid to say it
> (Probably helped by the fact Joker is a great movie too)
> We could have been more subtle and give her the oscar, newman the golden globe, Powell the Bafta... (the man only got 1 oscar nom, can you explain this to me? his work has influenced film scoring so much...)




Yes, she deserves all. the music is nothing shorter than perfect for the film. It really helped the film go from a “well, I liked it” to a “holy cow, this is deep” status - meaning: the music perfectly accentuated every emotion in the film. 

Music for picture means - music for picture. It must augment the storytelling side perfectly regardless of whether it will be as enjoyable to listen to it the same way we listen to concert hall music or not.

try watching the movie without the soundtrack...


----------



## Michael Antrum

Well I saw Joker today. I thought it was a very good film indeed, but I didn't actually like it, if you know what I mean. 

Joaquin Phoenix really conveyed the insanity that eventually became Heath Ledger's Joker - and I can see why he has won awards for this role.

As far as the Soundtrack is concerned. I listened to it before I saw the film, and really did not get on with it at all. However, when you put it together with the picture, it all started to make sense, and I can see why many have lauded it.

Some here have made the point that the judging the soundtrack on its own without the picture is not a valid point of view, but it so clearly is. Because back in the day, composers used to write music that both worked with the picture AND at the same time stood as compelling music in its own right.

I could never imagine wanting to put the soundtrack CD into my car stereo and listening to it on a long journey, but when you sell a soundtrack CD, that is exactly what you are asking people to do.

So mixed feelings here, but in my defence I am the wrong side of 50 and I am probably a grumpy old git with it, and not one for this new fangled sound designery stuff that the youngsters seem to like. I remember when you could go out, have 10 pints and fish, chips and mushy peas on the way home and still have change out of a tenner, etc.....


----------



## mscp

Then


Michael Antrum said:


> Some here have made the point that the judging the soundtrack on its own without the picture is not a valid point of view, but it so clearly is. Because back in the day, composers used to write music that both worked with the picture AND at the same time stood as compelling music in its own right.
> 
> I could never imagine wanting to put the soundtrack CD into my car stereo and listening to it on a long journey, but when you sell a soundtrack CD, that is exactly what you are asking people to do.



I respectfully disagree. A lot of music in history made to picture wouldn’t see the light of day in my stereo nor in many (eg. Star Wars - yes...Star Wars...it just doesn’t do for me even though I love the series). I think I have only bought pop/rock soundtrack OSTs in the past.

The point I made earlier was: Music for picture needs to work perfectly (not great) for the picture regardless. If the music is “great” or “ok” for the picture but also “great” or “ok“ for regular listening, it’s not worthy of OSCARS. That’s why the GRAMMYS exist in my opinion.


----------



## Michael Antrum

Phil81 said:


> If the music is “great” or “ok” for the picture but also “great” or “ok“ for regular listening, it’s not worthy of OSCARS. That’s why the GRAMMYS exist in my opinion.



You seem to be saying that music that is great both with picture *and* without the picture is not Oscar Worthy.

I'm not sure if I really understand what you mean, but that's OK.

I'm very happy for Hildur in any case - and I'm looking forward to what she gets up to next.....


----------



## mscp

Michael Antrum said:


> You seem to be saying that music that is great both with picture *and* without the picture is not Oscar Worthy.



Not really. My apologies. I’m still struggling to write lots of lines considerably fast (w/o proofreading them) with an Apple smartphone. Somehow SAFARI (the browser) does not work seamlessly with this forum - or maybe it’s me. I should have written the conjunction “and” instead of “but”.

The point I failed to convey was:

A piece of music that works just “ok” for both the picture as well as for the pure enjoyment of listening is not OSCARS worthy. The Oscars is an award intended for motion pictures, and everything attributed to them - regardless whether the soundtracks stand for themselves or not.


----------



## Nicktwo85

Art is subjective. Awards given for art are subjective. There is no official scale of merit or academic check-box that can point to one piece of art being objectively "better" or more deserving of a subjective award. 

The Academy, by a majority of its voting members, chose their subjective favorite. For whatever reasons they may have had. Being Oscar-worthy is, by definition, whatever they decide. There is no other criteria or metric. 

Incidentally, I enjoyed her score and thought it worked great with the film. I also thought her speech was very gracious and inspiring.


----------



## Michael Antrum

@Phil81 My iPad has a wicked sense of humour... you ought to see some of the, ahem, 'corrections' it makes to my typing. I'm sure the thing was designed to make me look a pillock when sending messages from it.....


----------



## mscp

Michael Antrum said:


> @Phil81 My iPad has a wicked sense of humour... you ought to see some of the, ahem, 'corrections' it makes to my typing. I'm sure the thing was designed to make me look a pillock when sending messages from it.....


The whole “typing without a computer” can be very frustrating for me, unless I “have an app for it”. It used to drive me insane until I “let it go”. Now I care about it, but barely. Ha.


----------



## mscp

Nicktwo85 said:


> Art is subjective. Awards given for art are subjective. There is no official scale of merit or academic check-box that can point to one piece of art being objectively "better" or more deserving of a subjective award.
> 
> The Academy, by a majority of its voting members, chose their subjective favorite. For whatever reasons they may have had. Being Oscar-worthy is, by definition, whatever they decide. There is no other criteria or metric.
> 
> Incidentally, I enjoyed her score and thought it worked great with the film. I also thought her speech was very gracious and inspiring.



I’m aware art is subjective, but the judges must apply a plethora of analytical skills to draw the winner in each category. I don’t believe their choice is prominently based on subjectivity, don’t you think so?


----------



## Nicktwo85

Phil81 said:


> I’m aware art is subjective, but the judges must apply a plethora of analytical skills to draw the winner in each category. I don’t believe their choice is prominently based on subjectivity, don’t you think so?



As far as I understand, each category is nominated by academy members of the same category. Final voting, however, is online and academy-wide. They can pick whatever they want, for whatever reason they feel. In a perfect world, each member would approach it analytically and weight the cultural impact or artistic merit of every nominee. But, as various members have intimated that they sometimes don't even watch all the films in each category before voting, it's just not the case. 

Peer reviewed science, it is not.


----------



## mscp

Nicktwo85 said:


> But, as various members have intimated that they sometimes don't even watch all the films in each category before voting, it's just not the case.



Shocking.


----------



## AEF

The irony of saying that the reason her score was best due to its placement in the film. The director determines that, and the music editors conform edits. So, two men are the reason she won the award?

The fool voter who criticized Thomas Newman’s score for being ever present: thats not up to the composer. Its amazing how folks dont even know how the process works.


----------



## mscp

AEF said:


> The irony of saying that the reason her score was best due to its placement in the film. The director determines that, and the music editors conform edits. So, two men are the reason she won the award?
> 
> The fool voter who criticized Thomas Newman’s score for being ever present: thats not up to the composer. Its amazing how folks dont even know how the process works.



Her score was not highly influenced by the director nor the sound editor.


----------



## South Thames

> The fool voter who criticized Thomas Newman’s score for being ever present: thats not up to the composer. Its amazing how folks dont even know how the process works.



So what? A screenwriter won't get a screenwriting Oscar if the director makes a pig's ear of his fantastic script. If a director has compelled a composer to make annoying or insensitive choices, it doesn't change the fact that the choices are annoying and insensitive, and it shouldn't receive an Oscar. It's rare in film that anyone has total autonomy; it's about what you can do within the given constraints. In reality, Mendes and Newman have had a long and respectful collaboration so I doubt there was much water between them on the creative choices.


----------



## silouane

For people like me who loves Hildur since the beginning, she continues to be present for experimental project (few days before winning oscar). Maybe a chance for some people to listen darker music.


----------



## sIR dORT

Oh bless these intense, rigorous, and sometimes nerdy VI-Control debates (no offense meant to anyone, just observing here)


----------



## Consona

5Lives said:


> Hildur's score certainly gave Joker the tone Todd Phillips was going for.


I'm not sure. Her score was quite a new-fashioned sound-designish stuff, while the film was stylised as some 70's/80's psychological drama. I felt some divergence there while watching it.


----------



## sinkd

Cat said:


> We don't know about that and I don't necessarily find it important. What some activists are trying to push is that "oh, we have very few women in X industry, let's hire women then to compensate" which I find parcticularly wrong. It should be instead: "let's encourage women to apply and give them equal opportunities based on skills/talent/merits".


So which is it? Do you think that the difference between outcome and opportunity is important (as you said in your first post) or do you not care because it's unimportant to you.

You seem pretty sure that the award is an artificial, and therefore politicized and unacceptable leveling of outcomes. How do you know that?


----------



## mscp

Consona said:


> I'm not sure. Her score was quite a new-fashioned sound-designish stuff, while the film was stylised as some 70's/80's psychological drama. I felt some divergence there while watching it.



Halldorophone is predominantly used in her score...I think that's why the term "sound design" is emphasized in this thread.

The overall sonics are indeed quite clean (new-fashioned), but they positively enhance the overall tone/mood of the film for me. In my opinion, it's what gave the film "that edgier/piercing" characteristic that made me enjoy the movie so much - if that makes any sense at all.


----------



## Consona

Phil81 said:


> Halldorophone is predominantly used in her score...I think that's why the term "sound design" is emphasized in this thread.
> 
> The overall sonics are indeed quite clean (new-fashioned), but they positively enhance the overall tone/mood of the film for me. In my opinion, it's what gave the film "that edgier/piercing" characteristic that made me enjoy the movie so much - if that makes any sense at all.


By sound-designy + new-fashioned I mean the overall focus on texture, unusual articulations and compositions being rather flat instead of having features of classical compositions.


----------



## mscp

Consona said:


> By sound-designy + new-fashioned I mean the overall focus on texture, unusual articulations and compositions being rather flat instead of having features of classical compositions.



Got it!


----------



## Consona




----------



## sinkd

Cat said:


> It is important, of course. But you did not quote what you had said, to which I replied:
> 
> sinkd said:
> "When she was hired to compose the score was that an outcome or an opportunity? Or both?. Almost everything is like that."
> 
> In other words, in this particular case (how Hildur was hired), we don't know exactly how it went and maybe it is not as important. The global activism that imposes unfair bias based only on gender - that is the problem.
> 
> EDIT: I am all for equal opportunity!
> EDIT2 - Also - I think you are making a confusion, maybe somebody else said something like that. I never said that I was sure she received the award based on politics. It is true that I think the score did not deserve the award, I did not like it that much, but this is just my taste (and apparently many others'). I am not saying it was foul play, though.


So did she win the award because of "[t]he global activism that imposes unfair bias [favoring women] based only on gender," or simply because the voting academy's taste was different than yours? If it is the latter, then you really had no reason to use this thread to complain about (reverse) gender bias in the first place. I don't know how you remain upright as hard as you are backpedaling.


----------



## mscp

Guys, guys, guys (girls, girls, girls):

1. Give the movie a go again;
2. Listen to her soundtrack again and again;
3. Deconstruct her work;
4. Discuss about it.

The 'gender equality' rhetoric seems like a cheap shot to me. I'm kind of waiting for a hero to deconstruct her work so we can, collectively, understand the negative "press" imposed on her.


----------



## will_m

rpaillot said:


> That is the kind of affirmative statement that worries me about the future state of film scoring.
> It is such a sad affirmation !
> 
> If your only goal as a film composer is to make it "work well with the film", then you can become a sound editor or a sound designer.
> Virtually any film can be done with sound design only and no music, and it can work pretty well.
> (I like such movies/ tv shows, plenty of examples)
> 
> Any action, drama, comedy, suspens, horror movie can be done with carefuly designed sound editing / sound design and NO music.
> 
> But we're missing a big part of the fun !



The minute you stop writing for picture you're writing for yourself and ego, the majority of directors wont enjoy you using their scenes to showcase your writing chops over enhancing the film.

This doesn't mean you can't write incredible music though, just that you can't let your own needs compromise the bigger picture.


----------



## mscp

will_m said:


> The minute you stop writing for picture you're writing for yourself and ego, the majority of directors wont enjoy you using their scenes to showcase your writing chops over enhancing the film.
> 
> This doesn't mean you can't write incredible music though, just that you can't let your own needs compromise the bigger picture.




this ^^ x100


----------



## Brasart

Did you know? My dad's friend is the actual Oscar statuette, and he told me everybody in the world gets a vote BUT people from VI-C


----------

