# Thoughts on best original score?



## SamGarnerStudios (Mar 3, 2014)

What are your thoughts on last night's Best Original Score award?


----------



## AR (Mar 3, 2014)

Steven deserved it absolutely. Great implementing score that serves the movie well. And all above: it was something new


----------



## Luke W (Mar 3, 2014)

I was hoping Thomas Newman would win it after 12 nominations and no wins. Kind of a nod to his entire body of work.


----------



## Mike Marino (Mar 3, 2014)

> I was hoping Thomas Newman would win it after 12 nominations and no wins. Kind of a nod to his entire body of work.



+1

Congrats to Steven on his win.


----------



## snowleopard (Mar 3, 2014)

Agree with all of you. Newman is long, long, overdue. It's almost laughable that he hasn't won. 

But I do think Price deserved the Oscar as his music very much fit the film, he was asked to do a little more than your average score (considering the sound design) and as AR said, it was something fairly new.


----------



## pkm (Mar 3, 2014)

I agree Newman is overdue too. I think these guys with a zillion nominations (John Williams, Thomas Newman, even Alexandre Desplat in the last 8 years, etc.) have a tougher time winning nowadays. If Newman didn't win for American Beauty, which totally changed film and tv music until The Dark Knight came along, or for Shawshank Redemption, which is almost universally loved and respected (while sure, it was against another Newman score, Forrest Gump, and The Lion King), is Saving Mr. Banks the one to finally win it for him?

It seems like there are the Oscar staples and the other guy, who has been winning lately. Steven Price won against JW, Desplat, and Newman; Mychael Danna won against JW, Desplat, and Newman; Ludovic Bource won against JW, Howard Shore, and another JW; Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross won against John Powell, Hans Zimmer, and Desplat; Michael Giacchino won against Horner, Desplat, and Zimmer; AR Rahman won against Desplat, JNH, Elfman, and Newman. The pattern continues backwards too.

The academy likes "new and fresh", and the staples have been giving them "tried and true" (not that there's anything wrong with that!)

Personally, I was pulling for Steven Price, but would have been very pleased by a Newman win.


----------



## mverta (Mar 3, 2014)

I will never win an Oscar, but I think that if I did, these days I'd feel like the Valedictorian of summer school.


----------



## jaeroe (Mar 3, 2014)

Steve Price's score was the best. It offered something new and was amazingly effective. A really really important part of the experience of the film. The other nominees were quality scores, but Price's score was really a notch above.

And by the way, he didn't just drop out of the sky. Just hasn't been given a big shot until late. He's worked with a huge number of people and can do it all. Very versatile and talented guy. I wouldn't mention people like Trent Reznor in the same sentence with him.


----------



## Inductance (Mar 3, 2014)

I think the Oscar was well-deserved for Steven Price, although I wouldn't have cried "foul" if one of the other scores had won. Price certainly had a challenge, since he was supposed to fill in the gap left behind by the absence of sound effects. I think he did a great job. And at the end, he brings it home with more emotional material. I absolutely love the last two tracks of the score album.


----------



## snowleopard (Mar 3, 2014)

That’s a very true response there. I imagine what we may be seeing is the Yin & Yang of the scoring world, where a composer becomes hot for an original, cinematic sound, and they either catch that wave to an Oscar (Price, Renzor & Ross, AR Rahman, Tan Dun, Dudley, Sakamoto, Byrne & Su, Vangelis, Legrande, Lai, etc), or they don’t (Newman, Desplat, others). And despite not winning when "hot" their wave continues on to a long, successful career. One where more often than they probably wish, they get pushed into repeating their sound, and despite some amazing efforts - even to the contrary of said sound - that is how they are known. Until they start to get old and the Academy comes to its senses and hands them an Oscar. 

This same theory doesn’t apply just to composers though. Look at Martin Scorsese. And of course it doesn't apply to every composer (Danna, Zimmer, Horner were working for a while before winning). 

I’ve always thought the nomination meant almost as much as the award, as it’s the peers that determine the nominees, with the general mass vote of the Academy choosing the winner. Then again, who said the Oscars were objective and made perfect sense anyway?


----------



## givemenoughrope (Mar 3, 2014)

mverta @ Mon Mar 03 said:


> I will never win an Oscar, but I think that if I did, these days I'd feel like the Valedictorian of summer school.



You didn't win. So, how do you feel now?

//

I'm sure Desplat and Newman aren't worried about being pigeonholed at this point like the Oscar seems to do to some. I agree with whoever said that the Academy likes "new" since the ceremony is already so boring that everyone is simply waiting for something funny or awkward to happen.

//

I wasn't a huge fan of Gravity (I feel like the director actually picked up a trophy for children of Men which was great) and therefore it kind of killed the score for me in a way. On second listen away from the picture I feel like the opening few cues are really inventive sonically. How do you do music in space? they must have been plagued with that question along the way. I think they towed that line as well as anyone could. Congrats to Stephen Price.


----------



## handz (Mar 3, 2014)

Not happy about it but of course not surprised, Oscars are not reflection of whatI think is good and what is not for a long time now (strange how in the past I had no problem with many nominations and was wishing it to any of them, now I cant found anything good sometimes). 

About the "it served the movie well" Yeah, as does almost any A grade movie music, but that is not the point. I do not like the score at all, sounds like updated 80s B movie score to me. Nothing memorable or standing apart. Strange days.


----------



## The Darris (Mar 3, 2014)

As much as I dislike where film music is going nowadays, though I am trying to embrace it, Steven did an amazing job on that movie and was well deserving of the award. Every score nominated was amazing in that sense as well. The thing that made Steven's score stand out to me was the fact that it was a main character in the film. I feel the movie would not have done as good without that score.


----------



## Lex (Mar 3, 2014)

I'm very happy about it, it was the most original score out of 5 (not that the Academy cared about it, but still...)

alex


----------



## Vin (Mar 4, 2014)

_Her_ was my favorite, but _Gravity_ was good as well so I wasn't dissapointed.


----------



## KEnK (Mar 4, 2014)

Best Score?
Best?
Really?

Bull...

Wake up people.
The Emperor has no clothes.

complete nonsense

k


----------



## Inductance (Mar 4, 2014)

btw, I'm surprised Hans didn't get nominated for 12 Years a Slave. I haven't seen the film, but the bits of music I've heard sound very emotional and inspired. It was an important movie, so the moment seemed right for Hans. (Also, I'm disappointed that the only soundtrack version available is a "Music from and inspired by" album, which has all of two Hans Zimmer tracks.)


----------



## Simon Ravn (Mar 4, 2014)

Deserved! It really did a lot for the film and was a big part of the experience.


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (Mar 4, 2014)

Totally deserved.
It fits the picture perfectly and that's what it's about.


----------



## KEnK (Mar 4, 2014)

An entirely forgettable score fit an entirely forgettable picture.

But maybe a remarkable score would've brought the picture up a notch or two.

It's nothing but pads- not even "sound design"
I listened to the whole thing before posting- excruciating.

Can you hum a single melody or rhythm from it?
I think not.

k


----------



## Simon Ravn (Mar 4, 2014)

I can't, because the score wasn't about melody, it was about soundscape and motion. But I certainly can recall its sound in my head.


----------



## KEnK (Mar 4, 2014)

An interesting point Simon.

In as much as "Melody" has traditionally been considered an essential ingredient in what defines music, 
taken one step further it means that "Best Score" is no longer about "Music".

I think this is in fact where we are.

k


----------



## givemenoughrope (Mar 4, 2014)

I can't whistle Ligeti -Atmospheres or Scelsi st qt #4. Music doesn't always have a show tune dancing on top of it. True, it makes it easier or at least more obvious in terms of development. 

Anyone have any clue how they achieved those noise-y riser things in the first few cues? Pink noise through a LPF?


----------



## KEnK (Mar 4, 2014)

Huge difference between the atonal works you mentioned and a bunch of synth pads.
And melody doesn't mean "show tune" :roll: 

Ives, Schoenberg, Bartok, Stravinsky etc. all used melody.


----------



## givemenoughrope (Mar 4, 2014)

Hyperbole, Ken.
I think it's obvious that these 'synth pads' (you make them sound like presets who should get a credit on the cue sheet) are the modern film/electronic music equivalent. Do they use the theoretical rules of Palestrina? No, but they evoke the same 'space'. I still think all of this points back to Kubrick's films creatively. Ligeti was once again used in a trailer (the new Godzilla which looks great) to good effect. I just think everyone is bemoaning the death of the film score when really I think that there are still a bunch of avenues just opening up.


----------



## jaredcowing (Mar 4, 2014)

To me this score was really about timbre and sound design, and it married the film very well. Personally I found the climactic music was too repetitive, far from original from a harmonic standpoint. To me a little more creativity with harmony and harmonic rhythm (I don't mean Schoenberg, I just mean some variation from IV-vi-I-V block chords) would have made the music even more effective, but it still worked. I find it exciting that it really grabbed listeners and tried some very, very cool things sonically- I think more people now realize how powerful music can be in film as a result.
At the same time, I hope this wasn't sending another signal that the over-and-over block-cord approach to harmony was always going to trump other styles in the "powerful/epic" department- variety is still good!! If the next Oscar goes to a score that sounds like Gravity, and the next and the next, I'll be worried, but as it stands I think it was refreshing and was glad to see it win. Really would have been nice to see Thomas Newman finally get a nod though it certainly wasn't his strongest score.


----------



## AC986 (Mar 4, 2014)

You have all approached this subject from entirely the wrong angle.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 4, 2014)

Simon Ravn @ Tue Mar 04 said:


> I can't, because the score wasn't about melody, it was about soundscape and motion. But I certainly can recall its sound in my head.



Yes, me too. If I hear a little clip of that distinctive sound... I don't even know how to describe it, it's not a motif, but it sort of IS the film, or rather the chaos, much like those two low cello notes ARE the shark in Jaws. I wasn't even aware of it when I was watching the film, but the second I heard it afterwards, I was "oooooooooooooohhhhh that's goooooooood...."

I love Newman, but the academy blew it on Shawshank, Brockovich, Nemo... don't feel its right to take it away from Price at this point for their past sins....


----------



## KEnK (Mar 4, 2014)

Yes- it does sound like synth presets to me.
A sawtooth is a sawtooth.
I hear presets all the time.
But no need to continue arguing about it-

I just think it's an extremely weak recipient for "Best Score of the Year".
(and I'm not alone)
I also thought the Social Network score was undeserved as well.

Those 2 taken together would seem to make "Best Score" little more than a hoax.
(And render the award meaningless, which it is anyway)

But I will ask one more q to those who like it.
Have you listened to it on it's own?
or are you remembering it in Glorious 3D?

If not, please do- then post your thoughts.

k


----------



## Simon Ravn (Mar 4, 2014)

KEnK, I haven't listened to it on its own yet. And yes, I watched the movie in "glorious" 3D (actually I think this is the first 3D movie I saw where 3D worked).

Anyway - what is your point? That the music should be interesting outside the film to deserve a "Best Score" award?


----------



## dcoscina (Mar 4, 2014)

I gave up on the Oscars after John Powell's HTTYD lost to The Social Network. A score that was basically sound scapes beating out a score that played an integral part in the film's narrative (Powell's) just showed me that the Oscars were all about popularity and trendiness and not a reflection of cinematic achievement. 

I almost gave up years earlier when Williams' Memoirs of a Geisha, one of his finest scores in his illustrious career insofar as how it played against the tapestry of the film, lost to Santaollala's simple guitar ditty....

To quote Salierie from Amadeus "mediocrities everywhere..."


----------



## AC986 (Mar 4, 2014)

Do any of you seriously assume that winning an Oscar or Bafta is for something that is best or better than something else?


----------



## dcoscina (Mar 4, 2014)

givemenoughrope @ Tue Mar 04 said:


> I can't whistle Ligeti -Atmospheres or Scelsi st qt #4. Music doesn't always have a show tune dancing on top of it. True, it makes it easier or at least more obvious in terms of development.
> 
> Anyone have any clue how they achieved those noise-y riser things in the first few cues? Pink noise through a LPF?



But if you look at the conductor's score for that piece, it's massive and reflects the thought process of an intelligent, creative mind. 

I don't think comparing Ligeti with Price or anyone writing film music for mainstream films is really possible. Except maybe John Corigliano and Elliot Goldenthal both whom haven't scored an A list film in ages....


----------



## KEnK (Mar 4, 2014)

Simon Ravn @ Tue Mar 04 said:


> KEnK, I haven't listened to it on its own yet. And yes, I watched the movie in "glorious" 3D (actually I think this is the first 3D movie I saw where 3D worked).
> 
> Anyway - what is your point? That the music should be interesting outside the film to deserve a "Best Score" award?


Exactly that.

or it simply isn't the "Best".


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 4, 2014)

KEnK @ Tue Mar 04 said:


> Simon Ravn @ Tue Mar 04 said:
> 
> 
> > KEnK, I haven't listened to it on its own yet. And yes, I watched the movie in "glorious" 3D (actually I think this is the first 3D movie I saw where 3D worked).
> ...



Disagree. If an actor turns in a powerful, tear jerking, spectacular performance in a light comedy, they shouldn't win any awards. Implicit in every category is Best XXXX _THAT SERVES PICTURE._ How much did it help the picture? Nothing else matters. If it sounds nice on a soundtrack CD, that's a happy by-product.

You clearly have your view that its a bunch of presets - fine, your point is made. Most of the rest of us can hear there's a lot more going on. The sound and music in Gravity were a huge part of the soul of that film, and the three awards that the film received in these categories were well deserved.


----------



## KEnK (Mar 4, 2014)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Aw ... inal_Score

Look at this list- Bottom of the page
Social Network and Gravity stick out like the sore thumbs that they are.

I rest my case 8)


----------



## givemenoughrope (Mar 4, 2014)

dcoscina @ Tue Mar 04 said:


> givemenoughrope @ Tue Mar 04 said:
> 
> 
> > I can't whistle Ligeti -Atmospheres or Scelsi st qt #4. Music doesn't always have a show tune dancing on top of it. True, it makes it easier or at least more obvious in terms of development.
> ...



I'm not putting down Ligeti as unintelligent or creative at all. I think he's peerless. To a director or to the non-musician public music is supposed to achieve whatever re: atmosphere, aesthetic, narrative, etc. They are absolutely comparable in that sense. Drag them both into Cubase against some footage and you just compared them. Which music is do you like better, Moby or Goldenthal? Which is better for the last scene in Heat? Are you guys going to the movies to listen to music? Could scores be more nuanced and varied harmonically? Will the producers let you write like that?


----------



## KEnK (Mar 4, 2014)

givemenoughrope @ Tue Mar 04 said:


> Could scores be more nuanced and varied harmonically? Will the producers let you write like that?


Not to long ago that was the norm.
Everything about the industry now is more confined and contrived.

We're in Hollywood's "Guy w/ Cape" period.
Remakes of T.V. shows, sequels, prequels.
It's not a good period when you look at the History of Cinema.

Occasionally (and rarely) something creative and meaningful happens.

The Score from Nebraska was amazing in it's stark simplicity.
Kind of shocking and new in that regard.
Fit the film amazingly well,
and the music became a "Character" w/o being cliche.
Check that one out if you haven't

k


----------



## givemenoughrope (Mar 4, 2014)

I've been meaning to. I will.


----------



## AC986 (Mar 4, 2014)

KEnK @ Tue Mar 04 said:


> givemenoughrope @ Tue Mar 04 said:
> 
> 
> > It's not a good period when you look at the History of Cinema.
> ...



Absolutely. I've always said you can't beat Buchannon Rides Alone.


----------



## Lex (Mar 4, 2014)

KEnK @ Tue Mar 04 said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Award_for_Best_Original_Score
> 
> Look at this list- Bottom of the page
> Social Network and Gravity stick out like the sore thumbs that they are.
> ...



Sir, I was wondering who are you? Your profile doesn't have links of any kind. I would love to follow your personal musical career considering you just took enormous dump, several times all over oscar winning work with such authority and sureness.

alex


----------



## handz (Mar 4, 2014)

Simon Ravn @ Tue Mar 04 said:


> Anyway - what is your point? That the music should be interesting outside the film to deserve a "Best Score" award?



Yes I think so. It have to be something more than supportive sound design. Name 4 scores for A movies that made the experience bad or were destroying the mood.

I think you cant, because most movies, even the bad ones have music that works well for them, actually even music did with some oldest samples and synths for 70s b movies usually work well in movie, because you dont focus on music only. Maybe even music that would use fart as sample would work great in some films and it will be for sure original, but being original is not so hard in music, just use some crazy stuff, but is it enjoyable to listen, often not. 

but to me to get award - music should have something more, something really memorable. 

In 70/80/90 this was like this, melodies and music that even people who not listen OSTs knows, this is not happening now and it is sad.


----------



## jleckie (Mar 4, 2014)

Well deserved Steven. The academy finally came to their senses.


----------



## Simon Ravn (Mar 5, 2014)

handz @ Wed Mar 05 said:


> Simon Ravn @ Tue Mar 04 said:
> 
> 
> > Anyway - what is your point? That the music should be interesting outside the film to deserve a "Best Score" award?
> ...



I don't know what anything you wrote except the last paragraph has to do with what we're discussing - unless you think Steven Price's score for Gravity made the movie worse or even a bad experience. Is this what you think about the score? I don't think you think so - but even if you did, ask the normal moviegoer who gives sh*t about the music, as long as it doesn't annoy them and make them cover their ears. I doubt you'll find any normal movie goer who will say that the music in Gravity made the movie a bad experience for them.... 8) 

Noone here said that being original just for originalitys sake is great or that this is what the Gravity score is about. I don't really care about originality - I care about whether it works in the movie, and even better whether it enhances the movie experience - and I certainly think Steven's score did that - I felt it was a huge part of the movie's style and expression - just as Jaws, Star Wars and a lot of other successful scores have been in the past.

And as for your notion about people who don't even listen to OST's remembering film music from the 70s/80s/90s.... aaaargh... Maybe you can find a few "normal" people who can hum and recognize Star Wars, The Godfather and Harry Potter - but most of them will mix up Star Wars with E.T. or Superman, and if you ask them to sing or hum any tune they remember from a movie, it will most likely be a song - not a piece of score.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 5, 2014)

Simon Ravn @ Wed Mar 05 said:


> Noone here said that being original just for originalitys sake is great or that this is what the Gravity score is about. I don't really care about originality - I care about whether it works in the movie, and even better whether it enhances the movie experience - and I certainly think Steven's score did that - I felt it was a huge part of the movie's style and expression - just as Jaws, Star Wars and a lot of other successful scores have been in the past.
> 
> And as for your notion about people who don't even listen to OST's remembering film music from the 70s/80s/90s.... aaaargh... Maybe you can find a few "normal" people who can hum and recognize Star Wars, The Godfather and Harry Potter - but most of them will mix up Star Wars with E.T. or Superman, and if you ask them to sing or hum any tune they remember from a movie, it will most likely be a song - not a piece of score.



Very good.

I do think about 50% of composers here are in the wrong job. Stuff in films and TV appears to be a nuisance that gets in the way of a lovely piece of music. A score has to do one job and one job only - support the movie.

I honestly think these people would be much happier in their lives if they were honest with themselves, forgot about media composing entirely and pursued concert music.


----------



## handz (Mar 5, 2014)

Simon:

"I don't really care about originality - I care about whether it works in the movie, and even better whether it enhances the movie experience "

What I said was that every "A movie" score does that quite well - support the film, and I dont see this one did it so better than others. Doing music that supports the picture is one thing, doing music that supports picture and it is also good on its own is second and for me much more important.

"And as for your notion about people who don't even listen to OST's remembering film music from the 70s/80s/90s.... aaaargh... Maybe you can find a few "normal" people who can hum and recognize Star Wars, The Godfather and Harry Potter - but most of them will mix up Star Wars with E.T. or Superman, and if you ask them to sing or hum any tune they remember from a movie, it will most likely be a song - not a piece of score."

It is not few people for sure. It does not matter if they confuse movies, but they know them. Those are recognizable pieces of music. Heck even some Ligetti from 2001 and Shining is more recognizable than music from Gravity. In those years m talking about most of Awards were won by scores with recognizable and now classic themes - and of course, they were enhancing the mood of the movies they were in too.


----------



## SamGarnerStudios (Mar 5, 2014)

I find it a weird position to be as a young 20 year old in that I feel like I grew up on the tail end of these great film scores with classic themes and hummable melodies, but also grew up in the beginning of I would call the "I bVI" era. The saying "Newer is always better, and that's my oldest rule" resonates with me on what film music is now and what it used to be. They all serve the picture, just in a different way. I personally don't think Gravity was a better piece of music then some of the other pieces of music, but I think the argument of which music served the picture better is very valid. I listened to the soundtrack again this morning, and I could really relive the movie while not even watching. Maybe this score did that more than some of the other ones, who knows. 

Gravity was an original and innovative score, and very fresh and new; if you haven't watched some of his interviews on how he created the sounds, you should, it's interesting. 

Another thing to ponder is that is we talk about how film scoring is dead, i.e melody is dead, nobody could hum the melody of Gravity (even though I could scream louder and louder then instantly close my mouth to dead silence, my favorite part of the score is when the music is doing this), but whose fault is it that we can't hum pad design, original sound creation, and big fat synth pads, an element that didn't exist in John Williams scores. 

There has been a transition from innovative and fresh melodies to innovative and fresh sounds and pads; I don't like it, but life sucks.


----------



## Vin (Mar 5, 2014)

I disagree with all that "melody is gone" thing. There are plenty of fantastic, melodic film scores. A few examples:









etc.

_Gravity_ was good, but definitely not the best or the most memorable score of the year. I don't take Oscars very seriously...


----------



## handz (Mar 5, 2014)

Melody is not dead, but sadly there is some urge in movie industry to put that "new kind of music" into more and more movies, to look new and fresh. I just hope this is another short period and they will come to their senses again like it was in 80s when after that synths and jazz experimetnal soundtracks era, they returned to classical symphonic, romantic style of music. It is probably periodic. After some time, they want to come with something "new" but then they realise that what is already best dont need to upgrade. I hope so.

" The saying "Newer is always better, and that's my oldest rule""

May work with women (Barney?) But for sure this is not true with culture nowdays. Commercial Movies & Music - no way. I of course love some new stuff but you have to dig deep, the mainstream is full of crappy stuff more than before.


----------



## KEnK (Mar 5, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Wed Mar 05 said:


> ...I do think about 50% of composers here are in the wrong job. Stuff in films and TV appears to be a nuisance that gets in the way of a lovely piece of music. A score has to do one job and one job only - support the movie.
> 
> I honestly think these people would be much happier in their lives if they were honest with themselves, forgot about media composing entirely and pursued concert music.


Guy-

Just to clarify my position.
I'm not seeking a career in film music, 
though I do the occasional project when I'm sought out.

The thread title is "Thoughts on Best Original Score".

Whether or not a bunch of synth pads fit w/ a Saturday Afternoon Space Adventure
is not the question.

The question is - Is this the Best Score?
And I state again that it is not even close.

Why should it matter to me how a bunch of Elite 1%-ers choose to congratulate themselves?

The problem is I still like movies.
And I object to the trends keeping me out of the theaters.
It's really that simple.

k


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 5, 2014)

KenK - the jibe about synth pads gets that little bit more tiresome and desperate every time you repeat it. I don't see anyone else agreeing with you, and I don't see anyone else suddenly convinced by your argument. So why keep on?

You clearly think that a film score is assessed on something that stands apart from a film, but there's not really any evidence to back that up. It's not an award for Best Music Coincidentally Used In A Film or an award for Best Music That Sounds Great On Its Own Even Though It Was Used In A Film. It's Best Score, and that's what a film score is - music to accompany a film. Do they give the sound guys an award for some cool sound effects that sound great on their own? Does the award go to the costume designer whose frocks look the most beautiful in a shop window?

Etc etc.

Folks spent a fair bit of the last decade begrudging Gustavo Santaolalla - the trend for non-classic-orchestral scores is older than you seem to think it is. Hell, Vangelis won with a bunch of synths in 1981. Come to think of it, jazz ruined everything in the 50s. Don't get me wrong - I love classic scores too - in the case of The Social Network year, I do think it was a shame that HTTYD missed out because it was genuinely exceptional. The Social Network's score was terrific, and it did have a huge impact on the picture so I don't begrudge that either, but frankly everything else from the past decade pales next to HTTYD imo.

But, of course, the classic score is far from dead. There is certainly a trend right now for hybrid stuff and ambitious sound design and its a shame you can't appreciate it, but fear not, all things come round again.


----------



## dcoscina (Mar 5, 2014)

Melody isn't dead but harmony is pretty close to being extinct. At least harmony in the way John Williams employs it. Barely any other composer has that sense of expansive harmonic extensions and atypical resolutions. 

Does it make a film better? Not necessarily but does it allow the composer to paint various scenes with more feeling and emotion? I say yes it does. It allows for greater range of emotional shadings by being able to put a theme under different harmonies...

But that's just me. I'm 46 years old so I'm one of the oldies...


----------



## KEnK (Mar 5, 2014)

tiresome and desperate ?

I thought we were having a little fun.

My previous post was addressed to you because I didn't want you to misread my position.
But in your follow up post to me you are attributing views to me that I don't have and said nothing about. 

I tried.

Thanks for listening.

k


----------



## AC986 (Mar 5, 2014)

KEnK @ Wed Mar 05 said:


> tiresome and desperate ?
> 
> I thought we were having a little fun.
> 
> ...



We are Ken and I do agree with you. o-[][]-o 

That said, I quit like synth pads in the right context. Think John Carpenter!

Think about the best scores and the best films for a second. But it's also subjective.

If you really REALLY want to get forensic, take a look at the nominated films and scores of 1960. Arguably some the best film music ever written in the context of the time (was Psycho even nominated?) I have no interest hhhhhhhhwhatsoever in Oscars apart from it must be a good night out for the winners AND the runner up. There are no losers. If I was at an Oscar party I would spend most of my time networking with good looking actresses. I would naturally take Chimuelo with me for obvious moral support. Wouldn't give a shit who won what.

Thomas Newman. He must love the Oscars and the whole ceremony by now. You can't really take any of it seriously after The Shawshank Redemption.

Films win filmscores. :wink:


----------



## jaeroe (Mar 5, 2014)

they have an award for best score on its own - it's a grammy called 'best score soundtrack album for visual media'.

the oscars are for film. it's not 'concerto for film score' - it's best score for a motion picture. catchy melody isn't required for good or memorable music. but, this score is quite memorable and quite good. it works incredibly well for the film - and it does offer plenty new. the other scores were quality stuff, but i can't say they really offered anything new. not that that alone is a requirement, but Gravity i thought was a very effective film and it was hugely indebted to its score for that effectiveness. 

the film had plenty of new offerings to the film experience. it was a fantastic use of 3D - not as a gimmick, but as an integral part of the story and film experience. the score was extremely effective at achieving a sense of spinning and being out of control and did so in a way we hadn't seen before - and with the lack of sound, the score had to take up extra slack.

there have been a fair amount of scores that won best score over the years whose films didn't really make any sort of dent (red violin and frida coming to mind quickest of the last 15 years). there have been plenty of scores that have won against far better competition that i thought were just ridiculous (social network, broke back mountain, babel).

in the end - to me, a good, effective score brings you into the world of the film and its characters and often times without making itself known too much. first and foremost, a score should server the film. it's not always about being new or the most innovative or having a catchy melody. sometimes a catchy melody/accessible melody does a film a disservice.

john williams is no doubt one of the best film composers we've seen, and his knowledge of the orchestra is outstanding. but, from a musical perspective, he is often extremely derivative - out and out rip offs at times. but, he always works extremely well to picture. of late, the two scores of his that stood out most to me have been Catch Me If You Can and Minority Report. his big sprawling orchestral approach is a bit over done sometimes and does take me out of films sometimes.

if you think the Gravity score is just a bunch of pads, i don't think you've given it a proper listen. as has been suggested, you might want to read up on how the score was created, as well.


----------



## KEnK (Mar 5, 2014)

jaeroe @ Wed Mar 05 said:


> if you think the Gravity score is just a bunch of pads, i don't think you've given it a proper listen. as has been suggested, you might want to read up on how the score was created, as well.


I'm going to be done w/ this thread now-
because we're at a point where I'm having to answer repeated misunderstandings.

As I said in one of my very 1st posts, I listened to the entire thing end to end before posting.
I also saw the film in the theater.

I don't care if it served the film or not. This was never an issue I raised.

And as to what what term you choose to use for whooshings, hissings and what have you, 
it still bears little on my simple yet apparently outrageous message.

All I said was that it's not the best score of the year.
Some people agree.

How dare I have the audacity to express a conflicting opinion? :roll: 

I'm done here,
thanks


----------



## givemenoughrope (Mar 5, 2014)

The best score of the year is Only God Forgives. Pads and presets aplenty in that score I'm sure.


----------



## JohnG (Mar 5, 2014)

I was disappointed that Gravity won too. I don't like or admire that kind of music.

Without wishing to contradict or adopt a perverse position, overall I view "serving the film" as a dubious standard in evaluating film music. This has been driven home to me while coping with temp music in projects I've worked on. It's disturbing to me to see how wildly different musical approaches, well crafted or not, work pretty effectively for a given scene in a film.

I know there is a lot to talk about there so I don't mean to hit and run, but anyway...

I wish Thomas Newman had won, even if it was for a fairy tale, because I feel he's a superb writer and an innovator, and he is in full command of the medium -- orchestras, synths, electric guitars, voice, "regular" and unusual instruments -- all of it.


----------



## jaeroe (Mar 5, 2014)

KEnK @ Wed Mar 05 said:


> jaeroe @ Wed Mar 05 said:
> 
> 
> > if you think the Gravity score is just a bunch of pads, i don't think you've given it a proper listen. as has been suggested, you might want to read up on how the score was created, as well.
> ...



it's all just opinion - no one's saying any laws have been broken. when i said 'you might want to give it a proper listen' i was referring to there being a lot more than a bunch of pads in the score. it is possible for someone to 'listen' to something and not really take it in.

what fits a definition or qualification for you on several issues just doesn't seem to agree with how some other people figure things. i never said you were being outrageous - but, you certainly don't have much respect for the Gravity score. what you're saying just seems narrow sighted and somewhat illogical to me (e.g. music coming down to melody, etc). but, that's just me - and that's my opinion. to me, how a score serves a film is a fundamental criteria of 'achievement in original music for a motion picture.'

i agree that studio filmmaking today is generally a shadow of its former self, but there are still plenty of respectable films and scores coming out. some conform more to the old model and some to newer ones. i just wouldn't lump Gravity or its score in the camp of unremarkable/underwhelming junk coming out today. filmmaking is a tough tough racket these days - at all sizes (and for different reasons). the time and budget (and thus often creativity) allotted for everything but the biggest of films has shrunk considerably over the decades. but still, i would contend there are some very good things out there, as well as plenty of crap from the days of yore.


----------



## dedersen (Mar 6, 2014)

KEnK @ Tue Mar 04 said:


> An entirely forgettable score fit an entirely forgettable picture.
> 
> But maybe a remarkable score would've brought the picture up a notch or two.
> 
> ...


I can understand opinions and differences in these, but I will never be able to understand the arrogance displayed in a post like this one.


----------



## KEnK (Mar 6, 2014)

It's being passionate about the Art.

And I don't think honestly sharing my perspective is arrogant.
I never said "I" could do better, 
only that I think it's a weak choice and why.

Now if you'll excuse me,
I'd like to return to lurking in my cave,
where I'll keep my fetid and foul opinions to myself.


----------



## AC986 (Mar 6, 2014)

Don't do that Ken. Absolutely no need.

Yeah. Serving the film/picture/movie. That's an emotive one. It definitely has to do that or you might as well stick a German Oooompah Band on everything. Or even an English one.

So that's a given for every film ever made. Ergo, how is serving the film in anyway got to with anything? It is in no way a barometer on Ken's point here. It is certainly not an arrogant point either. 

In my case I don't get too involved with the music. I just like to see good films. Last night I watched Laughter in Paradise. Great score. I think.


----------



## KEnK (Mar 6, 2014)

adriancook @ Thu Mar 06 said:


> Yeah. Serving the film/picture/movie. That's an emotive one. It definitely has to do that or you might as well stick a German Oooompah Band on everything. Or even an English one.


Things have become so formulaic that that is essentially what's happening.
No, we don't use Bavarian Beer Hall Music,
but we use other devices just as much, just as generically.

The I/VI Chord Structures people talk about,
The Endless String Arpeggios
The "Epic" Toms.
The Poignant Piano Sound.

These have all become the cookie cutter devices of the day.
Just drop any of it in, cut & paste style.


And thanks for your vote of confidence Adrian o-[][]-o 

k


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 6, 2014)

KEnK @ Thu Mar 06 said:


> The I/VI Chord Structures people talk about,
> The Endless String Arpeggios
> The "Epic" Toms.
> The Poignant Piano Sound.



The absence of all of those is just one more reason to love Gravity :D

Smart alek comments aside, just imagine a modern conventional "exciting" action score over Gravity. Definitely makes me appreciate Price's achievement even more.


----------



## bimberl (Mar 6, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Thu Mar 06 said:


> KEnK @ Thu Mar 06 said:
> 
> 
> > The I/VI Chord Structures people talk about,
> ...



Amen.

Even if it's not your favorite score of the year it's so clearly worthy of respect. Cuaron, by the way, is extremely knowledgeable about contemporary concert music I'm told. This is what he wanted-- as a creative choice, not a lack of cultural refinement or desperation to be cool-- and Price delivered it really well.


----------



## H.R. (Mar 6, 2014)

It's a tricky thing. I can't stand listening to Gravity but yet it's just "genius" and works magnificently with the picture. Isn't that the final goal to make a proper "Soundtrack" not just a good music ? 

But in my opinion Alexander Ebert's "All is Lost" is the best score of the year. very fresh and intimate.


----------



## AC986 (Mar 6, 2014)

[quote="KEnK @ Thu Mar 06, 2014 12:56 pm"


And thanks for your vote of confidence Adrian 

k[/quote]

You don't need a vote of confidence Ken. I don't buy into worrying about what other people think or say in the sense it tries make anyone look stupid or somehow isolated and against the tide. That is bollocks and I always look forward to any opportunity I get to go against the tide providing its genuine, and so should anyone else.


----------



## jaeroe (Mar 6, 2014)

It's comments like 'it's just a bunch of pads....not even sound design' and the insistence that a score has to have a hummable melody to be good that i find way off the mark.

arrogant? - i don't know. but, you certainly seem dismissive. either that or you don't hear/listen very well. you didn't hear brass in the score? there are all sorts of orchestral elements - even a singer. not that all of that is necessary for a score, but there is a lot more going on than a bunch of pads.

if you don't like it that's fine. the reasons you keep referring to just don't make much sense to me.

when i watched the movie in the theater, i was gripping my seat in places. i see a lot of movies, and that happens rarely to me. i try to just 'watch' a film the first time i see it - no try to analyze too much. but, at a certain point it dawned on me that the music was very much responsible for engrossing me in the film and really keeping me there. it did that extremely well and was very dynamic - all the while not taking me out of the film one bit. that's why i thought it was the best score this year.

on reflection, he was presented with some unique issues to solve and did so very well.


----------



## choc0thrax (Mar 6, 2014)

Good to see this one won. It kicks the crap out of all the other contenders. While like many I would have preferred all the space destruction scenes to be very melodic( maybe something like the flute solo from "You are the Pan"? or the Seaquest DSV theme?) I still found the music fit quite well despite the bizarre lack of trumpet fanfares.

Here's to hoping that one of the 30 film scores Desplat will write this year will finally nab him that elusive quality-requiring award.


----------



## KEnK (Mar 6, 2014)

Jaeroe-

I invite you to not care at all about my opinion.
But I will address some things you brought up.

Pad-
To me a pad is defined as a bunch of things that happen when I play a single key.
These things are pre programmed, preset if you will.
There is little to none of the kind of interaction that one gets from applying vibrato,
or altering the timbre of an instrument through breath or bow for example. 
I love synthesizers and am quite comfortable programming complex patches.
Perhaps my orientation is off putting to you, but by my definition, 
a Pad is a complex evolving series of events that happen automatically.

I heard what I call pads in that score.

I never said a score needs to have a hummable melody.
Rather, what I said was that traditionally, most definitions of Music include Melody.

One of my favorite scores is Oscar Sala's "The Birds"
No melody there either.
I made no references to a preferred instrumentation.

I listened very carefully to the entire score before posting.
I listened to some pieces more than once as my attention wavered.
I did hear some violins and a voice- but mostly I heard a lot of droning.
This is a structural assessment of the compositions.

If I pay money for something, and I don't like it, I get to make a judgement.
This might include dinner, consumer goods, software, or in this case a Movie Score.

I left the theater after seeing Gravity and I couldn't actually remember hearing any music at all. 
I was not moved or deeply involved by it in any way.
To me it disappeared immediately.

I was quite surprised when it won Best Score.
That's why I listened intently to it again before posting.
Again, I simply don't think it's the Best thing anyone did All Year.
So yes- I "dismiss" it as "Best Score". 
And I further dismiss the Corporate Award Structure as a Hoax. >8o 
So what?

But I will say this-
Some of you are so passionately appalled by my not liking this score,
that I will listen to it again.

Not today though- I don't have time

k


----------



## jaeroe (Mar 6, 2014)

KEnK @ Thu Mar 06 said:


> I was quite surprised when it won Best Score.
> That's why I listened intently to it again before posting.
> Again, I simply don't think it's the Best thing anyone did All Year.
> So yes- I "dismiss" it as "Best Score".
> ...



i assure you, i'm not particularly impassioned about this. maybe a little thick headed?

is what i've written showing up in all caps on your screen or something? i know the internet lacks inflection, but i'm a pretty mellow guy. it's just an exchange of ideas. i'm not saying 'how dare you'. i just disagree and a decent amount of what you wrote didn't hold water for me. it obviously did for some others. we'll all survive.

i totally agree that the oscars are pretty ridiculous (but, i'll still accept one if they want to give me one...). i mean, just look at the history of the oscars. they were started as a distraction so people wouldn't unionize and fight back against the big wigs raking in the dough and paying peanuts. it has somehow stuck around ever since (even though they did eventually unionize). like 'i haven't had a raise in years'..... 'how about a promotion?.... no pay increase, but you can have a new title of.....'

we've seen plenty of ridiculous things over the years. for f&*k's sake - morricone has never won best score??!!! (that is somehting i do get a little passionate about). mission and untouchables lost to round 'bout midnight and last emperor. i love me some herbie hancock, but that clearly won for the music, not the 'original music' for the film. and last emperor - respectable, but not better than morricone in my book.

if you want a good laugh, look at 'best picture' for the last 50 years. wow were they on they wrong side of history with a lot of stuff. not all, but a lot. 

i just think this year they got it right. and i say that because, while the others were quality, i didn't think they were particularly creative and i didn't think they served the film better than Gravity's score did its film. that's my reasoning. you may think my logic is full of horse poop. the visuals and the effect of the film offered a good amount of new stuff and the score met those demands in spades - in my book.


----------

