# 25th Bond movie scored by Hans Zimmer!!!



## Allen Constantine

What do you guys think?





__





Hans Zimmer to Score 25th James Bond Film ‘No Time to Die’ | Film Music Reporter


Hans Zimmer has been brought in to score the 25th James Bond film, No Time to Die. It has not been confirmed yet whether he will be taking sole composer credit



filmmusicreporter.com


----------



## Jdiggity1

He's a busy bee that HZ. 
Combined with Dune, Top Gun: Maverick, and Wonder Woman 1984 also slated for this year, he's sure to have his Hans full.

Please don't ban me​


----------



## Loïc D

Damn, well, Dan Rover got kicked out, which confirm what I thought in the first place.
I guess he was not a name big enough for EON...


----------



## TGV

Not my cup of tea, but perhaps he manages to do something interesting with the theme.


----------



## angeruroth

Speaking strictly about music, I think he can make something really interesting/unexpected with the well know bits everybody expects in a Bond soundtrack and make it unique, and I like that kind of surprises. But sometimes things are good and sometimes ain't so who can judge right now?
What I don't understand is this: whatever Zimmer does some people love it no matter what and some people hate it no matter what.


----------



## MartinH.

AllenConstantine said:


> What do you guys think?



1) the colorgrading in the trailer looks terrible imho (trashy teal and orange with all color subtleties crushed)
2) slightly surprised they are still making Bond movies


----------



## Olfirf

I think you guys misread something ...

“Zimmer (as executive music producer) and Steve Mazzaro (as the credited composer) have previously been hired to replace another composer“

Zimmer is not going to compose but just produce the soundtrack. Well, it probably doesn’t make so much difference, anyway.


----------



## Allen Constantine

Olfirf said:


> I think you guys misread something ...
> 
> “Zimmer (as executive music producer) and Steve Mazzaro (as the credited composer) have previously been hired to replace another composer“
> 
> Zimmer is not going to compose but just produce the soundtrack. Well, it probably doesn’t make so much difference, anyway.



You are right, just as you said, it won't make much difference. In the end, I think that most of the people at RCP had enough work for this :D


----------



## Richard Wilkinson

Olfirf said:


> I think you guys misread something ...
> 
> “Zimmer (as executive music producer) and Steve Mazzaro (as the credited composer) have previously been hired to replace another composer“
> 
> Zimmer is not going to compose but just produce the soundtrack. Well, it probably doesn’t make so much difference, anyway.


 Why did you chop off the end of that line, which makes it clear they're talking about a different film and not Bond?

I'm interested to hear what Romer did for this - I liked his work on Maniac a lot. Hopefully Zimmer will lean towards the Wallfisch side of things if he's getting help on Bond. Ben can _really_ write! Of course, so can Hans. He's not all crash-bang-wallop loops, and very much capable of the kind of musical and nimble score Bond needs.


----------



## Olfirf

Apologies for the lazy reading on my part. The executive producer is indeed for the other movie.
However, as I said: it won’t make much difference anyway.


----------



## ThomasNL

A bit glass half empty but with his tight schedule i am really afraid that it's going to be another movie with only dark zebra drones and pulses all over the place. But we will see...


----------



## Loïc D

ThomasNL said:


> A bit glass half empty but with his tight schedule i am really afraid that it's going to be another movie with only dark zebra drones and pulses all over the place. But we will see...


I really appreciated Thomas Newman scores for the last 2 movies.

It would not be the first time composers for Bond are hired at the last moment. IIRC, Goldeneye score was a bit epic to produce with that weird Eric Serra / John Altman distribution of tracks...


----------



## Lionel Schmitt

Not sure I've heard much of the kind of nimble action orchestration on HZ scores that I'd like to hear in James Bond. 
But maybe he goes down another road... I love Mombasa from Inception, maybe the action parts will be more "modern" like this. I hope there will be some more emotional moments as well, because the strong point of Hans scores has always been that side IMO. 

I'd be beyond excited of Benjamin Wallfisch would be the one! He has just so much mastery in just about every area and could combine the Newman and Arnold approach and take both to the next level with his own take. 
But well, maybe he'll still score it and we'll never know.


----------



## CT

I think Inception has a certain degree of the Bond vibe and class in it. I'll be interested to hear what he comes up with!


----------



## Consona

Hope it's not another MI:Fallout kind of stuff.


----------



## GtrString

Looking forward to that!


----------



## South Thames

> I think Inception has a certain degree of the Bond vibe and class in it. I'll be interested to hear what he comes up with!



Indeed. I often thought 'The Dream is Collapsing' hinted at good potential for Bond assignments - the ski scenes in that movie even made me wonder if that was a source of inspiration.

Newman somehow managed to get through two Bond assignments without creating even a single cue worth coming back to - just interminable textural noodling.

Zimmer on the other hand will hopefully rise the occasion.



> It would not be the first time composers for Bond are hired at the last moment. IIRC, Goldeneye score was a bit epic to produce with that weird Eric Serra / John Altman distribution of tracks...



John Barry himself was a last minute hire to spruce up Monty Norman's Bond theme.


----------



## Bluemount Score

AllenConstantine said:


> What do you guys think?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hans Zimmer to Score 25th James Bond Film ‘No Time to Die’ | Film Music Reporter
> 
> 
> Hans Zimmer has been brought in to score the 25th James Bond film, No Time to Die. It has not been confirmed yet whether he will be taking sole composer credit
> 
> 
> 
> filmmusicreporter.com


I think that it's not easy to imagine, but the more I'm curious


----------



## StefanoM

It Wil be Fantastic! Go, Hans !


----------



## dgburns

Imagine for a moment that in fact YOU are tasked with the score. What to do, what to do? Do you pay hommage to the best of what’s come before? Do you venture out into uncharted territory in a bid to refresh the franchise? Do you reference those now standard definitions ( surfed gtr, orchestration with muted brass, the lavish opulence of 60’s era spy as ladie’s man gentleman ) or do you move in tandem with the approach the recent ones took, where Bond is a bit colder, dirtier, more ruthless and maybe less suave? kinda fits the modern flow that’s out there now.

I’d probably want to make it a celebration of the best of old, but I’d be satisfied with an attempt to make it very modern, whatever complexion that eventually manifested sonically.

Hey, it’s Bond, it’ll be fun either way.


----------



## VinRice

You don't hire Hans for a film these days, you hire Hans plus at least 20 elves, so I think any preconceptions about style are nonsensical. Having said that, I think the idea of a Bond film will tickle Mr. Z so I suspect he will be a little more hands-on with this one. John Barry on steroids/acid.


----------



## jononotbono

I'm very excited to hear what HZ does! Can't wait!


----------



## ed buller

miket said:


> I think Inception has a certain degree of the Bond vibe and class in it. I'll be interested to hear what he comes up with!


 Well Johnny Marr is on board now !

best

e


----------



## CT

Wow, well there you have it!


----------



## Dave Connor

Hans will score the film and I bet it will be great. Also new, different and up to the challenge. All dependent on the film itself of course since that’s what speaks to him and determines the music.


----------



## jason.d

South Thames said:


> Indeed. I often thought 'The Dream is Collapsing' hinted at good potential for Bond assignments - the ski scenes in that movie even made me wonder if that was a source of inspiration.
> 
> Newman somehow managed to get through two Bond assignments without creating even a single cue worth coming back to - just interminable textural noodling.
> 
> Zimmer on the other hand will hopefully rise the occasion.
> 
> 
> 
> John Barry himself was a last minute hire to spruce up Monty Norman's Bond theme.



I kinda feel the same way. Although “Snow Plane” in Spectre was fun.


----------



## South Thames

Dave Connor said:


> Hans will score the film and I bet it will be great. Also new, different and up to the challenge. All dependent on the film itself of course since that’s what speaks to him and determines the music.



I hope not, since I'm fairly certain the film will be shite. Even the title 'No time to die' is dumb and uninteresting. Sounds like a Bond movie parody.


----------



## José Herring

He's dropping little hints here and there about the direction he's going in. I honestly thing It's going to be great. I think he's on to something new and exciting but also keeping in tradition with the Bond legacy.

Plus I love Johnny Marr's sound. It's going to be an interesting new twist on the traditional bond guitar sound.


----------



## KEM

Consona said:


> Hope it's not another MI:Fallout kind of stuff.



Fallout is probably one of if not my favorite scores ever, and I’d say it’s without a doubt the best action score ever made. But it seems like all the projects Lorne gets now he’s just asked to recreate that, so of course they sound awesome but nothing is topping Fallout. Do I think that could happen with Bond? Maybe. It’s certainly possible and I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s the kind of score they wanted, but I don’t think it’ll lean entirely in that direction.


----------



## Richard Wilkinson

KEM said:


> Fallout is probably one of if not my favorite scores ever, and I’d say it’s without a doubt the best action score ever made. But it seems like all the projects Lorne gets now he’s just asked to recreate that, so of course they sound awesome but nothing is topping Fallout. Do I think that could happen with Bond? Maybe. It’s certainly possible and I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s the kind of score they wanted, but I don’t think it’ll lean entirely in that direction.


 Have you heard Joe Kraemer's MI soundtrack? I know a lot of people love Fallout, but from a musical point of view - harmony, thematic development, interesting colours etc - I think Joe's is far better. So many scores use constant percussion as an easy win for action sequences, and I know it's not always easy to change the director's mind but I think Fallout is a very good example of the kind of early-2000's action score turned up to 11. But best action score ever made? Schifrin, Goldsmith, Don Davis, Williams, Powell?
That's not to say Lorne isn't capable of more musical scores - he's done plenty. Just that Fallout is a very crowd-pleasy sort of muscular 'epic action' thing that is far easier to do than the alternative.


----------



## Henu

KEM said:


> Fallout is probably one of if not my favorite scores ever, and I’d say it’s without a doubt the best action score ever made.



Funny how opinions vary- I don't usually watch movies like that in general, but when watching it, I thought the only worse thing than the actual movie was the completely joke of a soundtrack utilizing those same chord progressions, stormdrums and spiccato ostinatos we've heard so much they have almost become a parody of themselves.


----------



## Consona

KEM said:


> Fallout is probably one of if not my favorite scores ever, and I’d say it’s without a doubt the best action score ever made. But it seems like all the projects Lorne gets now he’s just asked to recreate that, so of course they sound awesome but nothing is topping Fallout. Do I think that could happen with Bond? Maybe. It’s certainly possible and I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s the kind of score they wanted, but I don’t think it’ll lean entirely in that direction.


Nothing against your taste, but IMO, it was horrible, one of the most irritating scores I've ever heard. Compositions were utterly blocky and stiff, all was so plain musically, any kind of dramatic development basically nonexistent, the production paralleled with a parody, it was so eeeepiiiiic and overly loud I literally had to cover my ears several times during the screening and I was considering leaving the cinema just because of the music, since the film was fine. Not to mention the level of EPICNESS it reached was absolutely ridiculous and I had to laugh because it felt like a farce. Tom Cruise is running atop of a roof and the music full of choirs, huge drums and tutti orchestra is blasting like it's some apocalyptic cataclysm of cosmic proportions, it was preposterous!!! I can't believe the director or producers were ok having something like that in their film.

Saying it's probably the best action score... to me, it's certainly one of the worst. Any one minute of Williams, Goldsmith or Horner action music is better than the whole Fallout score.

This is what I consider to be an amazing action music.


----------



## Loïc D

Am I the only one to enjoy Thomas Newman’s scores for James Bond ?

It has a fair share of sultry cues (The Eternal City, Madeleine, Skyfall, etc.)


----------



## germancomponist

Hans is always good for surprises, especially sound wise. And I'm sure he will surprise us all.


----------



## Richard Wilkinson

LowweeK said:


> Am I the only one to enjoy Thomas Newman’s scores for James Bond ?



Nope! TN is ace, and I think his Bond scores were very good.


----------



## Satorious

I think Thomas Newman was great at the quieter more emotional side (I adored his theme for Severine in Skyfall for example), and he had a moody atmosphere about him - but I really struggled with his action scoring. I also struggled with the amount of recycling he did in Spectre, that his Bond theme essentially always the same orchestration of David Arnold's 'The Name is Bond' and the way he shoe-horned in the title songs almost like he was forced to at gun-point. He seemed like an odd choice, although I can see why he was picked having had so many successful collaborations with Sam Mendes.


----------



## I like music

Consona said:


> Nothing against your taste, but IMO, it was horrible, one of the most irritating scores I've ever heard. Compositions were utterly blocky and stiff, all was so plain musically, any kind of dramatic development basically nonexistent, the production paralleled with a parody, it was so eeeepiiiiic and overly loud I literally had to cover my ears several times during the screening and I was considering leaving the cinema just because of the music, since the film was fine. Not to mention the level of EPICNESS it reached was absolutely ridiculous and I had to laugh because it felt like a farce. Tom Cruise is running atop of a roof and the music full of choirs, huge drums and tutti orchestra is blasting like it's some apocalyptic cataclysm of cosmic proportions, it was preposterous!!! I can't believe the director or producers were ok having something like that in their film.
> 
> Saying it's probably the best action score... to me, it's certainly one of the worst. Any one minute of Williams, Goldsmith or Horner action music is better than the whole Fallout score.
> 
> This is what I consider to be an amazing action music.




Kind of unfair to bring Goldsmith into these comparisons. He always wins, so lets not make such comparisons!


----------



## Consona

I like music said:


> Kind of unfair to bring Goldsmith into these comparisons. He always wins, so lets not make such comparisons!


KEM said


KEM said:


> I’d say it’s without a doubt the best action score ever made


so I can bring whoever I want into that conversation.


----------



## I like music

Consona said:


> KEM said
> 
> so I can bring whoever I want into that conversation.


Yes but he clearly meant "by a human"


----------



## South Thames

> always the same orchestration of David Arnold's 'The Name is Bond' and the way he shoe-horned in the title songs almost like he was forced to at gun-point..



The fact that the composer used to write or co-write the songs used to encourage some level of structural and stylistic coherence in the Bond scores. I think Licence To Kill was the first instance where the song and score became completely divorced. David Arnold, to his credit, at least seemed to try (and some times succeeded) in offering the producers a song that related to the score and some times they were decent enough. Now it's pretty much expected that the two will have no relationship. The token instrumental of the song is sort of a half-hearted hat tip to what used to be.


----------



## jononotbono

KEM said:


> Fallout is probably one of if not my favorite scores ever, and I’d say it’s without a doubt the best action score ever made. But it seems like all the projects Lorne gets now he’s just asked to recreate that, so of course they sound awesome but nothing is topping Fallout. Do I think that could happen with Bond? Maybe. It’s certainly possible and I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s the kind of score they wanted, but I don’t think it’ll lean entirely in that direction.



Lorne’s music is fantastic. That Piano lick in Fallout is wicked!


----------



## Satorious

I think the Fallout score works pretty well in the movie, outside of it -not so much. The score for Rogue Nation felt a lot classier to my ears, Fallout was more of a generic action film score.


----------



## José Herring

LowweeK said:


> Am I the only one to enjoy Thomas Newman’s scores for James Bond ?
> 
> It has a fair share of sultry cues (The Eternal City, Madeleine, Skyfall, etc.)


I liked the score because it was so different than what a Bond movie usually has. I just like TN. I didn't think he was the best fit for bond going into seeing the film but when I did see it I recognized that he was just the right composer that brought something different and unique to Bond.

I honestly think that HZ will do the same. Bring something unexpected to Bond.

It's weird and maybe a little creepy but I was dreaming about the next Bond score and I was hearing Big Band, mixed with Johnny Marr guitars and Orchestra. Odd combination but I was getting it to work (I'm one of those people that sleeps partially conscious so my dreams are mainly me thinking about stuff).

But, I was hearing some low bones, trumpets and sax session mixed with strings and that unique Johnny Marr guitar sound. It was wild.

Like this sound around :10sec with some strings and Marr guitar. Man I was exciting myself.


----------



## Allen Constantine

josejherring said:


> But, I was hearing some low bones, trumpets and sax session mixed with strings and that unique Johnny Marr guitar sound. It was wild.
> 
> Like this sound around :10sec with some strings and Marr guitar. Man I was exciting myself.





Oh, this would be indeed lovely! I am pretty sure Hz and his team have something unique, maybe even similar to this. Not sure about the saxes in their classic form, but from how we all know Hz, he's probably into a synth-sax mood.


----------



## José Herring

I hear you. Saxes are a tough sell these days, but I still think they could be of use. It's just hard to add in saxes without it sounding like the score to Bullitt or Taxi Driver while I love it not everybody else does. 

But, I'm wondering if in the right context, I'd love to bring the sax back into the movie sound.


----------



## KEM

jononotbono said:


> Lorne’s music is fantastic. That Piano lick in Fallout is wicked!



The weird dissonant one? Because I looooove that!! One of my favorite motifs from the film.


----------



## babylonwaves

josejherring said:


> I honestly think that HZ will do the same. Bring something unexpected to Bond.


does anybody know who did the music for this cinematic trailer?



Sounds a bit like a trailerized version of what came out of RCP 10 years ago... not so sure about that ...

I don't think it's this one - which IMO is pretty shitty...


----------



## jononotbono

KEM said:


> The weird dissonant one?Because I looooove that!! One of my favorite motifs from the film.



Yes.


----------



## Satorious

@*babylonwaves*
Think the trailer music is by Jeff Pfeifer (Pfeifer Broz) who has composed a number trailer tracks during the Daniel Craig era - starting with Casino Royale.


----------



## Consona

KEM said:


> The weird dissonant one? Because I looooove that!! One of my favorite motifs from the film.


That's what's happening right now, those guys can make great motifs, but can't do anything interesting with them, they can't compose as the people before them were able to, not even a little bit. It's like with Giacchino, his Star Trek motifs were nice, but the compositions themselves were terrible.



jononotbono said:


> Lorne’s music is fantastic. That Piano lick in Fallout is wicked!


I dare you, send any Fallout piece to the next Mike's Unleashed, if it's that fantastic.


----------



## jononotbono

Consona said:


> That's what's happening right now, those guys can make great motifs, but can't do anything interesting with them, they can't compose as the people before them were able to, not even a little bit. It's like with Giacchino, his Star Trek motifs were nice, but the compositions themselves were terrible.
> 
> 
> I dare you, send any Fallout piece to the next Mike's Unleashed, if it's that fantastic.



I wasn’t aware that Mike Verta has to approve all music everybody writes and tell us what we love and what we don’t love.


----------



## KEM

This is my favorite action cue ever, it gets me so hyped, I can’t get into old scores at all because I just love modern production too much. Are the old school composers better on a technical level? Yeah I guess you could say so. But does that make their music better? Not at all, in my opinion. Old music is so boring to me that it’s almost completely unlistenable, it’s too quiet and there’s no bass, but I could listen to the Fallout score all day long.


----------



## South Thames

> Old music is so boring to me that it’s almost completely unlistenable, it’s too quiet and there’s no bass,



Sounds like the kind of thing a 15-year old gangbanger would say when hearing Mozart for the first time. Which is to say it says a lot more about the listener than the music. 

Seriously, try harder.


----------



## Kent

KEM said:


> Old music is so boring to me that it’s almost completely unlistenable, it’s too quiet and there’s no bass,


Have you tried turning it up?


----------



## KEM

kmaster said:


> Have you tried turning it up?



I did, still wasn’t loud enough, had to throw a maximizer and a limiter on it


----------



## Consona

jononotbono said:


> I wasn’t aware that Mike Verta has to approve all music everybody writes and tell us what we love and what we don’t love.


That's not what he's doing.


KEM said:


> This is my favorite action cue ever, it gets me so hyped, I can’t get into old scores at all because I just love modern production too much. Are the old school composers better on a technical level? Yeah I guess you could say so. But does that make their music better? Not at all, in my opinion. Old music is so boring to me that it’s almost completely unlistenable, it’s too quiet and there’s no bass, but I could listen to the Fallout score all day long.



Yea, this exactly is the worst piece from the entire score. Endless flat repetitions, dull boring composition, just horrible.


----------



## KEM

Consona said:


> Yea, this exactly is the worst piece from the entire score. Endless flat repetitions, dull boring composition, just horrible.


----------



## babylonwaves

KEM said:


> Old music is so boring to me that it’s almost completely unlistenable, it’s too quiet and there’s no bass, but I could listen to the Fallout score all day long.


that's probably the most ignorant comment I've seen in a long while. you know, I'm very much into sound as well. I understand that a mediocre composition can be great because the sound design is great. But I would never go as far as you and label everything old (whatever that means anyway) "unlistenable".

i feel a bit sorry for you 🤦‍♂️


----------



## KEM

babylonwaves said:


> that's probably the most ignorant comment I've seen in a long while. you know, I'm very much into sound as well. I understand that a mediocre composition can be great because the sound design is great. by I would never go as far as you and label everything old (whatever that means anyway) "unlistenable".
> 
> i feel a bit sorry for you 🤦‍♂️



It’s just how I feel man I’m not gonna lie about it, I can’t listen to old music, I’ve tried and I just can’t, no matter how good that stuff is on a compositional level.


----------



## KEM

I certainly respect it and study it as I want to be a better composer myself, but I can’t really enjoy listening to it. I like my music really loud with low bass that shakes my house, that’s why I basically only listen to metal lol


----------



## South Thames

> I like my music really loud with low bass that shakes my house, that’s why I basically only listen to metal lol



Tinnitus is in your future, my friend.


----------



## Consona

South Thames said:


> Sounds like the kind of thing a 15-year old gangbanger would say when hearing Mozart for the first time. Which is to say it says a lot more about the listener than the music.
> 
> Seriously, try harder.


The comment below affirms the suspicion.


KEM said:


> I certainly respect it and study it as I want to be a better composer myself, but I can’t really enjoy listening to it. I like my music really loud with low bass that shakes my house, that’s why I basically only listen to metal lol


Explains everything, or at least a lot. When your reference point is loud music with barely any dynamics, no possibilities for rich orchestration, playing in a non-developmental riff A 4x, riff B 4x, and repeat form, then I'm not surprised by your statements.



KEM said:


>


There's nothing shocking about my statement. Just listen to it, flat dull repetitions with the over-produced wall of sound aesthetics where brass players are told over and over again to blast FFF for every note they play, it's awful and retarded. And I hope people behind this music read our comments here to realize how stupid all of it is. I'd use Schopenhauer's "perfumed penury" to describe it, it sounds cool and modern and whatnot, but the composition itself is so poor.


----------



## KEM

Consona said:


> The comment below affirms the suspicion.
> 
> Explains everything, or at least a lot. When your reference point is loud music with barely any dynamics, no possibilities for rich orchestration, playing in a non-developmental riff A 4x, riff B 4x, and repeat form, then I'm not surprised by your statements.
> 
> 
> There's nothing shocking about my statement. Just listen to it, flat dull repetitions with the over-produced wall of sound aesthetics where brass players are told over and over again to blast FFF for every note they play, it's awful and retarded. And I hope people behind this music read our comments here to realize how stupid all of it is. I'd use Schopenhauer's "perfumed penury" to describe it, it sounds cool and modern and whatnot, but the composition itself is so poor.



But music is subjective, there’s no such thing as “good“ or “bad” music. Like when I said Ludwig Göransson’s music for Star Wars is way better than anything John Williams ever write for the franchise, of course that pissed off a lot of people, but it’s just an opinion, and everyone is allowed to have them.


----------



## Consona

KEM said:


> But music is subjective, there’s no such thing as “good“ or “bad” music. Like when I said Ludwig Göransson’s music for Star Wars is way better than anything John Williams ever write for the franchise, of course that pissed off a lot of people, but it’s just an opinion, and everyone is allowed to have them.


Of course. I'm not here to tell you what's good and bad. I'm presenting my opinions (and arguments) as you do. Don't take my posts as some personal attack or something (and I think you don't, just saying for the sake of clarifying things...)

You like what you like, that's great, enjoy that. But when you say Fallout is the best action music or Göransson writes better SW stuff than Williams, I find that *utterly* absurd and must react.

Plus your post about metal IMO puts your statements into perspective. I was listening to metal 24/7 in my teens and some following years, thought Batman Begins and Inception were the best stuff ever. Now, when my music understanding's grown exponentially, I see their huge limitations. I still listen to some metal sometimes, but despite the fact I enjoy it a lot, I wouldn't claim it's some finely composed music.
Same with things Alan Meyerson's mixes, I like to listen to his sound, but I wish those Aquaman scores and whatnot were way better because that's the stuff I have to listen to to experience his sound.

I'm posting some music other than the usual modern stuff to bring more broad perspective on things. That's why I visit forums anyway, to get other people's perspectives. I'm not trying to indoctrinate anyone. 


Just take a listen to that Freefall track again, the first minute or so, then listen to this and compare the vast difference in their expressiveness.


Horner's track has literally more development in the first 11 seconds than the Freefall track in its entirety. Not to mention way richer harmonies, and *way* sophisticated structure of the musical phrases. (Go compare this Star Trek music to Giacchino's, jeez, what a slump.)
I know the music was composed to different scenes, but keep in mind editing in older films was much slower yet the music is more vivid and energetic, paradoxically. The inability of the modern composers make films feel more flat. They can't compose nimbly, they don't develop, it's sad. (Ok, there's some motivic development in Rupert Gregson-Williams' Wonder Woman for example, but still those compositions are nowhere, I mean _nowhere_, near the level of Williams, Goldsmith or Horner.)

Wanna hear how insane can the orchestration get or how adroitly can one work with a single motif in an suspense track?


This composition is light-years ahead of any Freefall, it's basically incomparable, a totally different category. Same with Williams, he's another category altogether compared to Göransson.

Here's the overture version. It's crazy. So simple yet so unobtainable.


No amount of gloss and sheen can hide the fact Fallout stuff is a basic level composing at best, compared to Rozsa, Steiner, Korngold, and all those other old school guys.


----------



## muk

KEM said:


> But music is subjective, there’s no such thing as “good“ or “bad” music.



An increasingly common, utterly uninformed misconception. If this was true, I was as good a composer as Mozart and Beethoven. Sadly I am not. And that is not subjective opinion only, but objective fact.

The sounds produced by a cat walking on a keyboard would be equally great music as Beethoven's ninth symphony. That's utter nonsense of course. There _is_ good music, and there is bad music. People have just become too lazy to learn the difference between the two. It's also a convenient way to discard criticism: 'hey, that's just your subjective opinion!'.

It's subjective what music you like listening to. But because somebody prefers Britney Spears over J. S. Bach it doesn't make Britney's music better than Bach's. Subjective taste doesn't make them equally good either. Bach's music is objectively better. Or, at least, in our culture it is inter-subjectively better.

Unfortunately, it is usually no good discussing this matter. Because when somebody holds the opinion that you need to study, learn, and practice certain things to become good at it, usually the 'elitism'-bomb argument gets dropped.

If you study music, you will learn to discern between good and bad. The borders between the two can be fuzzy. But for a lot of music it is pretty clear in which category it falls. It's fine if somebody doesn't want to learn about music. No problem. But don't pretend that there is nothing that could be learnt about it, and everything about it is just subjective.

Personally, I do not particularly enjoy listening to a lot of Wagner's music. But I have learned enough about music to realize that it belongs to the best music that has ever been written, even if I prefer listening to other music.


----------



## Loïc D

Consona said:


> but keep in mind editing in older films was much slower yet the music is more


Conversely, nowadays editing standards, especially in action scenes, leaves very little space for theme development and even motivic writings. This and production schedule & budget are the main reasons to produce electronic-epic-staccato-blockbuster scores.
Music gets as expendable as the movie itself.


----------



## KEM

LowweeK said:


> Conversely, nowadays editing standards, especially in action scenes, leaves very little space for theme development and even motivic writings. This and production schedule & budget are the main reasons to produce electronic-epic-staccato-blockbuster scores.
> Music gets as expendable as the movie itself.



Never really thought about this point but I can definitely see it being a reason. Especially given that composers seem to have less and less time to write scores, and technology has made it a lot easier for composers to just lay down a synth bass arp with an ostinato copied and pasted over it and call it a day. But like I’ve said before I love a synth bass arp and a good ostinato lol


----------



## Lionel Schmitt

muk said:


> It's subjective what music you like listening to. But because somebody prefers Britney Spears over J. S. Bach it doesn't make Britney's music better than Bach's. Subjective taste doesn't make them equally good either. Bach's music is objectively better. Or, at least, in our culture it is inter-subjectively better.


But this "objective" superiority of certain pieces compared to others is still based on subjective human standards. What else would it be based on? There is no god that created a musical bible to determine musical value... it's all based on human's understanding of the logic of music.

So what ever you are going to study that makes you "understand" the supposed objective distinction between bad and good music - who came up with it? Gods? No - humans... with certain ideas about what is "right" and "wrong" in music (and came up with a million fancy terms for it). 

Unless there is a clear argument as to why the folks who wrote these books etc on music should be afforded the right to create an universal law that musical quality is "objectively" measured by it's easy to go back to the subjectivity argument cause it's not refuted. 

And another perspective here is - who in their right mind would even compare Britney Spears and Bach??? Music with an entirely different aim, instrumentation and logic... further apart than apples and oranges.


----------



## Salorom

Another Zimmer soundtrack, fine.
I’m much much more interested in what Finneas and Billie will come up with for the main title song!


----------



## muk

DarkestShadow said:


> it's all based on human's understanding of the logic of music.



Yes, but that is not subjective, it's part of our culture. It's imagineable that a universe exists where Beethoven's music would be seen as horrible, nauseating noise. And this culture would not be wrong. The point is, that within our western culture, Beethoven's music is viewed as some of the greatest that has ever been written, and there are established rules and procedures that explain why that is the case. If you want to write great music within our culture, you have to adhere to our culture.



DarkestShadow said:


> Unless there is a clear argument as to why the folks who wrote these books etc on music should be afforded the right to create an universal law that musical quality is "objectively" measured by it's easy to go back to the subjectivity argument cause it's not refuted.



No rule-book ever created a universal law. The books by theoreticians never created a rule at all. What they did and do is _describe and explain the practices that have been used by composers in retrospect_. Adolph Bernhard Marx did not invent the sonata form, nor did he codify it as universal rule. He described and tried to explain what Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven had been doing in their works. It's actually the composers who are making the rules.



DarkestShadow said:


> who in their right mind would even compare Britney Spears and Bach???



Why not, it's both music, isn't it? But you can make the same argument with any Schubert (or Schumann, or Brahms, or Hugo Wolf, or...) art song instead of Bach, if that is more closely related for you.

It's horribly off-topic. I apologize for that. 

For anyone interested, we already have had this discussion at some lenght here:





__





Learning music theory - why it matters


In the thread linked below the old question about whether knowing music theory is worth it has come up again. I first wrote this post as an answer for that thread, but it would have been too long and offtopic for that...




vi-control.net


----------



## Lionel Schmitt

muk said:


> Yes, but that is not subjective, it's part of our culture. It's imagineable that a universe exists where Beethoven's music would be seen as horrible, nauseating noise. And this culture would not be wrong. The point is, that within our western culture, Beethoven's music is viewed as some of the greatest that has ever been written, and there are established rules and procedures that explain why that is the case. If you want to write great music within our culture, you have to adhere to our culture.
> 
> 
> 
> No rule-book ever created a universal law. The books by theoreticians never created a rule at all. What they did and do is _describe and explain the practices that have been used by composers in retrospect_. Adolph Bernhard Marx did not invent the sonata form, nor did he codify it as universal rule. He described and tried to explain what Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven had been doing in their works. It's actually the composers who are making the rules.
> 
> 
> 
> Why not, it's both music, isn't it? But you can make the same argument with any Schubert (or Schumann, or Brahms, or Hugo Wolf, or...) art song instead of Bach, if that is more closely related for you.
> 
> It's horribly off-topic. I apologize for that.
> 
> For anyone interested, we already have had this discussion at some lenght here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Learning music theory - why it matters
> 
> 
> In the thread linked below the old question about whether knowing music theory is worth it has come up again. I first wrote this post as an answer for that thread, but it would have been too long and offtopic for that...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> vi-control.net


Yea, very off-topic, there should be some auto splitting of off-topic discussions.   

But well, in this case "objective" seems to be more "culture satisfying" and culture is of course mostly a subjective human construct of how things should be.
Actually when I'd strive to adhere to our modern culture's standards great music would be Britney Spears as you said, so I'm not even sure that the greatness of classical music is so much part of our culture anymore.

The culture where particularly loved examples of classical music is viewed as horrible noise from hell is massively unlikely, so I wouldn't even bring it up. But there are certainly cultures in which it is increasingly viewed as boring and stiff. Modern western culture being one of them. Pop music, modern film music (Hans Zimmer) and old school scoring in a modern make-up (John Powell) has taken over.

And that is not necessarily wrong, because 'musical' sophistry and value (based on human-made criteria) in and of itself does not make something great, so my opinion at least - which is our split-point I guess.


----------



## Consona




----------



## Consona

Miss those times when Bond intros had those kick-ass tunes...


----------



## brenneisen

Consona said:


>




omg, so dull


----------



## KEM

I personally love the song, probably my favorite after the scrapped one Radiohead wrote.


----------



## Jeremy Gillam

DarkestShadow said:


> who in their right mind would even compare Britney Spears and Bach???



I think using a variation of the chorus after the bridge in songs like “...Baby One More Time” and “Oops!...I Did It Again” and then overlapping the variation with the main chorus to form a counterpoint is very related to Bach. But I admit to not being in my right mind.


----------



## CT

Jeremy Gillam said:


> I think using a variation of the chorus after the bridge in songs like “...Baby One More Time” and “Oops!...I Did It Again” and then overlapping the variation with the main chorus to form a counterpoint is very related to Bach.



Agreed.



Jeremy Gillam said:


> But I admit to not being in my right mind.



Agreed.


----------



## CT

Hey I kinda like the Billie song! It's the first one I've really enjoyed since Casino Royale.


----------



## José Herring

brenneisen said:


> omg, so dull


It grows on you. I had to tough it out three times before I was like whoa this is really cool. But, I have to admit the first time I heard it I couldn't make it past the first 30 secs. The next time I made it to a minute. But, then the third time around I realized it's a slow burn.


----------



## Drundfunk

Billie Eilish is a great artist. Really makes me wonder why people often look at you in disbelief when you're saying that out loud. Yeah it seems kinda odd that todays' thirteen years old teenage girls have great taste in music, but in this case they are right.


----------



## CT

I watched an interview with her and her brother, and the actual musical understanding and inventiveness they seem to have really impressed me.


----------



## Consona

josejherring said:


> It grows on you. I had to tough it out three times before I was like whoa this is really cool. But, I have to admit the first time I heard it I couldn't make it past the first 30 secs. The next time I made it to a minute. But, then the third time around I realized it's a slow burn.


But this is the nature of every repetition when listening to music. The more you hear something, the more you are familiar with it, so you feel more comfortable with the composition. Listen to teletubbies whole day and it will grow on you. 

Remember these pieces? Distinct, striking, great tunes...








What have we now? Some emo pop song with a generic melody. :/


----------



## Lionel Schmitt

Jeremy Gillam said:


> I think using a variation of the chorus after the bridge in songs like “...Baby One More Time” and “Oops!...I Did It Again” and then overlapping the variation with the main chorus to form a counterpoint is very related to Bach. But I admit to not being in my right mind.


Ha, damn... perhaps it was ghostwritten by Bach!!


----------



## Loïc D

I think the essence of Bond credit songs is not to provide the best songs ever but to capture the zeitgeist.
After being ill-considered in the 90s and 00s, those 80s songs found a new popularity, not to say acknowledgment. 
It’s wise to wait 20 years before stating if it’s good or bad. 

(That said, I’m too impressed by what Billie Eilish & her brother are achieving now)


----------



## Marko Zirkovich

DarkestShadow said:


> Ha, damn... perhaps it was ghostwritten by Bach!!


You might enjoy this version:


----------



## South Thames

Ah, another Bond song that sounds like a contemporary artist trying too hard to write a Bond song.

What do the following do the following Bond songs have in common:

Goldfinger
Mister Kiss Kiss Bang
You Only Live Twice
We Have All The Time In The World
The Spy Who Loved Me
Moonraker
For Your Eyes Only
All Time High
View To A Kill
If There Was A Man

They are all in major keys (or employ mixed major/minor modes) -- something which, by my reckoning no Bond song since 1990s has been. But some are up tempo, some down tempo. Some are ballads, some are torch songs, some rockers etc. Consequently they are quite varied and don't all sound like the same formula reheated.

Nowadays, a new Bond song is virtually guaranteed to hang around down tempo in a minor key, with off-the-shelf chord progressions, the same kind of faux-moody lyrics and a sprinkle of bolt-on moody orchestration. It's insanely boring and unimaginative. Still, with a stupid title like 'No Time To Die' my hopes weren't high.


----------



## Tacet

South Thames said:


> Ah, another Bond song that sounds like a contemporary artist trying too hard to write a Bond song.
> [...]
> Nowadays, a new Bond song is virtually guaranteed to hang around down tempo in a minor key, with off-the-shelf chord progressions, the same kind of faux-moody lyrics and a sprinkle of bolt-on moody orchestration. It's insanely boring and unimaginative.


Yep, couldn't agree more.


----------



## Loïc D

South Thames said:


> Ah, another Bond song that sounds like a contemporary artist trying too hard to write a Bond song.
> 
> What do the following do the following Bond songs have in common:
> 
> Goldfinger
> Mister Kiss Kiss Bang
> You Only Live Twice
> We Have All The Time In The World
> The Spy Who Loved Me
> Moonraker
> For Your Eyes Only
> All Time High
> View To A Kill
> If There Was A Man
> 
> They are all in major keys (or employ mixed major/minor modes) -- something which, by my reckoning no Bond song since 1990s has been. But some are up tempo, some down tempo. Some are ballads, some are torch songs, some rockers etc. Consequently they are quite varied and don't all sound like the same formula reheated.
> 
> Nowadays, a new Bond song is virtually guaranteed to hang around down tempo in a minor key, with off-the-shelf chord progressions, the same kind of faux-moody lyrics and a sprinkle of bolt-on moody orchestration. It's insanely boring and unimaginative. Still, with a stupid title like 'No Time To Die' my hopes weren't high.


Still, You Know My Name was pretty darn good IMHO.


----------



## South Thames

> Still, You Know My Name was pretty darn good IMHO.



Notably, the last Bond song to be written by the score composer.


----------



## tmhuud

To Live and Let Dieeeeee!


----------



## Dave Connor

It’s an evocative track with a memorable tune which is what you want in a film title. The entire production seems heartfelt with a dose of experimentation and retro nods in the clever arrangement. You can hear why all the fuss about her with that great vocal. The filmmakers and her fan base are thrilled with it no doubt so the artists involved definitely delivered.


----------



## jononotbono

Just listened to it. Made me more excited to watch the film! Sounds great!


----------



## José Herring

Consona said:


> But this is the nature of every repetition when listening to music. The more you hear something, the more you are familiar with it, so you feel more comfortable with the composition. Listen to teletubbies whole day and it will grow on you.
> 
> Remember these pieces? Distinct, striking, great tunes...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What have we now? Some emo pop song with a generic melody. :/




What can I say, the song evokes my inner emo teen girl spirit yearning to break free.


----------



## tmhuud

brenneisen said:


> omg, so dull


It lays there like a dead fish. Where’s the excitement? Maybe her brother can fix it.


----------



## cloudbuster

LowweeK said:


> Am I the only one to enjoy Thomas Newman’s scores for James Bond ?
> 
> It has a fair share of sultry cues (The Eternal City, Madeleine, Skyfall, etc.)


TN is one of my favorite composers and I really enjoy what he did for Skyfall.


----------



## jeremyr

Consona said:


>




I'm like 85% certain that the rising motif was inspired by Prokofiev


----------



## South Thames

> I'm like 85% certain that the rising motif was inspired by Prokofiev



Not for a moment to suggest Billie Eilish and Prokofiev are sharing a patch inspiration-wise, but some musical ideas are so simple (and the number of simple music ideas is so finite) that it's actually more far-fetched IMO to imagine that one inspired the other than to imagine they were conceived independently.


----------



## brenneisen

jeremyr said:


> I'm like 85% certain that the rising motif was inspired by Prokofiev



yea

minor scale, 1, M2, m3 then a P5

rarely happened before... very atypical


----------



## KEM

Yeah I highly doubt Billie and Finneas are listening to Prokofiev lol


----------



## Drundfunk

KEM said:


> Yeah I highly doubt Billie and Finneas are listening to Prokofiev lol


I wouldn't be so sure about that since both of them seem very educated when it comes to music theory. Maybe they did. Maybe their parents did and they listened to it. You never know.


----------



## brenneisen

Drundfunk said:


> Maybe they did. Maybe their parents did and they listened to it. You never know.



even if they did, I'm like 86% certain that they can come up with a simple melody like that by themselves


----------



## José Herring

KEM said:


> Yeah I highly doubt Billie and Finneas are listening to Prokofiev lol


I saw an interview. They both spent a lot of time in choir it seems and are actually very musically knowledgeable. There is a lot to be gained by participating in that old music that lacks bass.


----------



## KEM

josejherring said:


> I saw an interview. They both spent a lot of time in choir it seems and are actually very musically knowledgeable. There is a lot to be gained by participating in that old music that lacks bass.



Man don’t come at me like that lol, I still study old music I just don’t listen to it!


----------



## Vin

The best Bond song in my opinion wasn't even used:




And to think that they chose that godawful Sam Smith song over this.


----------



## KEM

Vin said:


> The best Bond song in my opinion wasn't even used:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And to think that they chose that godawful Sam Smith song over this.




100%, Billie’s Bond theme is my second favorite after this, still upset they never used this.


----------



## Anders Wall

Exited to hear what Hans and his crew will bring to the Bond franchise.
Bond have always been cutting edge cinematography, stunts and other effects.
Music has sometimes been of a more traditional kind, not saying that's a bad thing, but still...

And isn't Hans known for pushing the limits and working with odd ensembles/ensemble sizes?
I'm sure we will get something different. I hope we will.

I think the Billie Eilish song will prove to fit this last David Craig movie perfectly.
Also, I like the message they send out to aspiring composers having her doing the song.

Best,
Anders


----------



## Loïc D

KEM said:


> 100%, Billie’s Bond theme is my second favorite after this, still upset they never used this.


Not to speak about this one :


----------



## Consona

LowweeK said:


> Still, You Know My Name was pretty darn good IMHO.


That song rules.



LowweeK said:


> Am I the only one to enjoy Thomas Newman’s scores for James Bond ?


I've only seen his Skyfall and those constant rhythmic/percussion passages were driving me crazy.


----------



## South Thames

Very glad they decided not to use this one and John Barry had another crack at it:


----------



## jononotbono

Consona said:


> I've only seen his Skyfall and those constant rhythmic/percussion passages were driving me crazy.



What modern film scores do you actually like? Curious.


----------



## Consona

jononotbono said:


> What modern film scores do you actually like? Curious.


----------



## jononotbono

Consona said:


>




Never heard of it.


----------



## VinRice

brenneisen said:


> omg, so dull



Actually I think it's fucking genius. The Bond musical memes interwoven perfectly without pastiche, the arrangement, the orchestration (Mr. Zimmer's team I believe), the production, and the way that Miss Eilish's lyrics and delivery perfectly match the melancholy of where the Bond story is at right now. Perfection. She's one in a generation that one.


----------



## jononotbono

I just listened to it again. Yep, still love it. It’s a good song. Man, the misery of the internet can get almost a bit much at times.


----------



## KEM

Consona said:


>




This John Williams guy seems to be able to write a pretty good tune, I think he might have a bright future ahead of him, he just needs more low end and some higher dynamics in his horn writing, maybe he should start studying Lorne Balfe


----------



## zvenx

Sorry, still hasn't grown on me.


My favourite?
Goldfinger -Shirley Bassey
rsp


----------



## José Herring

Consona said:


>



Maybe I'm just old. But, in this modern age when they have filmscores being done with 1000 tracks of overdubs and 200 pieces orchestras, Everytime I'm hear John Williams all I can think is that everybody else is just doing it all wrong.


----------



## José Herring

zvenx said:


> Sorry, still hasn't grown on me.
> 
> 
> My favourite?
> Goldfinger -Shirley Bassey
> rsp



C'mon give it a chance. About the 50th listen you'll warm up to it.


----------



## José Herring

I was always partial to this Bond theme


----------



## jononotbono

josejherring said:


> C'mon give it a chance. About the 50th listen you'll warm up to it.



Don't be silly. It's cool to hate stuff.


----------



## Consona

josejherring said:


> Maybe I'm just old. But, in this modern age when they have filmscores being done with 1000 tracks of overdubs and 200 pieces orchestras, Everytime I'm hear John Williams all I can think is that everybody else is just doing it all wrong.









The difference starts with the fact that these "modern"* guys use orchestral instruments like just another sounds in their rock-n-roll compositions, while they actually can't compose orchestral music. It's easily noticeable, things like Inception, Batman Begins, MI Fallout, etc., the orchestration of those pieces has nothing to do with orchestral composing. So they have over 300 strings (literally) and god knows how many brass players, but it's just sounds, not a part of some organic orchestral body.

Another thing is that their compositional level is just low. It will never cease to astound me that Wallfisch has on his wiki page "began playing the piano at 5, composing at 6 and has been conducting since he was 14", yet after listening to his Shazam theme you realize he can't compose 3 minutes of coherent orchestral music at the age of 40.

Whenever we start talking about Williams in this context, we start comparing the incomparable. Those 2:37 minutes of the March are light-years ahead of anything we can hear nowadays from the rest of the hollywood.

I mean, listen to this.


Who else can, these days, make an impeccable impression of Strauss, Wagner and Rossini and even make it more enjoyable than the originals.  His work with musical phrases is out of this world. Those flipping 20 seconds from 1:05 to 1:25, or actually any 20 seconds of that piece.  Like the beginning and how it progresses, it's insane. Notice how the motif develops, it feels like one melodic piece, yet there are no fricking repetitions! It's f***ing crazy!  And some people want to draw comparisons to some stupid MI Fallout or something?  Sorry, but that's utmost absurd.
Guys, stop buying new sample libraries and starting your uber epic hybrid music youtube channels and rather compose one kontakt factory library piano piece at least one-tenth as good as flipping Aunt Marge's Waltz.  Then orchestrate it so it does not sound boring or like an utter mess.
That's it.

Rant over. 



*To me, the term modern refers to some art movements of the 19th/20th century, but whatever.


----------



## jononotbono

Consona said:


> The difference starts with the fact that these "modern"* guys use orchestral instruments like just another sounds in their rock-n-roll compositions, while they actually can't compose orchestral music. It's easily noticeable, things like Inception, Batman Begins, MI Fallout, etc., the orchestration of those pieces has nothing to do with orchestral composing. So they have over 300 strings (literally) and god knows how many brass players, but it's just sounds, not a part of some organic orchestral body.
> 
> Another thing is that their compositional level is just low. It will never cease to astound me that Wallfisch has on his wiki page "began playing the piano at 5, composing at 6 and has been conducting since he was 14", yet after listening to his Shazam theme you realize he can't compose 3 minutes of coherent orchestral music at the age of 40.
> 
> Whenever we start talking about Williams in this context, we start comparing the incomparable. Those 2:37 minutes of the March are light-years ahead of anything we can hear nowadays from the rest of the hollywood.
> 
> I mean, listen to this.
> 
> 
> Who else can, these days, make an impeccable impression of Strauss, Wagner and Rossini and even make it more enjoyable than the originals.  His work with musical phrases is out of this world. Those flipping 20 seconds from 1:05 to 1:25, or actually any 20 seconds of that piece.  Like the beginning and how it progresses, it's insane. Notice how the motif develops, it feels like one melodic piece, yet there are no fricking repetitions! It's f***ing crazy!  And some people want to draw comparisons to some stupid MI Fallout or something?  Sorry, but that's utmost absurd.
> Guys, stop buying new sample libraries and starting your uber epic hybrid music youtube channels and rather compose one kontakt factory library piano piece at least one-tenth as good as flipping Aunt Marge's Waltz.  Then orchestrate it so it does not sound boring or like an utter mess.
> That's it.
> 
> Rant over.
> 
> 
> 
> *To me, the term modern refers to some art movements of the 19th/20th century, but whatever.




What does your music sound like? Very interested to hear it. Hope it’s good.


----------



## Richard Wilkinson

I would definitely count Wallfisch as one of the guys who can really write. JW is obviously a very special case and a more direct link to Stravinsky, Prokofiev etc than anyone else active in the industry, but Ben absolutely knows what he's doing orchestrally.
Also, a lot of the sound of film scores is down to the director and producers - JW is a special case in this respect too since his collaborators afford him far more freedom than most other composers get.


----------



## Lionel Schmitt

Consona said:


> Another thing is that their compositional level is just low. It will never cease to astound me that Wallfisch has on his wiki page "began playing the piano at 5, composing at 6 and has been conducting since he was 14", yet after listening to his Shazam theme *you *realize he can't compose 3 minutes of coherent orchestral music at the age of 40.


Is that some kind of joke I don't get? 
Well, I guess subjectivity kicks in here - reminder for me, reminder for you. 
I listened to a bunch of JW pieces (yea, a bunch - not interested in more) and found several to be pretty all over the place compositionally. (Blashemy!) I don't find that with Shazam at all. What does "coherent" mean? Coherent to YOU. Coherent to ME. Coherent to random person X - it will all be different. 
The most coherent JW-style orchestral music I have ever heard is are Thomas Bergersen's pieces on Volume One. 
You (and most others) will certainly disagree, but there is no objective truth to either opinion. It all comes down to what our mind considers to be musically compelling and engaging, so "you realize" should rather be "I personally find...".  
I don't think you'll find many allies with your views about Ben Wallfisch.


----------



## Loïc D

Richard Wilkinson said:


> Also, a lot of the sound of film scores is down to the director and producers - JW is a special case in this respect too since his collaborators afford him far more freedom than most other composers get.


This !
I’m sure most the composers that are criticized or looked down are perfectly able to write fine & elaborate pieces of music. Maybe not to the JW standard but still...
It’s just that the producers & directors don’t ask for this.
I’m pretty sure the temp tracks given to composers these days are seldom JW.


----------



## zvenx

jononotbono said:


> Don't be silly. It's cool to hate stuff.


I don't hate it.
It just doesn't grab me as a Bond theme.
rsp


----------



## brenneisen

zvenx said:


> It just doesn't grab me as a Bond theme.



sorry, you don't have that option, you either hate it or love it

grumpy traditional boomer or a dumb bassy millennial? choose one, no hybrids allowed 

thousand+ years of intellectual development so we can judge ourselves based on binary standards


----------



## Dave Connor

Consona said:


> The difference starts with the fact that these "modern"* guys use orchestral instruments like just another sounds in their rock-n-roll compositions, while they actually can't compose orchestral music. It's easily noticeable, things like Inception, Batman Begins, MI Fallout, etc., the orchestration of those pieces has nothing to do with orchestral composing. So they have over 300 strings (literally) and god knows how many brass players, but it's just sounds, not a part of some organic orchestral body.


You’ll want to avoid Mahler’s 8th which is known as, Symphony of a Thousand. Also his 6th where he has 10-12 winds on the same melodic line. You might enjoy some of the early criticism of Beethoven’s expanded symphonies with their, _noisy brass and winds._

If Hans or anyone else is expanding the orchestra, he is firstly distinguishing himself and not copying anyone. Why criticize that individualistic impulse? The question is the sound results which planet Earth has fallen in love with and flocking to see in the flesh.

As far as writing chops, there are string clusters in Batman Begins that would make Ligeti drool. I don’t think Hans asked an intern at RC to bring him those along with his morning coffee. He wrote them and they couldn’t be better. In the da Vinci Code there is two-part (low) string writing in contrary motion that shows complete command of that prime indicator of compositional technique. The size of the string group sounds natural and is rich and beautiful - whatever size it was. Or the long string cue in a montage towards the end of Gladiator which is a model of part-writing and harmonic invention. Truly expert writing unique to the composer and thoughtful in the extreme. (I don’t have all day but I could go on all day.)

I don’t know why people are unable to hear the abundant examples of Mr. Zimmer’s world class writing chops. The average guy on the street sure seems to.


----------



## jononotbono

brenneisen said:


> sorry, you don't have that option, you either hate it or love it



Exactly. It’s just like Marmite. Why isn’t there a Poll on here about this yet... “Do you LOVE or HATE the new Bond song?” It’s rare VI-C surprises me. Disappointing.

And I also think the Like buttons on this forum should all be removed apart from the Love heart and a hopefully Mike can sort out a Hate Button in the immediate future.


----------



## South Thames

> Another thing is that their compositional level is just low. It will never cease to astound me that Wallfisch has on his wiki page "began playing the piano at 5, composing at 6 and has been conducting since he was 14", yet after listening to his Shazam theme you realize he can't compose 3 minutes of coherent orchestral music at the age of 40.



I'm not really sure what that means. Shazam reminds me of much of Wallfisch's work - an accomplished simulacrum of its stylistic influences, but devoid of much in the way of a personal touch. I can't help thinking that's why the films he gets (without Zimmer) are rather patchy.



> The question is the sound results which planet Earth has fallen in love with and flocking to see in the flesh.



Why does this kind of thing remind me of North Korean television? (doggerel by the way - sound doesn't have flesh and can't be seen).



> As far as writing chops, there are string clusters in Batman Begins that would make Ligeti drool. I don’t think Hans asked an intern at RC to bring him those along with his morning coffee. He wrote them and they couldn’t be better. In the da Vinci Code there is two-part (low) string writing in contrary motion that shows complete command of that prime indicator of compositional technique. The size of the string group sounds natural and is rich and beautiful - whatever size it was. Or the long string cue in a montage towards the end of Gladiator which is an example of model part-writing and harmonic invention. Truly expert writing unique to the composer and thoughtful in the extreme. (I don’t have all day but I could go on all day.)



And don't forget that amazing but elusive 'sound fugue' in Dunkirk. That too was an achievement without earthly precedent (probably).


----------



## AEF

If JW is Art Tatum, Hans is Kenny Kirkland. 

There’s room for realizing the greatest ever while being in awe of another brilliant musician.


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> Why does this kind of thing remind me of North Korean television?


Quite right. Who is it though exactly that’s forcing people by the millions into concert venues to see Hans Zimmer and orchestra? At gunpoint or with the threat of a virus or what? Of course they’re not going because they love his music. They’re like you and me, spending quality time and money to hear music they have no love for at all.


South Thames said:


> (doggerel by the way - sound doesn't have flesh and can't be seen).


I always appreciate those with keen insight that are able to infer the intended meaning of things stated in brevity. It just makes the world more pleasant. I do admit I close my eyes every second when I go to a concert. And no one has ever once said to me something like, _I saw Grand Funk at the Fillmore East in ‘71._


South Thames said:


> And don't forget that amazing but elusive 'sound fugue' in Dunkirk. That too was an achievement without earthly precedent (probably).


I haven’t forgotten that fantastic bit of concrete musical invention that took advantage of IMAX’s towering, multichannel sound. A mechanized fugue underneath a story about the ultimate mechanized war, waged from the fatherland of the fugue. Also haven’t forgotten you saying that there are numerous examples of such in the repertoire, to which I replied that I would settle for three examples, and then eventually... a single example. Your scholarship (upon which your confident assertion was undoubtedly based) yielded not even a single _guess_ who might have done such a thing let alone a single example of it. I remain throughly impressed.


----------



## South Thames

> Quite right. Who is it though exactly that’s forcing people by the millions into concert venues to see Hans Zimmer and orchestra? At gunpoint or with the threat of a virus or what? Of course they’re not going because they love his music. They’re like you and me, spending quality time and money to hear music they have no love for at all.



I imagine the same kind of forces driving similar or larger numbers of people to see, oh, Ed Sheeran, Adele, Justin Bieber, Andrew Lloyd Webber musicals etc. Planet Earth apparently falls in love with a lot of different people. Quite why you imagine this should bolster Zimmer's musical bona fides I've no idea.



> I always appreciate those with keen insight that are able to infer the intended meaning of things stated in brevity



The intended meaning was clear, I'll give you that. But I'm a prisoner of my good taste I'm afraid, and I simply couldn't allow something as cringeworthy as that to go unremarked.



> Your scholarship (upon which your confident assertion was undoubtedly based) yielded not even a single _guess_ who might have done such a thing let alone a single example of it. I remain throughly impressed.



Interesting that this was your rather delusional take away from that exchange. You never even managed to locate the 'fugue' you'd waxed so ridiculously about, much less prove it was what you said it was. I remain convinced it was a figment of an overactive imagination, and every sentence you write about Zimmer makes me more convinced I'm afraid.


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> I imagine the same kind of forces driving similar or larger numbers of people to see, oh, Ed Sheeran, Adele, Justin Bieber, Andrew Lloyd Webber musicals etc. Planet Earth apparently falls in love with a lot of different people. Quite why you imagine this should bolster Zimmer's musical bona fides I've no idea.


Exactly, Planet earth does indeed fall in love with entertainers whether it’s Peter Gabriel or Yanni. Popularity confers nothing upon them in regard to their artistic merits. Who on earth needs this explained to them other than you?

To indict Zimmer as an average talent, way over his head in an orchestral setting isn’t just a pat dismissal of pedestrian tastes of the masses - it’s an indictment of the premiere filmmakers of their time such as Ridley Scott and Christopher Nolan. Forget about me. I’m just an idiot on the internet like you. Ridley Scott is already in the history books as a great filmmaker and much admired for his choices for film composers. He doesn’t just admire Hans like a fan of his music, he chases him down to score his films! The way he did Jerry Goldsmith and Vangelis.

Look at it this way, I admire Hans Zimmer’s musical gifts nearly as much as Ridley Scott does and a lot more than you.




South Thames said:


> The intended meaning was clear, I'll give you that. But I'm a prisoner of my good taste I'm afraid, and I simply couldn't allow something as cringeworthy as that to go unremarked.


We’re all prisoners of your good taste.



South Thames said:


> Interesting that this was your rather delusional take away from that exchange. You never even managed to locate the 'fugue' you'd waxed so ridiculously about, much less prove it was what you said it was. I remain convinced it was a figment of an overactive imagination, and every sentence you write about Zimmer makes me more convinced I'm afraid.


Wrong. All wrong. I did locate it and gave a time stamp which is more than you did to prove your point - which was nothing. I mentioned the fugue the day after I saw the film. I began by mentioning the expert way in which a cue created action and anticipation when there was none on the screen. It began when a stretcher was picked up and the soldier taken elsewhere. Convince me there is no such scene and I will concede All your points. I know, that’s asking you to prove your point which you refuse to do while accusing others of the very same.

When your argument comes down to ..._You’re delusional..._you have lost.


----------



## KEM

This is kind of a dumb argument to have, a media composers writes whatever they’re told to write, it doesn’t matter what it sounds like as long as it serves the picture well, it’s a good score. I don’t even really listen to film music outside the context of the film because most of the time it’s not that interesting to me, I want to hear it within the film as it’s intended. This goes for John Williams just as much as it does for Hans Zimmer.

Also, Hans and John are stylistically very different, and are hired for very different kinds of films, could you see John Williams scoring The Dark Knight? He’d have completely ruined that film, whereas Hans did it seemlessly. Some of you guys like sweeping orchestra-only scores, and some of us love epic half and half scores, and there’s nothing wrong with that, it’s all subjective taste, but both have the same purpose: to serve the film. John gets asked to write sweeping orchestra-only scores, Hans gets hired to write epic half and half scores, and both are amazing at what they do.


----------



## CT

I have no clue what's being argued about here, but it seems kinda silly. I like a lot of different composers, a lot of different stylistic approaches. What's so hard about that? Why do we need forum treatises about why this or that is better? 

I swear, some people can't feel comfortable with what they like unless they're always telling everyone else how wrong they are about what *they* like. What a waste.


----------



## Dave Connor

I’m making a principled argument that doesn’t have anything to do what people _like_. Taste is always subjective. There are people that don’t like Bach or Mozart.

If someone says John Williams _can’t write for the orchestra, _that is objectively false - correct? You don’t have to be a JW fan or sycophant to want to dispel that pitiful notion. I would dispel it even if I didn’t _like_ his music. In fact, even if I didn’t like _him_.

Once again we have this pitiful claim with Hans Zimmer who somehow has managed to convince not just a worldwide audience and not just numerous professional musicians - but the greatest directors of their generation - that he is one of the best orchestral writers in film. (We’ll ignore that he has the number one song everywhere now - in a completely different medium - that he arranged and orchestrated.)

I’m not insisting anyone like or bow to HZ’s music anymore than JW’s. I’m saying that their music is informed by a compositional technique that is easily heard in their work. I give examples, but no one ever argues against them. It’s always a generalized criticism by people who don’t seem to understand that specific examples are needed to bolster any argument about any subject - for or against.


----------



## South Thames

> Exactly, Planet earth does indeed fall in love with entertainers whether it’s Peter Gabriel or Yanni. Popularity confers nothing upon them in regard to their artistic merits. Who on earth needs this explained to them other than you?



Err, you do. You cited twice the popular verdict (the other instance being 'the average guy on the street sure seems to') in trying to argue for his merits as a composer. If it's irrelevant to your argument, why bring it up? You're really quite bad at this, aren't you?

I haven't said anything about Zimmer's gifts on this thread, nor have I gotten involved in the JW vs HW stuff. I actually think he'll do a pretty good job on Bond (better than Newman).

I just know a silly argument when I see one.



> I did locate it and gave a time stamp.



Oh, yes, you mean this sheepish concession that it could apparently only be properly heard on an Imax sound system:



> 56:24 is either the exact bit or an iteration of it. My home system is not up to presenting it. There may be a better version later in the film



Which was tripe. It just isn't there. It doesn't matter what sound system you listen on.


----------



## I like music

KEM said:


> This is kind of a dumb argument to have, a media composers writes whatever they’re told to write, it doesn’t matter what it sounds like as long as it serves the picture well, it’s a good score. I don’t even really listen to film music outside the context of the film because most of the time it’s not that interesting to me, I want to hear it within the film as it’s intended. This goes for John Williams just as much as it does for Hans Zimmer.
> 
> Also, Hans and John are stylistically very different, and are hired for very different kinds of films, could you see John Williams scoring The Dark Knight? He’d have completely ruined that film, whereas Hans did it seemlessly. Some of you guys like sweeping orchestra-only scores, and some of us love epic half and half scores, and there’s nothing wrong with that, it’s all subjective taste, but both have the same purpose: to serve the film. John gets asked to write sweeping orchestra-only scores, Hans gets hired to write epic half and half scores, and both are amazing at what they do.



John Williams wouldn't have ruined Batman. In fact, I'm confident he'd have done a damn good job. This is irrespective of how well one thinks Zimmer did it.


----------



## Loïc D

KEM said:


> Some of you guys like sweeping orchestra-only scores, and some of us love epic half and half scores,


Hey, I love jazz scores and I’m fond of Vangelis too.

The what-if game is pretty pointless. What if Monteverdi had scored Avengers Ultron ? 

The most important is not the mastery in composition just the way it serves the movie... This is movie scoring 101.

There are around 100 less notes and far simpler harmony in Blade Runner than in Star Wars ; is it 100 times inferior ? Vangelis is self-taught not reading composer - with terrible Greek accent -, shall he be considered as a subpar composer ?


----------



## KEM

LowweeK said:


> The most important is not the mastery in composition just the way it serves the movie... This is movie scoring 101.



That’s exactly what I said...


----------



## jononotbono

So when is No Time To Die released then? Might go to the IMax Cinema to watch it!


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> Err, you do. You cited twice the popular verdict (the other instance being 'the average guy on the street sure seems to') in trying to argue for his merits as a composer. If it's irrelevant to your argument, why bring it up? You're really quite bad at this, aren't you?


 When did I say _popularity_ was irrelevant? I said it, _doesn’t confer artistic merit _on anything. Neither does it negate anything. Record execs in the U.S. dissed the Beatles and wouldn’t promote them. Who had it right? The man on the street did. (Be honest, I am explaining further here aren’t I? A principle that anyone taking up the subject of popular vrs art should know backwards.)


South Thames said:


> I haven't said anything about Zimmer's gifts on this thread, nor have I gotten involved in the JW vs HW stuff. I actually think he'll do a pretty good job on Bond (better than Newman).
> 
> I just know a silly argument when I see one.



You inserted yourself into a silly argument I was disabusing someone of: That HZ _can’t write for the orchestra_. I gave examples of just how well he does write, including essentially, his two-part and four-part writing. Not making fan-boy proclamations. Why is this ignoble of me somehow?


South Thames said:


> Oh, yes, you mean this sheepish concession that it could apparently only be properly heard on an Imax sound system: Which was tripe. It just isn't there. It doesn't matter what sound system you listen on.


Explaining the obvious is tiresome, hence my complaints about dialogue with you.

Why do recording engineers have different sets of speakers in front of them just a few feet away? Why do they also go out to their car and listen there? It isn’t because they can hear everything - it’s because they can’t. Skilled professionals who actually recorded and put the sounds together - and know every second of the music - unable to hear what they put there on certain speakers. Someone sitting right next to them might say, _Where’s the hi-hat? _To which he may say, _It’s there. _Then perhaps he changes speakers and the guy is convinced - or not.

The Zimmer _fugue_ I heard in DUNKIRK was spread left to right across the length of the wide-screen - whatever considerable number of feet that is. Vertically - on both sides of the screen - the spread was something like 30 feet. So a different fugue-type theme was in each of the four corners at these distances. Four distinct themes which meshed beautifully, very cleverly distributed. The fact that in my home, listening on two pitiful computer speakers 18 inches apart, these glorious sounds and their effect did not translate - is perfectly understandable and indeed expected. Otherwise we should all listen to everything on earbuds.


----------



## South Thames

> When did I say _popularity_ was irrelevant?



You should make your mind up about what you're arguing for. If it's Zimmer's ability to write for the orchestra, argumentum ad populum doesn't carry much weight. 



> Not making fan-boy proclamations.



You don't seem to be aware when you are:



> The question is the sound results which planet Earth has fallen in love with and flocking to see in the flesh.





> He wrote them and they couldn’t be better.



etc.

BTW, there's a good chance some of the notes in those couldn't-be-more-perfect clusters belong to James Newton Howard.



> That HZ _can’t write for the orchestra_.



I think the poster was perhaps making a rather more subtle point. Clearly Zimmer writes music that is performed by orchestral instruments (I actually don't know what Zimmer's input to his orchestrators looks like), usually recorded separately in choirs. Whether it has much to do with the art of orchestral writing, with its delicate balances between proportionately sized sections, contrasting colours etc I'm not so sure. Zimmer has basically taken a sort 'wall of sound' aesthetic and applied it to the orchestra. One of his legacies is the almost complete obliteration of woodwind in many contemporary scores; his use of brass and string section sizes that make little sense acoustically, but since all the balancing is done in the mix it doesn't matter. Whilst none of that necessarily makes his music bad (indeed one could argue it makes it sound fresh), I can see why purists wouldn't regard it as being 'proper' writing for the orchestra.



> The Zimmer _fugue_ I heard in DUNKIRK was spread left to right across the length of the wide-screen - whatever considerable number of feet that is.



Perhaps you should email Zimmer and tell him you found his fugue. Since he went to so much trouble to hide it's possible there's a prize up for grabs.


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> You should make your mind up about what you're arguing for. If it's Zimmer's ability to write for the orchestra, argumentum ad populum doesn't carry much weight.


Disingenuous if not dishonest. The context of my statement was that the issue of_ expanding the orchestra_ cannot be evaluated as good or bad in itself. It is the _sound results _that tell the tale. My making the observation that the populace loves the results is not an argument that _popularity confers artistic merit on anything_. You are accusing me of an argument I never made. But that’s you - you don’t follow and need everything spelled out as I just did - with my third explanation of the same thing to you.

Now, let’s get to your great offense at my semantics: Hans Zimmer is immensely popular throughout the world. That‘s a fact. World = Planet Earth. Following? People _are flocking to see him in the flesh _(i.e. going in numbers to see his live show.) That isn’t some fanboy statement, it’s a figure of speech as when people are, _flocking to the beach _or someone needs to, _talk with my landlord in the flesh. _Relax, try to address the actual point people are making. I’m not being flowery as much as economical because I don’t want to spell everything out like I’m doing here.

Question: Did the planet fall in love with John Williams’ music since Star Wars? That’s a big Yes - right? Leonard Bernstein described the first time America watched the Beatles on Ed Sullivan saying, _We all fell in love. _But he cited their song-writing skills and _flawless intonation. _A nice blend of objective and subjective observation. It’s not criminal.


South Thames said:


> BTW, there's a good chance some of the notes in those couldn't-be-more-perfect clusters belong to James Newton Howard.


_Couldn’t be better_ is what I said. If you aren’t hearing musical passages executed as well as can be done on a regular basis, what the heck are you listening to? JNH may have indeed written those clusters, I don’t know. I also cited other films scored solely by HZ as excellent examples of traditional composition technique. Examples that also have traditional-sized orchestras at least in their sound. If he uses 100 violins that end up sounding like 30 or 300 - what do I care if the end result sounds great?

Whether it’s the looped multiple pianos on the end of, A Day In The Life (with its triple-layered orchestra) or the Echoplex on Planet of the Apes and Patton or Hans’ various experiments - why single him out? He’s following in the footsteps of those artists. Each effort should be evaluated on its merits - not criticized as a general principle, particularly if the principle is well proven.


----------



## South Thames

Dave Connor said:


> Disingenuous if not dishonest. The context of my statement was that the issue of_ expanding the orchestra_ cannot be evaluated as good or bad in itself. It is the _sound results _that tell the tale.



He didn't say it wasn't popular. So invoking its popularity was irrelevant.



> Now, let’s get to your great offense at my semantics: Hans Zimmer is immensely popular throughout the world. That‘s a fact. World = Planet Earth. Following? People _are flocking to see him in the flesh _(i.e. going in numbers to see his live show.) That isn’t some fanboy statement, it’s a figure of speech as when people are, _flocking to the beach _or someone needs to, _talk with my landlord in the flesh. _





> I’m not being flowery as much as economical because I don’t want to spell everything out like I’m doing here.



Saying 'Zimmer's music is popular worldwide' is much more economical than what you wrote.

Do you think you'd read sentences about Planet Earth falling in love with and 'flocking to [see him] in the flesh' in any self-respecting publication? It's wide-eyed fanboy hagiography stuff. And in your case, part of a distinct pattern in your references to Zimmer. Not criminal, just cringeworthy.



> If he uses 100 violins that end up sounding like 30 or 300 - what do I care if the end result sounds great?



If it ends up sounding like 30, it wouldn't say much for the wisdom of doing it in the first place would it? Which is generally my position when it comes to outsized sections, particularly on film soundtracks where you have complete control of the balance. The size of the sections can be a product of egotism as much as creativity. 



> Each effort should be evaluated on its merits - not criticized as a general principle, particularly if the principle is well proven.



I'd agree. As I've said before, I admire some of Zimmer's scores, whilst disliking much of his wider impact on film music (which he has been instrumental in precipitating).


----------



## jules

zvenx said:


> Sorry, still hasn't grown on me.
> 
> 
> My favourite?
> Goldfinger -Shirley Bassey
> rsp




The real title of this song should be "no time to file", there's a typo. Those false nails, oh my ! I got distracted ! 
Incredible how fast Billie Eilish is growing !


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> He didn't say it wasn't popular. So invoking its popularity was irrelevant.


Which is another way of saying you missed my point and are criticizing what I said completely out of context.

After I explained in very specific musical terms that indeed HZ displays command of compositional procedures in this and that way (my actual argument) I mentioned - in summary - that the man on the street also has his reasons for appreciating the music. Which was to say, _both professional musicians and regular folks have reasons for their approval - what are your reasons for such a contrary opinion? _Again - harmless - and a routine way of framing an argument and inviting a response.


South Thames said:


> Saying 'Zimmer's music is popular worldwide' is much more economical than what you wrote.


That doesn’t make the point at all. Zimmer is a true phenomenon in being a film composer who not just sells out Rock venues, but is the most popular act at Rock Concerts. That’s a first. His music has been running on Broadway for years. He currently has the number one record on the pop charts - which entered at number one. That never happens. Young children know and love his music. Gamers love his music. But then again, his musical influence is everywhere - in too many mediums to count.

The preceding paragraph is a brief summation which should be book-length. So yes, I said it in far fewer words. Your suggestion is void of capturing the HZ phenomenon as well as a completely obvious statement that’s unnecessary.

If you say Planet Earth fell in love with The Beatles or Nadia Comenici or Charlie Chaplin or Charles Lindberg, you are saying how absolutey rare an occurrence is their popularity. I read Leonard Bernstein’s comment about the Beatles the other day. Do you take offense at him saying it? (Speaking of someone the planet fell in love with who also had immense popularity.)


South Thames said:


> Do you think you'd read sentences about Planet Earth falling in love with and 'flocking to [see him] in the flesh' in any self-respecting publication? It's wide-eyed fanboy hagiography stuff. And in your case, part of a distinct pattern in your references to Zimmer. Not criminal, just cringeworthy.


I read an article just a few days ago where Bernstein said it. He’s an author. Hans just entered the charts at number one which has been done only by phenomenons such as the Beatles. But no one fell in love with their music and to say so is cringeworthy over at your house. I imagine that phrase or something similar has been in articles for centuries. I’m days from reading it which is telling statistically. You can lump me in with Bernstein though - I shan’t take offense.




South Thames said:


> If it ends up sounding like 30, it wouldn't say much for the wisdom of doing it in the first place would it? Which is generally my position when it comes to outsized sections, particularly on film soundtracks where you have complete control of the balance. The size of the sections can be a product of egotism as much as creativity.


Another figure of speech that any musician should understand. Making an outsized string group sound “like 30” is a way of saying they sound _natural, workable, acoustic._

Egotism? Beethoven, Berlioz, Mahler, Stravinsky, Varese? All driven by ego in their beefing up the orchestra? Have you stopped to think that it’s you that has a particular thing going with Zimmer? Or do you indict all these guys for their identical procedures? I use superlatives with some of the names above - they’re not reserved for Hans.

Let me demonstrate how preposterously unscientific your suggestion that _ego_ is what drives HZ’s decision on orchestral sizes (a nasty, strange accusation.) If synthesist Hans Zimmer, achieves a sound he likes with three oscillators - that would be fine by you right? But if he adds another three or six to fatten it up - that’s pure ego? Not his ears or musical tastes but a psychological defect? I don’t think he’s the one who belongs on the couch. You seem to want to put him down unreasonably and are even comfortable making non-musical accusations. No wonder you disapprove of my enthusiasm for his music.


----------



## ed buller

South Thames said:


> I'd agree. As I've said before, I admire some of Zimmer's scores, whilst disliking much of his wider impact on film music (which he has been instrumental in precipitating).



sorry...I just think that's Monstrously unfair !.....So it's Hans's fault that a lot of people are dreadful at imitating him ?

best

ed


----------



## South Thames

> sorry...I just think that's Monstrously unfair !.....So it's Hans's fault that a lot of people are dreadful at imitating him ?,



No, it's Hans's fault, at least to an extent, that so many people are even expected to. By essentially franchising his sound through his production companies and apprentices, Zimmer has stamped his aesthetic imprimatur on many, many more films than he would otherwise have been able to do had he worked in the way that every other composer had previously worked. As a result, he's been able to build essentially a musical brand whose ubiquity wouldn't be possible for composers who were harder to imitate or who simply didn't run their affairs in this way. This is not simply a matter of people imitating success. It's a carefully engineered effort to spread himself as wide as possible, so that, in the end, it doesn't much matter to most people who actually wrote the scores for Pirates of the Caribbean, or The Crown, or Planet Earth -- what matters is his brand is stamped on them. All credit to him -- it's been an astonishingly successful strategy, but you're very naive if you think it's happened by accident.


----------



## South Thames

> If you say Planet Earth fell in love with The Beatles or Nadia Comenici or Charlie Chaplin or Charles Lindberg, you are saying how absolutey rare an occurrence is their popularity. I read Leonard Bernstein’s comment about the Beatles the other day. Do you take offense at him saying it?



It would be a daft and intemperate thing to say as far as I'm concerned, but I can find no quote from Bernstein along these lines, but the comparison with historic pop culture phenomena such as Chaplin and The Beatles I think speaks to how out of proportion you haven't gotten things.



> Hans just entered the charts at number one which has been done only by phenomenons such as the Beatles



Get a grip man. He's not even the producer of that track. The same way way nobody going to the Lion King is going to see a 'Hanz Zimmer musical' (I remember losing count of the number of composers who wrote incidental music for the stage show). Billy Eilish and Bond are selling the records, in the same way as Disney and Elton John/Tim Rice are selling Lion King tickets. Not to discount his contributions, but your fanboy tendencies can't help but put him at the centre of things that he's really on the periphery of.



> Egotism? Beethoven, Berlioz, Mahler, Stravinsky, Varese? All driven by ego in their beefing up the orchestra? Have you stopped to think that it’s you that has a particular thing going with Zimmer? Or do you indict all these guys for their identical procedures? I use superlatives with some of the names above - they’re not reserved for Hans.



There are many figures in classical music for whom egotism was a major factor in the scale of their undertakings -- Wagner and Stockhausen are two examples that spring to mind. You're very naive if you don't recognise the role it has to play. Ego is a massively important force for many creative people and I think ego looms fairly large in his personality.

Parenthetically, I think I accused him of an unhealthy dose of narcissism on this very forum a while back, and this was his response:



> But the touch of unhealthy narcissism is a shoe - I have to admit to agreeing - that fits.


----------



## Loïc D

South Thames said:


> All credit to him -- it's been an astonishingly successful strategy, but you're very naive if you think it's happened by accident.


Yet he has launched the solo career of a lot of his collaborators and was openly mentioning them on movie credits.
AFAIK, he’s a bit of a pioneer in this, lots of composers used to just ghostwriting forever.


----------



## South Thames

> Yet he has launched the solo career of a lot of his collaborators and was openly mentioning them on movie credits.



True, but I'd say in the end very few of them have truly emerged from his shadow - HGW and John Powell being notable exceptions.


----------



## brenneisen

South Thames said:


> True, but I'd say in the end very few of them have truly emerged from his shadow - HGW and John Powell being notable exceptions.



Heitor Pereira, Henry Jackman...


----------



## ed buller

South Thames said:


> it's been an astonishingly successful strategy, but you're very naive if you think it's happened by accident.



First off....I dislike anonymous postings....have the balls to use your real name if your going to accuse people of being Naive !

Secondly I've been lucky enough to have worked on a few films for Hans ......he is very mindful of his approach and he expects that to be adhered to....but each film is unique ...he will spend an enormous amount of time creating that !...once you go off and do your own music.....that LAST thing he wants is for you to do is spread the "zimmerness"......Don't you think he's concerned his "brand" would be perceived as Just that ? .....something that can be just imitated at will......you sound just a touch bitter about his success I must say....Trust me...it's the result of enormous effort and skill....a ferocious intelligence and a knack at dealing with creative people that is hard to comprehend......he is a fantastic dramatist too !...and has an uncanny ability at writing a fucking catchy tune.......your just gonna have to suck up your pain and accept it . All those sold out concerts are NOT the result of Russian interference.......people like his music !.....why don't you get off the internet and try and write something as good ?......or are you scared you can't....mr Fucking anonymous from sawf lundin ?

all my best

ed


----------



## KEM

I like Hans, Hans makes good music


----------



## mr

Wow, what an enormous task. Replacement announced in January, movie premieres in April. 

But also what a great opportunity! I hope they have time to enjoy working with those James Bond harmonies.

I'm excited to hear what Hans Zimmer and team come up with. Loved Billie's theme song, she has such amazing voice, and the arrangement/production is great.


----------



## South Thames

> .....why don't you get off the internet and try and write something as good ?......or are you scared you can't....mr Fucking anonymous from sawf lundin ?



Is there some sort of pheromone released when Zimmer is criticised that brings out other agitated cultists?

Anyone would think I'd insulted your mother rather than ventured an opinion about a leading industry figure who has no reason to care what I think.

It's just a forum, Ed. Try not to be so belligerent, ha?



> I like Hans, Hans makes good music



All together now...


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> It would be a daft and intemperate thing to say as far as I'm concerned, but I can find no quote from Bernstein along these lines, but the comparison with historic pop culture phenomena such as Chaplin and The Beatles I think speaks to how out of proportion you haven't gotten things.


 I’ve been aware of the Bernstein quote for decades. It was on his legacy page on Facebook a few days ago. Why do you resort to accusations of _delusional _or infer that I'm lying or giving false information? Make your case and leave it at that.

Also, turn down your outrage meter and be more objective. Hans Zimmer is a phenomenon by the strictest definition of the word. As I said, children know who he is: a film composer. One would have to say John Williams is not a phenomenon by your measure when considering the degree he has entered the awareness of worldwide popular culture - as a film composer. He _statistically_ is when considered against_ every other composer in the history of Hollywood. _With the exception of Hans Zimmer. That makes me a gushing fanboy of Williams - right?

The comparison of HZ or JW to phenomenons of the past, such as Chaplin is a _statistical comparison_ based upon their extraordinary popularity which exceeds the norms of those of their profession. I am literally referring to _numbers _not talent or other values that are more subjective in nature. (I love spelling every single obvious point to you since your agenda doesn’t seem to allow you to grasp my obvious rather simple points.)


South Thames said:


> Get a grip man. He's not even the producer of that track. The same way way nobody going to the Lion King is going to see a 'Hanz Zimmer musical' (I remember losing count of the number of composers who wrote incidental music for the stage show). Billy Eilish and Bond are selling the records, in the same way as Disney and Elton John/Tim Rice are selling Lion King tickets. Not to discount his contributions, but your fanboy tendencies can't help but put him at the centre of things that he's really on the periphery of.


He’s a film composer! He did the arrangement of a song that’s number one everywhere and entered the charts at number one. That’s TWO rare things which once again bolster my _statistical _argument about his unique stature in the culture and his musical gifts. His involvement is based upon his being sought out once again by filmmakers (of a storied franchise who _objectively _understand the level of talent he brings.)

Lion King? Do you realize how much he contributed to the major identifying characteristics of that film and now franchise? He was instrumental in defining it: the ambience, the rhythms, the soundscape. I’m not dismissing Elton John’s contribution - why would you dismiss HZ’s? If that film wasn’t a monster hit and had that very distinctive score (vital in the extreme in animation) the film never makes it to Broadway. Right? Right. Who wouldn’t know or even assume that unless they had a skewed view of the composer - who won the Oscar for that film. An Oscar for the score of an animated film: what are the stats on that over the history of film?


South Thames said:


> There are many figures in classical music for whom egotism was a major factor in the scale of their undertakings -- Wagner and Stockhausen are two examples that spring to mind. You're very naive if you don't recognise the role it has to play. Ego is a massively important force for many creative people and I think ego looms fairly large in his personality.


When did I say Hans or _any _composer doesn’t have a healthy ego? Most if not all do and want the whole world to hear their music. Your suggestion that ego plays a major role in his sound experiments (which he was doing as a kid locked alone in rooms with synthesizers) is fallacious. That‘s who is at his core: a musician on the hunt for new sounds while also enamored of old sounds that he _sometimes _augments in size and other times leaves completely alone. By your theory, ego would have to figure in that process: a process that by necessity - is _scientific._


South Thames said:


> Parenthetically, I think I accused him of an unhealthy dose of narcissism on this very forum a while back, and this was his response:


I am impressed by your prowess in Psychology. Not in this case though since everyone knows that clinical Narcissists readily admit to it. There couldn’t be a better example than Donald Trump who regular concedes that and other flaws in his makeup.


----------



## Living Fossil

I don't want to enter into this quite toxic thread, however, it's interesting to see how often grown up people mix up their subjective opinion with objetive truth... 

Still, there are three comments i'd like to address:

@Dave Connor : you mentioned that "sound fugue" in Interstellar about two years ago.
Nobody other than you hears it. You never offered the slightest analytical prove of your imaginary fugue.
I guess, if you can't prove something for such a long time, it's the same as with imaginary friends: better stop mentioning them. In states of euphoria we sometimes experience things that aren't there, that's no big deal. But after regaining control over the senses it's good to fact-check things. 
(BTW: the imitation of some kind of a texture doesn't make it a "fugue". There are some formal parts required in order to speak of a "fugue")

@ed buller :
While your advice to STh to "get off the internet and try and write something as good" for sure is a good one, it's not a fair one.
Human culture is based on the fact that some people specialize on certain tasks and offer their work to a community. The community, while not being specialized, of course is free to critique the work of the specialists. Without their critique culture would stagnate.
Imagine you buy a car that breaks down on your way home and your complain is answered by a: "why don't you build a better car yourself?" That's just not how it works.

@brenneisen : Since you mentioned Henry Jackman: I think he would be a great collaborator on this one. The typical James Bond sound requires a feeling for a specific kind of harmonic language which i think Jackman can deliver (i liked his work for the first part of Kingsman a lot).


----------



## Olfirf

Jesus! Why aren’t JW fans so touchy when someone accuses him of stealing from Holst, Hanson and Korngold? Or calls his music to descriptive or one-dimensional? 
There sure are people who say stuff like that about his music, but I have never seen anybody freak out about that as people frantically defend Zimmer on this forum.


----------



## KEM

Olfirf said:


> Jesus! Why aren’t JW fans so touchy when someone accuses him of stealing from Holst, Hanson and Korngold? Or calls his music to descriptive or one-dimensional?
> There sure are people who say stuff like that about his music, but I have never seen anybody freak out about that as people frantically defend Zimmer on this forum.



Probably because there is nobody out there denying John Williams’ obvious skill set, everyone knows he’s amazing, whereas some people seem to think Hans is actual really bad so people go to great lengths to defend him, maybe it’s because he’s on here and they want to kiss up to him idk. I for one love Hans and will gladly give reasons as to why I think he’s great but if someone’s just gonna sit there and mindlessly bash him I’m not gonna put to much effort into trying to change their mind.


----------



## South Thames

> The comparison of HZ or JW to phenomenons of the past, such as Chaplin is a _statistical comparison_ based upon their extraordinary popularity which exceeds the norms of those of their profession





> That’s TWO rare things which once again bolster my _statistical _argument about his unique stature in the culture and his musical gifts. His involvement is based upon his being sought out once again by filmmakers (of a storied franchise who _objectively _understand the level of talent he brings.)



If someone told you in 2011 JAC Redford had a number 1 hit in 11 countries, it would be a curious thing to say. JAC Redford did the spectacular job of orchestrating Skyfall. I don’t think however that its success attests to his ‘popularity’, nor do I think one could credibly say that ‘JAC entered the charts at number 1, like the Beatles!’ etc. 

It’s an apples to oranges comparison.

When people went to a Beatles concert, there was no ambiguity about what was drawing them. Likewise, when people go to a Hans Zimmer concert today.

I don’t think that’s true of the Lion King or No Time To Die though — his partial involvement in these things attests his success, but the success of those things is not in itself a reflection of his ‘popularity’.

You seem to think I’m begrudging Zimmer some recognition of the fact that his success in his field is wholly unprecedented and singular. It would be futile to do so and I’m not. At the end of the day, we’re simply arguing about degrees, and your tendency towards I regard as hyperbole.



> There sure are people who say stuff like that about his music, but I have never seen anybody freak out about that as people frantically defend Zimmer on this forum



Quite. I'm second to no-one in my admiration for much of Williams' music, and have considerable admiration for him personally, but that doesn't equate to thinking he's above criticism, or indeed being uncritical of his work.


----------



## jbuhler

Olfirf said:


> Jesus! Why aren’t JW fans so touchy when someone accuses him of stealing from Holst, Hanson and Korngold? Or calls his music to descriptive or one-dimensional?
> There sure are people who say stuff like that about his music, but I have never seen anybody freak out about that as people frantically defend Zimmer on this forum.


Back in the day, it did happen. And these kinds of arguments upholding the "standards" of the old composers against interlopers who are commercial hacks that know nothing of the art have been around pretty much forever. Soon Zimmer will be part of the old guard and many will be bemoaning that they don't make scores like his any longer. Indeed, I already detect signs of that discursive formulation.


----------



## mikeh-375

Olfirf said:


> Jesus! Why aren’t JW fans so touchy when someone accuses him of stealing from Holst, Hanson and Korngold?



Probably because there's some truth to it, although JW is too good a composer to just 'steal'. He borrows and then makes it his own, just like any respectable composer...


----------



## Dave Connor

Olfirf said:


> Jesus! Why aren’t JW fans so touchy when someone accuses him of stealing from Holst, Hanson and Korngold? Or calls his music to descriptive or one-dimensional?
> There sure are people who say stuff like that about his music, but I have never seen anybody freak out about that as people frantically defend Zimmer on this forum.


Touchy? My entrance to this thread was because of the accusation that Hans Zimmer, _Can’t write for the orchestra. _First of all, do you agree with that statement? Does it seem like a routine criticism such as the ones you mentioned regarding Williams? Would you say nothing if hurled at JW?

My response was to refer to HZ’s compositional technique; his 2 and 4 part writing specifically. I gave examples from two films. Does that seem like a hysterical response to a measured criticism? Or a measured response to a hysterical criticism? The fact that the intellectual giant I’m sparring with pounced on my observation (after I made my argument) about HZ’s writing abilities being wholly approved by _the man on the street - _is a secondary issue of far less importance.


----------



## Dave Connor

Living Fossil said:


> ... it's interesting to see how often grown up people mix up their subjective opinion with objetive truth...


 Grown up people such as anyone whoever argued any point in recorded history? I’m not writing a science paper. Even so my response to a highly subjective criticism (that Hans Zimmer who writes music for orchestras for a living - can’t write music for orchestras) was indeed objective. Read what I said.


Living Fossil said:


> @Dave Connor : you mentioned that "sound fugue" in Interstellar about two years ago.
> Nobody other than you hears it. You never offered the slightest analytical prove of your imaginary fugue.
> I guess, if you can't prove something for such a long time, it's the same as with imaginary friends: better stop mentioning them. In states of euphoria we sometimes experience things that aren't there, that's no big deal. But after regaining control over the senses it's good to fact-check things.
> (BTW: the imitation of some kind of a texture doesn't make it a "fugue". There are some formal parts required in order to speak of a "fugue")


Do you mean Dunkirk? I’m not the one with the hazy memory then am I? I did offer proof. If you read my description here it is identical to my description then: 4 motives placed in the four corners of the screen that mesh brilliantly. What hogwash about imaginary friends and euphoria. Here you are making an argument not rooted in a single fact - pure amateur speculation (your _subjective opinion_ right?) Yet you can’t accept a composer’s observation about a cue in a movie; how it functioned, it’s sonic characteristics and even it’s allocation to the sound system.

I used the term _fugue_ because that is the closest and most fitting musical correlation to a construct made with non-tonal, non-instrumental sounds. It put you in the frame of mind of listening to a musical fugue. Millions of people heard it if they didn’t identify it as such. The definition of a fugue - if you would bother to research - is that of a _process _more than a strict _form_. Try Google. If not, try the Harvard Dictionary of Music.


----------



## Living Fossil

Dave Connor said:


> The definition of a fugue - if you would bother to research - is that of a _process _more than a strict _form_. Try Google. If not, try the Harvard Dictionary of Music.



Sorry, you picked the wrong guy for your statements, you shouldn't make such statements about people you don't know. (asides, i know - due to my vita - quite a lot about fugues, feel free to pm me about more on this)
And: No, what you describe has nothing to do with a fugue since a fugue very well has some formal fix points on top of the "process".
But you're right about Dunkirk, i mixed those up. And there are no hard feelings from my side, i just dislike the unpropper use of terms in order to make seem things bigger. (BTW the Dunkirk soundtrack is great as it is, even without a "sound fugue".)
So, peace!


----------



## Dave Connor

Did you read my post?:

_I used the term fugue because that is the closest and most fitting musical correlation to a construct made with non-tonal, non-instrumental sounds. _


Why are you struggling to understand that? - or not allowing for it? If you do in fact understand fugues than you should understand my description better than others. But instead, you’re quibbling about my definition? It’s perfectly fair to refer to a _fugal process _as exemplified by Beethoven’s repeated use. Sure he writes outright fugues such as the String Quartet op 131 but far more it was fugato or a _fugal process_ he made use of.

I teach composition Wolfgang. There’s a four voice fugue with double counter subjects on my soundcloud page. And you should really have a look at the Harvard definition. You know all about fugues but not that common definition? I have found it everywhere. If you know Bach’s work then you know there’s a wide variety of his treatment of fugue It is not a rigid form.

I’m not keen on semantic arguments. If you can’t bring your self to discuss the actual topic you should move on. Or create a thread on fugues or counterpoint.


----------



## Living Fossil

Dave Connor said:


> Why are you struggling to understand that? - or not allowing for it? If you do in fact understand fugues than you should understand my description better than others. But instead, you’re quibbling about my definition?



As i wrote, because there are some crucial elements that make a fugue a fugue (those you will find not only in Beethoven's fugues, but also in the use of this form by lots of modern composers) that you still didn't point out. I understand your motivation, but i'm waiting for your argumentation.

p.s. if you'd speak of a "sound canon" or a "proportional sound canon", i had no problems.


----------



## Dave Connor

My argument is crystal clear. As I said, you will not allow for it. One last time, _The closest musical term to describe it is fugue. _Understand? What sophomore in college doesn’t know the makeup of a fugue generally speaking? Do you think I was suggesting Hans entered subjects in the correct order and voice in the correct harmonic relationship than allowed for free counterpoint and eventually entered with the third voice etc? I mean, just get the gist of my description and take it for what it is. It’s silly that you would even have the slightest problem with this. I was describing what: _in effect on the listener - came across as a four voice fugue with four different motives meshing together. _You of all people should understand that if you have ever marveled at that phenomenon in traditional fugues. Which I never suggested this was - and how on earth would anyone take up the issue with that comparison. Very silly.

Then again you are arguing earnestly with me about something you said was _imaginary _on my part. Even more silly.


----------



## Living Fossil

Dave Connor said:


> Do you think I was suggesting Hans entered subjects in the correct order and voice in the correct harmonic relationship than allowed for free counterpoint and eventually entered with the third voice etc?



No, of course not. Just put down in a small analysis some of the crucial events.
E.g. confrontation of the theme with the counterpoint (i.e. the countertheme).
[this could of course also be on the level of contrasting sounds]
Differently crafted entrances of the themes. [Entrances of sound elements in changing time distances etc] A part where the theme appears in short intervals through different voices etc.
I'm speaking on a very basic level that doesn't stick to some epochal conventions (there are lots of atonal fugues, spoken fugues, percussive fugues etc.).

Of course a crucial point is that in a fugue theme and counter theme interact and in this interaction undergo modifications.
Etc., just to mention some important aspects.

What i'm waiting for is a brief analysis that shows where and in which sense these things happen.

If you show them plausibly, i'm glad to read them (and of course i would also correct my guess that it was "euphoria" that made you here those things).


----------



## chimuelo

Glad the ZMan is involved in a Bond Film.

Meanwhile back at the Ranch.....


----------



## Dave Connor

Living Fossil said:


> No, of course not. Just put down in a small analysis some of the crucial events.
> E.g. confrontation of the theme with the counterpoint (i.e. the countertheme).
> [this could of course also be on the level of contrasting sounds]
> Differently crafted entrances of the themes. [Entrances of sound elements in changing time distances etc] A part where the theme appears in short intervals through different voices etc.
> I'm speaking on a very basic level that doesn't stick to some epochal conventions (there are lots of atonal fugues, spoken fugues, percussive fugues etc.).
> 
> Of course a crucial point is that in a fugue theme and counter theme interact and in this interaction undergo modifications.
> Etc., just to mention some important aspects.
> 
> What i'm waiting for is a brief analysis that shows where and in which sense these things happen.
> 
> If you show them plausibly, i'm glad to read them (and of course i would also correct my guess that it was "euphoria" that made you here those things).


I simply made an observation of a very clever bit of composing on Hans’ part that _behaved _and _gave one the impression and same feeling when listening to a fugue. _You certainly must know how when multiple motives all finally come together as they do in Mozart’s 41 last movement its a very distinct feeling - not brought about by any other device in music - not for me anyway. It’s a meshing together of distinct ideas that are very thoughtfully crafted to work together that way. Well, Hans managed to do this with sounds-only - not musical notes. In an IMAX theatre you hear them all churning away on the four corners. Put a big smile on my face. I haven’t heard anything like that in film or outside of film. I wouldn’t doubt someone or even several people have tried doing something like that in the electronic world but I haven’t ever heard an example and couldn’t speak to the success. Hans’ bit worked flawlessly and was inventive in every way. Whether anyone believes me may be the single most unimportant thing in my life.


----------



## mikeh-375

HZ's musical aesthetic and rhetoric sounds very different to JW's classicism and the formers style and approach is more malleable and therefore more appropriate for the modern cinema than JW's imo. I say that as a JW fan first and foremost, but one can easily recognise that the approach to film scoring that utilises all production and reproductive techniques (of which HZ was a pioneer), is probably more relevant to modern digital ears than a traditional scoring approach.

Combining HZ's scoring, recording and mixing practice with advances in projection and fidelity over the last 20 odd years (as he has done), one finds a bewildering template of sound and manipulation that can be drawn upon for creative ends. This timbral landscape has more combinatorial potential, power and non-digetic emotional manipulation than a traditional orchestra I believe and one can easily see the appeal to directors and producers as well as the audience. I'd even go so far as to say that scoring via HZ's approach is in some ways, _harder_ than JW's orchestral approach because of the overt and unlimited colours available beyond the orchestral palette - and that is from someone who has studied orchestration and worked with orchestras of all sizes for 25 odd years and who knows what it takes to to be able to get on top of the complexity.

Hz has played a major role in this expansion of the audio palette within film even if the traditional boundaries of real music making have been ignored - it doesn't matter in a filmic sense, reality is almost always suspended anyway. Still, my musical preference is for JW, especially his art music, but I do have admiration for HZ and some of his music has moved me.


----------



## cuttime

Yes, I know it's a parody, but can anybody top Bacharach?


----------



## mikeh-375

cuttime said:


> Yes, I know it's a parody, but ca anybody top Bacharach?




Bacharach was brilliant. I do have a fondness for Louis Armstrong too with 'We have all the time in the World'.


----------



## cuttime

There's even a "Pussycat" quote at 30:15.


----------



## South Thames

> I simply made an observation of a very clever bit of composing on Hans’ part that _behaved _and _gave one the impression and same feeling when listening to a fugue._



Let's not be revisionist here. Your claims were rather less modest than that:



> The ramifications of such an achievement require almost as many planes of analysis as there are voices in this fugue. In film history is there anything similar?[....] Hans has done something here that is completely unique: a deliberate use of a Classical form where the structure itself is fundamental to it's workings rather than an approximated or vaguely referenced form. Who thinks like that in film music these days? To combine an ancient form with original sounds no older than the film itself is truly a profound creative impulse from a film (theatre) composer.
> 
> If something like a pure-sound fugue structure has ever been done by anyone it couldn't have been done better. This thing is drop dead gorgeous and done within the confines of a movie! Not snuck in but clearly presented in a perfect execution of the composers stated vision of integrating the score into the sound and visual scape of the picture. So, in the first truly mechanized war, started by the nation of Bach's ancestry you get a mechanized fugue of sorts that meshes with the sound and visual of an experimental film - perfectly. A bit of music that looks back centuries to Bach, as well as decades to WWII, then to the electronic music boom after the war, to it's eventual use in film up till now. Most importantly it thrusts film-making and film-music forward into the future with an integration of the two we have never seen or heard heretofore. That is an extraordinary achievement and as is typical with this composer: you can remove the picture entirely and you still have a stunning musical achievement which in this case may be historic. (Please show me if you have an example of something like this ever being done in music.



Not that there's a fugue of any description to be found in Dunkirk, but if you'd simply said 'there's a neat little sound canon-type thing buried under some FX in a part of Dunkirk I don't really remember', instead of beholding it as turning point in the history of film music, I don't think anyone would have given it a second thought.


----------



## I like music

Yum ...


----------



## Consona

jononotbono said:


> What does your music sound like? Very interested to hear it. Hope it’s good.


So, you want me to get my music evaluated by people who think Thomas Bergersen writes more coherent John Williams-style music than John Williams, MI Fallout is the pinnacle of action movie scoring and the old music is almost completely unlistenable because it’s too quiet and there’s no bass?









And what kind of feedback should I be expecting?



Richard Wilkinson said:


> I would definitely count Wallfisch as one of the guys who can really write. JW is obviously a very special case and a more direct link to Stravinsky, Prokofiev etc than anyone else active in the industry, but Ben absolutely knows what he's doing orchestrally.
> Also, a lot of the sound of film scores is down to the director and producers - JW is a special case in this respect too since his collaborators afford him far more freedom than most other composers get.


The Shazam theme I was talking about is something where you can show how good you are as an orchestral writer since it's not a cue but a standalone piece of music.


What an incoherent hodgepodge that is... (the actual score is better, IMO, dunno why)

Now go listen to Horner's Star Trek themes when he was 29 years old, since he's one of those who started with piano at 5 as well



. It's a fricking masterclass on how you should compose symphonic film music.



This is a work of someone who "(somewhat)absolutely knows what he's doing orchestrally." (Yea, that is of course an exaggeration, but in comparison to that Shazam thing, not that much of a stretch.)



DarkestShadow said:


> Is that some kind of joke I don't get?
> Well, I guess subjectivity kicks in here - reminder for me, reminder for you.
> I listened to a bunch of JW pieces (yea, a bunch - not interested in more) and found several to be pretty all over the place compositionally. (Blashemy!) I don't find that with Shazam at all. What does "coherent" mean? Coherent to YOU. Coherent to ME. Coherent to random person X - it will all be different.
> The most coherent JW-style orchestral music I have ever heard is are Thomas Bergersen's pieces on Volume One.
> You (and most others) will certainly disagree, but there is no objective truth to either opinion. It all comes down to what our mind considers to be musically compelling and engaging, so "you realize" should rather be "I personally find...".
> I don't think you'll find many allies with your views about Ben Wallfisch.


I've made a whole long post about how incoherent the Shazam piece is, you can find it in the corresponding thread. It’s a rather detailed analysis of the structure, far from some subjective "I like this/I dislike that". Based on it, you can see what I mean by incoherence in music (it's basically a jumble of ideas). Everyone who's "not my ally with my view" can comment there why I'm wrong.
If you want, go watch some video classes about Beethoven's usage of motifs in his symphonies, since that's the exact opposite of being a mess.

And nothing against discussing stuff like Thomas Bergersen writing more coherent JW-style music than John Williams, but that notion alone already feels like trying to conduct a serious flat-earth debate.



Sorry, don't know how better describe it, (even just for the fact that TB can't write the JW-style music, for starters... let alone more coherent).



@Dave Connor
I don't know what are you trying to prove by your arguments...

Zimmer's music is very popular. Yes, it is. So what?
Nolan co-works with him often. Yes, he does. So what?

And again, you confuse what I've pointed out already, writing with orchestral instruments does not mean writing orchestral music. Go listen to Inception, it's full of strings and brass, yet there's not even one symphonic piece in that whole score. Maybe I should not call it "orchestral" music since it can be rather unclear. Then again, I've pointed that out as well, there's a difference in using orchestral instruments as guitars in a rock composition, and using orchestral instruments in the way Beethoven or Williams use them. That's the difference I'm talking about.

But I went listen to some older Zimmer's music, like 20 years old, Prince of Egypt and such and I must say he was writing way more interesting music back then than right now. Dunno why.
I wish he was using all his amazing production but started evolving his compositions from that 20 years old route.

I have not much hope for the Bond soundtrack, I fear it will be another MI Fallout, but I'm really interested what he'll do with Dune. Because there he really could present some good symphonic chops. But it's a Villeneuve film so I hope it's not another Blade Runner 2049 score with 3 hours of loud synth pads...



cuttime said:


> Yes, I know it's a parody, but can anybody top Bacharach?



The thing is, there's more skill involved in a minute of Bacharach's parody stuff than in the whole MI Fallout soundtrack.



Sadly, I'm not even exaggerating.



KEM said:


> whereas some people seem to think Hans is actual really bad


Citation needed, otherwise a nice straw-man.


----------



## Dave Connor

Consona said:


> @Dave Connor
> I don't know what are you trying to prove by your arguments...
> 
> Zimmer's music is very popular. Yes, it is. So what?


I said popularity doesn’t confer anything upon anyone - good or bad_._ The Beatles were wildly popular. So was Sean Cassidy.



Consona said:


> Nolan co-works with him often. Yes, he does. So what?


 I also mentioned Ridley Scott. I think you should consider that you’re catching these fellows in your net as well as far as indicting someone’s artistic capabilities. If you hire Jerry Goldsmith for one thing and Hans Zimmer for another - it wouldn’t seem that one is utterly lacking in musical ability (including orchestral writing) - only that they are differing composers - as with all composers.


Consona said:


> And again, you confuse what I've pointed out already, writing with orchestral instruments does not mean writing orchestral music. Go listen to Inception, it's full of strings and brass, yet there's not even one symphonic piece in that whole score. Maybe I should not call it "orchestral" music since it can be rather unclear. Then again, I've pointed that out as well, there's a difference in using orchestral instruments as guitars in a rock composition, and using orchestral instruments in the way Beethoven or Williams use them. That's the difference I'm talking about.


 If you say Hans Zimmer doesn’t have the same facility in orchestral writing as Beethoven or even John Williams why would I quibble about that? I wouldn't. That isn’t what you said.


Consona said:


> But I went listen to some older Zimmer's music, like 20 years old, Prince of Egypt and such and I must say he was writing way more interesting music back then than right now. Dunno why.
> I wish he was using all his amazing production but started evolving his compositions from that 20 years old route.


 All fine. You’re perfectly entitled to your opinion. But if you say, _he was writing way more interesting music _that’s a far cry from saying he can’t write for the orchestra. Prince of Egypt is an orchestral score if there ever was.

I took you up on what you said, not what you’re saying here.

We do evaluate composers quite differently though. You site Horner and Williams as examples of great orchestral writing. I agree that both know their way around the orchestra (if neither is particularly experimental which I give Hans points for.) In both their cases however, they borrow very heavily. Neither started their own school which Hans inarguably did. And for some strange reason whenever he needs to rise to the occasion of a strictly orchestral piece, I don’t find it lacking at all - but fully informed writing. I don‘t find Williams in Hans’ writing and vice-verse. 

I don’t think you and I should have any problems at all if you set out your points far more along the lines as you’ve done here.


----------



## rudi

For those who haven't heard it before, Monty Norman wrote a musical before James Bond came along. This is the song called "Good Sign, Bad Sign" - the music was repurposed, and then turbo-charged by John Barry 



And for some more context, an interview with Monty Norman - the meat of the interview starts around 1:15


----------



## Consona

Dave Connor said:


> If you hire Jerry Goldsmith for one thing and Hans Zimmer for another - it wouldn’t seem that one is utterly lacking in musical ability (including orchestral writing) - only that they are differing composers - as with all composers.


Goldsmith and Zimmer can both make your film sound super awesome. For sure.

But that's also where the similarities kinda start to end.


----------



## Kevinside

Why do you all like Hanz Zimmer...?


----------



## Kevinside

Just listened to J Goldsmiths Total Recall.... Damm great music...
Now listening to The dark knight rises by HZ and JNH...
wow...what a difference...
Action Sequences can be very orchestral and complex and not this ostinato runs for minutes...
Listen to the Soundtrack of the first Mission Impossible Movie with Tom Cruise...

But there is a fanbase for this type of Hanz Zimmer Music...Tenet from Ludwig Göransson...Everybody likes it... For me its boring as Music itself. Perfect for the movie, but the Music is underwhelming...


----------



## Dave Connor

Consona said:


> Goldsmith and Zimmer can both make your film sound super awesome. For sure.


That’s essentially my point.

Hans is indeed a marvelous writer/orchestrator as well. He can mystify in the same way Goldsmith does (how did he do that?) If he didn’t I wouldn’t sing his praises. Guys who copy Hans fail for that very reason: the conception, writing and execution of the creative idea just isn’t there.

Goldsmith is one of the giants of film and is nearly peerless as an original orchestral composer. That distinguishes him from practically everyone else so I hardly begrudge him that.


----------



## nolotrippen

Consona said:


> So, you want me to get my music evaluated by people who think Thomas Bergersen writes more coherent John Williams-style music than John Williams, MI Fallout is the pinnacle of action movie scoring and the old music is almost completely unlistenable because it’s too quiet and there’s no bass?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And what kind of feedback should I be expecting?
> 
> 
> The Shazam theme I was talking about is something where you can show how good you are as an orchestral writer since it's not a cue but a standalone piece of music.
> 
> 
> What an incoherent hodgepodge that is... (the actual score is better, IMO, dunno why)
> 
> Now go listen to Horner's Star Trek themes when he was 29 years old, since he's one of those who started with piano at 5 as well
> 
> 
> 
> . It's a fricking masterclass on how you should compose symphonic film music.
> 
> 
> 
> This is a work of someone who "(somewhat)absolutely knows what he's doing orchestrally." (Yea, that is of course an exaggeration, but in comparison to that Shazam thing, not that much of a stretch.)
> 
> 
> I've made a whole long post about how incoherent the Shazam piece is, you can find it in the corresponding thread. It’s a rather detailed analysis of the structure, far from some subjective "I like this/I dislike that". Based on it, you can see what I mean by incoherence in music (it's basically a jumble of ideas). Everyone who's "not my ally with my view" can comment there why I'm wrong.
> If you want, go watch some video classes about Beethoven's usage of motifs in his symphonies, since that's the exact opposite of being a mess.
> 
> And nothing against discussing stuff like Thomas Bergersen writing more coherent JW-style music than John Williams, but that notion alone already feels like trying to conduct a serious flat-earth debate.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, don't know how better describe it, (even just for the fact that TB can't write the JW-style music, for starters... let alone more coherent).
> 
> 
> 
> @Dave Connor
> I don't know what are you trying to prove by your arguments...
> 
> Zimmer's music is very popular. Yes, it is. So what?
> Nolan co-works with him often. Yes, he does. So what?
> 
> And again, you confuse what I've pointed out already, writing with orchestral instruments does not mean writing orchestral music. Go listen to Inception, it's full of strings and brass, yet there's not even one symphonic piece in that whole score. Maybe I should not call it "orchestral" music since it can be rather unclear. Then again, I've pointed that out as well, there's a difference in using orchestral instruments as guitars in a rock composition, and using orchestral instruments in the way Beethoven or Williams use them. That's the difference I'm talking about.
> 
> But I went listen to some older Zimmer's music, like 20 years old, Prince of Egypt and such and I must say he was writing way more interesting music back then than right now. Dunno why.
> I wish he was using all his amazing production but started evolving his compositions from that 20 years old route.
> 
> I have not much hope for the Bond soundtrack, I fear it will be another MI Fallout, but I'm really interested what he'll do with Dune. Because there he really could present some good symphonic chops. But it's a Villeneuve film so I hope it's not another Blade Runner 2049 score with 3 hours of loud synth pads...
> 
> 
> The thing is, there's more skill involved in a minute of Bacharach's parody stuff than in the whole MI Fallout soundtrack.
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly, I'm not even exaggerating.
> 
> 
> Citation needed, otherwise a nice straw-man.



Bacharach's Casino is awesome.


----------



## nolotrippen

rudi said:


> For those who haven't heard it before, Monty Norman wrote a musical before James Bond came along. This is the song called "Good Sign, Bad Sign" - the music was repurposed, and then turbo-charged by John Barry
> 
> 
> 
> And for some more context, an interview with Monty Norman - the meat of the interview starts around 1:15





Wow I miss John Barry Bond scores. And John Barry!


----------



## Satorious

This may seem harsh - but I've heard that gun-barrel clip (basically a Newman retread - just with a touch more bass) and seen the bridge jump clip - totally underwhelmed! The bridge jump in particular sounded like any other generic trailer/action cue. I particularly disliked that annoying alarm noise - and no theme moment when Bond does something cool? Really hope these clips aren't representative of main score as I'm very unimpressed so far.


----------



## Kevinside

What did you all think of the James Bond Spectre Soundtrack from Thomas Newman?


----------



## jononotbono

Kevinside said:


> Just listened to J Goldsmiths Total Recall.... Damm great music...
> Now listening to The dark knight rises by HZ and JNH...
> wow...what a difference...
> Action Sequences can be very orchestral and complex and not this ostinato runs for minutes...
> Listen to the Soundtrack of the first Mission Impossible Movie with Tom Cruise...
> 
> But there is a fanbase for this type of Hanz Zimmer Music...Tenet from Ludwig Göransson...Everybody likes it... For me its boring as Music itself. Perfect for the movie, but the Music is underwhelming...




I'm always baffled why people think that HZ always writes the same type of music. It's as if they are stuck in a time loop and think that HZ only writes music for The Rock or Batman. Only writing with String Ostinatos. It's weird.

2017 BladeRunner 2049.
2016 Dunkkirk
2014 Intersteller
2013 12 Years a Slave
2012 Sherlock 2 (and the same year The Dark Knight Rises is released)
2011 Pirates 3
2010 Inception

Just a quick and rough "This is some of what HZ wrote each year that is radically different from each score for the past 10 years and none of it is String Ostinato Batman music"

And yes, I think the music for the Nolan Batman trilogy is perfect! Can't imagine anything else for those films. I can't wait to hear what the new Bond score is like!

Anyway, moving on. Back to HZ always writes the same music.


----------



## VivianaSings

Most people I know who have either worked with Hans or come in contact with him all hold the same opinion - he's a mediocre composer in the best of scenarios with an unparalleled ability to play the game or "game the system" as it were. Some of the people I know who worked with him early in his career have told me he was like that from day one - almost amazing in his ability to play politics and move up the ladder.

I'm sure we all know people like that - they exist in pretty much every career in the world. The person who seems to move up the ladder virtually unhindered until they're senior VP with almost no idea how their company or industry even works while the people in cubicles are flabbergasted at how no one manages to see this person is completely inept.

It's not sour grapes at all - in fact the people I know, if they were jealous it was of his ability to play the game at such a high level because that's actually what it takes to achieve success at this level. Not your compositional ability. Or at least not anymore - we're way past the point where talent or ability counts for much. They had told me they'd already accepted back then that they'd never be as big as him because they lacked the ability (or self-awareness maybe) to promote themselves at the highest levels with so little ability.

If anyone here is into mixing, a really good comparison would be Chris Lord-Alge. Quite a few people I know who worked with him at Unique back in the early 80s said even before he had any hits he was already promoting himself to labels as "the sound of hits". Most said he was always about self promotion and branding himself long before branding was even a thing and that he was insufferable back then - always talking about himself and how amazing he is and how people would duck into empty rooms in the studio to avoid him if they saw him coming so not to be subjected to a 10 minute conversation about how amazing he is. That's why it's like he's everywhere and his name is on every plug in and mixing video meanwhile his mixes sound abrasive, as if someone shoved all their hardware to 10, to put it nicely, while someone like Andy Wallace has 1/10th the name recognition while having over 10x the ability to craft a professional mix. That's not by accident. Chris Lord has been working at that all his life - kinda like Hans.

Anyway, I never met Hans and bear him no ill will as I, too, am in awe of his ability to go so far with his skillset, although his true skillset is really in playing politics. My opinion of his is based solely on comments from people who have been in contact with him or worked with him but honestly their comments would seem accurate based on his body of work.

As far as Bond goes, any Bond film worth watching has already been scored by any composers worth listening to. Over the last decade or two at least the film series has been circling the toilet and it makes sense that the music quality and theme songs have followed in lockstep to where we are now.


----------



## D Halgren

VivianaSings said:


> Most people I know who have either worked with Hans or come in contact with him all hold the same opinion - he's a mediocre composer in the best of scenarios with an unparalleled ability to play the game or "game the system" as it were. Some of the people I know who worked with him early in his career have told me he was like that from day one - almost amazing in his ability to play politics and move up the ladder.
> 
> I'm sure we all know people like that - they exist in pretty much every career in the world. The person who seems to move up the ladder virtually unhindered until they're senior VP with almost no idea how their company or industry even works while the people in cubicles are flabbergasted at how no one manages to see this person is completely inept.
> 
> It's not sour grapes at all - in fact the people I know, if they were jealous it was of his ability to play the game at such a high level because that's actually what it takes to achieve success at this level. Not your compositional ability. Or at least not anymore - we're way past the point where talent or ability counts for much. They had told me they'd already accepted back then that they'd never be as big as him because they lacked the ability (or self-awareness maybe) to promote themselves at the highest levels with so little ability.
> 
> If anyone here is into mixing, a really good comparison would be Chris Lord-Alge. Quite a few people I know who worked with him at Unique back in the early 80s said even before he had any hits he was already promoting himself to labels as "the sound of hits". Most said he was always about self promotion and branding himself long before branding was even a thing and that he was insufferable back then - always talking about himself and how amazing he is and how people would duck into empty rooms in the studio to avoid him if they saw him coming so not to be subjected to a 10 minute conversation about how amazing he is. That's why it's like he's everywhere and his name is on every plug in and mixing video meanwhile his mixes sound abrasive, as if someone shoved all their hardware to 10, to put it nicely, while someone like Andy Wallace has 1/10th the name recognition while having over 10x the ability to craft a professional mix. That's not by accident. Chris Lord has been working at that all his life - kinda like Hans.
> 
> Anyway, I never met Hans and bear him no ill will as I, too, am in awe of his ability to go so far with his skillset, although his true skillset is really in playing politics. My opinion of his is based solely on comments from people who have been in contact with him or worked with him but honestly their comments would seem accurate based on his body of work.
> 
> As far as Bond goes, any Bond film worth watching has already been scored by any composers worth listening to. Over the last decade or two at least the film series has been circling the toilet and it makes sense that the music quality and theme songs have followed in lockstep to where we are now.


Wow  

Interstellar is a masterpiece...


----------



## Consona

Kevinside said:


> Just listened to J Goldsmiths Total Recall.... Damm great music...
> Now listening to The dark knight rises by HZ and JNH...
> wow...what a difference...
> Action Sequences can be very orchestral and complex and not this ostinato runs for minutes...
> Listen to the Soundtrack of the first Mission Impossible Movie with Tom Cruise...
> 
> But there is a fanbase for this type of Hanz Zimmer Music...Tenet from Ludwig Göransson...Everybody likes it... For me its boring as Music itself. Perfect for the movie, but the Music is underwhelming...


The only thing I really dislike about the new-Zimmer type of music is, it has established very simplistic, even un-musical, scoring as the new great thing and trend that people even demand.

I haven't heard Tenet since I'm still waiting to see the film, but if it's all like that "music" in the prologue, it's exactly that stuff of music Zimmer with his style enabled to exist in the blockbuster sphere. Everrepetitive electro loops, uninmaginative piece structures, etc.
I don't hate electronic instruments and whatnot, I just don't like that people seem to not be able to do anything interesting with it.


Just today I was listening to Goldsmith's Rambo II, a score full of synths, but those compositions are fricking jaw-dropping.


Or that oscar-winning Joker soundtrack. Man that film suffered from the lack of some proper scored music. It used all those trendy sound-designy soundscapes, while being a pseudo-70s/80s crimi drama that would benefit from some insane Herrmann score, in some scenes I was hearing some of his wild Northwest passages that would enhance all the drama, when meanwhile in the film, there was some plain boring "something".



Dave Connor said:


> That’s essentially my point.
> 
> Hans is indeed a marvelous writer/orchestrator as well. He can mystify in the same way Goldsmith does (how did he do that?) If he didn’t I wouldn’t sing his praises. Guys who copy Hans fail for that very reason: the conception, writing and execution of the creative idea just isn’t there.
> 
> Goldsmith is one of the giants of film and is nearly peerless as an original orchestral composer. That distinguishes him from practically everyone else so I hardly begrudge him that.


All I said was, they can make your film sound awesome.

I didn't say anything about marvelous writing and orchestrating... 😜

Because... 
that's where the differences start. Zimmer is great when it comes to themes and motifs, he can really do memorable stuff. And awesome sounding stuff. But his compositions are not on that same level.


D Halgren said:


> Wow
> 
> Interstellar is a masterpiece...


Interstellar is exactly that type of his scoring I'm talking about. I can hum that organ motif any time anywhere, love it, but the compositions themselves are quite plain.
It shows his inspirations are people like Philip Glass, the minimalism, even though Glass' pieces are more lively than Zimmer's still.

Meanwhile you can hear people like Rozsa, Goldsmith or Horner were influenced by jazz or symphonic pieces, their work with musical ideas is so vivid, in terms of... everything... orchestration, harmonic language, shortening, lenghtening, interwhining and sculpting those phrases and motifs, etc., just a vastly different approach.



Kevinside said:


> What did you all think of the James Bond Spectre Soundtrack from Thomas Newman?


I only heard Thomas Newman's Skyfall and it was quite awful. Those constant percussive loops gave me some serious headache. Bleh.


----------



## Consona

Kevinside said:


> But there is a fanbase for this type of Hanz Zimmer Music...Tenet from Ludwig Göransson...Everybody likes it... For me its boring as Music itself. Perfect for the movie, but the Music is underwhelming...


You made me listen to some Tenet pieces. What a fucking heap of crap.


----------



## Technostica

Consona said:


> Interstellar is exactly that type of his scoring I'm talking about. I can hum that organ motif any time anywhere, love it, but the compositions themselves are quite plain.
> It shows his inspirations are people like Philip Glass, the minimalism, even though Glass' pieces are more lively than Zimmer's still.


I love some of the earlier Glass soundtracks but they had a different landscape as the two I am thinking of were for documentaries with no dialogue.
I should check out more of his movie scores.


----------



## Henrik B. Jensen

VivianaSings said:


> Most people I know who have either worked with Hans or come in contact with him all hold the same opinion - he's a mediocre composer in the best of scenarios with an unparalleled ability to play the game or "game the system" as it were. Some of the people I know who worked with him early in his career have told me he was like that from day one - almost amazing in his ability to play politics and move up the ladder.
> 
> I'm sure we all know people like that - they exist in pretty much every career in the world. The person who seems to move up the ladder virtually unhindered until they're senior VP with almost no idea how their company or industry even works while the people in cubicles are flabbergasted at how no one manages to see this person is completely inept.
> 
> It's not sour grapes at all - in fact the people I know, if they were jealous it was of his ability to play the game at such a high level because that's actually what it takes to achieve success at this level. Not your compositional ability. Or at least not anymore - we're way past the point where talent or ability counts for much. They had told me they'd already accepted back then that they'd never be as big as him because they lacked the ability (or self-awareness maybe) to promote themselves at the highest levels with so little ability.
> 
> If anyone here is into mixing, a really good comparison would be Chris Lord-Alge. Quite a few people I know who worked with him at Unique back in the early 80s said even before he had any hits he was already promoting himself to labels as "the sound of hits". Most said he was always about self promotion and branding himself long before branding was even a thing and that he was insufferable back then - always talking about himself and how amazing he is and how people would duck into empty rooms in the studio to avoid him if they saw him coming so not to be subjected to a 10 minute conversation about how amazing he is. That's why it's like he's everywhere and his name is on every plug in and mixing video meanwhile his mixes sound abrasive, as if someone shoved all their hardware to 10, to put it nicely, while someone like Andy Wallace has 1/10th the name recognition while having over 10x the ability to craft a professional mix. That's not by accident. Chris Lord has been working at that all his life - kinda like Hans.
> 
> Anyway, I never met Hans and bear him no ill will as I, too, am in awe of his ability to go so far with his skillset, although his true skillset is really in playing politics. My opinion of his is based solely on comments from people who have been in contact with him or worked with him but honestly their comments would seem accurate based on his body of work.
> 
> As far as Bond goes, any Bond film worth watching has already been scored by any composers worth listening to. Over the last decade or two at least the film series has been circling the toilet and it makes sense that the music quality and theme songs have followed in lockstep to where we are now.


I read the first three paragraphs, then I knew I could skip the rest, because anyone with ears knows what you’re saying is utter bull....

HZ, a mediocre composer who only gets hired because he‘s adept at the politics game etc. - are you shitting me? Go watch Gladiator, check how well the music fits each scene. That was HZ back in 2000. Then afterwards, watch Dunkirk. Notice how perfectly the sound matches the grim nature of the film. That’s HZ in recent years. To claim what you do in your post above... I shouldn’t even have bothered replying, but here you go.


----------



## Dave Connor

VivianaSings said:


> Most people I know who have either worked with Hans or come in contact with him all hold the same opinion - he's a mediocre composer in the best of scenarios with an unparalleled ability to play the game or "game the system" as it were.


Do you think an artist on the level of Ridley Scott ever hired even one person based on their political savvy rather than their artistry? He‘s been long recognized as the one the best film-makers ever to stand behind a camera. You think he hired Hans because he thinks Hans has a good “game”?

The people I’ve worked with that know Hans have the highest opinion of him. In a conversation with a violinist who did a ton of solo work on Dunkirk I mentioned the _Beethoven cue in Interstellar _to which his jaw dropped and neither of us said another word. Because it’s a stunning bit of writing where Hans writes in the first person as Beethoven using the language of the 9th Symphony’s slow movement. Yet he steals only the language but not a single note in a sustained cue where you wait breathlessly for him to falter and swipe something since Schubert, Schumann, Brahms and Mahler were never able to do that without actually copying.

I think Hans Zimmer is a monster of a musician; a model musician with protean gifts and entirely deserving of his success.

Everyone that’s ever hired a musician based upon their clever abilities in career advancement - raise your hand.


----------



## Arbee

I only just read this thread (damn you procrastination!) and wow, seriously folks. Are we still doing the JW vs HZ dance?! If I read it correctly, the first is a thief and the second is an imposter. Does that make everyone feel better about those who put in the hard yards, made the sacrifices, and yes perhaps got a little luck along their way to a highly successful career? Jeez guys


----------



## Consona

Arbee said:


> Are we still doing the JW vs HZ dance?!


Yes, we are. Go procrastinate elsewhere.


----------



## Dirtgrain

VivianaSings said:


> Most people I know who have either worked with Hans or come in contact with him all hold the same opinion - he's a mediocre composer in the best of scenarios with an unparalleled ability to play the game or "game the system" as it were. Some of the people I know who worked with him early in his career have told me he was like that from day one - almost amazing in his ability to play politics and move up the ladder.




Working with Hans Zimmer and/or coming into contact with him in some way does not necessarily give them insights into his talent as a composer. People say stuff like this in every field--teaching even. More often than not, it is BS. That doesn't mean it is BS in this case, but such hearsay is not called for when one could just analyze Zimmer's music instead of basing an opinion on what other people say. Or is it that you mean to say that other people are writing the scores for Zimmer?

Also, I'd say that Zimmer has been at the top of the ladder for a long time. I don't imagine he has to do any climbing. Isn't he in demand, given his record?


----------



## Matt Damon

"BWWWAAAAAAAAAM, Mr. Bond."


----------



## jononotbono

Matt Damon said:


> "BWWWAAAAAAAAAM, Mr. Bond."



I've been curious. You look really hard in the Jason Bourne trailer. You know, the bit when you one punch a terrorist cold to the floor. Truly terrific performance. Is that all you or does the Braam/Cinematic Hit help a bit?


----------



## Matt Damon

jononotbono said:


> Is that all you or does the Braam/Cinematic Hit help a bit?



The braaaaams really sell it, don't they?

It's my alarm clock noise on my phone, actually. I like to start the day as action-packed as possible.


----------



## purple

You know, I don't think people hate Hans Zimmer so much as they hate the genre of endless copycat music he spawned. Not his fault. He's pretty trail-blazing with most of his stuff. That said, the film industry has always been filled with crappy copycat music. Watch some old movies on TCM or something. Many of the movies are great but the music is usually dreadful. It's easy for us to remember the greats of a given era and forget that most everyone else working was a discount copycat of those greats (because that's what they were hired to be!). The same is true now.


----------



## Arbee

purple said:


> It's easy for us to remember the greats of a given era and forget that most everyone else working was a discount copycat of those greats (because that's what they were hired to be!).


 Here's perhaps an exception that comes to mind (I read they wanted Rachmaninoff but had to "make do" with Addinsell )


----------



## Consona

I was just listening to this...




and was like... _waaaaaaiiit a minute_...







_I know this music from a different film..._

Maybe HZ could use it in the correct film universe this time.


----------



## GNP

purple said:


> You know, I don't think people hate Hans Zimmer so much as they hate the genre of endless copycat music he spawned. Not his fault. He's pretty trail-blazing with most of his stuff. That said, the film industry has always been filled with crappy copycat music. Watch some old movies on TCM or something. Many of the movies are great but the music is usually dreadful. It's easy for us to remember the greats of a given era and forget that most everyone else working was a discount copycat of those greats (because that's what they were hired to be!). The same is true now.


Well observed.


----------

