# Titanic - attack or defend!



## noiseboyuk (Jul 12, 2010)

I've noticed that admitting to liking Titanic pretty much wrecks your credentials as a movie lover or film maker. I like it. Not without flaws, of course, but I like it, and here's my defence:

Titanic is a 3 1/4 hour movie, and everyone knew the ending going in - hey folks, the boat sinks. Easy to forget now just how derided this was before release - the tales of a maniacal director way over budget, a huge folly that no-one wanted to see. Also films this long are bad news for box office, cos they can fit less screenings in a day.

Screenplay is structure. I think the good script Titanic - as opposed to the not-good ship Titanic - is in sound shape. The maguffin of the Heart Of The Ocean (the diamond) is actually very clever and elegant. It drives both contemporary and historical stories, both weaving in and out of each other. It's the driving force for Bill Paxton's expedition, it propels Old Rose to find Bill when she sees it on TV, it represents the death of her current relationship in 1912 as she is given it and her liberation when painted nude with it - and in turn having Jack and Rose fall in love (and the back of a car). It is then used to frame Jack, and thus imprisoning him in the bowels of the ship. Eventually - it's purpose to show that love is more important than money, with Bill Paxton transformed - it is returned to the sea at the movie's end. You can call the moralism a bit hackneyed, but it's a very clever device.

In and around this, Cameron devotes a full 90 minutes - a standard movie length - to establishing all the characters and relationships. Sure they are broad archetypes, but they work. Some of the dialogue is hideous (the notorious early scene unpacking the paintings with the anachronistic comments about Picasso). But much works very well - the dinner scene is very effective for example, and imho made a star out of Leonardo Di Caprio right there.

So when the iceberg hits, for at least the audience in cinemas at the time, they cared about the characters. So for them the sinking become less about spectacle and more about the genuine horror - as we all know, if you don't care about the characters, ANY film is sunk. The film's raison d'etre was that we all know the story of Titanic - but we didn't REALLY know what it was like. In that, I think he succeeded - he never looked at the Carpathia etc which would provide poignancy, but also detachment. We we're on the deck, from beginning to end - a more visceral experience.

So there you go - that's my defence. Oh, and it was well cast and the effects were fantastic. Incidentally, I loathe the sampled vocal patch Horner uses in the score... I hated it at the time and it just gets worse with age. Shame...


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 12, 2010)

noiseboyuk @ Mon Jul 12 said:


> Incidentally, I loathe the sampled vocal patch Horner uses in the score... I hated it at the time and it just gets worse with age. Shame...



Horsefly nipping at a champion stallion.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Jul 12, 2010)

Ashermusic @ Mon Jul 12 said:


> noiseboyuk @ Mon Jul 12 said:
> 
> 
> > Incidentally, I loathe the sampled vocal patch Horner uses in the score... I hated it at the time and it just gets worse with age. Shame...
> ...



Well, I like the rest of the score and like Horner very much generally. Just that one patch which sounds like a cheap sampler imho...

We lesser mortals ARE allowed to express opinions, right?


----------



## choc0thrax (Jul 12, 2010)

Ashermusic @ Mon Jul 12 said:


> noiseboyuk @ Mon Jul 12 said:
> 
> 
> > Incidentally, I loathe the sampled vocal patch Horner uses in the score... I hated it at the time and it just gets worse with age. Shame...
> ...



^^**LONG THREAD ALERT! GO TO CODE RED!**^^

Anyways, uhhhh It's hard for me to give an opinion since I was like 15 or so the last time I saw Titanic. I liked it at that age but then again I liked almost anything that had people dying/boobs in it. At age 16 I believe I referred to Armageddon as the greatest film I had ever seen. Yeah I referred to it as a "film" not simply a movie. I really deserved to get my face kicked in back then. So my past self basically had no taste in films and is nothing to go by. I think if I saw Titanic today I'd probably see all the flaws and suckage. Maybe I'll rewatch just to see.

Recently someone told me a kind of amusing story about when they were filming Titanic out in like Halifax or something and some crew member spiked the chowder everyone was eating with uhhh either LSD or something similar. Everyone including Cameron was just sitting around describing the effects until Cameron was like "Just get it out of me!!" and someone gave him liquid soap to clean out his system...which didn't really do anything. That chick that played old Rose ended up in the hospital heh.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 12, 2010)

Folmann @ Mon Jul 12 said:


> I think its a little sad when people - without notable credit - starts dissing high-end scores without the proper experience/understanding of what goes into these scores and their value to the general public.



Well, halle-f'ing-lujah, I am not the only one here who feels this way. Good to know.

Your stock just went WAY up with me, Troels.


----------



## wst3 (Jul 12, 2010)

Folmann @ Mon Jul 12 said:


> <big snip>I think its a little sad when people - without notable credit - starts dissing high-end scores without the proper experience/understanding of what goes into these scores and their value to the general public. Its particular sad cause many of the haters are composers themselves, but they fail to provide examples of how it should be done.
> 
> Its easy to hate - its much harder doing it better.


Well said, but I'd extend it even further in my little world... don't hate the score, or the movie, or the composer! Explain to me why it did not work for you instead. Even without the proper credentials, if you can explain to me, in any level of detail, why a composers choice of this or that left you unsatisfied I'll consider it. But if all you can say is that it is trite, well, to me that's not much to go on, even if you have tons of credits.

It takes some effort to explain why you don't like something, or some aspect of something, and sadly that seems to be in short supply today. But that's how we learn!



Folmann @ Mon Jul 12 said:


> Titanic is a masterpiece in commercial soundtrack scoring.


Well it is certainly as epic as the film<G>... and while I did find some of the dramatic devices to be lacking, for me (and I'll be glad to go into detail off line) I did enjoy the overall effect of the film. That's good enough.

As one who has taken part in some truly odd interpretations of plays both classic and modern I can respect any artist that stretches, whether they succeed or not.

As an aside, two of my all time favorite films are Apollo 13 and Twister. The former surprised me because I was a geeky kid when it took place, and not only knew how it turned out, but remember quite clearly thinking that the news media could have paid a bit more attention. And yet the film captured my imagination, and it didn't matter that I knew how it ended. The later, well, the story line is, I believe, a bit trite, but the overall effect still worked for me, and I was glad that they survived, and got back together again - not that the outcome was surprising from an analytical perspective<G>! And I love that score. The marriage of the sound effects and the music is as good as it gets for me. If you looked at my movie shelf they would both probably seem terribly out of place, but that's just the way things work sometimes.


----------



## Mike Connelly (Jul 12, 2010)

For anyone who doesn't have the soundtrack handy, a number of the snippets on iTunes have the sampled choir if you want to refresh your memory.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Jul 12, 2010)

Folmann @ Mon Jul 12 said:


> I think its a little sad when people - without notable credit - starts dissing high-end scores without the proper experience/understanding of what goes into these scores and their value to the general public. Its particular sad cause many of the haters are composers themselves, but they fail to provide examples of how it should be done.



Couldn't agree more, but I do hope this doesn't refer to my OP! This thread came out of the Zimmer Inception one, where I make exactly the same point about Zimmer's critics. However, the principle is that of lazy bandwaggon-joining criticism. To extend the argument to the point where NO criticism, however well argued, is considered on-form is absurd. Is anyone who has ever disliked a book, movie, play or work of art but not made one that is commercially more successful themselves not allowed to voice their thoughts?! To say, as Asher did "a horsefly nipping at a stallion" was imho absurd, as one could type exactly the same thing after any criticism by anyone of anyone who is more prominent in their particular career. Indeed, it functions just as a crude device to close down any intellectual debate whatsoever.

In the case of Titanic, one of the easiest shots is against the Celine Dion song, now firmly etched in the public consciousness as a point of ridicule. I wasn't too keen on it sung in the end credits, but as a theme I thought it worked great - even though on first viewing I was (humble admission) totally swept up in the movie and not thinking for a second about the music, this did somehow get through. I seem to remember the opening piano figure was used just after the love scene as the couple appear on deck, and even on a first listen in a movie context it stood out... which serves story perfectly. The Irish influences too have been much derided, but again I think they work well in context.

So, again, overall Horner's work was fantastic (as it usually is... Apollo 13 is another real favourite). My criticism in the OP though I'd totally stand by, as it takes me out of the film. Definitely worth a listen to refresh anyone's memory... it really jars to my ears, especially over the boat-setting-sail sequence. Titanic was the biggest budgeted movie of all time, and was delivered 6 months later than originally anticipated, so I can't believe that he couldn't have used a real choir or a different sound... which makes it an artistic choice and one I personally can't understand...


----------



## nikolas (Jul 12, 2010)

Folmann @ Mon Jul 12 said:


> We can always have a subjective discussion about the scores, but for anybody interested in commercial scoring one has to respect and analyze what these scores are doing right.


Fair enough I guess, but some people do judge music for what it is: music. And this is where most misunderstandings happen I think! 



> I think its a little sad when people - without notable credit - starts dissing high-end scores without the proper experience/understanding of what goes into these scores and their value to the general public. Its particular sad cause many of the haters are composers themselves, but they fail to provide examples of how it should be done.


Actually you need to define 'notable credit' here, cause, frankly, I would gladly think of you, or JohnG, or Brian, or many other people in here people WITH notable credit and experience, who have also proven they can write music.

Writting on the same scene as Titanic seems undoable (who amongst us would today score such a HUGE movie and still be around to talk about it? Can you imagine zimmer a member in vi-control?), but also not to the point.

A critic doesn't have to be a doer, similar to a piano teacher who doesn't have to be a concert pianist.



> Its easy to hate - its much harder doing it better.
> 
> Titanic is a masterpiece in commercial soundtrack scoring.


I agree with your sentiments, but I do, still, dissagree with the general idea "if you can't do it, then shut up". I can't score a movie, I've almost never done it (apart from a few documentaries, ads, and plenty of games). I wouldn't know where to start in all honesty. I do hope though that this doesn't preclude me from saying that I REALLY REALLY didn't like the music for Avatar (cause I can't even remember the music of Titanic). *

a. There was as total lack of any uniqueness and originality in the sound and the aesthetics. We are dealing with a new planet, all in CGI and you get what sounds like Braveheart at most times!
b. Contrast of feelings. Yes I felt it many times, I found the music simply innappropriate for certain scenes. I can't go into more detail since I would have to rewatch the film, but this is my feelings.
c. Lack of interest. Yes, music is serving the media and not the other way around, but THIS? It was simply non existant at most times, with generic stuff, sounding like coming out of a bot composing music based on what it's been fed (temp tracks) alone.

The above could all be choices of the producers, for all I know, so there is the benefit of the doubt here. I am claiming my ignorance to who makes the final choice (and I'm not certain but seems this way that unless you are called Williams, or ok Elfman and Zimmer you have next to 0 chance in pushing your own directives in how the music goes). 

BUT

And I also have to comment that plenty of things I've heard of Horner sound like DIRECT RIPS (not borrowing, not 'stealing' per Stravisnky saying, just copy pasting) from other composers and particularly Russian ones (Prokofiev springs in mind for at least two movies). There is a thin line between temp tracks and original music I guess, but in most examples of Horners music I found this thin line dissappearing.

PS. Others have Zimmer, others Cage. I guess I have Horner as my pet peeve! :D

* I know what I'm doing here, talking about Avatar instead of Titanic, so please excuse this small derailing... It wasn't done on purpose or for pure trolling, but as an effort to talk about something I do remember, can analyse a little and talk about, instead of throwing stones at random. 


EDIT: Both movies, Titanic and Avatar are simply STUNNING, from my point of view! Masterpieces both, hard to overpass! Not to get me wrong at least! I loved both movies!


----------



## Narval (Jul 13, 2010)

noiseboyuk @ Mon Jul 12 said:


> I loathe the sampled vocal patch Horner uses in the score... I hated it at the time and it just gets worse with age. Shame...


They put ketchup on hamburgers, don't they? Very popular food. Extremely successful business. Now, instead of applauding it, you dare to suggest that you know better than the masses? That the average Joe/Joanne are gullible, stupid, impulsive, that they have poor taste and little concern for their own and their children's health? Well, guess what? - You are a horsefly nipping at a champion stallion.(o)


----------



## nikolas (Jul 13, 2010)

Troels: You are indeed right that it is sad to forget to discuss about the merits of soundtracks, instead of constant bashing. And you are also right that details, technical, compositional, orchestrational or otherwise are trivial and simply useless to the averege movie fan!

However it should be noted that there is no reason to discuss feedback in any sense. There is 0,00001% chance that Zimmer/Horner/other is reading this and taking note into what to do better next time! And silly to even consider that! 

Ultimately, though, we learn from our peers mostly, and we judge ourselves based on what is out there. There is no other way to know that your work is pro enough, especially when starting out, other than comparing it to other work, already established. And in order to do that... well you fall into the bashing area, sometimes more than others.

For those who know me, will remember that I usually stay out of a lot of bashing, but I have my pet peeve, Horner... :-/ Sorry about that and I won't be mentioning anything else for this matter really!

EDIT: You know what? I think I'll take the above paragraph back! I've already mentioned I don't know how movies work and I have serious doubts if the end result is an issue of Horner (or any composer apart from the biggest names perhaps) or the producers. I also mentioned that I wouldn't be able to do anything similar myself, so really, I don't see any bashing from my behalf...


----------



## lux (Jul 13, 2010)

Folmann @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> I think the challenge here is that people are criticizing without the proper framework. The majority of negative feedback normally falls into two categories:
> 
> 1. The composer is ripping/raping somebody else.
> 2. The composer is using simple/cheesy production tricks.



i would be a bit more specific on that. Point 1 is not technically a critique but its an accusation. Most of times its wrong accusation, considering that is almost impossible to not find similarities in most music out there existing today. 

Point 2 is not a critique either. Its a technical analysis. Again, most of times its just an exercise of dissection as it looses the overall sense of a composition. Usually comes out of people in a learning process. And its pretty useful, as we all try to get away from the "wow, i could never do that" to "ok, i'll try to do that anyway, just lemme understand where's the trick". Most of times there's a trick. A pretty nice trick btw, which concurr to create beautiful things. everything is tricky. Difference is where the trick is nice or is gritty and lazy.



> The problem is that this type of feedback has little to no relevance for the general public. The general public is another word for our main target audience(s).
> 
> The general public doesn't care if it is a rip off or if its using a synth choir.
> 
> The general public base their perceptions on entirely different set of values and for any commercial composer those values are far more important then home cooked criticism on an internet forum.



this is a risky and long debated argument. I would be careful personally to express in such a simple fashion as it pertains a very complex matter, resumable with the question "do we really give people what we like or do the people like whatever we give them?".

I'll make a simple example which usually gets me introuble when trying to resolve the rebus. 

In the late seventies people loved (i say LOVED) scores attached to major blockbusters which were everything but cheesy or lazy creation. They have been probably among the nicest orchestral compositions and executions of the late century. Obvious example being the binome LSO and John Williams.

People didnt seem to care about Jaws being an harmonic madness and a fugue mastership piece or the sophisticated and beautiful nuances of Encounters or ET. Nobody sorted out of the cinema saying "wow, great movie, but that score was sooo serious". Nobody.

So basically i always have a bell ringing in my head when i hear stuff like "thats what people like". A possible, suspicious lazy and unartistical approach.

Of course is a matter of manners sometimes. Too "finalized" comments are typically not useful as they dont reveal the whole thing. But still, trasforming a forum in a handshake academy of "successful" and politically correct composers sounds odd for more than a reason, which i will not state here.

Thats the reason i tend to not bash too much guys who dissect, talk and critique with good passion what comes out there. Personally.


----------



## EnTaroAdun (Jul 13, 2010)

Folmann @ 2010-07-13 said:


> The fact remains that scores like Titanic and Avatar (disregarding our subjective feelings) are major successes for the general public. It doesn't matter what we think about them. It doesn't matter if we feel its cheesy or if they are ripping other composers.
> 
> What matters is that we embrace what these composers are doing right and how their scores are perceived by the target audiences they are writing for.


You totally can't measure the quality of a soundtrack/song/album on how well it sells. Totally not.

The Avatar score sucks. It's really bad.
But it still sells, because of the popularity of the film.



Oh .. this thread was about Titanic. :lol:
Well ... good film.


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Jul 13, 2010)

I like Titanic quite a bit - both the film and the score, and I have no issues admitting to it 

I find it a really entertaining and atmospheric film.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 13, 2010)

Troels points are, and mine, is that if you do not have a track record of scoring films (and even if you do) you may:

1. Have no idea how hard it is and the skills required that are not necessarily only your pure ability to compose.

2. Have no idea how much of the score is the composer's vision and how much is what the director wanted.

3. You owe the guys who do it a modicum of respect and perhaps you could be a little humble in arrogantly expressing negative opinions and instead look at what is good.

There is a big difference in saying "I did not like the score because of issue A and issue B" and "Horner sucks because he rips himself off , is unoriginal, blah, blah, blah."

If you do the former, you are having a respectful discussion. If you do the latter, you are behaving like a jerk.


----------



## nikolas (Jul 13, 2010)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luaWfx1qTmU (from 3:49) 

and 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYeqnDOhPqY (from around 3:32, although the theme starts earlier). 

There we go, to get it over about the ripping thing I mentioned. NO IDEA IF IT'S HORNER's FAULT OR SOMEONE ELSES, BUT IT'S THERE! It's dead obvious to anyone with ears!

So let me retract my words above, not to hurt people who like yelling 'jerk' to others and say:

The music in Avatar seemed to me, in a very personal fashion, to be unoriginal. It hit me as such because I was stunned by the CGI and everything else in the movie. There is noone to blame, since scoring a movie is VERY hard and I've no idea if the composer is to blame, or someone else. It just happened to be Horner.

Som parts of the soundtrack, seemed like they belonged to a different movie and brought such sentiments in me, while watching the movie. Again, chances are that the director had more to do with it than the composer.

The music was fitting in other places, of course it was perfectly produced, but... forgetable (and in either way a movie soundtrack can do that and still work well).

I'm judging it from MY point of view and not that of the Averege Joe. My point of view has been polluted by the time I've spent studying, listening and composing music, so...



____________

I'm just wondering if Troels or Jay would still stay so 'clean' if we were in a pub drinking. Perhaps this has something to do. I tend to treat forums like a live discussion, where I say pretty much what's on my head. (and this is pretty obvious most of the times). I don't keep much and I don't regard my opinion as special or anything (but it is MY opinion and I've earned a right to have one in music I think). If my son told me something about Beethoven I wouldn't be thinking that he's rude or arrogant. If Troels (for example) was going about how bad Bach's music is, while drinking a beer, I wouldn't mind really. But suddently when things are written in a forum they take a strange colouring!


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 13, 2010)

nikolas @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> ____________
> 
> I'm just wondering if Troels or Jay would still stay so 'clean' if we were in a pub drinking. Perhaps this has something to do. I tend to treat forums like a live discussion, where I say pretty much what's on my head. (and this is pretty obvious most of the times). I don't keep much and I don't regard my opinion as special or anything (but it is MY opinion and I've earned a right to have one in music I think). If my son told me something about Beethoven I wouldn't be thinking that he's rude or arrogant. If Troels (for example) was going about how bad Bach's music is, while drinking a beer, I wouldn't mind really. But suddently when things are written in a forum they take a strange colouring!



I guess this is the crux of it. I do not think a public forum should be treated like a bunch if guys in a bar drinking beer. We all defecate but I assume most of us prefer to do so out of view of others

But even in a bar, I would be far more likely to criticize a specific score with specifics or say I don't care for a particular composer's work than to say "he sucks", etc.

And the other point you don't get is that until you produce a body of work the fact that you have studied music does not elevate your opinion of a film score beyond that of the "Average Joe." To pros, you are still just an Average Joe, not in terms of music, but in terms of evaluating film scores because they are NOT purely about the music!

And I called no one a jerk. I described certain specific behavior as "behaving like a jerk."


----------



## nikolas (Jul 13, 2010)

In which case, we just have to agree to dissagree in everything you said pretty much.

Different people treat the forum differently. There is no right or wrong, but at least it explains a few things (from both perspectives). And again I never said anyone sucks! Right? Are we clear on that? not to mention that I keep mentioning that exactly because I don't know how *exactly* the soundtrack creation process works, I reserve that maybe it's not the composers fault, but someone elses, or even noones (just a choice, which I don't understand). Perhaps I need to learn to keep my mouth shut a bit more (or my fingers away from teh keyboard).

I don't care to advertise what I've done and my experience in music, especially to you Jay (since you never show anything you've done in music...), but, just for the shake of it:
1. Music is music is music. Usage differs and one can take that into account, but one can also judeg things in anyway they please. I don't remember ever mentioning anything in regards to technical issues, or techniques, etc... 
2. How far is a movie from a computer game, from ads, from documentaries, from theatrical plays I wonder? 
3. But really most importantly. We have a (big) forum which deals with sample libraries primarily. We get very often people talking about samples... The vast majority of those do not work in developing sample libraries. The majroity of those do not work professionally in a studio. Some even haven't bought those sample libraries. Yet we still have a forum talking about it.

I'll repeat, once more, in case it's not getting accross: I am EXTREMELY confident that the theme in the intro of Red Heat is the SAME theme of the Cantata for the 20th commemoration of the October revolution by Prokofiev (pilosophers part II). I find there is no question there. The choice for doing this is up to debate I guess, but I still find it very hard that there is a problem in me saying that a movie soundtrack has this "issue" ("issue" meaning the lightest of things). And I'll repeat that in the end nobody but me seems to care, since nobody but me knew the music of Prokofiev when Red Heat came out ("me" is an exxaggeration, but it certainly is not a well know work of Prokofiev. I just happened to have an old Russian record with parts of this cantata).


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 13, 2010)

nikolas @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> In which case, we just have to agree to dissagree in everything you said pretty much.
> 
> Different people treat the forum differently. There is no right or wrong, but at least it explains a few things (from both perspectives). And again I never said anyone sucks! Right? Are we clear on that? not to mention that I keep mentioning that exactly because I don't know how *exactly* the soundtrack creation process works, I reserve that maybe it's not the composers fault, but someone elses, or even noones (just a choice, which I don't understand). Perhaps I need to learn to keep my mouth shut a bit more (or my fingers away from teh keyboard).
> 
> ...



Just for clarity, since we will not agree:

1. In my mind, and apparently Troels as well, there is a right and wrong way to behave on a forum.

2. I didn't say you said "Horner sucks" but others have and said other film composers suck also. 

3. When you say "music is music is music" about a film score, it just shows that you are ignorant about the craft of film scoring and therefore can only evaluate it as music. I don't say this to insult you, but I find it an inescapable conclusion.

4. Although I don't post anything here, lots of my music is on my website and you can draw whatever conclusions you wish from it. Once again though, the music there that was written for films or TV shows will give you an incomplete view without seeing the picture. Truth be told, some of the best sounding cues I have written worked less well with the picture than some that would be unimpressive without the picture.


----------



## Mike Connelly (Jul 13, 2010)

I was wondering about the use of sampled choir so I looked up about the movie. Reportedly, Horner chose the samples over live choir because he thought live would sound too "church". So assuming that's true it was a creative choice and not a financial one.



Narval @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> noiseboyuk @ Mon Jul 12 said:
> 
> 
> > I loathe the sampled vocal patch Horner uses in the score... I hated it at the time and it just gets worse with age. Shame...
> ...



This thread made me think along the same lines. I guess nobody can complain about the quality of a McDonalds hamburger since they sell so many? There's definitely something to be said for commercial success, but it's hard for me to buy into the notion that the things that sell the most must be the best. I must be naive, but I'd say it's possible to create stuff that is high quality AND appeals to the masses (and there are tons of examples of that in film scoring).

To take the analogy in another direction, I guess Jar Jar must be a great movie character and above critique?


----------



## nikolas (Jul 13, 2010)

1. Since Troels hasn't posted for a long time, unless there is a 'behind the curtain' discussion I can't see how you can say that... 

2. Fair enough. I always try to NOT make personal comments, or even indirect ones (behave like a jerk...)

3. When you read a series of points, read all three of them. Let me explain. I judge things, based on who I am (which I assume is generally known in here). I make various comments based on that, but not based on incompatible 'formats'. I didn't take, for a minute, a soundtrack to be concert hall music. On the other hand my comments were aimed at judging a soundtrack, based on what music for media should, for me, be. So I mentioned unoriginality, contrast of aesthetics, and also something else I already mentioned as a pet peeve of mine.

This pet peeve IS completely musical and has nothing to do with film/media/anything music. I posted two clips to back my mentioning on something very specific. So, despite my non existant experience in creating movie music and perhaps taken as an Average joe by pros (no insult taken, btw), I could have studied film msuic (and actually have, both on a more official level and non official as self taught), but since my comment was aimed at a purely musical level, there's hardly any problem here, but your denial in me having an opinion, which I've been trying to back up the best way I can, only to find you discussing (in general) how arrogant this seems, blah blah (in general, not aimed particularly to me), and how someone is behaving like a jerk because he... blah blah.

4. I don't care to draw any conclusions (again generally speaking). I read your words and decide whether I agree or dissagree. I try (not always successful) to be unimpressed by the WHO but stay on the WHAT someone is saying! And I agree that what I consider my best music, doesn't work (at all) in picture, or computer games...

Let's recap: General bashing is quite rude. Personal comments are very rude. "The x composer sucks!" is extremely rude. Finding a soundtrack unoriginal is not nice, but neither rude. Having the belief that something in a soundtrack was taken from somewhere else has no moral reprecautions really. (BTW, I thinòîÖ   Ü;*îÖ   Ü;+îÖ   Ü;,îÖ   Ü;-îÖ   Ü;.îÖ   Ü;/îÖ   Ü;0îÖ   Ü;1îÖ   Ü;2îÖ   Ü;3îÖ   Ü;4îÖ   Ü;5îÖ   Ü;6îÖ   Ü;7îÖ   Ü;8îÖ   Ü;9îÖ   Ü;:îÖ   Ü;;îÖ   Ü;<îÖ   Ü;=îÖ   Ü;>îÖ   Ü;?îÖ   Ü;@îÖ   Ü;AîÖ   Ü;BîÖ   Ü;CîÖ   Ü;DîÖ   Ü;EîÖ   Ü;FîÖ   Ü;GîÖ   Ü;HîÖ   Ü;IîÖ   Ü;JîÖ   Ü;KîÖ   Ü;LîÖ   Ü;M


----------



## wst3 (Jul 13, 2010)

Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> 1. Have no idea how hard it is and the skills required that are not necessarily only your pure ability to compose.


No I don't, but I know how hard it is, and what skills are required at the shallow end of the pool, and I can extrapolate. It's hard! And it requires as many inter-personal and negotiating skills as it does composers chops. And that's before all the technical stuff<G>!



Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> 2. Have no idea how much of the score is the composer's vision and how much is what the director wanted.


This is key! The vast majority of my original music composition has been for live theatre. I just love live theatre - probably need a 12 step program, but that's another topic.

In live theatre the director is king. In a big budget film or game setting the director is king, but the producers have quite a big of say, so I'll use the term king to refer to the decision makers.

As a composer or sound designer or lighting designer I join the artistic staff for a production with the understanding that I am there to execute the director's vision. I may be asked for input (and I prefer to work in collaborative settings, so often I am.) Sometimes I have been the one to come up with the central theme, but most of the time I just add bits and pieces here and there.

Quite often I have a strong personal 'like' for my concepts, and that's fine. But in the end I do have to bow to the director's vision. It's the way it is. If I wanted to be king I'd direct... and I have in the past, and I will once my kids are a little older. It's time consuming, and it is a TON of work, and for now I am quite happy contributing as much as I reasonably can through different design roles. (I also pity the design team that would have to work with me as king<G>!)

This same relationship has existed in the few film and game projects that I have worked on. The composer and sound designer are seldom the kings, and again that is just the way it works.

So, when we judge a sound track, or costumes, or lighting, or scenery, we need to keep in mind that the credited designer may not have had complete autonomy.



Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> 3. You owe the guys who do it a modicum of respect and perhaps you could be a little humble in arrogantly expressing negative opinions and instead look at what is good.


There is an old, and over-told gag about how many lighting designers (or guitarists or <fill in the blank> does it take to change a light bulb? The answer is usually given as seven, one to change the light bulb and six to stand around describing how they'd do it differently (or better if you really want to push buttons) - and yes, when squints are the target the term bulb is corrected as well<G>!

I have heard very few scores for theatre or film where I did not think, at one point or another, that I might have taken a different approach. If the production is well done then this does not happen during the first viewing, but rather at some time later, when I make it a point to listen. Every once is a while a choice is so jarring that I might notice it first time around.

I think that is perfectly natural. And at the same time, when I am in 'critical listening mode' I also look for ideas to 'borrow'. Maybe a specific ornamentation strikes me as perfect for a fight scene. Maybe an unusual orchestration fits a high speed chase. Usually, when that happens, I'll go back and try to mimic the feeling that I felt by using similar techniques.

So yeah, respect for those that have made successful careers is due.

One last thought... years ago I was good friends with a very successful recording engineer. He has worked with acts from every corner of the music industry. At one point he worked with an artist that I don't find terribly exciting. I asked him why. I wasn't trying to be critical, but I later realized that was the only way it could come off. He pointed out that he had lots and lots of awards, and a personal studio that rivaled any major facility. Then he asked me how many awards I had, and what my studio was like. It stung, but it was an important lesson. There are business aspects of the creative endeavors, and the real success stories have usually sussed that out already.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 13, 2010)

Mike Connelly @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> This thread made me think along the same lines. I guess nobody can complain about the quality of a McDonalds hamburger since they sell so many? There's definitely something to be said for commercial success, but it's hard for me to buy into the notion that the things that sell the most must be the best. I must be naive, but I'd say it's possible to create stuff that is high quality AND appeals to the masses (and there are tons of examples of that in film scoring).
> 
> To take the analogy in another direction, I guess Jar Jar must be a great movie character and above critique?



Of course, that is true but if you are not a screenwriter, the simple fact is that nobody has any reason, other than yourself and extended family, to CARE about your opinion about the character.

This is the crux of it. EVERYONE has opinions on practically everything, agreed? So I maintain that if on a public forum you are going to insult a practitioner and/or his work one should ask himself the following:

1. Is there any reason anyone should value my opinion or is my posting it merely masturbatory?

2. Am I contributing something POSITIVE to the dialog or only self-aggrandizing by putting down the work of more successful people?

If the answer to these is "no" then I suggest the person should refrain from posting the comment.

This is NOT directed at you Mike, just a general commentary.


----------



## ChrisAxia (Jul 13, 2010)

I thought it was a great movie and a great score, though I'm quite certain I remember reading an interview with Horner where he said he was upset that he didn't have time to re-record with real choirs. No one else remember this?

~C


----------



## Narval (Jul 13, 2010)

Mike Connelly @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> I guess nobody can complain about the quality of a McDonalds hamburger since they sell so many?


Yes you can complain, but, according to the hardcore ultra-orthodox paradigm, when doing so you behave like a jerk, because:



> If you do not have a track record of making dhambourgueurs (and even if you do) you may:
> 
> 1. Have no idea how hard it is and the skills required that are not necessarily only the cook's pure ability to make dhambourgueurs.
> 
> ...


q.e.d.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 13, 2010)

Narval @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> Mike Connelly @ Tue Jul 13 said:
> 
> 
> > I guess nobody can complain about the quality of a McDonalds hamburger since they sell so many?
> ...



This is a silly comparison on the face of it. McDonald's has no artistic or creative pretensions, it is simply a commercial product. With films, in theory at least, we have some attempt to create something at least moderately artistic.


----------



## Mike Connelly (Jul 13, 2010)

Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> With films, in theory at least, we have some attempt to create something at least moderately artistic.



I'm sure someone like Thomas Keller would take issue with the implication that cooking has no artistic or creative pretensions.


----------



## Narval (Jul 13, 2010)

Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> This is a silly comparison on the face of it. McDonald's has no artistic or creative pretensions, it is simply a commercial product. With films, in theory at least, we have some attempt to create something at least moderately artistic.


So, if I understand correctly, the (presumed) presence of artistic creativity in a mass consumption product makes its critics look like jerks in your eyes, while the (presumed) absence of artistic creativity in a mass consumption product enables one to criticize it without looking like a jerk in your eyes. Is that what you're suggesting?


----------



## clarkcontrol (Jul 13, 2010)

Hilarious. I get the impression that you've gotten one too many bad reviews, Jay. 

I've enjoyed everyones comments concerning the titanic soundtrack. EnTaroAdun manages to make the only unconstructive comment (concerning music) in this thread, but that did not deter me from enjoying the opinions expressed by the others. 

Concerning unconstructive comments about other things: I have my opinions but seeing as I have not written a book on manners and do not hold a degree in social psychology I will keep silent on this matter. I would suggest that comments concerning etiquette be prefaced by credentials indicating mastery of behavioral analysis. Starting with where you went to finishing school and ending with the date that Oprah added your critically endorsed "miss manners" book to her book of the month club. 



RE: mcDonalds. 

Seems like you gotta be pretty creative and artistic to be able to sell sh!t of that magnitude. Just slagging it and saying it has no artistic value screams ignorance. We don't know how hard that creative team worked to sell that stuff, Jay. 

Plus it might be good if you considered "what are those people doing right, artistically speaking? Sure it's fast food but consider blah blah..."

what a wonderful parallel: mass produced food and mass produced culture. Music intended for the masses vs food intended for the masses.

Clark


----------



## lux (Jul 13, 2010)

May we discuss some matter here and there between one Jay Asher rant and another?

Jay really, i confess that i'm guilty being polemic with you but just realized that you're mostly trolling pratically all threads on this forum stating to death a single concepòîô   ÜC{îô   ÜC|îô   ÜC}îô   ÜC~îô   ÜCîô   ÜC€îô   ÜCîô   ÜC‚îô   ÜCƒîô   ÜC„îô   ÜC…îô   ÜC†îô   ÜC‡îô   ÜCˆîô   ÜC‰îô   ÜCŠîô   ÜC‹îô   ÜCŒîô   ÜCîô   ÜCŽîô   ÜCîô   ÜCîô   ÜC‘îô   ÜC’îô   ÜC“îô   ÜC”îô   ÜC•îô   ÜC–îô   ÜC—îô   ÜC˜îô   ÜC™îô   ÜCšîô   ÜC›îô   ÜCœîô   ÜCîõ   ÜCžîõ   ÜCŸîõ   ÜC îõ   ÜC¡îö   ÜC¢îö   ÜC£îö   ÜC¤îö   ÜC¥îö   ÜC¦îö   ÜC§îö   ÜC¨îö   ÜC©îö   ÜCªîö   ÜC«îö   ÜC¬îö   ÜC­îö   ÜC®îö   ÜC¯îö   ÜC°îö   ÜC±îö   ÜC²îö   ÜC³îö   ÜC´îö


----------



## noiseboyuk (Jul 13, 2010)

Well, I seem to have stirred up a bit of a Horner's nest! Ha ha ha! (wind, tumbleweed)

Jay, you might well be right. Perhaps it really IS wrong for anyone to criticise any single element of anything that they themselves don't have a proven track record of of commercially bettering. Masturbatory it may be. But this does beg the question - why on earth contribute to an internet thread where this is clearly the whole point?

Never mind James Horner, that was merely a postscript in my OP - it may come as a shock, but I should confess that I haven't written and directed a single movie that has topped a billion dollars worldwide. What the hell do I know? Yet somehow I - and literally millions of others are interested in discussing its various merits and flaws. And I started the thread, I should point out, cos the movie (and score) are thoughtlessly panned in my view by people who should perhaps know better, and was interested in a debate to get under the skin of the film.

VI Control is a place where composers who love music and movies hang out. It's interesting to discuss this stuff to me. It's actually another way of learning - people make interesting points that I won't have thought of. I've learned in this very thread that PERHAPS James Horner never wanted that notorious patch, and also the possibility that it might yet get replaced for a reissue. Maybe not, but it's an interesting notion - what if you could rescore a movie to fix the flaws? 

I love Mark Knopfler's score to the sublime Princess Bride, but I'd LOVE to hear it orchestrated with a budget. Perhaps then I'd miss the old cheap and nasty patches I've come to know and even love a little...

To return to the score for Titanic - one of the main themes used (not My Heart Will Go On) is SO evocative of the movie, it's one of those that you only have to hear 5 seconds and it puts you right back into the film, remembering how you felt watching it. That's probably the highest compliment one can pay a composer. For all of us composers, our job is to serve story first and foremost.

Oh, and Narval... it does seem a TAD far fetched to think Horner and Cameron deliberately used a rubbish sampler patch just to give a knowing wink to the audience that they knew their film was a pile of crap all along...


----------



## Narval (Jul 13, 2010)

I don't think the film was a pile of crap, and what I was saying is that the director/composer presumably wanted that "pop new age-ish Enya-esque" mood (hence the patch), probably in order to make it clear to what audience they do appeal, which is the mainstream pop audience. That's what I was suggesting. I think it's pretty reasonable to presume that was intentional, considering the other Irish elements in there.

By the way, why so strong the Irish tone in the score? As I remember there was only one (and not very poignant) Irish guy there. The Italian guy was more colorful, so why not some Italian touch? Most of the others were English and some of them Americans, right? So what's the deal with the Irish ethnic color?


edit
... maybe it has something to do with the luck of the Irish?


----------



## Mike Connelly (Jul 13, 2010)

Cameron originally wanted to have Enya score the movie and used her stuff as temp tracks but she declined.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Jul 13, 2010)

Narval @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> I don't think the film was a pile of crap, and what I was saying is that the director/composer presumably wanted that "pop new age-ish Enya-esque" mood (hence the patch), probably in order to make it clear to what audience they do appeal, which is the mainstream pop audience. That's what I was suggesting. I think it's pretty reasonable to presume that was intentional, considering the other Irish elements in there.
> 
> By the way, why so strong the Irish tone in the score? As I remember there was only one (and not very poignant) Irish guy there. The Italian guy was more colorful, so why not some Italian touch? Most of the others were English and some of them Americans, right? So what's the deal with the Irish ethnic color?
> 
> ...



Oh I get ya. However, Enya may be "pop" but vocally it's not samples (is it?)

As to the Irish motif, it's Irish music that steerage party-on to, so having that as a set-piece I guess it makes musical sense to keep with that motif even in the more poignant moments. It's pretty broad stroke stuff, but the equation seems to be - Ethnic Irish = genuine people living for the moment, which is Rose's transition - abandoning polite society to slum in in a drinking contest etc, then of course abandoning her rich fiancée for the penniless artist (indeed, "I'd rather be his whore than your wife").


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 13, 2010)

Mike Connelly @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 13 said:
> 
> 
> > With films, in theory at least, we have some attempt to create something at least moderately artistic.
> ...



Thomas Keller' goals and Mc Donald's are not commensurate.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 13, 2010)

I have re-thought this post and decided it was not necessary.


----------



## Mike Connelly (Jul 13, 2010)

Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> Thomas Keller' goals and Mc Donald's are not commensurate.



Of course they're not. So why do you seem to think that the same goals are shared by the makers of The Hurt Locker and the makers of Furry Vengeance?


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 13, 2010)

Mike Connelly @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 13 said:
> 
> 
> > Thomas Keller' goals and Mc Donald's are not commensurate.
> ...



No but I think at least in his own mind James Cameron thinks what he is creating is artistic. Whatever Titanic and Avatar are or are not they are not Furry Vengeance. I think he is quite proud of both of them and looked to Horner to create what HE felt were quality scores. They were not cynical efforts.

And the fact that they won or at least were nominated for a bunch of awards means that some people in the industry shared that view. Maybe, just maybe, they know a little something.


----------



## Mike Connelly (Jul 14, 2010)

I never said Titanic or Avatar was equivalent to Furry Vengeance, I'm speaking generally in response to general comments about critique of "successful" films and scores. My point is simply that there are films with artistic aspirations and films with financial aspirations and probably little or no artistic aspirations (McMovies). And I'd consider defending "successful" movies and scores purely based on financial success the same as defending a big mac based on that same criteria.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 14, 2010)

Mike Connelly @ Wed Jul 14 said:


> I never said Titanic or Avatar was equivalent to Furry Vengeance, I'm speaking generally in response to general comments about critique of "successful" films and scores. My point is simply that there are films with artistic aspirations and films with financial aspirations and probably little or no artistic aspirations (McMovies). And I'd consider defending "successful" movies and scores purely based on financial success the same as defending a big mac based on that same criteria.



OK, understood.


----------



## Narval (Jul 14, 2010)

Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> And the fact that they won or at least were nominated for a bunch of awards means that some people in the industry shared that view. Maybe, just maybe, they know a little something.


And why should anyone care about what "they" do or do not share and know?

So, vox populi and the "experts" have spoken. What now? Are we to stop thinking critically and evaluating and discussing scores because the masses and the "experts" have already established how brilliant they are? How stupid would that be from our part?

Thing is, both the masses and the "experts" do have a long history of poor aesthetic choices with regard to music. And even if they didn't, why should anyone care about them when analyzing scores? Is that synthy vocal patch choice beyond criticism because the masses and the "experts" loved the score? And, unless we obey their taste, we behave like jerks? Sorry but, to say the least, that's a very poor appreciation for open-mindedness.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 14, 2010)

I have said all I have to say about this topic. There is no point in my rehashing it.
I simply do not think about these issues the way most of you do and I think that the close mindedness here is not limited to me.


----------



## Dave Connor (Jul 15, 2010)

I just read a few posts and this is what occurred to me. People are going to form an opinion on the merits of any score. So it's not an issue about that but merely giving voice to that opinion. If someone has an opinion about something then they must chose whether they want to say anything. Then others can decide whether that opinion is valid and chose to say something or not. I don't have a problem with anyone voicing their opinion on anything.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 16, 2010)

I have a problem with the lack of civility in forums, but perhaps it's not civil for me to mention it. Heh.

Seriously, I'm not fond of arguing with people who enjoy drama more than they enjoy discussion and the swapping of opinions. I prefer to discuss things with friends rather than win the debate club crown, but that's just me. I could be wrong.

Nah.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 16, 2010)

Narval @ Tue Jul 13 said:


> I don't think the film was a pile of crap, and what I was saying is that the director/composer presumably wanted that "pop new age-ish Enya-esque" mood (hence the patch), probably in order to make it clear to what audience they do appeal, which is the mainstream pop audience. That's what I was suggesting. I think it's pretty reasonable to presume that was intentional, considering the other Irish elements in there.
> 
> By the way, why so strong the Irish tone in the score? As I remember there was only one (and not very poignant) Irish guy there. The Italian guy was more colorful, so why not some Italian touch? Most of the others were English and some of them Americans, right? So what's the deal with the Irish ethnic color?
> 
> ...



Regarding the "pop new age-ish Enya-esque" style, I wonder- have you ever listened to Clannad? Ever heard 'Harry's Game'? That piece is so beautiful to me, it almost makes me weep....and much of the rest of their stuff is stellar as well.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Jul 16, 2010)

NYC Composer @ Fri Jul 16 said:


> Regarding the "pop new age-ish Enya-esque" style, I wonder- have you ever listened to Clannad? Ever heard 'Harry's Game'? That piece is so beautiful to me, it almost makes me weep....and much of the rest of their stuff is stellar as well.



Yeah, that's a fantastic track. Famously also used by U2 to open their concerts in the 1980s, including the Red Rocks video.


----------



## Narval (Jul 16, 2010)

NYC Composer @ Fri Jul 16 said:


> Regarding the "pop new age-ish Enya-esque" style, I wonder- have you ever listened to Clannad? Ever heard 'Harry's Game'? That piece is so beautiful to me, it almost makes me weep....and much of the rest of their stuff is stellar as well.


For the record, I was just suggesting that they were after a certain style for the score. I didn't make any value judgment on pop, new age, Enya, Irish music, or the combination of them.

Loved the Clannad piece, thanks! Some synthy vocal patches in there too around 1:10... I'm not very fond on that, sounds like plastic bags to me. :|


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 16, 2010)

Narval @ Fri Jul 16 said:


> NYC Composer @ Fri Jul 16 said:
> 
> 
> > Regarding the "pop new age-ish Enya-esque" style, I wonder- have you ever listened to Clannad? Ever heard 'Harry's Game'? That piece is so beautiful to me, it almost makes me weep....and much of the rest of their stuff is stellar as well.
> ...



Glad you liked it. I agree about the synth voices, but if you take a look, that track was done quite a long time ago, and at the time that sound was considered very mysterious and modern, kind of a post 10CC synth patch.Styles change-see 'The 80's"  

Regarding value judgements and presentational style, I think sometimes you come off sounding judgmental without meaning to. It's a stylistic thing-I think there are ways to be direct without being blunt or reflexively dismissive. 

This is not meant as an attack, just an observation. I recently had a chat with a friend about the communicative process, and it made me ponder a bit. This is what happens when one gets ponderous!


----------



## Narval (Jul 16, 2010)

Point taken. 

However, nothing wrong with judging products and valuing them positively or negatively. As opposed to negative comments directed to the person - that's plain wrong.

Btw, I think Titanic was a piece of junk, poorly designed for bumping into icebergs.


----------



## Mike Connelly (Jul 16, 2010)

True about styles changing, but that's something artists need to keep in mind. If you want people to still enjoy your music years later, will using the latest, trendiest synth sounds or processing sound timeless or dated?

Personally, I think the synth voices make the least sense in a piece that has lots of live instruments and vocals. At least if it's in something that has lots of other electronics, it may come off as an intentionally quirky texture instead of making people wonder if you couldn't afford real singers.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 16, 2010)

Narval @ Fri Jul 16 said:


> Point taken.
> 
> However, nothing wrong with judging products and valuing them positively or negatively. As opposed to negative comments directed to the person - that's plain wrong.
> 
> Btw, I think Titanic was a piece of junk, poorly designed for bumping into icebergs.



Mmm hmm. But you'd take the Oscars and the billion dollars, correct?

Art/commerce/whatever. If you like it, it's good. If you don't like it, it's bad, ne c'est pas?

For the record, I think presentational style affects how seriously one is taken, on forums and in life..


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 16, 2010)

Mike Connelly @ Fri Jul 16 said:


> True about styles changing, but that's something artists need to keep in mind. If you want people to still enjoy your music years later, will using the latest, trendiest synth sounds or processing sound timeless or dated?
> 
> Personally, I think the synth voices make the least sense in a piece that has lots of live instruments and vocals. At least if it's in something that has lots of other electronics, it may come off as an intentionally quirky texture instead of making people wonder if you couldn't afford real singers.



Ummm. Mike-did you listen to the piece I mentioned?


----------



## Narval (Jul 16, 2010)

NYC Composer @ Fri Jul 16 said:


> Mmm hmm. But you'd take the Oscars and the billion dollars, correct?


Along with the most excruciatingly negative comments on cheesy synthy patches. :mrgreen: 



> Art/commerce/whatever. If you like it, it's good. If you don't like it, it's bad, ne c'est pas?


It is n'est-ce pas, itnt i's?  



> For the record, I think presentational style affects how seriously one is taken, on forums and in life..


Ummm. Mmm hmm. If you don't like my "presentational style," then don't take me seriously.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Jul 16, 2010)

dogforester @ Sat Jul 17 said:


> wasn't the ship built in ireland ?



Quite right, it was - I'd forgotten that. Belfast - so why was Liverpool written on the ship's stern I wonder?

Just looked it up - it was White Star's admin HQ apparently. Tell you what, just looking at images of the ship, both in construction and sailing, gives me goosebumps. I think part of the reason for the film's success is that it's a real life myth - most oppulent / maiden voyage / unsinkable / first to third class - all those elements make the tragedy what it is, and Cameron really nails ever single one of them for maximum impact.

Just to touch on Avatar again, I was watching it again yesterday and I agree the music just doesn't stand out in that, in contrast to Titanic. But I think part of the reason for that is that for a lot of the film it does seem to be mixed particularly low. Obviously there are a few featured sections though. Don't get me wrong, it's never bad, far from it - I think it serves the film well, but I never really latch on to a theme, for example. Still, $2.6bn and all that...


----------



## dogforester (Jul 17, 2010)

Narval @ Sat Jul 17 said:


> dogforester @ Fri Jul 16 said:
> 
> 
> > anyway wasn't the ship built in ireland ?
> ...



Well considering the ships fate, I wouldn't call the irish that lucky. :lol:


----------



## noiseboyuk (Jul 17, 2010)

A couple of great Horner interviews (thanks to Michael Allen and Jeff Hayat at soundsonline). The first talks very candidly about the hellish experience of scoring Aliens, and a little about Titanic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAciDfxBN7U

And this goes into some detail about Star Trek II, and his use of themes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AN04imF ... re=related


----------



## Mike Connelly (Jul 19, 2010)

NYC Composer @ Fri Jul 16 said:


> Ummm. Mike-did you listen to the piece I mentioned?



You're right, on second listen my comment doesn't really apply to that track. Maybe I listened to the wrong track or something, sorry about that.


----------

