# Hate HZ? Hate trailers? Find JW too old-fashioned?



## JohnG

Hi all,

In reading the "Is trailer music to blame for non-memorable themes" thread and in response to another member's PM, I wrote the following. Apologies in advance that I don't cover every aspect of these composers' works, or note every exception to some of the generalisations in this post.

*Why Hate Trailers?*

Arguably, the issue with trailer music (and with HZ) is that people tend to hear what they listen for, what they, personally, like and focus on. When someone who loves, say, Ravel, Debussy, Stravinsky, or JW, listens to HZ or trailer music, they keep thinking "where's the harmonic inventiveness?" or "Where's the orchestration?" "Strings through a distortion chain??" "Everyone plays the tune???" "FHNs in an inappropriate register????" etc.

So, from that person's perspective, HZ and trailer music lack what the listener is seeking, so he finds it empty. (I'm ignoring, for the moment, the fact that plenty of trailer music in fact has more melody than some final scores, and that HZ doesn't ignore melody either -- he's one of the more melody-focused composers out there, but that's what critics say.)

*JW = Old School*

JW, as we know, defines old school. He does use electronic instruments but his secret sauce is orchestra -- and conducting. Yes, he knows every orchestration trick in the book, can write for any section of the orchestra, and knows each instrument thoroughly enough to write a concerto for any one of them.

But people neglect to consider his extraordinary conducting, which is not just the final 10%; in the right person's hands, it's more like 25%. JW knows better than any other film composer how to draw the last ounce of expressiveness, glamour, and magic from the orchestra while recording.

Even gifted composers like the amazing James Newton Howard don't usually conduct their works. Not quite sure why he doesn't, as he's a virtuoso pianist and has perfect pitch, is a musical genius, etc. But -- he doesn't (at least not usually).

So JW is not only the most amazing orchestrator possibly since Ravel, he's amazing at coaxing just what he wants from the performance because he does it personally and has the skill to do so.

And that's not so different from HZ in a way.

*HZ and Audacity*

HZ, as he'd probably agree, is (usually) differentiated less by the "notes" and more about inventiveness in sonic textures, post-production and sheer AUDACITY. I still can't get over that creepy solo electric cello in "Why So Serious?" from "The Dark Knight." It's just amazingly brave to do that with a huge budget movie like that -- in fact the whole cue is audacious in so many ways. The sub-sonics around 3:28, the simple piano around 6:55 which gradually becomes the only sound as the rest of the music dies away at about 7:15 or so. And then there's Dunkirk which, like it or not, rethinks scoring for that kind of movie, not to mention its rhythmic weaving, which I liked a lot.

But those who fault the absence of traditional compositional technique in HZ may miss that _part of that audacity alluded to above is simplicity_. HZ doesn't modulate often; sometimes, he doesn't even change pitch centre for long stretches. He seems to write to a steady click much of the time. As a result, his music (the action music for which he's so famous) rarely provides those luxuriant accelerandos and rubato that characterise JW's work; we don't hear the loving embrace of the woodwinds, the choirs of mallet / keyboard instruments. He doesn't consciously juxtapose one key against another, at least not the way Bach and JW do. I've read complaints that many HZ melodies are in d-minor so that the flat VII pitch is available to the strings for modular harmony. (Honestly, I haven't checked the Dm thing, so I don't know if it's true -- maybe it is and maybe it isn't.)

*HZ Haters, JW Haters*

Some people regard these absences as deficiencies, and condemn HZ as a "know-nothing" composer. Ok -- some of the earlier scores don't reflect what he's evolved to, but some of JW's early stuff, long before the mighty Star Wars, was not at the level he later achieved either.

I think a lot of the hating of HZ comes down to what people _think they hear_, rather than what's actually _there_. Even many of his imitators and fans don't seem to hear what's really there -- constant evolution of sound, constant movement, substitution of synthetic or warped sounds for traditional instruments, a thousand ideas and substitutions.

Many of his would-be imitators ape instead only the most obvious elements and repeat them endlessly. That approach is audible in some trailers. Maybe it's those people we should hate?

The guy (HZ) is so hard-working and bold -- he has dared to question every aspect of what film music is like, rejecting (or at least failing to incorporate) quite a number of old favourites, which outrages many. But even they can't fault his a work ethic and attention to detail. People say he's still working in the studio routinely at 2AM, 3AM. He is always trying to reinvent what he does. He cares about EXACTLY what sounds he produces.

And in that respect, the absolute insistence on controlling the final result and sound, he's comparable to JW. Both care intensely just how short the staccato is, or how flutey the _sul tasto _is. Both care intensely about the balance of the orchestra, and both are willing to take chances.

If you want to compare them and choose a champion, great. But those who condemn JW for being boring and old have probably not listened for a while, or are listening to the wrong stuff. Likewise, those who think HZ has nothing to offer should perhaps _listen_ a little. There's a lot going on, even if it's not what you personally care about and focus on.

And in fact, regarding HZ, he deploys quite a bit more "technique" and sensitivity than one might assume if one has listened only to the big action scores. Check out "Kung Fu Panda," "The Simpsons" or "The Holiday," for radical departures from what people usually think of when they think of HZ.

Again, apologies for omissions and oversimplifications.


----------



## mikeh-375

Couldn't agree more.
Both composers are excellent in different ways and both are innovators.


----------



## passsacaglia

Great insight JG.

Music is something that's creative, creativity has no rules, no borders, no boundaries, no limits, music is personal.
One man's music, may differ from another one. One man's taste, may also differ. What matters is what comes out, there will always be haters. An artist makes the things that comes out of him/her, the differences and nuances and the originality is what makes That artist unique. Melodies, chord progressions and music will always be there, there are no "patents" or "owning" of certain notes/harmonies, they're there to stay. It's what the artist do to them, some may be better than others, but it's what matters to that person that matters and the ability to love what that person do.

Like many people say and agree with, music IS a language you speak, use and express yourself with. Like personalities and taste, that differs. The music I write (ok I need to put more on soundcloud) is the stuff that I hear in my head in my sleep, when I just put my fingers on the keys, when I wake up or when I go to bed, the melodies and chords that are inside me that I hear, the stuff I hear inches next to me that I grasp and make music of. Everyone is different.

I do not know Hans, but heard a lot of his music, nor have I met John or the other composers...but I can imagine, and from what I've seen/listened to...that (especially my impression of Hans) after hearing about the Interstellar story of how the music was created, I got the same feeling ... the artist "heard" or hear stuff, that sounds like something, an idea, a feeling, something is there to be written, which I think is so cool. To me it either happens 1) I hear melodies and I make tracks in my imagination when I'm standing or lying, or 2) When I'm at the piano and my hands to the work - I play something and then my hands are glued, I canno't control them, they just play and play what I'm thinking and what would be Beautiful, continue playing and adding stuff and Voila! It's there. Magic just happened.

What's my point...well, those people may not be familiar with the process of writing something, the creative process and the creation of something new, something unfamiliar, something special and unique, maybe that's why ppl do not understand other peoples' work, because they only do it By the book or... I dunno, a true artist listens, feels and enjoys what's in front of him, and they can either like it or "hate" it. If someone hates something that's art, well, their loss, sad for them.

Hans if you ever read this, I love what you do  <3 Ciao bellos!


----------



## synthpunk

Dear Mr. Graham, congratulations on what I think is one of the best posts I've ever read on this board. Sincerely, James



JohnG said:


> Hi all,
> 
> In reading the "Is trailer music to blame for non-memorable themes" thread and in response to another member's PM, I wrote the following. Apologies in advance that I don't cover every aspect of these composers' works, or note every exception to some of the generalisations in this post.
> 
> *Why Hate Trailers?*
> 
> Arguably, the issue with trailer music (and with HZ) is that people tend to hear what they listen for, what they, personally, like and focus on. When someone who loves, say, Ravel, Debussy, Stravinsky, or JW, listens to HZ or trailer music, they keep thinking "where's the harmonic inventiveness?" or "Where's the orchestration?" "Strings through a distortion chain??" "Everyone plays the tune???" "FHNs in an inappropriate register????" etc.
> 
> So, from that person's perspective, HZ and trailer music lack what the listener is seeking, so he finds it empty. (I'm ignoring, for the moment, the fact that plenty of trailer music in fact has more melody than some final scores, and that HZ doesn't ignore melody either -- he's one of the more melody-focused composers out there, but that's what critics say.)
> 
> *JW = Old School*
> 
> JW, as we know, defines old school. He does use electronic instruments but his secret sauce is orchestra -- and conducting. Yes, he knows every orchestration trick in the book, can write for any section of the orchestra, and knows each instrument thoroughly enough to write a concerto for any one of them.
> 
> But people neglect to consider his extraordinary conducting, which is not just the final 10%; in the right person's hands, it's more like 25%. JW knows better than any other film composer how to draw the last ounce of expressiveness, glamour, and magic from the orchestra while recording.
> 
> Even gifted composers like the amazing James Newton Howard don't usually conduct their works. Not quite sure why he doesn't, as he's a virtuoso pianist and has perfect pitch, is a musical genius, etc. But -- he doesn't (at least not usually).
> 
> So JW is not only the most amazing orchestrator possibly since Ravel, he's amazing at coaxing just what he wants from the performance because he does it personally and has the skill to do so.
> 
> And that's not so different from HZ in a way.
> 
> *HZ and Audacity*
> 
> HZ, as he'd probably agree, is (usually) differentiated less by the "notes" and more about inventiveness in sonic textures, post-production and sheer AUDACITY. I still can't get over that creepy solo electric cello in "Why So Serious?" from The Dark Knight." It's just amazingly brave to do that with a huge budget movie like that -- in fact the whole cue is audacious in so many ways. The sub-harmonies around 3:28, the simple piano around 6:55 which gradually becomes the only sound as the rest of the music dies away at about 7:15 or so. And then there's Dunkirk which, like it or not, rethinks scoring for that kind of movie, not to mention its rhythmic weaving, which I liked a lot.
> 
> But those who fault the absence of traditional compositional technique in HZ may miss that _part of that audacity alluded to above is simplicity_. HZ doesn't modulate often; sometimes, he doesn't even change pitch centre for long stretches. He seems to write to a steady click much of the time. As a result, his music (action music) rarely provides those luxuriant accelerandos and rubato that characterise JW's work; we don't hear the loving embrace of the woodwinds, the choirs of mallet / keyboard instruments. He doesn't consciously juxtapose one key against another, at least not the way Bach and JW do. I've read complaints that many HZ melodies are in d-minor so that the flat VII pitch is available to the strings for modular harmony. (Honestly, I haven't checked the Dm thing, so I don't know if it's true -- maybe it is and maybe it isn't.)
> 
> *HZ Haters, JW Haters*
> 
> Some people regard these absences as deficiencies, and condemn HZ as a "know-nothing" composer. Ok -- some of the earlier scores don't reflect what he's evolved to, but some of JW's early stuff, long before the mighty Star Wars, was not at the level he later achieved either.
> 
> I think a lot of the hating of HZ comes down to what people _hear_, rather than what's actually _there_. Even many of his imitators and fans don't seem to hear what's really there -- constant evolution of sound, constant movement, substitution of synthetic or warped sounds for traditional instruments, a thousand ideas and substitutions.
> 
> Many of his would-be imitators ape instead only the most obvious elements and repeat them endlessly. That approach is audible in some trailers. Maybe it's those people we should hate?
> 
> The guy (HZ) is so hard-working and bold -- he has dared to question every aspect of what film music is like, rejecting (or at least failing to incorporate) quite a number of old favourites, which outrages many. But even they can't fault his a work ethic and attention to detail. People say he's still working in the studio routinely at 2AM, 3AM. He is always trying to reinvent what he does. He cares about EXACTLY what sounds he produces.
> 
> And in that respect, the absolute insistence on controlling the final result and sound, he's comparable to JW. Both care intensely just how short the staccato is, or how flutey the _sul tasto _is. Both care intensely about the balance of the orchestra, and both are willing to take chances.
> 
> If you want to compare them and choose a champion, great. But those who condemn JW for being boring and old have probably not listened for a while, or are listening to the wrong stuff. Likewise, those who think HZ has nothing to offer should perhaps _listen_ a little. There's a lot going on, even if it's not what you personally care about and focus on.
> 
> And in fact, regarding HZ, there's quite a bit of "technique" and sensitivity than one might assume if one has listened only to the big action scores. Check out "Kung Fu Panda," "The Simpsons" or "The Holiday," for radical departures from what people usually think of when they think of HZ.
> 
> Again, apologies for omissions and oversimplifications.


----------



## patrick76

+1. Love JW and HZ.


----------



## ctsai89

I'm a Scriabin admirer and hater of Mozart/Brahms where do I belong? 

But I do like both JW and HZ

Great post anyways. Thanks


----------



## John Busby

@JohnG 
great post man! i agree with this whole heartily
what HZ has done for film scoring, to his revolutionizing modern composition workflow, to his unique approach to each score that he does, and to his overall knowledge of the rules and how he boldly breaks them (something he harps on in his Masterclass). Does he from time to time use the same kind of sounds or synths or even chord progressions, sure who doesn't? i mean JW uses the orchestra every time doesn't he? These are the things which make these guys unique in their own right - the "sound" or the "tone" that they trademark themselves by.

the point made about imitators - when it comes to trailers, what did we all start hearing after the summer of 2010? 
BRAAAAAMMMMS!
that said, what HZ did with Inception is take his listeners and the film itself to a whole new realm of sonic amazingness with BRAAAMS or the "BRAA...BRAAAAMS" in his case along with his brass, string and synth textures and the use of a simple melody and layering which made "Time" so transcendent and one of my all time favorites.

In my opinion, it's the simplistic nature of the melodies (or how they sound simplistic with how easy they are to listen to and to follow), and the complex and inventive texturing and layering which make these two guys so great at what they do!

BTW: I friggin' love the score for Kung Fu Panda!! all 3 of'em


----------



## wst3

Well said! I wish more folks would look at more topics in such a rational, reasonable manner!


----------



## VinRice

John Williams is a master composer, orchestrator and conductor - no doubt. They'll be talking about him for a hundred years. Hans is the most successful film composer of all time for a different reason. He's a 'designer' of film music and a fantastic salesman. He has built an empire by understanding the nature of modern film production. Hans makes the music an 'event' for the Director and Producers and knowns the psychological and promotional value of 'novelty' in the best sense of the word. Add to that the facilities at Remote and the school of talent on tap, once you have entered Hans' velvet boudoir there's no escape.


----------



## Kyle Preston

JohnG said:


> Maybe it's those people we should hate?



I don't think we should be _hating_ anyone.

I love HZ and JW. Framing things in black and white is part of the reason people keep perpetuating this (ridiculous) debate. Like most things in life, taste is a spectrum. If that bothers you, pick a different universe to live in.

This was a thought-provoking and insightful post from you @JohnG, as usual : ) Also, pretty sure the Dminor thing is so that cellos can hit the open string. It's satisfying!

edit: misspelled insightful


----------



## germancomponist

Great post, John.
I have learned that most critics are in fact only envious.


----------



## Mike Fox

People can be closed minded. I think that's what it boils down to. It's like the Japanese car lovers who don't like the American muscle cars, and vice versa.


----------



## dannymc

actually i think the real reason why there are so many HZ haters and not the other way around is unfairly or not, JW music and those who create music in a similar fashion are just not getting the same amount of opportunities today for big high profile scoring projects. this comes down to the directors and music directors in hollywood who have decided rightly or wrongly the public dont want to hear beautiful JW themes like star wars etc and instead just want LOUD , LOUD, DARK and even LOUDER. then of course the HZ sound has spawned the whole trailer genre with inception style brahms etc resulting in even more frustration and anger among those in the JW camp.

imo there should be a large enough market for both styles to flourish without composers forming into two camps and going at each others throats over how one style is superior to the other.

Danny


----------



## J-M

dannymc said:


> actually i think the real reason why there are so many HZ haters and not the other way around is unfairly or not, JW music and those who create music in a similar fashion are just not getting the same amount of opportunities today for big high profile scoring projects. this comes down to the directors and music directors in hollywood who have decided rightly or wrongly the public dont want to hear beautiful JW themes like star wars etc and instead just want LOUD , LOUD, DARK and even LOUDER. then of course the HZ sound has spawned the whole trailer genre with inception style brahms etc resulting in even more frustration and anger among those in the JW camp.
> 
> imo there should be a large enough market for both styles to flourish without composers forming into two camps and going at each others throats over how one style is superior to the other.
> 
> Danny



For a composer, HZ is constantly on display, he's like a rockstar of film composers and I think that some people find that annoying and pretentious...Dunno, I'm just a guy who likes to write music at home, so what do I know? :D


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

I agree, John. Also:

- What I *like* about Hans' writing is how bold and strong it is. That doesn't mean I don't also like complicated, intricate music with billions of moving parts (Igor is my main man), but that's Hans' voice.

JW: some of his old music is freaking awesome too, and it's not the out-Wagnering Wagner stuff people think of at all. Missouri Breaks, for example.


----------



## Replicant

It's been my observation that the John Williams superfanboys generally seem to only know his most famous pieces; of which, he obviously has many.

For every great theme he has composed for films, he has composed many more, rather forgettable, but effective underscore. Listen to his soundtracks for films in their entirety on Spotify if you don't believe me. They still served the picture incredibly well, but _most_ tunes are NOT "Star Wars"-level anthems.

Now, that being said, I do strongly prefer the Williams and Goldsmith kind of music, but that's also because I generally prefer those old, bombastic, romantic adventure films.

One of my favourite movies and scores, hate me for it all you want, was Van Helsing. Sure the plot was nonsensical, and cheesy dialogue and accents, but I'd expect nothing else from the Universal Monsters and the movie had that "romantic adventure" of yore, that I talked about.

I felt Alan Silvestri's work on it was the perfect balance between "Old Hollywood" and "New". I feel the two halves of this piece at the end of the film is the perfect example of both. The whole thing still gives me goosebumps just like when I saw it in theaters back when; and that synth, choir and guitar at the end (which is actually the main theme of the movie) just gets you amped for what's to come.



but on the other end of the spectrum, my favourite TV show's most iconic piece of music, was just ONE note, but every time you hear it, you know Number Six is around.



There is room for both styles


----------



## CT

I love both of these composers in a big way... and I find trailer music almost universally boring. What team do I join?


----------



## Dave Connor

Put a young Hans Zimmer in a composition class with a young Mozart and Beethoven and believe you me, he is going to get the teacher's attention every bit as much as those other two. He is relentlessly inventive at the pure musical level. In fact _any _composer who comes later in the stream of time faces a greater challenge in making fresh musical statements since he must steer around what's been said before him. Hans has done that consistently for a very long time now. If you only consider his melodic writing against the simple triad you can't miss it (but I think people do miss it.) What isn't missed (I think) is his fresh harmonic movement; his re-casting of the upper harmonies by bass movement (still wonderfully inventive and hip as in the Batman vrs Superman end title) as well as out and out inventive free modulating chord schemes. Now he's writing fugal structures as he did in Dunkirk except that he's using pure sound (which is a logical step in electronic music history and has probably been done in the "legit" world in a fashion but still, it's an accomplishment that lifts him out of the _film-composer_ category.) Then again as a minimalist, he's easily in the class of Philip Glass except more modern sounding and more exciting to the point where masses of youth love and relate to him and don't even know who Glass is. All that may not be widely understood because his gifts seem to be equal in other musical areas such as programming, big percussive rhythms and his many other innovative signatures - that he often (not always!) employs.

When a pure composer on the level of Ennio Morricone mentions John Williams and Hans Zimmer in the same sentence as being above reproach while lamenting the over-use of synths and pounding grooves in modern scores, it isn't because he thinks Hans does those things better than the lesser talented. It's because he sees HZ and JW as equally accomplished _writers _who work differently. Morricone was the Zimmer of his day with his sound inventions but his pure writing chops were always world class. He wouldn't put Hans in the same class as a supreme composer like John Williams unless doing so was well deserved.


----------



## VinRice

Replicant said:


> One of my favourite movies and scores, hate me for it all you want, was Van Helsing



I LOVE that movie! I think Silvestri was at the top of his game during this period.


----------



## Rctec

Nick Batzdorf said:


> I agree, John. Also:
> 
> - What I *like* about Hans' writing is how bold and strong it is. That doesn't mean I don't also like complicated, intricate music with billions of moving parts (Igor is my main man), but that's Hans' voice.
> 
> JW: some of his old music is freaking awesome too, and it's not the out-Wagnering Wagner stuff people think of at all. Missouri Breaks, for example.


Love 'Missouri Breaks'!! Can I join in the conversation? I've always loved and admired John Williams. 'Witches of Eastwick', anyone? But for me the true timeless composer is Ennio Morricone.


----------



## CT

It's probably not a popular choice, but I think A.I. is Williams' best work, and probably one of the best scores ever. And, it's really far from the typical Williams model that most people who don't like him point to.


----------



## dannymc

Rctec said:


> Love 'Missouri Breaks'!! Can I join in the conversation? I've always loved and admired John Williams. 'Witches of Eastwick', anyone? But for me the true timeless composer is Ennio Morricone.



interesting Hans. listening to some of your scores i would of thought you would be well an truly in the Jerry Goldsmith camp when it came to your greatest influences. 

Danny


----------



## germancomponist

dannymc said:


> interesting Hans. listening to some of your scores i would of thought you would be well an truly in the Jerry Goldsmith camp when it came to your greatest influences.
> 
> Danny


I think, of course Hans is also influenced, he always went his own way. And he did it right!


----------



## patrick76

Morricone is phenomenal. One of my favorite opening scenes in a film -


----------



## VinRice

Rctec said:


> Love 'Missouri Breaks'!! Can I join in the conversation? I've always loved and admired John Williams. 'Witches of Eastwick', anyone? But for me the true timeless composer is Ennio Morricone.



Hello mate! Went to the second Wembley show. Loved it. Here's a fun story - I got offered the job as your's and Trevor's driver when "Video..." was blowing up. Fresh out of University. Only one problem, couldn't drive... So close...


----------



## VinRice

And yes, "Witches" is the one. Perfect example of a score completely integral to the dramatic, and commercial success of a movie.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

Jerry Fielding, if we're naming names.

He certainly wasn't a wimp!


----------



## Kyle Preston

I feel like that first Harry Potter score has aged so well - still have no idea how he wrote it. But man is it beautiful.


----------



## Raphioli

I like both a lot, so I guess I'm one of the lucky ones ? =P
Because I feel like by disliking either of them, one will be missing a lot. This is of course, just my personal opinion.


----------



## synthpunk

Maestro, Paradiso gets me every time.





Rctec said:


> Love 'Missouri Breaks'!! Can I join in the conversation? I've always loved and admired John Williams. 'Witches of Eastwick', anyone? But for me the true timeless composer is Ennio Morricone.


----------



## dgburns

@JohnG Thanks for posting, thoughtful and uplifting (for lack of a better word).

Funny, never thought that to like one composer meant that I had to therefore hate all the others. (maybe I didn't get the memo)

The Mission !


----------



## kavinsky

JW is undoubtedly a virtuoso composer.
I hope I will be forgiven, but I think JW for composers is something like Prog rock for guitarists.
Sort of a technical showoff, it's great and adventurous, you are amazed by the skill, but at the end of the day, you are not listening to JW when you want those deeper emotions

When I hear scores from "Once Upon a Time in the West" or "Once Upon a Time in America" or "The Mission", it just takes me out of the moment straightaway. I feel so many things when I hear it. It's like a journey through my life, and to the places I've never been to.

Realistically, I think Morricone has a great understanding of a simple yet effective "tune", his music is not trying to amaze you with all the crazy tricks - his influences are clearly in italian pop of the 60s, he has that producer's vision.
That's why everybody can understand it and relate to it instantly when they hear it.

Ask yourself. If you could take just one film composer's CDs to some uninhabited island, who would it be?
Don't even think - of course it's Morricone. It's just unbelievable how many beautiful things one single man gave us through his life.


----------



## NoamL

John I love this post but I disagree with "If you want to compare them and choose a champion, great." The concept of "champions" just creates this dynamic where each composer's particular approach becomes a take-it-or-leave-it thing, where each element of their style is considered necessary and indivisible from everything else that makes it work.


----------



## g.c.

Nick Batzdorf said:


> I agree, John. Also:
> 
> - What I *like* about Hans' writing is how bold and strong it is. That doesn't mean I don't also like complicated, intricate music with billions of moving parts (Igor is my main man), but that's Hans' voice.
> 
> JW: some of his old music is freaking awesome too, and it's not the out-Wagnering Wagner stuff people think of at all. Missouri Breaks, for example.



John G., thanks for the thoughts.
I'll add that for Mr. Williams, try his "Manne, That's Gershwin", with the Shelly Manne Quintet-Capitol Records, for another unique page of Mr. Williams playbook.

There is something similar in John G.'s article that reminds me of the back and forth I've read of within the industry responses to Alex North's major film intro with his score for Kazan"s Streetcar.
North scored Streetcar for a small ensemble playing music laced with Orleans jazz, Reveuletas and Milhaud-Le Creation flavors, and with the score pushed away from the norm at a time when the Newman and Steiner and18th century orchestral approaches dominated producers tastes.
What is also true I think is that every dominant composer in film has a limited shelf life.
It's a little sad to me that I think that so many of the participants in this forum haven't heard North's music, heard Freidhofer, Korngold, Franz Waxman,Andre Previn, the Quincy Jones scores, Johnny Mandels "Sandpiper", and I could go on and on---
but I think I'll go to bed instead.
Nite all---
g.c.


----------



## Rctec

dannymc said:


> interesting Hans. listening to some of your scores i would of thought you would be well an truly in the Jerry Goldsmith camp when it came to your greatest influences.
> 
> Danny


No, Ennio! ...but yes, Jerry was a big influence. Not only a lovely man - who always took time for a chat and explain things to me, but completely revolutionary. ...and you're probably right. Just because I'm so deeply touched by Williams and Morricone, I'm probably not as aware of how much Jerry has influenced me. But Ive had so many different stages and styles in my career...I'm basically a kid in a candy store...


----------



## Iskra

Rctec said:


> ..I'm basically a kid in a candy store...


There are so so many great composers and great music that I always felt as a kid in a candy store just as a listener. And the good thing is that we don't even have to choose between candies, we can have them all


----------



## ghandizilla

+1 for Witches of Eastwick. Devil's Dance is so full of innovative ideas! I'm surprised to read that Ennio Morricone was such a huge influence on your career. In which way would you say his influence is audible in your work?

I would also outline that it would be a bit reductionnist to define HZ music as this dimension of everchanging motion, layering different times, even if it's an important part of his work. My favourite HZ score is The Lion King. So inventive, so delightful to hear, every time.


----------



## mikeh-375

so people, is it true that HZ frequents this forum?


----------



## VinRice

mikeh-375 said:


> so people, is it true that HZ frequents this forum?



No, absolutely not.


----------



## URL

Ennio M. and La Priovra (television drama) there is some wonderful cues, listen!


----------



## mikeh-375

VinRice, that is too emphatic, is it you or am I being too cynical?


----------



## VinRice

mikeh-375 said:


> VinRice, that is too emphatic, is it you or am I being too cynical?



...the truth is out there...


----------



## mikeh-375

oh god not enigmatic too...I'll keep it brief, if it is YOU, then the score for Gladiator is genius if it isn't you, the score for Gladiator..........


----------



## Marcin M

mikeh-375 said:


> oh god not enigmatic too...I'll keep it brief, if it is YOU, then the score for Gladiator is genius if it isn't you, the score for Gladiator..........


Well, he answered 2 times in this thread so...


----------



## VinRice

mikeh-375 said:


> oh god not enigmatic too...I'll keep it brief, if it is YOU, then the score for Gladiator is genius if it isn't you, the score for Gladiator..........



It's not me you noggin! Look through the previous posts.


----------



## FinGael

I like the works of HZ and J. Williams both very much, with their different approaches to film scoring. At the same time I am generally tired and disappointed of most of the (Hollywood) movie trailers nowadays. The cutting style, sound design, song format/structure and the style of tracks feel like cheap tricks most of the time and often lack the soul of the movies they are representing.

Once in a while comes a trailer which feels more fresh, is well made and evokes interest, but most of them do not even feel like they are made of the movie they are advertising. It feels like advertising a product with some other product. What's the point of advertising a movie with a trailer that is much different in style and feel? In my understanding from misleading advertising one can get financial sanctions in many countries. I've seen the "they get people to the theaters" -answers, but what makes advertising movies different from other marketing and misleading content commonly acceptable?

I have just watched a few dozen trailers after writing the rants in the other thread, because I wanted to see if the situation still feels the same. Maybe there is progression, more diversity and evolution in the trailer scene, but overall the session still made me feel like someone is pissing on my love for movies.

It may sound contradictory, but I also think that many of the trailer composers are skilled and I respect their effort and producing skills. Would like to hear more of something different and original from them.


----------



## mikeh-375

Damn you VinCharlatan...still Gladiator is a great score....
So is it true HZ frequents here or what? Had wine and don't really want to trawl thru posts at this time...c'mon yes or no


----------



## Mike Fox

Replicant said:


> It's been my observation that the John Williams superfanboys generally seem to only know his most famous pieces; of which, he obviously has many.
> 
> For every great theme he has composed for films, he has composed many more, rather forgettable, but effective underscore. Listen to his soundtracks for films in their entirety on Spotify if you don't believe me. They still served the picture incredibly well, but _most_ tunes are NOT "Star Wars"-level anthems.
> 
> Now, that being said, I do strongly prefer the Williams and Goldsmith kind of music, but that's also because I generally prefer those old, bombastic, romantic adventure films.
> 
> One of my favourite movies and scores, hate me for it all you want, was Van Helsing. Sure the plot was nonsensical, and cheesy dialogue and accents, but I'd expect nothing else from the Universal Monsters and the movie had that "romantic adventure" of yore, that I talked about.
> 
> I felt Alan Silvestri's work on it was the perfect balance between "Old Hollywood" and "New". I feel the two halves of this piece at the end of the film is the perfect example of both. The whole thing still gives me goosebumps just like when I saw it in theaters back when; and that synth, choir and guitar at the end (which is actually the main theme of the movie) just gets you amped for what's to come.
> 
> 
> 
> but on the other end of the spectrum, my favourite TV show's most iconic piece of music, was just ONE note, but every time you hear it, you know Number Six is around.
> 
> 
> 
> There is room for both styles




I can't begin to tell you how much Silvestri's Van Helsing soundtrack inspired and motivated me.


----------



## FinGael

kavinsky said:


> JW is undoubtedly a virtuoso composer.
> I hope I will be forgiven, but I think JW for composers is something like Prog rock for guitarists.
> Sort of a technical showoff, it's great and adventurous, you are amazed by the skill, but at the end of the day, you are not listening to JW when you want those deeper emotions


Morricone is a marvelous film composer, also from an emotional impact point of view, no doubt about that, but happy to disagree with what you wrote above. JW has written a lot of themes that I find emotionally very rewarding. Including the famous ones: Jurassic park theme, some tracks from Potter, Indy & the Last Crusade (especially the grail theme, can't remember the name), A.I. and many more.

Hans has also written many great emotional themes and scores, but I think that one of the most important scores from that perspective to me is The Last Samurai. The clash of the beauty of the old traditions and progression of the industrial era, colliding in a way that has brought me to tears more than once.

Thank you all great film composers.


----------



## Kyle Preston

mikeh-375 said:


> Had wine and don't really want to trawl thru posts at this time...c'mon yes or no



What kind of wine? 

And yes, it's true @mikeh-375


----------



## Architekton

In my opinion, when someone says John Williams and Hans Zimmer are boring and that their music sucks...I think those persons are very very unhappy with their take on music in their own life, they are extremely frustrated and most probably lack some talent. So, ideal place for their frustrations are of course, forums...where they can anonymously express their feelings as true internet warriors, while deep inside of them they cry because they are miserable and because they will never achieve in their life what those two legends of composer achieved.

JW sucks and old fashioned...lol...everyone knows Indiana Jones theme, everyone knows Star Wars main theme as well Vaders Imperial March, not to mention Harry Potters main theme...? Hans Zimmer - Lion King, Last Samurai, Gladiator, Pirates, King Arthur, Dunkirk, Dark Knight? Those two maybe arent Mozart, but I dont think they dont try to be him either. Their job is music for pictures and they do it magnificent and on the highest level possible. I have nothing but respect for them and I hope one day (if its even possible) I'll compose at least 50% as good as them, than I will be happy.


----------



## gsilbers

I wished we care this much about the way tech companies not paying their fare share for streaming.


----------



## Replicant

Architekton said:


> In my opinion, when someone says John Williams and Hans Zimmer are boring and that their music sucks...I think those persons are very very unhappy with their take on music in their own life, they are extremely frustrated and most probably lack some talent.



or maybe they just genuinely don't like them and/or are elitists?

I think that's both simpler and far more likely.

Though to be fair, sometimes haters suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Saw that all the time in metal music. Guys who couldn't play or carry a tune go on about how "terrible" pop music is.


----------



## Dominik Raab

This being a forum for musicians, I might have a slightly different point of view than most of you. I'm absolutely shit at music theory and harmony, and counterpoint is as much of a mystery to me as Counter-*Strike*. I suck at shooters.

For me, the difference between HZ and JW is very easy to name. JW: How the *fuck* do you write something like that? HZ: Hey, I could write that! ... From a music theory standpoint. I'm not nearly as inventive as HZ is when it comes to sounds and implementing live musicians, and I'm sure I'd struggle with some theoretical aspects too, but HZ's music often elicits a (treacherous?) feeling of _I could have written that, _even if I couldn't.

For a musically ignorant, uneducated wannabe like me, listening to JW results in: "Holy shit, even if I weren't a procrastinating, lazy fuck, I could never be as great as that!" HZ's music initiates a conversation on eye-level. He might still be miles above me in actual skill, but he doesn't boast it. He invites me to listen and be inspired without prejudice.

I'm from a dual background: A) Playing someone else's music for years, purely mechanical skill, no creativity whatsoever. B) Abruptly switching to playing my own music, this time rock/metal. Therefore, I appreciate the rock-like structure in (some of) HZ's music, not just because I find it easier, but because it appeals to me.


----------



## Daniel James

Too many people these days spend to much time with things they hate, trying to explain why they hate, and why you should hate too.

I made the conscious decision to not participate in that nonsense a long time ago....its funny how much time that leaves for actually creating new things and having fun. You will find most of those who 'do' in life tend to not to give a fuck about haters, they know what makes them happy and they live happy.

So I put it to people. Let haters hate and ignore them. Focus on what you like and what makes you happy. Life is way better that way!

-DJ


----------



## sostenuto

Daniel James said:


> Too many people these days spend to much time with things they hate, trying to explain why they hate, and why you should hate too.
> 
> I made the conscious decision to not participate in that nonsense a long time ago....its funny how much time that leaves for actually creating new things and having fun. You will find most of those who 'do' in life tend to not to give a fuck about haters, they know what makes them happy and they live happy.
> 
> So I put it to people. Let haters hate and ignore them. Focus on what you like and what makes you happy. Life is way better that way!
> 
> -DJ



Luv Alpha/Bravo Bundle !! *Hate* hav'n a budget


----------



## NoamL

Dominik Raab said:


> JW: How the *@#[email protected]* do you write something like that? HZ: Hey, I could write that!



See but even here they're not that different! 

So much of JW's writing boils down to something you could play at the piano with 2 or 3 hands. His orchestration is very broad and unified, don't get me wrong it's also judicious and precise, but it's not 8 or 9 ideas at the same time like Mahler, it's usually 3 or 4 ideas and partitioned out in a way that's very safe and sturdy.

With HZ's music it's kind of the same thing... his music can focus your attention on some very broad and simple foreground material, but the propulsive feeling is due to how he creates all these little layers that interlock. The piece "Hans's Sketchbook" from Man Of Steel is incredibly educational to transcribe.

Also a lot of HZ's music is very deceptive because it feels like one chord but then when you transcribe it you see he used the "wrong" bass or there's a "wrong" note in the voicing that actually transforms it into something new and more difficult to label. Which he talks about here:



And with Williams it's the same... Sometimes he is very obvious about his technique:



But sometimes he's NOT  There's actually a bit of Honegger-worthy bitonality in this piece, with two tonal progressions in parallel and only tangentially related. Which usually is a bizarre effect yet I dare anyone to identify where it happens in this piece on the first listen, it's so smooth! I only figured it out when transcribing the piece... "Hey why is there a Db and D in the same chord?!?!"


----------



## dannymc

Daniel James said:


> Too many people these days spend to much time with things they hate, trying to explain why they hate, and why you should hate too.
> 
> I made the conscious decision to not participate in that nonsense a long time ago....its funny how much time that leaves for actually creating new things and having fun. You will find most of those who 'do' in life tend to not to give a fuck about haters, they know what makes them happy and they live happy.
> 
> So I put it to people. Let haters hate and ignore them. Focus on what you like and what makes you happy. Life is way better that way!
> 
> -DJ



you're spot Daniel. for me, creative people who's main aim is to explore the limitations of sonic worlds to inspire and motivate people to take them out of their reality even for 5 minutes should be commended not condemned. but i guess to many art comes in many forms. 

Danny


----------



## mikeh-375

Kyle Preston said:


> What kind of wine?
> 
> And yes, it's true @mikeh-375



Cheers Kyle at last a straight answer...... St Emilion


----------



## VinRice

mikeh-375 said:


> Cheers Kyle at last a straight answer...... St Emilion



Or is it?...


----------



## germancomponist

Daniel James said:


> Too many people these days spend to much time with things they hate, trying to explain why they hate, and why you should hate too.
> 
> I made the conscious decision to not participate in that nonsense a long time ago....its funny how much time that leaves for actually creating new things and having fun. You will find most of those who 'do' in life tend to not to give a fuck about haters, they know what makes them happy and they live happy.
> 
> So I put it to people. Let haters hate and ignore them. Focus on what you like and what makes you happy. Life is way better that way!
> 
> -DJ


Great statement, Daniel!


----------



## mikeh-375

#


VinRice said:


> Or is it?...



Bad naughty robot


----------



## Marcin M

mikeh-375 said:


> #
> 
> 
> Bad naughty robot


You really didn't see HZ posts in this thread?


----------



## mikeh-375

Marcin M said:


> You really didn't see HZ posts in this thread?



Nope, only glanced at some posts this time, shameful I know, but unless his avatar says Hans Zimmer senior member, I missed it. I guess I'm not in the know here, never mind we are all ignorant on something eh. Anyone care to elucidate?


----------



## muk

mikeh-375 said:


> Anyone care to elucidate?



Well his film score company is called 'Remote Control'. Now look for somebody who chose an acronym for 'Remote Control Technician' as username. Isn't that furtive and understated?


----------



## mikeh-375

well, yes it is, thanks Muk. If you are reading MrZ, I still mourn the loss of The Snake Ranch on Lotts Rd, even after all this time. I used to love getting smashed up in the boozer on the corner with musos after sessions...happy days. Anyhow, this got a little too involved and took away from the OP, so apologies JohnG.


----------



## dgburns

Daniel James said:


> Too many people these days spend to much time with things they hate, trying to explain why they hate, and why you should hate too.
> 
> I made the conscious decision to not participate in that nonsense a long time ago....its funny how much time that leaves for actually creating new things and having fun. You will find most of those who 'do' in life tend to not to give a fuck about haters, they know what makes them happy and they live happy.
> 
> So I put it to people. Let haters hate and ignore them. Focus on what you like and what makes you happy. Life is way better that way!
> 
> -DJ



But at some point, you will work on a project and basically you will get ALOT of HATE. Happens to anyone who gets successful, or works on a fairly large scale project with penetration into the general public. The Hate comes fast and furious.

At first you have disbelief, then you get defensive, then angry, then finally resigned. Best is to be indifferent, but always vigilant to any consensus that the forum threads posess. Like if they are all hating on the same thing, there could be reasonable actionable feedback to absorb and integrate (somewhere in your brain for future use)

It all has to do with the fact you can't control how others respond to your work. For the vast majority of creators, the basic reaction from the public is disinterest. But I have to admit that to me, maybe that's the worst kind of reaction. It can help to have a support system in place (close friends with like minded interests; a group you form a creative cluster that has a vector to future projects). Your creative entourage is your greatest support mechanism. Helps if the projects are doing well financially too.

But the haters can unleash alot of hurt. I've felt it firsthand, and my first reaction is to lash out at the noob who destroyed my work with a few keystrokes. I'm convinced the hate comes from a feeling of ignorance and isolation. Also, for some reason, proxy hate also feels alot like virtual bullying. And I'll admit it has at times diminished my desire to create.

And finally, I've come to understand we all don't listen quite in the same way, and it's actually interesting. Because we can't force people to develop into experts and understand all the beauty of this medium. It does take a lifetime to learn, and some people are simply tone deaf and will never fully understand the medium of music. It's like arguing over what wine is best to someone who doesn't drink at all.

And for no reason and off topic, both JW and EM played trumpet, maybe the instr helped with their voicing ideas? JW surely.

-edit-

I just wanted to add however, that the reason feedback is important is because the Execs DO wade through public feedback, and so we can't entirely dismiss the haters- we will at some point need to justify our creative with our higher ups. while the Networks etc don't wade into the creative discussions, they do care about public ratings and general feeling towards the shows- so the hate actually does hurt in a real way- too much hate towards a show and it can be a CLT (career limiting thing). That aspect can be very real and I for one can't take that too lightly.


----------



## mikeh-375

ok...should have read the posts and not glanced...ooops, ah well, I blame that robot fella


----------



## Rctec

ghandizilla said:


> +1 for Witches of Eastwick. Devil's Dance is so full of innovative ideas! I'm surprised to read that Ennio Morricone was such a huge influence on your career. In which way would you say his influence is audible in your work?
> 
> I would also outline that it would be a bit reductionnist to define HZ music as this dimension of everchanging motion, layering different times, even if it's an important part of his work. My favourite HZ score is The Lion King. So inventive, so delightful to hear, every time.


There...
https://www.gramophone.co.uk/feature/ennio-morricone-my-inspiration-by-hans-zimmer


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

I neither hate HZ nor I hate JW. And I think a very few only do. I don´t care personally for the Zimmer sound, of course I do care for the JW sound. But both have their playground. Still I feel that we are throwing too many good things which grew over centuries over board. But I neither diminish people who do the Zimmer sound nor I put people who do the williams sound on a pedestal.

Our modern times require a different kind of composer than back in the 80s. If a longform symphonic self supporting soundtrack would be still required nowadays 95 percent of nowadays composers would be imo jobless. Good that its not like that.


----------



## Kyle Preston

"none of the parts in there are for timid players."

^ Grinned so hard reading it. Thanks for posting this Hans.


----------



## dgburns

Rctec said:


> There...
> https://www.gramophone.co.uk/feature/ennio-morricone-my-inspiration-by-hans-zimmer



Beautiful read.


----------



## Markus Kohlprath

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Our modern times require a different kind of composer than back in the 80s. If a longform symphonic self supporting soundtrack would be still required nowadays 95 percent of nowadays composers would be imo jobless. Good that its not like that.


But wouldn't it be nice if the remaining 5% would get a job too every now and then? I miss it and I doubt if it would hurt a films success.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

Markus Kohlprath said:


> But wouldn't it be nice if the remaining 5% would get a job too every now and then? I miss it and I doubt if it would hurt a films success.



Of course that wouldn´t hurt at all. I would have loved that if they would demand more of that technique. But like I said: This isn´t a requirement anymore to be a filmcomposer for orchestra and it is even not anymore done or demanded by producers. And it is not taught anymore also. This technique is not easy to learn and very hard to master. Believe me: missing that very much too.


----------



## dannymc

> But wouldn't it be nice if the remaining 5% would get a job too every now and then? I miss it and I doubt if it would hurt a films success.



imo trends and especially musical trends are cyclical. there will be a time in the future when all of this stuff will come back into fashion and it will be all the composers in the JW school of music getting all the jobs. who would of thought 5 years ago that epic versions of 80's classics would become all the rage in trailer music. 

Danny


----------



## synthpunk

Life is short, loose a parent or friend and remember how short. Make the important things count.



germancomponist said:


> Great statement, Daniel!


----------



## ptram

mikeh-375 said:


> so people, is it true that HZ frequents this forum?


If he had liked to be recognized, he would have used his real name. So, please everybody: respect his privacy.

Paolo


----------



## ghandizilla

I believe it's a question of not bringing just himself upfront, but also his collaborators at Remote Control. I like a lot what Alexander Schiborr is saying. Orchestra mastercraft is not a requirement anymore. Does it matter ? Not really, since this freedom opens different paths. I would add : now, we are not working on orchestral writing by obligation but by taste. My humble opinion : it's actually a good thing. We could regret to hear less things at our tastes, but in the same time, appreciate the vision of composers like Johann Johannson.


----------



## mikeh-375

ptram said:


> If he had liked to be recognized, he would have used his real name. So, please everybody: respect his privacy.
> 
> Paolo



Of course, but why drag it up again?


----------



## germancomponist

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> .... But like I said: This isn´t a requirement anymore to be a filmcomposer for orchestra and it is even not anymore done or demanded by producers. And it is not taught anymore also.



Really?


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

germancomponist said:


> Really?



Critters


----------



## synthpunk

probably because you incessantly asked 3 times.



mikeh-375 said:


> Of course, but why drag it up again?


----------



## ghandizilla

My two cents : clients don't care if I'm able to imitate some Williams' devices. They don't even care about dynamical structure since the cut is non static. They don't care if you do phrases since long takes are less frequent. (Is it the reason why, according to Mike Verta, HZ once said that modern films reject themes ?) What they care about is : is it identifiable ? Is it interesting in its way ? Does it fit with the other sounds of the montage ? (The only-music scenes, so abundant in A New Hope, become rarer too, as if everything were to be explicited nowadays. Which is a bit sad.)


----------



## mikeh-375

synthpunk said:


> probably because you incessantly asked 3 times.



yeah, that'll be because a bit of fun banter developed and I only got an answer later on. Have you read the context?Not exactly a full on definition of incessant really is it?, at least not in the sense of never ending - although you may well be taking it to that place. Once I found out I walked away. Don't you think it'd be best to let it lie, I didn't read the posts early on and should have, there you go, my bad. Now, how is this helping said persons anonymity? Wanna drag it out even more so?


----------



## synthpunk

Have a great day Mike, heading out for hurricane cleanup in 15 here.



mikeh-375 said:


> yeah, that'll be because a bit of fun banter developed and I only got an answer later on. Have you read the context?Not exactly a full on definition of incessant really is it?, at least not in the sense of never ending - although you may well be taking it to that place. Once I found out I walked away. Don't you think it'd be best to let it lie, I didn't read the posts early on and should have, there you go, my bad. Now, how is this helping said persons anonymity? Wanna drag it out even more so?


----------



## mikeh-375

Sorry to hear that SP. Good luck and yeah, perspective is all. Enough said.


----------



## dgburns

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> I neither hate HZ nor I hate JW. And I think a very few only do. I don´t care personally for the Zimmer sound, of course I do care for the JW sound. But both have their playground. Still I feel that we are throwing too many good things which grew over centuries over board. But I neither diminish people who do the Zimmer sound nor I put people who do the williams sound on a pedestal.
> 
> Our modern times require a different kind of composer than back in the 80s. If a longform symphonic self supporting soundtrack would be still required nowadays 95 percent of nowadays composers would be imo jobless. Good that its not like that.



Hey Alexander, it's nice to see someone that is trying to maintain his originality of thought. It's hard to find your way sometimes because we can easily get overwhelmed by others who eclipse the landscape.( and our modest work )

I think we have to be clear thinking in our assessment of the landscape. I think alot about where music is going, partly to try and keep relevant, partly to try and understand trends. If only to better understand my place in the whole thing. Pop music for example does filter down into the tv/film world. Sometimes it bombs, and sometimes it works great.

Personally, I've met with good luck when I took on an assignment that seems out of place or foreign to me. Stuff like music I'd never tried writing. Funny thing is, in the process of getting inside this unfamiliar music, I would discover I'd fall in love with it more often then not.

Somehow I can't help thinking that being flexible and open minded is a key ingredient to carving a carreer. Problem solving gets easier when you are willing to consider a wider range of solutions.

This doesn't mean you can't hold a torch to your dearset style of music, actually in todays world, I'd say being a specialist might even help, but being aware and conversant in as many different styles as possible will no doubt benefit the composer far more.

Sometimes just thinking about the kaleidoscope of music styles that exist makes my head spin, and it may be impossible to grasp all of it. But still, if music were to stay as program music from a hundred years ago, that would not be as interesting. Even if you still feel that the best musical thinkers were at their height back then. I still feel that music is a reflection of the times it lives in. Whether you like where society is going or not. Personally I'm a little distracted by all the disruptions due to technology, but we may as well get on with it and see where it goes.

-edit-
Hey I should add as an after thought, that the BEST times I've had collaborating with others was when I was with someone who was open mided and not afraid to try just about anything. The worst experiences I've had was when I could tell people were struggling to get out of their comfort zone. I'll never forget the one time I was trying to finish a theme song with an artist and asked for an "out of the box " approach and his response was "sorry man, that's just not my thing". I rolled my eyes and moved on, that gig instantly got boring to me.


----------



## Lupez

I think it's very simple: Morricone's music has a soul - ha l'anima!
He makes you cry with a few notes...top melodic stuff ! Just listen to "The Mission" theme.
At the same time he can be very experimental, epic or avant-garde. Best of both worlds!
But also HZ and JW have all of that in different degrees, no question about it.
In fact they're my top 3 favorite film composers for a reason. Ciao Hans!


----------



## Rctec

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> I neither hate HZ nor I hate JW. And I think a very few only do. I don´t care personally for the Zimmer sound, of course I do care for the JW sound. But both have their playground. Still I feel that we are throwing too many good things which grew over centuries over board. But I neither diminish people who do the Zimmer sound nor I put people who do the williams sound on a pedestal.
> 
> Our modern times require a different kind of composer than back in the 80s. If a longform symphonic self supporting soundtrack would be still required nowadays 95 percent of nowadays composers would be imo jobless. Good that its not like that.




What irks me is that "the Zimmer Sound" is such a small percentage of what I've done: Thelma and Louise, Da Vinci Code, Driving Miss Daisy, The Holiday, Hannibal, As Good As It Gets, Prince Of Egypt, Lion King, Backdraft, Frost/Nixon, Gladiator, Sherlock ...to just name a few, all use a different - but still my - musical vocabulary. Partly that's why I've given the superhero movies a rest. I don't want to develop a sound into just one direction, I want to develop into all directions. I think that for example in the three big orchestral ones I mentioned - Gladiator, Da Vinci and Hannibal (my personal favorite) there is a very different side to me, that I felt appropriate to express in those movies. I love writing scores like "The Holiday" and "League of their own". To me, they are of course as much of the Zimmer sound as a Chris Nolan movies. And - Chris and I really tried to make "Interstellar" different from an "Inception", for example.
The popularity and pervasiveness of a style is in direct proportion to the success of the movie. And how loud they mix the music !
I'm sure JW has the same dilemma: that's why I got excited that someone mentioned The Missouri Breaks. I always loved The Eiger Sanction of his...
But nothing will ever be as popular as Star Wars or his masterful Superman. Or ET...but you should try sitting there in your chair with the brief: "we expect you to reinvent the iconic JW Superman theme"...trust me, it makes for anxious days and nights! But, I'm so not complaining. It's been such a pleasure, such an honor to work with these film makers and such a thrill to be constantly pushed beyond my capabilities...

One other thought: all the successful filmcomposers I know don't really listen to film scores - unless they are watching a movie. There is so much other music to listen to. I get periods of electronics, blues, classical, avant garde, disco (ok, I admit it). But not really film scores. Other than...Ennio.


----------



## Jetzer

@Rctec

The Davinci Code is a personal favourite. The album presentation is wonderful as well, with all these longer pieces and the Richard Harvey piece at the end. Just has a certain depth that you don't here in many film scores. Track 8-12 are just amazing: Daniel's 9th Cipher, Poisoned Charlie, The Citrine Cross and Rose of Arimathea.

One of my favourite albums out there.


----------



## will_m

Rctec said:


> What irks me is that "the Zimmer Sound" is such a small percentage of what I've done:



This is exactly the point that I and a few others have raised about film scores in general, in the previous thread.

I truly believe there is a really exciting array of scores available if you're willing to listen and seek them out. Its sometimes easy to forget that although superhero films might dominate the box office there are many more options out there.

Often when people tell me they think everything sounds the same I'm reminded of listening to rock music growing up and how my parents would tell me it all sounded the same, loud drums, big guitars and shouty vocals. I never understood what they were hearing.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

Rctec said:


> What irks me is that "the Zimmer Sound" is such a small percentage of what I've done: Thelma and Louise, Da Vinci Code, Driving Miss Daisy, The Holiday, Hannibal, As Good As It Gets, Prince Of Egypt, Lion King, Backdraft, Frost/Nixon, Gladiator, Sherlock ...to just name a few, all use a different - but still my - musical vocabulary. Partly that's why I've given the superhero movies a rest. I don't want to develop a sound into just one direction, I want to develop into all directions. I think that for example in the three big orchestral ones I mentioned - Gladiator, Da Vinci and Hannibal (my personal favorite) there is a very different side to me, that I felt appropriate to express in those movies. I love writing scores like "The Holiday" and "League of their own". To me, they are of course as much of the Zimmer sound as a Chris Nolan movies. And - Chris and I really tried to make "Interstellar" different from an "Inception", for example.
> The popularity and pervasiveness of a style is in direct proportion to the success of the movie. And how loud they mix the music !
> I'm sure JW has the same dilemma: that's why I got excited that someone mentioned The Missouri Breaks. I always loved The Eiger Sanction of his...
> But nothing will ever be as popular as Star Wars or his masterful Superman. Or ET...but you should try sitting there in your chair with the brief: "we expect you to reinvent the iconic JW Superman theme"...trust me, it makes for anxious days and nights! But, I'm so not complaining. It's been such a pleasure, such an honor to work with these film makers and such a thrill to be constantly pushed beyond my capabilities...
> 
> One other thought: all the successful filmcomposers I know don't really listen to film scores - unless they are watching a movie. There is so much other music to listen to. I get periods of electronics, blues, classical, avant garde, disco (ok, I admit it). But not really film scores. Other than...Ennio.



Yes definitely agreed. So when I was mentioning it, I should have probably added the majority of what went by and followed after inception and superhero stuff. Don´t get me wrong: It is not that I would ever blame you, that you have your handwriting. It is good and you have. It is just that everywhere we have this sound or mostly some shitty impression of yours. Look, yesterday I watched a docu on Arte Europe which was revealing the mongolian life in the rough wilderness and how they use their domesticated eagles for hunting. Super beautiful docu, then after..10 minutes in this documentary the second cue was some 16th guitar hero string ensemble mixed with pounding drums and choirs which could have come out of batman returns. The scene was like with the mongolian riders and the eagle and rough mountains...how does that fit? These producers are on drugs when you ask me and everytime they touch their epic music fader they should get an electric shock through their chair. So to put it in other words..producers overlay so many scenes with dramatic epic modern music, it feels like to me when I go in the morning taking a shit so that I should turn on the dark Knight theme to underscore my event? It is totally missplaced and becomes just hilarous.

PS: Nothing to do with subject or your post, but I can´t stand ass kissers


----------



## dannymc

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Yes definitely agreed. So when I was mentioning it, I should have probably added the majority of what went by and followed after inception and superhero stuff. Don´t get me wrong: It is not that I would ever blame you, that you have your handwriting. It is good and you have. It is just that everywhere we have this sound or mostly some shitty impression of yours. Look, yesterday I watched a docu on Arte Europe which was revealing the mongolian life in the rough wilderness and how they use their domesticated eagles for hunting. Super beautiful docu, then after..10 minutes in this documentary the second cue was some 16th guitar hero string ensemble mixed with pounding drums and choirs which could have come out of batman returns. The scene was like with the mongolian riders and the eagle and rough mountains...how does that fit? These producers are on drugs when you ask me and everytime they touch their epic music fader they should get an electric shock through their chair. So to put it in other words..producers overlay so many scenes with dramatic epic modern music, it feels like to me when I go in the morning taking a shit so that I should turn on the dark Knight theme to underscore my event? It is totally missplaced and becomes just hilarous.
> 
> PS: Nothing to do with subject or your post, but I can´t stand ass kissers



but Alex do you not think you sound a little bit like the parents who say to their teenage kids "whats all that noise coming out of your room" in reference to a Nirvana classic or a modern EDM banger. "music was better in my day etc etc".

in any other discipline people would be supporters of progression and embrace it. i don't see why music is suppose to get to one particular era in history and then everything from then on in is some how less credible or of lower quality.

i'd argue if Mozart or Beethoven could be reincarnated and brought back tomorrow they wouldn't just go straight back to making stuff like Don Giovanni or the 9th Symphony. imo they would be saying "wow look at this new technology called synths etc, look at the colors, tones and textures i can now express myself with".

but yes i do get your frustration with dark knight sounding cue's being used everywhere and inappropriately but why is that Hans fault? its one movie in many that he has composed on. the main issue i feel you have is that some of these movie scores such as the big inception, and batman have spawned a whole genre which seems to be all the people who make the decisions these days want to hear in their productions.

i think that's more a issue of ignorance on their behalf rather than anything else.

but also i feel the tone and mood of modern films just don't call for JW style music. take for example this great trailer for Sicario. would that work better with a JW style love theme? i think not.



Danny


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

But Danny, due to all respect but a lot seem to be here in your interpretation. Please go and read my comment again. At no point there I blamed Hans for that such music is overused (in particular I even said that I did not!) nor I am saying that music has to be sophisticated to mean something. I also don´t say at any point in my comment that back then everything was better. Not at all. I refer to my comment.
And yes you are completely right: Most modern films even don´t require a John Williams rendering. But who sais to put a love theme of John Williams into such a trailer of Sicario? I also never said that someone should do such thing.
Look, I tried to point out a problem. Later after I finished the docu I zapped on a different channel and there was a cooking show, guess what happened? There was the same music again used, then in the break there was a car commercial where they used something very very similiar again. So it is literally everywhere regardless what the context is really about. It feels like that nowadays nobody can say something "epic" anymore "without using 16th string ostinato, choirs and pounding godzilla drums". Then this is one thing which is a bit unfortunate, but why then this music has to be used in contexts where it just doesn´t fit and belongs to, even becomes annyoing and poor? It damages the scene rather than adding something great to it. That´s the problem. It makes the scene BAD, REALLY BAD. Plus: Nobody cares anymore for the music because the music is absolutely no focal point of storytelling anymore. And that is even worse imo.
Again: I would highly appreciate to read exactly what I write because what you write is also right, but wasn´t at all the point of my comment. Thank you.


----------



## ghandizilla

What Alex is trying to state I guess is : HZ's endeavour is very different of what his epigones and imitators make. It's sad because the Barman Begins stuff doesn't fit everywhere, moreover when done poorly (HZ always keeps a sense of contrast, though I'm not a fan at all of his superhero style, I have to admit he sparingly does it fff and keeps his low end clear).


----------



## Darren Durann

Rctec said:


> What irks me is that "the Zimmer Sound" is such a small percentage of what I've done: Thelma and Louise, Da Vinci Code, Driving Miss Daisy, The Holiday, Hannibal, As Good As It Gets, Prince Of Egypt, Lion King, Backdraft, Frost/Nixon, Gladiator, Sherlock ...to just name a few, all use a different - but still my - musical vocabulary. Partly that's why I've given the superhero movies a rest. I don't want to develop a sound into just one direction, I want to develop into all directions. I think that for example in the three big orchestral ones I mentioned - Gladiator, Da Vinci and Hannibal (my personal favorite) there is a very different side to me, that I felt appropriate to express in those movies. I love writing scores like "The Holiday" and "League of their own". To me, they are of course as much of the Zimmer sound as a Chris Nolan movies. And - Chris and I really tried to make "Interstellar" different from an "Inception", for example.
> The popularity and pervasiveness of a style is in direct proportion to the success of the movie. And how loud they mix the music !
> I'm sure JW has the same dilemma: that's why I got excited that someone mentioned The Missouri Breaks. I always loved The Eiger Sanction of his...
> But nothing will ever be as popular as Star Wars or his masterful Superman. Or ET...but you should try sitting there in your chair with the brief: "we expect you to reinvent the iconic JW Superman theme"...trust me, it makes for anxious days and nights! But, I'm so not complaining. It's been such a pleasure, such an honor to work with these film makers and such a thrill to be constantly pushed beyond my capabilities...
> 
> One other thought: all the successful filmcomposers I know don't really listen to film scores - unless they are watching a movie. There is so much other music to listen to. I get periods of electronics, blues, classical, avant garde, disco (ok, I admit it). But not really film scores. Other than...Ennio.



Besides the amazing work from all parts of your career, one only needs to witness such relatively recent scores as Interstellar and Inception to know that you're far from a "superhero composer" only (an image people like Henry Jackman and Brian Tyler are probably going to have a harder time getting away from....not to mention seemingly endless comparisons to what you've done).

I should mention, I sure wish I myself was known for some kind of sound. Even if it was an superhero or Inception sound or whatever.

People who are smart enough to dig deeper will know the bigger, more eclectic truth about you. But you are so fortunate to have created a whole trend, one that apparently isn't going anywhere anytime soon (certainly the latet superhero movies show the influence, roughly a decade since Batman Begins). My hats off to you sir; even that which you seem to be distancing yourself from is _quite_ the far reaching achievement . How many others will be "known" in that way, even with the laptop composer boom one in half a million might be a kind number.

I'd embrace it all. But then, I'm not one of the world's best composers like you are. Everyone's different.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

JW Missouri Breaks theme:



Jerry Fielding (an example of what I meant by "nothing wimpy about him"). Also, 46 years ago and it doesn't sound at all dated:


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

More Jerry Fielding. While the low piano riffs (actually rows in this case) have become cliché, this still stands up:


----------



## adam_lukas

I find it interesting that lots of people tend to compare them solely from a music-theory/production point of view. hans is always the one that 'uses less harmonies but mingles acoustic and electronic worlds brilliantly' and John's the 'extraordinary, sophisticated writer that gets the most out of an orchestra'.

but after all it's film music - it has functional nature and has to be seen in context with the movie's story.
That reminds me of my mum and my dad telling me the exact same story when i was a kid but they both did it in a completely different way - not only they used different words to describe the scenery, my dad always left out a part that my mum described in full detail. I loved both versions anyways and i can appreciate both Hans' and John's approach to music in film.


----------



## Kyle Preston

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Also, 46 years ago and it doesn't sound at all dated



You weren't kidding, this sounds fantastic. I'm currently enjoying this puppy:

​


----------



## lux

ghandizilla said:


> ... It's sad because the *Barman Begins* stuff doesn't fit everywhere, ...



The barman begins its a movie I would definitely enjoy.

Btw, nice to see such homage to Ennio Morricone, being italian one of the very few advantages I had is the chance to see his works performed live and conducted by him quite a few times. I personally always had the impression of Morricone as someone who composed music "thinking of the movie" instead of "working on the movie". If that makes sense. Which is something also related to the years he composed his most famous works, when they didn't have massive workhorse computers and didn't compose every bit of music on a timeline. It was music coming out of a story, which is definitely nice, if you think about it.


----------



## Darren Durann

lux said:


> The barman begins its a movie I would definitely enjoy.
> 
> Btw, nice to see such homage to Ennio Morricone, being italian one of the very few advantages I had is the chance to see his works performed live and conducted by him quite a few times. I personally always had the impression of Morricone as someone who composed music "thinking of the movie" instead of "working on the movie". If that makes sense. Which is something also very related to the years he composed his most famous works, when they didn't have massive workhorse computers and didn't compose every bit of music on a timeline. It was music coming out of a story, which is definitely nice, if you think about it.



I always wondered, especially in a fairly recent interview where he put Morricone over Herrmann as an influence (blasphemy! just kidding HZ), if he was especially inspired by The Thing, because I do hear that in Mr. Zimmer's 21st century scores.


----------



## Darren Durann

Said "Thing" is a pretty marvelous film and score to this very day imo, that was back when Carpenter seemed to be on top of the world.

As for John Williams being old fashioned, I guess my opinion (according to avatars) is righteously biased: scores that feature traditional orchestral instruments will never go completely obsolete imo. There are too many wonderful colours that all inspire empathy, honed over centuries.

I love synthesizers, but writing for orchestra is far more gratifying for me as a personal artist. It's so much more challenging overall, and the pay off is sensational.


----------



## germancomponist

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> .... Look, I tried to point out a problem. Later after I finished the docu I zapped on a different channel and there was a cooking show, guess what happened? There was the same music again used, then in the break there was a car commercial where they used something very very similiar again. So it is literally everywhere regardless what the context is really about. It feels like that nowadays nobody can say something "epic" anymore "without using 16th string ostinato, choirs and pounding godzilla drums". Then this is one thing which is a bit unfortunate, but why then this music has to be used in contexts where it just doesn´t fit and belongs to, even becomes annyoing and poor? It damages the scene rather than adding something great to it. That´s the problem. It makes the scene BAD, REALLY BAD. Plus: Nobody cares anymore for the music because the music is absolutely no focal point of storytelling anymore. And that is even worse imo. .....



Ha, that is the reason why I like samplelibraries like "action-strings" so much ..... . You get all this with one fingersnip. (Caution: Irony!)

Yeah, the first time that I can agree with you.


----------



## Rctec

Jesse Heslinga said:


> @Rctec
> 
> The Davinci Code is a personal favourite. The album presentation is wonderful as well, with all these longer pieces and the Richard Harvey piece at the end. Just has a certain depth that you don't here in many film scores. Track 8-12 are just amazing: Daniel's 9th Cipher, Poisoned Charlie, The Citrine Cross and Rose of Arimathea.
> 
> One of my favourite albums out there.


Track 8-12 is my original suite. That's probably why it feels quite coherent...


----------



## Daniel James

Rctec said:


> What irks me is that "the Zimmer Sound" is such a small percentage of what I've done: Thelma and Louise, Da Vinci Code, Driving Miss Daisy, The Holiday, Hannibal, As Good As It Gets, Prince Of Egypt, Lion King, Backdraft, Frost/Nixon, Gladiator, Sherlock ...to just name a few, all use a different - but still my - musical vocabulary. Partly that's why I've given the superhero movies a rest. I don't want to develop a sound into just one direction, I want to develop into all directions. I think that for example in the three big orchestral ones I mentioned - Gladiator, Da Vinci and Hannibal (my personal favorite) there is a very different side to me, that I felt appropriate to express in those movies. I love writing scores like "The Holiday" and "League of their own". To me, they are of course as much of the Zimmer sound as a Chris Nolan movies. And - Chris and I really tried to make "Interstellar" different from an "Inception", for example.
> The popularity and pervasiveness of a style is in direct proportion to the success of the movie. And how loud they mix the music !
> I'm sure JW has the same dilemma: that's why I got excited that someone mentioned The Missouri Breaks. I always loved The Eiger Sanction of his...
> But nothing will ever be as popular as Star Wars or his masterful Superman. Or ET...but you should try sitting there in your chair with the brief: "we expect you to reinvent the iconic JW Superman theme"...trust me, it makes for anxious days and nights! But, I'm so not complaining. It's been such a pleasure, such an honor to work with these film makers and such a thrill to be constantly pushed beyond my capabilities...
> 
> One other thought: all the successful filmcomposers I know don't really listen to film scores - unless they are watching a movie. There is so much other music to listen to. I get periods of electronics, blues, classical, avant garde, disco (ok, I admit it). But not really film scores. Other than...Ennio.



I actually went into this point in an interview recently where you came up as the example (as you often do  )

the tl;dr version is no successful composer aims to sound like them, they just do through things they do right and 'wrong' when it comes to their process and it sounds new but also like them.



I mention in the video that I don't presume to speak for you or other composers but I am giving my assumption based on my own experiences.

-DJ

p.s when I say people fuck things up I dont mean they do things wrong but in context of the interview the point earlier came up that people sound like they do because they have their own ways of doing things.

Also sorry for posting a video interview, it just would have taken forever to type out my rambling.


----------



## Creston

Rctec said:


> What irks me is that "the Zimmer Sound" is such a small percentage of what I've done: Thelma and Louise, Da Vinci Code, Driving Miss Daisy, The Holiday, Hannibal, As Good As It Gets, Prince Of Egypt, Lion King, Backdraft, Frost/Nixon, Gladiator, Sherlock ...to just name a few, all use a different - but still my - musical vocabulary. Partly that's why I've given the superhero movies a rest. I don't want to develop a sound into just one direction, I want to develop into all directions. I think that for example in the three big orchestral ones I mentioned - Gladiator, Da Vinci and Hannibal (my personal favorite) there is a very different side to me, that I felt appropriate to express in those movies. I love writing scores like "The Holiday" and "League of their own". To me, they are of course as much of the Zimmer sound as a Chris Nolan movies. And - Chris and I really tried to make "Interstellar" different from an "Inception", for example.
> The popularity and pervasiveness of a style is in direct proportion to the success of the movie. And how loud they mix the music !
> I'm sure JW has the same dilemma: that's why I got excited that someone mentioned The Missouri Breaks. I always loved The Eiger Sanction of his...
> But nothing will ever be as popular as Star Wars or his masterful Superman. Or ET...but you should try sitting there in your chair with the brief: "we expect you to reinvent the iconic JW Superman theme"...trust me, it makes for anxious days and nights! But, I'm so not complaining. It's been such a pleasure, such an honor to work with these film makers and such a thrill to be constantly pushed beyond my capabilities...
> 
> One other thought: all the successful filmcomposers I know don't really listen to film scores - unless they are watching a movie. There is so much other music to listen to. I get periods of electronics, blues, classical, avant garde, disco (ok, I admit it). But not really film scores. Other than...Ennio.



I'm often telling so called Zimmer fans about your score to Black Rain (and the incredible film itself!). 

I also realised a couple of years ago that one of my favourite scores since my childhood seems like it was temped heavily with Rain Main.


----------



## Ultra

Morricone is light years ahead of HZ and JW combined, IMO. the only film/tv composer that can hold a candle to Ennio was Delerues. Basil unfortunately gone way too soon.

Even from an American film composer perspective, Goldsmith edges out JW. Imperial March is the epitome of pin-point followed by Jurassic Park but Goldsmith has hammered out so many different scores... Spectrum is much, much wider... Spectrum covered as in: versatility. Alien score... then THE OMEN score... Drama, action, sci-fi, horror... All covered.

HZ... Leaving wallbrook + end credits (RAINMAN)... shades of Vangelis in 1492... 5 years before they did it... ) I'd love him do more stuff like that...

Ennio "admiring" JW and HZ... (If he ever said so) maybe on a personal level, but also don't forget Ennio never broke into Hwood... JW redefined it and Hans owns it. I literally mean it. I mean he owns half of SM... )) making it in Hwood may possibly be where an "admiration" came from...

Kubrick admired Spielberg... Not because of his movies, but because his movies made so much money... Kubricks never did, and they were way better than spielbergs.

Another thing to consider is the picture... Ennio was fortunate enough to work on Sergio's pics (and vice versa) - him and Sergio being childhood friends, Sergio helped create the music, recut some scenes to fit... That is a perfect match... JW was lucky enough to meet Lucas and Spielberg... Since the job is to write pin-point to picture, if the pic sucks then that's not good... Ennio wrote way over a hundred scores, and many of them were just okay...

But since it only makes sense to judge composers by their best work, there's nobody that writes musical poetry like Ennio (other than Delerues). Minimum of instruments, crystal clear communication, the emotional texture is so deep, u'll see the images although uve never seen the movie...


----------



## NoamL

HZ's style is not 16th note pulses, it's that* he creates a new sound for every movie*.

I can't find too many examples of this from the age of orchestral scoring that JW brought about. Composers would bend the score in the direction of particular instrumentations (like the trumpet ensemble on _Superman_) or use soloists (_Schindler's List_) or throw in a few instruments from outside the traditional orchestra (_The Two Towers_) or played in untraditional ways (_The Matrix_) or invent instruments and synths (_Harry Potter_). But the idea of something like Zimmer's _Sherlock Holmes_ just doesn't exist in the scores I've studied... suppose I should study Morricone more because each of his scores do sound differentiated that way.

@AlexanderSchiborr said "music has to be sophisticated to mean something" - I agree. It has to be sophisticated and specific. Generic music is emotionally empty and meaningless. The Zimmer wannabes are using 16th pulses and so on, but they aren't curating a unique stand-out collection of sounds for their scores. That is the true sin of their imitative attempts. Not that they cop Hans's musical language. It's precisely because I so appreciate the importance of the _sonic_ aspect of HZ's approach to film music that I _do not_ put much stock in the claim that films have "moved on" and film music has to be written more or less as he writes it. I think his musical language is a preternaturally amazing fit for Nolan's films but in his other work I can see other approaches working. Henry Jackman was mentioned not-very-positively on the last page, which is strange because I believe his music is a great example of taking "only" the right lessons from HZ's music. John Powell is another. When you compare their music to what was being written in... say the nineties... then it's hard to argue that music _has_ moved on. With regard to JW's filmography during and since this big shift, I think he's had the advantage of working on a series of films since the 90s where his traditional orchestral approach works very well and hasn't needed changing.


----------



## Dave Connor

Ultra said:


> Morricone is light years ahead of HZ and JW combined, IMO


 How so? You don't give a single example or comparison.



Ultra said:


> Even from an American film composer perspective, Goldsmith edges out JW... Spectrum covered as in: versatility.


Goldsmith is considered the most versatile composer in film history by a lot of folks. Hans has simply said that he thinks Ennio is the best ever which many people do as well. Many say Williams.



Ultra said:


> Ennio "admiring" JW and HZ... (If he ever said so) maybe on a personal level...


Why would you guess at something like that? And in the negative? You don't think one of the greatest of all film composers admires the talents of two decades-long cultural-defining composers who have impacted the entire music world? Composers who are highly regarded by musicians in countless mediums including the symphonic world? You're saying when Morricone singled them out as maintaining the high standards of the art and craft of film writing while others are pushing presets on their synths, that it was a completely false statement? So all that beautiful music that came from Morricone came out of a man so full of himself he must force himself to _appear _to praise others in public?

You're not only indicting the character of the man you say you admire, you're questioning his musicianship. If he does admire Hans Zimmer and John Williams in the way he has said on record, then he's hearing all kinds of things in their music that you aren't. Please don't ask us to assume he's a superior minded fellow enamored only of himself and deaf to those two hugely gifted composers who have done countless things he could never do. My guess is Ennio wouldn't like that.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

This is for all the people who think Hans is a lightweight or he writes throbbing music or whatever the frick it is I skipped over.

I love this main title, and with the graphics (which aren't here) it was really stunning:


----------



## Kyle Preston

Definitely!

Transcribing for the contest was fun - had to really roll up my sleeves for it. Such beautiful chord movements in there.


----------



## jononotbono

NoamL said:


> *he creates a new sound for every movie*.



Exactly. I'm sure most people are deaf. Or stuck in some weird psychological loop and aren't aware HZ has done anything more than The Rock or Batman.

I actually would love it if HZ did the next Star Wars film. Imagine the hysterical frenzy all the 30 somethings that play with rubber light sabres on Christmas morning would go into.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

NoamL said:


> HZ's style is not 16th note pulses, it's that* he creates a new sound for every movie*.
> 
> I can't find too many examples of this from the age of orchestral scoring that JW brought about. Composers would bend the score in the direction of particular instrumentations (like the trumpet ensemble on _Superman_) or use soloists (_Schindler's List_) or throw in a few instruments from outside the traditional orchestra (_The Two Towers_) or played in untraditional ways (_The Matrix_) or invent instruments and synths (_Harry Potter_). But the idea of something like Zimmer's _Sherlock Holmes_ just doesn't exist in the scores I've studied... suppose I should study Morricone more because each of his scores do sound differentiated that way.
> 
> @AlexanderSchiborr said "music has to be sophisticated to mean something" - I agree. It has to be sophisticated and specific. Generic music is emotionally empty and meaningless. The Zimmer wannabes are using 16th pulses and so on, but they aren't curating a unique stand-out collection of sounds for their scores. That is the true sin of their imitative attempts. Not that they cop Hans's musical language. It's precisely because I so appreciate the importance of the _sonic_ aspect of HZ's approach to film music that I _do not_ put much stock in the claim that films have "moved on" and film music has to be written more or less as he writes it. I think his musical language is a preternaturally amazing fit for Nolan's films but in his other work I can see other approaches working. Henry Jackman was mentioned not-very-positively on the last page, which is strange because I believe his music is a great example of taking "only" the right lessons from HZ's music. John Powell is another. When you compare their music to what was being written in... say the nineties... then it's hard to argue that music _has_ moved on. With regard to JW's filmography during and since this big shift, I think he's had the advantage of working on a series of films since the 90s where his traditional orchestral approach works very well and hasn't needed changing.



Noam, I did say that music has NOT be sophisticated to mean something. I refer to my own comment ("At no point there I blamed Hans for that such music is overused (in particular I even said that I did not!) nor I am saying that music has to be sophisticated to mean something"

I already told Danny that please everybody read exactly what I write. I feel either people skip words or they fly to fast over my post and thats the reason why they interprete things outisde the message of what I have posted. By saying that I meant that music has not to be complex to be good. Nothing more nothing less. But your comment is also pretty damn on spot. Completely agreed. I just wanted to clarify that. Also I know and I never said in my comment that the HZ Sound is only about 16th string ostinatos, choirs, and pounding drums. It is sure not, but at least you have to admit that it is a very typical device of HZ which is used or missused million times by others. 



germancomponist said:


> Ha, that is the reason why I like samplelibraries like "action-strings" so much ..... . You get all this with one fingersnip. (Caution: Irony!)
> 
> Yeah, the first time that I can agree with you.



Oh..you read my comment, it seems. (irony). Allright..


----------



## Ultra

Dave Connor said:


> How so? You don't give a single example or comparison.
> 
> Goldsmith is considered the most versatile composer in film history by a lot of folks. Hans has simply said that he thinks Ennio is the best ever which many people do as well. Many say Williams.
> 
> Why would you guess at something like that? And in the negative? You don't think one of the greatest of all film composers admires the talents of two decades-long cultural-defining composers who have impacted the entire music world? Composers who are highly regarded by musicians in countless mediums including the symphonic world? You're saying when Morricone singled them out as maintaining the high standards of the art and craft of film writing while others are pushing presets on their synths, that it was a completely false statement? So all that beautiful music that came from Morricone came out of a man so full of himself he must force himself to _appear _to praise others in public?
> 
> You're not only indicting the character of the man you say you admire, you're questioning his musicianship. If he does admire Hans Zimmer and John Williams in the way he has said on record, then he's hearing all kinds of things in their music that you aren't. Please don't ask us to assume he's a superior minded fellow enamored only of himself and deaf to those two hugely gifted composers who have done countless things he could never do. My guess is Ennio wouldn't like that.



My post is merely my opinion, as clearly stated. Yours is yours, zero problem with that. There is no right or wrong here.

re Goldsmith: read closely... _*American*_ film composer... and then u actually agree, so not sure why u quoted that 

Re the "admiration" statement... the point was that these things are often made up when there is zero record and when the statement in question was actually made, they may possibly be made out of other reasons... as my examples pointed out. What the truth ultimately is, none of us knows (and it doesn't matter).

Making blanket statements (again, which are often false) just to lift the two composers in question even higher is nothing but blinding the fools.

Zero negative in it, just a reality check. Whatever Ennio has said or not should never affect ur opinion of JW or HZ.


----------



## Rohann

Interesting post. I'd have to agree on most points.

My personal issue isn't at the extreme end for either quite honestly. I'll study Williams, learn as much as I can muster about his writing and orchestration, but his _most _popular works don't do a great deal for me. I grew up with Star Wars and completely understand why it's as fantastic as it is and why the score is so renowned (same with Indiana Jones, same with Superman, etc), but on an emotional level, the style as a whole just doesn't do it for me as an adult. I have nothing negative to say about it, other than the fact that it just doesn't resonate with me.

Similarly, I understand the frustration with the seemingly complete lack of long-form or any "traditional" musical style in scoring -- the obsession with editing until the last second means temp music abounds and composers don't get to score start to finish anymore, at least a lot of the time from what I understand. It's sad that scores in the vein of Shore's LOTR (a composer that doesn't get mentioned _nearly _enough) or Williams' Star Wars, not stylistically but in form, are rarely done -- Marvel would be _perfectly _suited to this but they avoid it like the plague.
I also get the irritation with "trailer music", and I share it -- anything that feels so utterly derivative and formulaic, especially when it legitimately _is _based _almost purely _on a formula, cheapens the art. The fact of the matter is also that it's way easier to layer 300 pre-mixed instruments from expensive libraries into a four chord progression that never develops horizontally than to write interesting, developing music, nevermind also orchestrate it well. I also get _immensely _tired of seeing the word "cinematic" tacked on to damn near every new sound library that gets advertised at 95% off. I also understand why people feel frustrated with Hans for this considering the aforementioned "Zimmer sound".

But as with most things, people tend to swing on that pendulum instead of finding middle ground.

Not all Hans' music is remotely similar, nor is it at all sensible to blame him for cheap copycats (whether the fault of composers or studios that demand strict adherence to temp music). As Hans himself mentioned, he's done a ton of different stuff stylistically, and while the Inception score might have bred a particularly and comically overused "motif" in trailer music, in its original form it was interesting, relevant and unique. I don't know why no one ever mentions the Last Samurai score; finding and listening to that score after seeing the movie changed my life. It may not have been a long-form score in the realm of Rivel or Wagner, but it was certainly melodic and hauntingly beautiful. The Sherlock Holmes score is also rarely mentioned, and I found it quite fun, very memorable, and there's a violin piece contained in the film unlike anything I've heard in film before.

Similarly with Williams. I always hear about Star Wars, Superman, Jaws, Indiana. Great, I get why. But what about Schindler's List? Or Harry Potter? He's really a master at what he does, and like his style or not there's a ton to be learned by listening to his work, and I think his most popular work overshadows some of his other brilliant scores. I also think his musical structure, in terms of the use of motifs and the subtle sophistication in his musical development, is something that most new composers ought to pay a lot of attention to, and would likely make the average film's score a lot more interesting. We may have moved away from the classic Hollywood "sound", but there's no reason to neglect sophisticated and highly intentional structure.

I really do understand the frustration with the current state of film music, but the issue is likely more systemic than anything -- scores need to be done quickly, scores need to sound like *this*, score scenes at random instead of the entire film, don't take risks on the score (simply copy what works), trailers need to follow this formula to appeal to the widest demographic because it's effective, follow this scoring trend, shots are often called by studio execs with little to no creative mindset and money being the central focus (I've always found it a grand irony that the money that funds art most often tends to be in the hands of those who don't really understand it) etc. I think the "Marvel industry" is probably the biggest perpetrator of these issues. Fortunately this is being challenged by composers like Johan Johansson, who's doing Bladerunner and also co-scored Arrival -- it's refreshing to see other styles coming to the forefront and the faux-"epic" sound starting to finally fall by the wayside. I'm sure we'll all be sick of minimalism in a few years too, because trends tend to be followed by the mediocre (whether films, scores or otherwise), and most creative people aren't fond of trends.


----------



## Dave Connor

Mr. Morricone pretty clear to my ears.
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2...one-good-film-scores-replaced-by-bad-and-ugly


----------



## ctsai89

@Dave Connor > HZ and JW. For me personally.

come on guys just because someone is more famous and have done in the film industry/academia doens't mean you can't find someone else's music more beautiful than theirs.


----------



## Dave Connor

@ctsai89 you're far too kind. The very last thing I would have expected this evening.


----------



## Ultra

Dave Connor said:


> Mr. Morticine pretty clear to my ears.
> https://www.theguardian.com/music/2...one-good-film-scores-replaced-by-bad-and-ugly



he's 1000% dead on, and we all have seen the trend over the last 20 years in film scores... 

but - and this is again the other side of the coin, or even clearer: one of many viewing angles - Ennio is "just" a composer. He is one part of the big puzzle of film making. I truly appreciate him saying that many directors do not understand the impact of the score and the room it needs. I fully agree. And like I said before, he never broke into Hwood, and u can believe there were countless conversations. So u can imagine how frustrated he must have been.

but the reality is - even for the greatest like himself - the composer's job is to serve the picture, and that is to serve the director's vision. Many composers do NOT freaking understand that. Matter of fact, many artists on a film do not understand that. Getting hired is not a wildcard permission to deviate from the original vision. This is a frustrating problem, on top of general communication issues between individuals. ("oh, I thought u meant this....")

On Sergio's stuff, Sergio sat in with him and also wrote music, he very very clearly directed Ennio what he wants, to ensure this is pin-point to each scene. This is why these movies are absolutely fantastic, because it all fits just perfectly. And those were low budget indie productions.

This is by far the best way to ensure consistency and a high quality product. But u need a master director for this, with a very clear vision, who can communicate clearly. And then obviously professionals who (a) LISTEN to what the director says (b) know their role in the hierarchy, and (c) deliver what is asked w/o arguing or too much deviation (creative discussion is welcome of course). But... it's NOT the composer's movie we're doing here.

regarding whining... composers need to understand that every single department on a movie (costumes, make-up, vfx, sound design, edit, color, etc etc etc) are all singing the same song... there is never enough attention and never enough money for them.

While to me personally sound (edit, design, score etc) is at least 51% of a movie, and the score is very very important, it is very difficult to find professionals on that upper echelon skill level that then are able to work within the confined space of the story (and the intended vision) and are still able to deliver non-generic themes, motifs, Leitmotifs etc... so first a lot of complaint, then they gotta deliver, and when they don't then they complain about not having "enough freedom"... u're delivering to picture. we're not funding here your free-for-all-symphony about an unicorn playing peek-a-boo. Happens more often than u can count.

Ennio has done so many below average, indie movies (that nobody has seen) and still delivered beautiful stuff (Delerues even more so)... that is a statement to his work ethic and his skill. I hear the score from people doing the latest biggest blockbuster and the score is abysmal generic, and u would think these peeps would take the chance to deliver the score of their lifetime as this picture will be seen by half of the planet... nope. 

Jo Yeong-Wook delivered beautiful score for Oldboy... need more peeps like him.

just a different side of the same story, probably not very popular here.... )))))


----------



## germancomponist

Dave Connor said:


> Mr. Morricone pretty clear to my ears.
> https://www.theguardian.com/music/2...one-good-film-scores-replaced-by-bad-and-ugly


What a good read! Thanks Dave.


----------



## Dave Connor

Ultra said:


> My post is merely my opinion, as clearly stated. Yours is yours, zero problem with that. There is no right or wrong here.


 I thought your statement that Morricone is light years ahead of John Williams and Hans Zimmer _combined_ is clearly wrong (of course it's your opinion.) JW is one of the great thematic composers in all of film and HZ, one of it's greatest innovators. To say nothing of JW's miraculous handling of the orchestral machine and Hans' reintroducing the world to harmonic resonance through numerous combinations of acoustic and non-acoustic instrumentation. When in the last few centuries have we heard those (HZ's) stunningly beautiful _new_ sounds? You would have to point to Bach on the organ to flood the human senses like that. Also, both writers exploit the western musical system with uncanny deftness and invention. My point is that I don't think these things have escaped the golden ears of Ennio Morrocone (though it seems they have escaped some.) 


Ultra said:


> Re the "admiration" statement... the point was that these things are often made up when there is zero record and when the statement in question was actually made....


I posted a link to Morricone's comment on said composers. It's not even the quote I had in mind as he said it in an entirely different way in the quote I was thinking of. Why repeatedly go out of your way to acknowledge the same two composers? If he was being generous or even disingenuous he would have thrown in some other names. But a towering giant like him keeps mentioning these two. Why? Because he's watching and listening and is perhaps the most qualified person on the planet to comment on them. Forget me, but why not consider someone who's musical integrity is unquestioned in you own mind?



Ultra said:


> Making blanket statements (again, which are often false) just to lift the two composers in question even higher is nothing but blinding the fools.


Hold on. YOU said that were _light years _beneath EM. I'm simply not allowing they be dumped into that chasm. I'm assigning them the place I think history will put them, not exalting them. I don't listen to film music much which is why these two impress the hell out of me. I know facile, inventive writing and orchestration when I hear it and these two are parked in that sphere of writing. What is harder to do as a composer?



Ultra said:


> Zero negative in it, just a reality check. Whatever Ennio has said or not should never affect ur opinion of JW or HZ.


 My opinions of composers is based upon the music they write, not what they say. I thought maybe it would be good for you to take a cue from EM.

I don't have a problem with people having their cup of tea. Debussy didn't like Beethoven. But if he said Beethoven didn't deserve his rightful place among the greats than I would take issue with that faulty logic. He's a great composer whether you like him or not.


----------



## gregh

Ultra said:


> he's 1000% dead on, and we all have seen the trend over the last 20 years in film scores...
> 
> but - and this is again the other side of the coin, or even clearer: one of many viewing angles - Ennio is "just" a composer. He is one part of the big puzzle of film making. I truly appreciate him saying that many directors do not understand the impact of the score and the room it needs. I fully agree. And like I said before, he never broke into Hwood, and u can believe there were countless conversations. So u can imagine how frustrated he must have been.
> 
> but the reality is - even for the greatest like himself - the composer's job is to serve the picture, and that is to serve the director's vision. Many composers do NOT freaking understand that. Matter of fact, many artists on a film do not understand that. Getting hired is not a wildcard permission to deviate from the original vision. This is a frustrating problem, on top of general communication issues between individuals. ("oh, I thought u meant this....")
> 
> On Sergio's stuff, Sergio sat in with him and also wrote music, he very very clearly directed Ennio what he wants, to ensure this is pin-point to each scene. This is why these movies are absolutely fantastic, because it all fits just perfectly. And those were low budget indie productions.
> 
> This is by far the best way to ensure consistency and a high quality product. But u need a master director for this, with a very clear vision, who can communicate clearly. And then obviously professionals who (a) LISTEN to what the director says (b) know their role in the hierarchy, and (c) deliver what is asked w/o arguing or too much deviation (creative discussion is welcome of course). But... it's NOT the composer's movie we're doing here.
> 
> regarding whining... composers need to understand that every single department on a movie (costumes, make-up, vfx, sound design, edit, color, etc etc etc) are all singing the same song... there is never enough attention and never enough money for them.
> 
> While to me personally sound (edit, design, score etc) is at least 51% of a movie, and the score is very very important, it is very difficult to find professionals on that upper echelon skill level that then are able to work within the confined space of the story (and the intended vision) and are still able to deliver non-generic themes, motifs, Leitmotifs etc... so first a lot of complaint, then they gotta deliver, and when they don't then they complain about not having "enough freedom"... u're delivering to picture. we're not funding here your free-for-all-symphony about an unicorn playing peek-a-boo. Happens more often than u can count.
> 
> Ennio has done so many below average, indie movies (that nobody has seen) and still delivered beautiful stuff (Delerues even more so)... that is a statement to his work ethic and his skill. I hear the score from people doing the latest biggest blockbuster and the score is abysmal generic, and u would think these peeps would take the chance to deliver the score of their lifetime as this picture will be seen by half of the planet... nope.
> 
> Jo Yeong-Wook delivered beautiful score for Oldboy... need more peeps like him.
> 
> just a different side of the same story, probably not very popular here.... )))))



I certainly agree the goal should be to serve the film as an entirety. But perhaps that just means we need to sometimes think that JW and HZ are composing for "musicals" rather than for "film". In other words the genre they sometimes write for is quite different to say a western of the Once Upon a Time in the West ilk. My own preference is very strongly for Morricone but that is really a matter of taste. HZ and JW are tremendously successful across many years and many films, because they are skilledcomposers, whether or not one likes what they compose


----------



## Rctec

Dave Connor said:


> How so? You don't give a single example or comparison.
> 
> Goldsmith is considered the most versatile composer in film history by a lot of folks. Hans has simply said that he thinks Ennio is the best ever which many people do as well. Many say Williams.
> 
> Why would you guess at something like that? And in the negative? You don't think one of the greatest of all film composers admires the talents of two decades-long cultural-defining composers who have impacted the entire music world? Composers who are highly regarded by musicians in countless mediums including the symphonic world? You're saying when Morricone singled them out as maintaining the high standards of the art and craft of film writing while others are pushing presets on their synths, that it was a completely false statement? So all that beautiful music that came from Morricone came out of a man so full of himself he must force himself to _appear _to praise others in public?
> 
> You're not only indicting the character of the man you say you admire, you're questioning his musicianship. If he does admire Hans Zimmer and John Williams in the way he has said on record, then he's hearing all kinds of things in their music that you aren't. Please don't ask us to assume he's a superior minded fellow enamored only of himself and deaf to those two hugely gifted composers who have done countless things he could never do. My guess is Ennio wouldn't like that.



Ennio Morricone: good film scores have been replaced by the bad and the ugly
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2...placed-by-bad-and-ugly?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other


----------



## Darren Durann

I thought Bernard Herrmann was the greatest film composer, with Vertigo the greatest score and Psycho both close to in level of quality and more groundbreaking than the former 

Oh you mean _living_ composers.

Trying to be cute but probably failing.


----------



## dgburns

Rctec said:


> Ennio Morricone: good film scores have been replaced by the bad and the ugly
> https://www.theguardian.com/music/2...placed-by-bad-and-ugly?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other



"even bad music cannot ruin a good film"

I'm not sure I can stand behind Ennio on that one. Bad music can ruin a film imho.

I'm watching Versailles at the moment, and I'm just not gelling with the synth score on an otherwise
brilliant period show. Brilliantly executed score, but I'm just left wondering.


----------



## Darren Durann

I remember watching Beast Master (fantasy film from the 80s) and having my fun kid's view of the film completely ruined by what for me was a truly abysmal soundtrack. But then, I detest E.T. as a film but like the soundtrack.


----------



## Rctec

Well, all Zimmer Haters can now use the new hashtag...

https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2017/sep/18/hans-zimmer-blade-runner-2049-film-composer


----------



## ctsai89

Dave Connor said:


> @ctsai89 you're far too kind. The very last thing I would have expected this evening.



my kindness is irrelevant... But I do mean it, I'm trying to listen to as much HZ as I can this morning and am not finding anything close the feeling Quantum could achieve for me. Nothing was even close.. maybe some stuff from "the Bible".

But seriously I'm always on the lookout for unknown composers and I even watch unknown/underrated shows/movies and find some of them great or better than the mainstream ones. 

If we live in a world where we only care about the biggest names and focus on them, we could do ourselves more harm than good. And we'll never truly discover some composers who potentially could have better ability than JW/HZ


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

ctsai89 said:


> @Dave Connor > HZ and JW. For me personally.
> 
> come on guys just because someone is more famous and have done in the film industry/academia doens't mean you can't find someone else's music more beautiful than theirs.




Very cool track. Thanks for sharing, Charles and kudos to Dave. Love it.


----------



## rottoy

Rctec said:


> Well, all Zimmer Haters can now use the new hashtag...
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2017/sep/18/hans-zimmer-blade-runner-2049-film-composer


Now I'm hoping Denis Villeneuve will temp track some J. Strauss II into Blade Runner 2049.
Einzugsmarsch over shots of futuristic Los Angeles. Molto bene!


----------



## germancomponist

Rctec said:


> Well, all Zimmer Haters can now use the new hashtag...
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2017/sep/18/hans-zimmer-blade-runner-2049-film-composer


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr

Rctec said:


> Well, all Zimmer Haters can now use the new hashtag...
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2017/sep/18/hans-zimmer-blade-runner-2049-film-composer



But where are all those Zimmer haters? At least in this thread I haven´t seen any. But I have seen a number of people showing admiration for his work.


----------



## ctsai89

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> But where are all those Zimmer haters? At least in this thread I haven´t seen any. But I have seen a number of people showing admiration for his work.



both sides whether people who lean JW or HZ have fair points on why they like them over the other

What I can't stand is HZ supremacists label JW enthusiasts as haters of HZ or vice versa.

It's like oh you like what I don't like you're a F***ing hater now.

please.

They're both film composers to be honest.

Wagner vs Brahms would be a much more interesting topic.


----------



## Michael Antrum

We are not really the audience though are we ?

My father is a typical Yorkshireman in his late 70's. He's not particularly musically aware, but ask him about movie soundtracks, there are two he will simply rave over. He'll tell you that even thinking about them makes the hairs on his neck stand up.

One is John Barry's Out of Africa.

The other is Gladiator.

I know what he means. If you screw your eyes shut you simply can't imagine those iconic scenes without hearing and feeling the music at the same time. I think that's the trick of it. If you can do that - well then you've cracked it.

(If you've ever tried to make an impression on a Yorkshireman in his late 70's - you'll know exactly what I mean.)


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

dgburns said:


> "even bad music cannot ruin a good film"
> 
> I'm not sure I can stand behind Ennio on that one. Bad music can ruin a film imho.
> 
> I'm watching Versailles at the moment, and I'm just not gelling with the synth score on an otherwise
> brilliant period show. Brilliantly executed score, but I'm just left wondering.



It's very distracting to me too. Too often - absolutely not always, but a lot of the time - scores that use nothing but analog synth sounds don't work for me. Analog synths are capable of a near-infinite number of sounds, yet they tend to sound all the same after a while if that's the only thing in the pallet. My feeling is that we moved on from electronics a long time ago.

I felt the same about Cliff Martinez' scoring for The Knick when it was on. It was a creative choice and the music was really well done, but it just didn't seem to sit properly.

That could also just be what I'm used to hearing, but I don't think so.

By the way, we had to stop watching Versailles. It got too gross!


----------



## dannymc

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> But where are all those Zimmer haters? At least in this thread I haven´t seen any. But I have seen a number of people showing admiration for his work.



Alex are you now writing for the Guardian, you kept that quiet 

to be honest and i could be wrong with this, but i reckon the reason why Jóhann Jóhannson was axed may have been his unwillingness to push certain scenes more into that epic world to just give the movie that cinematic blockbuster sound so much loved by many Directors. listening to Jóhann in interviews he always came across to me as a perfectionist composer with a vision on how his music should sound, i always wondered how he would work with a director who may be telling him from time to time, "less dark tones more epic". but who knows this is just a theory. 

Danny


----------



## Dave Connor

Rctec said:


> Well, all Zimmer Haters can now use the new hashtag...
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2017/sep/18/hans-zimmer-blade-runner-2049-film-composer



Thank you Hans! We were running out of things to throw at you here!

I hope you did read the article and are appropriately chastened in taking so many films away from other composers. Sure you've started the careers of 20 or 30 guys and therefore cut yourself out of 40, 50, 60 films but still… you should be more considerate toward others I'm sure. Just because none of us can name even one other composer ever who is closely identified with dozens of other composers obtaining the impossible dream of a career in film doesn't mean we should think at all clearly about it.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

Rctec said:


> Well, all Zimmer Haters can now use the new hashtag...




hahaha

A hate hashtag is a sure sign you've arrived.


----------



## CT

Dave Connor said:


> Thank you Hans! We were running out of things to throw at you here!
> 
> I hope you did read the article and are appropriately chastened in taking so many films away from other composers.



Yeah! He's... he's such a big meanie!


----------



## Kyle Preston

Oh god, I can already see the terrible ads. 

"Other composers HATE him"


----------



## Ultra

gregh said:


> I certainly agree the goal should be to serve the film as an entirety. But perhaps that just means we need to sometimes think that JW and HZ are composing for "musicals" rather than for "film". In other words the genre they sometimes write for is quite different to say a western of the Once Upon a Time in the West ilk. My own preference is very strongly for Morricone but that is really a matter of taste. HZ and JW are tremendously successful across many years and many films, because they are skilledcomposers, whether or not one likes what they compose



I think one other ultra important aspect is communication between director and composer, and this can be very tricky even if language and education are not that far off... Once directors find someone on a certain skill level that correctly interprets given communication and executes without too much deviation from intent its a match made in heaven... Ennio/Sergio, JW/Lucas, JW/Spielberg, badalamenti/lynch, mansell/aronofski, korzeniowski/ford etc etc etc

Re genre: A skilled composer should be able to handle every genre, looking at composition as an abstract, independent of genre. Ennio has done every genre a billion times. Some just know the western stuff... But I'm sure they remember Chi Mai when they hear it....


----------



## Ultra

Dave Connor said:


> I thought your statement that Morricone is light years ahead of John Williams and Hans Zimmer _combined_ is clearly wrong (of course it's your opinion.) JW is one of the great thematic composers in all of film and HZ, one of it's greatest innovators. To say nothing of JW's miraculous handling of the orchestral machine and Hans' reintroducing the world to harmonic resonance through numerous combinations of acoustic and non-acoustic instrumentation. When in the last few centuries have we heard those (HZ's) stunningly beautiful _new_ sounds? You would have to point to Bach on the organ to flood the human senses like that. Also, both writers exploit the western musical system with uncanny deftness and invention. My point is that I don't think these things have escaped the golden ears of Ennio Morrocone (though it seems they have escaped some.)
> I posted a link to Morricone's comment on said composers. It's not even the quote I had in mind as he said it in an entirely different way in the quote I was thinking of. Why repeatedly go out of your way to acknowledge the same two composers? If he was being generous or even disingenuous he would have thrown in some other names. But a towering giant like him keeps mentioning these two. Why? Because he's watching and listening and is perhaps the most qualified person on the planet to comment on them. Forget me, but why not consider someone who's musical integrity is unquestioned in you own mind?
> 
> Hold on. YOU said that were _light years _beneath EM. I'm simply not allowing they be dumped into that chasm. I'm assigning them the place I think history will put them, not exalting them. I don't listen to film music much which is why these two impress the hell out of me. I know facile, inventive writing and orchestration when I hear it and these two are parked in that sphere of writing. What is harder to do as a composer?
> 
> My opinions of composers is based upon the music they write, not what they say. I thought maybe it would be good for you to take a cue from EM.
> 
> I don't have a problem with people having their cup of tea. Debussy didn't like Beethoven. But if he said Beethoven didn't deserve his rightful place among the greats than I would take issue with that faulty logic. He's a great composer whether you like him or not.



There are a couple of very obvious problems in your reasonings... One is the fundamental lack of being able to differentiate and/or understand statements in a given context... u act like a 2 year old child that wants to be right. Understand this:

I like JW and HZ. Got almost all of their scores. Never said I did not. 

Saying Ennio is light years ahead of both of them combined does not put any of the two down. It just puts Ennio higher. 

Delerues ranks higher for me, Basil does, so does Goldsmith.

But since ure trying so hard to suck up to Hansi, here's one for u: I think out of all composers mentioned here, HZ has the highest level of consistency in delivering a quality score. He works like a mule, he always delivers, never a bad score.

But, when comparing - not necessarily when hiring, UNDERSTAND THIS - we're looking at magical moments in film music history... Oh wait... FIGURINES.... )))


----------



## Rohann

Ultra said:


> he's 1000% dead on, and we all have seen the trend over the last 20 years in film scores...
> 
> but - and this is again the other side of the coin, or even clearer: one of many viewing angles - Ennio is "just" a composer. He is one part of the big puzzle of film making. I truly appreciate him saying that many directors do not understand the impact of the score and the room it needs. I fully agree. And like I said before, he never broke into Hwood, and u can believe there were countless conversations. So u can imagine how frustrated he must have been.
> 
> but the reality is - even for the greatest like himself - the composer's job is to serve the picture, and that is to serve the director's vision. Many composers do NOT freaking understand that. Matter of fact, many artists on a film do not understand that. Getting hired is not a wildcard permission to deviate from the original vision.


True, but I don't necessarily think that serving the director's vision to a T serves the film best in many cases. Not to mention studio execs often seem to have a lot of control of a director's vision and I laugh heartily at the idea of studio execs being concerned about serving a picture as a piece of art.



> regarding whining... composers need to understand that every single department on a movie (costumes, make-up, vfx, sound design, edit, color, etc etc etc) are all singing the same song... there is never enough attention and never enough money for them.


Again, fair point, but as you mention afterwards, it's incredibly difficult to see any of these as equal to a score when you hear the kinds of things Spielberg says about Williams and how tightly associated composers and directors tend to be.



> u act like a 2 year old child that wants to be right





> just a different side of the same story, probably not very popular here.... )))))


I'm not sure this is the reason your opinion wouldn't be popular here.


----------



## Ultra

Rohann said:


> True, but I don't necessarily think that serving the director's vision to a T serves the film best in many cases.



q.e.d.


----------



## Rohann

Ultra said:


> q.e.d.


Maybe I misunderstood your original post, but it didn't seem like you were arguing in favour of the point I made with "many composers DO NOT freaking understand that".


----------



## Ultra

Rohann said:


> Maybe I misunderstood your original post, but it didn't seem like you were arguing in favour of the point I made with "many composers DO NOT freaking understand that".



what u said in ur last post is exactly the culprit of the main issue, and that is exactly what some are thinking...

were u there when the script was written/conceptualized ? 
were u there in the months/years of pre-prod ? 
were u there in the months of prod ?
were u there in the months/years of post-prod ?
were u part of the 1 billion phone calls/meetings with the studio ?
do u have the tiniest idea of the million of decisions that were laid into place before u ever heard about the project ?

No, u weren't. No, u don't.
u are not getting paid to make executive decisions, and u are the last person on the planet who would qualify for that. 
u have zero idea of all the moving parts.
yet u think u know better than the director, who is the heart and soul of the marriage of creative and technical execution. so u're just gonna secretly wing it and adjust this whole project as u see fit coming in at the very end, spending 2 weeks on a project that others already spent 2 years on. 

People like you are the reason Scorsese and Tarantino avoid composers like the plague.

It is mind blowing to me how delusional psychopathic an individual must be to compromise a project that thousands of people worked on, and are dependent on to be successful for future work.

Zero responsibility. As unprofessional, anti-social and as anti-cooperative as one can be. And this happens all the time.

And I wanna make this very clear: this has nothing to do with being creative, or bringing forward creative ideas, or starting a creative discussion/collaboration. That is all welcome and I for one expect that.

If you wanna call the shots and make executive decisions, find somebody who is nuts enough to fund your movie... and then finally YOU will run into other peeps who sabotage your baby. 

Some people only seem to learn when they are being put on the other side.

This can (and will) happen with any dept. People who understand hierarchy and their role (in a large team effort) and what they get hired to do, and then hopefully successfully execute, are getting hired again.


----------



## Rohann

Ultra said:


> what u said in ur last post is exactly the culprit of the main issue, and that is exactly what some are thinking...
> 
> were u there when the script was written/conceptualized ?
> were u there in the months/years of pre-prod ?
> were u there in the months of prod ?
> were u there in the months/years of post-prod ?
> were u part of the 1 billion phone calls/meetings with the studio ?
> do u have the tiniest idea of the million of decisions that were laid into place before u ever heard about the project ?
> 
> No, u weren't. No, u don't.
> u are not getting paid to make executive decisions, and u are the last person on the planet who would qualify for that.
> u have zero idea of all the moving parts.
> yet u think u know better than the director, who is the heart and soul of the marriage of creative and technical execution. so u're just gonna secretly wing it and adjust this whole project as u see fit coming in at the very end, spending 2 weeks on a project that others already spent 2 years on.
> 
> People like you are the reason Scorsese and Tarantino avoid composers like the plague.
> 
> It is mind blowing to me how delusional psychopathic an individual must be to compromise a project that thousands of people worked on, and are dependent on to be successful for future work.
> 
> Zero responsibility. As unprofessional, anti-social and as anti-cooperative as one can be. And this happens all the time.
> 
> And I wanna make this very clear: this has nothing to do with being creative, or bringing forward creative ideas, or starting a creative discussion/collaboration. That is all welcome and I for one expect that.
> 
> If you wanna call the shots and make executive decisions, find somebody who is nuts enough to fund your movie... and then finally YOU will run into other peeps who sabotage your baby.
> 
> Some people only seem to learn when they are being put on the other side.
> 
> This can (and will) happen with any dept. People who understand hierarchy and their role (in a large team effort) and what they get hired to do, and then hopefully successfully execute, are getting hired again.


While I don't understand the relevance of many parts of this tirade, I'll respond to those that don't read as purely straw-man statements.

The point is that there is a measurable deficiency in the art of film when scenes are scored on an individual, non-connected basis and adherence is demanded to temp music, _especially _temp music that leads to plagiarization of music in the same genre or series. It is an objective fact that such scores tend not, in any way, to be memorable to the audience. It should also been relatively commonly known that many directors considered to be visionaries give credit to their composers for being the "heart" of the film, or at the very least a crucial component to it, and make it abundantly obvious that they greatly value the unique insight and contribution of their chosen composers. The majority of the most influential and highly regarded films in history had similarly highly regarded scores, with few exceptions I can personally think of.

My statements regarding serving a director's vision don't refer to visionary directors who hire people to collaborate and make their film better than they alone could make it, but in reference to directors who are terrified of doing something other than what is "safe" and inadvertently becoming swayed by emotional ties they're unaware of (i.e. temp music). This is rather obviously not in the best interest of the film, and especially so when a studio further interferes in the director's vision in order to try and play it safe.
Practically, yes -- for better or worse, a composer is hired to serve a vision, but it's ridiculous to claim that strict adherence to a director's vision _always _makes for a better piece of art in the end. Note that _nothing _has been mentioned here in regard to a composer's conduct in the context of his or her gig, and no reference has been made to intentional sabotage, psychopathic tendencies, or anything so remotely deranged.

PS -- What professional Hollywood composer spends _two weeks_ on a large-budget film score, on average? You realize someone like Shore spent _four years_ composing LOTR, right? And worked closely with Jackson during that time?



> People like you are the reason Scorsese and Tarantino avoid composers like the plague.


I'll again have to reiterate that I don't think you providing a "different side" to the coin is why your opinion would be unpopular.


----------



## Dave Connor

Ultra said:


> There are a couple of very obvious problems in your reasonings... One is the fundamental lack of being able to differentiate and/or understand statements in a given context... u act like a 2 year old child that wants to be right… Saying Ennio is light years ahead of both of them combined does not put any of the two down. It just puts Ennio higher.


Light years… that's pretty high. Beyond both of them combined? I don't know at what age children figure out what an awful verbal slight towards another person is but you haven't reached it. In any case your comparison seems unscientific as best. The verdict (especially in the case of John Williams) is already in. He has been universally embraced as a singular talent on this earth. Both by the populace and by the great musicians of his era - as in Ennio Morricone. I don't know a single musician that would say that in relative terms, he sucks compared to EM. I don't know how your comment can be taken otherwise and that's not even taking into consideration putting HZ on the scales (which really makes it nonsensical given his and their contributions to music.) My fanboy point is as I said, I don't think history will remotely share your diminishing of two major talents even in comparison to one giant.


Ultra said:


> But since ure trying so hard to suck up to Hansi...


Not just Hans! John Williams and Beethoven too! I say the things I do because I just think they're terrific! Nothing to do with their skills (even though I sight their accomplishments by objectively enumerating them one by one and why they separate them from the pack.) Truth be told, it's Beethoven I'm trying to suck up to here the most. Im hoping he'll call but for all I know - he's light years away by now.


----------



## Ultra

Rohann said:


> While I don't understand the relevance of many parts of this tirade, I'll respond to those that don't read as purely straw-man statements.
> 
> The point is that there is a measurable deficiency in the art of film when scenes are scored on an individual, non-connected basis and adherence is demanded to temp music, _especially _temp music that leads to plagiarization of music in the same genre or series. It is an objective fact that such scores tend not, in any way, to be memorable to the audience. It should also been relatively commonly known that many directors considered to be visionaries give credit to their composers for being the "heart" of the film, or at the very least a crucial component to it, and make it abundantly obvious that they greatly value the unique insight and contribution of their chosen composers. The majority of the most influential and highly regarded films in history had similarly highly regarded scores, with few exceptions I can personally think of.
> 
> My statements regarding serving a director's vision don't refer to visionary directors who hire people to collaborate and make their film better than they alone could make it, but in reference to directors who are terrified of doing something other than what is "safe" and inadvertently becoming swayed by emotional ties they're unaware of (i.e. temp music). This is rather obviously not in the best interest of the film, and especially so when a studio further interferes in the director's vision in order to try and play it safe.
> Practically, yes -- for better or worse, a composer is hired to serve a vision, but it's ridiculous to claim that strict adherence to a director's vision _always _makes for a better piece of art in the end. Note that _nothing _has been mentioned here in regard to a composer's conduct in the context of his or her gig, and no reference has been made to intentional sabotage, psychopathic tendencies, or anything so remotely deranged.
> 
> PS -- What professional Hollywood composer spends _two weeks_ on a large-budget film score, on average? You realize someone like Shore spent _four years_ composing LOTR, right? And worked closely with Jackson during that time?
> 
> 
> I'll again have to reiterate that I don't think you providing a "different side" to the coin is why your opinion would be unpopular.




I again have to state that I don't care if anything I stated here would be unpopular. Spade is a spade.

Points u just wrote have _*nothing*_ to do with what I wrote, which was a direct response to what u wrote. Because that is what u think. And not a tirade, just telling it like it is. Has been going on forever, with every dept.

Nobody said Shore did that. Nobody said directors don't and shouldn't give composers their rightful credit. I never said that a director should not take a composers advise/idea if it serves the movie better. All of this is a best case scenario and absolutely welcome..........

we're talking here in direct reply to ur statement that u think u know better than everybody else, and u just put urself on top of the hierarchy. And that is the reason why u would be very unpopular in the movie industry 

so coming back to the point that Ennio made: film music has gotten worse, quality of composers is a bit down... that is one parameter in the equation...

I expanded on that: rogues like u, another parameter as in: problem...

studio exec hiring amateur idiots as directors on large scale franchises another parameter, because these fools even if they wanted to cannot and do not give proper creative to the composer... because believe it or not, there are actually composers who wanna serve the picture/vision !!! I know, makes no sense to you. ))

next parameter: directors who don't give the music enough room... it needs to breathe and it needs to live, flow... u can't expect composers to magically create 13 secs bits that do everything...look at how Palma implemented Ennion score in Untouchables.. some of the best tracks were butchered... implementation of Basil's score in Conan The Barbarian... some of the score is so drastically butchered at times, while the score is 1000 times better than the movie... they should have cut the movie to the score !

next parameter: last minute timelines, budget provided, scope changes etc etc etc

list goes on.

this is a starting point of the reasons why ultimately the audience (and all of us) get to enjoy less great film music. It's not just that the composers are "not that good anymore"... I tend to believe (better: hope) that the next Ennio, Basil, Goldsmith, JW etc are out there...


----------



## Rohann

Ultra said:


> I again have to state that I don't care if anything I stated here would be unpopular. Spade is a spade.
> 
> Points u just wrote have _nothing_ to do with what I wrote, which was a direct response to what u wrote. *Because that is what u think*. And not a tirade, just telling it like it is. Has been going on forever, with every dept.
> 
> *Nobody said Shore did that*. Nobody said directors don't and shouldn't give composers their rightful credit. I never said that a director should not take a composers advise/idea if it serves the movie better. All of this is a best case scenario and absolutely welcome..........
> 
> we're talking here* in direct reply to ur statement that u think u know better that anybody else*, and u just put urself on top of the hierarchy. And that is the reason why u would be very unpopular in the movie industry


What on earth?

Since I don't care to waste any more time trying , I'll leave it open to anyone else here to chime in if they thought your "response" actually responded to anything I personally said or implied in the slightest.


----------



## Ultra

Rohann said:


> True, but I don't necessarily think that serving the director's vision to a T serves the film best in many cases.



direct statement from u. Everything else is a response to that, or using it as a case example. No worries, u're not the first one


----------



## Ultra

Dave Connor said:


> In any case your comparison seems unscientific as best.



u just don't have it.
*
Art cannot be measured in scientific (or economic) standards or popularity.* 

because if so, then van gogh would be a horrible painter and blade runner would be an abysmal failure. Also, never said JW "sucks", matter of fact I wrote that Imperial March is the epitome of pin-point.

I also wrote that everybody has their own opinion and there is no right or wrong here. Can the redundancy of posting this for the Xth time serve as a virtual hug that u need so bad cause u feel that ur "heroes" (that u prob never met) were dethroned ? By a forum post. From a stranger. Well, Dave...........


----------



## Rohann

Ultra said:


> direct statement from u. Everything else is a response to that, or using it as a case example. No worries, u're not the first one


You somehow took this to mean that one should be belligerent, intentionally sabotage a film, make executive decisions, and somehow that a composer thinks they know more about production and the film than the director.

What should have been relatively obvious, as least as far as I read my own statement, is that I meant:
-the whole point of collaborating with other artists is to enhance your vision more broadly than one could have hoped, or at least fulfill it in such a way that the oneself alone couldn't.
And primarily:
-a contention to the idea that "what serves the directors vision 'to a T' (without any creative alteration or enhancement) best serves the film". This has nothing to do with specifics; I was simply contending, _abstractly_, that this idea is demonstrably false as a universal.

It's actually relatively widely agreed, at least academically, that art has relatively objective measures of quality, for the record.



> I again have to state that I don't care if anything I stated here would be unpopular. Spade is a spade.


You've missed my point.


----------



## Ultra

Rohann said:


> You somehow took this to mean that one should be belligerent, intentionally sabotage a film, make executive decisions, and somehow that a composer thinks they know more about production and the film than the director.
> 
> What should have been relatively obvious, as least as far as I read my own statement, is that I meant:
> -the whole point of collaborating with other artists is to enhance your vision more broadly than one could have hoped, or at least fulfill it in such a way that the oneself alone couldn't.
> And primarily:
> -a contention to the idea that "what serves the directors vision 'to a T' (without any creative alteration or enhancement) best serves the film". This has nothing to do with specifics; I was simply contending, _abstractly_, that this idea is demonstrably false as a universal.
> 
> It's actually relatively widely agreed, at least academically, that art has relatively objective measures of quality, for the record.



no, not "a composer" but the specific composer who voices or thinks what u stated. That is a deliberate, intentional deviation from the vision that has been defined by many creatives way before the composer comes on board. Can this expanded ? Sure, and if the director agrees so this can be implemented.

Has been done many times successfully. Those are all best case scenarios, nothing to worry there. 

The scenario I outlined (that happens so often) is something else, and it is very clear what I wrote. And again, can potentially occur in every dept, the extra weight of the problem in the score dept is, that the score has a major impact... ergo the deviation is larger.

It's about managing deviation, not labeling peeps as something. Exactly as I wrote.

Also, differentiate between deviation and propelling forward. Picture a ship. Deviation from target could potentially be disastrous, while propelling it forward (expanding the vision, serving the picture, enhancing it further) in the INTENDED DIRECTION cannot hurt and is often welcome.

Also, the ship has one captain. You're not the captain. Understand that. And only the captain decides if deviation from original course may occur.

Your statement refers to when somebody who's part of the crew, but thinks he's also a captain (and a much better captain than the current one), secretly changes course... because he thinks he knows better. And now the entire ship and crew is affected. And the holding company owning the ship. And the people waiting for the goods that the ship delivers.


----------



## ctsai89

Ultra said:


> u just don't have it.
> *
> Art cannot be measured in scientific (or economic) standards or popularity.*
> 
> because if so, then van gogh would be a horrible painter and blade runner would be an abysmal failure. Also, never said JW "sucks", matter of fact I wrote that Imperial March is the epitome of pin-point.
> 
> I also wrote that everybody has their own opinion and there is no right or wrong here. Can the redundancy of posting this for the Xth time serve as a virtual hug that u need so bad cause u feel that ur "heroes" (that u prob never met) were dethroned ? By a forum post. From a stranger. Well, Dave...........



I'm honestly a bit lost in what you guys are arguing about. 

If you think You're smart/better than Dave then you better post up a track of yours I'll be you guys' judge. 


Promise I'll be as unbiased as I can


----------



## Rohann

Ultra said:


> no, not "a composer" but the specific composer who voices or thinks what u stated. That is a deliberate, intentional deviation from the vision that has been defined by many creatives way before the composer comes on board. Can this expanded ? Sure, and if the director agrees so this can be implemented.
> 
> Has been done many times successfully. Those are all best case scenarios, nothing to worry there.
> 
> The scenario I outlined (that happens so often) is something else, and it is very clear what I wrote. And again, can potentially occur in every dept, the extra weight of the problem in the score dept is, that the score has a major impact... ergo the deviation is larger.
> 
> It's about managing deviation, not labeling peeps as something. Exactly as I wrote.
> 
> Also, differentiate between deviation and propelling forward. Picture a ship. Deviation from target could potentially be disastrous, while propelling it forward (expanding the vision, serving the picture, enhancing it further) in the INTENDED DIRECTION cannot hurt and is often welcome.
> 
> Also, the ship has one captain. You're not the captain. Understand that. And only the captain decides if deviation from original course may occur.
> 
> Your statement refers to when somebody who's part of the crew, but thinks he's also a captain (and a much better captain than the current one), secretly changes course... because he thinks he knows better. And now the entire ship and crew is affected. And the holding company owning the ship. And the people waiting for the goods that the ship delivers.


You've stated a number of times now what I think, what I'm referring to and what I intended with what I said. As such it's somewhat redundant to continue responding in light of this newfound omniscience -- that or we're missing each other somewhere and this really isn't going anywhere (not to mention it's a relatively large departure from the original thread topic).
In either case, I'm done. For the record, I agree with many of the things you've said, many of them being a rather obvious consensus by most with even a shred of knowledge of how the film industry works (namely the director's job as captain, a composer's job to help fulfill a vision, etc). Since more subtle hints have eluded you, it's not your _opinion_, per se, that would make you unpopular (or that I disagree with for that matter), but your outlandish assumptions and overall tone of condescension.

Have a good one.


----------



## Dave Connor

Ultra said:


> u just don't have it.
> *
> Art cannot be measured in scientific (or economic) standards or popularity.*
> 
> because if so, then van gogh would be a horrible painter and blade runner would be an abysmal failure. Also, never said JW "sucks", matter of fact I wrote that Imperial March is the epitome of pin-point.
> 
> I also wrote that everybody has their own opinion and there is no right or wrong here. Can the redundancy of posting this for the Xth time serve as a virtual hug that u need so bad cause u feel that ur "heroes" (that u prob never met) were dethroned ? By a forum post. From a stranger. Well, Dave...........


Let me give you an example of what I mean by _scientific comparison_. When Woody Allen discusses the differences between Chaplin and Keaton he maintains that Chaplin is the greater because of, _his willingness to be sentimental. _He gives a very specific example for why he considers Chaplin the greater of the two. But of course that is hardly a slamming put-down of Keaton as that would be patently offensive as well as wildly untrue as in - _an unscientific comparison. _If he did put down one of Chaplin's very few peers in that way he would disqualify himself as speaking objectively on the subject since Keaton is acknowledged by virtually everyone who understands the field he worked in as a true genius. It's like saying Paul McCartney is light years beyond Brian Wilson. He's not. McCartney would protest that comparison more ardently than anyone else and is perhaps the most qualified person to do so. Morricone actually made his point about the poor level of writing in film currently by comparing it to two composers he considers to be at the highest level. Your assumption he holds himself above them in an incalculable way is just that: an assumption and pure guesswork. He is deliberately putting them at his level because his standards and the standards of his and prior generations is specifically what he's taking about. Morricone is the one who disagrees with your opinion. I'm just a clueless jerk on the internet so you may jettison my opinion. But the guy you think is light years beyond your own understanding doesn't agree with you.

Even more specifically (since you did not understand what I meant by the use of the word _scientific_): in your own comparison you don't say things such as, _Morricone's contrapuntal writing in such and such a cue vrs., Williams in Jaws is far more agile and informed etc., …and through the use of delayed resolution creates far more tension…etc., _or whatever to make your point. You also don't say, _ Raiders of The Lost Ark in the hands of Morricone would not have been the joyless affair it was since in such and such a film Morricone proved there is no composer capable of the memorable rousing themes he so masterfully…etc. _Same with Hans: _The Batman series would not have sounded so old if the much older Morricone had gotten his hands on it and done a symphonic score with a touch of his Arp 2600 thrown in here and there. _

You're not making your case very well except for the general use of the word _pinpoint._(?) If you're going to make bold statements that marginalize the best practitioners of this day, you should back it up. There's an intelligent audience here not a bunch of breathless children who are crushed when their super-heroes are made mortal.

As I said, Ennio Morricone cannot do the things Williams and Zimmer can. If he_ could _actually do what they do better by even a factor of two - *then*… you could perhaps put him in the stratosphere. But since he _can't_ do what they do (and recognizes it due to the sufficient brain matter in his cranium) he happily and logically sees them as peers and not as failed planets in his orbit.


----------



## Ultra

Dave,

U keep digging that ditch deeper.  again, all of this is personal opinion. There ain't no universal applicable measurement on art. Done. Tattoo it on ur forehead.

Morricone does way more for me than JW and HZ. Done. My original statement said: "IMO". For you, JW and HZ does more. That's absolutely fine.

Citing technical reasons is pointless as peeps like u would then continue to argue. But... as I posted, Ennio (and Goldsmith) have covered (--> mastered) more part of the genre spectrum than JW and HZ. One out of a gazillion aspects of looking at it, if trying to analyze a given artist. But the emotional connection u get to music from specific artists is obviously a subjective experience.


----------



## Kyle Preston

ctsai89 said:


> you better post up a track of yours I'll be you guys' judge.



Ultra has already posted a mockup (of someone else's music) here on VI. Since we're all throwing shit at each other in here, might as well have some music to listen to.


----------



## Ultra

Kyle Preston said:


> Ultra has already posted a mockup (of someone else's music) here on VI. Since we're all throwing shit at each other in here, might as well have some music to listen to.



that's right, a baby attempt at Delerues evaluating string libs (that was rather the exercise).

and this discussion here, is not throwing sh*t at all. Rohann got caught posting what some dudes simply think, then tried to explain. I just took that as an example - I don't care that it's Rohann, don't know him personally - u can substitute in anybody else who thinks the exact same unprofessional crap.

there's peeps always complaining why they don't get jobs... well that's one reason.


----------



## ctsai89

Kyle Preston said:


> Ultra has already posted a mockup (of someone else's music) here on VI. Since we're all throwing shit at each other in here, might as well have some music to listen to.



has to be an original though! but the mockup didn't sound bad/fake.


----------



## givemenoughrope

Ultra, didn't you see Morricone's Oscar speech? He names JW by name and looks at him. I mean cmon.

I'm glad Ennio is getting some recognition on the forum finally (thanks to rctec). He's my 1st, 2nd and 5th favorite film composer and probably my favorite musician next to Sonny Rollins. I can safely say that I wouldn't be sitting here pushing dots around, or micing guitars, or learning the cello, or trying to understand digital or granular synths or pursuing anything like what i'm doing without him and watching Once Upon a time in the West. It all comes back to that. Go see a film he scored at the New Beverly and the place cheers louder for him than the director. Much like Goldsmith, he is/was the past, present and future of the art form at one time. I'd offer that he's more of a primary color along the lines of Herrmann but really no one can reproduce what he does bc it is just so uniquely him. A mix of symphonic music, 60s pop, latin jazz, the Latin Mass (yes) and the Avant Garde.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gruppo_di_Improvvisazione_Nuova_Consonanza
The dude is deeper than anybody. His own genre maybe along the lines of Miles Davis, Frank Zappa, Eno, Zorn. We will always come back to his scores of the late 60s (and will soon really discover his totally f'n awesome scores of the 70s...his prime era in my opinion...before directors told him to tone it down) for the same reason we will come back to the Beach Boys. The tunes, the arrangements and those wild elements in the recordings. Film scores are sterile beyond belief now in comparison. Those old scores were alive.

rctec complains that he's only known for ostinatos or making the strings sound like a synth arp...hey, AT LEAST YOU HAVE THAT! Morricone is known for reverb-y guitars and whistling which is also like 2% of what he does. Whatever. When people dig deeper (like John did in the great opening post) then they'll hear more. If they don't, it's their loss. I'm not alone in the fact that I've gone to the theater and suffered through an awful movie JUST to hear what you do.(And I liked The Lone Ranger.)

I think when you get to the level of JW, JG, BH, EM and HZ...it makes no sense to say who is better. They've each stood on the shoulders of giants and made great music that few else could or have. Yes, Ennio (and Goldsmith!) don't get the respect from fanboys or the film composer bros bc they just don't get it. That's fine with me. I don't care.

And yes I hate trailers. Unless it's this one:



(This^ makes me so happy I could $#@t.)


----------



## Dave Connor

Ultra said:


> Dave,
> 
> U keep digging that ditch deeper.  again, all of this is personal opinion. There ain't no universal applicable measurement on art. Done. Tattoo it on ur forehead.
> 
> Morricone does way more for me than JW and HZ. Done. My original statement said: "IMO". For you, JW and HZ does more. That's absolutely fine.
> 
> Citing technical reasons is pointless as peeps like u would then continue to argue. But... as I posted, Ennio (and Goldsmith) have covered (--> mastered) more part of the genre spectrum than JW and HZ. One out of a gazillion aspects of looking at it, if trying to analyze a given artist. But the emotional connection u get to music from specific artists is obviously a subjective experience.


I'm sure I'm giving you a harder time than you deserve. You made quite a statement there and a nasty one at that. The thing is, I don't know any musicians that can't go on and on why they like or dislike a composer or player or whomever. A monumental statement like yours should be backed up with something and you never really did.

Check out Hans on Ennio Morricone. He names all kinds of reasons why he thinks EM is the best, along with the attributes he admires most. He also speaks comparatively and even mentions Bach in that manner. That's what musicians do: they talk about the numerous reasons why they like someone and usually (out of respect) the few reasons why they may not. But they don't just gush that's it's their opinion someone is good or bad and leave it at that. That's a disqualifier in a lot of people's books. Any fan can do that. (And it wasn't technical reasons I was sighting and asking you for - it was the artistic merits.)

A very good example of effusive praise explained with ample specifics. https://www.gramophone.co.uk/feature/ennio-morricone-my-inspiration-by-hans-zimmer


----------



## givemenoughrope

Dave Connor said:


> But they don't just gush that's it's their opinion and leave it at that. That's a disqualifier in a lot of people's books. Any fan can do that.



Not following. I gush over the music I like and maybe who made it...although they are human just like anyone. I'm pretty sure I gushed above. Musicians aren't music fans? They have a technical reason for why X is "better" than Y? Maybe I'm not understanding. EM writes great tunes and makes daring musical choices that I don't see coming. Gush-worthy. I'm a little dubious when someone says what musicians do (as the right thing). Musicians do a lot of things.


----------



## Dave Connor

givemenoughrope said:


> Not following. I gush over the music I like and maybe who made it...although they are human just like anyone. I'm pretty sure I gushed above. Musicians aren't music fans? They have a technical reason for why X is "better" than Y? Maybe I'm not understanding. EM writes great tunes and makes daring musical choices that I don't see coming. Gush-worthy.


Yes you're missing my point. Anyone can gush over an artist (and we're all fans) but if you make a statement about someone being this much greater or this much worse than someone else - back it up with some facts or conclusions. Tell us why you like or dislike them. If you can't then your lack of expertise factors in to how valid other's will see your view. If you love Chevys and hate Fords give us a clue as to why. If you can't I wouldn't go down to the pit crews at the Indy 500 and start talking trash. Stay in the stands and cheer.


----------



## givemenoughrope

You're right. I missed your point. And I agree.

That link is great...Fistful of Dynamite is so overlooked. I heard a muzak? version of the themes in the Arclight lobby a few months back. Best thing I heard all day. (And it's bc you could play the themes on a toy piano and they'd come across.)


----------



## SillyMidOn

rottoy said:


> Now I'm hoping Denis Villeneuve will temp track some J. Strauss II into Blade Runner 2049.
> Einzugsmarsch over shots of futuristic Los Angeles. Molto bene!



You know I think that would work really well, in a very sinister sort of way... nasty dark undercurrent... I'm thinking of the way Beethoven was used in A Clockwork Orange. When I was lecturing briefly, I took the opening credits from Bullitt, which are great, and played a variety of different famous tunes under it, to get students to realise how much music can affect a scene, and how at first seemingly wildly inappropriate music can actually work with a scene, and create an entirely different meaning to the images...


----------



## enyawg

I love this quote form the "Ennio Morricone: good film scores have been replaced by the bad and the ugly" article that -hZ- sent us.
"Ultimately, he [Ennio Morricone] believes, music is there to serve the movie. While good music cannot save a bad film, “even bad music” cannot ruin a good film, he said."
So true, so true.


----------



## CT

I can't really tell what happened to this thread, so let's all just listen to this.


----------



## Dave Connor

miket said:


> I can't really tell what happened to this thread...


 As usual someone needed to insult an illustrious forum member/composer (and even included another legendary composer in the mix.) He had the same reason as others in the past who have done that here: he had absolutely no idea what he was taking about.


----------



## Markus Kohlprath

miket said:


> I can't really tell what happened to this thread, so let's all just listen to this.



So great this one! Thanks


----------



## Mundano

wasting time writing opinions (edit: criticizing others) in a forum is bad for music composition....


----------



## Darren Durann

Dave Connor said:


> As usual someone needed to insult an illustrious forum member/composer (and even included another legendary composer in the mix.) He had the same reason as others in the past who have done that here: he had absolutely no idea what he was taking about.



cracking up!


----------



## Darren Durann

miket said:


> I can't really tell what happened to this thread, so let's all just listen to this.



Exactly.


----------



## Mike Fox

miket said:


> I can't really tell what happened to this thread, so let's all just listen to this.




Yeah, I'll just post this. After-all, tis the season.


----------



## cmillar

My favorite 'Morricone moment':

- in 'The Mission', when the priest is wandering throught the forest .... we hear some natural 'bird-song'...Morricone picks up on this and it beomes his main theme for the oboe!

As Beethoven said: "I let the trees and the wind tell me what to write" (...I paraphrase; I believe it was Beethoven)


----------



## givemenoughrope

*good, bad and ugly*


----------



## givemenoughrope

(can't help myself, sorry)


----------



## givemenoughrope

lastly...not the best film ever made but the almost everything about the last few scenes are incredible... not the least which is Edda Dell'Orso


----------



## Ultra

Dave Connor said:


> As usual someone needed to insult an illustrious forum member/composer (and even included another legendary composer in the mix.) He had the same reason as others in the past who have done that here: he had absolutely no idea what he was taking about.


*<<Portion deleted by moderator>>*

I understand why u keep begging to know more why I prefer Ennio... but instead off going of what I or others are saying, why don't u freaking listen to the music and hear for urself.... ? Yup, it's a huge catalogue. see u never again.

and nobody insulted Hans, matter of fact quite the opposite. Read the posts. Understand. Stop sucking up.


----------



## Dave Connor

*<<Moderator note - Apologies for deleting your post, but we need to ratchet down the personal rhetoric>>*


----------



## ChristopherDoucet

My favorite John Williams Piece by far.


----------



## Ultra

*<<Moderator note - Probably some fair points in here, but too many combative attacks to let stand, so I deleted the whole thing. My apologies for not being more surgical, but honestly this isn't a good use of my time to play referee.>>*


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

There is a reason why we have a Private Message option. Most of us don't come here to watch a cock fight. 

I also think this a thread with a title like this is a minefield. There are actually 3 subjects in the title, each one worthy of an epic battle of egos. I guess it was inevitable that it would turn into a cage match.


----------



## Kony

Ned Bouhalassa said:


> There is a reason why we have a Private Message option. Most of us don't come here to watch a cock fight.
> 
> I also think this a thread with a title like this is a minefield. There are actually 3 subjects in the title, each one worthy of an epic battle of egos. I guess it was inevitable that it would turn into a cage match.


Aw, but I haven't finished my popcorn....


----------



## Darren Durann

Kony said:


> Aw, but I haven't finished my popcorn....



There can be some amusement value to it, especially when people who obviously don't really, actually know anything about music start trumpeting their likes and dislikes.

That said, it's freakishly rare to see such "Tiger Beat" deliberation here; it goes without saying that such a thing is part and parcel of most music (hell, entertainment and arts) forums.


----------



## jononotbono

Rctec said:


> Well, all Zimmer Haters can now use the new hashtag...
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2017/sep/18/hans-zimmer-blade-runner-2049-film-composer



This article is ridiculous although highly amusing. Please start selling Baseball Caps at your gigs but instead of HANS ZIMMER written on the front, cross out the NS and put "TE" over the top.


----------



## Dave Connor

Ned Bouhalassa said:


> There is a reason why we have a Private Message option. Most of us don't come here to watch a cock fight...


 Agreed and I don't get into that kind of thing unless there's an egregious stepping over the line. I actually have forum members in mind when I get into it with someone because they (the younger ones) can see how professional musicians think and communicate and so learn what's expected of them. In this case HZ gives the numerous reasons why he thinks Morricone is the best ever. Completely opposite is the over the top declaration that HZ (and John Williams combined!) do not equal a single Morricone. Ok fine - but give maybe one reason why you see it that way? Let us know the musical reasons and what specifically you're talking about. Both the forum members and one of the composers on the end of that statement deserve the courtesy and respect of some level of insight and explanation for a statement like that. That's true with any discussion on any topic: support your views with command of facts and observations. Otherwise you've said nothing and only derailed an informed conversation.


----------



## Darren Durann

Dave Connor said:


> Completely opposite is the over the top declaration that HZ (and John Williams combined!) do not equal a single Morricone.



I think I mentioned the amusement factor in that kind of declaration. It's so broad it can't help but be smile-inducing imo.

To me, those types of Tiger Beat statements are easy to shrug off. We know better, if they don't than they can indulge in their sycophancy with no ill will on my part. Whatever gets you through the night c'est vrai?


----------



## Greg

I think everyone should take a deep breath, approach the keyboard, and prove your opinions about music in the only way they can ever be truly realized. By creating it.


----------



## Ultra

Dave Connor said:


> Agreed and I don't get into that kind of thing unless there's an egregious stepping over the line. I actually have forum members in mind when I get into it with someone because they (the younger ones) can see how professional musicians think and communicate and so learn what's expected of them. In this case HZ gives the numerous reasons why he thinks Morricone is the best ever. Completely opposite is the over the top declaration that HZ (and John Williams combined!) do not equal a single Morricone. Ok fine - but give maybe one reason why you see it that way? Let us know the musical reasons and what specifically you're talking about. Both the forum members and one of the composers on the end of that statement deserve the courtesy and respect of some level of insight and explanation for a statement like that. That's true with any discussion on any topic: support your views with command of facts and observations. Otherwise you've said nothing and only derailed an informed conversation.



Man, u make me laugh. )))))))

I want to publicly apologize and take back the fruit fly statement. I do not want to insult fruit flies. U have even less IQ.

X days in, countless posts and the dude still tries to understand personal prefs as universal applicable laws. And zero counter arguments.

So, EM is now greater than HZ (b/c Hans said so) but cannot be greater than HZ + JW ? Man, what a rule came up there buddy and great list of arguments why that is. Also, lots of techniques u mentioned there. I see now how it's done.

U have a pure vacuum between ur ears, buddy.


----------



## Ultra

Darren Durann said:


> I think I mentioned the amusement factor in that kind of declaration. It's so broad it can't help but be smile-inducing imo.
> 
> To me, those types of Tiger Beat statements are easy to shrug off. We know better, if they don't than they can indulge in their sycophancy with no ill will on my part. Whatever gets you through the night c'est vrai?



Yeah, u seem to know so much better about something where there is no better, that u posted zero arguments/opinions about anything about the OP.

I think u know better not to say anything........ Or why the freak post ?


----------



## Darren Durann

Ultra said:


> Yeah, u seem to know so much better about something where there is no better, that u posted zero arguments/opinions about anything about the OP.
> 
> I think u know better not to say anything........ Or why the freak post ?



Dude, you aren't entirely comprehensible here. Spend more time on writing your posts so people can know what you're talking about. This is gibberish.


----------



## Ultra

Darren Durann said:


> Dude, you aren't entirely comprehensible here. Spend more time on writing your posts so people can know what you're talking about. This is gibberish.


Again: U said u know better. Put up.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

U know what? We're all bored now, get a ring and fight as much as you like.


----------



## Ultra

Ned Bouhalassa said:


> U know what? We're all bored now, get a ring and fight as much as you like.



Ur two last posts: nothing in regards to the OP.

so u complain about a "fight", yet ur contribution to the thread is talking about "the fight". Not bad.

Why don't u ignore "the fight" and talk about the OP.... ?


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire




----------



## Darren Durann

Ned Bouhalassa said:


> U know what? We're all bored now, get a ring and fight as much as you like.



*yo YO yo!*


----------



## SterlingArcher

Ned Bouhalassa said:


> U know what? We're all bored now, get a ring and fight as much as you like.


----------



## Michael Antrum




----------



## RyanMcQuinn

I'm a little late to the party here, but John, your insight is always so refreshing, inclusive, and respectful. What a pleasure to read.


----------

