# Miserable, obnoxious trend



## Ashermusic (Jan 24, 2009)

My wife and I just watched another reasonably decent film that was spoiled for us by this STUPID, OBNOXIOUS, practice of putting a bunch of DREADFUl, on- the- nose songs where there should be underscore. The audience is not so stupid that it needs a song to tell us what is going on. And I started out as a songwriter, so I believe in the value of a good, well-placed song in a film.

The same thing is going on in TV dramas. I know the soundtracks bring in revenue but dramatically it is really damaging to these projects.

Kid Surf, if when you make your movie you let them do this I will personally come to your place and hit you over the head with a 2 X 4.
.


----------



## rgames (Jan 24, 2009)

Amen brother!

I've had the same discussion with folks several times over the last couple years.

rgames


----------



## Evan Gamble (Jan 24, 2009)

I've actually been to many films were I have been wanting the opposite, a good use of already written music as opposed to cliche film score gestures and ideas.

THough Im sure with the examples you are thinking of I might agree with you as well.


----------



## wonshu (Jan 25, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Sun Jan 25 said:


> My wife and I just watched another reasonably decent film



Which one?


----------



## PolarBear (Jan 25, 2009)

Well... better a good laid out class A song than a B- or even C-score which screams MIDI... IMHO. And: It definately depends on the type of film and even in a certain film it may suit here or there better than in another scene. There is certainly room for Rock or Pop songs in a soundtrack style. "The Virgin Suicides" is a very good example at that.

Would you also forbid for Beethoven or Mozart accompany some scenes?


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 25, 2009)

PolarBear @ Sun Jan 25 said:


> Well... better a good laid out class A song than a B- or even C-score which screams MIDI... IMHO. And: It definately depends on the type of film and even in a certain film it may suit here or there better than in another scene. There is certainly room for Rock or Pop songs in a soundtrack style. "The Virgin Suicides" is a very good example at that.
> 
> Would you also forbid for Beethoven or Mozart accompany some scenes?



1. Of course, with great songs (not right on the nose) and the right film, it can work. "The Graduate" is a classic example. But these were IMHO terrible songs, very on the nose, and distracting from the picture. The underscore that was in the film by John Frizzel was very effective and would have worked fine with 1/3 of the amount of the songs.

2. I do not want to name the film as we will then engage in one of those "But I LIKE those songs" thread.

3. The difference for me is that underscore is designed from the git-go to work with the picture, so unless it is done very badly indeed, while it may be ineffective, it won't usually take you out of the picture the way a bad song choice (and they are usually mixed too loud) does.

4. The score cliches argument has never moved me. If it works with the picture, it works with the picture. This is not concert hall music. It is like criticizing contemporary songwriters for using the same chords roughly the same way the Beatles did.

5. The word is "definitely", not "definately."


----------



## artsoundz (Jan 25, 2009)

yeah- and most often I find these kinds of movies have songs that appeal to a much younger crowd even though the movie is intended for a wider age group. My impression usually is that it's instantly takes me out of the film and I find my self thinking about that rather than being lost in a movie. 

The older I get the more I skim through movies. Maybe they can off that option for theater patrons. Ya know- if enough people push a button then it skims over the tune...


----------



## lux (Jan 25, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Sun Jan 25 said:


> 5. The word is "definitely", not "definately."



the guy is german. I'm sure you can speak his language better as he tries to do with yours. Show us, smarty.


----------



## PolarBear (Jan 25, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Sun Jan 25 said:


> It is like criticizing contemporary songwriters for using the same chords roughly the same way the Beatles did.


No, it's like criticizing directors for making the wrong choice... in any case: it's thinkable, so why not do it? If every car has to have four wheels and motorcycles two, we'd never have trikes... are they in any field superior to the rest of wheeled material?

The question I'd like to raise with this is more like this: Which movies will contain such "inappropriate" material? Definitely (see, I can, thanks for pointing out so prominently an usual non-issue, at least not at all discussion-related, but that shows to me where you're coming from quite well) more those, that are made not because of film art but because they should generate money and income. Objections?


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 25, 2009)

lux @ Sun Jan 25 said:


> Ashermusic @ Sun Jan 25 said:
> 
> 
> > 5. The word is "definitely", not "definately."
> ...



Actually, this is a common mistake among native English speakers as well so I correct it when I see it. It was not meant to denigrate him.

Another pervasive one is "wierd" instead of "weird."


----------



## PolarBear (Jan 25, 2009)

I'm gonna name some more film titles soon... :twisted: Or I could enlist you a hundred common spelling errors in german by germans. Your choice  Oops forgot the caps... so what.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 25, 2009)

PolarBear @ Sun Jan 25 said:


> Ashermusic @ Sun Jan 25 said:
> 
> 
> > It is like criticizing contemporary songwriters for using the same chords roughly the same way the Beatles did.


No, it's like criticizing directors for making the wrong choice... in any case: it's thinkable, so why not do it? If every car has to have four wheels and motorcycles two, weòÄÒ   “/<ÄÒ   “/=ÄÒ   “/>ÄÒ   “/?ÄÒ   “/@ÄÒ   “/AÄÒ   “/BÄÒ   “/CÄÒ   “/DÄÒ   “/EÄÒ   “/FÄÒ   “/GÄÒ   “/HÄÒ   “/IÄÒ   “/JÄÒ   “/KÄÒ   “/LÄÒ   “/MÄÒ   “/NÄÒ   “/OÄÒ   “/PÄÒ   “/QÄÒ   “/RÄÒ   “/SÄÒ   “/TÄÒ   “/UÄÒ   “/VÄÒ   “/WÄÒ   “/XÄÒ   “/YÄÒ   “/ZÄÒ   “/[ÄÒ   “/\ÄÒ   “/]ÄÒ   “/^ÄÒ   “/_ÄÒ   “/`ÄÒ   “/aÄÒ   “/bÄÒ   “/cÄÒ   “/dÄÒ   “/eÄÒ   “/fÄÒ   “/gÄÒ   “/hÄÒ   “/iÄÒ   “/jÄÒ   “/kÄÒ   “/lÄÒ   “/mÄÒ   “/nÄÒ   “/oÄÒ   “/pÄÒ   “/qÄÒ   “/rÄÒ   “/sÄÒ   “/tÄÒ   “/uÄÒ   “/vÄÒ   “/wÄÒ   “/xÄÒ   “/yÄÒ   “/zÄÒ   “/{ÄÒ   “/|ÄÒ   “/}ÄÒ   “/~ÄÒ   “/ÄÒ   “/€ÄÒ   “/ÄÒ   “/‚ÄÒ   “/ƒÄÒ   “/„ÄÒ   “/…ÄÒ   “/†ÄÒ   “/‡ÄÒ   “/ˆÄÒ   “/‰ÄÒ   “/ŠÄÒ   “/‹ÄÒ   “/ŒÄÒ   “/ÄÒ   “/ŽÄÒ   “/ÄÒ   “/ÄÒ   “/‘ÄÒ   “/’ÄÒ   “/“ÄÒ   “/”ÄÒ   “/•ÄÒ   “/–ÄÒ   “/—ÄÒ   “/˜ÄÒ   “/™ÄÒ   “/šÄÒ   “/›ÄÒ   “/œÄÒ   “/ÄÒ   “/žÄÒ   “/ŸÄÒ   “/ ÄÒ   “/¡ÄÒ   “/¢ÄÒ   “/£ÄÒ   “/¤ÄÒ   “/¥ÄÒ   “/¦ÄÒ   “/§ÄÒ   “/¨ÄÒ   “/©ÄÒ   “/ªÄÒ   “/«              òÄÓ   “/­ÄÓ   “/®


----------



## PolarBear (Jan 25, 2009)

Well, that list may look very familiar to you as it is the IMDB Top250. My point about posting this was, that around a fifth of those in the list are past 2000, 16 out of 250 from 2007 and 2008 alone. This is the natural weight of perception (even on these "superlatives" alone) and with all due respect I don't believe one can have an unbalanced, equal view of things. I may be not right, but it would be very unnatural.

If you feel at home in the 60s, 70s or 80s, well, I'd like to shift your view back a bit more, well beyond the golden 30s... what's your perception of average in the 40s, the 50s? It's not that I want to prove you wrong, just to explain where I'm coming from. You'd also have to weigh in that in these times cinematic films had much more impact on the public as alternatives in form of TV or DVD simply weren't there yet.

Have a look at this:
http://manyeyes.alphaworks.ibm.com/manyeyes/visualizations/new/bar-chart/imdb-number-of-movies-by-genre-per-y (http://manyeyes.alphaworks.ibm.com/many ... enre-per-y)
(maybe choose Romance as genre, I think it shares the tendencies of all genres over time, as there is no total) - the total amount of films raising more than only constantly, so the average filmmaker will produce more "average" films in total. But is it enough to make a shift, to cause a degradation? I'm not playing òÄå   “4pÄå   “4qÄå   “4rÄå   “4sÄå   “4tÄå   “4uÄå   “4vÄå   “4wÄå   “4xÄå   “4yÄå   “4zÄå   “4{Äå   “4|Äå   “4}Äå   “4~Äå   “4Äå   “4€Äæ   “,/Äæ   “,0Äæ   “,1Äæ   “,2Äæ   “,3Äæ   “,4Äæ   “,5Äæ   “,6Äæ   “,7Äæ   “,8Äæ   “,åÄæ   “,æÄæ   “,çÄæ   “,èÄç   “+ÃÄç   “+ÄÄç   “+ÅÄç   “+ÆÄç   “+ÇÄç   “+ÈÄç   “+ÉÄç   “+ÊÄç   “+ËÄç   “+ÌÄç   “+ÍÄç   “+ÎÄç   “+ÏÄç   “+ÐÄç   “+ÑÄç   “+ÒÄç   “+ÓÄç   “+ÔÄç   “+ÕÄç   “+ÖÄç   “+×Äç   “+ØÄç   “+ÙÄç   “+ÚÄç   “+ÛÄç   “+ÜÄç   “+ÝÄç   “+ÞÄç   “+ßÄç   “+àÄç   “+áÄç   “+âÄç   “+ãÄç   “+äÄç   “+åÄç   “+æÄç   “+çÄç   “+èÄç   “+éÄç   “+êÄç   “+ëÄç   “+ìÄç   “+íÄç   “+îÄç   “+ïÄç   “+ðÄç   “+ñÄç   “+òÄç   “+óÄç   “+ôÄç   “+õÄç   “+öÄç   “+÷Äç   “+øÄç   “+ùÄç   “+úÄç   “+ûÄç   “+üÄç   “+ýÄç   “+þÄç   “+ÿÄç   “, Äç   “,Äç   “,Äç   “,Äç   “,Äç   “,Äç   “,Äç   “,Äç   “,Äç   “,	Äç   “,
Äç   “,Äç   “,Äç   “, Äç   “,Äç   “,Äç   “,Äç   “,Äç   “,Äç   “,              òÄç


----------



## Dave Connor (Jan 25, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Sun Jan 25 said:


> However, I DO remember very well the average record in the 60's and I will say flatly that if you turn on the radio today, it will not compete with an era where when you did so you heard records by the Beatles, Rolling Stones, Sly and the Family Stone, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, the Byrds, Bob Dylan, the WHo, the Kinks, Frank Sinatra, James Brown, Otis Redding, Crosby, Stills & Nash, Dionne Warwick, etc. in a row on the same station.
> 
> And fiilm scores by Elmer Bernstein, Henry Mancini, Alex North, and so on.


You really can't argue with this in any context. It really is a stunning era of creativity and diversity. Louis Armstrong would even have a number one hit back then. And don't get me started on Brian Wilson and the Beach Boys.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 26, 2009)

Bunch of old farts! 

Perceptions change with time/perspective. Some of you just don't appreciate how good some of the films/soundtracks/albums are today. In order to do that, you'll have to wait until 2028 or 2038. Then you can compare that period's stuff to this one, and you'll probably say, "OMG! The music/films from the 00's were so much better than todays!


----------



## wonshu (Jan 26, 2009)

Ned, I agree 100%!


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 26, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Mon Jan 26 said:


> Bunch of old farts!
> 
> Perceptions change with time/perspective. Some of you just don't appreciate how good some of the films/soundtracks/albums are today. In order to do that, you'll have to wait until 2028 or 2038. Then you can compare that period's stuff to this one, and you'll probably say, "OMG! The music/films from the 00's were so much better than todays!



And yet, my 25 year old daughter and her 30 year old fiancee agree with me.

And is anyone here saying. OMG, the music and films from the 80's were so good.

The culture is getting progressively more stupid, crude, and controlled by the bean counters.

And yet some good work continues to be done. 

So gentleman, let me propose a toast to the valiant film/TV score composers who still apply their training, craft, work ethic, and love to trying to make good pictures, and even not-so-good pictures, a more moving and enriching experince for the audience.
o-[][]-o 


And down with the musically ignorant director/producers who fill their films with badly written, on the nose songs, that do not help the picture and treat the audience as too dumb to understand what is taking place. :twisted:


----------



## JB78 (Jan 26, 2009)

Totally agree with Ned, since this is very much in the ear/eye of the beholder I don't think we'll ever reach a consensus of what's THE period for music/film though.


Jay, I don't know if asking your daughters fiancee is the best way to strengthen your argument. When my daughter starts dating, her bf/gf fucking better agree with everything I say!

:mrgreen:


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 26, 2009)

And FTR IMHO, Thomas Newman, John Powell, Philip Glass, Mychael Danna, Danny Elfman, Hans Zimmer, Michael Giacchino, Elliot Goldenthal, Alexandre Desplat, Harry Gregson-Williams, etc will be remembered, and referred to at some point in the future as composers of a Golden Era. It's all relative.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 26, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Mon Jan 26 said:


> And FTR IMHO, Thomas Newman, John Powell, Philip Glass, Mychael Danna, Danny Elfman, Hans Zimmer, Michael Giacchino, Elliot Goldenthal, Alexandre Desplat, Harry Gregson-Williams, etc will be remembered, and referred to at some point in the future as composers of a Golden Era. It's all relative.



Exactly, and that is why their scoring capabilities should not be supplanted by crummy, on-the-nose songs.


----------



## germancomponist (Jan 26, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Mon Jan 26 said:


> The culture is getting progressively more stupid, crude, and controlled by the bean counters.
> 
> And down with the musically ignorant director/producers who fill their films with badly written, on the nose songs, that do not help the picture and treat the audience as too dumb to understand what is taking place. :twisted:



+1000 o-[][]-o


----------



## wonshu (Jan 26, 2009)

There is no: "should not" in art, you don't like it, fine. But there are no rules.

Now, whether or not those films are "art" is another discussion, the point is, there are no rules in creative work. Whatever someone decides (even if it's a bean counter) is what it is, whether you like it or not is a different matter.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 26, 2009)

wonshu @ Mon Jan 26 said:


> There is no: "should not" in art, you don't like it, fine. But there are no rules.
> 
> Now, whether or not those films are "art" is another discussion, the point is, there are no rules in creative work. Whatever someone decides (even if it's a bean counter) is what it is, whether you like it or not is a different matter.



There may be no rules but there ARE aesthetic criteria that can be applied. A carpenter can look at table that you may like and tell you whether or not it is well constructed and see the lack of quality of the materials. One that you may not like, he may similarly see quality craftmanship and materials in.

The same with film composition and songs in films. You are entitled to like what you like and not like what you do not, but I can put on my craftsman hat and have an educated opinion about whether it is a well constructed score that serves the picture well or on the nose, badly written songs that do not.

And I realize that in this anti-egalitarian age where being "judgmental" has become a pejorative this is politically incorrect to say, I will nonetheless maintain that an educated opinion is worth more than one that is not.

I am NOT saying yours is not, just to be clear. and I certainly respect differing educated opinions and even some uneducated ones


----------



## Dave Connor (Jan 26, 2009)

The problem with the "Old Geezer" analysis is that it's too unscientific in what may be a very objective view of an era of music. For example if someone says a particular form and genre were better over a certain stretch of time (say: Classical music, the symphony, from 1770 to 1836) then you cannot assume a prejudice based upon childhood memories. Also it would be perfectly reasonable to say that Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven are far superior in that genre than any who followed. In fact those who did follow are deliberately placed in another era.

I think there's all kinds of wonderful music being done today. I just don't hear an Alex North, Sinatra, Aretha Franklin, Beatles etc., out there right now. That doesn't mean I have a highly negative view of the considerable talent working in music today or am not very appreciative of them. I just don't hear a lot of folks making musical history these days.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jan 26, 2009)

If we hadn't grown up in the second half of the 20th century, I'd agree with the old geezer analysis. But we're completely used to listening to music that goes beyond the previous bounds in every direction, whether it's pointillism or rap.

Of course there are going to be different fashions today, but I think we all take that into account. And if my 14-year-old daughter likes, say, Headhunters, I know it's not just me - it really does stand up.

The other thing is that I haven't met a musician outside of academia who's an old geezer. Seriously. There's something about music.

Well, there's Jay...


----------



## ComposerDude (Jan 26, 2009)

Dave, the artists you cited tended to have strong musical themes. Is perhaps one of the changes nowadays that the music you're hearing is blander or more nonspecific or atmospheric, not having something so hummable and with a strong 'hook' as in years past?

-Peter


----------



## PolarBear (Jan 26, 2009)

What would have looked the 60s, 70s or 80s like if there where nobody to break the current consensus of good arts and craftmanship? What if nobody broke with that rules that art can only expressed in a Fugue or Sonata? What if nobody thought that art is to have a individual film score for each film instead of an individual score at every theater? What if nobody thought like a Bernard Herrman, a Philip Glass, or a gifted carpenter for that matter because it wouldn't hit the mainstream guess on what art is?


----------



## Mahlon (Jan 26, 2009)

wonshu @ Mon Jan 26 said:


> There is no: "should not" in art, you don't like it, fine. But there are no rules.
> 
> Now, whether or not those films are "art" is another discussion, the point is, there are no rules in creative work. Whatever someone decides (even if it's a bean counter) is what it is, whether you like it or not is a different matter.



I rather like this, though:

"All art is expression, but all expression is not necessarily art."

M.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jan 26, 2009)

PB, my point is that all those rules were totally shattered years ago. My objection to most things I hear is that they suck, not that they're different. 

But I'm not sure whether the quantity of good stuff is lower today.


----------



## Dave Connor (Jan 26, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Mon Jan 26 said:


> And FTR IMHO, Thomas Newman, John Powell, Philip Glass, Mychael Danna, Danny Elfman, Hans Zimmer, Michael Giacchino, Elliot Goldenthal, Alexandre Desplat, Harry Gregson-Williams, etc will be remembered, and referred to at some point in the future as composers of a Golden Era. It's all relative.



Some very talented people in there Ned. I'm not in awe of anyone in particular. I could certainly name a number of predecessors that I would call truly great composers.


----------



## PolarBear (Jan 26, 2009)

Nick, are they shattered? Or is it just that technology is more widely availible and new forms of art arising which we don't consider being art yet? So what do you think - is it better to have a rising total amount of art with a few more total top artists or in order to skip most average or below average stuff have only a few great artists then... just besides the fact that you couldn't steer these numbers in any way?


----------



## Hans Adamson (Jan 26, 2009)

Every time I watch one of the very early episodes of Columbo I just marvel at how well the music supports the drama, and how well written the story is. Also, the songwriting of the 60's 70's was golden. There were great songs written in the decades before that as well. For me, not a lot has happened after 1980. Just listen to old songs like "A change is gonna come", or "At Last", that both were recently re-recorded. Maybe it is all generational. (o)


----------



## bryla (Jan 26, 2009)

Hans I was not born in those decades but I share your view! So its not generational


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 26, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon Jan 26 said:


> "Dave, do you think you would have been in awe of Herrmann in the 50s? Of Goldsmith, or Williams in the 70s?"
> 
> I was in awe of all those guys in the 70s.



I am still in awe of those guys.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jan 27, 2009)

You're still a bunch of old farts (or old-farts-wannabes)


----------



## germancomponist (Jan 27, 2009)

bryla @ Tue Jan 27 said:


> Hans I was not born in those decades but I share your view! So its not generational



Same here... .


----------



## PolarBear (Jan 27, 2009)

Hans Adamson @ Tue Jan 27 said:


> Maybe it is all generational. (o)


Which is what I (and farly superior thinkers compared to me) are trying to say somehow. I wouldn't say strictly generational though, but more technology or development related. A cultural era (maybe that's what I'm looking for term-wise) brings up it's own cultural understanding and its own art in conjunction or in break with the current, "traditional" art-definition. What we now regard as traditional usually wasn't when it came up...

Anyway... Nobody and neither Nick nor Jay wished to answer the question about whether more good artists is a good thing or not (though the latter reading usually to the letter  )... a form degradation in our art of discussion already?


----------



## wonshu (Jan 27, 2009)

Good god, it's just music, people, FCOL!


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 27, 2009)

PolarBear @ Tue Jan 27 said:


> Hans Adamson @ Tue Jan 27 said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe it is all generational. (o)
> ...



More good artists is of course a good thing, but as I said good art is harder to define than good craft, and once again, Polar Bear, film scoring is primarily a craft.

Whatever the intrinsic artistry of the songs in this film, and I would say not much (and check out my website, I know a thing or two about songwriting) from a craft standpoint they did not work with the film because:

1. They did not heighten the impact of the movie.

2. They were mixed so loudly they take the viewer out of the picture.

3. They were so on the nose that they told the viewer what the viewer was already learning from the visuals and dialogue.


----------



## PolarBear (Jan 27, 2009)

I'm not disagreeing with you that the artistry level of song accompanied films is usually low, the songs itself are not very high quality either. If that's your point, I'm out.

You used very harsh words when saying "Miserable, obnoxious trend" - which I regard it's not. Your enumeration is a part of a list of others than can make a movie a very bad experience. But it is that then - a bad movie even perhaps (if I was to say that). Do you really think that you have that unfocused view to call the rising mass of rubbish the end of art?

Were the masses of painted portraits when no photography was around a degradation in art respectively painted art for us? Did it really matter when photographing and filming became popular? Did the invention of recorded music end or diminish the art of musical performances? Each of the tools became availible more widely at a later point and more people made even more art out of it. Other art following other rules. Take wonshu's avatar for instance. Who would consider *that* art in 1900? Is it less artsy because of that? You will now probably say that it could be done better. Somebody will, if it's interesting enough for him. As somebody tried to paint better than van Gogh or compose better score than heard in film XY. And break current boundaries or art rules. With that guy around others will follow him and form a new form of art. The Aristotle quote should be a proof that it has worked for more than two thousand years, and years to come.


----------



## Hans Adamson (Jan 27, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue Jan 27 said:


> You're still a bunch of old farts (or old-farts-wannabes)


It certainly gives me another perspective on the reaction to pop/rock music by my parents generation in the 60's..... ~o)


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 27, 2009)

PolarBear @ Tue Jan 27 said:


> I'm not disagreeing with you that the artistry level of song accompanied films is usually low, the songs itself are not very high quality either. If that's your point, I'm out.
> 
> You used very harsh words when saying "Miserable, obnoxious trend" - which I regard it's not. Your enumeration is a part of a list of others than can make a movie a very bad experience. But it is that then - a bad movie even perhaps (if I was to say that). Do you really think that you have that unfocused view to call the rising mass of rubbish the end of art?
> 
> Were the masses of painted portraits when no photography was around a degradation in art respectively painted art for us? Did it really matter when photographing and filming became popular? Did the invention of recorded music end or diminish the art of musical performances? Each of the tools became availible more widely at a later point and more people made even more art out of it. Other art following other rules. Take wonshu's avatar for instance. Who would consider *that* art in 1900? Is it less artsy because of that? You will now probably say that it could be done better. Somebody will, if it's interesting enough for him. As somebody tried to paint better than van Gogh or compose better score than heard in film XY. And break current boundaries or art rules. With that guy around others will follow him and form a new form of art. The Aristotle quote should be a proof that it has worked for more than two thousand years, and years to come.



Polar Bear, we are having different conversations. You are discussing philosophy and I am discussing what I am actually seeing out there.

I have zero interest in discussing this philosophically. The fact is that in film after film, TV episode after TV episode, underscore is being replaced by songs, good and bad, that IMHO do not serve the picture well. The fact that a handful of films/TV shows do it well and more theoretically could does not change my assessment that it is a miserable, obnoxious trend.


----------



## PolarBear (Jan 27, 2009)

It's not average craftmanship we will remember, we only will remember artful pieces well. And: Good craftmanship can only build up on better artistry.

I'm out, you're drooling over seeing a short time trend (an even numerical questionable btw.) and try to project that on the bigger picture - which is not working, see the painted portraits example.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jan 27, 2009)

I'm not saying that everything produced today is crap for one minute, nor am I saying there's shortage of talent.

But yes, we do need the next generation of the music industry to bring albums of the old quality to the public. The guy with the cigar is out of date, of course, but there was a whole "farm" system with bands playing in clubs, A&R people spotting and developing talent over the years and spanning several albums, and so on. It's all become more supermodel and focus group-oriented than it used to be.

Project Studios and 1-man bands have nothing to do with that. Obviously I'm a big fan of them!

The other thing is that we're going through a musical fashion period that to me is less interesting overall than some others in history. But that changes all the time.


----------



## wonshu (Jan 28, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jan 27 said:


> But yes, we do need the next generation of the music industry to bring albums of the old quality to the public. The guy with the cigar is out of date, of course, but there was a whole "farm" system with bands playing in clubs, A&R people spotting and developing talent over the years and spanning several albums, and so on. It's all become more supermodel and focus group-oriented than it used to be.



I think if you (not you, Nick but the OP, just reacting to what you say) focus away from the mass media and start looking in the indie scene, it's more alive, healthy, wealthy and creative than ever before. Ever.

But of course the bean counters at Universal/Warner/Sony/Viacom have no clue about it and hence you're not seeing it in the wide open. Just let them spend every last dollar on marketing and ignore them.

Go work on creative projects regardless of the rewards and you will find that the creative scene is doing just fine, thank you.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 5, 2009)

I was just listening to the Grammy-nominated music (because I'm going to be a papparazzo at the rehearsal today), and it occurred to me that Radiohead is a perfect example of how bands need to develop over time. That's what I hope doesn't disappear along with the album.


----------



## dannthr (Feb 5, 2009)

I agree, however, this song can be placed ANYWHERE, ANYTIME:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MurRC8dIqY


----------



## Waywyn (Feb 5, 2009)

Hans Adamson @ Tue Jan 27 said:


> Every time I watch one of the very early episodes of Columbo I just marvel at how well the music supports the drama, and how well written the story is. Also, the songwriting of the 60's 70's was golden.



Actually it is funny as you mention Columbo. I recently watched a very old episode of Hart to Hart. Probably the sense of dramaturgy did change big time over the years. Seriously the writing is awesome. It is really good orchestra writing, especially some of the woodwind stuff is just superb and I would give a lot to be able to write like this ... BUUUUT 

As mentioned above I was looking that one episode and on a certain scene I heard like music as if 5000 most frightening looking demons enter our world and brutally fight against a few soldiers one by one and after that the whole world exploded .... but actually what happened on screen was a guy who opened a suitcase by daytime in a hotel room :D

To be serious. I think there is lots of crap today, but there was also a lot of crap happening back then. No matter if it was the 50, 60, 70 etc.

By the way, older farts shook their head when they did see young people running around with long hairs ... today old farts shake their head when they see young people listeing to their music through the 2,478 Khz speakers of their cellphone .. so what?


----------



## Ashermusic (Feb 6, 2009)

Niah @ Thu Feb 05 said:


> what trend?
> 
> songs in movies have been around since millenia
> 
> ...



Over-rated film, over-rated soundtrack, got by on Ellen Page's excellent performance, IMHO.


----------



## Niah (Feb 6, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Fri Feb 06 said:


> Niah @ Thu Feb 05 said:
> 
> 
> > what trend?
> ...



what does that mean? did you like it? did you not like it? are you pissed it got more attention than it deserved? do you think the soundtrack made with songs was a mistake?do you still think this is a trend? what would you have changed to make it better?


----------



## Niah (Feb 7, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Fri Feb 06 said:


> 5. Hired me to do a score.



oh ok so that's what this is about. 

just kidding


----------



## Brian Ralston (Feb 9, 2009)

So...I just had the time to see where this thread has gone and read the entire thread, and I found it actually interesting as I just finished a score for a film that has a very heavy song usage. In fact...they initially did not have a "composer", rather a songwriter doing a bunch of songs and their thought was that would be enough for their film's music needs. Towards the end of post...after the 2 week sound mix had already started...they soon figured out that the songs alone were not cutting it. So...they needed a composer to write an original score. Through word of mouth...I got the "emergency" call last week, took a meeting hours later...and began a week of work without much sleep, only having 5 days to compose, record and deliver the score. 

The trend of seeing filmmakers wanting to use songs in place of score is a trend that, in my opinion...is primarily based around a notion that the score is artificially manipulating the audience reaction to the scene. Where as the songs, in their opinion is more of a creative expression of the story being told in a poetic way from an "iPod generation" that plays songs throughout the day. Yeah there are commercial influences in the larger films...but on this film...I guarantee you the choice was purely an artistic one to be song heavy. 

Hence...whenever there is score...it is usually requested to be more atmospheric and subtle, instead of melodic and memorable. More sound design inspired than classical. Creatively...I see it as just a choice. But I do see that the grand style of scoring film with melody and thematic material is still there...you just sometimes have to make the "proper" case for it and show the filmmaker why it will support their film in the way they intend. 

For example...most of my score for the film above was atmospheric and subtle with solo instruments, steel string guitar, etc...It was a style we decided upon at our first meeting and me only having seen the film once. But the final scene of the film was a complete departure from the rest of the film in terms of feel. It was an uplifting "afterlife - life flashing before your eyes" kind of moment that was not like the rest of the film. So I saw an opportunity to score the entire sequence traditionally with a big orchestral sound and not stick with the small ensemble score we had done with the rest of the film. Essentially, I lawn mowed through 3 songs in the temp they already had rights to with my score proposal and at the end of the day...my orchestral scoring of this particular scene won out. The director had never thought that his "little" film could hold such a heavy score in any scene, but I convinced him that it could..at least in this instance. And the rest is history. We finished the theatrical mix last Friday. 

Here is the cue by the way if anyone wants to know what got mixed into the film. The film 5.1 version sounds much better as it was mixed from the various stems...unlike this quick DP stereo MP3 downmix. It is called Transcend.

http://www.brianralston.com/temp/Transcend-BrianRalston.mp3 (MP3 LINK)

The film is called *Don't Fade Away* directed by Luke Kasdan and stars Beau Bridges, Mischa Barton, Ryan Kwanten and Ja Rule.

Traditional scoring and thematic scores aren't dead...the young filmmakers today just have to be shown where that style has a place in their films. If it doesn't work...it doesn't work. But if it does work...I will be sure to make my case as to why it works and would be willing to bet that if it is working...everyone in the room will see that it is working and will want nothing else in its place.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Feb 10, 2009)

Thanks for that excellent post, Brian, and thanks for sharing that beautiful cue - I'm sure it works very, very well. Oh, and congratulations on the gig! =o


----------



## Brian Ralston (Feb 10, 2009)

You're welcome Ned. :wink: My pleasure.


----------



## kid-surf (Mar 12, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Sat Jan 24 said:


> My wife and I just watched another reasonably decent film that was spoiled for us by this STUPID, OBNOXIOUS, practice of putting a bunch of DREADFUl, on- the- nose songs where there should be underscore. The audience is not so stupid that it needs a song to tell us what is going on. And I started out as a songwriter, so I believe in the value of a good, well-placed song in a film.
> 
> The same thing is going on in TV dramas. I know the soundtracks bring in revenue but dramatically it is really damaging to these projects.
> 
> ...



Sorry I'm a little late to the party... 

Jay, this sounds very close in tone to my thread you had a problem with...but...you are forgiven. :D

To respond to your, sort of, question: "It depends..."

*If it's my family drama:* Nope, it's likely 100% source. Ironic, perhaps, because it's the lowest budget of them all and could be used, hypothetically, as a vehicle for my music as well. That is...if I felt like putting all my eggs in one basket to fight to get this thing made with me directing. I don't, not yet... BTW -- this script was written to the source cues I name in the script.

*If it's my Mexican cinema / Heart of Darkness inspired:* Maybe...maybe not.  I wrote the script with a loop of the electronic/orchestral band 'Hybrid' playing almost 24/7. In a perfect world I would direct it and beg Hybrid to score it...keeping in mind the music needed to be Mexican 'inspired', not authentic and definitely not "on the nose", and at times EXTREMELY hard hitting and DARK (not evil, dark). In other words, "give me the darkest most hard hitting mexican inspired music we've ever heard". Many composers couldn't hang with that. It would sound deliberate...wouldn't work that way.

*If it's the new one:* Likely it will be traditional underscore. Not so ironically, it's the most commercial of the bunch. Said another way, it's the only commercial one of the bunch. Big name producers (the folks I'm working with on it) don't work on indie flicks...I don't want to either, unless I'm also directing. There's no way in hell anyone would let me direct this one and I wouldn't want to. Not yet. It's a story based fundamentally on mythic/classic story design. A bunch of source cues plainly wouldn't work for this story. Matter of fact, I'm listening to "old-school" score as I write it (think: mid 70's). It's that kind of movie. Many twists and turns, big characters, much subtext, layers, etc. No CGI. The type of script/movie I've not seen done well in many years. The kind of story/characters big actors may be fighting over. Time will tell...

Matter of fact -- if you want to read the first few pages to tell me whether or not you feel I'm on the right track, lemme know. 

The bottom line is -- the story dictates the music. A great director knows that, a good director isn't sure, a bad director pretends to know the difference. (BTW - a bad director normally has never written a screenplay in their life, let alone a remarkable screenplay, and probably isn't capable of either.)


----------

