# Give Hans the Oscar!



## Dave Connor

What I mean to say is that there is a musical achievement in Dunkirk that deserves an award (recognition) whether or not Hollywood finds it the "best score" or not. In fact an Oscar is not nearly weighty enough of an award in this case in my opinion. I refer to a cue where the structure is best described as a four voice (or more) fugue. I don't recall whether the entrances of each motive were staggered but when full blown it is unmistakably a polyphonic structure that is in the direct lineage of Bach. It may be more akin to Mozart's final movement of his Symphony 41 since it is not the same motive in multiple voices with free counterpoint, counter-subject and stretto attending but rather simultaneous distinct motives only, making up the entire texture. If that weren't enough, each motive is a sound-construction, not melodic in any way but pure sound of a mechanical nature predominantly.

The ramifications of such an achievement require almost as many planes of analysis as there are voices in this fugue. In film history is there anything similar? Goldsmith's title to Planet of the Apes functions in a similar way and contains pure sound as well as melodic and percussive motives. It is considered a landmark in film and a singular achievement. Morricone is another who has used unconventional sounds blended with melodic and harmonic information in highly inventive ways. But Hans has done something here that is completely unique: a deliberate use of a Classical form where the structure itself is fundamental to it's workings rather than an approximated or vaguely referenced form. Who thinks like that in film music these days? To combine an ancient form with original sounds no older than the film itself is truly a profound creative impulse from a film (theatre) composer.

Just as Goldsmith and Morricone are rightfully viewed outside of the film music genre so must we view Hans Zimmer based upon this brilliant musical invention (and not just that.) The question is, what electronic composer(s) of the last century to the present have created polyphonic textures using pure sound only? Stockhausen, Varese, Subotnick, Davidovsky, Tomita, Carlos, Vangelis? That's an honest question so please answer if you know. I'm not aware of any and one must keep in mind that these guys were running from ancient established forms for the most part. That was part of the idea in their departure from traditional music.

If something like a pure-sound fugue structure has ever been done by anyone it couldn't have been done better. This thing is drop dead gorgeous and done within the confines of a movie! Not snuck in but clearly presented in a perfect execution of the composers stated vision of integrating the score into the sound and visual scape of the picture. So, in the first truly mechanized war, started by the nation of Bach's ancestry you get a mechanized fugue of sorts that meshes with the sound and visual of an experimental film - perfectly. A bit of music that looks back centuries to Bach, as well as decades to WWII, then to the electronic music boom after the war, to it's eventual use in film up till now. Most importantly it thrusts film-making and film-music forward into the future with an integration of the two we have never seen or heard heretofore. That is an extraordinary achievement and as is typical with this composer: you can remove the picture entirely and you still have a stunning musical achievement which in this case may be historic. (Please show me if you have an example of something like this ever being done in music.)

Can anything remotely like this be said of the other scores this year? If you consider Hans' programming alone on Dunkirk you have an achievement that towers in film or any music category. Where's the Oscar for best synthesizer programming? Hans wins that easily. So give him one Oscar because he deserves two or three awards for the Dunkirk score.


----------



## Zhao Shen

Great read. I respectfully disagree completely on Dunkirk "deserving" the Oscar, but you've at least helped me understand and appreciate your point of view.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

He also used the Shephard tone in Dunkirk (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepard_tone).

Brill. Really clever.

And I'm absolutely stealing that.


----------



## Fab

I also agree, it was a great read!


----------



## synthpunk

Agree with Zhao.

If the trend of the Globes and BAFTA's continues it will go to Maestro Desplat.

It will also be sad to see Johann's name in Memorium tomorrow night.


----------



## CT

Dave Connor said:


> What I mean to say is that there is a musical achievement in Dunkirk that deserves an award (recognition) whether or not Hollywood finds it the "best score" or not. In fact an Oscar is not nearly weighty enough of an award in this case in my opinion. I refer to a cue where the structure is best described as a four voice (or more) fugue. I don't recall whether the entrances of each motive were staggered but when full blown it is unmistakably a polyphonic structure that is in the direct lineage of Bach. It may be more akin to Mozart's final movement of his Symphony 41 since it is not the same motive in multiple voices with free counterpoint, counter-subject and stretto attending but rather simultaneous distinct motives only, making up the entire texture. If that weren't enough, each motive is a sound-construction, not melodic in any way but pure sound of a mechanical nature predominantly.
> 
> The ramifications of such an achievement require almost as many planes of analysis as there are voices in this fugue. In film history is there anything similar? Goldsmith's title to Planet of the Apes functions in a similar way and contains pure sound as well as melodic and percussive motives. It is considered a landmark in film and a singular achievement. Morricone is another who has used unconventional sounds blended with melodic and harmonic information in highly inventive ways. But Hans has done something here that is completely unique: a deliberate use of a Classical form where the structure itself is fundamental to it's workings rather than an approximated or vaguely referenced form. Who thinks like that in film music these days? To combine an ancient form with original sounds no older than the film itself is truly a profound creative impulse from a film (theatre) composer.
> 
> Just as Goldsmith and Morricone are rightfully viewed outside of the film music genre so must we view Hans Zimmer based upon this brilliant musical invention (and not just that.) The question is, what electronic composer(s) of the last century to the present have created polyphonic textures using pure sound only? Stockhausen, Varese, Subotnick, Davidovsky, Tomita, Carlos, Vangelis? That's an honest question so please answer if you know. I'm not aware of any and one must keep in mind that these guys were running from ancient established forms for the most part. That was part of the idea in their departure from traditional music.
> 
> If something like a pure-sound fugue structure has ever been done by anyone it couldn't have been done better. This thing is drop dead gorgeous and done within the confines of a movie! Not snuck in but clearly presented in a perfect execution of the composers stated vision of integrating the score into the sound and visual scape of the picture. So, in the first truly mechanized war, started by the nation of Bach's ancestry you get a mechanized fugue of sorts that meshes with the sound and visual of an experimental film - perfectly. A bit of music that looks back centuries to Bach, as well as decades to WWII, then to the electronic music boom after the war, to it's eventual use in film up till now. Most importantly it thrusts film-making and film-music forward into the future with an integration of the two we have never seen or heard heretofore. That is an extraordinary achievement and as is typical with this composer: you can remove the picture entirely and you still have a stunning musical achievement which in this case may be historic. (Please show me if you have an example of something like this ever being done in music.)
> 
> Can anything remotely like this be said of the other scores this year? If you consider Hans' programming alone on Dunkirk you have an achievement that towers in film or any music category. Where's the Oscar for best synthesizer programming? Hans wins that easily. So give him one Oscar because he deserves two or three awards for the Dunkirk score.



I agree with all of this. The way that Hans seems to use "old" forms and processes applied to a more contemporary musical dialect is something I find very inspiring. Inception has some good examples of this, too.


----------



## Dave Connor

Zhao Shen said:


> Great read. I respectfully disagree completely on Dunkirk "deserving" the Oscar, but you've at least helped me understand and appreciate your point of view.


The gist of my post is that there is a major musical achievement in the Dunkirk score that transcends film music and so _deserves an award_, not that it is the best score this year. I couldn’t say on the latter since I’m not familiar with the other scores.


----------



## muk

Dave Connor said:


> I refer to a cue



Would you mind sharing which cue that is? It sounds intriguing, but I have quite a few question marks about what you are describing. If the 'motives' are 'pure sound of a mechanical nature', how can there be independent voices that are a prerequisite for any kind of fugue? And how can these 'motives' (aka pure sounds) switch between the voices? I'd very much like to check that cue you're mentioning.


----------



## dcoscina

The line-up of Oscar nominated composers this year is terrific. As a fan of them all, I would be happy to see any one of them receive the statuette. If memory serves, Greenwood and Burwell have not won one yet. Williams would be picking up his 5th statuette for Best Score while Zimmer and Desplat would be garnering their second. Fine achievements by all this year which is nice to see. Sometimes it's hard to accept that a truly magnificent score has not received its due recognition at award time. This year is the exception.


----------



## Architekton

I believe HZ should get Oscar for Dunkirk, it was amazing movie with even better soundtrack, I have nothing but respect for mister Zimmer. I really hope Ill be good in near future at least 1/10th as he is...


----------



## Dave Connor

muk said:


> Would you mind sharing which cue that is? It sounds intriguing, but I have quite a few question marks about what you are describing. If the 'motives' are 'pure sound of a mechanical nature', how can there be independent voices that are a prerequisite for any kind of fugue? And how can these 'motives' (aka pure sounds) switch between the voices? I'd very much like to check that cue you're mentioning.


I haven't seen the film since I saw it in the theater but the cue is at least 2/3's of the way through I would think. I remember it like it was yesterday because it was one of the most delightful experiences I've ever had watching a movie. I would have to see the film again to give you the exact time and scene. Easy enough to find if you have it though.

As to your specific question regarding the distribution of voices and their sound: think of a fugue where the top voice is in the flutes, the next in lower winds, the next in French Horns and so on down. So the flutes now become motive 1: a non-instrumental short motive or figure that in character and behavior strikes one as mechanical or clock-like or something of the sort. It sits above and to the left while motive 2 sits above and to the right but perhaps lower and is also a short motive of a contrasting yet non-harmonic/melodic in nature. Keep going in this way (left and right and up and down) and you have this construct that feels like Bach done with various sound-motives rather than "musical" motives. I'm not saying it's a strict fugue, I'm saying it _functions _like one in full flight where all the distinct motives are brought together and easily identifiable (like Mozart's Jupiter Symphony final movement.)


----------



## NoamL

It's not really a fugue, it looks like this -







Three time scales in the story, three metric scales in the music... 

Divided feelings on this score, as it kinda simultaneously represents what I most admire and least admire about HZ's art.

I admire that the score is so elemental, atomic even ("minimalist" isn't the right word). I admire that HZ took the octatonic scale, a sort of semi-abandoned composer's tool from pre-Media-Ventures Hollywood, and he found something utterly new to do with it (just as I admire how he used woodwinds so creatively on Interstellar). I admire that the score, instead of following the "ET Reeses Pieces" model of developing themes, consists of static chunks of music and it is up to the listener to figure out that they relate on a deep story-driven level (like how Lex Luthor's theme is an upside-down version of Superman's, or that the trombones in Inception relate to the Edith Piaf song).

What I least admire is that I feel despite all the creativity it's so limiting. It's such a small box. While it's quite possible that no other score could have suited this movie, I didn't get into music to write or to listen to "atomic" music. This movie is CN and HZ at their most experimental, most artistic, and - for me - least moving. The score is a bit of a trap for composers and musicians as it's one of his most "transparent" movies ever in terms of musical devices. So I kind of checked out emotionally once I recognized the musical devices, you know, like the symmetry of the octatonic scale, or the super slow Elgar bit.

He's written scores that totally blew me away emotionally, to this day I don't understand how Inception didn't win etc., but there are many other great scores in 2017.


----------



## Dave Connor

The above is not what I'm referring to. Not what I described remotely.


----------



## NoamL

Give a timestamp in the score then?


----------



## germancomponist

Isn 't a good red-wine or a good gin much more valuable than an Oskar?


----------



## Dave Connor

NoamL said:


> Give a timestamp in the score then?


Your punishment for not taking a couple of minutes to read my posts carefully enough to respond with at least some accuracy is to sit through the entire film and find the cue yourself : ) I don't own the film or soundtrack. On the bottom right of this construct is a sort of funky grooving repetitive figure that is the closest thing to a melodic idea in it (as I recall.) Very hip! Very Hans!

btw, wouldn't your example above be best described as a _two bar ascending melodic phrase played over itself in augmentation twice and four times in length? _As opposed to my numerous references of a _non-melodic/harmonic fugal structure_ done with _pure sounds_?


----------



## Dave Connor

Folks, this really isn't about the Oscars. I'm not really that interested in the subject and particularly when it comes to film music because they have gotten that wrong so many times. Plus, who will remember the winner in six months besides a few folks here and elsewhere? I'm pointing out what I feel is quite an extraordinary achievement in music. I'm generally interested whether anything like this has ever been done by anyone. I'm hoping someone with greater knowledge than me can point to an example of what I've described above being done prior. I would love to hear it!

I am certainly in favor of the inference that Hans Zimmer is a composer of real stature in that he writes and produces music that gets one asking about it's possible historic significance (within and without the film context.) That's far more significant to me than a gold statue from what is essentially a political body as much as artistic. I wonder what Bach would be more interested in?


----------



## Jeremy Gillam

I really enjoyed this post Dave, thanks. To me the most intriguing feature in Hans' studio isn't the wall of synths, but the collection of art and architecture books that fills the space between them. It's interesting to observe how classical ideas of structure, form, and beauty are reflected in his work, which sounds so cool and modern!


----------



## CT

Dave Connor said:


> btw, wouldn't your example above be best described as a _two bar ascending melodic phrase played over itself in augmentation twice and four times in length? _As opposed to my numerous references of a _non-melodic/harmonic fugal structure_ done with _pure sounds_?



It's a mensuration canon, right? That would be the easiest way to describe it. Like 528491 from Inception.


----------



## Dave Connor

miket said:


> It's a mensuration canon, right? That would be the easiest way to describe it. Like 528491 from Inception.


Yes it’s a canon which is quite distinct from a fugue - right? I merely described it’s properties in order to identify just how far it is from what I described. It’s based upon a _two bar ascending melodic phrase... _which again is nothing like what I described. Not sure why a canon containing melodic material would be used to clarify another musical form based upon non-melodic synthetic material.

I wasn’t quibbling about musical forms but that the musical example given indicated my post hadn’t been read well enough to be understood at all.

Edit: Look, you can say it was an honest mistake and assumption (posting the wrong piece of music) since Classical forms are so rare in film but still: we should all read posts thoroughly enough to respond accurately. Not spoiling for a fight. Simply identifying an extremely rare achievement in music (let alone film) that will probably go unrecognized in a season where significant achievements are supposed to be recognized. Just because one person wins Best Actor doesn’t mean others haven’t broken new ground and also deserving recognition. What I heard in Dunkirk was just that exactly.


----------



## MaxOctane

Dave Connor said:


> Your punishment for not taking a couple of minutes to read my posts carefully enough to respond with at least some accuracy is to sit through the entire film and find the cue yourself



Dave, your analysis is just not that instructive without the cue itself. Can you look on YouTube for it?


----------



## Dave Connor

MaxOctane said:


> Dave, your analysis is just not that instructive without the cue itself. Can you look on YouTube for it?


I can’t promise when but if I can do it with any dispatch I will. One of the reasons I mentioned it here is that it hasn’t been talked about. John Burlingame hasn’t mentioned it nor Jim Svejda nor anyone that I know of. HZ does these amazing things that can be a bit hidden in his films and then be brought up short for surface characteristics in his music. So I chime in on my own observations as he is deserving of a thorough unbiased evaluation. Mahler realized at some point that most weren’t getting what he was really doing and I think Hans has been subject to a healthy dose of that.


----------



## givemenoughrope

MaxOctane said:


> Dave, your analysis is just not that instructive without the cue itself. Can you look on YouTube for it?



+1

And I listen to Jim Svejda almost every week night. If he plays Hans I guess I've missed it...


----------



## Apostate

Too bad no Morricone last year, he'd have been a runaway whatever he partook in. Tarantino should make good on his promise this year and get the two back together.

I didn't see this latest effort by HZ as one of his better scores. But I can respect he tried something different.


----------



## dcoscina

I like your analyses Dave; they give me food for thought.


----------



## dcoscina

Apostate said:


> Too bad no Morricone last year, he'd have been a runaway whatever he partook in. Tarantino should make good on his promise this year and get the two back together.
> 
> I didn't see this latest effort by HZ as one of his better scores. But I can respect he tried something different.



It comes down to what we all classify as film music. Dunkirk has challenged the conventional idea of what a film score is. Is it music with melody, harmonic and rhythm? Is it any organized sound employed in a dramatic manner that affects the film? 

I'm sure when when Prokofiev (for his score to Alexander Nevsky) purposefully recorded the trumpets too close to the mic's to produce an off-putting distortion that represented the Teutonic Knights' barbarism, it was unorthodox and challenged.


----------



## Dave Connor

givemenoughrope said:


> +1
> 
> ...I listen to Jim Svejda almost every week night. If he plays Hans I guess I've missed it...


Jim interviewed most if not all the nominees for best score this year but I missed them so I listened to the podcast with Hans. It didn't include the music that was played during the interview live however. Even so, any discussion along the lines of this thread would have been on the podcast. I communicate with a certain regularity with both Jon and Jim and have thought about asking them about it but haven't gotten around to it. Both would be happy to take up the subject I would think as they're two of the very best in their respective fields.


----------



## Dave Connor

Apostate said:


> I didn't see this latest effort by HZ as one of his better scores. But I can respect he tried something different.


 There seems to be a consensus in numerous articles online about the Dunkirk score; that it is _one of his better scores._ I agree with that particularly given the experimental nature of both the music and film. In that sense it's certainly a successful experiment. My comments on a single cue are related to just how experimental the score actually is in places and wildly successful at that.


----------



## muk

What @NoamL posted is an example of the Shepard tone apparently used in the movie. It looks clever. I'll definitely search for the cue that Dave mentioned when I have the time.


----------



## Apostate

I doubt HZ would compare himself to Profokiev.


----------



## Dr Belasco

I've been to the theatre to see films lately and most film music today sounds like a drone. I am going to see 3 Billboards on Thursday and I will be pleasantly surprised if there's even any music in it even though it's been nominated.
I heard some Desplat music and I find it a bit anaemic but it will probably win because it has tunes or something like tunes.


----------



## Puzzlefactory

I just watched it yesterday and thought the the score was great. Reminded me of Gravity. 

Not hugely musical but great sound design and really amplified (or even created) the tension of the movie.


----------



## South Thames

NoamL said:


> What I least admire is that I feel despite all the creativity it's so limiting. It's such a small box. While it's quite possible that no other score could have suited this movie, I didn't get into music to write or to listen to "atomic" music. This movie is CN and HZ at their most experimental, most artistic, and - for me - least moving.



I quite agree - and, as you point out, the limitations of the score are inherent in the way Nolan approached the material. Very cinematic and effective on its own terms, but ultimately rather hollow, and unlikely to linger in the memory - the score likewise. I would contrast that to Interstellar, a film of much grander ambitions, not necessarily successful in all of them, but which seemed to me to be an example of 'peak Nolan/Zimmer'.

I often think it's interesting to note how often it is the case that scores, even from the best composers, mirror quite precisely the strengths or limitations of the films themselves, even from composers who we know are not bound by those limitations. I often think of the example of the Star Wars prequel scores, which, despite the obvious skill behind them, have virtually none of the structural, emotional or dramatic texture that makes the original trilogy scores so compelling -- but then, neither do the films...

Have to say, I find the initial post here to be hyperbolic, and given that HZ frequent this forum, perhaps even a tad sycophantic - with all the formalist experiments around since the advent of tape machines, there are probably any number of 'sound' canons out there of various kinds; it's a fairly obvious way to approach form in the absence of pitch. It might be an interesting conceit and done well in the context of this score (I'll await the reference) but I shouldn't think many people besides the poster will be dropping to their knees and beholding the visionary feat of this moment any time soon.

As for why there isn't an Oscar for synth programming, I'd say for the same reason there isn't an Oscar for colour grading or set dressing or orchestration. Its incidental to the end result, not an end result in itself. Fantastic colour grading on lousy photographic compositions will not make great cinematography. Likewise, great programming on lousy music or poorly applied music (I'm not referring to Dunkirk -- just making the point in principle) will not make a good film score.


----------



## Dr Belasco

In the theatre we sat with a someone born in 1930 who went through the whole Dunkirk thing and she thought the film was tripe.


----------



## South Thames

Dr Belasco said:


> In the theatre we sat with a someone born in 1930 who went through the whole Dunkirk thing and she thought the film was tripe.



I can understand that. For people who live through these seminal moments in our history, the trivialising vacuity of something like Dunkirk or Darkest Hour must be really galling.


----------



## Puzzlefactory

Don’t think it’s fair to single out just those two movies. 

If they’re trivial then all war movies are...


----------



## Dr Belasco

South Thames said:


> I can understand that. For people who live through these seminal moments in our history, the trivialising vacuity of something like Dunkirk or Darkest Hour must be really galling.



Christopher Nolan made a great film set in Alaska called Insomnia and here's a director I thought that was going to be good at making films. He turned out to be good at making money.


----------



## Apostate

Dr Belasco said:


> Christopher Nolan made a great film set in Alaska called Insomnia .



That's a good one.


----------



## D Halgren

Apostate said:


> That's a good one.


It's a remake, and not one of his better films.


----------



## Ashermusic

The Oscar for Best Score is not a "best music" or "most inventive" music award. It is an award for music that serves the picture best, in theory at least. I have not yet seen "Dunkirk" but man, Desplat's score for "The Shape Of Water" served the picture perfectly.


----------



## D Halgren

Dr Belasco said:


> Christopher Nolan made a great film set in Alaska called Insomnia and here's a director I thought that was going to be good at making films. He turned out to be good at making money.


Nolan is one of the greatest living directors, and a true artist.


----------



## Dr Belasco

Ashermusic said:


> The Oscar for Best Score is not a "best music" or "most inventive" music award. It is an award for music that serves the picture best, in theory at least. I have not yet seen "Dunkirk" but man, Desplat's score for "The Shape Of Water" served the picture perfectly.



Desplat will probably win but whether he does or not, it won't have anything to do with whether 'it serves the picture best' kind of bullshit. It's to do with who kisses ass the best. ~This is why Thomas Newman never won an oscar and why Bernard Herrman won only one at the very beginning off his career. They refused to kiss the oscar committees ass. Or maybe you don't think Newman ever wrote anything that deserved to win a an oscar because 'it didn't serve the picture'??


----------



## Ashermusic

I have lived and worked in LA since '72 but I have no insight into the politics that have gone into what has won and what has lost other than to say that some people who seem to be popular have not won and some who seem to be less popular have won.

So I don't know. I am sure that Hans could provide insight but I think he is too classy a guy to do that. 

But anyway, that is what the award is supposed to be about.


----------



## Apostate

D Halgren said:


> It's a remake, and not one of his better films.



I like it.


----------



## Apostate

Dr Belasco said:


> Desplat will probably win but whether he does or not, it won't have anything to do with whether 'it serves the picture best' kind of bullshit. It's to do with who kisses ass the best. ~This is why Thomas Newman never won an oscar and why Bernard Herrman won only one at the very beginning off his career. They refused to kiss the oscar committees ass. Or maybe you don't think Newman ever wrote anything that deserved to win a an oscar because 'it didn't serve the picture'??



On the other hand, dad Alfred won nine and was nominated for over forty. Waxman even resigned once he found out the Academy ignored the brilliant "Robe" score.


----------



## dgburns

I think when you get to the point of being nominated for an Oscar, it’s all a win win.

I hope Hans takes it, because it seems to me his output since Lion King deserves it. I know ya’ll will say it doesn’t factor into it (but somehow I think it does)

And well, Hans has already complained he doesn’t want to win for a score that is tension filled, rather than something beautifull and uplifting, so as things go, he’ll win so he can complain about that afterwards ( written in jest with irony in case you misunderstand my gentle poke )


----------



## Dr Belasco

D Halgren said:


> It's a remake, and not one of his better films.



You live long enough, you soon realise every film ever made is a remake.


----------



## Dr Belasco

Ashermusic said:


> But anyway, that is what the award is supposed to be about.



You go around to Thomas Newman house and ask him what he thinks the award is supposed to be about.


----------



## Apostate

I think Morricone got robbed at least as much as Thomas, witness the despicable "Mission" fiasco.


----------



## Apostate

Actually wait, Zimmer (and Howard) were both ripped off big time on the Dark Knight. The impact of that sucker can't be overestimated imo. You hear it all the time in scores today.


----------



## D Halgren

Dr Belasco said:


> You live long enough, you soon realise every film ever made is a remake.


I'll give you that, and it's every story, not just films.


----------



## South Thames

Dr Belasco said:


> Desplat will probably win but whether he does or not, it won't have anything to do with whether 'it serves the picture best' kind of bullshit. It's to do with who kisses ass the best. ~This is why Thomas Newman never won an oscar and why Bernard Herrman won only one at the very beginning off his career. They refused to kiss the oscar committees ass. Or maybe you don't think Newman ever wrote anything that deserved to win a an oscar because 'it didn't serve the picture'??



Desplat doesn't strike me as any more of an ass kisser than Newman -- in fact, they both seem like very modest, personable fellows to me. And Zimmer is hardly some kind of volatile, abrasive maverick like Herrmann was. In any case, the ass kissing is far more the purview of the studio than the individual nominees. 

Best score occupies a sort of 'never land' between the artistic and the technical awards as the Oscars, for better or worse, and who the music Oscar goes to often follows the general tide of the artistic awards (best film, screenplay, director etc) -- remember the nominations are made by the music branch, but the award is voted on generally. I often feel best score is used to help spread the awards around for the sake of an impression of fairness to the nominated films, not to the composers themselves.

Thrillers, sci-fi, action -- any pictures of this sort -- are routinely overlooked for nominations in anything except the pure technical categories, because these pictures and their scores don't fit the academy's idea of what an Oscar-worthy film or film score should be like. Any composer who contributes a significant score in one of these genres will be very lucky to get recognised with the actual award as a general rule. Sure, there is the odd exception - like Gravity - but as a general rule, at least of late, the academy seems to have favoured the 'art-house' scoring aesthetic rather than anything with a more mainstream sensibility.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire

miket said:


> It's a mensuration canon, right?



Menstruation cannon? Sounds nasty.


----------



## vicontrolu

By the description in the first post I'd guess that I would have enjoyed the score but unfortunately that was not the case.

Would be nice to actually hear the tune.


----------



## jules

D Halgren said:


> Nolan is one of the greatest living directors, and a true artist.


It's really a mater of taste.


----------



## D Halgren

jules said:


> It's really a mater of taste.


Is it? You can not like something, but can you deny the validity and craftsmanship of it? Is it a matter of taste that Kubrick and Hitchcock were greats?


----------



## Ashermusic

Dr Belasco said:


> You go around to Thomas Newman house and ask him what he thinks the award is supposed to be about.



I see, and you know for a fact the reason he has not won is because he doesn't cozy up or are you surmising that? I don't disagree that he should have won several times, but I don't know the reasons he hasn't.


----------



## Nico

I really like Desplat's music. They never talk about him in France and that' s a shame. Right now it is all about Timothée Chalamet who is nominated for Best Actor


----------



## CT

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> Menstruation cannon? Sounds nasty.



Or prolation canon if you prefer, but that doesn't sound very appetizing either.


----------



## artomatic

South Thames said:


> the academy seems to have favoured the 'art-house' scoring aesthetic rather than anything with a more mainstream sensibility.



Totally agree with this. I've questioned this tendency for quite some time now. Many deserving nominees, in my opinion, have been deprived of their warranted accolades for years now because of this, the Academy's mindset.

All the best and much respect, Master HZ!


----------



## jules

D Halgren said:


> Is it? You can not like something, but can you deny the validity and craftsmanship of it? Is it a matter of taste that Kubrick and Hitchcock were greats?


Deny nothing, just point out that going from _craftmanship_ to _one of the greatest living director_ is a bit of a stretch, and _surely_ a matter of taste.


----------



## D Halgren

jules said:


> Deny nothing, just point out that going from _craftmanship_ to _one of the greatest living director_ is a bit of a stretch, and _surely_ a matter of taste.


https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2010/03/the-fifty-best-living-directors.html

www.imdb.com/list/ls000026027/


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> Very cinematic and effective on its own terms, but ultimately rather hollow, and unlikely to linger in the memory - the score likewise.


You mean in your memory. I first posted about this _fugue_ the day I saw the film and just stated here I remember it as if it were yesterday.


South Thames said:


> I often think it's interesting to note how often it is the case that scores, even from the best composers, mirror quite precisely the strengths or limitations of the films themselves, even from composers who we know are not bound by those limitations.


 This is the type of insight you offer on film music? The most cliched well-known principle of them all?: that a score cannot improve upon the inherent strengths or weaknesses of a film to the degree where it can alter or remedy those qualities? This is what you find _interesting_? Not a fugal structure in the middle of a colossal, world-wide smash Hollywood movie - perhaps the only thing like it ever in film? This doesn't interest you? I find that interesting.


South Thames said:


> Have to say, I find the initial post here to be hyperbolic, and given that HZ frequent this forum, perhaps even a tad sycophantic


Hyperbolic and sycophantic to point out what may be a first in all of film? What's your favorite film cue structured in the manner of a multi-voice, multi-motive fugue done only with originally programmed sounds? What film and what composer? (I'll settle for one example dating from the electronic score for Forbidden Planet - so in the last 60 or so years.)

You do know that people comment on music here all day every day with everything from lavish praise to constructive criticism to harsh criticism? In my case are you suggesting only negative comments you would find tolerable? By your definition it's _sycophantic_ if I tell someone who is on this forum I think their music is great. Or are you singling out a single forum member for biased treatment because he is well known? Should I go create an account on some other forum in order to comment on Mr. Zimmer's music? Anyone else here I can praise up and down and you and others are ok with that? That's exactly right isn't it.

Of course I'm aware of Hans Zimmer's presence here and of course I would want him to read about what I consider to be certain extraordinary achievements in his music. I do that all the time with numerous musicians and no one ever questions my motives. No I'm not going to single him out for bad treatment. I let others do that. I will say that one award he wins going away is "worst treated forum member ever at v.i." The guy has been subject to everything from tabloid-like speculation regarding his finances to taking credit for others work, to not doing his own work to lying about it! I'm supposed to see my positive take on the man and giving him an ounce of respect as a negative? The way you do? Again, show me why (even hypothetically) it's somehow disingenuous to point out and even be effusive about a truly rare and expertly done piece of music that may in fact be the lone example in film music history.


South Thames said:


> with all the formalist experiments around since the advent of tape machines, there are probably any number of 'sound' canons out there of various kinds


Ok post a half dozen examples in the next few days: where numerous completely distinct sound-motives are arrayed along vertical and horizontal planes as in a fugue. Since you won't find an example in film (the reason and justification for this thread - contrary to your gifted psychoanalysis) I assure you we will all settle for a good handful of examples from composers outside of film. In which case you will have managed to confirm the rarity of what Hans has achieved in film.



South Thames said:


> it's a fairly obvious way to approach form in the absence of pitch. It might be an interesting conceit and done well in the context of this score (I'll await the reference) but I shouldn't think many people besides the poster will be dropping to their knees and beholding the visionary feat of this moment any time soon.


I'll drop to my knees when you provide several examples of what you describe above. That will be the rarest achievement I've witnessed in years. You won't. You will further your attacks on my character when you are unable to provide adequate examples in support of your speculation. An easy call.


----------



## jules

D Halgren said:


> https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2010/03/the-fifty-best-living-directors.html
> 
> www.imdb.com/list/ls000026027/


Sure. But i do not rely on such a classification (you can find hundreds on the web, all different), nor on facebook likes, nor on box office results, but on my own appreciation. Hey, you know the expression : each one their own !


----------



## D Halgren

jules said:


> Sure. But i do not rely on such a classification (you can find hundreds on the web, all different), nor on facebook likes, nor on box office results, but on my own appreciation. Hey, you know the expression : each one their own !


I give


----------



## dcoscina

dgburns said:


> I think when you get to the point of being nominated for an Oscar, it’s all a win win.
> 
> I hope Hans takes it, because it seems to me his output since Lion King deserves it. I know ya’ll will say it doesn’t factor into it (but somehow I think it does)
> 
> And well, Hans has already complained he doesn’t want to win for a score that is tension filled, rather than something beautifull and uplifting, so as things go, he’ll win so he can complain about that afterwards ( written in jest with irony in case you misunderstand my gentle poke )


Could say the same for Williams who should have won for Geisha and probably War Horse as well. 

That said, Zimmer should have won for Interstellar and Thin Red Line... IMO. I really enjoy Gladiator but Crouching Tiger was pretty damn good (though I will submit Tan Dan's score to Hero was even finer of an achievement). 

now I'm rambling.. apologies...


----------



## Jeffrey Peterson

Nick Batzdorf said:


> He also used the Shephard tone in Dunkirk (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepard_tone).
> 
> Brill. Really clever.
> 
> And I'm absolutely stealing that.



Welcome to earth. Where do you think 8dio got the "inspiration" to release "Shepard Tones"?


----------



## NoamL

Hey all, consider the following comparison:


Which of the three lists do you think is better?

2017: ??? // The Phantom Thread // The Shape Of Water
2016: La La Land // Arrival // La La Land
2015: The Hateful Eight // SW The Force Awakens // The Hateful Eight
2014: The Grand Budapest Hotel // Interstellar // The Theory of Everything
2013: Gravity // Romeo And Juliet // All Is Lost
2012: Life of Pi // Life of Pi // Life Of Pi
2011: The Artist // War Horse // The Artist
2010: The Social Network // How To Train Your Dragon // The Social Network
2009: Up // Up // Up
2008: Slumdog Millionaire // The Curious Case of Benjamin Button // Slumdog Millionaire
2007: Atonement // Atonement // Atonement
2006: Babel // Lady In The Water // The Painted Veil
2005: Brokeback Mountain // Memoirs of a Geisha // Memoirs of a Geisha
2004: Finding Neverland // The Incredibles // The Aviator

The first movie is the Best Score according to the Oscars, the second is the Best Score according to the IFMCA Awards (International Film Music Critics Association), and the third is the Golden Globe for Best Score.

Based on this history, Desplat certainly seems likely to win the Oscar having won the GG, as they have concurred 8 out of the last 13 times.

However, I think the IFMCA Awards are perhaps the best collection of scores out of the three lists. How can anyone pass over HTTYD, Interstellar and The Incredibles? Those are three amazing scores, and it's not like the composers were unknown or the movies got buried at the box office. When you give out only one top award a year there will always be snubs but those are some _real_ oversights.


----------



## South Thames

Dave Connor said:


> Not a fugal structure in the middle of a colossal, world-wide smash Hollywood movie - perhaps the only thing like it ever in film? This doesn't interest you?



Even assuming your analysis is correct, not particularly, no. Any more than a composer putting sounds in a twelve-tone series and structuring them that way would do - it would be a formalistic conceit, and entirely incidental to whether the music is good or bad. I would be excited or not excited to the extent the music was any good. The reputation of the Dunkirk score will rest on its impact on the film, and to some extent the degree to which it can be enjoyed independently of the film. To the extent that the mere presence of a fugue per se makes any contribution to either of those, I think it's extremely limited and will not change the perception of the score.



Dave Connor said:


> Again, show me why (even hypothetically) it's somehow disingenuous to point out and even be effusive about a truly rare and expertly done piece of music that may in fact be the lone example in film music history.



I didn't say it was disingenuous (although the level of gush I find unseemly, but perhaps that's just my British reserve). I think you are genuinely excited about it; I simply think you have the significance of such a thing (assuming it isn't just a case of excitable over-interpretation) out of all proportion, particularly in respect of the Oscars which do not exist to reward stuff like that.



Dave Connor said:


> Ok post a half dozen examples in the next few days: where numerous completely distinct sound-motives are arrayed along vertical and horizontal planes as in a fugue. Since you won't find an example in film (the reason and justification for this thread - contrary to your gifted psychoanalysis) I assure you we will all settle for a good handful of examples from composers outside of film. In which case you will have managed to confirm the rarity of what Hans has achieved in film



I'll admit it's an assertion I've no interest in going to the effort of proving, since I don't think it's important -- I'm pretty sure the tone row thing has been done also, but finding examples would be very tricky since most electronic art music is highly obscure. 

Anyway, at present you've yet to even reference the example you posted about in a way that allows anyone else to verify your lofty claims. May be when you I'll be as bowled over by you (although it won't be because it's a fugue).


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

Jeffrey Peterson said:


> Welcome to earth. Where do you think 8dio got the "inspiration" to release "Shepard Tones"?



Is this really necessary?


----------



## jules

So congrats to Alexandre Desplat for his trophy, and congrats to Hans Zimmer for his amazing work !


----------



## Garry

I didn't know about the 'Shepard tone' before: really nice explanation of it here, and it's use in several movies. Very cool! Shame Hans didn't win: would have been nice for a VI-C member to win! Next time Hans!


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> It [a fugal structure] would be a formalistic conceit...


Not necessarily. It could be a _formal conceit_ as you say but far more likely in this case a film composer (who is known for constantly experimenting and searching for the right musical solution) going with his gut and using any device that allows him to present a given creative idea. Including a multi-planed polyphonic structure. It seems so well hidden that _conceit_ doesn't seem to apply in any of it's meanings in this context.


South Thames said:


> ...and entirely incidental to whether the music is good or bad.


That the employment of any musical form or device would be, _incidental to whether the music is good or bad_ goes without saying doesn't it? Such as a student's first two part invention? The form doesn't confer any quality onto the music obviuosly.


South Thames said:


> The reputation of the Dunkirk score will rest on its impact on the film, and to some extent the degree to which it can be enjoyed independently of the film. To the extent that the mere presence of a fugue per se makes any contribution to either of those, I think it's extremely limited and will not change the perception of the score.


The entire point of my post IS the _presence of a fugue _in the Dunkirk score. Not that it alone makes the entire score Oscar-worthy. Rather that it (the fugue-device) was deserving of _recognition._ My Oscar reference was nearly tongue in cheek (although obviously the score is in fact officially considered Oscar-worthy without any citations such as I have made.)

I know of a single fugue in film history: in Jaws by John Williams. Also a single Passacaglia: in The Blue Max by Jerry Goldsmith. I know of Zero examples of what HZ has done in Dunkirk. I have simply doubled it in importance since he also invented the sounds themselves. The high level of creativity and execution of it is what brings it to the level of major significance to me. If nothing quite like it has ever been done or even just not done as well, you have quite an accomplishment by a composer who is often criticized as bombastic, repetitive and locked in to a few signature styles. What I heard in Dunkirk is the work of a Swiss watch-maker who continues to grow artistically. Not someone stuck creatively and relying on old tricks.


South Thames said:


> I didn't say it was disingenuous (although the level of gush I find unseemly, but perhaps that's just my British reserve).


 Sycophancy is at least _disingenuous_ by definition. I'm analytical by nature and grudging with praise. Historic precedence and masterful composition with non-acoustic sounds invented by the composer; all enhancing the visuals in model filmic fashion will get me gushing I admit.


----------



## South Thames

Dave Connor said:


> going with his gut and using any device that allows him to present a given creative idea.



If you say so, but a fugue doesn't strike me as particularly a 'gut' device, and Zimmer an unlikely exponent of the form -- in fact, one of his many legacies is arguably the steady reduction of the use of counterpoint in mainstream film scoring.



Dave Connor said:


> I know of a single fugue in film history: in Jaws by John Williams.



Well, there's a single well-known piece which signposts itself as such in the album title (and wherein the strict fugal part is dispensed with fairly quickly in the film itself), but I can think of many other fugue passages -- in Black Sunday, Home Alone, Land Before Time, Total Recall etc. Even Andrew Lloyd Webber wrote one for the Odessa File, including a cello solo played by his brother -- possibly the first ever use in film of a solo cello played by the composer's blood relative.

If Jaws' fugue stands out it's because the music and film stands out, not because of the particular novelty of having a fugue in it. As for Passacaglia, it depends how elastic your definition is, but ground basses with degrees of 'variations' on top are to be found everywhere.



Dave Connor said:


> you have quite an accomplishment by a composer who is often criticized as bombastic, repetitive and locked in to a few signature style



The inclusion of a fugue per se in that score wouldn't dispel any of those criticisms -- it could well be a bombastic and repetitive fugue. As a general point, I think for anyone inclined to those conclusions about Zimmer, Dunkirk is likely not the score that will change their minds, fugue or no fugue.


----------



## Living Fossil

@Dave Connor : I'd be very interested to get to know which cue you are refereing to as being a fugue. So far i couldn't find a hint in this thread which points to it. Thanks in advance!


----------



## Puzzlefactory

I don’t think HZ is “locked into signature styles”. 

Compare True Romance to Hannibal to Frost Nixon to Dark Knight to Gladiator to Interstellar to Sherlock to Dunkirk...

I think he has a pretty wide variety of sounds and styles. 

People just seem to zero in on the batman trilogy and label it the “Zimmer sound” without justification IMO.


----------



## Garry

Come on guys, for the vast majority of us on here (>98%?), any 'criticism' of Hans Zimmer is just pure envy, and the football equivalent of the guy stood at the bar, on his 5th pint, having just played substitute goalkeeper on a Saturday morning in the local park for Nobody Wanderers United, saying, "Yeah, that David Beckham, rubbish'. 

I have to say, I think the guy is inspirational. I'm no fanboy or sycophant (too old for that!), but I can't imagine the amount of people who would have otherwise been turned off orchestral music, had it not been for Zimmer scores in their favourite movies. I first became aware of him from Pirates of the Caribbean in 2003, more than 20 years after his first published works, and 15 years later, my son is equally enamoured by him! I can count on one hand, having lost 3 of the fingers, how many composers my teenage son and I share a common interest in! We now both watch movies like Gladiator and Dark Knight together, mainly for the music. 

You can like the music or not, that's down to taste - everyone's entitled to that. But when my IMDB page looks like this below, only then, might I consider saying how limited the 'Zimmer sound' is! Oh, if only I could be 'so limited'!!

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001877/


----------



## South Thames

Garry said:


> You can like the music or not, that's down to taste - everyone's entitled to that. But when my IMDB page looks like this below, only then, might I consider saying how limited the 'Zimmer sound' is! Oh, if only I could be 'so limited'!!



Not sure who was claiming Zimmer was limited. But composers get known for their 'signature sounds' -- the handful of projects people identify closely with them. Remember the 90s when every commercial had something Edward Scissorhand's-esque on it? Zimmer has written a number of scores which have been both hugely successful and incredibly easy to imitate -- and they've tended to be his more bombastic efforts. He's also, much more so than previous composers, facilitated the 'franchising' of that sound, first through Media Ventures and now Remote Control, making it even more ubiquitous since it allows him to work on more films than he would otherwise be able to.

In my mind I separate Zimmer the composer -- some of whose work I enjoy and admire, especially Interstellar -- from what I consider some of the broader and more unfortunate trends that have partly resulted from his success.


----------



## cucio

Dave Connor said:


> I know of a single fugue in film history: in Jaws by John Williams.



Does 'West Side Story' count as a film?


----------



## jamesavery

In my humble opinion, I thought Greenwood's score to Phantom Thread was far superior to anything else nominated. This 'House Of Woodcock' piece is sublimely beautiful, and will be remembered for decades to come, I think...


----------



## South Thames

cucio said:


> Does 'West Side Story' count as a film?



The film version certainly does - good spot. 

Star Trek IV has a 'whale fugue' (so-called), and actually Rosenman's work is full of this sort of thing. But it's awfully dated and twee sounding.


----------



## cucio

Prompted by this thread I found this in YT:



Absolutely loved Bronisław Kaper's (6:00).

I find strange Mr. Zimmer has written anything that resembles a classical fugue. I read somewhere he actively avoids learning about academic music theory, but perhaps that's some kind of urban myth.


----------



## NoamL

Garry said:


> saying how limited the 'Zimmer sound' is!



If only I had said that? I said the scoring *in this film* feels "atomic" and "elemental"... to me... (how many "this is my opinion" qualifiers should one post need?) The musical material feels... to me... to be very irreducible, concept-driven. The main idea in the score is literally a scale or pitch collection. The musical atoms create musical form by building up "crystals" of the same thing, tessellating and re-arranging. I do admire the creativity within those self imposed limits. I don't believe I ever said those limits constitute some kind of "Zimmer Sound" ... that would be tantamount to saying "Zimmer doesn't write tunes" or something equally silly in the face of Rango, Sherlock Holmes, Hannibal, The Thin Red Line.... as people have said 10x already, Dunkirk got the score it got because of the kind of movie it is. A "Nolan movie" if we want to use that as shorthand for a certain aesthetic. The more Nolany it gets the less I like it, that's all. As you said: a matter of taste.


----------



## dcoscina

Dave Connor said:


> I know of a single fugue in film history: in Jaws by John Williams. Also a single Passacaglia: in The Blue Max by Jerry Goldsmith.
> .


Yared wrote several fugues in his film career. There's a fugal passage in his rejected Troy score. 

Morricone wrote a fugal passage (though it might be more of a canon) for The Thing.

Williams took inspiration from Bartok's fugal writing from Music for Strings Percussion and Celeste for Cybertronics cue in A.I. 

There are other examples in film score history though not as overt as the Shark Cage Fugue.


----------



## dcoscina

jamesavery said:


> In my humble opinion, I thought Greenwood's score to Phantom Thread was far superior to anything else nominated. This 'House Of Woodcock' piece is sublimely beautiful, and will be remembered for decades to come, I think...



I think Greenwood's "problem" is that he's writing from the standpoint of the modern concert arena rather than from the Hollywood film score tradition. While his music garners deserved attention thanks in no small part to PT Anderson who mixes his scores prominently in his films, I think the voters are still hardwired to vote for scores that are either tuneful and memorable, or else present some kind of novelty (ie Midnight Express, Chariots of Fire, BrokeBack Mountain, etc etc). 

Sophisticated music or its application to film is much less understood and garners far less attention. Greenwood's There Will be Blood, in my opinion, is the greatest score of the 21st century, not because it draws upon Bartok, Varese, and Penderecki, but in its application. Who in the world would marry those stark, emotionally ambiguous idioms to an early turn of the century film about industrialization and religion in America? It's the same intelligent sophistication that goes for Dunkirk- it challenges the viewer's expectations of what music is and how it functions in a dramatic narrative. Would I put Dunkirk on as pure listening enjoyment? Probably not. Does it impact its film in a way that makes a profound statement? YES! And at the end of the day, that is film music's primary function: to serve the film the best way it can. Sometimes the music can operate on both plains and be as enjoyable freed from its filmic confines like Interstellar which plays like a ballet or symphony to me. But that's a bonus and not a requirement of the gig, especially if the movie calls for a very different approach. 

I often wonder what people thought of David Shire's Taking of Pelham 1,2,3 with its marriage of big band instrumentation and serialism. Was it accepted? Did people think Shire had gone batty? Did the filmmakers even know what a tonerow was or because it was dressed up in 70s funk/jazz, it didn't really matter? 

It's important for film composers and filmmakers to continue pushing the boundaries of what music for film is and I applaud HZ and Greenwood for probing those areas as much as a I salute directors like Nolan and Anderson for being receptive to these intelligent approaches.


----------



## Dr Belasco

When it comes to judging who is going to win an Oscar (for anything) not just music scores or songs, where most people go wrong is they try to use their personal judgement on what they think is good.
What they don't do, and what they should do, is make a judgement on the Oscar committee and historically what they think is good. That way you'll get closer to understanding Oscars and the bullshit that surrounds it.

Let me put it another way. Hitchock, Herrmann, Goldsmith and T. Newman in their entire careers, which adds up to getting on for 200 man years I could guess, have won 2 oscars between them. And there are numerous other examples. So on the music oscar, Desplat was always going to win it because (a) the type of film (b) because of the type off music and (c) because the oscar committee think that way. And good luck to him and them.

That is all I need to know.


----------



## Ashermusic

That statement makes perfect sense, but that is very different from your previous statement that said that Desplat would win because he is an ass kisser and Newman does not because he isn't


----------



## Dr Belasco

Ashermusic said:


> That statement makes perfect sense, but that is very different from your previous statement that said that Desplat would win because he is an ass kisser and Newman does not because he isn't



I will just say to you that Newman is NOT an ass kisser. He does not do 'the rounds'. Now I would have been very happy to see HZ win or anyone else for that matter, but unfortunately, it's not really about the music.


----------



## Ashermusic

Well, if we are talking about the music as music and more importantly how it serves the film, I think Desplat's score was a fine choice.


----------



## Dr Belasco

Probably was but haven't seen the film or really heard any of the music. The only real interest in the Oscars I had this year was the Oscar for cinematography and from a purely fun PoV, Roger Deakins was finally a winner. Although I hear the film isn't great, it was fun to see Deakins win.


----------



## Dave Connor

Finally! A thread at v.i. control focused on Hans Zimmer that isn't about how to get proper spiccato eights sounding; Braaams in brass, large percussion sounds and grooves, synth plugins and the size or quality of his latest sample library! Look at the names that are being mentioned, Leonard Bernstein, Leonard Rosenman, Bronislau Kaper, Jerry Goldsmith, Bernard Herrmann and of course Mr. Williams. My purpose in this thread (using just one example of HZ's unique and innovative writing) is precisely to look at what he is actually achieving in his work and his proper place in film history. The topic is fugue and the subject (pun intended) is Hans Zimmer!

Now, if you simply take all that's been said here and the musical examples and take note of the fact that the structure I refer to is done with _concrete_ sound-motives, you have what is rightly a first in all of film. That is a major achievement pure and simple and obviously has gone unnoticed. It cannot be hyperbole to point it out. It is a factually accurate observation. I have also made the point that the impulse to do something of this nature is a rare creative artistic gesture whether in the film context or without. Also that the composer should rightfully be compared to non-film composers since the advent of electronic music who may or may not have done such a thing.

I thought for sure someone would have found this cue by now. I don't own the film and don't have time to sit down with it but I'll see what I can do.


----------



## dcoscina

We are fortunate that HZ drops in here. It's one thing to talk to a composer via an interview and another when a composer talks shop with fellow musicians, regardless of the spectrum that the members operate on in music.


----------



## synthpunk

Anyone catch the commercial short featuring HZ on last nights Oscar broadcast ?


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> If you say so, but a fugue doesn't strike me as particularly a 'gut' device, and Zimmer an unlikely exponent of the form -- in fact, one of his many legacies is arguably the steady reduction of the use of counterpoint in mainstream film scoring.


I meant his _instinct_ to even use such a structure. There is a ton of brain-power behind the actual execution of it as would be necessary in programming alone not to mention composing and fitting things together where psychologically it's profile and effect strike you as a Bach construct not that of a modern film composer.


South Thames said:


> Well, there's a single well-known piece which signposts itself as such in the album title (and wherein the strict fugal part is dispensed with fairly quickly in the film itself), but I can think of many other fugue passages -- in Black Sunday, Home Alone, Land Before Time, Total Recall etc. Even Andrew Lloyd Webber wrote one for the Odessa File...


Yes and I have received a welcome education on the subject here by some of the informative posts. Nonetheless they all seem to confirm the fact that no one has done such a thing with non-melodic/harmonic material.


South Thames said:


> The inclusion of a fugue per se in that score wouldn't dispel any of those criticisms -- it could well be a bombastic and repetitive fugue. As a general point, I think for anyone inclined to those conclusions about Zimmer, Dunkirk is likely not the score that will change their minds, fugue or no fugue.


The inclusion of a fugue would in fact dispel criticisms along the lines of a _typical, synth score that offers nothing new_. Criticisms I read here before I saw the film. None of the other criticisms are mine btw. I think HZ is a delicate composer in the extreme who is capable of large musical gestures. The _fugue_ is not the work of a bombastic composer but a forward thinking music innovator.


----------



## cucio

This seems to be the official upload to YouTube of "Dunkirk"'s OST:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLpOW2x1fl4dzL6LnSRtJw1AnjTlZYnDYX

Can the OP find his fugue there? From his description in #11 I think it might be track 4, "Supermarine."


----------



## Valérie_D

synthpunk said:


> Anyone catch the commercial short featuring HZ on last nights Oscar broadcast ?




Charming!


----------



## Dave Connor

cucio said:


> This seems to be the official upload to YouTube of "Dunkirk"'s OST:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLpOW2x1fl4dzL6LnSRtJw1AnjTlZYnDYX
> 
> Can the OP find his fugue there? From his description in #11 I think it might be track 4, "Supermarine."


I'm looking and listening. HOME is the closest thing I've found but I don't think that's it.

Something that occurred to me when no one was able to easily identify it is the fact that I saw it in Imax and so the vertical sound plane was 30 feet high or whatever with even more considerable width. All the elements were spread out over these two planes and so there was considerable delineation of the sound-parts. That isn't going to translate on desktop computer speakers. I will keep searching.

Heavens though really: just listening to a couple cues such as THE OIL really makes me shake my head. Anybody who has ever layered sustaining and repetitive ideas and tried to make them fluid, dynamic, harmonically interesting, natural sounding and breathing (and for considerable length) has to know HZ does the impossible here. Just stunning music making and all the while riffing on a diminished chord. I'm always baffled at casual dismissal of these innovative, major achievements in music and film scoring. To say nothing of the perfect wedding of such to picture. That cue just blew me away totally.


----------



## germancomponist

synthpunk said:


> Anyone catch the commercial short featuring HZ on last nights Oscar broadcast ?



How cool is this?


----------



## South Thames

dcoscina said:


> I often wonder what people thought of David Shire's Taking of Pelham 1,2,3 with its marriage of big band instrumentation and serialism. Was it accepted? Did people think Shire had gone batty? Did the filmmakers even know what a tonerow was or because it was dressed up in 70s funk/jazz, it didn't really matter?



The whole thing is built over an ostinato (non-twelve tone), and it's written in the style of the highly chromatic jazz of the era anyway. So the lead may be twelve tone, but the listener has a clear sense of being grounded by the ostinato. It may be serial in certain particulars, but it's not a true dodecaphonic piece. It obviously was accepted I guess - it made it into the film and was nominated for a BAFTA.

Rosenman's The Cobweb from 20 years earlier -- a heavily (if not always strictly) twelve tone score -- certainly sounds more like what Webern/Berg/Schoenberg et al would have recognised as dodecaphonic music, so Shire wasn't really blazing any trail here, though the juxtaposition with jazz was neat.


----------



## dcoscina

South Thames said:


> The whole thing is built over a ostinato (non-twelve tone), and it's written in the style of the highly chromatic jazz of the era anyway. So the lead may be twelve tone, but the listener has a clear sense of being grounded by the ostinato. It may be serial in certain particulars, but it's not a true dodecaphonic piece. It obviously was accepted I guess - it made it into the film and was nominated for a BAFTA.
> 
> Rosenman's The Cobweb from 20 years earlier -- a heavily (if not always strictly) twelve tone score -- certainly sounds more like what Webern/Berg/Schoenberg et al would have recognised as dodecaphonic music, so Shire wasn't really blazing any trail here, though the juxtaposition with jazz was neat.


Very true Scott. And yeah the tonal ostinato does anchor the music so it’s still relatable. Goldsmith’s POTA was even more experimental as was his score to Freud. I should check Rosenman’s Cobweb. I’ve heard many great things about it


----------



## goalie composer

synthpunk said:


> Anyone catch the commercial short featuring HZ on last nights Oscar broadcast ?



Love it!


----------



## John Busby

synthpunk said:


> Anyone catch the commercial short featuring HZ on last nights Oscar broadcast ?



Love this!!

"anything else" - "whole pot of coffee, got it"


----------



## Apostate

I don't think much of the Oscars to begin with, especially this year's elections, however I do think HZ should have won over that dumb Water score.

That said, I feel as though the film world was really missing Morricone this year. His absence was like a presence. I have no doubt he would have done something worthy again. Only Williams stands up to the Maestro imo.


----------



## josephspirits

jamesavery said:


> In my humble opinion, I thought Greenwood's score to Phantom Thread was far superior to anything else nominated. This 'House Of Woodcock' piece is sublimely beautiful, and will be remembered for decades to come, I think...




This is the correct opinion, in my opinion.


----------



## josephspirits

What's surprising to me is not who wins the Oscar, especially given the voting pool, but that on a forum like this people wouldn't even be making an effort to see all of the films nominated for original score at least once in the theater. Woah!


----------



## Ashermusic

Exactly. Judging a film score away from the film is like imagining an elephant while feeling the trunk when blindfolded.


----------



## synthpunk

Do you listen to film music ?... "Ohh god no!" - John Powell


----------



## Greg

synthpunk said:


> Do you listen to film music ?... "Ohh god no!" - John Powell



I've heard that in interviews from several composers and it always struck me as kind of weird. Have you heard them explain why not?


----------



## Dr Belasco

Predator, like Pelham, drives everything forward with relentless and insistent scoring. Silvestri at his percussive and textural best. His score is the heartbeat of the film.


----------



## AR

F*** those Oscars. Year by year it gets shittier and crappier. With their anti-racism and metoo bull they can go *peep* themselfs and put their bling thing somewhere, where the sun's not shining. Period.


----------



## Apostate

Greg said:


> I've heard that in interviews from several composers and it always struck me as kind of weird. Have you heard them explain why not?



Many of them might be trying to avoid being unduly influenced in their own writing. I write music, and during the writing I only listen to other music for specific reasons (and then almost never anything past 1983 or so...you know, when the greatest scores had already been written).

To listen to what's going on today might creep up in my writing and that along with my general distaste for today's predominantly Zimmerian style of scoring, keeps my listening more focused.


----------



## dgburns

synthpunk said:


> Do you listen to film music ?... "Ohh god no!" - John Powell



I think it’s also because when you live it 24/7 and it carries alot of pressure to perform. And score seems to me to be music with a purpose, each film needing something different. And also, it’s about you as a brand. Listening to others’ score (not music) is time wasted not blazing your own path.


----------



## Apostate

Ashermusic said:


> Exactly. Judging a film score away from the film is like imagining an elephant while feeling the trunk when blindfolded.



I've never seen Sodom and Gomorrah, yet am pretty crazy about the score. Same with Lionheart (Goldsmith), Magnificent Seven, Red House...

But when I listen I'm making my own movie in my mind.


----------



## AdamAlake

Ashermusic said:


> Exactly. Judging a film score away from the film is like imagining an elephant while feeling the trunk when blindfolded.



Wrong.


----------



## synthpunk

I think it's pretty self explanatory actually Greg. PM me if you want to discuss.



Greg said:


> I've heard that in interviews from several composers and it always struck me as kind of weird. Have you heard them explain why not?


----------



## Dr Belasco

Greg said:


> I've heard that in interviews from several composers and it always struck me as kind of weird. Have you heard them explain why not?



I booked up 5 weeks ago to go and see 3 Billboards this Thursday. I didn't book up to go and listen to film music. Film music should at worst, be like a good football referee. Effective but unnoticed most of the time.


----------



## Apostate

Dr Belasco said:


> I booked up 5 weeks ago to go and see 3 Billboards this Thursday. I didn't book up to go and listen to film music. Film music should at worst, be like a good football referee. Effective but unnoticed most of the time.



And at best...I'm thinking of To Kill a Mockingbird. Hard to imagine that film being as effective without its at times arguably "intrusive" score. Same with Psycho.

If anyone had given me Close Encounters as a blank cd with no markings regarding its name or composer, NOTHING, I would still think it was a marvelous piece of music. The Omen, Family Plot, etc.


----------



## Dr Belasco

Yeah that's at best alright. When the big boys used to come out to play, things could get really awesome really fast. But these days you need to lower your sights and make allowances.


----------



## Dr Belasco

Actually, Jerry Goldsmith thought The Omen a frivolous film and the score as not his best. It was up against Taxi Driver for the Oscar that year I believe. That's why big boys don't take the Oscars seriously.


----------



## Apostate

Dr Belasco said:


> Actually, Jerry Goldsmith thought The Omen a frivolous film and the score as not his best. It was up against Taxi Driver for the Oscar that year I believe. That's why big boys don't take the Oscars seriously.



Not just Taxi, but also Bernard's Obsession. Stiff competition, try listening to Obsession sometime and feel the brilliance.


----------



## Dave Connor

To remind everyone: This thread is not actually about the Oscars. I used the concept of, _giving an award for a creative achievement in film _as a point of departure to discuss something Hans had done (a type of _fugue_ with sound not melody) in his nominated score that seemed to be a first in all of film (which we seem to have confirmed here except that finding it is probably going to require watching the entire film - which I will do at some point.) There's a link to the score in the thread however which reveals so many artistic and technical firsts (even in one cue) that it almost makes my point moot.


----------



## cucio

It seems the only one who has confirmed anything of the sort is, apparently, you. The rest of us seem to be still waiting to hear what this supposed fuguey-thing is about.

But at least we found about a great fugue by Kaper in the least likely of places: a movie about nuclear-mutated giant ants. So that makes this a great thread in my book, whatever it is about.


----------



## Dave Connor

That fugue in THEM (my favorite film of that genre and time) does indeed make all this worthwhile I agree. It's so brilliant. You would think that's a concert version posted as I can't imagine the entire length of it is in the film but perhaps I'm wrong (another film to watch for a fugue in.)

The fugue thingy in Dunkirk exists I can assure, and at some length. It may not have made it into the released score though which would not surprise. (Only Hans Zimmer could create something unique in all of film music which drops another composers jaw in the theater but escapes numerous others notice and then doesn't make it onto the soundtrack.) That's half my point about the fellow: people aren't noticing the depth of what he's doing as a pure composer.


----------



## muk

Well, this alleged sounddesign-fugue seems to be so well hidden that it can't be even found by the one who sings its praises. After so much advance praise heaped on it, it would be nice to actually hear the track. Otherwise discussing this becomes a bit moot. For me exactly nothing is confirmed until I can listen to it thoroughly.


----------



## AR

dgburns said:


> I think it’s also because when you live it 24/7 and it carries alot of pressure to perform. And score seems to me to be music with a purpose, each film needing something different. And also, it’s about you as a brand. Listening to others’ score (not music) is time wasted not blazing your own path.


Do I listen to scores seperately? Nope (well, nowadays). Do I watch many movies? Yes. So, whats the point? If I hear something good in a movie my ears get the attention anyways. No need to listen to the entire score. For example, I was watching Jigsaw the other day. And I have to congratulate Charlie Clouser for establishing another great score that works well with the picture.


----------



## Apostate

muk said:


> Well, this alleged sounddesign-fugue seems to be so well hidden that it can't be even found by the one who sings its praises. After so much advance praise heaped on it, it would be nice to actually hear the track. Otherwise discussing this becomes a bit moot. For me exactly nothing is confirmed until I can listen to it thoroughly.



I'm still not sure there is a fugue. Perhaps an after-the-fact, happy-accident-one-could-fancifully-call-a-fugue is more on point.


----------



## South Thames

> Wrong.



Clearly you can judge it as music, but you obviously can't make an informed judgement of it as a film score. It's probably rather rare that a good or effective score on record actually works to the detriment the film in the dub but it can happen. Saving Private Ryan, for example, I always feel had scenes that would have been more effective without music or with different music, even though the music itself was perfectly fine. 



> That's half my point about the fellow: people aren't noticing the depth of what he's doing as a pure composer.



I wonder if you should ask for an audience with Zimmer and explain to him the depth of what he does. He doesn't strike me as the kind of guy to underestimate his achievements but I think even he might be surprised.


----------



## cucio

Apostate said:


> I'm still not sure there is a fugue. Perhaps an after-the-fact, happy-accident-one-could-fancifully-call-a-fugue is more on point.



Neither am I, to be honest. A fugue is a fugue, a highly intellectual and thoroughly crafted musical form: there is counterpoint (meaning vertical synergy, not just "more than one thing sounding randomly at the same time"), imitation, recurrence, modulation, thematic development (inversion, retrogradation, augmentation, diminution), stretto... all the works. If the thematic material is non-pitch based some adjustments will have to be made.

It's surely been done before in the concert hall. Many academy-trained composers have to jump through the hoop of hammering out a bona-fide fugue, so the notion of substituting tonal material for unpitched one doesn't sound like anything too revolutionary. The hilarious and wonderfully didactic "Fuguing by doing" by Prof. Hal Owen springs to mind:



Mr. Zimmer doesn't strike me as someone who would draw from these kind of resources for his works, but I am willing to be pleasantly surprised.


----------



## Greg

Dr Belasco said:


> I booked up 5 weeks ago to go and see 3 Billboards this Thursday. I didn't book up to go and listen to film music. Film music should at worst, be like a good football referee. Effective but unnoticed most of the time.



And I got tickets to Annihilation just to hear the score on big speakers. Film music "should" be many things but what it can be is limitless.


----------



## Dave Connor

My original thread within hours of seeing the film last summer. Third paragraph https://vi-control.net/community/threads/the-miracle-of-dunkirk.64788/

I accidentally ended up at Frys today and would have picked up the DVD but they didn't have it. I'll get it though and have an idea that will illustrate nearly the exact same thing in the meantime.


----------



## germancomponist

Ashermusic said:


> Exactly. Judging a film score away from the film is like imagining an elephant while feeling the trunk when blindfolded.


Haha ...., there is some truth in your words.
But, let me tell you a story: When I was young, my mother spent me a Birthday present, and it was the film-music from Star-Wars on a LP-Vinyl. I never had seen the film before but just listened to the music, and this music had literally cast a spell over me. I've listened to it a thousand times and more and had composed all sorts of film scenarios in my mind. Of course, I later saw the movie ..... So I came to the film music.


----------



## Apostate

My first ever soundtrack was given to me the year it came out: Jerry Goldsmith's Boys from Brazil (total masterpiece). I didn't see the movie until five years later, and decided I was better off not having seen it LOL!

It depends on the score. Jaws is an example of a score that's kind of lonely without the movie. Plenty of other scores stand alone...I can make lists on demand.

Try listening to John Williams' "Family Plot" if you've never seen the movie. That score is a delight through and through, and an oddly ignored yet great piece of music in general.


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> I wonder if you should ask for an audience with Zimmer and explain to him the depth of what he does. He doesn't strike me as the kind of guy to underestimate his achievements but I think even he might be surprised.


The Dunkirk score (as one example) was dismissed here by numerous folks as a _typical_ score, among other similar criticisms. He is routinely criticized in that way here and elsewhere. (I hear it all the time.) Hans himself pointed out the hashtag #stophanszimmer (or something of the sort from a music critic or some such.) Does that sound to you as if he is being perceived as a _composer of depth_? #stopmartinscorsese something you would not stand to correct? Where's the evil in me or anyone very specifically pointing out the _depth_ in his work. It is precisely what I think people are missing with endless talk of taikos, spiccatos, samples, synths etc. What about the compositional aspects of his work? It's rarely brought up. So I bring it up. Not a crime right?


----------



## germancomponist

If I were Hans, then I would continue to maybe read here for many days before I would comment. Totally interesting, the speculations. (Dave, forgive me my little joking!)


----------



## Dave Connor

germancomponist said:


> If I were Hans, then I would continue to read here for many days before I would comment. Totally interesting, the speculations. (Dave, forgive me my little joking!)


Hans knows where I come down on his work. It's quite deliberate on my part that I post about it now and then. It's deliberately positive since invariably very nasty unwarranted stuff gets thrown his way at near 100% of the threads he engages in. Witness his and the Spitfire guys being grilled on their new HZ Strings. And that's mild. In truth though, I think he does things in his writing that far too many miss or fail to comment on which baffles me.


----------



## Apostate

Dave Connor said:


> Hans knows where I come down on his work. It's quite deliberate on my part that I post about it now and then. It's deliberately positive since invariably very nasty unwarranted stuff gets thrown his way at near 100% of the threads he engages in. Witness his and the Spitfire guys being grilled on their new HZ Strings. And that's mild. In truth though, I think he does things in his writing that far too many miss or fail to comment on which baffles me.



Well, HZ is an Oscar winning film composer. And his influence is unmistakable in modern film scores, indubitably. So, even though he's not a favorite of mine, I have total respect for him. And I _do_ really like a couple of his scores.


----------



## germancomponist

Dave Connor said:


> Hans knows where I come down on his work. It's quite deliberate on my part that I post about it now and then. It's deliberately positive since invariably very nasty unwarranted stuff gets thrown his way at near 100% of the threads he engages in. Witness his and the Spitfire guys being grilled on their new HZ Strings. And that's mild. In truth though, I think he does things in his writing that far too many miss or fail to comment on which baffles me.


Envious people lurk everywhere. I am very sure that Hans and Spitfire know this and can easily ignore it. At least I have learned that for myself..


----------



## Cowtothesky

I thought he should have received the Golden Globe for 12 Years A Slave. That was an amazing score for an amazing film. That was the year that All is Lost (Alex Ebert) won for best score, which made no sense to me.


----------



## Dave Connor

The reason for and spirit of this thread may not be understood so I will explain:

At 8 years old I recognized that George Harrison played and sounded like my Dad's Chet Atkins records. When I saw that he played a black Gretsch Country Gentleman just like his hero, I was sure of the influence. [edit: the reference to my age isn't to suggest a particular intellect as any child could make that connection - it's to say I've been observing musical lineage a very long time.]

Keith Richards does Chuck Berry except that a few years ago I heard those dead-on Berry riffs on a 1942 Freddie Slack Big Band recording called Riffette from guitarist T-Bone Walker. A guitar player friend confirmed Chuck loved T-Bone's playing.

Same with John Williams' woodwind rushes in Star Wars from Walton's Crown Imperial March or the famous final brass cadential repetitions of the Raiders Theme from Mahler's 3rd.

More recently when HZ posted Mozart's Piano Concerto 23 on his fb page, I immediately posted one of the Bach Goldberg Variations that shows the spine tingling opening notes of the concerto's slow movement came from the earlier Bach piece (only a half step away) to which Hans replied, "I have always thought that." (or something very similar.)

Everyone can hear when Justin Timberlake is doing Michael Jackson.

When I hear something I have never heard before, I try to find it's roots. It's just what I do. Having heard tons of film music from the great practitioners and knowing how rarely classical forms are used, I was convinced that the use of non-melodic material in a clear fugal structure was a first in all of film. That begs the question whether it's ever been done in music period. I find that remarkable, particularly from a guy who's been criticized as not being in the classical line of Korngold, Morricone, Williams and others. He obviously is but honestly - is that how he's perceived? (The fact that he's a forum member is incidental to all that folks - think about it.) I have simply pointed it out and said it should be recognized as long as we are in the awards season that's supposed to do just that. The Oscars though, are also incidental to these facts. (The Dunkirk DVD is on it's way to me.)


----------



## dcoscina

I guess the real question we should ask ourselves is why is an Oscar important? For the composer, it does elevate their status and potentially expands their options as far as future projects. But for us, the spectators (obviously many of you guys work professionally in the system), why is it important to us whether Danny Elfman or John Powell or Tom Newman still have no coveted statues while Trent Reznor or Santaolalla have them? Do we need that superficial badge to validate why we enjoy a composer's music or our respect for their artistry? The answer should really be no. Look at what Goldsmith accomplished in his life and he only won a single Oscar for a film that wasn't as important to him as many others he'd been nominated for. Look at the impact Planet of the Apes had. There have been several remakes and NO ONE has approached the innovation that Jerry brought to the table. 

Alex North only won a Lifetime achievement award even though he'd penned a plethora of innovative and memorable scores like Streetcar Name Desire (first use of jazz in Hollywood I believe), Spartacus, Cleopatra, and many more. 

Herrmann won a single Oscar but is probably one of the most unique composers of the 20th century, not just in the film realm but who could stand beside the greats like Stravinsky, Bartok, etc etc. 

To put this in more relevant context, let's look Hans Zimmer. His first nom came with Rain Main. It introduced a different type of music to the film score landscape. It was organic, eclectic, and worked wonders with the film; but it didn't win. Same goes for Thelma and Louise. Would that film be as good without HZ driving rhythms, his atmospheric synth textures that matched the desert vistas, or the somber blues guitar theme that punctuated the cruel and unjust world the protagonists were immersed in? I think not. There are countless other scores by Mr Zimmer that have influenced and affected an entire generation of filmgoers, music fans and the general population. At one of my day jobs, I mentioned a movie score I liked and the person I worked with said, "was it Hans Zimmer?" To produce a body of work that not only resonates with those who themselves know the field well but to the average listener/movie fan, that's something else. It transcends the function of film composer and elevates them to a status that is far more profound, and far more impactful than a statue of a nude golden dude.


----------



## Vischebaste

Dave Connor said:


> When I hear something I have never heard before, I try to find it's roots. It's just what I do.



What, even this?


----------



## blougui

@dcoscina : well said. Couldn't agree more.


----------



## dgburns

AR said:


> Do I listen to scores seperately? Nope (well, nowadays). Do I watch many movies? Yes. So, whats the point? If I hear something good in a movie my ears get the attention anyways. No need to listen to the entire score. For example, I was watching Jigsaw the other day. And I have to congratulate Charlie Clouser for establishing another great score that works well with the picture.



I was answering some possible reasons why John Powell MAY not want to listen to scores.

As for me personally, as a composer, I DO listen to scores. I find it interesting, especially stuff that is not orchestral for some reason. Not so much to try and glean anything, more to just listen to what others are doing. I don’t think it’s a bad thing, nor do I feel I get influenced too much- I’m too ingrained in my own set of bad habits and muscle memory! lol


----------



## Ashermusic

Don't get me wrong, I think listening to film scores away from the film is fine to enjoy or not enjoy it, decide if it is good as music or not so good as music. Just don't then say "This is a great score" or "this is not a great score" until you see the film because until you do, you don't know. It's primary raison d'etre is to serve the picture.

Years ago there was a jazz player who got hired to score films a lot name Gil Melle, who has passed on. He was a wonderful musician and if you listened to the scores as music, you would think he was one of the great film composers. But for me, when I saw the films, the music almost never worked that well. OTOH, I have seen a number of films where on its own the music was unimpressive but exactly what the film needed.

Obviously, when a composer can accomplish both it is special but not every film (or every director) allows that to happen.


----------



## Apostate

Ashermusic said:


> Don't get me wrong, I think listening to film scores away from the film is fine to enjoy or not enjoy it, decide if it is good as music or not so good as music. Just don't then say "This is a great score" or "this is not a great score" until you see the film because until you do, you don't know. It's primary raison d'etre is to serve the picture.



I think I get it. I heard Rozsa's Ben-Hur before I saw the movie, and I practically worshipped the music. Then I saw the movie and loved both it and the _score_.

Let me know if I'm off.


----------



## Ashermusic

Apostate said:


> I think I get it. I heard Rozsa's Ben-Hur before I saw the movie, and I practically worshipped the music. Then I saw the movie and loved both it and the _score_.
> 
> Let me know if I'm off.



History long ago made its judgment that you are right on both counts.


----------



## dcoscina

Ashermusic said:


> Don't get me wrong, I think listening to film scores away from the film is fine to enjoy or not enjoy it, decide if it is good as music or not so good as music. Just don't then say "This is a great score" or "this is not a great score" until you see the film because until you do, you don't know. It's primary raison d'etre is to serve the picture.
> 
> Years ago there was a jazz player who got hired to score films a lot name Gil Melle, who has passed on. He was a wonderful musician and if you listened to the scores as music, you would think he was one of the great film composers. But for me, when I saw the films, the music almost never worked that well. OTOH, I have seen a number of films where on its own the music was unimpressive but exactly what the film needed.
> 
> Obviously, when a composer can accomplish both it is special but not every film (or every director) allows that to happen.


I love what Melle did with Night Stalker. I think a lot of his scoring choices were a sign of the times in the 70s. Jay, what did you think of Jerry Fielding as a composer? I found him to be of the same ideology which was not necessarily follow the drama as much as providing some counter to it through the music. North did the same with some of his scores too, like Dragonslayer. Maybe it's a jazz thing.....


----------



## Apostate

dcoscina said:


> North did the same with some of his scores too, like Dragonslayer. Maybe it's a jazz thing.....



Alex North was a master who could seemingly write anything!


----------



## Dave Connor

Korngold thought Rosza was the best ever in film. Goldsmith adored Alex North. Mancini was baffled by Goldsmith's genius. The brilliant Fielding had a classic Director/Composer relationship with one of the premier filmmakers of his day Sam Peckinpah. Clint Eastwood used him more than once. Don Siegal and Irwin Allen also brought him on board. He's an important composer to say the least. I love the guy's work.

Nothing wrong of course in listening to _any_ music that one fancies. The evaluation of how a score serves the picture is one thing and then there is the music evaluated as music only. The common thread of those above is the quality of the music itself. The fact that they were all excellent writers to picture is what elevates them as _film composers_. My bit here about Hans Zimmer is exactly because he shares that distinction.


----------



## Apostate

Dave Connor said:


> Korngold thought Rosza was the best ever in film. Goldsmith adored Alex North. Mancini was baffled by Goldsmith's genius. .



Then they all had very good taste! Of course, none of those men were exactly a joke when it came to film scoring, either.

Korngold, Rozsa, and Herrmann were very conscious of succeeding in the concert music realm as well as film. Herrmann's early symphony and Moby Dick are about as Art music as you can get, and some feel his Vertigo on its own might have been the best American symphony of the 20th century (which is saying one hell of a lot).


----------



## Apostate

iirc, HZ was big into Morricone, Williams, old Carpenter.


----------



## Ashermusic

Dave Connor said:


> Korngold thought Rosza was the best ever in film. Goldsmith adored Alex North. Mancini was baffled by Goldsmith's genius. The brilliant Fielding had a classic Director/Composer relationship with one of the premier filmmakers of his day Sam Peckinpah. Clint Eastwood used him more than once. Don Siegal and Irwin Allen also brought him on board. He's an important composer to say the least. I love the guy's work.
> 
> Nothing wrong of course in listening to _any_ music that one fancies. The evaluation of how a score serves the picture is one thing and then there is the music evaluated as music only. The common thread of those above is the quality of the music itself. The fact that they were all excellent writers to picture is what elevates them as _film composers_. My bit here about Hans Zimmer is exactly because he shares that distinction.



+1, Dave.


----------



## dcoscina

Apostate said:


> Then they all had very good taste! Of course, none of those men were exactly a joke when it came to film scoring, either.
> 
> Korngold, Rozsa, and Herrmann were very conscious of succeeding in the concert music realm as well as film. Herrmann's early symphony and Moby Dick are about as Art music as you can get, and some feel his Vertigo on its own might have been the best American symphony of the 20th century (which is saying one hell of a lot).


I wish there was more of Herrmann's concert work recorded


----------



## Apostate

dcoscina said:


> I wish there was more of Herrmann's concert work recorded


 
You're preaching to the choir, my friend! Bafflingly, I don't think even one of those concert and film scores are available in regular, print books (at least not in full). That's just plain ignorant...Herrmann, Williams, Morricone, Goldsmith, Shore, Korngold, Rozsa, the Newmans...all great composers of the 20th century. Right up there with the other greats since Wagner and Brahms like Scriabin, Bruckner, Schoenberg.

All my opinion, but people who know music know that real deal when it comes to film composers. Someday in the future the rest of the world will too, I'm sure.


----------



## Guy Bacos

I'll just though in my Canadian 2 pennies here. I think you could love or hate HZ style, but one thing is for sure, he is one of the most effective film composer ever.


----------



## Apostate

Guy Bacos said:


> I'll just though in my Canadian 2 pennies here. I think you could love or hate HZ style, but one thing is for sure, he is one of the most effective film composer ever.



He might be the most influential this century, as much as the old school folks rail against it.

I put only Morricone and Williams above him in film music today, and Hans is younger...which means hopefully we'll get tons more music out of him


----------



## dcoscina

Apostate said:


> He might be the most influential this century, as much as the old school folks rail against it.
> 
> I put only Morricone and Williams above him in film music today, and Hans is younger...which means hopefully we'll get tons more music out of him



I adore Williams but let’s face it: HZ is THE most influential composer of the 21st century Hans down. Sorry for the pun but I’m sincere about this. Williams style of music is not what I hear most directors are after except for SW.


----------



## Kyle Preston

dcoscina said:


> Sorry for the pun



But are you?


----------



## Apostate

dcoscina said:


> I adore Williams but let’s face it: HZ is THE most influential composer of the 21st century Hans down. Sorry for the pun but I’m sincere about this. Williams style of music is not what I hear most directors are after except for SW.



I'm really starting to agree with you except for the Williams thing. Williams is capable of so much more...capable of more than anyone else besides Morricone. I'd bet you already know that, Williams has a very large repertoire, much of it has nothing to do with Star Wars.

But as I mentioned, I think you know most if not all of that. I almost feel like you wanted me to say something like that.


----------



## Kony

I can see this thread turning into a "who's the best composer or most influential etc" thread again.... zzzzzzzzz

It's all subjective people - some of you prefer HZ, some prefer JW, some prefer EM etc etc. There is no objective yardstick to say which is "the best".... 

I actually think Mozart was the greatest classical composer, others will disagree - it's just "so what"?

Yeah, I know, why am I reading this thread then? I dunno, I was watching to see when someone would post a rebuttal to the thread title along the lines of something like this:


----------



## Apostate

It isn't all subjective...allow me please to save you from being looked down upon by people who know a lot about music. The overwhelming majority of music historians and graduates and anyone who has studied the music of the past four centuries agree that not too much outrageously great in music composition has happened in Occidental music since Beethoven's late era works.

Just please be warned with friendly intentions:if you start using that ridiculous everything's subjective garbage you get lumped with people who compare Madonna to Mahler and sorry...that's an offense that immediately brands a person as not knowing much about music. No offense or disrespect intended. Ask your local music professor.


----------



## Kony

Apostate said:


> allow me please to save you from being looked down upon by people who know a lot about music


Thank you! 


Apostate said:


> It isn't all subjective


Ah, sweet irony....


----------



## South Thames

Apostate said:


> The overwhelming majority of music historians and graduates and anyone who has studied the music of the past four centuries agree that not too much outrageously great in music composition has happened in Occidental music since Beethoven's late era works



I'm as much in favour of getting things in proportion as the next music school graduate (hence my initial intervention on this thread, proclaiming the genius revolutionary qualities of a fugue that apparently still eludes the poster), but this seems a tad dismissive, even for me. It's quite fashionable in the conservative precincts of academia to be dismissive of late 20th century composition, but to exclude most of the romantic era and the early 20th century is unusually rash I would say.


----------



## Dave Connor

To bring clarity to the point of this thread: The specifics my OP refer to a fugal structure that strikes one the same as _listening to a Bach fugue in full flight_ (or perhaps closer Mozart's famous Jupiter finale where each voice is a different motive.) Also that if something like this has been done before by anyone _it could not have been done better._ Some of the experts here have speculated this has been done countless times - yet they offer not even one example. So we may speculate that they are not historians or lawyers by profession with not threadbare proof of their assertions, but none at all. My lack of supplying the specific example initially is because I thought a dozen people would have taken note of it as I did. I'll give the timing of it soon, when I have time to watch the DVD.

If the first Jazz score is important to note then perhaps this occurrence within a film is. Keep in mind that if this has been done before even _outside of film,_ I said that HZ did it _as well as can be done_. Equal or surpassing achievement in a Western art form within the context of a Hollywood film strikes me as important. My point in initiating the thread is that it should be _recognized_. Hardly an outrageous, superfluous observation and suggestion. It certainly augers against the notion that HZ is a sort of limited composer. Not when he's bursting out at seams heretofore ignored in film.


----------



## Apostate

South Thames said:


> this seems a tad dismissive, even for me.



Welcome to the world of scholars. Saying that Beethoven's late works were the last outrageously great Occidental music has been de rigueur in those circles since the late 19th century (and let's keep in mind, Wagner, Brahms, and Bruckner were around then, definite heavyweights).

I think what scholars mean is depth of composition (the entirety of Symphony 9 is from that angle one of the Wonders of the World) as well as the pushing-the-harmonic-and-sonata-envelope endeavors of the late string quartets and sonatas. The slow mvt. of the Hammerklavier, for instance, is one of the most idiosyncratic, uniquely expressive pieces in music history.

Btw there's zero shame in acknowledging those works as being the high bar in the Occident, and I seriously doubt anyone who graduated in music would contend that.

However, I personally happen to love a LOT of music since then, and I'm a graduate.

I do most strongly recommend giving all of the above works a headphone listen...or four; you stand to gain a ton of knowledge, plus understand a whole lot better the two-centuries worth of gushing praise.

I'm a nobody, but I would never lead you astray, especially on that point.


----------



## NoamL

Apostate said:


> It isn't all subjective...*allow me please to save you from being looked down upon by people who know a lot about music.* The overwhelming majority of music historians and graduates and anyone who has studied the music of the past four centuries agree that not too much outrageously great in music composition has happened in Occidental music since Beethoven's late era works.


----------



## Kyle Preston

^ @NoamL hits the nail on the head



Apostate said:


> if you start using that ridiculous everything's subjective garbage you get lumped with people who compare Madonna to Mahler and sorry...that's an offense that immediately brands a person as not knowing much about music.



(Forgive the off-topic rant)

I usually ignore these kinds of _ivory-tower-regurgitate-the-opinions-of-my-professor_ comments, but you seem like you’re coming from a good place.

Most listeners don’t care about the opinions of music academics. Yet they intuitively understand that the music they like follows guidelines, not rules. And most professors don’t teach guidelines, they teach rules. God they love their rules. Rules that were relevant to some context that is alien to modern culture. Rules established by geniuses like Mozart and Beethoven. Rules established _after_ their beautiful minds explored and poked and prodded the nature of music itself, not _before_.

Of course Mahler is more complex than Madonna. But they’re different musical languages. Apples and oranges. Saying Mahler is _better_ is like saying German is _better_ than English. What does that even mean?

I want to help preserve the beauty of classical music. And this oft-repeated snobbery from academia and its students is why no one cares about the opinions of a few musical elitists. And it makes it harder to convince people to give a shit about classical music.

(back to the topic)

Really wanted to see Jonny Greenwood take home an Oscar, that score is hauntingly-alluring. Also, recommended reading:

@JohnG's brilliant post on the ridiculous HZ vs JW debate.


----------



## Apostate

We don't need to defend any of these composers and works...they're all great and will live for centuries after we're done. And again, don't ask me, ask any professor of music, or anyone who's taken the time to intensively study the composers since the 17th century.

Not too much more for me to say, and I'm sorry I derailed the thread this long for something everyone should know as fact, anyway (rebel against it all you want, it will just keep you from learning and make you look silly).

Put it this way, if you want to have the fullest experience of what elite composition is, you can't go wrong with the mid to late era of Beethoven, baby! I shouldn't have to tell anyone that. Do yourself a favor and become more informed on the subject. Out.


----------



## South Thames

Apostate said:


> Not much more for me to say, and I'm sorry I derailed the thread this long for something everyone should know as fact, anyway (rebel against it all you want, it will just keep you from learning).



Oh, please. It was your comparative dismissal of everything after, not your assertion of their importance, that garnered a sceptical response. I spent about six years in academia -- playing pointless games of top trumps with the Big Boys of the Western canon was not something most professors were interested in doing.


----------



## Dave Connor

If you've ever heard directors discussing other directors work, you will hear the phrase, _I've never seen that before. _It's one of the highest compliments that can be paid a director (i.e. acknowledging the first time this or that shot or technique was ever used in a film.) Simply because it's so difficult to do after over a hundred years of film making. Often times it's something just a few seconds long such as Charles Laughton's shot of deceased Shelly Winters submerged in water with her hair floating beautifully in the film, Night Of The Hunter (copied a million times now.) Or Spielberg's dolly/zoom opposites when Roy Scheider first sees the boy on the raft attacked in Jaws (which may have been done prior but done wonderfully here.) Or even just the first use of a certain lens. It can be just a few seconds - a moment in a film.

Celebrating artistic firsts is the celebrating of the art itself and it's practitioners. If you would like the definition of _harmless_ - it's observations such as this. It's just fun and interesting to those of a certain ilk; gets done all day long and will continue to be.


----------



## South Thames

Dave Connor said:


> Or Spielberg's dolly/zoom opposites when Roy Scheider first sees the boy on the raft attacked in Jaws



That one was, famously, cribbed from Hitchcock in a similarly effective shot from Vertigo. 

There's generally a lot of boosterism in film music appreciation - your first post read like that to me and I do think it's not necessarily harmless, in that it can deprive people of proper perspective. Of course, nothing wrong with being enthusiastic about people's work -- but you were making rather lofty claims which you've yet substantiate with the example. I don't think there's anything more to say whilst the example remains unposted.


----------



## Kyle Preston

Apostate said:


> (rebel against it all you want, it will just keep you from learning and make you look silly)





> Do yourself a favor and become more informed on the subject. Out.




Enjoy your echo chamber @Apostate.

Damnit... I remember when I liked the phrase _echo chamber_. Politics ruins everything.


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> There's generally a lot of boosterism in film music appreciation - your first post read like that to me and I do think it's not necessarily harmless, in that it can deprive people of proper perspective.


 I thought I was the one assigning overly important perspective on the subject? _Harmful_? _...deprive people of a proper perspective_? I have offered in the main, a statistically measurable occurrence in film - a precedence: The first fugue structure ever in film that is void of the tonal system. Precedent has always been a prime consideration in measuring the growth or development of a given science or study. Which means that a _first-use_ of something in a given field is historically notable. Is it important that the first use of the Contrabassoon is in Beethoven's 5th? Look it up. Is it an unhinged statement or a _harmful improper perspective_ to sight a _first-use_ such as the one I have here? We're not talking about my gushing about it. We're talking about whether it's ever been done in a film - a single time. A yes or no question that is statistical in nature not emotionally subjective. People will dispute the importance of it the same as they would any similar occurrence. It's not _harmful_ that I find it important. Not a distortion of the occurrence itself.



South Thames said:


> ... you were making rather lofty claims...


See my lofty claim above - it is scientific in nature and entirely objective. Also consider that if you wish to jettison precedence as a primary ingredient in scientific inquiry, that you yourself are attempting to set a NEW precedence in the evaluation of all recorded human history. (There, I defy anyone to over-blow the importance of this thread/subject more than I just did.)


South Thames said:


> ...which you've yet substantiate with the example.


 Said the guy who dismissively cited numerous examples of works he has never heard to correct the record regarding another work he's never heard.


----------



## South Thames

> It is scientific in nature and entirely objective.



Really?



> The ramifications of such an achievement require almost as many planes of analysis as there are voices in this fugue.





> If something like a pure-sound fugue structure has ever been done by anyone it couldn't have been done better.





> Most importantly it thrusts film-making and film-music forward into the future with an integration of the two we have never seen or heard heretofore





> Where's the Oscar for best synthesizer programming? Hans wins that easily. So give him one Oscar because he deserves two or three awards for the Dunkirk score.



Yup, nothing but cool, dispassionate, level-headed analysis here.


----------



## Apostate

Kyle Preston said:


> Enjoy your echo chamber @Apostate.
> 
> Damnit... I remember when I liked the phrase _echo chamber_. Politics ruins everything.



Who gives a shit?


----------



## D Halgren

Apostate said:


> Who gives a shit?


Wow, tactful.


----------



## Kony

Apostate said:


> I'm a graduate


Are you? Where did you graduate from? I only ask as you're not really adopting an approach I'd expect a well-informed music graduate to be taking - ie enlightened, respectful debate. You make some subjective claims based on aesthetic values but assert these subjective claims to be objective empirical facts, and yet you offer no data to support these "facts" other than to say "most academics agree" and "ask your local professor" etc. 

It's also odd that you're pushing a Beethoven agenda when the thread hasn't got anything to do with Beethoven. Was it something to do with Dave Connor's avatar...? 



Apostate said:


> Who gives a shit?



I can see you've only been a member here for a month: did you only just come across this forum recently, and was this the level of "academically" inspired debate you were hoping for by making comments like that? 

This thread is about soundtrack discussion in general, and HZ in particular. I refer back to my earlier post where I said the "best" composer is a matter of personal subjective taste.


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> Yup, nothing but cool, dispassionate, level-headed analysis here.


Let me help. In my post immediately prior to yours (quoted above) I removed every subjective point of analysis (by me or anyone else) and left a simple yes or no question. The very cool, dispassion you claim you want, I applied _in toto_ to the subject. You dodged it completely. Why? I'm not surprised since you seem to consider _level-headed_ reasoning as presenting music examples [which you have never heard] as supporting facts in a discussion about... [music which you have never heard.] Consider how disqualifying that is to your case; how annoying it is to even the somewhat objective who know how to make their case with a morsel or two of comparative examples. _Cool, dispassionate, level-headed analysis_ does your case in - not mine.


----------



## South Thames

Dave Connor said:


> In my post immediately prior to yours (quoted above) I removed every subjective point of analysis (by me or anyone else) and left a simple yes or no question



No, you made a bunch of gushy, hyperbolic claims to start this thread, as I quoted above, and that is what I responded to, much to your chagrin.

In your post above you attempted to focus on precedence:



> I have offered in the main, a statistically measurable occurrence in film



since that's about the only one of your gushy claims that could be said to have an objective element to it, though you get even that totally out of proportion. But I think it's fair to say at this point you haven't convinced anyone it really is a fugue at all -- thus failing to provide evidence that it even is what you say it is, much less that it's a first.

You've written numerous posts defending your original post. The time would have been far better spent_ locating the example,_ which you keep telling us you don't have time to do.


----------



## Living Fossil

May it be that this thread got out of hand?

It seems there is more ad-hominem argumentation here as a discussion about the (still not appointed) piece of music in question.

The interesting thing in a fugue (among lots of other aspects) is the interaction of the different voices; since through there interaction they create the way the fugue goes on. It's like a discussion where the participants pay attention to what the other ones say and in relation to this change their further statements.

In short: this discussion seems not to work like a fugue...
I guess if the piece of music which Dave mentioned in the first place can't be located, it has no sense to continue this thread.
Either it's possible to discuss a specific cue, or not.
(personally i'd like to hear a cue where different layers of sound interact in a complex way....but without hearing a piece of music it's pointless to speak about it....)


----------



## Dr Belasco

How can anything to do with Oscars get out of hand? Oscars are one of the most fatuous conversations anyone could have. You might as well watch Crufts.


----------



## PaulBrimstone

Maybe it's time to just fugue-edaboutit.


----------



## vicontrolu

Hey guys.. I don't have the time to go through the whole thread. Has the OP found the tune? Just curious about it


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> No, you made a bunch of gushy, hyperbolic claims to start this thread... and that is what I responded to...


 With insults, a smug, superior attitude and phantom musical references in an argument void of even suggesting a _single_ composer who _might_ have done something similar to [something you've never heard.] Oh and you aren't going to provide a single recording to support your claims of _any number_ of examples of the form I describe. That's not a weak position - that's nothing - why say anything oh vigorous scholar? 

You hurl insults with confidence but offer absolutely nothing to suggest you know what you're talking about. All you can do at this point is demand proof while at the same time refusing to provide any. Now that's debating with real insight and integrity.


----------



## Dave Connor

vicontrolu said:


> Hey guys.. I don't have the time to go through the whole thread. Has the OP found the tune? Just curious about it


I had to order the DVD which I did and it has arrived. I haven't had time to watch the film and I sincerely hoped others would hunt it down if they were that curious. I'm not going to scroll and find it. I'm going to watch the film and enjoy it - just been to busy to do that but I will.


----------



## NoamL

PaulBrimstone said:


> Maybe it's time to just fugue-edaboutit.



This thread just keeps going rondo round... and some-a these hostile posts really make me wonder what's sonata with you people!


----------



## South Thames

> With insults, a smug, superior attitude and phantom musical references in an argument void of even suggesting a _single_ composer who _might_have done something similar to [something you've never heard.] Oh and you aren't going to provide a single recording to support your claims of _any number_ of examples of the form I describe. That's not a weak position - that's nothing - why say anything oh vigorous scholar?



I'm not the only person on this thread to note that this really doesn't seem like a particularly revolutionary idea, given all the collegiate stuff done with electronic music throughout the years, but I am quite prepared to concede (and did so earlier) that I've no interest in going to the effort of proving the point, since the vast majority of such music is unpublished and obscure (for good reason), and I wouldn't know where to start.

The same cannot be said for your failure to put up -- it's quite clear where you should start. It appears Zimmer was sufficiently modest not to put this earth-shattering musical accomplishment on the soundtrack album, and that despite managing to identify it as a fugue in the the theatre under copious SFX you apparently have no idea when in the film it occurred.

So, if you ever manage to find the fugue, and if it is indeed a fugue, and not some kind of thing that might fancifully be called a fugue by an excitable Zimmer groupie, I will concede that, as far I can prove, it is indeed a first. I won't agree with you about its significance and its far-reaching ramifications, since I think such a thing would have virtually none. 

But I will concede the objective point. Can't say fairer than that.


----------



## Dave Connor

For those who may have difficulty in discerning the obvious:

My own quote: _The ramifications of such an achievement require almost as many planes of analysis as there are voices in this fugue. 
_
Here's the math on {say} four voices:_
_
Four separate motives which (as in any polyphonic texture) can each be analyzed as to length, character, arc, relationship to each other and so on. (On youtube you will find each motive given a different color on Mozart's 41st., so common is this type of analysis.)

Four separate sound constructions; their sonic characteristics and makeup: are they synthesized, noise/sample generated, mechanical sounding, organic sounding, a combination? (or whatever other analysis is applied to non-pitched concrete sounds and their behavior.) This type of analysis is _extraordinary_ in the scientific sense of the word as it would not apply to a tonal fugue and in fact, _adds another plane of analysis_ for each motive. 

Four separate analysis, not as to the character of the sounds but the programing which created them. In Mozart you simply say that he gave a certain motive to the flutes or that he _orchestrated motive S1_ in this or that way. With HZ, you have the science behind the creation of each and every motive. Another _four planes of analysis_. If you question this consider it must be true as he had to undergo an analytical process in discovering, experimenting with, and creating the sounds he desired.

That's twelve planes of analysis right on the surface. Keep in mind, no one is going to analyze the sound characteristics of the oboe (or other instrument) each and every time it's used, let alone analyze how to build one. There are other planes nearly as obvious but my gushing was about the science behind this rare achievement.


----------



## Vischebaste

Dave Connor said:


> That's twelve planes of analysis right on the surface. Keep in mind, no one is going to analyze the sound characteristics of the oboe (or other instrument) each and every time it's used, let alone analyze how to build one.



I've just done a quick test on the sound characteristics of the oboe and on that basis am happy to give you the go-ahead to create the thirteenth plane of analysis.


----------



## cucio

In this age and era of Google and YouTube, it is so easy to let music speak for itself! But not many people is doing it, which makes me wonder.

Anyway, here's a non-pitch-based fugue from 1941 by Lou Harrison:



And with that, I think I am quietly fuguing myself from this thread because, at this point, Poe's Law seems to be kicking in and I don't know anymore if people are talking seriously or it's all facetious.


----------



## Dave Connor

cucio said:


> In this age and era of Google and YouTube, it is so easy to let music speak for itself! But not many people is doing it, which makes me wonder.
> Anyway, here's a non-pitch-based fugue from 1941 by Lou Harrison.


Very good! I appreciate that - I really do. When you hear that does it put you in mind of Bach? It didn’t me at all. I didn’t find it particularly interesting and I must admit I turned it off. It’s quite a distance from HZ’s invention but I’ll listen to it again to see if get’s to that feeling.


----------



## dcoscina

Hey Dave,

I think there's nothing wrong at all for being passionate about a composer's music. It's a pity that we cannot articulate our enthusiasm for something that really affects us without being labelled as a sycophant or "fanboy". I'm sure you would be lauding HZ Dunkirk to the same extent even if he did not frequent this forum. I appreciate your thoughts and perspective on this as it's given me food for thought.

I have also enjoyed reading POVs from other members' responses as well in addition to all of the side routes this thread has taken.


----------



## Ashermusic

I have not seen "Dunkirk" yet and will not listen to the score until I have.

Once I have, if it works well with the film, as I fully expect it will do, I will decide on how well I think it works with the film. Then I may or may not listen to the score alone and assess it just as music.

But I know Dave Connor and how much he knows, and if he tells me it is extraordinary, my guess is that I am probably going to find it to be extraordinary.


----------



## Parsifal666

I didn't like the movie or score (and I'm a definite fan of both Nolan and Zimmer). But I can see where elements of it might polarize folks' opinions. No disrespect meant to fans, I just expect a certain level of quality from those two modern day masters.


----------



## dcoscina

Ashermusic said:


> I have not seen "Dunkirk" yet and will not listen to the score until I have.
> 
> Once I have, if it works well with the film, as I fully expect it will do, I will decide on how well I think it works with the film. Then I may or may not listen to the score alone and assess it just as music.
> 
> But I know Dave Connor and how much he knows, and if he tells me it is extraordinary, my guess is that I am probably going to find it to be extraordinary.


Well said.


----------



## Dave Connor

Well, I watched the movie last night. Quite a film! Chris Nolan is such an unusual story teller and visual artist. The definition of an intelligent film maker: incredibly considerate and thoughtful about his subject and the techniques he will need to best tell his story (a good description of his favorite composer.) Half the planet turns out to see his films it seems. Highly experimental films that make serious demands on his audience. Is he successful? He's the definition of _success_ too_._

The film is so experimental in nature, I think he made his composer's job extremely challenging: scoring the visuals (which can be rather disparate) and tying together the three main viewpoints and different timelines. Much of HZ's score is psychological and even haunting. (With nearly half a million people being haunted by death, the score puts you in that frame of mine.) It's not a sentimental film or score. The choices in the score and their execution by the composer are new, fresh and brilliant to these ears.

I will say that (as I pointed out in my initial post right after seeing it at the theater), Hans helps his director enormously. In the oil sequence (an action sequence) some of the visuals tend toward the static with various shots of soldiers swimming in the water. Hans blows it up to the impending crisis that it is with his score. It's masterfully done and a clinic in scoring film. HZ takes over the film here essentially (because he must) and presents the story's drama and intensity as it is, even if the visuals seem to lack some of that information. Nolan knows exactly what he has in Hans Zimmer. So do millions of people throughout the world if not everyone here at v.i. The Oil cue itself has some firsts I have never heard from any composer going back to chants.

(fugue time stamp some time today)


----------



## Dave Connor

dcoscina said:


> Hey Dave,
> 
> I think there's nothing wrong at all for being passionate about a composer's music. It's a pity that we cannot articulate our enthusiasm for something that really affects us without being labelled as a sycophant or "fanboy". I'm sure you would be lauding HZ Dunkirk to the same extent even if he did not frequent this forum. I appreciate your thoughts and perspective on this as it's given me food for thought.I have also enjoyed reading POVs from other members' responses as well in addition to all of the side routes this thread has taken.


I agree Dave. It's pretty dumb to assign childish motives to a professional musician talking or even gushing about another one. I've talked about being at composer legends Post/Carpenter sessions with over 50 of the best orchestral and rhythm players in LA back during Magnum P.I. days (ever since those days in the 80's.) The story I tell is that out of all those 50 players, I was glued to bass player Lee Sklar almost to the point of excluding the others in awareness. His time, sound, feel and sight-reading had me suspended in thought. How does a bass player of all people tower above a group of world class players like that? I've lost count of the times HZ has blown me away in similar fashion. 
Thanks btw.


----------



## JohnG

There are several composers whose work seems to be ignored, even snubbed, by the academy. HZ is one, but James Newton Howard and Thomas Newmann are two others.

Hans seems to me a bit in the position of Ennio Morricone. Like Mr. Z, during his working life, Mr. Morricone also managed to be ubiquitous in actual, real-life films that people enjoyed, even loved. His music also was singled out as particularly conspicuous in his films (in a good way!) and he yet had to wait until the crack of doom, nearly, for an actual win at Oscar. If IMDB is accurate, he was nominated five times, beginning in 1979 and only in 2007 did he get a statuette, an honorary one. He also won for The Hateful Eight in 2016, FWIW.

How about The Mission? Often cited as one of the greatest film scores ever?

Whether you like the music, are a fanboy, or don't care for it that much, it does seem to me that HZ gets pigeon-holed into "that action stuff," which I assume drives him mad for at least two reasons. First, that's a long way from being the only kind of music he writes, and second, it's INCREDIBLY hard to write good action / adventure music.

Kung Fu Panda is absolutely hilarious, just to take one non-Marvel-type example, but there are plenty of others -- The Holiday and As Good as it Gets being two I can think of that are nothing like what people seem to associate with him. Moreover, As Good as it Gets also is a very thoughtful movie, arguably excellent at portraying the weird contradictions of love and attraction, the strange, nearly mentally ill people we all have met in life, and the possibility of grace from unlikely sources.

And sure, he's written a lot of action music, some of which is for films with less to say than, for example, As Good as it Gets. But those films are unimaginably hard to handle. First of all, there is often over 90 minutes of music. Second, everyone in Los Angeles / the World has an opinion to "contribute" to the score, and third, they re-edit and re-think the approach to the entire movie until approximately the hour before it hits the theatres.

But no. Everyone seems to think of "blam blam" or something.

Maybe JNH has the same issue? King Kong may not be an art film but there are passages in that score that remind me of the beauty of Tristan & Isolde (the Wagner one) and other transcendent music. Where are _his_ Oscars? Is he ignored because he scored popcorn movies? The scores for Atlantis, Peter Pan, Dave, Michael Clayton -- genius, in my opinion. Let's not forget his part of The Dark Knight series, a ground-breaking marriage of HZ and JNH.

And let's not start with Thomas Newmann either. Little Women, The Good German, The Road to Perdition -- also genius. Where are the Oscars?

So HZ is not alone. Yes, media composers' music is shackled to sometimes-forgettable movies, but that doesn't salve the irritation some of these guys surely must feel at being passed over.


----------



## germancomponist

Hans is a German ...., maybe this has something to do with all the rest? The cool thing is that he himself and millions of other people know how good he is! Not only very good: He is a genius!
Huh..., Albert Einstein also was a German .... .


----------



## Parsifal666

germancomponist said:


> Hans is a German ...., maybe this has something to do with all the rest? The cool thing is that he himself and millions of other people know how good he is! Not only very good: He is a genius!
> Huh..., Albert Einstein also was a German .... .



And Mozart, Haydn, the Bachs, Mahler, Schoenberg, Beethoven, Brahms...we could go on for quite awhile here.

It's weird to me how Thomas Newman gets snubbed...I mean he's not just great, but also a legacy (his dad Alfred won 9 Oscars and...dude, I'm not making this up) *45 NOMINATIONS!!!!
*
Morricone got screwed on *Days of Heaven* too.


----------



## JohnG

I don't think it has a thing to do with nationality. JNH and TN are both American and they deserve far more recognition. Not to mention Randy Newman (A Bug's Life -- awesome; and Toy Story), and David N. too, arguably. Mr. Desplat has won, and he's not American either.

Maybe it's the idea that music has to be "brainy" to deserve an award? Kind of annoying, as I write a lot of "blam blam" myself.

Plus there are Austrians in there @Parsifal666. Just to nitpick.


----------



## Dave Connor

_The question may well be raised whether there is such a thing as the "fugue form" and whether it would not be more proper to speak more of a "fugal procedure" rather than "fugal form." _Harvard Dictionary of Music.

In the thread I posted hours after seeing Dunkirk I sighted two _Miracles_ in the film:
_
There's a film-scoring miracle early on in the film that I haven't seen mentioned yet. Perhaps that's because it's so masterfully done but anyone working in film certainly should notice it. The cue that begins with two guys starting to run with a stretcher and then gives way to a series of long and lengthy shots of numerous soldiers standing in line doing absolutely nothing..._ Watching the film last night for the first time since that post shows I had that exactly right. It was a simple observation exactly as the second _Miracle_. Not a big deal.
_
Another miracle, was the multi layered textures that had more in common with Bach than Omnisphere. In one, there were at least four parts going; each it's own motive and sound though no actual notes or harmony. On the bottom-right a very hip, grooving lick; then going up (and placed left or right) several other individual motives each in their own frequency space (brilliantly mixed by Alan Meyerson.) _It may be that I was referring to 56:24 because of the groove figure in the low voice on the right. But that seems earlier than I recall it occurring (plus the groove happens earlier and later than this.) As I mentioned earlier, in an IMAX theater everything was wonderfully delineated and clear as a bell (which is why I mentioned the great mix by Meyerson.) It just shouted Bach to me and just as I took note of the first miracle it is a virtual impossibility that I would post about the second in error which as I say - I had never heard the likes of. Maybe it is later in the film but my TV/Computer speakers setup (and my absorption in the film) may not have allowed me to identify it as well as I did in the theater.

To the above I can only say how little I care if anyone has my same take on things. Also I do apologize to Hans if he's indeed followed along and had to suffer through what became a rather silly, overwrought, overthought, topic examination. Once you try and explain something that you've experienced in a few seconds and didn't think about or analyze for more than another few seconds, things go south in a hurry. I took note of a brilliant musical construct and identified it with the most closely related musical form or procedure I could and having not been aware of (and still not) anything close to it being done ever in any context - assigned an importance to it. The film is important; the composer is important and the bold innovations contained therein just may be important. Please join me in not losing any sleep over that.


----------



## South Thames

JohnG said:


> I don't think it has a thing to do with nationality. JNH and TN are both American and they deserve far more recognition. Not to mention Randy Newman (A Bug's Life -- awesome; and Toy Story), and David N. too, arguably. Mr. Desplat has won, and he's not American either.
> 
> Maybe it's the idea that music has to be "brainy" to deserve an award? Kind of annoying, as I write a lot of "blam blam" myself.
> 
> Plus there are Austrians in there @Parsifal666. Just to nitpick.



There's no sense to be made of it, if you take the view that the composers and scores have much to do with it. 

If, on the other hand, you think that the academy membership tends to use the music awards to 'spread the acclaim' across the usual handful of widely-nominated Oscar-bait films, it tends to make much more sense. If you make a great score for a pic that isn't otherwise Oscar-bait, although the music branch may give you a nomination, the chances of walking away with the actual award are very small.


----------



## Parsifal666

JohnG said:


> Plus there are Austrians in there @Parsifal666. Just to nitpick.



You knew what I meant my friend 

Same language, right next door to Germany. And at times much of the area WAS Germany, if I'm not mistaken.

But I'm leaving myself open for more nits and picks lol!


----------



## Parsifal666

The Oscars (at least the most coveted awards) seem to most often go to the big moneymakers, though that's not a hard fast rule.

When I think of all the scores that were neglected (think Jerry Goldsmith too, folks) it just adds up to the Oscars being kind of a wash imo.

A bunch of big shot Hollywood volk patting each other on the back. I stopped watching after a couple of my favorite Goldsmith scores got completely overlooked.


----------



## dcoscina

Oh there's a lot of composers who have been snubbed. John Powell comes to mind. Elfman. Newman(s) as mentioned. Goldenthal finally got one for Frida but his really supreme work was from the 90s. JN Howard, well sheesh, he could have gotten it for Grand Canyon, Wyatt Earp, Unbreakable, Sixth Sense, The Village, Falling Down, Lady in the Water, really any number of films he worked on. 

That's why I take no interest in the Oscars and haven't watched since 2006 when Williams lost to Santaollala for his guitar monothematic Brokeback Mountain. It's not about how complex or how many notes, but jeez, when there's the craft there AND the music enhances the film, I just threw my arms up and like George from Seinfeld said "ok you've been great, I'm outta here". And I've been rather content with that decision. I love Powell's HTTYD and it worked just as well as Reznor's Social Network which I don't listen to and didn't think it particularly elevated the film but hey, that's just my taste.


----------



## JohnG

very true, guys. Plenty of neglect to go around!

I watched about 30 seconds this year and the "humour" was so idiotic it was embarrassing. Not even infantile or insulting (which maybe we could get behind), just awful.


----------



## Parsifal666

I think there was a time when the Oscar meant more, but it might have been after the Silver age when things got really bad. Not sure why.

Most awards things are crapola anyway. Look at some of the jokes in the Rock n Roll Hall of Fame.


----------



## D Halgren

JohnG said:


> very true, guys. Plenty of neglect to go around!
> 
> I watched about 30 seconds this year and the "humour" was so idiotic it was embarrassing. Not even infantile or insulting (which maybe we could get behind), just awful.


I agree with you there, John. It is so infuriating that they cut below the line personnel's acceptance speeches so Jimmy can serve up some lame skit or stunt. Really classy Academy.


----------



## Kyle Preston

This is just my armchair conjecture, but it seems like people associate Zimmer with "blam blam" for a few reasons:

His sound is more recognizable to the layperson, i.e. most people who see films, than say someone like Newman (any of em). Most people hear that loud _brand_ and instantly associate it with HZ, whether it’s warranted or not. My wife and I left the theatre after Dunkirk and heard a dude exclaim loudly _“that was the best fucking music I’ve ever heard!” _I’ve never heard anyone leave the theatre saying _“man, Newman is at it again with his crazy-beautiful-complex harmonic development!”_
HZ hires a lot of composers that perpetuate his _brand_ of sound (and from the interviews I’ve watched, his composers are sometimes specifically hired for that sound too). And his team scores so many blockbusters. I imagine the decline of “middle-class” movies has only added to the distribution of his blockbuster sound. He’s one of the rare composers whose work is impossible to escape.
Anyway, I don’t know that he deserves to be labeled as the "blam blam" composer, his work is so varied and I always look forward to hearing it. Especially in Nolan’s films.

But I honestly can’t believe Thomas Newman hasn’t won an Oscar yet. It’s also strange to remember that Kubrick never won an Oscar (for director) either…


----------



## Parsifal666

Kyle Preston said:


> T
> Anyway, I don’t know that he deserves to be labeled as the "blam blam" composer, his work is so varied and I always look forward to hearing it. Especially in Nolan’s films.



Let's not forget, HZ's win for the Lion King. Not much blam-blam there. Kind of hard to offer much criticism over it either. There's Rain Man, Interstellar...and that's just the tip of the iceberg, he's a prolific dude.

But it's true, a lot of that blam-blam in today's scores is heavily indebted to Zimmer; unfortunately it also constitutes the majority of what's been ripped off from him. His score for Dark Knight...sometimes I wonder if that is the most important score (most especially in terms of influence) in the past decade. Listen around.


----------



## Kyle Preston

Parsifal666 said:


> But it's true, a lot of that blam-blam in today's scores is heavily indebted to Zimmer; unfortunately it also constitutes the majority of what's been ripped off from him.



Also a really great point!


----------



## JohnG

Parsifal666 said:


> His score for Dark Knight...sometimes I wonder if that is the most important score (most especially in terms of influence) in the past decade



Fair enough, but it's by HZ _and_ James Newton Howard. Not to take anything away from either one separately, but I think that's a pretty magic combination.


----------



## South Thames

Dave Connor said:


> The film is important; the composer is important and the bold innovations contained therein just may be important. Please join me in not losing any sleep over that.



Happy to leave it at that.



Kyle Preston said:


> His sound is more recognizable to the layperson, i.e. most people who see films, than say someone like Newman (any of em). Most people hear that loud _brand_ and instantly associate it with HZ, whether it’s warranted or not. My wife and I left the theatre after Dunkirk and heard a dude exclaim loudly _“that was the best fucking music I’ve ever heard_



Not just more recognisable, it's more appealing to a general public. Particularly in Nolan's films, Zimmer's music is loud (not necessarily his fault -- Nolan's one of the few directors whose managed to make his own dubs a source of controversy), omnipresent, repetitive, monolithic and tends much more towards boldness than intricacy. It is, so to speak, 'in your face', and much more in keeping with the aesthetics of popular music forms like rock etc than that of someone like Newman, who is often incredibly intricate but very rarely bold, at least by comparison.

Both tendencies have their strengths and weaknesses, and films where they work more or less well (I think Zimmer would have written much better Bond scores than Newman for example).

But no surprise that the former is noticed by the kind of people inclined to use 'fucking' as an adjective more than the latter...


----------



## Parsifal666

JohnG said:


> Fair enough, but it's by HZ _and_ James Newton Howard. Not to take anything away from either one separately, but I think that's a pretty magic combination.



Well heck, I know Newton Howard doesn't need me sticking up for him but he's a pretty killer film composer, too.


----------



## Ashermusic

Parsifal666 said:


> Well heck, I know Newton Howard doesn't need me sticking up for him but he's a pretty killer film composer, too.




One of the very best IMHO.


----------



## Oliver

Parsifal666 said:


> You knew what I meant my friend
> 
> Same language, right next door to Germany. And at times much of the area WAS Germany, if I'm not mistaken.
> 
> But I'm leaving myself open for more nits and picks lol!



i also knew what you meant, but thats an "insult" against me as an Austrian. 

Mozart, Haydn, Mahler, Schoenberg, Steiner (three oscars BTW) , Korngold and hundreds more were AUSTRIANS !!!!

Yes we are a small country south of Germany, we speak german in a different dialect, and we dont want be part of Germany! 
Would be the same as i would say Canada is USA  

no offence intended, just nitpicking and a very friendly reminder!


----------



## Parsifal666

Oliver said:


> i also knew what you meant, but thats an "insult" against me as an Austrian.
> 
> Mozart, Haydn, Mahler, Schoenberg, Steiner (three oscars BTW) , Korngold and hundreds more were AUSTRIANS !!!!
> 
> Yes we are a small country south of Germany, we speak german in a different dialect, and we dont want be part of Germany!
> Would be the same as i would say Canada is USA
> 
> no offence intended, just nitpicking and a very friendly reminder!



Hard for me to take offense when I know you're right!


----------



## Oliver

Parsifal666 said:


> Hard for me to take offense when I know you're right!


----------



## germancomponist

JohnG said:


> I don't think it has a thing to do with nationality... .


I also don't, was a little bit joking ... .


----------



## Dr Belasco

Now Bach was a genuine genius. Every single day. That takes some doing.


----------



## Ashermusic

Dr Belasco said:


> Now Bach was a genuine genius. Every single day. That takes some doing.



And yet a some music historians say stuff like "Bach wasn't an innovator, he just codified all that came before in the Well Tempered Clavier" etc.

I doubt he would care and his music endures to speak for itself.


----------



## Dr Belasco

Yes indeed to those historians. One of Bach's faults was he spent far too long in front of the computer and messing around on his iPhone. Even geniuses can get distracted.


----------



## Dave Connor

A pure coincidence: I recorded a violin player yesterday (who's played on some string arrangements of mine) to play a fiddle track on a re-record. Turns out he was one of the solo string players HZ used on Dunkirk for countless sampling/recording sessions (something like 12 hours daily for over a month.) Well, he went on an on about his sessions, the processing of his samples (of every kind and length) their stretching, shrinking, use in constructing the Shepard tone and on and on. A non-stop gush for at least fifteen minutes. He is just in awe of the process over there and HZ's incredible focus and prodigious methodology in pursuit of his creative goals. A wide-eyed enthusiasm that makes you feel like you've taken the same drug, such is the effect of exposure to the HZ world of sound. When he finally paused, I told him about my observation of a bit in the film that, _sounds exactly as if you're listening to a Bach fugue only done with sounds._ Do you think this fellow even batted an eyelash at that? He just grinned a little wider than he had been while telling his story. He is a composer himself so he knew exactly what I was saying and the ramifications. Of course there was no agenda to tear down, or be dismissive. It was in celebration of greatness in music.

As I've said so many times, the people in HZ's orbit know the level of achievement going on around them. They know they're a part of something unique that is singular in music of any kind (and can be compared any which way to other music and composers.) The fact that such a heady world of method and technology brings out young people in droves to concert venues just shows you that this guy HZ is truly from Bach to Rock. On too many levels to count.


----------



## South Thames

> He is a composer himself so he knew exactly what I was saying and the ramifications. Of course there was no agenda to tear down, or be dismissive. It was in celebration of greatness in music



Since I take this to be something of a reference to my comments, I will say this: whilst I regret having used the word ‘sycophantic’ earlier (since that goes to motive, which I could not know), it is not improper to disagree with you about the Dunkirk score and and the particular claims that were being made for it (which I think we’ve now established were at least somewhat embellished beyond what was verifiably the case). This isn't a fan club - honest enthusiasm for something doesn’t mean your opinions can't be disagreed with honestly and legitimately. 

Was the score effectively done in my opinion? Sure, as you’d expect with the massive technical/personnel arsenal at Zimmer’s disposal. But the fact is all it really had to do was pulse away making the audience feel uneasy/tense for the best part of the film (and yes, Zimmer of course found interesting ways to do that, but still...), a limitation born of Nolan’s limited approach to the material. I would argue the bar to succeed in doing that was fairly low (and the film wouldn't have played that much differently with various similar music tracked in from any number of other films). And, for that reason, among others, I don’t think this it will go down as one of his more accomplished and memorable scores.


----------



## jamesavery

Parsifal666 said:


> Let's not forget, HZ's win for the Lion King. Not much blam-blam there. Kind of hard to offer much criticism over it either.



Ah here, let's give credit to where credit is due. The greatness of that score has everything to do with the songwriting of Elton John and Tim Rice, and little to do with Zimmer. I can't for the life of me remember the air of anything Zimmer composed for that movie, but ask any random stranger on the street if they can sing the hooks of 'Circle Of Life', 'Can You Feel The Love Tonight?', 'Hakuna Matatta', or 'I Just Can't Wait To Be King' and they won't hesitate for a moment!


----------



## JohnG

South Thames said:


> Was the score effectively done in my opinion? Sure, as you’d expect with the massive technical/personnel arsenal at Zimmer’s disposal. But the fact is all it really had to do was pulse away making the audience feel uneasy/tense for the best part of the film (and yes, Zimmer of course found interesting ways to do that, but still...), a limitation born of Nolan’s limited approach to the material. I would argue the bar to succeed in doing that was fairly low (and the film wouldn't have played that much differently with various similar music tracked in from any number of other films). And, for that reason, among others, I don’t think this it will go down as one of his more accomplished and memorable scores.



Man -- I don't know you but if you think that score is just "pulse away" you are ignoring a lot. Dunkirk is pretty different, and your scornful, dismissive tone really makes me wonder.

I thought trailer music was easy until I tried my hand at it.


----------



## Parsifal666

JohnG said:


> Man -- I don't know you but if you think that score is just "pulse away" you are ignoring a lot. Dunkirk is pretty different, and your scornful, dismissive tone really makes me wonder.
> 
> I thought trailer music was easy until I tried my hand at it.



You're not alone, John! And now I'm thinking I should stop being a pighead and give the Dunkirk score another try. I did give it two listens, one during the movie and one with the music alone. Time for me to slam on the headphones and try again. HZ is worth it.


----------



## South Thames

JohnG said:


> Man -- I don't know you but if you think that score is just "pulse away" you are ignoring a lot. Dunkirk is pretty different, and your scornful, dismissive tone really makes me wonder.



I said Zimmer found interesting ways to do it, which I think is what's being remarked upon here (I don't under-estimate the technical skill to achieve this, nor claim I could do it better myself) but I think just the basic function of music in that film is (by design) very limited, and that limits the score. 



jamesavery said:


> Ah here, let's give credit to where credit is due. The greatness of that score has everything to do with the songwriting of Elton John and Tim Rice, and little to do with Zimmer. I can't for the life of me remember the air of anything Zimmer composed for that movie, but ask any random stranger on the street if they can sing the hooks of 'Circle Of Life', 'Can You Feel The Love Tonight?', 'Hakuna Matatta', or 'I Just Can't Wait To Be King' and they won't hesitate for a moment!



Let me actually stick up for Zimmer here. He was brought onto The Lion King because of a film he'd done set in South Africa, where he'd used African vocals etc., and he was basically recruited by Disney to help add some flavour to the film score and songs -- it was Zimmer and his polyglot musical tendencies that got LeboM involved and arranged the songs into a more distinctive form (though I know that wasn't what the Oscar was for). Without Zimmer, the Lion King songs may have sounded much more like generic Elton John pop numbers (and for me, anyway, that would not be a good thing).


----------



## Kyle Preston

Parsifal666 said:


> You're not alone, John! And now I'm thinking I should stop being a pighead and give the Dunkirk score another try. I did give it two listens, one during the movie and one with the music alone. Time for me to slam on the headphones and try again. *HZ is worth it*.



Absolutely! On top of HZ's score, I really, *really *loved Wallfisch's Elgar variation too.


----------



## JohnG

South Thames said:


> I don't under-estimate the technical skill to achieve this



Then perhaps if you indeed don't want to sound dismissive, consider avoiding expressions like: "all it really had to do was pulse away making the audience feel uneasy/tense for the best part of the film"

and: "I would argue the bar to succeed in doing that was fairly low"

and: "the film wouldn't have played that much differently with various similar music tracked in from any number of other films"

I agree with your point that v.i. control is not and should not be a worshipful fan club. That said, even my own forays into scoring to picture has humbled me. It is unutterably hard to come up with a new approach to action / adventure. It's been done for over 100 years by some astonishingly skilled composers from Tiompkin to Herrmann to Williams / JNH and yes, HZ.

Resisting the pressure to do exactly what you did before takes courage and guts. Even if I don't care for everything, I admire and respect audacity and I think there is plenty of audacity in Dunkirk. 

*Novelty*

You apparently find little novelty in the score, which surprises me, as I find the score very unusual, especially for one of the most memorable (to the British) events in their history. I enjoy the way some of the cues evolve / seem almost to crossfade, something I have not heard 10,000 times. And I like the weird out of tune wavy synths, the growls and sort-of-sirens. To me, the music is unusual for a war movie because it does not comment on the events of the movie or even try to tell you what emotion is taking place; I don't feel someone's musical elbow digging into my ribs saying "hey! this is SAD" "hey! this is scary!" Quite the reverse -- instead of a composer "talking about" the movie, I feel the music _inhabits what's taking place_ and uses a modern vocabulary to do it.

That I find a relief and a novelty. And about 10 miles away from the score in other movies, including others with scores by HZ.

Sometimes listening to what's NOT there is as important as what IS there -- check out "Supermarine" or any number of the pieces. What's missing? What's not there, that you would normally expect in music for a World War II movie about a famous sort-of-not-defeat/victory by the British and French (and Polish -- many others) soldiers' escape?

*Missing in Action:*

Here is a brief list off the top of my head of what's NOT in the score. With mind-numbing predictability this is what we usually hear in war movie scores and what are not in this one.

*1. Timpani* -- boom-boom-boom! It's a war movie! Like "Patton!"

*2. Big French Horn Line* that sort-of-sounds-like-a-hymn-tune

*3. Snare drums* -- hey, it's the Army! Where are the snares? In fact, while there are some drums here and there, they are incredibly sparse for an action pic.

*4. "Inspiring Melody" *thank goodness we are spared yet another Heartfelt Tune. Elgar gets to be Elgar, and who's better at that than -- Elgar?

*5. Functional harmony* -- no Big Cadences telling you how to feel about this or that event. Alleluia !

Look, I don't expect you or anyone to love this or that score. That's why we are composers -- we have opinions about music and those opinions are what make us do this in the first place. Otherwise we're merely musical color-wheel guys who do whatever the director thinks.

I don't think HZ does that, and whether I like everything he does or not, I appreciate the innovations. Action music by its nature has a certain "blam blam" generic quality, and I find "Dunkirk" to be different.


----------



## JohnG

PS -- I am a fan of Mr. Desplat am happy to see him win prizes. I was just listening to his wonderful score to "The Painted Veil."


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> ...the particular claims that were being made for it [the 'fugue'] (which I think we’ve now established were at least somewhat embellished beyond what was verifiably the case).


Let me assist you in making the inferences I hoped you would have made by now, including in my last post: that expert practitioners of music who have worked with or just listened to this composer are so accustomed to a high level of innovation and flat out world-class musical invention, that they are far more inclined to believe a report of some rare or previously unheard occurrence in one of his scores than not. Engineers will marvel at the latest sonics; trailer composers the latest {new} musical devices and sound-constructions, orchestrators the latest re-imagining of the traditional orchestra sound and young people the latest immersion into a fantastic world of sound (and whatever other categories there are, including composers with their observations.)

In my case you have someone who had been studying, listening to, reading old books and buying new books on the subject of fugues: Bach's keyboard fugues, great organ fugues and their orchestrated versions. Suddenly I'm hearing what puts me in the exact frame mind as when listening to them in a Hans Zimmer score??? Hearing all the objective properties of the form with one element (tonality) simply altered? My point is that none of the other groups I mentioned are going to be surprised that some marvelous invention in their area of expertise has shown itself in his latest work. Such are the protean gifts of this composer. I am qualified to make such an observation is my point. I can't worry about who accepts that. [_Embellishment_? No. It was just far easier to hear in the surround mix. I gave the time stamp.]


South Thames said:


> Was the score effectively done in my opinion? Sure...but the fact is all it really had to do was pulse away making the audience feel uneasy/tense for the best part of the film ... but still... the film wouldn't have played that much differently with various similar music tracked in from any number of other films.


Now you have the primary motivation for most of my posts about HZ. People don't seem to pay attention to or hear what he's really doing. (They miss his composing chops most of all: what he would come up with at a piano in a cabin in the mountains with no electricity.) In my first post in September I addressed the criticisms of _typical, synth score_ which the Dunkirk score objectively is not.


----------



## South Thames

JohnG said:


> . To me, the music is unusual for a war movie because it does not comment on the events of the movie or even try to tell you what emotion is taking place; I don't feel someone's musical elbow digging into my ribs saying "hey! this is SAD" "hey! this is scary!" Quite the reverse -- instead of a composer "talking about" the movie, I feel the music _inhabits what's taking place_ and uses a modern vocabulary to do it.



Interesting. I personally don't see the need to applaud the score for not operating to the most inappropriate banal genre cliches. That would be grading on a curve.... We know Nolan's a superior director, and his rarefied aesthetics are applied to all aspects of his productions including music (of course Zimmer's quite capable of genre bombast given the wrong director -- Pearl Harbour etc). But really, Dunkirk is not the first serious war movie to consciously eschew certain musical cliches -- serious movies have done that going back decades; it's one of the hallmarks of sophisticated direction.

It's also not the first movie to eschew an approach where the music actively responds to the narrative in favour of a more ambient-based approach -- I think of something like The Hurt Locker. In fact, I'd say at this point such an approach is pretty much the expected one for a serious film in certain genres.

I suppose one area where Dunkirk is 'innovative' if you like is the amount of music. Most high-end war movies equate 'seriousness' with the relative absence of music -- no music during action scenes in Saving Private Ryan etc. 

Dunkirk is perhaps unusual in having music that seems virtually omnipresent, but whose function never seems to change much -- just adds a constant sense of escalating danger and dread. I can't think of many other movies like this, but I don't know how much of an achievement it is or really how difficult it is to do this (regardless of how skilfully it may be done in this case) -- and I know I wasn't alone in feeling oppressed by the music by the end of the movie and wishing there was less of it. I felt the music was, in its own way, hammering home the point just as relentlessly as the cliches you mentioned in the movies where they were employed. 



JohnG said:


> Look, I don't expect you or anyone to love this or that score. That's why we are composers



Agreed -- I'm obviously in a minority here and so it's interesting to me to discuss and understand why our opinions differ.


----------



## NoamL

Dr Belasco said:


> Now Bach was a genuine genius.





Ashermusic said:


> And yet a some music historians say stuff like "Bach wasn't an innovator, he just codified all that came before in the Well Tempered Clavier" etc.



And wouldn't both perspectives be equally right?  JSB was definitely consciously borrowing techniques of "German music" and "Italian music." He also combined them to create something new and great.

And! Bach stayed up late at night transcribing Vivaldi but he didn't turn into Vivaldi 2. He only stole some of Vivaldi's ideas.

Jumping off that point - there is nothing "sycophantic" about being an admirer of someone else's art. On the other hand... when admiring someone who is massively successful (meaning both JW and HZ, here), isn't it a mistake to buy the narrative that everything about their approach is a necessary and inseparable ingredient of their success?

Thinking that way will only leave us a choice between writing "the new way" and "the old way." I feel that's a big trap. @JohnG your post is greatly insightful except for one thing, I feel suspicion at being asked to consider Dunkirk in opposition to a fictional score full of horribly inappropriate Big Tunes and snare drums. It seems that the point of this score that wasn't written (and let's be clear, that nobody would have dared to write in 2018) is that we cannot "go back" - and shouldn't want to... Seems like a false dilemma? There are composers out there working on other films and combining some very Remote Control things with some very old school things in the way they score.


----------



## givemenoughrope

Dave Connor said:


> A pure coincidence: I recorded a violin player yesterday (who's played on some string arrangements of mine) to play a fiddle track on a re-record. Turns out he was one of the solo string players HZ used on Dunkirk for countless sampling/recording sessions (something like 12 hours daily for over a month.) Well, he went on an on about his sessions, the processing of his samples (of every kind and length) their stretching, shrinking, use in constructing the Shepard tone and on and on. A non-stop gush for at least fifteen minutes. He is just in awe of the process over there and HZ's incredible focus and prodigious methodology in pursuit of his creative goals. A wide-eyed enthusiasm that makes you feel like you've taken the same drug, such is the effect of exposure to the HZ world of sound. When he finally paused, I told him about my observation of a bit in the film that, _sounds exactly as if you're listening to a Bach fugue only done with sounds._ Do you think this fellow even batted an eyelash at that? He just grinned a little wider than he had been while telling his story. He is a composer himself so he knew exactly what I was saying and the ramifications. Of course there was no agenda to tear down, or be dismissive. It was in celebration of greatness in music.
> 
> As I've said so many times, the people in HZ's orbit know the level of achievement going on around them. They know they're a part of something unique that is singular in music of any kind (and can be compared any which way to other music and composers.) The fact that such a heady world of method and technology brings out young people in droves to concert venues just shows you that this guy HZ is truly from Bach to Rock. On too many levels to count.



Very cool!!!

But Dave, please!...if you are planning on watching it again can you make a note of this ‘a-ha!’ moment...bc id like to have it too. I think I’ll probably watch it this weekend if there’s time for a couple hours of pure terror.


----------



## Dave Connor

givemenoughrope said:


> Very cool!!!
> 
> But Dave, please!...if you are planning on watching it again can you make a note of this ‘a-ha!’ moment...bc id like to have it too. I think I’ll probably watch it this weekend if there’s time for a couple hours of pure terror.


56:24 is either the exact bit or an iteration of it. My home system is not up to presenting it. There may be a better version later in the film. In IMAX surround it was the size of Texas and crystal clear requiring no effort to hear.


----------



## Kyle Preston

Dave Connor said:


> In IMAX surround it was the size of Texas and crystal clear requiring no effort to hear.



That is nicely put.


----------



## givemenoughrope

Dave Connor said:


> 56:24 is either the exact bit or an iteration of it. My home system is not up to presenting it. There may be a better version later in the film. In IMAX surround it was the size of Texas and crystal clear requiring no effort to hear.


Thanks!


----------



## JohnG

@South Thames 

You make some fair points, ST but your tepid appreciation of rejecting cliché makes me wonder wonder if you've ever faced the array of pressures of a big / fairly big movie. Not sure there was anything bigger at the time.

Even in my own scoring situations, legions of opinions appear, and the bigger the budget, the greater the caution. I realise that Mr. Nolan can get what he wants within reason, but it's not his money making the movie and one of the easiest "gives" is to change the score to mollify objections.

Besides, I feel you are talking past what I wrote, rather than making specific musical points to support your "not much to see here" position. Yes, he did avoid the typical, but I think the score does far more and goes a long way away from "the typical." It doesn't sound like War Movie Music, and it doesn't sound anything at all like "Superman" or anything else I've heard lately, again as much by what it doesn't do as by what it does.

So I stand by what I wrote, even if you diluted it down to avoiding "inappropriate banal genre clichés." It's surprising the extent to which people insist on those genre clichés in large-budget movies, given that 80% of world wide box office now comes from non-English-speaking audiences (though perhaps less for that particular movie).


----------



## Dave Connor

South Thames said:


> ...It's also not the first movie to eschew an approach where the music actively responds to the narrative in favour of a more ambient-based approach -- I think of something like The Hurt Locker. In fact, I'd say at this point such an approach is pretty much the expected one for a serious film in certain genres.I suppose one area where Dunkirk is 'innovative' if you like is the amount of music. Most high-end war movies equate 'seriousness' with the relative absence of music -- no music during action scenes in Saving Private Ryan etc.


I wish you would post in this way consistently. It's well written with examples, comparisons and an informed view of the subject. I'm not being condescending, I'm saying if you steer clear of dismissing other points a view out of hand with comments that seem strangely uninformed you aren't going to get into tiffs with people. I don't think people here are desperate to be agreed with. Just properly engaged with. I enjoy the insights you present. I pointed out something _in_ the score and haven't said much about the entire score except for a few cues which I think are model film scoring. I do think it's an excellent score overall which I said after seeing it.


----------



## Michael Antrum

I have often marvelled at how the Oscars seem to have a a 'political' dimension to them, as well of a sense of it being someone's 'turn' to receive an Oscar. Look at Sorcese's body of work, for example, and what does he get the Oscar for - The Departed !

So it's hardly surprising to find some composers have been overlooked for many years, Thomas Newman and James Newton Howard particularly spring to mind. But a small anecdote.

Last year I got a couple of tickets to see James Newton Howard in his first concert tour, at the Royal Albert Hall in London. Due to one of our labradors giving birth to a litter of puppies the day before, my wife had to remain at home, so I took my 11 year old daughter instead on the epic trip to London from Yorkshire.

Now my daughter, being of a certain age, was far more interested in the pop charts that classical or film music - and the prospect of a visit to Harvey Nicks and Harrods may well have been uppermost in her mind when she agreed to come with me. 

But when we got into that hall she was absolutely mesmerised. There was a cinema screen playing scenes along with the cues, and I particularly remember seeing her tearing up at the famous King King ice skating scene. It was a wonderful concert (apparently HZ was there too) and covered a great deal of his work.

At the end of the concert the applause was heartfelt as she turned to ask me if I would take her again when JNH did his next tour......

Since then we have been exploring more and more film music together, and and she has been listening to a wider range of film and classical music.

Now I do hope, that in the fullness of time that JNH will indeed get his well deserved Oscar(s), it would be a travesty if he didn't.

But if I were JNH, I know which I would value more.....

(We are going to see John Williams in October next !)


----------



## Dr Belasco

Haha. Political dimension. That's a laugh a minute. Anyone doesn't believe that take a look at the 1960 oscar winner for filmscore and then take no further interest in oscars. The 1960 result should be enough to cure anyone of oscaritis. And its gone on for years.


----------



## South Thames

Back to fugues. I was remiss earlier in not mentioning surely one of my favourite, since I tended to think of it more as a concert piece, but William Walton originally wrote it for the film 'The First Of The Few' from 1942 making it the earliest of examples, and which was about -- interestingly enough -- the creation of the Supermarine Spitfire.

You can find it at around 132:50 in the film:



You can obviously find much better recorded versions of his concert piece 'Spitfire Prelude and Fugue'.

The context in which it is used I think provides some clear antecedents to John Williams' use of fugues to underscore sequences such as the 'Setting The Trap' sequence in Home Alone etc.


----------



## Ashermusic

Anytime you put three people together in a room, you now have a "political dimension."


----------

