Film (movie) Music

Started by vandermolen, August 12, 2008, 12:33:38 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

karlhenning

Quote from: sound67 on August 21, 2008, 06:58:02 AM
Quality cinema? Maybe not. Quality cinema with a quality soundtrack - if he chooses to get involved with the latter? Definitely.

No, I don't think so.  He mustn't be a musical ignoramus, to be sure;  but a little musicality and luck will work as well as genuine erudition in this task.

ezodisy

Quote from: sound67 on August 20, 2008, 11:01:59 PM
All film music is functional music in as much as it serves its purpose to support a film. It is the composer's talent that makes him able to forge the music in a way that it transcends its original function and can become an independent entity. And the better the composer, the better he is able to achieve both simultaneously. Which means that a score that is listenable when separated from the visuals serves its "function" as film scoring equally well, if not better, than a score that is deigned more along the lines of an "audio effect" and has no musical life. That's why a Jerry Goldsmith is a better composer than a John Carpenter.

Thomas

I see you have something of an agenda to push one composer in front of another. That's fine, I don't really want to argue about this matter of "independent entity", partly because I don't know anything about original film music and partly because I think the distinction you're making is a little bit silly. What I'm interested in is the point you ignored -- the integration of music and film. Speaking frankly I think this is the opposite of what you like, i.e. music which is enjoyable in itself somehow fitting on top of a film for superficial emotional/climactic effect. If I'm wrong you can inform me otherwise. In the end these guys you mention are, mostly, film composers, so talking about separating their music from what it's designed for is somewhat pointless (though I suppose I would say that as I never listen to ballet music or suites without the visuals).

Quote from: donwyn on August 21, 2008, 06:44:29 AM
I'm not convinced that a filmmaker needs to be "musically erudite" to make quality cinema.

Right. It is also worth pointing out that the majority of films with good soundtracks/scores are, in terms of quality cinema, absolute rubbish.

Sergeant Rock

#182
Quote from: James on August 21, 2008, 08:18:36 AM
Hermannn never wrote anything on a high level that's even remotely comparable...

Not so: to list just the non-film Herrmann works I own:

an opera:





a cantata:





a symphony:





a clarinet quintet:




song cycle, The Fantasticks:




Sarge
the phone rings and somebody says,
"hey, they made a movie about
Mahler, you ought to go see it.
he was as f*cked-up as you are."
                               --Charles Bukowski, "Mahler"

Don

Quote from: James on August 21, 2008, 09:30:00 AM
no sarge, he tried his hand at that stuff but it's still nowhere near the big boys i'm afraid.

Have you heard all four recordings that Sergeant Rock mentioned?  Personally, I haven't heard any of them so I have no opinion.

Sergeant Rock

Quote from: James on August 21, 2008, 09:30:00 AM
no sarge, he tried his hand at that stuff but it's still nowhere near the big boys i'm afraid.

No one is near the big boys...that's why they're big  ;D  But in fact he was an excellent composer of classical music. I edited my initial post to include his great song cycle, The Fantasticks.

Sarge
the phone rings and somebody says,
"hey, they made a movie about
Mahler, you ought to go see it.
he was as f*cked-up as you are."
                               --Charles Bukowski, "Mahler"

karlhenning

Quote from: Sergeant Rock on August 21, 2008, 09:37:25 AM
No one is near the big boys...that's why they're big  ;D  But in fact he was an excellent composer of classical music. I edited my initial post to include his great song cycle, The Fantasticks.

I thought that was Henry Mancini?

(* ducks *)

Sergeant Rock

Quote from: karlhenning on August 21, 2008, 09:46:57 AM
I thought that was Henry Mancini?

(* ducks *)


Bad, Karl, bad...go to your basket.

Sarge
the phone rings and somebody says,
"hey, they made a movie about
Mahler, you ought to go see it.
he was as f*cked-up as you are."
                               --Charles Bukowski, "Mahler"

pjme



;D ;D ;D



Famous American violinist J.Mansfield practising the Beethoven concerto, in the comforting surroundings of her own home.  ;)

M forever

Quote from: James on August 21, 2008, 09:40:48 AM
I haven't heard all of those Don, but I have heard some of his mediocre concert works and let's just say, he was better at composing for film & tv scenes...

I haven't heard any of Herrmann's concert works, but this thread has made me curious. I think I will check out some of the CDs Sarge showed there.

While I do that, in the meantime, please explain in detail what makes these works "mediocre".

vandermolen

Herrmann's String Quartet "Echoes" is worthwhile as is his "For the Fallen", Moby Dick and  Symphony.

However, even greater, in my opinion, than Herrmann's Moby Dick cantata is Phillip Sainton's score for the movie Moby Dick (Marco Polo)
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm" (Churchill).

'The test of a work of art is, in the end, our affection for it, not our ability to explain why it is good' (Stanley Kubrick).

Dancing Divertimentian

Quote from: sound67 on August 21, 2008, 06:58:02 AM
Quality cinema? Maybe not. Quality cinema with a quality soundtrack - if he chooses to get involved with the latter? Definitely.

I am saying NO LESS than that in regards to 2001! So you are actually AGREEING with me!

So it comes full circle - you're so full of double-talking, side-switching cleverness you end up on the same side of the argument as I am. Beautiful.

QuoteBTW:
Blame? How old are you - 11?  :)


?

What you fail to notice is that when I said that I was put on the defensive by YOU. Fending off yet another of your petty insults.

And fancy that - here we are again.

Is this all you're made of? It's sad how often others on this thread have tried to engage you in genuine dialogue (like ezodisy's queries to you) yet you continue to ignore any and all. Yet your string of insults continues without end. I suppose this is how you define "erudition".



Veit Bach-a baker who found his greatest pleasure in a little cittern which he took with him even into the mill and played while the grinding was going on. In this way he had a chance to have the rhythm drilled into him. And this was the beginning of a musical inclination in his descendants. JS Bach

eyeresist

Quote from: James on August 21, 2008, 08:18:36 AM
the 1st 3 arent known for film work...and as karl pointed out earlier if the film music is all they did they would hardly be considered at all....
What you said was: "Name me a film composer who's written something on the level of Bartok's String Quartets? Stravinsky's Symphony of Psalms? Webern's Symphony Op. 21? Ligeti's Piano Etudes? Bach's Art of Fugue? etc etc etc Go ahead!" And I did. Being "known for film work" doesn't enter into it.


Quote from: James on August 21, 2008, 08:18:36 AM
Hermannn never wrote anything on a high level that's even remotely comparable...same applies to any film writer or film score.
Two kinds of foolishness in one sentence. Herrmann is one of the great (unacknowledged) 20th century composers, and if he'd only written his scores for Vertigo and Psycho, that would be enough. It's a shame sheer snobbery prevents you from hearing that. Second, your underlying assertion is that it is impossible that a composer of film music ("known for film work", to use your evasive expression) could ever write what you call great music. Well, since your definition of great music explicitly excludes film music or anything written by a composer of film music, that would follow. But you are making the mistake of judging music by genre rather than by quality.

sound67

Quote from: ezodisy on August 21, 2008, 07:51:54 AM
I see you have something of an agenda to push one composer in front of another. That's fine, I don't really want to argue about this matter of "independent entity", partly because I don't know anything about original film music and partly because I think the distinction you're making is a little bit silly.

The distinction is accepted in all circles that discuss or analyze film music. You cannot return to Adam and Eve every time you discuss film music (or any other subject).

QuoteWhat I'm interested in is the point you ignored -- the integration of music and film. Speaking frankly I think this is the opposite of what you like, i.e. music which is enjoyable in itself somehow fitting on top of a film for superficial emotional/climactic effect. If I'm wrong you can inform me otherwise.

Your are wrong. I wrote:

QuoteWhich means that a score that is listenable when separated from the visuals serves its "function" as film scoring equally well, if not better

Which means that a score that is listenable outside of the movie can be as integrated, or better integrated, in the film than music of lesser independent stature. Jerry Goldsmith's works are the best example: eminently musical, and eminently dramatic ("dramatic" here means contributing to the drama on screen in a meaningful way = integrated).

Thomas
"Vivaldi didn't compose 500 concertos. He composed the same concerto 500 times" - Igor Stravinsky

"Mozart is a menace to musical progress, a relic of rituals that were losing relevance in his own time and are meaningless to ours." - Norman Lebrecht

sound67

Quote from: M forever on August 21, 2008, 12:28:58 PM
I haven't heard any of Herrmann's concert works, but this thread has made me curious. I think I will check out some of the CDs Sarge showed there.

Naxos just released their recording of Herrmann's "Echoes" (for String Quartet) with the Fine Arts Quartet. So that one comes cheap. "Echoes" is a very peculiar work in that it is comprised of ten very short episodes within a single 20-minute movement. It was written shortly after his wife had left him (tired of his throwing tantrums on even trivial matters), and the depression he felt is palpable throughout. The episodes do include two of Herrmann's favorite musical forms, the Habanera and the Valse lente, both of which can be found in many of his film scores. But it's a very "bare" and barren piece.

If I were less of a lazy bum our own recording of it might have been released already...

The works originally released on Unicorn-Kanchana, sadly, have all been out of print since that company went belly-up, including his opera WUTHERING HEIGHTS. Regis has released a number of their CDs, but none with Herrmann's music so far.

Thomas
"Vivaldi didn't compose 500 concertos. He composed the same concerto 500 times" - Igor Stravinsky

"Mozart is a menace to musical progress, a relic of rituals that were losing relevance in his own time and are meaningless to ours." - Norman Lebrecht

M forever

Quote from: sound67 on August 21, 2008, 10:31:50 PM
The distinction is accepted in all circles that discuss or analyze film music. You cannot return to Adam and Eve every time you discuss film music (or any other subject).

Why not? I thought you pride yourself in always occupying the non-mainstream point of view, "challenging" whatever looks like "conventional wisdom". Now you are telling us about a catholically accepted canon of knowledge concerning how to classify film music? That doesn't make sense.

Quote from: sound67 on August 21, 2008, 10:31:50 PM
Which means that a score that is listenable outside of the movie can be as integrated, or better integrated, in the film than music of lesser independent stature. Jerry Goldsmith's works are the best example: eminently musical, and eminently dramatic ("dramatic" here means contributing to the drama on screen in a meaningful way = integrated).

I completely agree. Which is why the use of the eminently listenable music of Richard Strauss, compared to whom Jerry Goldsmith or Alex North are musical midgets, in Kubrick's "2001" makes so much sense and easily integrates with and enhances the movie's basic ideas. No wonder this use of pre-existing music in a film has attained such a classic status.

sound67

#195
Quote from: donwyn on August 21, 2008, 07:01:18 PM
I am saying NO LESS than that in regards to 2001! So you are actually AGREEING with me!

No I'm not. I said that to get a quality movie with a quality score the director should know something about music, because it severely improves the chances of getting the best possible score for his "quality movie". If he doesn't, he should trust the composer on the matter to get the best result. In the case of 2001, the director didn't - instead, he ignored the composer and made his own "musical decisions", which are crass and vulgar.

BTW, Jerry Goldsmith and Alex North were not "musical midgets" (Come to think of it: If the phrase "takes one to know one" is right, then ...) in comparison to Richard Strauss. They represent pinnacles in their field, as Strauss did in his (opera - and, only partly, of the symphonic poem). Their achievement is just as worthy, as film as an art of the 20th century is just as worthy as opera. If you mean they didn't write operas as good as Strauss, you'd be right. And I never said they did (In fact, they didn't write ANY (AFAIR)).

Thomas
"Vivaldi didn't compose 500 concertos. He composed the same concerto 500 times" - Igor Stravinsky

"Mozart is a menace to musical progress, a relic of rituals that were losing relevance in his own time and are meaningless to ours." - Norman Lebrecht

sound67

#196
Quote from: eyeresist on August 21, 2008, 07:35:32 PM
Two kinds of foolishness in one sentence. Herrmann is one of the great (unacknowledged) 20th century composers, and if he'd only written his scores for Vertigo and Psycho, that would be enough. It's a shame sheer snobbery prevents you from hearing that.

Give up. The intellectually challenged just don't get it that a film score can be as great - and as sophisticated - an achievement (meaning: in the combination of film purpose and musical meaning - taken together!) as, say, a Stockhausen piece can.

In James's case it's only his continued frustration that Stockhausen isn't appreciated by more listeners  ;D.  He compares apples and oranges to satisfy his frustration. Just ignore him.

And in so doing, I'd like to mention another point of interest: What motivates a composer to write music for movies - i.e. willfully subjecting himself to exact screen timings and other technical factors.

Obviously, the lure of money is important. In no other field of "classical" music (broadly referring to orchestral music as an example) you can earn as much money as quickly as in film scoring.

Well, actually, you can: in television. Alexander Courage, Jerrold Immel and Lalo Schifrin e.g. could well have stopped composing right then and there (and retired themselves to comfortable life under on sun-drenched Floridian beaches) after they had penned the main title themes of "Star Trek", "Dallas" and "Mission Impossible", respectively - i.e. had they foreseen the enduring popularity of these shows - and the royalties this popularity would earn them. 

But it's not the only motivation. Another big factor, one that composer after composer we interviewed for our magazines emphasized, is the opportunity to hear one's music immediately after the score has been completed. A concert composer these days often doesn't enjoy this opportunity - if he or she gets to ever hear the piece at all! That's a big thing and should not be underestimated.

Also, some composers ENJOY working in a team with other professionals, so a collaborative art like film holds more appeal to them that to sit in a closed room for months and months (years and years) brooding over a piece of music he or she can't be certain anyone would ever care about. And that's a big thing, too.

Thomas

"Vivaldi didn't compose 500 concertos. He composed the same concerto 500 times" - Igor Stravinsky

"Mozart is a menace to musical progress, a relic of rituals that were losing relevance in his own time and are meaningless to ours." - Norman Lebrecht

ezodisy

Quote from: sound67 on August 21, 2008, 10:31:50 PM
The distinction is accepted in all circles that discuss or analyze film music. You cannot return to Adam and Eve every time you discuss film music (or any other subject).

Your are wrong. I wrote:

Which means that a score that is listenable outside of the movie can be as integrated, or better integrated, in the film than music of lesser independent stature. Jerry Goldsmith's works are the best example: eminently musical, and eminently dramatic ("dramatic" here means contributing to the drama on screen in a meaningful way = integrated).

Thomas

Thanks for responding. You are not even scraping the top of the issue of integration so I am just going to drop it. I asked about it because you obviously know a lot about film music, which I don't, so I was expecting an interesting detailed response. Instead you're just repeating the same things about "independent" and "lesser staturre" again, and honestly that's not particularly interesting.

sound67

#198
Quote from: ezodisy on August 22, 2008, 12:18:54 AM
Thanks for responding. You are not even scraping the top of the issue of integration so I am just going to drop it. I asked about it because you obviously know a lot about film music, which I don't, so I was expecting an interesting detailed response. Instead you're just repeating the same things about "independent" and "lesser staturre" again, and honestly that's not particularly interesting.

Sorry, but as I pointed out above, I will not involve myself into this kind of discussing the "specs" of film music as an art (i.e. the "mosaic" aspects, as Herrmann liked to refer to them) ever again - I've been through it once too often. Actually, twice too often.

Instead, I'd like to refer you to a selection of studies in film music that you might want to seek out if you'd like to know more about the history and techinque of film music:

Fred Karlin, On the Track: A Guide to Contemporary Film Scoring

- a "very technical" look at film scoring by a veteran film and TV composer, considered essential reading for those who want to enter this professional field. A bit dry for general readers, though

Roy Prendergast, Film Music: A Neglected Art : A Critical Study of Music in Films

- less technical than the Karlin book, but specific enough. Makes for good reading, too.

George Burt, The Art Of Film Music

- again, very technical, and with a clear focus on the music of David Raksin. Written by a former student of Babbit and Sessions.

Royal S. Brown, Overtones and Undertones: Reading Film Music


- on the aesthetics of film scoring, written by an experienced film critic.

William Darby and Jack Du Bois, American Film Music: Major Composers, Techniques, Trends, 1915-1990


- though outdated, it provides a comprehensive overview on Hollywood composers, and is often refreshingly opinionated.

There are many more, including many new ones I haven't sampled. Mind though, they are all concerned with film music for Hollywood movies.

Thomas
"Vivaldi didn't compose 500 concertos. He composed the same concerto 500 times" - Igor Stravinsky

"Mozart is a menace to musical progress, a relic of rituals that were losing relevance in his own time and are meaningless to ours." - Norman Lebrecht

pjme

Do you know if the score (not a DVD) of "Logan's run" is available ? My search on the net was ...unclear.

Peter