Nicolai P. Zwar
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST/PASSION by Peter Gabriel is another one of the scores I considered as example for “great” film scores.
I have one more… well, I got more than four, but I originally wanted to pick four examples, but didn’t get to finish what I wanted to write. So here is the fourth one I didn’t get around to writing yesterday (we went to the theater).
Phlip Glass’ KOYAANISQATSI (1982), which opened completely new doors of music for me. I was a teen back then, and had never heard anything like it before. I was already interested in both classical music and film music, I knew Wagner and Beethoven and Stravinsky, and even some Schönberg, even some Ligeti, and of course Morricone, Williams, Goldsmith for film scores… but here came something along I had never heard before.
A type of music that would be called “minimalist” (I didn’t know the term back then), but Glass music was repeating arpeggios, gradual shifts, hypnotic layering… if Wagner’s music was oil paintings and Stravinsky’s music was ink sketches Glass’ music was… mosaics.
I was still in school, but I had a summer internship at the German distributer for KOYAANISQATSI, Atlas film, and access to all the promotional materials, so I got the poster and LP and stuff.
Glass music was perhaps the type of “current” modern classical music that was not overly concept bound and abstract, nor was is it simply regurgitating neo-romantic paths… it was definitely something different. KOAANISQATSI back in the day was an experiment, it was a highly influential film, and Glass himself would go on to apply his techniques and compose some very impressive film scores for movies with a more “classic” narrative. We’re all used to minimalist sound and music by now, but back in 1982, the music KOYAANISQATSI was radical. Even today, when I listen to it, the music has not aged, not dated, the music is timeless. (And was partially used, very effectively, in both the trailer and the movie for Zack Snyder’s WATCHMEN.)
That was the fourth score I wanted to mention among my examples for “great” film scores. And this one was one that would have fit in no score card I would have had back ín the day.There really isn’t anything right or wrong about which criteria one uses (all the ones mentioned so far seem fine to me), but there’s always the strive to find some sort of broad, semi-objective criteria that can function as umbrella categories for more specific sub criteria
Fully agree, because we look for patterns and meaning.
Though I think the evaluation of art in general and music in particular is basically subjective. I don’t see how anything can be evaluated objectively, as value is bestowed and not inherent, and as such always dependent on personal preferences.What music is that playing?
It’s Carter Burwell. I just recently discovered this composer series with recordings from Belgium, so I try to listen to them all (they are all available as streamung/download/CD)
It’s ‘In Bruges’: Prologue / Medieval Waters by Carter Burwell from this album.
I just made this short clip, just a live take with my phone, no editing, no nothing, it’s me tonight listening to some music, not even sure how it will sound (it’s just done with a phone on the fly), my dogs chill with me tonight on the sofa. They don’t seem to mind the music.
It’s as private as can be, as it’s literally just a few seconds old, live tonight and right out of our living room, so it’s not a public video and just to satisfy Thor’s curiosity, but that’s how I unwind at the weekend, listening to some music, maybe some wine later…Let me start with a quote from Tolstoy, because every Internet post gets an automatic quality buff when started with a quote from a famous Russian novelist:
“All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”
I use that because I love that quote and always wanted to use it, and now I finally got the chance. And the Film Score Monthly site and forum is down, so I get to spend my allocated forum time here instead. Which is why this may become a tad lengthy… For some reason though Thor’s “$1000 Question” inspired me to ponder about this today on my walk with my dogs, and to jot down my views on this.
Anyway, here is the parallel I want to draw with that quote:
Every great film score is great in its own way. I don’t think there is a universal formula, no checklist that guarantees greatness. In my view, many, or even all the things you mentioned — elevation, emotion, memory, imagination, intellect, style, balance — these are all valid, these can all be used to analyze and judge a piece of film music “great”, but another film score may come along that subverts all of these and be just as great.
That’s why I don’t have a template, or a checklist, or a set of rules for what makes a score “great”, and I find it hard if not impossible to talk about greatness in art — music or film or literature or paintings — without referring to actual works. I approach all art, and especially music, from the other direction.
Instead of measuring a (film) score against a pre-established score card, I just decide that a score is “great”, I just “recognize” a work or a piece of art as “great”, and then I ask myself: why. Why is that score “great”, or why do I consider it “great”. And then I peel away the layers and try to get to the core of what makes a particular score great.
Because film scores can be great for radically different reasons. Sometimes it’s musical architecture, sometimes captured atmosphere, sometimes audacity. I try to come to any new piece of music open minded, to stay alert for new ideas, new aesthetics, new ways music can fuse with image. If I began with rigid criteria, I’d risk missing a great piece of art because it did not fit in with my set of established rules. Or at least would fear it. So my process is the reverse: I judge a film score first, and then decide and try to decipher the underlying rules and ideas that made me come to that conclusion. Or at least which score card I pull out for it.
So I pick four examples of film scores I consider “great”, but for very different reasons.
There is BLADE RUNNER (1982) by Vangelis.
That’s just a highly atmospheric score. Vangelis didn’t write a dramatic underscore, this is not narrative music, it is music that lingers and fills the world of the movie like the smoky haze that drifts through Ridley Scott’s dystopian Los Angeles. It is synthetic, yet very organic… the music doesn’t “tell” you what Deckard feels, it just makes you feel what the city feels: neon melancholy, rain-soaked isolation, it’s a future that’s already tired of itself. (I love the movie, just like I actually love Dick’s book). BLADE RUNNER is music as part of the environment, it’s a soundscape, an immersive musical soundscape, that engulfs you.Which is totally different from
Howard Shore’s THE LORD OF THE RINGS (2001-2003)
This is classic leitmotivic “Wagnerian” film music at its best. It’s epic and highly operatic. Where Vangelis captured the “mood” of BLADE RUNNER, Shore’s music is practically the novel… it is THE LORD OF THE RINGS told in music. It’s a masterclass in leitmotivic technique. Every culture, every character, every moral axis has its own musical DNA. You recognize it subconsciously when watching the movie, but the vastness and intricacy of the ideas became only clear to me when I read Doug Adams’ book about the music in context with many note excerpts. There are themes for cultures, characters, concepts… in fact, the titular Ring alone is represented by at least three different musical ideas (the “history of the ring” theme, the Ring seduction theme, and the evil Ring theme). Shore even uses musical semiotics, like the aleatoric textures for the Watcher in the Water (which is without clear form and shifting), an eight-note motif for Shelob (eight legs, eight eyes, eight notes… maybe on the nose, but fun). Howard Shore’s music does not just accompany the story; it tells the story. It’s really THE LORD OF THE RINGS in sound. Wagner probably would have approved.And here’s another piece of greatness:
ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST (1969) by Ennio Morricone
Morricone’s themes don’t develop like Shore’s, and the music isn’t just atmosphere like Vangelis’. Instead, the music here is often broad and bold, the music lingers, it stays with you long after you have seen the movie. Major characters get their musical soul, there is Jill’s beautiful, aching lyricism, the haunting Harmonica theme that ties Bronson’s and Fonda’s characters. There isn’t really much (though some) motivic interplay. Morricone (and Leone) here are after grandeur, myth, and emotional punch. “Big” music for “big”, archetypal Western moments. And of course: silence where silence tells more. Those opening credits with the creaking windmill… perhaps my favorite 10 minutes of cinema of all time. No music at all…So… to get back to the original question… the “$1000” question… What makes film music great? I have no idea, or perhaps better, I don’t have a single set of ideas… or maybe I have too many ideas what makes a film score great. So when I think a film score is great, I configure my score card on the fly for that particular score. Maybe that’s how I tick… I think I learned something about myself today writing this.
PS: I said “four” but only came to “three” before I had to go… I may add the one I had in mind later, but I guess I made my point.
Another entry in this series with Dirk Brossé and the Brussels Philharmonic; for some reason it passed me by and I only recently discovered there were already over a dozen of these, though I already had the Goldenthal and Rosenthal albums.
Yes, we had a piano at home too, and I played around on it… my parents offered me to get piano lessons, but dumb child that I was I declined… So my piano playing never went beyond dabbling.
I agree with all of your choices so far, would be very interesting. I didn’t even know Desplat wrote a score for ROGUE ONE.
I like James Newton Howard a lot… UNBREAKABLE was a fantastic score… I remember FSM called it “part Arvo Pärt meets hiphop, and part Miklós Rózsa meets Danny Elfman”, which made me buy that score… well, that was a few decades ago. I don’t have FLATLINERS, so I might get it, sure sounds interesting. I’ve seen the movie way back when it came out (I watched a lot of movies back then), but didn’t think it was all that good, so I don’t remember the music.
James Newton Howard, on the other hand, is an excellent composer. I was at a concert he gave some years ago, and not only did I enjoy the music, it was quite interesting that Howard a few times turned from the conductor’s podium and told little anecdotes and background stories about the music he selected. He sure came across as a very likeable person.
I do play any instrument I can get my hands on, which is why everyone around me makes sure I don’t get my hands on any instruments.
I very much enjoy THE FALCON AND THE SNOWMAN, great Pat Metheny album.
As far as Intrada’s new JAWS release is concerned, I’m on the fence about it. On the one hand, I do have most previous JAWS releases (including the original LP), so I might as well get this one. However, I’m basically only interested in the original film score, much less the album, and I find that was already excellently remastered in the previous Intrada edition. The new master is good (it’s on Qobuz), but not really “better”. The thing is, audio technology has been long at the point where you basically get the same sound quality at home that is on the original tapes. I find the new album master from what I’ve heard excellent, certainly clear and sharp, but again, the previous release also had already an excellent master of the LP.I’m currently listening to this, just discovered it… a new recording of one of my favorite modern classical compositions.
Branagh/Doyle was a match made in heaven, theirs was an excellent collaboration, so I hope it’s not over. It’s like Hitchcock/Herrmann, Spielberg/Williams, there’s something about it that’s just right.
Currently it’s no fun to post at FSM… it is excruciatingly slow… up to unresponsive. But I have hopes they’ll get this going eventually.
I hate, absolutely hate unresponsive interfaces. They slow me down enormously. Not just because they are slow, but because if I have to wait for more than two or three seconds for a response after a click or touch, I tend to be off to do something else, forgetting what I was actually trying to do in the first place.Very interesting how Alex North incorporated some of the material for his unused score for 2001 -A Space Odyssey for the totally different in tone The Shoes of the Fisherman, yet both musical applications seem perfectly valid.
One of all time favorite film composers.But 1.8 MILLION posts…..that’s quite the haul to transfer.
Yeah, that’s quite a number… and lots of threads. I suppose that’s why they did not bother to implement 301 redirects for the forum. Pity, because that means the Google search won’t register the new threads… at least for a while. But perhaps the new board search will function much better.
Is that the right direction? Not sure anymore.
The photo does not really tell the direction, does it?
😀
Well, only one direction is the “correct” direction of the pic… not sure though which it is.Now listening to…
Yes, the functionality of this forum is quite good. The FSM forum is over two decades old, so it shows its age. I guess the biggest challenge in the FSM forum relaunch is not so much the forum functionality per se, but the transfer of all posts and associated users.
You should be able to see that on your profile page. I cannot access either board (old or new) since today, so I can’t check.
As far as I can see, they really transferred the board; it looks like the existing threads are all there. The Beta-Tester Board has been dismantled, it’s looking good so far. They had all the threads in both boards for a while, with a beta-testing board that didn’t show in the old board. I hope everything will go smoothly.
It’s certainly a board with more options than the old one.What? What happened? You must not leave FSM, Thor. It’s not an option and probably prohibited by law. You’ve been around for too long. Your FSM membership’s legal status has been set to “permanent”. So you see, there is no way out.
Anyway, it just won’t be the same without you. I can understand Sabbaticals, though. I once took one that lasted fiver years. But never say never.
