Thor Joachim Haga
Forumsvar Lagt Inn
-
Innlegg
-
RVW is maybe my favourite classical composer, mostly due to the pastoral beauty of things like Greensleeves/Thomas Tallis/Lark Ascending etc. So when people went on and on about his ANTARCTIC film score, I eventually decided to check it out a few years ago, in its Gamba performance. Well, there is only a fragment of that pastoral beauty in it, but it’s pretty good for what it is, with all its dramatic highs and lows. Largely tonal and “English” (a lot of RVW’s modern stuff alienates me a little bit), there’s still about 10 minutes of non-stop, Rozsa-ian brooding at the end there, though, which is pretty heavy on the ear.
Thanks! Yes, I vaguely knew he was in and out with the Soviet regime, but not the details.
Of course, his music (a selection from his symphonies) was used in a later release of BATTLESHIP POTEMKIN, which is very much counter-culture and anti-authoritarian, but AFAIK, he didn’t write anything original for that.
(btw, I only have two Shostakovich scores on CD, the Naxos combo of THE GADFLY and FIVE DAYS, FIVE NIGHTS…as war/conflict-related films, I suppose they would qualify, but not sure how much they concern anti-regime sentiments as such).
Tall Guy, if you’re reading, I was thinking about what I remember from your writings on your hero Shostakovich, and how his counter-culture music made him persona non grata with the Soviet regime. But do you know if that applied to some of his film scores as well? Or was it just the concert music?
Depends on your perspective. In my experience, it usually comes off as reductive. I remember discussing Alex Garland’s EX MACHINA, for example, a film I consider one of the best of the 2010s, super rich with layers of meaning – expressed both via dialogue and visuals. They failed to see this, and just brushed it off with that “but it’s entertaining, I guess” comment, as if that was all there was to it. No layers, no meanings, no value beyond being kept awake for two hours. Fortunately, their perspective changed a bit when I published my review, where I went in-depth about some of those layers. But it’s a rather annoying attitude to meet when you know it’s coming from an angle of snobbery and limited openness or ability to read films beyond their entertainment value.
I have more than once been called a “reductionist”, so who knows, maybe I am.
That was not in response to you, but the people who say such things…you know, those snobby folks who go “I disliked this and that about this movie. It generally sucked….but HEY, it was entertaining, I guess”. That’s reductive. Or faint praise, as one also calls it.
Yes, but it’s a reductive way of putting it. A way of saying that it only works on surface level, and doesn’t have any depth. Whereas in many cases, I feel like they’re overlooking several layers. These are snobby arthouse buffs, many of them, and can’t seem to wrap their heads around the fact that even certain mainstream Hollywood films can offer more than just entertainment – especially if they’re made by capable auteur directors.
As you say, entertainment is just the ‘entrance card’. There are often many more things to be “had” in the meeting of a film, no matter where that film comes from.
Right. That’s more or less exactly what I said. It is related to my taste and personal experience.
Others with different taste might say, if someone in a film music forum calls a soundtrack “a fun score” then they know that they will love it because they simply loves all scores that are called “a fun score” by other soundtrack fans.
But by my experience these scores are usually not my taste.
That’s what I said.Which you’re free to have, of course. We all have our connections.
I’m reminded of something sorta related. When I’ve discussed with colleagues, and they’ve been disparaging about a film, they’ve sometimes ended their argument with “but it’s got great entertainment value, I suppose”. A sort of reductive, faint praise when all else is lost. That’s often irritated me a little bit, especially if I love that same film for many other reasons than just its sheer entertainment value.
That sounds more like a personal connection you have, Gerate. Personally, I see no correlation between calling a score ‘fun’ and it being ‘bland or uninteresting’.
My only issue is the prevalent use of adjective itself, without further specifications.
Perhaps we should have a separate off topic forum unless we are starting to discuss sports music themes 😉
Not yet, I think. We’re so few active that we can afford topics all over the place.
Drillo says Norway can reach the final. Just think about it……
Just your regular Norwegian hyperbole, I don’t take it seriously anymore. But I do hope we can get at least to the quarter finals for the first time.
I think we have something similar in Norway – ‘kunstmusikk’ (art music) as separate from ‘underholdningsmusikk’ (entertainment music) or pop(ular) music. There’s also the term ‘bruksmusikk’, which is taken from the German ‘gebrauchsmusik’ and often used on film music. The latter somewhat derogatorily, perhaps, but it is technically correct.
Indeed, TG. That is also something that occured to me while expanding my Morricone collection a few years ago. GIORDANO BRUNO, PADRE PIO, LA CACA BRUCIATA and others.
Btw, there’s a Morricone thread here that requires your input, even though the parameters may be too wide for your taste.
It’ll be great to see Leeds United fan Erling Haaland play on a big international stage.
He, he. Yes, I’m sure Alf Inge has told his son some bedtime stories, brainwashing the young Erling. 😉
Obviously, England and Germany have marched through — it’s more routine for you than us. But I wonder what it’s like for Italy at the moment. They’ve usually marched through as well, but haven’t been to the last two world cups, and stand the risk of losing out on a third as well. For a team that is on England and Germany’s level (historically even better, I think), that must be pretty scandalous.
