Who did you want to score LOTR?

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Indeed.  And how silly the notion that an absolute masterpiece in an artist's output is somehow devalued by the fact that the rest of said output is more subtle and less known.  Disappointingly frail reasoning.

[KK 3,307]

1 hour ago, Richard said:

Call it what you want, but it's no more than an anomaly; a blip on an otherwise solid, but unremarkable, career.

 

Bullshit! It was no anomaly. Anyone well versed in Shore's career knows that it's the grandest summation of his style and contribution to film music. And just because he doesn't have a bunch of Spielberg hits to his name, doesn't mean he didn't play a valuable role in the industry.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Quintus 5,399]

Quintus - couldn't give two fucks 

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

He does!

[Nick1Ø66 4,711]

17 hours ago, SafeUnderHill said:

Why does Star Wars eclipse LOTR?

 

This surely varies individual to individual.

17 hours ago, TheWhiteRider said:

It's the pinnacle of the art.  It's not eclipsed by anything, certainly not SW. 

Of course taste varies by individual to individual, and of course LOTR is eclipsed by Star Wars. But when I say eclipses, I don't mean simply quality wise. The moon eclipsing the sun doesn't mean it's a "better" celestial body.  

 

It's more of a combination of cultural impact + influence + quality.  We can debate the merits of each score ad nauseam...De gustibus non est disputandum...but in terms of its influence, impact and cultural "footprint," I don't think there's really any question that William's achievement with Star Wars eclipses everything else in terms of film music. What else besides LOTR even comes close? Nothing.

In terms of quality, personally I really couldn't choose. I adore both pieces of work, and each one came to me at a different point in my life, like the film's themselves. I'm probably incapable of judging Star Wars, at least, objectively. Both represent the height of the form. If you asked me which I listen to more these days, however, there's no question...Shore's masterpiece.

 

14 hours ago, Richard said:

 

Call it what you want, but it's no more than an anomaly; a blip on an otherwise solid, but unremarkable, career.

 

The fact that LOTR was a singular work in no way detracts from its greatness. There are plenty of singular works of art that nonetheless stand at the pinnacle of their form.  No one is comparing Shore's entire body of work vs. Williams because there is no comparison, everyone knows what.  Delete Middle Earth from Shore's catalogue (all other things remaining the same) and you have a very talented but relatively minor film composer. Delete Star Wars from William's work and you still have arguably the greatest film composer of all time, and certainly the one of the greatest bodies of work.  

 

But none of that detracts, even one iota, from what Shore accomplished in LOTR. Nor does Shore creating something comparable to what William's did with Star Wars detract from Williams lifetime work.

[Bilbo 3,709]

I live both scores and both sets of films and both sets of scores. I think it's obvious that Williams is the greater of the two when you look at their over all output but Williams has never topped Lord of the Rings and I don't expect anybody ever will.  Especially the way modern film scoring is heading. 

 

Shore had the advantage of knowing he was going to be developing his themes over three films and that can't be understated. 

[Nick1Ø66 4,711]

16 hours ago, WojinPA said:

LOTR greatly eclipses Star Wars because FOTR was written from the onset to be the first of three parts. The musical continuity and foreshadowing are much greater than with the first installment of Star Wars, which would not have been continued as a saga if it had failed. I believe that Star Wars would have been the singular greatest waste of great themes if it had never garnered a sequel. 

Well, that's true enough as far as it goes. But that said, Shore definitely had an advantage over William's in that he knew what he was doing would be three films from the start. Williams was handed a b-movie no one thought would go anywhere and made a masterpiece out of it, which makes what he went on to do all the more impressive.

 

And William's theme is a big part of why Star Wars went on to garner a sequel. There aren't many films where score was as integral to the final product's success as Star Wars (perhaps Superman).

14 hours ago, Richard said:

 

That's why on the AFI TOP 25 GREATEST SCORES, LOTR is precisely... nowhere.

 

Glittering prizes and endless compromises shatter the illusion of integrity.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,514]

All right, I'll give you that... just for the last 10 words. 

 

Big money got...no...soul! 

[Quintus 5,399]

56 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

You're a fucking cunt, you know that?

 

No. The words as Carl Gottlieb wrote them were, "You're certifiable, Quint! You know that?" 

[crocodile 8,000]

5 hours ago, Stefancos said:

Indeed. Shores LOTR is an almost singular work in film music.

And The Hobbit is part of that score too. Bad films and/or sound mix aside, they are one big work and he clearly treated his assignment as seriously as before.

 

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I see what you mean, but I don't consider them the same score. Related absolutely. Very closely related in fact, but not a single entity.

[Nick1Ø66 4,711]

The Jaws Log! One of the greatest "Making of" books of all time. 

 

But I digress. I've been waiting for such a book on the making of LOTR. See, there I made it relevant to this thread.

[crocodile 8,000]

They're more closely related than SW scores. I love the moment in FOTR's Balin's tomb scene you can always hear House of Durin theme. Stuff like that.

 

Karol

[Nick1Ø66 4,711]

Both the PT and Hobbit are part of their respective larger bodies of work, only separate.

 

The drop becomes the ocean, the ocean becomes the drop.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

2 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

 

The drop becomes the ocean, the ocean becomes the drop.

 

That's deep!

[Nick1Ø66 4,711]

Just now, Stefancos said:

 

That's deep!

I'm glad you fathomed what I was saying!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

[BloodBoal 7,538]

3 hours ago, Nick1066 said:

Well of course. But when I say eclipses, I don't mean simply quality wise.  It's more of a combination of cultural impact + influence + quality.  We can debate the merits of each score ad nauseam...De gustibus non est disputandum...but in terms of its influence, impact and cultural "footprint," I don't think there's really any question that William's achievement with Star Wars eclipses anything else in terms of film music.

 

This. Regardless of quality, SW (both films and scores) simply had a bigger cultural impact. One simply has to look at how many times these films (and scores) have been referenced, parodied, copied in other movies, TV shows, books, etc. The number of fan films they inspired... And most importantly, the way they influenced filmmaking and film scoring as a whole. There is no comparison!

 

One could say: "But LOTR is younger. The films were only released 15 years ago!". But really, even taking that into account, I just don't see LOTR being as referenced in other works as SW was in the first 15 years that followed its release.

 

2 hours ago, Stefancos said:

I see what you mean, but I don't consider them the same score. Related absolutely. Very closely related in fact, but not a single entity.

 

And this.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,514]

2 hours ago, Nick1066 said:

The Jaws Log! One of the greatest "Making of" books of all time. 

 

Its good, but it's not as good, nor as comprehensive, as

FUTURE NOIR. Right. Alex?

[Nick1Ø66 4,711]

10 hours ago, Richard said:

 

Of course it is. That's why on the AFI TOP 25 GREATEST SCORES, LOTR is precisely... nowhere.

BTW, I looked at that list. Who compiled it? Was it polled from critics or composers? Either way, what a joke. It's almost as if they just had to throw in a lot of obligatory scores in a nod to history and stylistic balance. You of all people should know the folly of lists like this, given how consistently Rush is snubbed. By Jupiter's cock, please don't ever use this list to support an argument for (comparative) quality again.

 

And in any even it's from 2005...hardly time to give Shore's masterpiece any kind of breathing room or historical perspective.

35 minutes ago, Richard said:

 

Its good, but it's not as good, nor as comprehensive, as

FUTURE NOIR. Right. Alex?

Yeah but Future Noir doesn't feature a mechanical shark, so Jaws Log wins!

[Naïve Old Fart 9,514]

"YES GUV'NOR", MY ASS

[Nick1Ø66 4,711]

Carry on!

[Richard Penna 3,684]

10 hours ago, Richard said:

 

LOTR has not earned its place at the top of the pile, and it never will.

Call it what you want, but it's no more than an anomaly; a blip on an otherwise solid, but unremarkable, career.

Don't ever misunderstand me: I like the scores (I wouldn't fork-out over £200 for the three CR boxes, if I didn't like the music), and I would never want to part with them, but they are exceptions to a body of work by a composer who is, essentially, an also-ran. 

 

How does your assessment of LotR as an 'anomaly' denigrate what is an astounding achievement? Just because Shore's usual style is darker and more textural, and he hasn't had the fantastic opportunities Spielberg has given Williams, clearly didn't mean he lacked the chops to produce what he did for LotR. What an absolutely stupid argument.

[Nick1Ø66 4,711]

Let's also remember that Williams was almost 10 years younger when he did Star Wars vs. when Shore did LOTR.  Williams was in his prime and went on to make many of his most memorable scores during the next 10 years. Shore at that point was in the later part of his career.  Who knows what Shore might have gone on to do if he'd have had the opportunity to score LOTR in his prime. Or had a collaborator like Spielberg.

 

 

[Naïve Old Fart 9,514]

OK. Now that I've just got severely roasted by the world and his wife...a question.

If we can all agree that the original trilogies' scores are great, for both SW and LOTR why are the scores for the second trilogies not as well-regarded? Is it the quality of the work, the films that they are associated with, or, perhaps, some other reason?

Answers on.

[Jay 37,346]

The films they are associated with. 

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Never mind - misunderstood what Richard was asking.

[Nick1Ø66 4,711]

11 minutes ago, Jay said:

The films they are associated with. 

Yes.

 

Plus, by their nature they're derivative, and are always going to be compared to what came before.  Those kind of comparisons are almost never favourable to the later work (fairly or unfairly).

[KK 3,307]

39 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

Let's also remember that Williams was almost 10 years younger when he did Star Wars vs. when Shore did LOTR.  Williams was in his prime and went on to make many of his most memorable scores during the next 10 years. Shore at that point was in the later part of his career.  Who knows what Shore might have gone on to do if he'd have had the opportunity to score LOTR in his prime. Or had a collaborator like Spielberg.

 

And yet, I think it's exactly this that helped make LOTR as impressive as it was. As he once said in an interview, it's like his whole career had lead to this point. The LOTR scores are his finest summation of everything he's learned, used and innovated over the years.

[Quintus 5,399]

To be quite honest I think it was a bit of all that and a lot of the stars just being aligned. 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Oh of course. Everything just clicked, for a while.

[KK 3,307]

Definitely! And PJ deserves some credit for pushing him as far as he did at the time as well.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Absolutely!

[Nick1Ø66 4,711]

The stars aligned in general for that project...who would have predicted Peter Jackson and Howard Shore for Lord of the Rings? And who thought "yeah, perfect pick, just what I wanted!" when it was announced. Seldom do the stars align like that in Hollywood, which is probably why it didn't happen in Hollywood. 

[Quintus 5,399]

Actually, I remember feeling about as disappointed by Jackson's attachment as director as I did about Shore's appointment as composer. Both of them shut me right up though. 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Fellowship is a near perfect film!

[Quintus 5,399]

It's certainly always been the best one for my money. It's a filmic fantasy marvel. 

[Nick1Ø66 4,711]

Fellowship is indeed perfect, and first in my heart. I think TTT is also damned near perfect, but doesn't quite strike the same chord in me as FOTR.

 

ROTK is a great, but flawed film. Brilliant, but the least of the three. Though the emotional payoff more than makes up for its flaws, some of the most powerful moments of the trilogy are in that film.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Its not only the best, its also a great film on its own. Properly great!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[crocodile 8,000]

1 hour ago, Jay said:

The films they are associated with. 

Yes, I agree. Howard Shore basically approached the task in very much the same way. Within his means. There is absolutely nothing wrong with his contributions, just the way they were used. There is a lot of richness to his writing that almost goes against the films' increasing stupidity. That is why I regard those six scores as one long one.

Karol

[Quintus 5,399]

12 hours ago, BloodBoal said:

 

And both of them proved you right with The Hobbit!

 

The Tolkien novel? My hope is that never gets made into a film. It'd only be a couple of hours long anyway, because there isn't actually all that much to it. 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Could make a decent childrens film!

[Incanus 5,714]

5 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

Could make a decent childrens film!

With a lot of musical numbers with singing dwarves! "Far over the misty mountains cold..."

[BloodBoal 7,538]

It cannot be turned into a movie. It's too complicated! There are too many characters, too much information, the book is too long! It's unadaptable! You'd have to make at least three films for it to be true to the source material, maybe even four.

[Quintus 5,399]

True, but where there's a whip there's a way. 

[Naïve Old Fart 9,514]

Are all you guys having a giraffe, or what?

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

The only other composer in history aside from Shore that I think would have been up to the challenge of scoring these films and doing so in just the singular way that they needed was this guy.  There is no other.