Jump to content

Awesome Score - Awful Movie


Brundlefly

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, TheUlyssesian said:

I find it highly unlikely that by the release of Empire they did not know that Leia was Luke's sister. Doesn't the finale hinge on Leia using Force to track Luke (I haven't seen the film in ages so I might be completely misremembering).

 

The way its staged, its more Luke using The Force to reach out to Leia, than her using The Force, outright.

 

Besides, Leia kisses Luke twice in that movie, and there were deleted scenes that dialed the romantic tension between the two even more. I doubt anyone would have the nerve to stage it like that, had they already envisioned them to be brother and sister.

 

 

It was just a matter of the writers of Return of the Jedi going "well, that reveal involving a hitherto unthinkable fimilial tie between two characters  sure was succesful! now, what kind of twist should we add to this film, hmmm..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Brundlefly said:
3 hours ago, Jay said:

The Hobbit trilogy

 

WTF? You don't think the scores are awesome and the movies are awful, do you?

 

Wait, why are you surprised by this?  Of course Howard's scores are wonderful, and yea, I think most people would agree the films are mediocre at best, no?  Do you think the general consensus of the internet is that the Hobbit films are good?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Jay said:

I think most people would agree the films are mediocre, no?  Do you think the general consensus of the internet is that the Hobbit films are good?

 

I don't think they are considered "awful". Just, as you say, "mediocre" to "good". I know a lot of critics/reviewers enjoyed The Desolation of Smaug, specifically, very much. A few examples: Chris Stuckmann (who also wrote a good review of the film), John Flickinger and Jeremy Jahns (definitely on the more "populist" side of internet film criticism, but valuable nonetheless), Michael Winn Johnson (much more cerebral, and one that surprisingly enjoyed the trilogy as a whole), Pete Hammond and others. Hell, Sheila O'Malley from RogerEbert.com gave it 3.5/4!

 

Having just rewatched them not two days ago, I enjoy them (the last two, especially) very, very much. And not as a fan of the series, but as a fan of good cinema, and therefore can articulate the why and how, as well. But that's another matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't hate them as much as some people do but I don't really like them and don't think I'll be watching them again any time soon

 

Scores are fantastic though :up:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

 

The way its staged, its more Luke using The Force to reach out to Leia, than her using The Force, outright.

 

Besides, Leia kisses Luke twice in that movie, and there were deleted scenes that dialed the romantic tension between the two even more. I doubt anyone would have the nerve to stage it like that, had they already envisioned them to be brother and sister.

 

 

It was just a matter of the writers of Return of the Jedi going "well, that reveal involving a hitherto unthinkable fimilial tie between two characters  sure was succesful! now, what kind of twist should we add to this film, hmmm..."

 

I think Empire clearly sets up Leia and Han as a couple. They have their own love theme too and they even explicitly confess to each other. So there is no question in Empire that Luke and Leia are a couple.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Jay said:

I don't hate them as much as some people do but I don't really like them and don't think I'll be watching them again any time soon

 

Scores are fantastic though :up:

 

They're typically movies I only watch as part of a six-film marathon (spread across six days, I'm not crazy) although I haven't watched them in a good two months, so this latest rewatch was something of an eye-opener.

 

For instance, I enjoyed An Unexpected Journey far less than before, so I can see where people who dislike the trilogy are coming from. When a trilogy doesn't open strong, the "bad taste" is going to carry over to the other two films, although here I think its largely unwarranted as far as those two are concerned. The Desolation of Smaug has to go down as one of my all-time favorite films, but that's just me.

 

The scores are amazing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luke/Leia/Han was a love triangle in the first two movies. Whether Luke and Leia were always intended to he siblings, we can't be too sure. In that era, filmmakers didn't shy from showing incestuous affection, such as when Marty's mother has the hots for him in BTTF. It could have been seen as more innocent in that era than the way modern audiences perceive it. Lucas also gave Anakin a weird relationship with his mother and Padme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me the reveal in Return of the Jedi never felt pre-planned or natural. It was just a "you really wanted to copy the 'I am your father' moment, didn't ya?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chen G. said:

The Desolation of Smaug has to go down as one of my all-time favorite films

 

Out of curiosity, how old are you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, TheUlyssesian said:

I find it highly unlikely that by the release of Empire they did not know that Leia was Luke's sister. Doesn't the finale hinge on Leia using Force to track Luke (I haven't seen the film in ages so I might be completely misremembering).

 

And yet it is true. In the original outline the "other" Yoda spoke off was Luke's father Anakin, who turned out to still be alive. Vader was supposed to have lied about being Luke's father.

 

Leia doesnt use the Force in TESB, Luke does, to contact Leia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Chen G. said:

28. why?

 

Just curious, its the first time I've ever seen an adult rate DOS so highly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe that's Force projection at its most basic: using the Force to send a message to someone far away, regardless of the recipient's Force sensitivity. We just never see Luke send a telepathic message to a Force muggle like Han. 

 

Later Vader calls out to Luke as he's fleeing, but whether that's actual communication or just editing done for the audience is unclear. 

 

Kylo and Rey kick it up a notch, and Luke's final projection is his last hurrah. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Woj said:

 

Later Vader calls out to Luke as he's fleeing, but whether that's actual communication or just editing done for the audience is unclear. 

 

ROTJ had a cut scene that had Luke and Vader converse like that though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. It was supposed to provide a direct segue between the two opening scenes of the film.

 

 

The score to said scene is on the Special Edition, and the scene is described in the liner notes. It was most likely cut for time - it was already a much longer film than the previous two.

 

56 minutes ago, Jay said:

Just curious, its the first time I've ever seen an adult rate DOS so highly.

 

Well, I distinguish between my favorite films, and the films I think are the best. But I do appreciate The Desolation of Smaug, specifically, very highly. If a film professor like Hartwell can call a movie like Speed Racer "Great", I feel the same if not more can be applied to a film such as The Desolation of Smaug.

 

I'm certainly not trying to convince anyone who thinks otherwise, but in this day and age, when a film is unliked, its so easy for people who like it to be frowned upon even when they can articulate very clearly what it is that they like in said film. I'm trying to offer those kind of people a little encouragement, is all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disney's two "Planes" movies aren't particularily great, average at best, but for a series that was originally planned to be direct-to-DVD, its soundtracks by Mark Mancina are better then you would expect from something that clearly wants to cash in on Cars' success with kids. No, I'm under-selling them: They are great!

 

A few memoral themes, a varied mix of Mancina's pumping percussions, electric-guitar riffs, acoustic guitar Americana, a few electronics sprinkled in, and a fantastic orchestra (that brass section!) provide everything I need to return to these scores on a regular basis. The sequel's soundtrack is almost as good, with only the main theme disappointing a bit. Although it's basically the same (I would even assume it's the same recording, minus some overlays, plus some new ones), but it's not as striking as the one from the first film.

 

All in all, a duo of scores that's much better than it needed to be for this to be a success with its young audience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah his main theme is really fun and memorable.

 

Your last line makes me think though - is the composer really going to consider the needs of the target market when deciding on the technical aspects of the score? I don't think so. He's hired to do a job, and knows that his music will to some extent be reviewed on its own terms. I'd imagine he (like other composers) would just give it the best shot he could.

 

Also:

 

Lady in the Water - parts of JNH's score evoked some amazing images, then when I saw the film, I was completely taken aback by just how shit it was. And how much Howard had clearly tried to elevate it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Planes score are fantastic!  I dunno if I'll ever see the films.


I only mentioned awesome scores to films I had actually seen that I thought were bad; I have an endless list of awesome scores to films I haven't seen but look awful

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh there are tons of great scores to films that I assume are crap....

 

Although there's also the terrible films with 'meh' scores category where I've seen the film, hated it, and had absolutely no enthusiasm for the score either. God and Kings falls into that category.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Richard Penna said:

Your last line makes me think though - is the composer really going to consider the needs of the target market when deciding on the technical aspects of the score? I don't think so. He's hired to do a job, and knows that his music will to some extent be reviewed on its own terms. I'd imagine he (like other composers) would just give it the best shot he could.

That's not what I meant. I didn't mean to imply that Mancina could or should have done something differently, but that Disney might have just as well used a cheaper and/or less talented composer, while still having the same success (because kids don't neccessarily care about the quality of the soundtrack). I consider us lucky that they went the whole way and hired and ace like Mancina, and gave him an orchestra to play with. Since the first movie was originally supposed to go straight to DVD, that wasn't a given.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love how people still manage to debate over what quality art is: "No no this is a good movie!" "Well, general consensus says it's not. What do people think though? is it considered good?"

giphy.gif

 

What are you doing!? :lol: You're not supposed to agree with general consensus! :D Every person has formed their own opinion on every movie and soundtrack, there is no consensus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Borodin said:

What are you doing!? :lol: You're not supposed to agree with general consensus! :D Every person has formed their own opinion on every movie and soundtrack, there is no consensus.

 

What's up with all this relativist nonsense here lately? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, publicist said:

What's up with all this relativist nonsense here lately? 

 

I love a good debate generally, but you really don't want to go here. Claiming some movies are objectively better than others overall, is a bottomless can of worms. At best we can make abstract attributions to objective qualities, and note modern fads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forget the lofty stuff, it's just not true, patently, that there is no consensus nor criteria to judge a movie's artistic aspirations, be it it within canon or individual contributions of involved artists, say, actors or cinematographers. To leave that whole field to idiots on the internet like all those AICN fanboys 'greenlighting' mindless sequels from the early 2000's on is just wrong on so many levels.

 

No one forbids people to like Battle L. A., but just because i like or love something doesn't automatically make it a work of art or a worthwile contribution (many movies do not have such aspirations).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't argue against measureable objectivity in abstract areas, just consensus. There can be no consensus in this field. I think if you love something, then it's worthwhile and a work-of-art in your life: that's the fair equation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Borodin said:

Claiming some movies are objectively better than others.

 

It depends on genre: Horror and Comedy being the most subjective. One person will find something scary, where another won't.

 

In drama and action, there is more objectivity or at least objective criteria. The pros and cons of each film can be clearly and objectively analysed. Where subjectivity joins the party is when you weigh the good against the bad. Everyone has their threshold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Borodin said:

Hmm. I'm not going to bite on these worms, I've tasted better. But if you love something, then it's worthwhile, and it's a work of art in your life: I think that's the fair equation.

 

Yeah. If you don't mind a rape of semantics. And a total disregard for the history of any artistic field. But hey, it's OK, as long as you keep out of making movies or giving out scholarships or important prizes for the advancement of artforms, i am totally OK with that.

2 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

In drama and action, there is more objectivity or at least objective criteria. The pros and cons of each film can be clearly and objectively analysed. Where subjectivity joins the party is when you weigh the good against the bad. Everyone has their threshold.

 

That's already one of the finer points after you accepted that not everything (that is called art) should be evaluated on the whims of someone's day form and general unwillingness to look beyond his or her comfort zone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you're certainly entitled to your opinion! Even if that opinion extends to define what objectively good art means.

________________________

 

Personally speaking now,

I find it difficult to see how individuals can merge their artistic opinions with others'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not anyone's opinion, its the opinion of the entire field of film theory and film criticism.

 

Its not an absolute science, but you can point out what in a movie is good, what is bad and why. Where the balance between the two falls - that's the subjective part.

 

The criteria according to which film is analysed are objective. The overall verdict - isn't quite, but you'd expect it to fall within some sort of reasonable range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not one way or another on this issue. I just don't see the value in pretending to have the values of others. Art is clearly part strict science, but I believe it to be mostly biodiversity. I would argue the "strict science" we observe is not often science, but often fad.

 

Artistically in open-minded criticism, I find great movies to have an unpredictable range. Based on convention however, the range is fairly predictable. People are too hung up on objectivism in art, in my experience. And thus most artforms: film, music, and literature, tend to be boring copies of copies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair.

 

Also, not all artforms are made the same in terms of how they are critiqued.

 

Even just within the form of film, the different genres merit different levels of objectivity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chen G. said:

The criteria according to which film is analysed are objective. The overall verdict - isn't quite, but you'd expect it to fall within some sort of reasonable range.

 

That is spot on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nick1066 said:

Hmmmm.

 

The Black Hole

Meet Joe Black

 

Though truthfully either film isn't that bad.

 

THE BLACK HOLE is, but MEET JOE BLACK ain't that bad. It's got Anthony Hopkins, for Chrissakes, the second best actor who ever lived!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.