Jump to content
JoeinAR

Why do people hate Rosenman's score for Star Trek IV The Voyage Home.

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

The negative reactions to such positive, joyful music make me a bit sad.  Ah well, such is life.

 

Another passive aggressive comment by Stu about people not liking something he does, what a surprise!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stefancos said:

 

Another passive aggressive comment by Stu about people not liking something he does, what a surprise!

 

Would you rather I’d have used a.... colorful metaphor? ;) 

 

Nobody pays any attention to you unless you swear every other word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, JoeinAR said:

Thats why lighter fare such as Jurassic World inspires you.

 

To tell you the truth, I haven't watch a JP film since the lousy 3rd installment. I chose that picture as my profile picture just because it's cool... and it involves a shark. There's always a bigger fish. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jurassic Shark said:

 

To tell you the truth, I haven't watch a JP film since the lousy 3rd installment. I chose that picture as my profile picture just because it's cool... and it involves a shark. There's always a bigger fish. ;)

 

Jurassic Shark, doo doo, doo-doo doo-doo, 

Jurassic Shark, doo doo, doo-doo doo-doo, 

Jurassic Shark, doo doo, doo-doo doo-doo, 

Jurassic Shark... 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you close your eyes and listen you would think you were listening  to a score to a Christmas movie. It didn’t fit for me. It’s wonderful and cheery and I guess a breath of fresh air after the gloom of Star Trek 3 but in my opinion it didn’t fit and it bothered me when I first heard it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Garloo126 said:

If you close your eyes and listen you would think you were listening  to a score to a Christmas movie. It didn’t fit for me. It’s wonderful and cheery and I guess a breath of fresh air after the gloom of Star Trek 3 but in my opinion it didn’t fit and it bothered me when I first heard it. 

Yep, would have fit a Christmas movie for sure.

 

I guess it fits the goofiness of the film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, thestat said:

Cos its orchestration and placement is like a bad 80s sitcom. Very popular at the time. struggling since

 

I don't think it was popular at the time.  I saw it in theaters and the score was a let down compared to all other Star Trek music before.  I recall it just didn't feel "Star Treky" while watching it though also thoroughly enjoying the film. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, karelm said:

Same year as scores by Horner (Aliens), Goldsmith (Hoosiers), Morricone (The Mission)...and Herby Hancock won for a film I never heard of!

You've never heard of ROUND MIDNIGHT?

 

13 minutes ago, JoeinAR said:

HOOSIERS should have won.

Sorted! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of the complaints seem to come down to "it doesn't sound like the other scores", which is such a bullshit criticism. Scores should be judged by how well they fit into the film, not the fucking franchise. It's the same kind of gripes I heard over GOLDENEYE's score because Eric Serra made a score that was unique and perfectly suitable to that film, rather than just taking a "traditional" approach by copying John Barry, which you'd get in full spades anyway with David Arnold's banal run.

 

I've heard Rosenman's comments on why he repurposed previous material like LOTR onto this score, and his reasoning was simple: That film flopped hard, and he wanted the music he liked to be in a film more people would likely see. Truthfully, I never saw that animated film and have no intention of ever seeing anyway, so the fact that THE VOYAGE HOME repurposed music from that means very little to me. And I can sympathize his reasoning for doing so. Jerry Goldsmith's SUPERGIRL score is absolutely wonderful and should be something more people should listen to, but that will never happen because it's attached to a terrible film no one wants to see, thus remaining neglected by everyone except Goldsmith/film score aficionados. It's too bad both Goldsmith and John Barry put a lot of great work into really shit films that fewer people are likely to see. John Williams seemed to have a much better knack at selecting more films that became embedded in pop culture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Makeshift Python said:

A lot of the complaints seem to come down to "it doesn't sound like the other scores", which is such a bullshit criticism. Scores should be judged by how well they fit into the film, not the fucking franchise. It's the same kind of gripes I heard over GOLDENEYE's score because Eric Serra made a score that was unique and perfectly suitable to that film, rather than just taking a "traditional" approach by copying John Barry, which you'd get in full spades anyway with David Arnold's banal run.

 

It's not bullshit criticism, especially since the film is a *direct* sequel to the preceding one by the same director. (The James Bond films are all pretty much stand-alone.) Consistency is more important then. Like, imagine James Horner getting to develop his Spock theme further in this new setting. What a missed opportunity.

 

Yavar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Makeshift Python said:

A lot of the complaints seem to come down to "it doesn't sound like the other scores", which is such a bullshit criticism. Scores should be judged by how well they fit into the film, not the fucking franchise. It's the same kind of gripes I heard over GOLDENEYE's score because Eric Serra made a score that was unique and perfectly suitable to that film, rather than just taking a "traditional" approach by copying John Barry, which you'd get in full spades anyway with David Arnold's banal run.

 

I've heard Rosenman's comments on why he repurposed previous material like LOTR onto this score, and his reasoning was simple: That film flopped hard, and he wanted the music he liked to be in a film more people would likely see. Truthfully, I never saw that animated film and have no intention of ever seeing anyway, so the fact that THE VOYAGE HOME repurposed music from that means very little to me. And I can sympathize his reasoning for doing so. Jerry Goldsmith's SUPERGIRL score is absolutely wonderful and should be something more people should listen to, but that will never happen because it's attached to a terrible film no one wants to see, thus remaining neglected by everyone except Goldsmith/film score aficionados. It's too bad both Goldsmith and John Barry put a lot of great work into really shit films that fewer people are likely to see. John Williams seemed to have a much better knack at selecting more films that became embedded in pop culture.

 

No.  There is a vernacular and it is reasonable that a project that deviates from this will receive some criticism. For example there is a "sound" for a period piece.  Score it with rock ensemble and you can expect criticism even if it is good rock because it isn't a fit.  From time to time directors like to mix things up such as Julie Taymor placing a Shakespearean drama in a random time zone like Titus and the score fits perfectly.  But that is sort of her shtick and the music works effectively because it mirrors those esthetics...at times epic, at times lyrical, at times heavy metal, at times jazz, etc.  This is also music theater which she is known for.  Sort of like why Stravinsky was extremely effective in "A Soldiers Tale" using what is effectively music theater and jazz rather than the style used in Rite of Spring. 

 

Goldsmith's score to TMP was a perfect example of a unique personal take on a series.  I recall hearing it theatrically and recognizing about 5 to 10% of the themes as being classic trek but the bulk sounded entirely different but within the same framework.  Then came Horner's scores for TWOK and TSFP which were similarly 10% familiar and 90% unique so they still felt adequate while being distinctive.  Rosenman had a double wammy.  His score felt like a chamber score (it wasn't) and didn't fit the material.

 

We can differ on our opinions and I have every right to my opinion and it not being called "bullshit criticism" - I didn't like ST IV score then and its still my least favorite.  Feel free to disagree, but it aint bullshit criticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how do you guys feel about McCarthy's Generations?

 

It's the only one I haven't purchased in expanded form. I don't mind it too much but it does feel a bit too much like a super high budget TV episode score.

 

On 1/5/2019 at 1:35 AM, Yavar Moradi said:

 

Like, imagine James Horner getting to develop his Spock theme further in this new setting. What a missed opportunity.

 

Yavar

 

Interesting, I never really thought about it that way. Good point. Did Horner ever score 3 films in a series? Although I do love parts of STIII (Stealing the Enterprise!) I find Horner tended to retread too much ground with his follow up scores (to his own work). Cocoon: The Return is a good example. Perhaps he would have surprised us. I wonder what a Horner Amazing Spider-man 2 would have sounded like?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, JTWfan77 said:

Did Horner ever score 3 films in a series?

 

Sadly no :( AVATAR would have been his first and only, presumably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jurassic Shark said:

The first Avatar score wasn't especially good, so it's not that much of a lost opportunity.

You are seriously incorrect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jurassic Shark said:

The interpretation of art is subjective. If you claim that the quality of the Avatar score doesn't depent on the subject, then it's not art. ;)

 

Avatar is an objectively great score and you are objectively wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, John said:

 

Avatar is an objectively great score and you are objectively wrong. 

What you should say is "In my opinion, Avatar is an objectively great score and you are objectively wrong."  Then no one can debate you because you are being subjective.  Discuss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2019 at 3:35 PM, Yavar Moradi said:

 

It's not bullshit criticism, especially since the film is a *direct* sequel to the preceding one by the same director. (The James Bond films are all pretty much stand-alone.) Consistency is more important then. Like, imagine James Horner getting to develop his Spock theme further in this new setting. What a missed opportunity.

 

Yavar

 

It may be a "direct" sequel but it's such a tonally different film from the II and III that it makes sense that Nimoy would want to go for a different sound that was remiscent of the classic light hearted episodes, rather than continue the more dramatic stuff from the last two. I don't really care that we miss out on Spock's theme as I got all I wanted from those two scores. Being a direct sequel shouldn't restrict you to just sticking to a particular sound or composer, especially if the new sound fits like a glove with the specific film.

 

On 1/4/2019 at 4:49 PM, karelm said:

 

No.  There is a vernacular and it is reasonable that a project that deviates from this will receive some criticism. For example there is a "sound" for a period piece.  Score it with rock ensemble and you can expect criticism even if it is good rock because it isn't a fit.  From time to time directors like to mix things up such as Julie Taymor placing a Shakespearean drama in a random time zone like Titus and the score fits perfectly.  But that is sort of her shtick and the music works effectively because it mirrors those esthetics...at times epic, at times lyrical, at times heavy metal, at times jazz, etc.  This is also music theater which she is known for.  Sort of like why Stravinsky was extremely effective in "A Soldiers Tale" using what is effectively music theater and jazz rather than the style used in Rite of Spring. 

 

Goldsmith's score to TMP was a perfect example of a unique personal take on a series.  I recall hearing it theatrically and recognizing about 5 to 10% of the themes as being classic trek but the bulk sounded entirely different but within the same framework.  Then came Horner's scores for TWOK and TSFP which were similarly 10% familiar and 90% unique so they still felt adequate while being distinctive.  Rosenman had a double wammy.  His score felt like a chamber score (it wasn't) and didn't fit the material.

 

We can differ on our opinions and I have every right to my opinion and it not being called "bullshit criticism" - I didn't like ST IV score then and its still my least favorite.  Feel free to disagree, but it aint bullshit criticism.

 

All I can say is I strongly disagree with the assertion that his score doesn't fit the material. With what the film was aiming for, I thought it complimented the film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Makeshift Python said:

 

It may be a "direct" sequel but it's such a tonally different film from the II and III that it makes sense that Nimoy would want to go for a different sound that was remiscent of the classic light hearted episodes, rather than continue the more dramatic stuff from the last two. I don't really care that we miss out on Spock's theme as I got all I wanted from those two scores. Being a direct sequel shouldn't restrict you to just sticking to a particular sound or composer, especially if the new sound fits like a glove with the specific film.

 

But of course James Horner would have both maintained thematic continuity, while also very much changing his approach for the different setting/tone of the new film. But that new setting/tone isn't present from the beginning sequences of the film; it only starts when they go back in time. And many things are still carried over and developed from the previous film, like the Kirk/McCoy/Spock dynamic, with Spock learning to be himself again essentially.

I don't feel the Rosenman score DID overall "fit like a glove" -- in fact I found it largely distracting and detracting (again the final cue for the reveal of the Enterprise-A being an exception). And without sharing my opinion with her beforehand, my wife very much felt the same way, reacting incredibly negatively to the music in the film (physically screwing up her expression by way of reaction, even) when I went through all the Star Trek films with her.

 

Yavar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2019 at 8:46 PM, John said:

Avatar is an objectively great score and you are objectively wrong. 

A classic example of somebody who's got no clue acting like he's got a clue.

On 1/7/2019 at 8:50 PM, JoeinAR said:

It is a great score. Brilliant on so many levels.

A classic example of somebody mixing up his own very affective opinion with actual quality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...