Jump to content

The Return of the Jedi and Through the Flames


Recommended Posts

Indeed, Goldsmith lacked the Williams-like ability of getting into movies and characterisation which people had actually heard of or gave a shit about.

So do we blame Goldsmith for not getting those movies, or his agent? I say we blame Spielberg for not giving Goldsmith a chance to score one of his movies, which seem to be the only ones with simple enough characterization for people to give that shit about. About the only Goldsmith movie with a character as memorable as E.T. is Gremlins, but its most memorable music doesn't personify the adorable Mogwai.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed, Goldsmith lacked the Williams-like ability of getting into movies and characterisation which people had actually heard of or gave a shit about.

So do we blame Goldsmith for not getting those movies, or his agent? I say we blame Spielberg for not giving Goldsmith a chance to score one of his movies, which seem to be the only ones with simple enough characterization for people to give that shit about. About the only Goldsmith movie with a character as memorable as E.T. is Gremlins, but its most memorable music doesn't personify the adorable Mogwai.

It's okay Wojo, I was only taking the piss. You know I heart Gorgeous really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About the only Goldsmith movie with a character as memorable as E.T. is Gremlins, but its most memorable music doesn't personify the adorable Mogwai.

Only his second most memorable music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't Spielberg work directly with Goldsmith on Poltergeist when Tobe Hooper wasn't around?

SS was on set virtually every day. Hooper played no part in the post-production of "Poltergeist": it was all SS, and yet "you delivered the goods"

Yeah, right!

As for all this "it doesn't sound like JW" stuff: I am aware that only 3 composers have worked on the "Star Wars" films. One of them is Jerry Hey, and the other one is Joseph Williams. Can't for the life of me remember who the third one is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the revised cue, (tracktimes from SE) the moment at 4:04, with a boom-tzz overlayed with a flute flourish, its 200% williams.

Check the Anthology version, since in the SE you can barely hear the boom-tzz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is there a weird edit towards the end of Through the Flames and Brother and Sister?

Ever heard of multiple takes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is there a weird edit towards the end of Through the Flames and Brother and Sister?

Ever heard of multiple takes?

we are talking about them in the resource thread...

I dont undersand how the make those edits so bad, but i suppose it was one of the faults of analog tape. Now digitally they sure mix things easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having edited audio and video myself since the '80s, I can tell you that bad editing has nothing to do with the source being analog or digital. Also, TPM and AOTC are full of (100% digital) terrible edits which were perfectly noticeable in the films, so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Approximate Anthology times for the edits are 1:49 of Brother and Sister and 1:13 of Through the Flames. They are there on the Special Edition and they occur in the film as well. Film stems?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Film stems?

No, Anthology masters. according to GoodMusician:

The Star Wars Anthology set released a version of "Brother And Sister" from Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi constructed of two different performances.

During the years after this box sets release, the masters were woefully lost. The creation of the Special Edition sets of the scores were then taken from second and third generation masters of the recording sessions.

The concert suites, however, were recorded at a completely different set of recording sessions months latter. This second recording session was also when the final alternate to "Sail Barge Assault" was recorded along with a few other cues.

Due to the lackluster preservation efforts on Lucas' part, these masters were completely and utterly lost and all that remains of these cues were what had been preserved on the Anthology sets Masters.

The Special Edition set perservs this track, therefore, as it had been compiled for the Anthology.

The unfortunate nature of this track is how it showcases some of the poor editing and technology of the time.

As a favor to fishfilmsinc, I have produced a much smoother transition between the takes shown here.

Interesting to note is that this cue was recorded over three takes.

Part One extends until 0:53.

Part Two is layered in around 0:51 (with some audable tape noise) with the "click" of the start of the cue at 0:53.

Part Three begins at what was a harsh edit at 1:49.

Due to this cues less than complex nature, it would seem that it had been recorded in two halves perhaps because the first and second portions are so dramatically different in tempo. The first minute seems more relax while the second portion is more strict. A slightly audible flub is heard in the edit at 1:49 (which I omitted) which could explain why the takes were merged at this point (to use the best of two takes of the second portion of the cue but omitting the flubbed wind note).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After careful rethinking on myself about Michael Matessino's statement of the reels being deteriorated from ROTJ, I really don't know if I can believe him. He said he used the same reels from the Anthology and they weren't in a good shape. Ok, maybe that could be correct. But he also said for the concert pieces he couldn't locate the album master sessions, so he used the Polygram album masters. If you compare the sound from the underscore with the concert tracks, you will find out that quality is almost the same. The concert suites are slightly better, but that's very marginal.

Furthermore, for the end credits the first few bars were taken from the Empire sessions. Do you hear any sound quality differences between the first few Empire end credits and after then, the actual Jedi end credits? I don't.

Strange... Now the reels he used for the Anthology, the Polygram album masters and bits from the Empire reel were all deteriorated in the same way (!) and this implies that the sound quality from all of those features the same? Coincidence? I personnally don't believe in it.

This let me thinking that Digiprep, who was responsable with the re-mastering from the SE's, is guilty about that mess. I remember reading a guy (was it Chris Malone?) wrote a letter to Digiprep and wanted an explanation. He never got an reply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Film stems?

No, Anthology masters. according to GoodMusician:

The Star Wars Anthology set released a version of "Brother And Sister" from Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi constructed of two different performances.

During the years after this box sets release, the masters were woefully lost. The creation of the Special Edition sets of the scores were then taken from second and third generation masters of the recording sessions.

The concert suites, however, were recorded at a completely different set of recording sessions months latter. This second recording session was also when the final alternate to "Sail Barge Assault" was recorded along with a few other cues.

Due to the lackluster preservation efforts on Lucas' part, these masters were completely and utterly lost and all that remains of these cues were what had been preserved on the Anthology sets Masters.

The Special Edition set perservs this track, therefore, as it had been compiled for the Anthology.

The unfortunate nature of this track is how it showcases some of the poor editing and technology of the time.

As a favor to fishfilmsinc, I have produced a much smoother transition between the takes shown here.

Interesting to note is that this cue was recorded over three takes.

Part One extends until 0:53.

Part Two is layered in around 0:51 (with some audable tape noise) with the "click" of the start of the cue at 0:53.

Part Three begins at what was a harsh edit at 1:49.

Due to this cues less than complex nature, it would seem that it had been recorded in two halves perhaps because the first and second portions are so dramatically different in tempo. The first minute seems more relax while the second portion is more strict. A slightly audible flub is heard in the edit at 1:49 (which I omitted) which could explain why the takes were merged at this point (to use the best of two takes of the second portion of the cue but omitting the flubbed wind note).

That sounds really good. You know what's interesting, maybe we are so used to very polished recordings these days where every wrong note gets patched, but there are quite a few flubs in that performance. It's actually surprisingly many things like poor enterances, stage noice, etc. It's obviously very beautifully played, but our expectations have evolved quite a bit.

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.