Arnaud

Oops, sorry. I checked before posting but missed it. This was news to me. Please feel free to delete.

Hello all, I don't think this has been noticed here. Here's a link to a very interesting interview of Steven Spielberg by fellow director Marty Scorsese for Filmmaker Magazine on the occasion of the release of Bridge of Spies. If you get to 47:20, Spielberg talks about the call he got from Williams telling him he was going to be fit with a pacemaker and was prevented from working for seven weeks by his doctor. This is probably also why Williams didn't conduct most of The Force Awakens. http://filmmakermagazine.com/96810-watch-martin-scorsese-and-steven-spielberg-talk-about-bridge-of-spies/#.VpGmm0uE2iZ I recommend the whole interview and seeing Bridge of Spies which is an excellent film. Thanks to my friend Patrice for pointing out that interview.

I'm not sure anybody believes that. This Indy fan doesn't. Willy Scott was a bit of a problem. Sallah's character didn't suffer too much in Last Crusade but Marcus was a huge disappointment. So was the fat kid in the opening sequence. Such an appalling cliché. I won't go into the last film, I've forgotten it already.

Menace is a flawed film. Clone is a terrible film. Sith is not a film. This order can't be wrong, it's mine. Though I'm sad and disappointed by this prequel trilogy, I have to say that I still admire George for completing the six episodes. It's an incredible goal for an artist to achieve. Sorry about changing the subject. This was supposed to be about Indy.

As is often the case with film franchises, the first one is the best. So good it spawned sequels. And then the quality holds or decreases steadily. So: Raiders Temple of Doom / Last Crusade Skull It works with Star Wars too: Star Wars / ESB Jedi Menace Clone Sith

Not a single vote for Always, The Witches Of Eastwick or The River? Come on People!

I kinda like Eno's work. It's perfectly fine that he hates Williams' work although I find that a bit extreme, as though he had something to prove. It is a matter of taste. When he adds that 'it's ruined many a good film, in my opinion' he becomes ridiculous.

Too many great works to choose from. My favorite score is different every day so today I vote for Jaws 2 because it's a brilliant and often overlooked score that had no vote yet.

John Adams's piece is from 1982 and Steve Reich's is from 1986. Did Reich plagiarize Adams?

Well, that's a perfect illustration of a quote. Given that Rites of Spring is one of the greatest piece of music written in the 20th century and one of the most original for its time I'm tempted to say that Williams did a pretty good job. He toyed with it in the first few bars and then freed himself from the temp track. I won't dare to say that he improved on it but he certainly found his own voice pretty quickly and the rest of the piece is remarkable in its own right. That reminds me that Lucas rejected the original Jawa theme so he was really hands on.

Thank you, I will order this book right away. Plagiarism exists but some people see it at every turn which is really boring. Some because they don't know enough about music and others because they know more than they should and it turned them into snobs.

Yes, since the market for John Williams books is overflowing. People making this purchase are probably seeking it out, or something like it. The cover photo does not appear to be a serious deterrent in that regard. Ok, first of all, to seek something out, one has to be aware it's out there. Reaching people with no money spent on marketing is incredibly difficult. This means that one who publishes a book really can't afford to miss a sale after having caught a potential buyer's attention for even a mere fraction of a second. Anyone who has ever tried to sell something, anything, knows how hard it is. Publishing a book costs money. Selling books is more difficult now than ever in the past fifty years (except cooking books, it seems...). Few people get rich doing it. Granted, no one will get rich by publishing a book about John Williams. Yet, one would try to sell as many books as possible if only to recoup their investment and because every writer wishes to be read by as many people as possible. A book about John Williams is a niche project. It appeals to so few people that one would start by trying to reach all of the hardcore fans. For instance, we are on a John Williams forum, do you really think everyone here will buy it? Of course not. That's how difficult it is. Then, having hopefully reached the hardcore fans (who are the easiest to reach, the easiest to convince to buy the book and the ones most likely to learn of its existence by accident while surfing the web), one would try to reach a wider circle of people. Music lovers, film lovers, Star Wars fans, etc... John Williams does enjoy a notoriety of sort even in the general public. Not everybody would recognize him on a photograph but the face would be familiar to some. Familiar enough perhaps so they would check the book, read the back cover and eventually decide to buy it for themselves or for a loved one. Every sale matters. A cover photo is extremely important to try to reach as many people as possible. While searching the web, the title will attract people's attention but a bad photo will turn some away. In a bookshop (as long as these still exist) and also on a web page, people will notice the photo first if there is one. A human face is something the human brain recognizes from afar and reacts to. A smiling face is even more engaging. In that respect, this is like in real life when one meets another person and this can transform into a sale. That's regardless of whether the casual buyer actually recognizes the person in the photograph upon first seeing it. (See above) A photograph like the one on the cover of this book is not recognizable from a distance or in small size on a website page. It takes a moment to decipher the photo. Some people will miss it entirely because while their brain is trying to decipher the photo (this happens in the fraction of a second) their attention won't turn to the book's title. In fact most won't even notice it. Look at a bookstore's shelf and check for yourself what grabs your attention and what doesn't. And once your brain has discarded something, most times it won't give it a second chance or a second look. They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Well, some do and some don't. Good ones certainly do. People, if you decide to publish a book, please help your potential buyers find it. Make it as easy for them as possible. There are some people who will never notice your book who would have loved to own it. Some of these people would not only have bought the book for themselves but they would also have recommended it to their friends and on forums, in time generating more sales. Why take the risk at all? Why not put all chances on your side from the start? Personally I wouldn't have purchased the book - or now the two copies of the book - if I hadn't written these posts. The reason is that the photo is unappealing. Right or wrong, the natural reaction to an unappealing cover is that it may be hiding an unappealing or amateurish content. Now I hope this book sells out whatever the print run is because whatever the content is, it is a worthy and gutsy endeavor which I fully support in principle. To this effect, having bought my two copies, I will post a review in a few weeks when I have read it.

I went to the opera in Paris last sunday. I saw Wagner's Tristan and Isolde. Today I read an interview with the excellent conductor where he announced he was working on his next assignment which is Ravel's Daphnis and Chloé. He then added that he had never noticed before how often Ravel quotes this opera of Wagner's including in the very first notes of Daphnis. I guess that according to some another plagiarist has been outed... But maybe they already knew it!

It's unfortunate because many people still buy books based on the cover and this particular picture will not make anyone buy this book. It won't help them notice it and it won't help undecided buyers to make their choice. I assume the content of the book is of great interest. If so the cover does not give it justice. This is a good picture to use inside. Not on a cover. Sorry about that. I'll still buy it. Hell, I'll buy two to be forgiven. Though I don't like the cover. But I said that already.

I'm sorry to say I don't understand the choice of the photograph used on the cover. Very unfortunate to say the least.