101 replies to this topic

[SF1_freeze]

Tim, I would just ignore this thread and ask your own questions.

Great, with that comment you discourage all the thought that was put into questions and regard all those
who post here as dumb and not worthy to be taken serious

With all due respect please think before you make a post like that. Otherwise you really can't be taken serious!!!

[Hlao-roo]

ask him if John Williams will be back for Deathly Hallows.

I have nothing else to ask

That's like walking into a McDonald's and asking if there's a Burger King nearby.

Yeah, I've always thought of John Williams as the Burger King of the film scoring world, myself.

[MSM]

There are some good questions mentioned above. Critical questions are ok, they would be justified in the eyes of many HP and JW fans. Just try not to be be too negative or disrespectful.

[Hlao-roo]

Maestro, don't waste your time digging the bottom of the barrel for questions, there's far more worthy places on the web to find questions.

I think he's doing it more as a courtesy to us. I'm sure he's more than capable of coming up with his own questions.

[Josh500]

Tim, I would just ignore this thread and ask your own questions.

Great, with that comment you discourage all the thought that was put into questions and regard all those
who post here as dumb and not worthy to be taken serious

With all due respect please think before you make a post like that. Otherwise you really can't be taken serious!!!

Yes, exactly.

SF1 freeze and Hlaa-roo had some good suggestions.

Also, KM (his one question). How you phrase that question is up to you. But DO ask him!

Great you got him for the Interview. That will be a longer post but i hope you can use my input.
And i want to beg you to be critical in your interview approach, that's the only way to get satisfying answers to
some of our concerns here. Even if you post the critical questions just on this board and not in the FSM issue.
Please at least ask some of the critical questions .
(If you dont want to ask critical questions just tell him that you got some printed questions not by you from
a fan and give him a printed sheet with critical questions. So he at least knows about the problems a lot of us had with his soundtracks.
Maybe that changes his approach if he does Deathly Hallows)


Here are the questions:

1) Did you know about the dissapointment by a lot of filmmusic fans about the lack of all original themes
except Hedwig's in Order of the Phoenix and if you knew, did that change your approach on the Half Blood Prince?


2) A typical phrase from director, producer, etc... regarding the abandoment of the original themes was that the films got darker and
there had to be a different approach taken.
In my opinion there was a lot dark original material which could have reprised as cameos just for continuities sake. Just
to create a short sense of "Hey there is a known melody, great". It would in no way diminish your own work to have
more short cameos of original themes just to satisfy the fans.
What's your opinion about that statement?


3) Is there a special reason why you only ever played Hedwigs theme at max 20sec and stopped then. Is there no way to
here it in its entirety again if you are the composer?


4) Is it true that you spoke with John Williams for Half Blood Prince and what did you talk about?


5) What is the reasoning as a composer to abandon almost all original material after 4 films in a blockbuster franchise?


6) Why did you and Mr Yates change the established ending of the first four Potter movies for OOTP from the Hedwigs Signature theme and animated Credits to a
Screensaver Picture with no Hedwig's theme Cameo


7) Why do you all think just because the films changed a bit and got darker to throw away so much continuity in music. It's not necessary to change that
much to keep the audience interested.
Look at the Star Wars movies, they had continuity and similar approach for sicx films and were very successful. (But they also had the same composer)


8) We counted and in whole OOTP you played Hedwigs theme about 5 times for a total of 1min time in a 1hour 45min soundtrack !!!!!
That's not enough for a main theme in a blockbucter franchise even if you hadn't written it.
What's your opinion on that and will it occur more often and longer in Half Blood Prince. In the soundtrack it is only played for 25sec total!?!?!
Why that, it is the franchise main theme after all!!!


9) Are you involved in future Harry Potter films? If so is there a chance to collaborate with John Williams on the last one?


10) I loved the "Frewell Aragog" track and i think its one of your best melodies. It would be a great theme for Hagrid. Is it
somehow connected to Hagrid and may it return if you are still involved in the franchise?

11) Was the choir you used in Half Blood Prince for the great "In noctem" for example real or synth?

12) Why did you use the London chamber orchestra instead of the great LSO. Were budgetary restraints in play?

13) Is it important for you what filmmusic fans think about your approach and music? Do you read the reviews of your OOTP soundtrack?
Does that change your approach for future film scores?

14) Did you know about the Williams theme for Fawkes the Phoenix from the second Potter movie? It is a fan favourite. Would you mind to cameo it
in future films just to satisfy the fans? (Did you use it in Half Blood Prince for Fawkes scenes)

15) I listened to some Half Blood Prince tracks and noticed in Ron's victory you were inspired by Quidditch Third Year from PoA.
That's exactly what we fans want to hear. Just some familiar glimpses of John Williams original Potter music. Thank you for that.


16) What original themes did you use except Hedwig's theme and the Quidditch Third Year motif in Half Blood Prince?




So that's all i could think of by now

Does scoring a loud, sound f/x-laden Hollywood picture require you to intentionally orchestrate such that your music can achieve audibility and impact in the sound mix?

Have your Harry Potter assignments opened up other possibilities for you in Hollywood?

Musically, what has been the most challenging aspect or moment in scoring the two Harry Potter films?

In general, how important is it for a film score to maintain internal thematic continuity?

Sometimes, scores can get a pretty rough response at test screenings. In this case, given John Williams's contributions to the first three installments, audiences may have already had an established sense of what to expect musically from a Harry Potter film. Have you personally encountered any resistance to your style or approach to scoring these films, or have those with preconceived notions more or less been appeased with your incorporation of Hedwig's theme?

ask him if John Williams will be back for Deathly Hallows.

I have nothing else to ask

[Henry Buck]

Tim, I would just ignore this thread and ask your own questions.

Great, with that comment you discourage all the thought that was put into questions and regard all those
who post here as dumb and not worthy to be taken serious

With all due respect please think before you make a post like that. Otherwise you really can't be taken serious!!!

Nor can your insulting accusations passed off as "questions" be taken seriously.

[Maestro]

I appreciate the thoughtful contributions and am amused by the, um, less thoughftul ones. As always, Alan is the consummate professional and wordsmith.

I too hate interviews that are all rainbows and butt kissing, but there is a certain level of diplomacy required to keep the journalism machine in working order. There are composers who blacklist publications for sensed antagonism or disrespect, and I don't have any intention of putting my magazine in jeopardy.

That being said, there absolutely are ways of asking more probing (and potentially critical) questions without stabbing a composer in the heart. There's an art to a good interview, one that I make no claim of having perfected but at least am always improving in. Part of it comes in just discovering what the composer's personality is like, whether they have a sense of humor, and what your rapport with them is like. It's hard to predict these things, but almost every composer I've interviewed has been incredibly humble, jovial, candid, and even self-depracating. When that's the case it's hard to retain much in the way of criticism (let alone anger or condescension), but it also allows for some critical or challenging questions to be asked.

I may not use any of the suggested questions mentioned here, but I thought this hive of scum and villainy might well indeed reveal an itch that other readers may also want scratched.

[SF1_freeze]

And to be honest, some of the questions i posted are overlapping themselves and are not as respectful worded as necessary. But these should more or less be suggestions what to ask.
Of course you cant ask all of them in the way they are written and some of them would be very difficult to get right without being a bit insulting.

But it is important to be critical in such an interview and also to mention the dissapointments fans had about his score and the weakpoints. I'm sure a lot of you are curious what he
might answer regarding a critical interview...

And i did not carefully build the questions in a diplomatic way which would be required if i did the interview. Maybe i just had to get my anger about the obmitting of the original themes to paper/screen.
So don't take half of my questions too serious, they couldn't be asked that way but you all get my points what problems with Hoopers approach exist and this can be mentioned in a polite and respectful way.
And the other less critical half can absolutely be asked and there was also put some thought in it. For example why he changed the orchestra or why he changed the credits. Or if he
reads reviews about his scores and takes that serious or not...

By the way, the Potter fans will accept almost every score they get, even if it isn't that magical. But subconsciously even they rate the film worse if the score is average and better
if the score is great. Wise people say that the music defines almost the half of a movie.

With average music a good film stays good, with bad music a good film gets average and with great music a good film gets very good and almost great

[Koray Savas]

I wouldn't mention fan disappointment, the score's not even officially released yet.

You never heard of sarcasm, huh? You truly are the dumbest of the dumb.

I you're going to be sarcastic, don't be sarcastic and then follow with more sarcasm beginning with "Seriously..."

You can politely ask him why he composed such a pile of shit!

Seriously, you can ask him whether John Williams really wants to do DH, and if so, whether NH is willing to step down.

Koray is just still pissed off over my HZ fanboy comment is all. Oh well.

I'm not pissed, never was. I'm not even a HZ fanboy.

[Josh500]

I you're going to be sarcastic, don't be sarcastic and then follow with more sarcasm beginning with "Seriously..."

You can politely ask him why he composed such a pile of shit!

Seriously, you can ask him whether John Williams really wants to do DH, and if so, whether NH is willing to step down.

You done?

I want this question to be asked. But obviously not in these words.

[Diego]

There's no point in asking whether he'll be back, we'll get something like "I really enjoyed this one and I hope I'm on board for the next, David Yates has never complained about my work". I doubt he's been signed already, and even if they replace him I doubt they would tell him right when this movie is about to open.

[tharpdevenport]

"Have you ever had a score rejected, or turned down a film?"

[John Crichton]

Tim, I would just ignore this thread and ask your own questions.

Great, with that comment you discourage all the thought that was put into questions and regard all those
who post here as dumb and not worthy to be taken serious

With all due respect please think before you make a post like that. Otherwise you really can't be taken serious!!!

Nor can your insulting accusations passed off as "questions" be taken seriously.

Thank you Henry. I'm sorry you feel personally insulted, but if Tim is trying to conduct a professional interview (and I know he is, quality chap that he is) then he's better off ignoring most of the suggestions here.

[Mark Olivarez]

John is correct, as usual and Alan offered the most intelligent and correct questions.


Of course I have faith that Tim will do a good job.

[paleo]

Just out of curiosity, who is Alan (I am not always up to date about who is behind which Avatar)?
Anyway, after reading this entire blog I'm not sure if I should even be interested in the outcome of the interview. The questions I would like to have answered will never be asked out of diplomacy (what I understand, who wants to jeopardize job and/or reputation), and I'm not really interested so much in the technical issues of this mediocre piece of music.
One thing that comes to mind when reading the posts here is that most people preferred not to ask any questions but to ridicule other people's, even though many of these were considered seriously (yes, I actually think most people actually asking something were aware that these ideas would have to be rephrased, but that that's the job of the interviewer). In summary, why did I even waste my time here.

[Nick Parker]

Alan posts under the name of "Hlao-roo" ( I have to be honest, I am curious as to how that name came about).

[Koray Savas]

Hlao-roo was his original screen name. Then he switched to Alan, and recently went back to his original screen name. i.e. indysolo=Neil S. Bulk, TheGreatEye=Quint

[Hlao-roo]

Just out of curiosity, who is Alan (I am not always up to date about who is behind which Avatar)?

Sorry. Once in a blue moon, I'll append "- Alan" at the end of my posts, but I'm generally too lazy to do so.

Alan posts under the name of "Hlao-roo" ( I have to be honest, I am curious as to how that name came about).

The affectionate nickname of a Watership Down character I regard fondly.

Hlao-roo was his original screen name. Then he switched to Alan, and recently went back to his original screen name. i.e. indysolo=Neil S. Bulk, TheGreatEye=Quint

Yeah, partly because it seemed trendy at the time to go with a plausible-sounding name (real or pseudonymous) for one's member name. I finally decided I was most comfortable with my original moniker.

That being said, there absolutely are ways of asking more probing (and potentially critical) questions without stabbing a composer in the heart. There's an art to a good interview, one that I make no claim of having perfected but at least am always improving in. Part of it comes in just discovering what the composer's personality is like, whether they have a sense of humor, and what your rapport with them is like. It's hard to predict these things, but almost every composer I've interviewed has been incredibly humble, jovial, candid, and even self-depracating. When that's the case it's hard to retain much in the way of criticism (let alone anger or condescension), but it also allows for some critical or challenging questions to be asked.

Best wishes on the interview, Tim. I can only imagine how tricky these things can be, but, at least on your end, I feel confident it'll go well.

Anyway, after reading this entire blog I'm not sure if I should even be interested in the outcome of the interview. The questions I would like to have answered will never be asked out of diplomacy (what I understand, who wants to jeopardize job and/or reputation), and I'm not really interested so much in the technical issues of this mediocre piece of music.
One thing that comes to mind when reading the posts here is that most people preferred not to ask any questions but to ridicule other people's, even though many of these were considered seriously (yes, I actually think most people actually asking something were aware that these ideas would have to be rephrased, but that that's the job of the interviewer). In summary, why did I even waste my time here.

To be fair, one can ask only so many "critical" questions before the subject begins to feel as though he is under siege. There's something to be said for holding politicians' feet to the fire, but FSM is hardly Meet the Press. This interview is neither the time nor place to vent one's disapproval of the composer's legitimate artistic choices or his general stylistic propensities. Tim has indicated that he will try to tease out as much as possible Hooper's reasoning behind his being so sparing with his predecessors' thematic material, but, in the end, we must accept that it's the composer's prerogative.

I am interested in why he thinks that a very restrained, quiet, and simple approach does do justice to the drama and fantasy of Harry Potter (which in my opinion, as apparently in those of Williams and Doyle, begs for boldness and color).

Somewhere in here there's a fair question to be asked. I think the best thing to do would be to use the composer's own words -- he has referred to his Harry Potter writing as "simpler" to that of Williams -- and ask him to clarify what that means. Depending on his reply, one could perhaps ask if a more elaborate approach might not be more befitting of the complex fantasy universe of Harry Potter.

[SF1_freeze]

How did the interview go Maestro? Can you tell us a bit about it and when will it be released at FSM?

[Bowie]

Let's be fair here, it's not Nicholas Hooper's fault that the recent Harry Potter scores are so bad...

[MattyO]

Something I'd have liked to ask him is would he gracefully stepped down if John Williams did decide to return? Would he consider it an honour to have kept the maestro's seat warm and would he think it would add merit to the series to let Williams return or to continue developing the scores in his own style? Of course, that's not likely a question he'd want to answer.

[Josh500]

Let's be fair here, it's not Nicholas Hooper's fault that the recent Harry Potter scores are so bad...

Well, he wrote them, so it's his fault more than anybody else's...

Something I'd have liked to ask him is would he gracefully stepped down if John Williams did decide to return?

This yes.

Would he consider it an honour to have kept the maestro's seat warm and would he think it would add merit to the series to let Williams return or to continue developing the scores in his own style?

This no. "Kept the maestro's seat warm?" This'd make him sound so redundant somehow...

[Richard Penna]

Let's be fair here, it's not Nicholas Hooper's fault that the recent Harry Potter scores are so bad...

Who else can it be?

Something I'd have liked to ask him is would he gracefully stepped down if John Williams did decide to return?

Well, I'd like to know that too, but I can't imagine how you'd word it without effectively without saying "ok, we both know John Williams is much better than you. Will you let him do the last one without a tantrum?"


Difficult thing is that he's acknowledged that his composing style is 'simple', but doesn't seem to really grasp that the Potter world needs something bigger and more magical. He was very defensive in that aussie interview for OOtP when the guy suggested there weren't any themes and it lacked magic.

[Bowie]

Let's be fair here, it's not Nicholas Hooper's fault that the recent Harry Potter scores are so bad...

Who else can it be?

David Yates. Fully aware of Hooper's abilities and his pre-existing "documentary flourish" limited style, sacrificed a couple of amazing worldwide movie scores to appease a friend, or if you will, for the ease of working with someone with whom he's familiar.

Also to be fair, the first oversight can be forgiven, but letting him come back for a second movie is unforgiveable. I haven't seen the movie, but if it works as mediocrely as OOTP's did in-film as it is mediocre by itself and as everyone else here is saying, and unless Hooper put a gun to Yates' or the movie's producers' heads, then this is a failure at the hands of the executives and the director.

[Josh500]

Also to be fair, the first oversight can be forgiven, but letting him come back for a second movie is unforgiveable. I haven't seen the movie, but if it works as mediocrely as OOTP's did in-film as it is mediocre by itself and as everyone else here is saying, and unless Hooper put a gun to Yates' or the movie's producers' heads, then this is a failure at the hands of the executives and the director.

Yes, I agree. One might say, Yates gave Hooper a chance, put him on the map. Ok, he's a friend and he (might have) shown promise. But no need to go overboard.

[Richard Penna]

Well yes, I was thinking more 'who is responsible for Hooper not having the talent required to score a Potter movie', but that's a valid point too Dan.

Putting yourself in his situation though, the idea of rejecting someone you've worked with for years can't be an easy thing to do, especially when the man's so self-confident in his abilities. The line between a relationship and professional duties must be agonizing sometimes.

[BurgaFlippinMan]

well, how can he be 'rejected' had Yates had the common sense NOT to ask him in the first place? Technically speaking.

[Richard Penna]

Well he didn't know until it was too late that Hooper was rubbish

Really hope Hooper never reads this thread...

[Bowie]

If only Hooper at least had Williams' humility, if he can't have his skillz. In a dream world:

Hooper: "David, you need a composer far better than I am to score this movie."

Yates: "Yes, I know, but they're all dead, except for John Williams, with whom I'll be happy to replace you."

[Luke Skywalker]

sad it is an imperfect world...

[Josh500]

If only Hooper at least had Williams' humility, if he can't have his skillz. In a dream world:

Hooper: "David, you need a composer far better than I am to score this movie."

Yates: "Yes, I know, but they're all dead, except for John Williams, with whom I'll be happy to replace you."

I think the more talented and good you are, the more humble you have to be. Otherwise you'll come across as a braggart or a jerk.

Which explains why Nicholas Hooper isn't humble.

[Charlie Brigden]

If only Hooper at least had Williams' humility, if he can't have his skillz. In a dream world:

Hooper: "David, you need a composer far better than I am to score this movie."

Yates: "Yes, I know, but they're all dead, except for John Williams, with whom I'll be happy to replace you."

I think the more talented and good you are, the more humble you have to be. Otherwise you'll come across as a braggart or a jerk.

Which explains why Nicholas Hooper isn't humble.

That's ridiculous. Take Cristiano Ronaldo, who is a complete asshole who loves himself, but is without doubt one of the top three footballers on the planet.

It would be nice for everyone to be humble, but it doesn't share exclusivity with talent.

[Josh500]

If only Hooper at least had Williams' humility, if he can't have his skillz. In a dream world:

Hooper: "David, you need a composer far better than I am to score this movie."

Yates: "Yes, I know, but they're all dead, except for John Williams, with whom I'll be happy to replace you."

I think the more talented and good you are, the more humble you have to be. Otherwise you'll come across as a braggart or a jerk.

Which explains why Nicholas Hooper isn't humble.

That's ridiculous. Take Cristiano Ronaldo, who is a complete asshole who loves himself, but is without doubt one of the top three footballers on the planet.

It would be nice for everyone to be humble, but it doesn't share exclusivity with talent.

Read carefully what I wrote! I didn't say all talented people are humble. Far from it.

Ronaldo is--to use your word--an asshole exactly because he is not humble.

[Charlie Brigden]

If only Hooper at least had Williams' humility, if he can't have his skillz. In a dream world:

Hooper: "David, you need a composer far better than I am to score this movie."

Yates: "Yes, I know, but they're all dead, except for John Williams, with whom I'll be happy to replace you."

I think the more talented and good you are, the more humble you have to be. Otherwise you'll come across as a braggart or a jerk.

Which explains why Nicholas Hooper isn't humble.

That's ridiculous. Take Cristiano Ronaldo, who is a complete asshole who loves himself, but is without doubt one of the top three footballers on the planet.

It would be nice for everyone to be humble, but it doesn't share exclusivity with talent.

Read carefully what I wrote! I didn't say all talented people are humble. Far from it.

Ronaldo is--to use your word--an asshole exactly because he is not humble.

What I read was "Hooper is less talented because he is not humble". Sorry if I'm misconstruing what you said, but that's how I interpreted it.

[Josh500]

What I read was "Hooper is less talented because he is not humble". Sorry if I'm misconstruing what you said, but that's how I interpreted it.

No, what I meant was Hooper doesn't need to be humble because he isn't very talented or good.

[Mr. Breathmask]

You're just going out of your way to slam Hooper.

[Josh500]

Why "go out of your way"?

Have you read the reviews of this soundtrack?

[Mr. Breathmask]

No, but I can assume they at least refer to the music Hooper composed, rather than aiming petty comments at the man himself.

[Josh500]

No, but I can assume they at least refer to the music Hooper composed, rather than aiming petty comments at the man himself.

Actually no. You should read some of the reviews.

BTW, Mr. Breathmask, are you Nicholas Hooper?

[Bowie]

No, but I can assume they at least refer to the music Hooper composed, rather than aiming petty comments at the man himself.

Well I for one have been leveling my criticisms at the director/producers more than anything. I also called him Hooper Pooper but that wasn't going out of my way to attack him, it just sort of came out naturally and I found it amusing and somewhat apt.