Leaderboard

At what point did Goldsmith's corpse start decomposing and how do we feel about this?

he was gray not blue and the colors in the sequence were amazing. Prometheus failed in many respects not not visually. It's just a beautifully shot, technically stunning movie without much of a soul, or brain. Oh there I go prequel bashing again.

Ah right, I forgot you don't like the Japanese.

The main problem I have with Episode III (and PoA actually, from the same period) is the action music in the middle portions, specifically Grievous' material. For me, there's nothing remarkable about General Grievous or Grievous and the Droids. It's just stock JW action music. I mention PoA only because The Werewolf Scene to me is an utter mess of a cue. At one point it just descends into some banging metal things. Now I know that somewhat random orchestral hits has been JW's action style for years, but sometimes I prefer to hear something a bit more smoothened.

Williams' style has definitely changed over the years, but I think that as he has advanced in age, perhaps his focus has changed a bit. Surely, he is driven to make a film sing as best he can, and the sheer volume of work he has done constantly lends itself to that. But I think that as he gets older, perhaps he would like to be able to show how much he can re-invent himself. War Horse, I think is a fantastic example of this. When it comes to his very dense action cues, it is true that they've gotten increasingly busy, but I think it is a testament to how he is not slowing down at all. I don't think he is out to prove anything, but when you are the best, where do you go? It sounds a lot like the people posting here are wishing that he would just be the best, and continue to be the best by doing what has worked for him so well. It would seem that such a thing would ultimately become less gratifying. Pushing the envelope is what our beloved Maestro is all about, otherwise we wouldn't love him so much. He is still, and will continue to put his genius out there for all of us to see, and whether it takes this turn or that turn, we will like or not like what he has done. But it is still genius work, and we will always know that it is his best of the time, because he doesn't let anything past his own filter that doesn't belong. I, for one, trust his filter explicitly.

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - Patrick Doyle I find his solo entry into the Potter series to be ridiculously underrated. His voldemort theme is awesome, and something I wish Desplat/Hooper had included in the sequels, the trwizarding task cues are triumphant, and epic, without pushing it; and Harry In Winter is still one of the best cues of the series.

.

.

Waiting for an opening to cover up his virginity and lay it on other people.

We really miss that man.

I completely disagree with everything you've said, and I seriously wonder if you've actually been through a college music program, or have any knowledge of one. The goal of most college music programs is to create well-rounded musicians. Harmonic analysis is the focus of two or three semesters of theory, yes, but that comprises only a small part of a music degree. There's history, ear training, writing, conducting, pedagogy and above all performance. Most music degrees are chiefly about equipping students to find work in professional ensembles or in teaching positions. Some tracks like history and composition prepare students for further studies in grad school. Experience is certainly built into the curriculum. Music education students are required to do a semester of student teaching to earn their degrees. I had to put on an entire recital of my own compositions for my degree. I was able to have a piece performed by the university orchestra. For performance students, a half-recital junior year and a full recital senior year is required. History students have to write a thesis. You get the idea. But no matter your concentration, you will undoubtedly come out of college with a deeper understanding of what music is, where it comes from and how to perform it. Of course a school can't completely let imaginations soar because there would be no structure to such a program. Students are taught all the major forms and historical trends because knowledge enriches. You seem to think that genius develops best in a vacuum. That runs completely against everything we know. Nearly every prodigious composer was also a respected performer and teacher. Some were also conductors, critics, historians, and so on. They were all educated in the musical traditions of their time, and would have been afforded far less freedom than music students today. If you simply turn a person loose in the work world to gain experience, with no training and guidance, the result is usually disastrous. And colleges dismiss musical prodigies for being too individualistic? I'm convinced you just made that up on the spot. Most students I knew, especially piano and string students, began their studies at a very early age. Actually, I was unusual because I didn't start taking piano lessons until age 10. Most gifted and well developed students come into college eager to expand their experience and understanding, not to shut themselves away and ignore the history of music. You say harmonic analysis leads to works like Inception. Do you even know what harmonic analysis is? Most undergrad programs cover music of the late Baroque and Classical periods, counterpoint in the style of J.S. Bach. Do you know who Bach is? Yeah... he doesn't really sound like Hans Zimmer. By the way, Zimmer got his start in pop music and never went through a conservatory program. He didn't care much for the formal training that you seem so eager to trash. There's only one possible cause I can find for all these claims, which is that many of today's blander composers have formal training. For example, Brian Tyler went to UCLA and Harvard. But drawing a straight line between the overproduced, creatively bankrupt music most of us dislike and college music programs is completely wrong. You're ignoring everything the studio system does to composers. Look, college music professors hate this stuff most of all. My composition professor didn't like the idea of me trying to make it as a Hollywood composer because he felt that it stifled creativity and even human decency. You hate today's conformity, but everything you say makes it obvious that you just want yesterday's conformity back. You're about twenty years out of date here. Some game music continues to be looped, but many games call for all the same standalone forms that film does. Many feel that game music is actually outpacing film music at the moment in terms of creativity and expression. I bet you don't really know any game composers. Maybe you've heard of Mario and Pac-man and assume that game music is a bunch of robotic beeps. If you're interesting in actually getting up to speed on this stuff, check out: Nobuo Uematasu Jeremy Soule Mark Griskey Inon Zur Peter Land Jared Emerson-Johnson James Hannigan Christopher Lennertz Stephen Rippy Garry Schyman Jack Wall Just for starters. Completely agree with Henry Buck. I don't think wanner251 understands what he doesn't know.