charlesk

Melange, you should try eating your own brain, fried with garlic and parsley. I can understand you recently had a mystical experience with Goldsmith's inspired First Knight score... but Goldsmith doing something remotely close to E.T.? Blasphemy! It's revolting...

It was so weird that so much time passed without yet another debate about George Lucas... I think Return of the Jedi is a good movie, with Vader saving his son. It was very powerful for me at least. The first sign of decaying was when I saw the Ewok Parade... That was the first time it crossed through my mind that Lucas might be not as talented as I thought. Very frequently, a writer writes stories that convey a message for themselves. SW warns about excess of power, about totalitarism, about excess of ego; which in my opinion are the very same flaws that Lucas has been showing nowadays... Charles

Sorry I might have overreacted, it may be just an Amazon error, like the one that once listed Star Wars as 'punk' My emotional response from the ET mistake, was because at that time, I did check what it came in both the 2-disc ($26) and the 3-disc ($63!) versions, and the only difference apparent to me was that the 3-disc version had included the remastered soundtrack CD, which I already have, plus a bunch of books and stuff I didn't care much. I also have the original CD and the original LP with ET's photo. And if the Angela's Ashes dialogs was Williams' idea, well, this is one of the very few bad ideas from the Maestro, which is preventing many fans like me from buying his US version. CharlesK - who sometimes seems like he is more upset than he really is

How rude 8O A voice telling me to eat Charlesk with some Fava beans and a nice Chiantti :roll: Joking, Melange. Keep the spirits high!

From South Park's Episode 607: "The Simpsons already did it" "Well, that's a lot of sea men you got there, Cartman!" Cartman: "Yeah, I bought all that I could at this bank, and then I've got the rest from this guy Ralph in an alley. The sweet thing is, the stupid a**hole didn't even charge me money for it. He just made me close my eyes and suck it out of a hose!"

Annoying This European vs. US version differences are making me angry. I am yet to find the Angela's Ashes "European" version 'with dialogs removed'. Hey, this is a soundtrack, is music, I don't want dialogs in the US version or in any version, if I wanted dialogs on top of the music, I'll rip the music from the DVD! I don't need dialogs to 'understand' and 'feel' the music! And ET DVD 2 CD set, which in the European version supposedly included Williams featurette. I bought the 2-CD US version, and it is NOT there, it was included in a $55 3CD version Now it seems like the European version of Red Dragon came out 'expanded'. Stop it!

Melange, I don't know what you are smoking, but I recommend you quit doing it LOL Oh, I see... if you get like that with Mozart, stay away from Sibelius and Debussy

The development that Williams does with "When you wish upon a Star" is an homage to this little, simple song. When a composer takes a material of somebody else and makes such honorable rendition, it cannot be critizised. If I was the composer of "When you wish upon a Star", I would be more than proud with Williams "borrowing", I would pay Williams to do it, in fact.

And going back to topic (hehe) I think that the experience of watching a movie in a theater is unparalleled with DVDs. The presence of a hundred people around you has to have any effect, denying it is just ludicrous. I even had the experience of watching the same movie in two different cinemas, with different type of audiences, in terms of age, social, economic differences. In one, I didn't enjoy the movie at all, in other I enjoyed it plenty. Just like in sitcoms you need the audience laughs to get into the fun, in many movies it matters a lot how the particular audience you are watching the movie with is reacting to the moviewatching experience. CharlesK - who enjoys ET DVD more by watching it with the live score, complete with audience laughs and applauses

Ender, don't digress from Ross' topic, please show a little respect for his thread 8O CharlesK

The Ark Theme. It sounds more religious to me, and is scary because that's how the god it represents is seen.

I don't care about critics. They can say want they want. Mozart was called a copycat of Haydn, just like early Beethoven. Brahms was called a copycat of Beethoven. Mahler of Wagner. Shostakovich of Mahler.... The point is that critics die to be forgotten along with their useless critics, while creators live forever in their creations. Long live John Williams. CharlesK

Hehe, yeah, right, let's wait for "Tim"/Ross to prove it...duh! No, it wasn't me... I don't even use fancy nicknames or avatars for myself. I have enough with my own persona. And oops, Ross WORINSKY revealed my precious last name in this forum! CharlesK - who is actually a good friend of Ross "The Tyrant" Worinsky Charles II - who is wondering what was Ross' signature that was banned by the moderator

Red Dragon, by Danny Elfman (I mean, 'recently' as in the topic) There are some interesting ideas, rythms and use of new instruments. He's been doing this new stuff since Planet of Apes. I'm glad we are past the 'lalala' choruses of Scissohands and Batman.

I've only seen they are going to restore it, not remove any ghost or anything that belongs to the story. Let's face it, almost all other art expressions come to us 'restored', not in their original shape. Ancient architecture, statues, paintings, even music is restored by being played by contemporary musicians and instruments, which surely sound very different from the originals. Who to blame? Time, and human ego for trying to defeat it. CharlesK

BY the way, I just saw the same "Tim" refreshing Ross/Ender's Assimov's topic.... suspicious....

HAHAHA, maybe that "Tim", the new user that re-discovered this old thread without giving any new opinion to it, is the same Ross/Ender who created it and later on faked surprise to be 're-discovered' Cheap trick... but I went along with other cheap tricks from Ross, so... I think that we are losing the point by telling that editing makes a movie capture the audience. I think is the story. Some stories still capture the audience after many years, others don't. That doesn't mean a story that does not capture the audience for many years is a bad story. It means it's a story for a particular generation, for a particular time. For instance, there are many stories, good ones, based on the Cold War that look ridiculous today. Religion related stories like The Omen scared audiences in its time, but not today. In a few years, people may laugh that in the 90's audiences were scared of ghosts, with movies like Six Sense, The Ring, etc. And movies that rely only in scenes of violence for capturing attention are doomed to become tired in time, when people become more and more used to violent scenes and SFX. In terms of edition, when the story is weak and predictable, character development and acting is poor, like a music video, then movies need to be edited as such. I would say that overuse of ANYTHING is bad taste. Overuse of time, overuse of SFX, of cuts, of violence, overacting, overuse of musical themes, overuse of words! LOL CharlesK

I listen to compilation CD's mainly, because is in my car stereo where I can listen to this music at the PROPER VOLUME LEVEL, every day, in my commuting to and from work. This also keeps my original CD's in good shape. I'm very fond of some cool accidental combinations, like Cinema Paradiso, then Signs, then Angela's Ashes, then Seven Years in Tibet, then The Patriot, etc. Some movies are so sui generis that I make a compilation of them and their sequels (Star Wars, Jurassic Park) For the populi I have a compilation of Main Themes, but I found that people without appretiation for orchestral music will keep talking anyway, instead of enjoying the music, so I don't bother anymore. Compilations make as well good background music for trips; they add interchanging moments of thrill and calm, that frequently match my driving style I've rarely have Morn's luck of introducing film music to classical listeners. I rather do the opposite. I know very few of them, maybe because for me a 'classical music listener' is not a person who thinks that classical is only Sunday Brunch Classics, like Vivaldi and Handel. LOL

Although I promised Ross I won't come back with a thread like this, I guess I will. First reason? Two letters: E.T. A perfect movie. Obvious reason? Citizen Kane. Orson Welles did all things that were prohibited in movies, and got away with them: voice over narration, showing the ceiling, doing flashbacks, etc, a recipe for disaster, yet he turned them sucessfully without any previous experience in cinema. Surprising reason? Morn likes "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?". I have to admit he earned several points with me for this. Unlikely reason? West Side Story: sorry, but I have something emotionally rooted against stereo-typed latino and gringo gangs that dance like pussies on Berstein's superficial 'americana' music. Reasons not to complete the list of movies I like? Most of them were made YEARS ago, which reminds me so few movies that touched me recently. The last movie that impressed me was two days ago: "The Lion in Winter" with Peter O'Toole, Katharine Hepburn, young Anthony Hopkins and surpising good acting by Timothy Dalton, and excelent effective music by John Barry. It proved to me that a good movie is driven by: 1) Story 2) Script/Dialogue 3) Acting 4) Direction Art direction, stage everything else sucked, but I didnt care as far as the above were excelent. Maybe one day, people in Hollywood will remember what a good movie is made with.

You pervert!

It is always difficult to express a musical opinion when there is a "Morn" that permanently uses every post to advertise that Herrmann and Alex North are the best film composers that ever walked the face of Earth. Or when when I say that music has to survive the 'test of time', the same "Morn" affirms that "test of time" is just a "popularity" test. Popular music is not necessary "timeless" music. We are so fortunate this is true, or else, if Morn was right, we should be listening today to very popular "hits" like Spice Girls, New Kids on the Block and Technotronics. Music that survives the test of time, is music that is interesting in more than just one superficial level, music that is better appreciated the more you listen to it, the more you study it, the more you play it. My very simple point is that in the many several hours of Shore's LOTR two movies, there are very few moments that are interesting in more than one level, while in Williams' music, there are plenty of them.

Oh, come on! A Spielberg movie WITHOUT a family rupture? It's not a spoiler, it's a tradition.

I will only appeal to the test of time. If Howard Shore wins ANY serious prize for his score, like Williams did several times, I'll check his music again. If in 20 years we hear Howard Shore music performed in the concert hall for its value as a stand alone classic, then I'll give Shore another opportunity. Don't be confused, Shore's music is effective in the movie, of course that if you have a chorus of 100 people singing in fortissimo in a hall with the acoustics of a big cave, that will give a great scary effect in the movie. But as far as musical value is concerned, Howard Shore hasn't done anything special... yet.

What impressed me the most is the Father and Son theme. I've been listening to it for weeks, and I thought it was beautiful, but two days ago, when I hear at it in the movie, in the divorce scene (oops, spoiler!), it really touched me deeply. It works perfectly in the movie.

Mark, One thing is stating a opinion about a score you liked. ANOTHER thing is stating as a reviewer in a site called musicfromthemovies.com AND say that Howard Shore score is 'more complex and challenging' than Williams' Star Wars. If that wasn't enough, the jerk went ever further by saying just after last statement: "There is so much beauty, so much depth and so much integrity in this music." I take that he copied that sentence from a review of Mahler or Wagner. Using it for Shore's music is just ludicrous.