David Coscina

No, we're not! You stupid asshole! It's YOUR poll! You're the one who asked us to vote on this idiotic issue! I hate you! I hate you!

Holy crap some of you guys are waaaaaay too intense.

I said noteworthy in RELATION TO THEIR OWN OUTPUT early in their careers. I could have gone with Tyler's Children of the Dune I suppose but I do not know what early Revell I would have substituted.

The things each of these scores has in common is that they were early efforts that distinguished their respective composers as major league film scorers. I did not make this poll easy granted but c'mon, it's not a university final exam. I just wanted to see who had the most distinguished and noteworthy score of their early career. I think it's kind of a shoe-in for Horner in this regard. He, like no one else, stormed onto the scene with a thoroughly confident effort. To me, Silvestri's Back to the Future sounds a little awkward and somewhere he actually states that Romancing the Stone was his FIRST orchestral score. As he matured, I really liked the sound he got from a live group but his early outings always sounded wanting to my ears. IMO.

He was still trying then. Well, yes and no. He was new but he was already relying on some classical licks. The more i think about this and how his career has gone, I'm torn. On one level, I abhor his sometimes lack of originality. But the plain fact is, I can cite classical references in Goldsmith, Williams, Kamen, Goldenthal, anyone who studied formally. I do think Horner is an AWESOME dramatist and really knows how to apply music, even existing music, to a scene. I respect his talent for film scoring and his technique (amazing orchestral knowledge) but as often stated, I don't care for his overt borrowings (more from himself than classical composers).

yeah, this is a tough list. Myself, I also love the Goldenthal, Arnold, and even Powell. I wanted to use the best of their earliest output because it just shows these guys are all very talented guys. Horner was truly awesome when he first broke onto the scene though.

From a dramatic standpoint yes, from a balls-to-the-walls lush orchestral standpoint, I would respectfully disagree. I think Rocketeer is on par with ST:WoK and a few other scores. Horner entered a new stage of composing in the mid-'90s. Something a little more stripped down and more electronic. That's not to say I don't love listening to Braveheart and he certainly could rock out (metaphorically) on things like Enemy at the Gates and things like that. Goldenthal was also so promising and I cannot wait to hear Public Enemies this summer. He's due for a great score.

So there are a lot of choices here and I want to clarify that these are not DEBUT scores but notable scores early in these film composers' careers. I tried to draw the line at guys who, today, are still under 60 years of age as I believe that generation is comprised of a lot of heavyweights and it would not be fair to compare the younger guys (different tools, different Hollywood system bla bla). So I almost could not decide between Horner and Goldenthal but I would choose Horner in the end because he was 29 years old and so promising. What do you guys think?

that's a shakuhachi flute. It's Japanese and it's real, not electronic. Horner uses that lick as a "stinger" in a few of his scores. Not to start that age old debate again either.

Totally counts and Magnum Force is another one worth mentioning. Schifrin's jazz/funk scores of the '60s and '70s are legendary.

I do love Jazz Autographs from The Terminal. It's amazing. also Dave Grusin's Fabulous Baker Boys is a solid score. Pat Metheny's Falcon and the Snowman has some nice jazz fusion although the choral opening hymn (written by Lyle Mays) is beautiful in a Baroque sense.

I love The Taking of Pelham 1, 2,3 It's not traditional jazz but it's awesome.

Thanks guys for the responses. Most of them were quite articulate and certainly gave me a different insight to where you are coming from. Sadly, there were others that responded in the most crude fashion I have ever encountered on this forum. I will have to think long and hard as to whether it's honestly worth continuing to contribute or even voice my opinion here if this is the kind of flack I can expect to run into if my ideas run counter to others. Koray, if you can find a quote from me where I belittled a fellow forum member to the same degree as Quint did, please do so and i will retract this statement. Over and out.

So much for trying to keep things constructive on this thread. Fine. Lesson learned. I'll move on.

The Happening was better than most people realized *as far as the music goes. Some of the film was compelling too. But the acting by the leads is awful. Like watching kids in a local play.

I put forth the points simply to highlight the aspects of Zimmer that rub people the wrong way. Indy4, concerning pop music and its simplicity being accepted, this is largely because of the genre. Pop music is popular music by definition. It appeals to a large demographic mostly because it is easily digestible music. Which of course is not "bad" but when you get into the arena of film scoring, which largely relies on the orchestra these day, than there's a built in expectation of an accompanied larger sense of form. Those composers grounded in formal composition have had to learn how to write in larger and more complex structures so they have (traditionally) been better suited in handling the over all form and narrative structure in their score that reflects the dramatic arc of the film. To be able to use various tools, it always works better to have a solid understanding of melodic, harmonic and rhythmic variation, and how to develop motives fully. This is what a composer does. t least this is the technical demands of such a job. I know there are many here who are resistant to the idea that music composition is mostly about perspiration and less with inspiration because it's not as romantic an ideal Yes, JAWS has a simple hook. But look at the fantastically complex secondary themes Williams wrote, or even the set pieces he was prone to writing in the '70s. The Shark Cage Fugue is not just a guy who has technical chops but someone who had a lot of music resources at his command so he took a secondary theme and set it as that subject in a fugue which underlines the conflict both internal and external that was happening at that point of the film. It's a fantastic means with which to musically enhance the drama of the film. Nowadays, montages are accompanied by some cleverly marketed pop song injected into the score like product placement and has little to do with forwarding the film. What does this have to do with Zimmer? Well, like Jesse said, he represents a body of people who are like the Borg from Star Trek, they are a musical collective. And actually, like the Borg, they assimilate anyone who enters their assembly line. Even James NEwton Howard who used to have his own sound, now at times can be indistinguishable from MV-RCP. How sad. Not all scores have to be complex nor even orchestral. As I have said countless times, when Zimmer was kicking around in the '90s, I enjoyed his sound and approach because it was a contrast to other composers. Thelma and Louise is a good score. I don't think Williams or Goldsmith could have done better (okay, I think Jerry could have but that's another topic). Rain Man was also a fine score because it was different. I just find it ironic that Zimmer was largely employed at the beginning of his career because he was disparate from the sound that was omnipresent in Hollywood. Now it IS his sound that is dominant. I guess we're ready for another new"Zimmer"- someone who stands apart from the pack. Hey, maybe John Williams! More likely, someone like Jonny Greenwood who not only is a creative pop giant (okay, rock giant) but also has solid formal music chops. Yes, perhaps Greenwood represents the genesis of the complete musician. someone who skates between two styles and has a solid understanding and grounding from each one. Hope some of this helps build on my initial post.

So, since some of us get heat for spouting off our vitriole regarding everyone's reviled film composer, let's try to ascertain why we keep doing so. Even though the topic title implies or rather expects to garner the usual one-liners, I would like to thoughtfully probe WHY Zimmer is reviled so much, especially on this forum. 1. He hails from pop music background. Okay, so is this really a crime? Danny Elfman also comes from Oingo Boingo and receives a lot less heat. WRONG. When Elfman first tackled Batman (1989) he was berated by the establishment and outright called a "guy who lazily gets orchestrators and conductors to write his music" by a professor of composition (Micah B. Rubenstein) in KEYBOARD magazine back in 1989 (to which Elfman wrote a thoughtful rebuttal save for the sentence where he calls Rubenstein a "dumb f*&^"). But Elfman's influences were Herrmann, Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Kurt Weill among others that obviously allowed him to draw from a richer harmonic and orchestral tapestry when he was doing such memorable scores like Edward Scissorhands, Dick Tracy, and The Nightmare Before Christmas. Also, Elfman HAS evolved throughout the years and has stretched beyond his more tonal bonds of his early film career. Aside from Steve Bartek and a conductor, he's done the composing himself. No 5 other composers listed on separate cues. While he also likes to use electronics, he retains an organic, acoustic sound to his music. He rarely doubles a French Horn with a CS80 or some such nonsense. Where Zimmer developed his trademark sound through outside sources (like patches on synthesizers or doubling things with synths), Elfman's sound has been signified by chordal or harmonic turn of phrases. He's also a much better contrapuntalist than ZImmer will ever hope to be. And because John Williams is so strong with this, it goes to the point that ardent Williams fans would not necessarily like the disparity in qualitative approach to making music. This is really a loaded section because pop music also denotes simpler music structures. This is why I theorize ZImmer is so popular. His music is emotionally immediate. It's very palpable and digestible. There are never any big chunks to chew on and mull about. It's also very viscerally overwhelming which is also why I suspect people get so irate and defensive because a criticism of Zimmer is a criticism of their own feelings. Fair enough. I can accept this. 2. Zimmer employs various people to help complete a score So, Hans Zimmer once upon a time was given a chance to enter the world of film scoring by Stanley Myers (the guy who is largely known for that lovely Cavatina from The Deer Hunter). In the spirit of "paying it forward" he create a place where he could bring untapped talent to the forefront. One of his first finds was Mark Mancina who we all know scored SPEED and then went on to a fairly decent career. He still is writing although seems to have distanced himself from MV. Anyhow, Mancina's resume was surprisingly stacked with rock credits having done some work with Keith Emerson among others from the prog rock generation. Hardly a novice by the time he got to Hollywood. Mancina also aided ZImmer in his Oscar winning Lion King score BTW. Later additions to Media Ventures were John Powell (whom I like and respect a fair bit), Harry Gregson-Williams, Jeff Rona (who had been writing excellent film scoring articles for years for KEYBOARD), Klaus Badelt, to more recent guys like Steve Jablonsky. If you read any one of their CVs, you will see a crapload of credits and experience in the music industry before they ever set foot in the hallowed hallways of Remote Control Productions. So, what Zimmer was in truth looking for were guys who had resumes that reflected they were proven commodities but not well enough known to garner attention to the fact that they would be assisting him (writing actual cues) for his projects. Once Zimmer's altruism turned to assembly line, it was a downturn in the film music industry were scores from any one of his underlings sounded exactly the same. Thus the homogenous, predictable age of scoring came prevalent in Hollywood. Another reason to dislike him. 3. Hans Zimmer HAS range Er, no, his co-writers do. When you employ so many underlings, it's of course possible to have a sound the varies from score to score. But sadly, I personally can hear the same diminished to I chord cadence for every dramatic revelation in every one of his damned scores. What is really upsetting is that once in a while, Zimmer does come up with a interesting idea, like that ascending glide for The Dark Knight, because of the inclusion of so many hands in the pot, you cannot even give him props for it because it could be any one of his collaborators. Even in this case, the neat sound was borrowed from Elliot Goldenthal's infinitely superior HEAT (1995). Now I will submit that tight deadlines and long scores have warranted collaborations throughout the history of Hollywood. Herrmann and Newman teamed up on The Egyptian, Goldsmith relied on Arthur Morton or Alexander Courage to flesh out his ideas in their orchestrations. Very few composers have actually "gone it alone" because it IS almost impossible to compose, orchestrate, conduct, record, a symphony's worth of music in 3 weeks. James Newton Howard has his own band of merry men he used for the breakneck scoring of King Kong (2005). Even Howard Shore, who does orchestrate his own scores, has assistants. In this business, you need supports. The question is, how entrenched are those supports in the creative process. Where Goldsmith or Shore or whomever still retained complete control of the notes they were putting to paper, Zimmer gets his mates to actually compose parts of the score. This render any singular style impotent and the musical continuity or "voice" of the film is derailed because you have different personalities approaching each scene independently. This makes it difficult to have some kind of inherent narrative flow and development of thematic ideas through the score which also explains why almost every moment from a MV score sounds like the big climax from the film (at least the blockbuster scores). It's because the one guy working on that single scene is treating it that way. Okay, that's enough for now. Feel free to add to this. I DO HOPE that aside from my provocative topic title, we can keep this informative and constructive..

Yared is one of the most accessible and kind hearted people working in the film composing business. So is Bill Stromberg although he's more known for his amazing conducting (he does score films too!)

Interesting. Why would you go with The Happening Jesse? Oh, and to my knowledge, JN Howard has never used "synth horns" in any of his Shyamalan scores. They are real french horns possibly played with the bells up to give them a brassier sound though. Unkreakable did have that evolving drum beat but even that was interesting as Howard applied some neat processing of the sounds through expanded reverb (starts small, gets vacuous by the climax- excellent)

I thought it was an above average film and it definitely improves with time.

I find it tough enough without even including 'Signs'. So it's a battle between 'Unbreakable', 'Village' and 'Lady in the Water' with a narrow win for 'The Village' because of the love theme and it's sublime variation in 'Those we don't speak of'. Yes, the Village is also beautiful. I have to say that I have enjoyed ALL of Howard's scores for the Shyamalan films. Some of them are stronger than others but every one has at least one or two standout tracks. I love the opening titles of The Happening as well as "Be With You" and "End Credits". Unbreakable is still my favorite Shyamalan film mind you. So beautifully directed and acted. It also was partly the inspiration of the t.v. show Heroes (that and X-men). It's Howard's efforts on these films where you can almost see the torch being passed down from Goldsmith to him. Much less so on his non-Shymalan outings, post 2000 at least.

I searched to see if someone had done a poll on this but could not find one so I figured I would start this. It's no secret that some of JN Howard's best music has come out of his collaborations with director M Night Shyamalan even if the general quality of the filmmaking has diminished with every successive film. This is actually a tough poll because I think Howard's BEST score is Signs. It works so well with the film but I would still defer to Unbreakable or Lady in the Water as my favorite score because I really only enjoy the first and last tracks from Signs. What do you guys and gals think?

Bold and beautiful. You have to be a musician to appreciate it. How so? I'd explain it to you, but you have to be a non-musician to understand. Grow up

Just listened to Goldsmith's Twilight Zone (FSM release), Mancini's Nightwing, and Wendy/Lisa's HEROES. Of the three, and not surprisingly, Goldsmith's made the biggest impression (I also know the music the best). Mancini's score is the first I own in my collection of his and I really like it. Sort of lukewarm to Wendy/Lisa's Heroes even though I think it suits the show wonderfully. At least I got a signed CD booklet. Truth be told, I'm still on a high from Mysterious Island though. It blew me away and that does not happen much lately. Now back to writing my own score! No more listening to other sources!!!