David Coscina

All is not lost. A good many concert composers have been influenced by classic Williams, Herrmann, Goldsmith and you can hear their sound in concert works. Even John Adams' City Noir was said to be inspired by a '30s film style and you can totally hear it. It's whacked out in places and I love how unpredictable the music is. For me, to continue enjoying film music, I have to change what I get out of it. I don't expect to learn anything from what I hear these days the way I did in the '70s. The style and mandate has changed. I've also had 20 years of music training and experience so it's harder for me to be impressed with a lot of stuff I hear for many reasons. I have to go back to Shostakovich, Bartok, Prokofiev, Ravel, and those guys to be seriously floored by writing any more. As a little suggestions, take a listen to Bernard Haitink's reading of Shostakovich's 10th Symphony, second mvmt. It's perhaps one of the ballsiest "action" cues I've heard in recent years. It seriously mops the floor up with everyone scoring films these days if you want a kinetic energy. I always go back to this mvmt when I want to get the heart racing. Top drawer.

I like Desplat's Potter. End of story. I don't need to qualify it after all the endless observations I have put forth or Bluemenkohl or others have. I know he would like me to elaborate with some more musical observations (thanks for the nice comments BTW!) but iI honestly don't have the time these days. Those who like the score don't need musical analyses to help them to like it. Those who don't IMO have turned a blind eye to all of the terrific observations by us "fan boys" while offering no real solid reasoning aside from the most basic superficial observations. That's my reaction. At the end of the day, I see this as satisfying anyhow. Desplat has been hired to score the second film, I continually play HP7 pt1 and enjoy it and get a lot out of each listening and that's what's really important. I've enjoyed conversing with fellow enthusiasts and observing those little jewels within the score. That's what makes forums like this fun.

Actually they should track it to Varese's Arcana. I think that's dark enough for Satan. That'll scare the crap outta everyone. Or if they want some real melodic oomph, they can use the entire canon of Prokofiev. A little Romeo and Juliet for the romance parts, Scythian Suite for the ominous stuff, Peter and the Wolf for the whimsical sections, and Fiery Angel for the Voldemort material. Or else you could lift large sections of Bartok. Concerto for Orchestra, The Miraculous Mandarin, The Wooden Prince, and that lovely chestnut Music for Strings, Percussion and Celeste. Speaking of which, I'm sure the same people who cry that Desplat didn't give them any themes are the same folks who'd get all the way through Concerto for Orchestra and all declare they heard no themes.

You still offer only subjective reasoning sf1. Your posts only offer an explanation as to what you don't like about the score, not objective musical analysis. If you cannot see this I fear your argumentative skills are on par with your music analysis skills. If you just expressed your concerns with how it affects you than you'd get left alone but you're most certainly not offering any deep musical nor film score epiphanies in your posts. And acting out in frustration to those who take you to task for it only makes you look childish.

There's a quote from Voldemort's theme amidst Sky Battle in the winds during that bridge section. Cool.

I should check out Frost Nixon. I've heard good things. I like parts of Inception but I cannot really play it since I have yet to see the film. I won't lie- spending an afternoon talking shop with Zimmer would be cool. He seems like a nice guy, very down to earth. Then I could possibly convince him to let me score a scene from his latest project. Then again, given my penchant for Goldsmith and Herrmann in my own style, I think I'd stick out like a sore thumb. Oh well!

I agree. I think pitting these two together is a little irrelevant. They both have a love of traditional scoring but express it in different ways. Giacchino is more raw and muscular in his action tracks while his melodic tracks are more sparse chordal stuff. Desplat has a refined sense of shaping lines, orchestration, etc. He too can be economic which is why both these guys are getting A list jobs- they know how to work the system and give directors music that doesn't appear to conflict with their precious films but at the same time, satiating film score fans' thirst for interesting music because they're working on a very deliberate level. I'm more than glad we have big scores by them and not just the R-C factory that way we did a few years back. Not to bash R-C. Just saying that I like diversity and Giacchino and Desplat are two very singular compositional voices in the film world at present.

The only thing I can say is that, personally, for whatever reason, JW scores often have both an immediate and long-lasting impact. There’s usually something there that’s memorable, iconic (or whatever term one might want to use) that I can identify and recall after the very first listen. That wasn’t the case with Desplat’s DH1. I very much enjoyed the music -- it kind of felt like a journey, in a way -- but there wasn’t much that I found especially memorable (as a contrast, I found Hooper’s HBP more memorable after a first listen). So I certainly get the criticism that the DH1 score doesn’t have an immediate impact on listeners or moviegoers -- in a very real sense, DH1 “doesn’t work” for listeners in the same way that a Williams score might have (pure speculation notwithstanding). The thing with Desplat’s score, though, is that I enjoy it on repeat more than some scores which I enjoyed more after a first listen (like, say, Avatar, if that makes sense). Furthermore, I think Desplat’s score works exceptionally well both within the context of the film and as a listening experience at home (or at work). I’d have liked something more immediately memorable and identifiable element to the score -- something to form a thematic backbone, so-to-speak. But I tend to think that it’s a matter of subjective taste, rather than objective criticism. Whether you like Desplat’s competently written score or you dislike Desplat’s competently written score ... it's still a competently written score. And after several listens I *do* find it memorable and almost entirely enjoyable. Other than the lack of a prominent theme, I really can’t find much to say against the score. About the only thing I dislike are the few moments when the score becomes overly loud and nearly obnoxious (parts of "Bathilda Bagshot" and "Destroying the Locket" come to mind -- I dislike JW's "The Knight Bus" for the same reasons). THANKYOU SAM! See guys, this is what I call an objective post. It's not blindly gushy and Sam outlines things that doesn't resonate with him but is still able to acknowledge the skill behind the music. You know, I shouldn't get all bent out of shape. Many Williams lovers on this forum don't like his War of the Worlds or the bulk of Saving Private Ryan for the same reasons, as if Williams owes it to the world to be a one-trick pony. I would actually submit that the Ohama Beach theme, that low brass statement, and the one that pervades throughout the score of SPR is actually more moving than Hymn to the Fallen because it matches the tone and tempo of the film more successfully. I also love WotW for its sheer aggression and primitive quality. Or the stark parts of A.I. I actually don't care for Williams' more over-the-top warm themes, except maybe the Home Alone or Hook themes because they have sentimental value for me. I much prefer his muscular, intellectual approaches. but that's a personal preference, not a reflection of anything he's not done in the music. I think Sam really nails the aspect about Desplat that some find off-putting in that he's very precise and detailed about his music. There are often shadings that one could totally miss. I like my music to challenge me because when I discover something new, it makes me happy. It makes for an enjoyable listening experience for many times over. I remember the old adage that things which are immediately rewarding can lose their luster over time whereas things that take time to appreciate last much longer. I find this was many film scores to be honest. I listen to them intensely for a while but then often never go back to them again. Some scores, like Benjamin Button, have endured. I still enjoy listening to it. I can listen all the way through that score without skipping a track. The same cannot be said for Williams' post 90's scores, nor just about anyone else. Once again, that's my issue, not the composers'.

Which is why some of us Williams enthusiasts like Desplat- because he's widely accepted in Hollywood in spite of the current trends and he is putting out music that encompasses compositional practices of yesteryear. The final track in Benjamin Button could easily have been at home in a concert of Satie's music.

I'm with Koray. You guys can rationalize it all you want- you don't like it, fine. But stop trying to sound intelligent because you're still using adjectives like "weak" that don't specifically support your claim aside from the fact that you clearly cannot digest anything that's not overt and hitting you over the head. If you guys know so much about what is "strong" tell me by getting into the music and describe on an intervalic basis why Williams' themes are stronger and Desplat's are weaker. Why Williams' harmonies and orchestration work and Desplat's doesn't. I'd like to know what makes Sky Battle so uninspired. Please, obviously you guys have so much more knowledge than those of us "Desplat fan boys" so if you're going to pretend to know what the hell you're talking about, the podium is all yours. But if you just start throwing out the crap that I've seen and try to pass it off as an expert view, well, I must defer to my initial statement that you're full of bullshit. Having an opinion is fine and we all know those who don't like the score. But when those naysayers start whipping out the ol' tried and true "blinded fan boy" reasoning, it irks me beyond belief. And I guess you could also add a good many A list Hollywood profile composers to the "fan boy" club of Desplat because if you ask around, he's very well respected amongst fellow composers. See you guys, I'm off to work on a film score..... EDIT- I will say one thing more- I do wish more filmmakers would give Julian Nott a go at big fiilms. If anyone has ever listened to his Wallace and Gromit scores, they are bloody brilliant. I think Nott would have done an admirable job on HP. Pity he and Chris Gordon don't get more work. I think they're fantastic composers. 'bye!

That's total bull**** sf1. You clearly have selective memory or skipped past the thoughtful posts from the advocates of this score.

Funny. I find Benjamin Button one of the most emotive scores I've heard in years and I've still not seen the film....interesting. And I absolutely abhor Giacchino's Trek theme, It makes me want to pull my teeth out. So, as the saying goes, different strokes for different folks.

Something tells me a Gordon Harry Potter wouldn't have divided film score fans as much. THere are a number of high profile films that I would have loved to hear Gordon's interpretation on. He commented to me during an interview that he would have loved to score Lord of the Rings. That said, he had nothing but nice things to say about Shore so it wasn't a value judgement, just a wish for himself as a composer. It's funny because most of Giacchino's music strikes me in the same manner that Desplat's strikes others- it's technically very good but I find it not feeling largely. There are some exceptions of course like "Parting Sorrow" from Let Me In but ever since he graduated from Alias and his vid game scores, I haven't felt as connected to his music. I find a lot of feeling in Desplat's music because of his chord choices. Obviously it's subjective and I'm sure Giacchino's melodies and harmonies strike a chord in a lot of his supporters which is why we have this variety in music tastes and preferences. Of course, we all have the common love of John Williams' music so that's a nice unifying thing..

But you can apply this to any stimulus or system. Truly the only right way to score a film is using Goldsmith's thematically unified approach. John Williams and his action setpieces is just whoring himself to the audience. But Goldsmith ventured into abstract, textural scores like POTA which wasn't thematically unified. Texturally unified yes.

I agree completely that that approach to scoring, or as Williams once put it - to "condition" the audience via the subtle use of thematic development is by far the most effective technique of all scoring craft, but to conveniently overlook other techniques or to even write them off as being inferior is perhaps a little bit arrogant, after all - Williams' own scoring philosophy and in turn Powell's are just that - philosophies. They're just as open to subjective perceptions as the music itself. Yes, the technique you described is "what great scoring is about", but it isn't the only skill which makes for great scoring, clearly. Well, I do see your point. Jonny Greenwood's There Will be Blood is not a unified score in the same way John Williams' E.T. is. but then again, it's not the same kind of film. It provides atmosphere and is almost counter to the film's setting which is very cool. Greenwood actually mixes the strings with delayed ebow guitar which is terrific. I love his approach on this film. but yeah, there's not a lot of recapitulation from cue to cue. There's a couple variations on his themes but it's not as developed as Powell's HTTYD. I think something like Zimmer's Thin Red Line is a fine comparison to There Will be Blood and works equally well. I'm definitely not comparing apples to oranges. I'm thinking about the scores that Zimmer should have applied a more conventional technique because the film's construction itself almost dictates that. Things like Last Samurai or Batman Begins. I think using the minor 3rd interval as the seed of a larger theme would have been a fine idea. but the minor third never really develops in that film. In The Dark Knight, he overlays that idea with his "theme" and tracks like "A Dark Knight" are largely successful because they do have that inner logic. To say that Hans is not capable of this approach is ignorant on my part. After scoring 100 films over 20 years, it's not possible. But I think that the grounding in some fundamentals cannot hurt a composer. It's like saying to a bridge engineer "oh studying physics isn't necessary" and we've probably all see what happens why they forget to take sound waves into consideration. I think the biggest problem when discussing music is whether people want to take it to the cut and dried "science" of it or whether they want to remain in the subjective area of descriptive non-musical adjectives. This is further convoluted when some try to imply it's all subjective. I heartily disagree with that. Music is a system that has evolved over centuries. If it was all philosophy and interpretation, there would be no musical vernacular, no classes in theory, no conservatories, and really no field of musicology. Fact is, there are and but that measure, music can be broken down and objectified. Whether you wish to see it that way or not is irrelevant because it is what it is. Oh crap, I got sucked into responding again! Sorry!!!!

I personally would have liked to hear Hans develop his electronic chops more, meaning I would have been happy with more purely electronic scores of his like Rain Main or Thelma and Louise or Driving Miss Daisy which is possible one of his more successful scores because it's a period film but scored with a contemporary palette. I think Zimmer is totally comfortable using this medium. As someone noted, he's more of an expert on synthesis than Williams will ever be because that's how he developed. Obviously when discussing film music, it's clearly not possible to isolate the music's qualitative aspect apart from its source because the music was borne out of that. Especially in this day and age when the mandate is to keep things as "real" as possible, a composer is limited to certain compositional devices to provide the appropriate music setting. So, divorcing ourselves from the label of "good" or "bad" music as an absolute form, I will say that Zimmer, can be heavy handed at his application of music to picture. I distinctly remember the scene in Last Samurai where Ujio is fighting Algren in the rain and Zimmer's score crescendos to a dramatic loud dynamic to underscore Algren's tenacity and resolve. It's totally overdone and melodramatic. Then again, I can name a bunch of scenes where Williams went at it full out to the point where you can clearly hear the mixer pushing down the faders so that the audience can hear the dialog. So every is guilty of this from time to time although Alfred Newman actually wrote notes in his scores where dialog entered and exited so he could lighten up the activity in the score to accommodate- genius! Also, and this is actually kinda getting back to understanding form and development, I think that Zimmer's limitations compositionally have hurt him in understanding how to develop his key themes to their best potential. Do we hear a lot of variation in his music? I'm actually asking fellow forum members, perhaps Koray who does have a broader knowledge of his music, to lend some examples. Compare Zimmer's Inception to say, John Powell's How To Train Your Dragon. The architecture of Powell's score is scary in how he uses his key motives and themes in subtle and overt ways throughout the score. The more I listen, the more I hear these delicate shadings. This is absolutely the sign of a composer who KNOWS form and function. Powell is also formally trained and scores like HTTYD benefit from it dramatically because there is an unconscious development and genesis of his music that follows the story. I never got that from The Dark Knight and I even like parts of that score! Even a score I like a lot of, the Last Samurai, does not have this kind of linear development. Okay, you guys want specifics? HTTYD opens with the credits and you hear a bras chorale version of the Flying Theme. It's brief and very unadorned. But, it also comes up in a creepy string harmonic variation version when Hiccup finds Toothless the day following the dragon siege on the village. It then is recapped in the magical track "Forbidden Friendship" playing counterpoint no less to the "Toothless/Hiccup" theme. When we finally get to "Test Flight" Powell gives us a fully developed version and because the audience has heard this theme in various guises leading up to this, the music is majestic, powerful, triumphant and glorious. We, the audience, have been primed. Powell managed to accomplish something that Williams and his ilk had done on seminal scores like Superman, E.T.,etc. introducing a central idea and seeing it through to fruition. This isn't about music chops or training at the end of the day. IT SERVES THE FILM BETTER. And this is what great film scoring is about. It doesn't hurt that it's completely enjoyable to listen to on its own because in no small part of its inner architecture. And this is a direct result of Powell's background. Knowing symphonic form, having a grasp of larger structures allows a composer to bring this and weave their score throughout the film making it a cohesive whole, not a series of unrelated cues. I may not like some of Powell's over-indulgences in terms of orchestration but HTTYD is a solid score dramatically as one can get. And I just point out the development of ONE theme. There are other theme groups that he manipulates in various ways as well. It's worth pointing out that the piano rendition of the Flying Theme when Hiccup finds himself missing his leg was as poignantly scored as I have ever seen. Anyhow, I honestly cannot analyze nor hear this kind of structure in the Zimmer scores I have. I hear some minor variations but nothing too substantial. So this has nothing to do with Zimmer's use of the orchestra or not. And I do feel very strongly that it IS relevant to the success or failure of a score if it doesn't have this intrinsic sense of development and build. Powell clearly has it. I don't think Zimmer does as much. I think I'm done here. I've tried to explain my viewpoint. I'm sticking with it. And it DOES NOT MEAN I HATE ZIMMER! I believe objectivity is removing one's self from personal bias and analyzing things that way. I can tell you scores that I didn't like from Williams- parts of Spacecamp are HORRIBLE! the synth stuff is truly atrocious and no matter what musically cool things he might be doing, I cannot stomach the sound. So, I can be objective. I don't think everything Williams has ever written is pure gold. Most of his post '90s output is merely good. I don't think he writes at the level he used to in most cases. He's evolved perhaps and some scores like Geisha are homeruns (although I admittedly cannot get through the whole score- I like parts of it on its own). I'm going to go back to a positive thread like the Desplat one...well, positive in that I like his music and really enjoy his Harry Potter immensely. 'Bye guys! Have fun!

Didn't Mancina help out with Prince of Egypt? Or Gregson Williams?

I agree steb And Thor I was responding to a specific query of Bluemenkhol

I understand. I think Blue wanted to better understand my perspective so I tried to illustrate it using examples of composers we all know (and love in most cases).

Well first, I don't like the word "sophisticated" because it infers a class division. And it's highly subjective. At least that's how I interpret the term. Now, if you want to talk complex, well, here's my musical observations: - Williams uses multi-meters, chromatic harmonies, unusual chord resolutions, orchestration that is both full and Romantic as well as modernist and detailed depending on the score and scene. His sense of melodic motion is almost unmatched by any other living composer working in film at present. I will say that his scoring senstivity has gotten better over the years, even if it's to the detriment of the music sometimes. Something like Memoirs of a Geisha, for me, is the perfect combination of Williams' traditional tendencies (Confluence) but also displays a greater deference to the narrative (Brush on Silk, Becoming A Geisha). Williams is working in the language set by Prokofiev, Korngold, Strauss, Bartok, Elgar, basically guys who seriously knew their shit about music. - Zimmer doesn't compose retarded music like so many pop songs, let's be clear. but he doesn't have the breadth of music knowledge that Williams or Goldsmith or Morricone had/has. This means he's got a more limited palette to draw from, and I'm not just talking about the medium he's using, such as the orchestra. If you actually strip down his themes and Williams' themes to a piano reduction, Williams' themes still impart almost everything that the dressed up version communicates because he's using the full vocabulary of music (harmony, melody, rhythm, counterpoint) to convey his intentions. Zimmer of course uses these devices too much in a much simpler form. His harmonic language is much simpler- meaning he's using basic harmonies- triads or occasionally 7ths), his rhythmic sense is more rock based (relegated to 2/4, 3/4, 4/4, etc and usually chugging along at a steady tempo with little ritardandos (slight changes in tempo that help shape a line or section). Zimmer's not the only one to be fair- there are a lot of guys like this. And there were a lot of "hummers" in the times of Herrmann and North so it's really not fair to pick on Zimmer because he's doing more streamlined music. I'm sorry if I come off as snooty. What happens sometimes is that my respect for the medium of music, something I've been involved for 25 years, gets me a little to passionate and I lose some objectivity. I would never tell anyone what to like or what not to like. The fact that everyone here likes Williams means that they do like a variety of music if they also like Zimmer. I listen to jazz, New Age, rap, reggae, metal, everything except country music (sorry, I hate it with a passion), and there's merit in each genre in terms of expression. I think it's more telling that whenever someone presents an analytical viewpoint of Zimmer, they are immediately labelled a snob. I think it's not respecting the time and thought the author of the observation put into writing the post. Bluemonkhol, I largely agree with your viewpoint and because you asked what I define as sophisticated (which I re-interpreted as "complex") I tried to explain it in the terms I know best. I hope I articulated this well enough. I'm sure the usual suspects will skip all of the technical points and summarize that I'm a Zimmer hater or envious or some such nonsense. But the one thing I've learned is that it's not my obligation to changed anyone's views. I can only present mine and that's it. Cheers!

Did I ever say Williams was BETTER than Zimmer? Please point me to where I make a qualitative judgement. Also, and I didn't articulate this right which I already admitted, when I said the Lady Ga Ga thing I was trying to say those people who don't listen to any other film composers, just Zimmer. Honestly guys, some of you are being rather selective and not looking at all of my posts on this topic. And I agree that sophisticated music is not necessarily more effective than simpler music. Keith Emerson wrote some film music, nighthawks for instance, which has a great busy theme and he's clearly one of the finest keyboard players of all time, but hes not a better film composer than Zimmer. When someone has racked up as much experience over 20 years doing film scores, and being quite successful, obviously he's doing something right. But i will stick with my stance that it's still up in the air whether Zimmer's style will pervade or whether Hollywood will regress to a more conventional sound as it has done on several instances. I love Goldenthal's music but did you notice that after about 5 years or so, the demand for his sound (tone clusters, rips, atonality, etc) has diminished? When he first cane onto the scene, a lot of guys were copying his sound, and I've never heard as much aleatoric sections in scores as I did in the late '90s. Even Goldenthal himself moved away from his sound after Titus. So it's obvious that there are trends. Zimmer's sound has lasted longer so perhaps he's crystalized an approach that responds with filmmakers and audiences alike that will endure. I also think it doesn't help that Zimmer has two distinct compositional personalities. There's the guy who's scored Backdraft, The Rock, and those Bruckheimer nonsense, and them there's the Hans who's done As Good As it Gets, thin red line, Sherlock Holmes, Lion King, Thelma and Louise. Then there's the middle Zimmer who has done the Batman films, Last Samurai, things like that. Kinda like Morriconnde in that way.

Clearly I didn't articulate my post well. I did NOT want to come off as criticizing Zimmer. I like some of his music. I was extrapolating upon Joey's post. I don't know why it's forbidden to try to explain or analyze aspects about film scores. I will add that I have provided other observations on this post that are not anti Zimmer. I think previous posts of mine from the past have made some people biased. Also, I laugh a bit when someone declares I'm not objective enough. I'm trying to apply musical knowledge to form my observations. I think it's a real cop-out when I take the time to offer my perspective on this or other topics only to have them summarily dismissed when it appears as though some people have clearly not read the body of my actual posts, which in turn leads to my frustration. then there are others whom I clearly don't share much opinions in common and appear to like to bait me whenever possible. that makes me more upset but at least gives me something to focus my energies on at the dojo. p.s. Mark, thanks for your on-going support. Edit- Quint, I didn't take offence to your post. I am very small potatoes and post a couple things here but mostly unfinished stuff. I worry about having my music ripped off so I don't usually put out finished quality material on the web.

Well I do see Joey's point. It's amazing to go through Desplat's Harry Potter score on YouTube and see comments like "Hans Zimmer should have scored this". That would have been truly awful in my opinion. As much as Williams can score scenes with a leaden baton at times, he also has an exquisite sense of detail and restraint. I do not hear that in Zimmer's approach. And let's face it, the demographic of people who listen to Zimmer and not other film composers usually fall into the masses who also think Lady Ga Ga is a genius. I mean let's get some perspective folks. I also don't care for the rationale that just because someone is influential in their time that makes their contribution timeless. We'll have to wait a few decades to see whether Zimmer's sound is in fact evolution or whether it's an aberration in the genesis of this medium. Williams and co. (people who stick with what the rabid Zimmer lovers call "antiquated") are tapping into a sound and form that is TIMELESS because it's been around for centuries, not decades. Remember the disco craze in film scoring? Not many people still want or listen to that. Also those endless shit synth scores of the '80s. Ughhh. If I never hear a DX7 Rhodes or a LinnDrum again I will be happy (I cannot even stand when Goldsmith or Williams used them!). So it will be interesting to see what transpires. I think Zimmer's harmonic language is much simpler than Williams or even Desplat's by a wide mile. Because of this, his music is more accessible. He emphasizes strong rhythms, something that our primitive ancestors could relate to so it makes sense that it appeals to a much wider demographic than what we would call sophisticated music. I'm not trying to slag Zimmer for this, just point out my observations, because it's largely true. Major or minor triads, simple I-IV-V-I progressions, the off half diminished chord to I cadence as a means to emphasize a moment, these are all fairly simple devices. Now, I also must say that Williams has had his share of critics in his time. The classical community still regards his work as a lesser quality and derivative of the masters. So it's all a matter of perspective at the end of the day. I think those "high brow" sorts are as ignorant as the common people, maybe worse because they think they are somehow better than everyone when they know about as much about Bartok's use of the febonacci system in his Music for Strings, Percussion and Celeste as the guy on the street listening to maestro Zimmer...

Canada iTunes also doesn't have these tracks. Bummet

What store did you buy them from???