Ludwig

Interesting. I'd say they both do. Maybe Williams' uniqueness is subtler, less in-your-face like Morricone's off-the-wall orchestrations. Williams' orchestration tends to hide a lot of his originality (uniqueness!) because it is usually so traditional.

I see what you're saying. There are many common elements among a good deal of Hollywood composers, but I would argue Williams has a unique sound. For example, for scenes of action or mystery, he often uses parallel minor chords supported by a bass that frequently sounds dissonant notes (the "Star Wars" sound, if you will). That's a trademark Williams-ism. And there are plenty of others, just check out the thread where we get into the nitty-gritties of them: http://www.jwfan.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=20206&hl=%2Bunique+%2Bwilliams-isms

Definitions are at the heart of the matter in any debate. For some, originality = innovation of musical techniques, whereas for others (myself included), originality = uniqueness of overall style. I'd rather see people use the term "innovative" or "novel" when they say "original" in the former sense. It gives others the misleading impression that there's nothing of value in a piece of music unless it does something new from a technical point of view. It's a mode of thought that plagues contemporary concert composers and contributes to the snobbery that film music (as epitomized by Williams) is worthless music. That's what I'm talking about.

Williams' style isn't, his tunes are. I hardly think that people listening to BOOK THIEF, GEISHA, MUNICH or MINORITY REPORT find them very distinctive. Sure, there are less distinctive scores, but by and large his scores are very recognizable. As for Williams' style being unoriginal, I think we're already disagreeing on the definition of originality.

There is a temptation that runs rampant among contemporary composers to mistake novelty of technique for originality. Sure, he mentions "novel combination", but when he says he insinuates that novel combinations are somehow unoriginal. If these combinations are so unoriginal, how is it that Williams' style remains one of the most instantly recognizable among, well, all composers? People really ought to stop thinking that original means you're going to hear techniques that have never been used before. Please, please, please just stop it.

You have to give him credit, though. While he may be off in some of the details, I think his broader points are largely on the mark. So you're probably right on these things, but I see the books as a boon to film music analysis. Let's be thankful, Sharky!

I was recently directed to TWO new free e-books on film music analysis self-published online just last year by a composer and university lecturer named Brian Morrell: http://www.brianmorrell.co.uk/filmbooks.html Lots of great examples (including many Williams) are taken apart here - and he clearly has access to scores! With over 700 pages worth of material, it's a phenomenal resource for anyone interested in film music, from either a compositional or analytical standpoint. And many of the insights are quite sophisticated, though the text is written in a very accessible way. Morrell even states in his bio that he aims to write a third volume. Enjoy!

Yes, but not just choir. In many of these examples (i.e. the forest opening from E.T.) they're absent. Two other common features are diatonic parallelism and modality. Ok, but I think there's a conflation of a few quite different emotions in the list of examples. Probably best to distinguish positive from negative or mysteriously ambiguous.

You mean homophonic choral passages? That's what I'm talking about. It's basically how Williams treats the choir.

Which scores show this best for you? Got some examples? Sure: "Main Titles" from SGT. RYKER (1968) "The Miracle" from HEIDI (1968) "Restoration" from JANE EYRE (1970) "Blood Moon" from IMAGES (1972) "Main Title" from THE FURY (1978) "The Ark Theme" from RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK (1981) "Gloria" from MONSIGNOR (1982 - majestic variation) "The Emperor's Theme" from RETURN OF THE JEDI (1983) "Cadillac of the Skies" from EMPIRE OF THE SUN (1987) "Only the Penitant Will Pass" from IJ & THE LAST CRUSADE (1989) "Star of Bethlehem" from HOME ALONE (1990) "You are the Pan" from HOOK (1991) "Remembrances" from SCHINDLER'S LIST (1993) "Journey to the Island" from JURASSIC PARK (1993 - majestic variation) "Meeting With Mao" from NIXON (1995) "Duel of the Fates" from STAR WARS: THE PHANTOM MENACE (1999 - majestic variation) "Angela's Prayer" from ANGELA'S ASHES (1999) "A Window to the Past" from HARRY POTTER 3 (2004) "The Hope" from MUNICH (2005) Bits and pieces from WAR HORSE (2011) Aren't you essentially talking about Williams' use of choir as the "religious sound"? That is, I imagine you'd include the main title from Jurassic Park as another example.

You must be talking about the special X-rated edition.

I think you've hit on something really fundamental to Williams as a composer. Of course, we all know how hard he works on his themes, writing and re-writing them until just the right notes are found. But I've always sensed that once he's found the themes, the score comes effortlessly, as you say. Composing easily carries an unjustified stigma because many believe that music cannot possibly be profound if one didn't struggle to write it. Conversely, if music sounds rich and complex, one usually does not believe it could have been written easily. But in the case of Williams, I am constantly amazed that he consistently writes two minutes of music every day he's working on a film score, and still comes out with the results he does. That, to me, shows a clarity of musical vision and the accompanying wealth of knowledge needed to express it without much hesitation. "Lamest answer ever"? Surely you jest.

For me, a great Williams score is like a great film: you keep noticing little things you never noticed before, or simply revel in rediscovering what it was you always loved about it. The themes of a great Williams score are so adroitly sculpted that, even without the film, they give a vivid picture of the very thing they represent. There are transformations of themes that evoke emotions that, whether positive or negative, run counter to that of their definitive form and yet sound completely convincing. And within the film itself, a crucial narrative event is highlighted by a full version of a theme that is not necessarily climactic, but always memorably moving. There are plenty of orchestrations that lend a pleasing familiarity of emotion (e.g., low brass for evil characters), but there are a handful of moments that give us something different and unexpected that makes an indelible stamp on our memory, like the beautiful piccolo solo at the end of the Star Wars main title as the opening crawl drifts off into space. At a few key moments, whether consciously or subconsciously, Williams' choice of harmony sends a shiver of delight down one's spine, like the last few chords in the bridge (B section) of the Superman march that sets up the big statement of the fanfare, this one here: http://www.jwfan.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=23141&p=898869. The musical styles appearing in the score are varied, but share aspects that allow seamless shifts between one another. A passage blending elements of late romanticism, jazz, extended tonality, classical Hollywood, and modernism may move suddenly into a fiercely modernist passage while giving the impression of stylistic continuity. And a great score usually has a kick-ass march or militaristic scoring, even if in a subdued way like Parade of the Ewoks. But most of all, a great Williams score expresses the emotional implications of the film so well that it has a feeling of bewildering, awe-inspiring inevitability, as though nothing else would have worked quite as well, but it is difficult to say exactly why.

In Steef's recent threads on a favorite Williams score per decade, I've noticed that debates seem to be based on prioritizing different elements of a score. For example, some call JP's action writing "chaotic" while for others, it's "more concise". Or Superman's score turns "dull" after the first two acts whereas others find the entire score "perfect". While some have indicated what makes each of these and other scores great for them, many times it's not clear why one likes or dislikes scores or parts of scores. But the reasoning I have seen is great stuff, so I'd like to broaden the discussion here by asking... What makes a great Williams score for you?

You might like this one. It includes specific reference to music and the night. It's short-ish too. And "behold" is such a fun word to set to music - we even get two of them. Moment Musicale The round moon hangs above the rim Of silent and blue shadowed trees, And all the earth is vague and dim In its blue veil of mysteries. On such a night one must believe The Golden Age returns again With lyric beauty, to retrieve The world from dreariness and pain. And down the wooded aisles, behold What dancers through the dusk appear! Piping their raptures as of old, They bring immortal freedom near. A moment on the brink of night They tread their transport in the dew, And to the rhythm of their delight, Behold, all things are made anew! - Bliss Carman (1861-1929)

Nice. Yoda's Theme works well too: I love the YouTube comment below this video: Just picturing Yoda with his little feet perched up on the sofa with a fat cigar listening to this. "Good music this is, yes!"

I've now had some time to look into this but nothing comprehensive is coming up. When I search terms like secundal harmony, tone clusters, and the like, one name keeps coming up - Henry Cowell. Maybe he was the first to use them extensively. In any case, the research that comes up is hardly theoretical. It's been very disappointing, as have many concepts we've wanted to study on 20th-century music. Atonal sets are about the only thing that have a substantial amount of research. It seems there's still a ton of work to be done in many other areas. Haven't given the North a deep listening yet. Hopefully soon.

Yes, I remember about that. A piano, who'd'a guessed? Is there seriously nothing accessible out there that can help us with these things?

Someone needs to invent software that can transcribe hard-to-hear music into pretty notes on a page. I mean, we live in the 21st century, weren't we supposed to have flying cars by now?

We all know the reference to Korngold's Kings Row in Williams' Star Wars. But the discussion always stops there, as if it's some sort of truism that the two are "the same". As you know, I am rather fond of busting myths, especially with Star Wars, and this is another one. Musicologist Peter Larsen in his book Film Music contrasts the two themes elegantly: And most elegant of all,

Are you sure you hear a D, though?

One of the most brilliant aspects of Python is their ability to transition smoothly from one random sketch to another. The best examples of these are surely in Gilliam's wonderful animations. Watch the clip below from 1:00-3:50 and you'll see what I mean (or if you know the "falling from buildings" sketch, start from 2:39). While there isn't any particular reason for the things in the animation to happen, they have a kind of irrational logic in leading from one silly idea to the next. And in its final moment, it usually becomes the opening for the following sketch, as it does here. These transitional animations rarely fail to make me laugh. So non-sensibly sensible.

Blume, I want to make sure I understand your point of view because I think it provides us with some great insights. On the surface, it may seem that things would be just the opposite of what you're saying. Because Goldsmith blends so many emotions together into a single cue, one might think that he uses many themes to do this, something like a Wagnerian tapestry of leitmotifs or at least some recurring musical aspect (like texture or timbre). Conversely, one might believe that, since Williams deals with this emotional core you speak of, that he remains fixed to very few leitmotifs in a cue, and that having many would result in a variety of emotions, and so, suspense by the definition you cite. So what is it exactly that constitutes this "emotional core" in Williams, and how might we say it is lacking in Goldsmith? In other words, if we accept what you're saying, Williams must be able to group leitmotifs together under a unifying emotional umbrella, if you will. Is this a case of thematic transformation, each leitmotif altered to be in emotional resonance with the others being sounded in the cue? And in Goldsmith, is it something like thematic transformation of one or two leitmotifs, now altered to be diverse in their emotional meaning?

That's a C, not C#.

It starts by outlining the same notes as the ostinato, E-D#-C, then continues adding notes downward: B-A-G#-G-F. It continues down after that too, but gets very hard to pick out. I can hear D for sure below the F, but I'd guess there's E in there and maybe D# as well. I think there's a C# after the D. Then the high register adds Bb, and probably other notes beneath it like A and maybe others. The most interesting thing about these glassy lines is that they begin in a comprehensible, tonal way, basically outlining the A minor chord suggested at the opening with the ostinato and bass pedal on A. Then it gradually becomes an atonal mass. Nice technique to express either the mystery of Harmonica or the insanity of Frank.