Dixon Hill

I was never a big zimmer fan but as time goes by I'm starting to appreciate him more and more. 

2.  And a 3rd shared with Jon.

2.  And a 3rd shared with Jon.

Come on credit where credit is due.  Effective scoring that satisfied alot of fans.  That's hardly something to be scoffed at.

There was indeed some very satisfying hard fantasy imagery in the first act, especially with the dragon. It's just a shame that its ending felt so dramatically short-changed.
 
Imagine if we actually ended a season with Dany burning King's Landing. Then you had another season dedicated to the Mad Queen's reign, and plotting her demise, then that ending with Jon and Drogon would have really hit the spot. Because on paper, that scene is actually potent stuff, it just wasn't earned.
 
Also, anyone else feel like all the Night King stuff comes off as even more redundant now?
 

Voyager is better than everything.

I've been dead before.

I absolutely love the stylistic decision to go for "it" instead of "it's" here. 

I've recognized TheUlyssesian as one of the more obnoxious and troublesome elements of JWFan for some time now.  Glad the rest of you are catching on.  As for this other controversy, give me a break.

I never feel bad for millionaires.
 
 
 

The extended funeral sequence was boring. How are we supposed to care about the fallen if their own generals didn't when they sent them to their doom out of sheer incompetence? All the rest of the post battle stuff was alright though, there were some nice little 1 to 1s in there. Actually, it's only extra disappointing now that the drama returned quite well to the story in this episode. But it all feels so meaningless to me, after the events of last week.
 
Jamie will probably kill his sister, I reckon. But who gives a shit anymore?
 
This'll go down as the biggest most anticlimactic failure to a much loved ficton in history. They absolutely blew it, it's incredible.

I don't think it's limited to orchestration and I would call it "calculated" rather than "not experimental" though that may just be semantics.

That much may be true, yes. As with any industry, technological advances and the speed/ease with how we access and pump out information has made it easier to get lazy. But there are a good deal of talented young musicians who are trying to foster creative impulses in novel ways with all these new tools at their disposal. The kind of Williams' breed will indeed never truly be seen again, it's simply impossible. Williams and his process are a product of his time.
 
It's not just a challenge film music faces, but all art. Music has historically evolved in a very reactionary way (Modernism = response to post-war romanticism, serialism = post-WW2 response, minimalism = 60s response to stifling serialism, etc etc). But with information now available all at once, all the time, there is almost too much or even nothing to "react" to. That's the problem with post-post-modernism (or wherever the hell we're at). Anything goes. There are no longer templates to follow or rules to be broken, and the old systems simply don't work. Academia in music has become a far more nebulous and less practically useful space than it used to be. And this leaves many existentialist questions that today's young artists must confront that Williams' generation never really had to deal with. 
 
Pope's rhetoric, however friendly he is as a person, can at times be callously harmful to this generation of aspiring artists who simply will never have access to the kind of climate, resources and experiences that Williams' generation had. As an influencer in his own industry, Pope could instead be more valuable in helping youth navigate the challenging terrains of today. The traditional career ladders that were there in Williams' years no longer exist, at least in the same form. And there are very few ladders, if any, to climb at all. It's far more challenging to find meaningful direction for a young composer now than it used to be. This is where someone with Pope's experience and expertise could lend their support, instead of actively lamenting the "golden days" with every public platform he gets. 
 
It also goes without saying that technique and training are obviously essential things. As with any art, understanding the system is crucial before trying to manipulate it. And it is lamentable that people can rise to positions of power in the industry without having that necessary foundation...but I don't think that's necessarily a new problem. There are loads of talented individuals, with plenty of that who are struggling to find their place in the world. And having a senior musician like Pope, continuing to reinforce the idea that "You will never be or have what Williams had" just doesn't seem like a very healthy or conducive attitude to keep in the industry.

Different, yes.  Better, that depends on what you like.  The real problem is with filmmakers who don't trust music.  And the insane overflow of projects in every visual medium, so much of it crap.  Change those things and now you'll have a greater concentration of quality scores - in all manner of idioms, not just 2010s hybrid or 1980s blockbuster.  As for talent or vanishing musicianship, I just don't think it's true.  There are more film composers from non classical backgrounds than before, but the classically trained demographic hasn't gone anywhere and I would be surprised if it hasn't in fact grown.  Williams' consummate musicianship is a rarity, not a norm, to begin with.  You won't see it everywhere, and not necessarily in every generation.  Maybe among established film composers now, it's unique.  But how many of the younger generation are right where Williams was at their age, and on a similar trajectory?  The ground is very fertile.  I simply think reverence for the past as a lament for the present and future is a dangerous and useless way of thinking no matter who you are or what you do.

Different, yes.  Better, that depends on what you like.  The real problem is with filmmakers who don't trust music.  And the insane overflow of projects in every visual medium, so much of it crap.  Change those things and now you'll have a greater concentration of quality scores - in all manner of idioms, not just 2010s hybrid or 1980s blockbuster.  As for talent or vanishing musicianship, I just don't think it's true.  There are more film composers from non classical backgrounds than before, but the classically trained demographic hasn't gone anywhere and I would be surprised if it hasn't in fact grown.  Williams' consummate musicianship is a rarity, not a norm, to begin with.  You won't see it everywhere, and not necessarily in every generation.  Maybe among established film composers now, it's unique.  But how many of the younger generation are right where Williams was at their age, and on a similar trajectory?  The ground is very fertile.  I simply think reverence for the past as a lament for the present and future is a dangerous and useless way of thinking no matter who you are or what you do.

Powell > Silvestri > Arnold
 
Sometimes he's better than Williams.

I think I know what you mean and I agree.  This is probably just the price of working for Hollywood.  Even a craftsman from beginning to end like Williams has to deliver "the product" in that kind of environment.  And forget about countless others who all share a handful of the same orchestrators which leads to an incredible homogeneity and polished shine on so much of what comes out of this town.  Now contrast this with outsiders like Goldenthal, Shore, Morricone yada yada yada...from them you'll hear something which to me anyway seems far less assembly line produced.

Nick is a gentleman and a scholar.

When I want to remember why I like film scores, I just look at a poster I Xeroxed and stapled to my wall:
 
-THE ORCHESTRA IS THE ONLY VALID MEANS OF MUSICAL EXPRESSION, COMPLEXITY, SOPHISTICATION, AND INTELLIGENCE 
-SYNTHESIZERS DO NOT EXIST (except sometimes to augment aforementioned orchestra)
-PERCUSSION IS A SIGN OF WEAKNESS AND LAZINESS (outside of traditional instruments and usage) 
-MELODIES ARE THE ULTIMATE FORM OF MUSICAL WORTHINESS. WITHOUT THEMES TO ATTACH TO CHARACTERS OR SITUATIONS, THERE IS NO WORTH
-HARMONIES AND SONIC TEXTURES THAT ARE TOO "ADVENTUROUS" ARE BAD FOR THE SPIRIT
 
I have other posters with similar wisdom (and some hilarious ones about Hans Zimmer and his ghost army lol), but I put this one across from my bed so that when I feel intimidated by the winds of change and feel pressured to face the possibility of expanding my tastes beyond where they were as a child, I can look at this poster at nighttime, relieve my nervous spirit, and drift off to sleep listening to my C & C Hook playlist (except for that trash Banning Back Home, that is!) 

Powell > Silvestri > Arnold
 
Sometimes he's better than Williams.

Powell > Silvestri > Arnold
 
Sometimes he's better than Williams.

Powell > Silvestri > Arnold
 
Sometimes he's better than Williams.

I think I know what you mean and I agree.  This is probably just the price of working for Hollywood.  Even a craftsman from beginning to end like Williams has to deliver "the product" in that kind of environment.  And forget about countless others who all share a handful of the same orchestrators which leads to an incredible homogeneity and polished shine on so much of what comes out of this town.  Now contrast this with outsiders like Goldenthal, Shore, Morricone yada yada yada...from them you'll hear something which to me anyway seems far less assembly line produced.