Loert

I think they're both bad.

I did listen to the damn scores more than once - but I will go back to RotK and see if I agree 
 
 
If this is true, I am not one of those people. I am a musician and I know that a good orchestration does not necessarily equate with frantic activity. It also does not necessarily equate with aleatoric writing or with a minor chord with added 9ths or 4ths played by a choir. It's about the intelligent use of the instruments to achieve a certain effect, and I note when a composer makes a choice that surprises me. E.g. Mozart was a genius orchestrator, even if his orchestra was extremely limited if compared to what we have nowadays. 
 
As an example from LOTR, I really appreciate when Shore voices chords in an unusual way, for example by giving the chord to the brass but the lowest note to the timpani (it happens in several statements of the Fellowship theme). If I had seen this on paper only, I would have expected it not to work at all, instead it sounds great: hats off. But I don't remember many more examples of situations like this in the LOTR scores, which I like for other reasons.
 
In the Potter scores, I find something exciting in almost every cue. Take the statements of the Hedwig's theme, where the melody is given to alto flute, English horn and bassoon in a very high register ("Rite-of-Spring"-like!), over a landscape of violins + celesta playing those fast runs, and there is almost nothing in the bass register, except for those pizzicato notes by the cellos, which are actually in their high register. What I find interesting is not the mere fact that the violins are playing fast, but the fact that the combination of woodwinds is unique and well-conceived, the absence of basses combined with the speedy runs perfectly gives the idea of flying, and the combination of all these elements defines the HP sound in a way that is instantly recognizable and evokes a whole world. It's not about woodwind fluorishes or glockenspiel, which I also find irritating when used just for the sake of impressing. 
 
But then you could reply that Shore achieves the same effectiveness just with simpler means, you could give me an example with which I could agree or disagree, I could reply, and we could go on forever. At the end, whether an orchestration is great or just good might be a bit subjective. And this thread is about opinions, after all. What impresses me most about the HP scores, however, also compared with LOTR, is the harmony (I have always considered this as Williams' strongest point as a composer).  
 
... at the end, we all like and listen to both the HP and the LOTR scores, right?
 
 
 
 

Uh oh, this is beginning to sound like a case of "If you don't like it, then you just haven't understood it"...!!!
 
Ultimately, each score has something to offer that the other does not. I think it's pretty much certain that LOTR is the more profound work, not least because of how extensively Shore integrated all the characters and places in the story into the score, and the numerous subtleties in the thematic presentations and transformations. But it doesn't have the colourful orchestrations of the Harry Potter scores, or the variety in style, to give two examples. So a lot of it falls down to what's important to the listener. For example, I don't fall head over heels for "subtlety" in music. I can appreciate it when a composer begins "Happy Motif #2" in the flute only to cleverly interject "Evil Motif #5" in the oboe at the midway point, or when they change one note in the leitmotif to suggest another motif... But what's most important to me is whether the music sounds "good" to my ears. And by "good", I think most of all of harmonic control, melodic lucidity, and clarity of counterpoint and instrumentation (how I perceive it). Not the manipulation of motifs per se. Having listened through the LOTR scores a couple of times, there are moments in there that I absolutely adore, but in general it's not a soundscape that I find that appealing. The fact that one can discover 200 different leitmotifs in there means little to me, if I don't buy the sound of the music in the first place. I much prefer the glimmering, glistening soundscape of Harry Potter. And by the way, Wagner, whose usage of leitmotifs inspired Shore's writing (and many other film composers'...) is one of my favourite classical composers not merely because he used leitmotifs in such an advanced way, but because I absolutely dig his music, note for note.

Uh oh, this is beginning to sound like a case of "If you don't like it, then you just haven't understood it"...!!!
 
Ultimately, each score has something to offer that the other does not. I think it's pretty much certain that LOTR is the more profound work, not least because of how extensively Shore integrated all the characters and places in the story into the score, and the numerous subtleties in the thematic presentations and transformations. But it doesn't have the colourful orchestrations of the Harry Potter scores, or the variety in style, to give two examples. So a lot of it falls down to what's important to the listener. For example, I don't fall head over heels for "subtlety" in music. I can appreciate it when a composer begins "Happy Motif #2" in the flute only to cleverly interject "Evil Motif #5" in the oboe at the midway point, or when they change one note in the leitmotif to suggest another motif... But what's most important to me is whether the music sounds "good" to my ears. And by "good", I think most of all of harmonic control, melodic lucidity, and clarity of counterpoint and instrumentation (how I perceive it). Not the manipulation of motifs per se. Having listened through the LOTR scores a couple of times, there are moments in there that I absolutely adore, but in general it's not a soundscape that I find that appealing. The fact that one can discover 200 different leitmotifs in there means little to me, if I don't buy the sound of the music in the first place. I much prefer the glimmering, glistening soundscape of Harry Potter. And by the way, Wagner, whose usage of leitmotifs inspired Shore's writing (and many other film composers'...) is one of my favourite classical composers not merely because he used leitmotifs in such an advanced way, but because I absolutely dig his music, note for note.

Fantastic opera!

Uh oh, this is beginning to sound like a case of "If you don't like it, then you just haven't understood it"...!!!
 
Ultimately, each score has something to offer that the other does not. I think it's pretty much certain that LOTR is the more profound work, not least because of how extensively Shore integrated all the characters and places in the story into the score, and the numerous subtleties in the thematic presentations and transformations. But it doesn't have the colourful orchestrations of the Harry Potter scores, or the variety in style, to give two examples. So a lot of it falls down to what's important to the listener. For example, I don't fall head over heels for "subtlety" in music. I can appreciate it when a composer begins "Happy Motif #2" in the flute only to cleverly interject "Evil Motif #5" in the oboe at the midway point, or when they change one note in the leitmotif to suggest another motif... But what's most important to me is whether the music sounds "good" to my ears. And by "good", I think most of all of harmonic control, melodic lucidity, and clarity of counterpoint and instrumentation (how I perceive it). Not the manipulation of motifs per se. Having listened through the LOTR scores a couple of times, there are moments in there that I absolutely adore, but in general it's not a soundscape that I find that appealing. The fact that one can discover 200 different leitmotifs in there means little to me, if I don't buy the sound of the music in the first place. I much prefer the glimmering, glistening soundscape of Harry Potter. And by the way, Wagner, whose usage of leitmotifs inspired Shore's writing (and many other film composers'...) is one of my favourite classical composers not merely because he used leitmotifs in such an advanced way, but because I absolutely dig his music, note for note.

This is incorrect

I enjoy KOTCS

Great moment, exceptional work, one of my very favourites! Also love the horns that play towards the end of "The Glacier", from 19:09.
 
 
My short moment; the cheeky Holst-like woodwind at 1:48 - 1:57:
 
 

This theme introduction in the "On the Alpine Pasture" section of Strauss' Alpine Symphony.  I love how he plays with this theme throughout "Through Thickets and Undergrowth on the Wrong Path" but the short intro of it is so beautiful on solo horn:
 
 
 
I'm a sucker for a stately horn
 

The poor guy didn't know what hit him when SW became a worldwide phenomenon. 
 
Btw, has anybody heard the story about Williams thinking that Star Wars was just going to be a Saturday matinee showing for kids and that it would disappear in a couple of weeks?!

Loving the top one; "I'm... not a film composer".
From the horse's mouth, folks.

Great stuff! Loved the thunder sheet during Witches of Eastwick...in fact, the whole orchestra went a bit crazy during that piece.  And such wonderful playing from the soloists too! I regret not being able to make it yesterday.
 

He was the wrong composer for 'Schindler's List'.

My thoughts...
 

You know what one of the best things was about this John Williams concert? Not having to hear Americans whooping and hollering all over it

Don't you think he looks tired?

Of course, that's only because if he had used the "other" word there would've been a massive riot in the hall!

Two thunder sheets, actually! 
 
I have commented already on how brilliant I thought the three young soloists were, but watching the concert back on TV reminded me how well BBC Concert Orchestra lifer Catherine Moore played the trumpet solo in JFK.  I really hope this concert is released on DVD post haste.
 
There are already a few video clips available at the BBC proms website here.

Great stuff! Loved the thunder sheet during Witches of Eastwick...in fact, the whole orchestra went a bit crazy during that piece.  And such wonderful playing from the soloists too! I regret not being able to make it yesterday.
 

Watched the concert, it was fabulous!

This approach to wanting films to be almost ascetic in their storytelling, or that those kind of films are somehow "purer," is such horse crap to me.  These are tricks that storytellers have been using for thousands of years, now applied in a new medium.  Putting a child in danger is an old easy trick, one that Spielberg used masterfully in that Munich sequence.  He was practically winking at the audience, "Did ya think I was gonna kill the kid?  But you weren't sure, were ya?"  It was great!
 
Spielberg doesn't just trust his audience, he's in constant conversation with them and their expectations.  Like all the best old Hollywood directors were.

Link to radio episode:
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08y02bl

Catch Me If You Can!