Chen G.
-
Posts
9,820 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by Chen G.
-
-
It only has three new leitmotives overall, compared to twice as many in Empire Strikes Back, so its only natural.
I actually like that the concert piece meshes the two themes together. Its like one concise presentation of the entire score.
-
But that was to be expected: you weren't expecting a Star Wars score to be an idee fixe score, did you? Of course Powell is going to write new themes and utilize existing Williams themes when appropriate: The Imperial March, possibly the Rebel Fanfare, the Star Wars theme, the Force theme, maybe the original imperial motif - who knows.
-
The way its credited makes me suspect that we're getting a concert arrangement of the theme on the CD and/or end-credits, which would be great!
-
1 hour ago, DominicCobb said:
Do we think the Force theme gets a play even though (it seems like) no one in the movie uses the Force?
Ask Michael “let’s use The Force theme as a epic-wide-shot-of-rebel-spaceships-taking-off theme” Giacchino.
And we don’t know how much Williams’ new theme is used in the piece; Powell may want to not quote it all that often and use more of his original score instead, so we’d end up with a handful of statements. Just sayin’.... We’ll have to wait and see.
-
Yes.
That's the interesting question: "What Williams would have done?"
-
1 hour ago, Loert said:
I would like to keep Howard Shore's LOTR scores in the films but I wish Williams would've actually written the soundtrack albums.
I love Shore's scores, probably more than anything Williams would have done for the films had the project landed on him; but I do wonder what he would have done.
I know Horner was approached for the project before Shore, but in that case I have a strong sense of what that would have been like. I would have probably enjoyed it very much, but it wouldn't be as unique as The Lord of the Rings ended up being.
-
3 minutes ago, Brundlefly said:
Jerry Goldsmith should have done[...]Titanic
Again, just...just no.
-
16 hours ago, Trent B said:
fanboys who were butt hurt by this movie and think it's the worst movie ever (especially for Star Wars).
The most succint phrasing of this issue I've heard was: "no one hates Star Wars more than Star Wars fans."
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
4 hours ago, Josh500 said:Titanic
No. Just...no.
- MikeH, Unlucky Bastard, Naïve Old Fart and 2 others
-
4
-
1
-
12 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:
I actually mind the Han Solo menu less than The Hobbit one. Star Wars went down this road from almost day one, there's no dignity there left to protect.
Very true.
-
I blame my phone for the duplication.
1 hour ago, Stefancos said:There's plenty of Star Trek in TLJ already! I can bring it up.
Also, is purple hair any weirder that Leia's buns in 1977?
Oh yeah, all that talk of fuel supply made it feel more science fiction (i.e. Star Trek-y) than Star Wars usually does.
As for Leia’s space buns, two wrongs don’t make a right. Those things are damn wierd!
-
On 8.4.2018 at 3:37 AM, Marian Schedenig said:
Considering the fact that women are still a minority in film casting, and still haven't achieved equal status in society, I''d be fine with the balance tipping for a while to a larger number of women rather than men.
Women have a right to equal opportunities, not to equal outcomes. Equalization of the cast (or equalization anywhere) is not, nor has it ever been, an ideal in the western world. That’s the point.
It makes sense that an action film would, usually, have a predominantly male cast. It’s a masculine genre with characters that are usually required to be very masculine themselves.
-
What’s so mysogynistic here, I have no idea. It always helps when you, the individual watching the film, can relate to the characters further through something you share: whether it means having characters of different age groups so you can find the one that you share your age with; different genders and yes, different ethnicities.
Female characters can also help men watching the film, certainly. It gives the film a sense of variety. Since it is a feminine trait by nature, women in films tend to serve as the emotional core and/or the conscious of the film. That’s not sexist on the part of the filmmakers.
But, if you were to point out in the current social climate that women in film also serve as eye-candy for men (which they absolutely are), that too would be hastly classified as misogynistic and sexist, so....
-
It should be said, Star Wars films had three romantic relationships thus far: Han and Leia, Anakin and Padme, and now Finn and Rose; and only one of these works.
I think we have enough romance for now, heterosexual or otherwise.
-
4 hours ago, Nick1066 said:
Denny's, an American diner chain, home of the infamous...
Well, to be fair, that world lends itself to that much more.
Compare Tolkien's descriptions of the Hobbits' diet, or Jackson's portrayal of the contents of Bilbo's pantry, to what we know about food from the Star Wars films: there's blue milk, and these bread portions from The Force Awakens; and pears (which are appearantly eaten in this galaxy with silverware) and that's it.
-
I don't really mind that its the films conforming to the times, as it were.
All I mind is for the producers to not get too carried away with what is, this far, working out quite well as it is.
-
I don't have an issue with the existing films, as they are. I think female characters are important: women watching the films need a character to "latch" unto.
Gay characters are trickier because where a woman's gender or a black person's ethnicity are readily appearant, one's sexual tendencies are not.
-
The people making the films seem to be thinking that it is ridiculous for this world - fantastical though it may be - to not exhibit diversity. So I say it is equally ridiculous for it to exhibit unrealistic diversity, or equality-of-outcome.
Gender diversity and racial diversity aren't the same. Women and men are far more different to each other (by nature), than people of the same gender across different ethnicities are. So with races you can do whatever you will, but with gender, you can't. On the other hand, diversity of gender is also much more important.
-
6 minutes ago, KK said:
more importantly, why would any of this be problematic in an imaginary sci-fi fantasy universe designed for children?
The people making these films seem to think that diversity in these films is important, and that it does reflect diversity in our own society. I am all for it, as long as its done realistically. Otherwise, it will feel contrived and may interfere with people "getting into" the movie.
-
My point is that because women and men have, on average, different attributes (agreeableness being just one of many), they are drawn (again, on average) to different things. If the Resistance were to be portrayed as half female it would be ridiculous. Military organisations are, from the outset, less attractive to women, and so they won't be anywhere near 50/50.
-
You really can't see, in the near future, people starting to call for movies to represent not just various genders and ethnicities but also their proportions in society?
Can you really not see that coming?!
-
I can't think of any, but I wasn't criticizing any specific film. It was a general comment.
-
My issue isn't with the female characters that aren't agreeable. You come to accept that protagonists in films, men and women alike, are not average people.
My issue is with 50/50 divided casts. Its jarring.
-
What than is your argument? that the cast should reflect the demographics? why?
Films you wish were scored by Williams
in JOHN WILLIAMS
Posted
You said it! Because you know how in the early parts of the film, were it scored by Williams, we would have gotten this:
...which would have been all wrong for Titanic.
And I don't want to hear anyone even mention Braveheart in regards to this thread!