Chen G.

Star Wars: Darth Vadar Reincarnated
 
Or:
 
Star Wars: Third Base
 
(featuring the first ever love theme written for the franchise)

Just another example of Jackson excelling as a director of actors: he does a lot of rehearsals, and takes a hell of a lot of takes until he gets it just right. And the way in which he shoots his multi-film projects as one long period of principal photography really allows the actors to embody their characters.
 
Another great aspect of this is that as a screenwriter, Jackson is always keen to allow the actors to have input regarding their lines and motivation. This is a godsend because in these big projects you can't quite write a part with a specific actor in mind as you could a smaller project. But allowing the actors to change their dialogue allows to create that retroactively.

Yes. It is.
 
That's my point: not to show that one is better than the other, but to show that one cannot make such bold claims regarding either of the two. 

The comparisons were inevitable. Difficult to judge for me. Different films, different goals. More importantly, different composing styles. Both franchises highlighted each composer's styles completely. Both styles were the perfect fit for each respective franchise. They are pretty much the epitome of leitmotiv scoring in the modern era. So ultimately it's just down to whose style you prefer.
 
And I personally prefer JW because I enjoy his orchestrations a bit more than everyone else. I love orchestrations that are very busy and has a lot of movement. Also, JW's woodwind writing is simply on a different level than everyone else. With that being said, it does not mean Star Wars is better than LOTR. I just prefer one composer's style over the other. I say this with utmost respect to Howard Shore. Also, to give Shore some love, the highs in the LOTR score were probably higher than the ones in SW. There's also arguably more highs in the LOTR score than SW.

I’d like to believe both Star Wars and The Lord Of The Rings represent the very best in multifilm scoring.
 
I like both series for different -and a lot of the same- reasons.
 
Star Wars has the stronger themes and more complex orchestrations, The Lord Of The Rings is emotionally speaking more solid and has a sense of unity unlike anything out there.
 
Is it possible to just like both without the need to debate which is better?
 
 

This reminds me of another thing I prefer about Shore's work.  It is far more bespoke and organic to the story.  You can hear the "limited" harmonic vocabulary, the earthy, granite like orchestration, and immediately identify Middle Earth in any isolated passage.  Take a similarly isolated and non thematic moment from Star Wars, and it's just... John Williams.  The only things that make it a Star Wars score are the themes.  There are certain little Star Wars isms, but ultimately they're few and far between, not something that defines the sound world.  
 
I've been a musician for decades now.  At no point has anything been more determining of my enjoyment of music, especially film music, than its spiritual, emotional impact.  I have little interest in music created to exemplify complexity or theory for its own sake.  The best art provides something more for us.   Obviously Star Wars as a story does that for some, but not me, and when it comes to more esoteric and purely musical concerns, I'm left similarly cold, as there's only well crafted but unrooted and at times generic (within the composer's output) music on offer.  
 
Star Wars, music and film, can't ever be more than light entertainment for me. 

And, in both cases, this enjoyment needn't be viewed as a "guilty pleasure", either by the person enjoying them, or by others. Both The Hobbit, Rogue One and The Last Jedi have a lot to legitimately enjoy in them.

Star Wars Episode IX: TFA (Thank Fuck it's All over)

For my money,
 
Star Wars: The Desolation of The Force
 
Yep. No more Rey, no more Ren, no more Jedi, no more Sith, no more Resistance, no more First Order, no more Force! Disney can do all of the spin-offs they want, they're just as profitable, but for the main episodes, they just need, and I can't stress that enough,
 
F  I  N  A  L  I  T  Y !!
 
 

Legolas? Thranduil?
 
Star Wars will be returning to its roots! 

It was more daring and it was more flawed than Ep7, so in general it had more positive aspects and more negative aspects. The experience in cinema was definitely impressive.
 
But one thing really annoyed me: That one thing annoyed everybody! A big shitty pile of overreactions and the arguments could not be less fair. If there was one thing that you personally didn't like, you went:
 
"You know there are so many plot holes and it is not logic at all!"
"Well ... have you seen the Original Trilogy?"
"Yeah, but these are classics."
"You think I don't notice it, when you try to bash the movie, just because you don't like it?"
"But Luke's character..."
"Stop it, immediately!!! You're now the fifth guy complaining about Luke's character and I've not even left the fucking cinema!!!"
 
I just dodged every possible discussion about the film, cause it's not worth the time. I love discussing movies, but this time - no! Just no!

He didn't spend 10 months composing, they just spread out the recording sessions over that period of time. Williams, I believe, openly said that his output in terms of minutes of music per day has remained relatively consistent, in spite of his age. Its just attending recording sessions and conducting that is the issue.
 
And, I agree that its a superficial "dick-size" contest. That's what I'm trying to show: that you can't point to the superior of the two without resorting to debates on such trivialities, hence you cannot be so unequivocal in claiming that "STAR WARS IZ DU BEST FILM SKOR EVAR." The same is true of hailing Shore's work as just that.

True, but on the other hand, there is a lot of harmonic forethought in terms of creating a glossary of themes which, unlike Williams' but very much like Wagner's, are all harmonically tied together in sets and subsets of related themes. Pretty damn mind-blowing.
 
These are leitmotivic works. They should be assessed based on their leitmotivic variety and intricacy, first. Again, not trying to start what is bound to be a never-ending argument, but rather to show the error in such bold statements as "Star Wars is without peer" nonsense.

LOTR and SW are hard to compare IMO.  Star Wars is a collection of fantastic individual scores while LOTR is more cohesive/all-encompassing with less individuality between entries (+The Hobbit scores which aren't as good).  
They are both singular achievements in film scoring and its possible to acknowledge one without subtlely knocking the other.  

Who cares about the time between installments?! If anything, what matters is how much time the composer actually spent (overall) working on the bloody thing!
 
Wagner worked on the Ring Cycle on and-off throughout that entire time period, stopping only to write his other operas; Shore worked on Lord of the Rings for four years straight, and I believe another three for The Hobbit. Williams worked for 10-12 weeks before each installment, so less than two years, at most.
 
To be fair to Williams, he didn't have existing source material to work with, or a story of his own design, so even if he wanted to, he couldn't spend the interim time between installments developing themes that are to come.

I see.
 
It should be said however that that reply was only one of a number in that vein, also from Score, igger6, and from Richard on the ranking of the Star Wars scores thread.
 
Like I said, I would like to have seen both receive an honorary oscar, and while only one of them may acquire such a title at this point (unless Shore ends up scoring more Middle Earth films, which I hope he does), I think its incorrect to claim, even indirectly, that only one of them should.
 
And I still think that unequivocally granting either of the two works the title of "achievement without peer" and "the single greatest achievement in motion picture scoring" as they have been called in these two threads, is much too bold a claim. 

Yes, there are moments where it is deflated by the acting, but for the most part I think it works. That was very bold of George Lucas to go for. 
 
I mean, killing the younglings? Anakin getting burnt beyond repair? Very out-of-character for Star Wars, in a good way.

The Force Awakens is, I think, a more polished and certainly better paced film.
 
This film is more ambitious, and much, much more visually striking, but also has some bad composite and CG shots, serious pacing issues throughout, and a lot of the characters don't feel nearly as compelling, which also extends to the level of their acting and dialogue: this includes all the baddies (Snoke, Hux, Phasma), DJ and, to some extent, Rose.
 
I also think a lot of the aesthetic of the set-design are a departure from the worn-down, "used" look of Star Wars, which The Force Awakens did adhere to, and more of a step in the glossy look of the prequels: namely, Canto Bight and Snoke's chambers.
 
I feel like Rian Johnson lacked restraint in terms of action and stakes (to the point that the film is already so climactic with the ramming of Snoke's ship that it feels like it could come to close, which it doesn't) and in terms of his attempts at surprising the audience: really, all you need is one surprising twist at the mid-point (Snoke's demise) and that's it. You don't need to completely subvert expectation in every single turn.
 
I enjoyed it well enough. But I do think people can't help but feel disappointed at what they hoped would be a truly outstanding film, and wasn't.

This means nothing, though.  There is plenty of harmonically conservative music which moves and engages more people than some harmonically "adventurous" music does.  Equally meaningless is the length of the work or the composing period, the instrumentation....
 
Why these two series' need to constantly be pitted against each other is childish, or just beyond me.  One is possessed of a great artistic and spiritual depth that the other largely lacks, but the latter has decades and decades of cultural saturation... who cares?  They're both remarkable cinematic and musical achievements, whatever awards their creators have or don't have.

And, in both cases, this enjoyment needn't be viewed as a "guilty pleasure", either by the person enjoying them, or by others. Both The Hobbit, Rogue One and The Last Jedi have a lot to legitimately enjoy in them.

What action? The film is utterly boring and inconsequential until the final action scene. And when that scene comes, its firing on way too many fronts: Jyn is inside the base, the other Rebels are on the ground, the fleet is in the sky, etc. Its Return of the Jedi syndrome!
 
 
So the movie is worth it for fan service? than what's the point of making an original story if that's what it amounts to? you might as well have simply made another The Force Awakens.

I'm not trying to argue which is the better of the two. They're different enough to render any such comparison moot.
 
I'm trying to put a dent into the "Star Wars is the crowning achievement of film music" argument, especially insofar as its being based on the argument that Williams had scored eight of them, or will score nine. If the expansiveness of the score is the point (and it isn't), than its a matter of hours of music, not number of installments. In which case both works stand on relatively equal (and very impressive) grounds. If its the time period that the work spans, than the amount of time the composer actually spent working on the piece is the criteria, not the number of years between the first and last installment, in which case Shore's work is by far the more outstanding.
 
Its just the academic in me that flinches at strong, unequivocal claims such as "Star Wars is without peer".
 
As for special achievement Oscar for the work as a whole, I'm saying I would have liked to have seen both works receive such an honor. Its actually somewhat surprising that neither had received such an award already.

Obligatory repost.
 

 

It's because a two films is in many cases the perfect number where it should stop. Fans liked the first film, so you give them a second one which is a bit different. The third film has usually some signs of fatigue and a lack of ideas. There are many examples of films that work well as duos.
 
The Godfather + The Godfather Part II
Jurassic Park + The Lost World
Gremlins + Gremlins 2
Home Alone + Home Alone 2
Terminator + Terminator 2
28 Days Later + 28 Weeks Later
Kill Bill Vol. 1 + Kill Bill Vol. 2
Trainspotting + T2 Trainspotting
Blade Runner + Blade Runner 2049
Batman + Batman Returns
 
None of these examples would have/has taken benefit from a third film.