Desplat13

Indeed.

But I thought we only had Joey to go to in order to know if we should like something or not. Don't tell me there are now two people with 'quality' meters instead of opinions. You do not have permission to use my name newbie, not until you have something of real value to say, still waiting on that. My most sincere apologies. What should I call you? Oldbie?

This is what I was wondering about. In that case, both HGW and JP are A-list, whether you like it or not.

Me too....Pfft

But I thought we only had Joey to go to in order to know if we should like something or not. Don't tell me there are now two people with 'quality' meters instead of opinions.

In that case, what composer working today ARE a-list composer? What composer get bigger-budget movies than the afore-mentioned?

Who all do they consider "A-List" composers? I prefer both Harry Gregson-Williams and John Powell to Zimmer or Newton-Howard, and HGW with JP have collaborated quite often. What about the VERY recent Kung Fu Panda?

Soule's music has a tendancy to bore me. I really think what Harry Gregson-Williams WROTE for the Narnia movies is better than what we would have gotten from Soule. But then, I could be wrong, as I haven't heard a whole ton of Soule's stuff.

Yup.

No, NOT Howard Shore. Remember, we already had LOTR, and we don't need another one. A Williams Narnia score would probably sound too, Williams-esque, and would take away from the movie. For those movies, I think I would have been more happy with, in order, James Newton Howard, John Powell, or John Debney.

Nooooooo ... not at *all*! If you think TDK is generic, you haven't heard generic music. Sure, there has been more generic music in the past, just like there has been worse music in the past. That doesn't change the fact that Batman Begins, at least, is quite generic sounding, especially compared to good music. Which should, after all, be the standard.

I'm sorry, I couldn't make it through it. I tried, I really did...

So, is it usually the director's job to hire the composer? I thought that might be the producer's decision.

Worked for me... Just think how much better it would work if Elfman actually wrote it for that scene...

But how can a boring score fit a movie better than an interesting one unless the movie is boring?

What those composers wrote was exceptional, but were the movies (ballets, etc...)? (I don't know, that's why I'm asking). Do you think Williams saw what they had to write there music to, and wanted that material, or would he have heard their music and wished he wrote it, regardless of what it was written for.

I think Snowster asks a very valid question, and one that has not really be discussed to death here that I can remember (a rarity, really). Does John Williams regret not 'going after', if you like, scores that have turned out to be very iconic in our culture. Sure, the guy has done plenty of iconic stuff already, but do you think he wishes, upon seeing how a movie turns out and what musical options there are inherent in it, that he had tried to get the 'gig'? I could see this certainly being the case with LOTR. It is not everyday that there comes a movie saga with those type of thematic possibilities as those movies turned out to have. It must be enough to make a composer giddy at the thought. Also, by the way, I knew what he was asking after reading the first post.

I like that. Not sure what it means, but I like it.

What he said, minus the little late part.

A meaningful score tells a story, makes a point, is more than noise (many other options). Sure, some movies don't need great scores, just like we don't need hearing. Sure is nice, though...

A movie is meaningless if its score is meaningless? Think about what you just said... OK, I guess it did look that way. What I meant was that if a score that was meaningless fit a movie better than a meaningful one would have (remember, this has nothing to do with style), that means that the movie is meaningless as well. What I was saying is that a meaningful score is always going to be better.

But music will always be better if it is good music as well as good ambient background noise. At least in my opinion... This is art. Since when is 'workable' part of the equation? Why stop there?

OK. But remember, this was my original post: I was comparing it with the oh so lush sounds that so many composers go after. I was not saying it was great, but still a breath of fresh air, so to speak.

Depends on what you mean by dismissed. I would not buy the cd, and I would wish during the movie that the music were better (if I got to know the movie well enough). It is fine, I suppose, but it could be better. And why settle for fine, when there is so much more out there? The question is should the music serve itself or the movie first. I think choosing one or the other falls short of the possibilities in music.