Jump to content

Naïve Old Fart

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Naïve Old Fart

  1. The first c.d. that I ever bought was Jean Michel Jarre's "Zoolook", in 1986. It was always my favourite J.M.Jarre recording, and it always will be. The first J.W. c.d., was "Home Alone", in 1990. The first J.W. soundtrack l.p., was "The Towering Inferno", in 1975, the same year that I bought "Earthquake", "Jaws", and "POTA", my first J.G. l.p., begining a love affair with film music, that, I hope, will never end. The first anything to do with film music was the 45rpm, 7inch single of "Theme From The Persuaders", which is still John Barry's finest hour (or, rather, 3 minutes)! That "wrong" note played on the bass synthesizer (Arp, Moog, anyone?) during the second half of the track is absolutely priceless.
  2. Basic Instinct, the Prometheus edition. Hot damn, if that isn't some of the sexist, sultryest, sweatiest music I have ever heard, I'll eat my Hans Zimmer collection!!!
  3. Do you really despise 1941 that much? There is no denying that the film is an unmitigated mess of practically 250 confusing story lines that resolve in an arguably unsatisfactory way, but I consider it entertaining nonetheless(that and the "Swing, Swing, Swing" sequence immediately raises it to a level far beyond "Worst Movie Ever", at least in my eyes). One could do far worse, I think. Yeah, I really despise it that much. There are only a few funny moments (I wouldn't consider the club scene to be one of them). The best aspect is the score, which is fantastic. At least Superman IV has ORIGINAL music by J.W., which makes it essential, in my books. It is also closer in "spirit" to the first two movies than III is. Howazbout The Swarm (bad film, but what a score???!!!), Jaws 3-D, Jaws: The Revenge, Beyond The Poseidon Adventure, When Time ran Out, Poseidon, Hook, Diamonds Are Forever, and many more coming soon to a terminal near you (if I can remember them). I have waxed lyrical on the merits of 1941 at this site for almost ten months, now. Yes, it is confusing, plot-wise, but it boasts superb visual effects, fine cinematography, great sound design, and a brillant score. IMO it is far better than Spielberg's more lauded efforts, such as all films begining with Indiana Jones And The..., Hook, Jurassic Park, and The Lost World,
  4. Not quite. He is killed by Wormtongue, but not at the end of the film. I understand why the film makers probably cut The Scouring Of The Shire out (it wouldn't be all that dramatic), and I am saddened that it was not included, but after you have just seen and heard Aragorn say "my friends, you bow to no man", where on Earth do you go? Personally, my favourite theratrical version is FOTR, but for extended editions, nothing beats ROTK.
  5. Totally agree with both posts. I just skipped the opening interveiws. The problem with B.O.B. is that it semed to give very little-if none at all-credit to any other nation fighting in WWII. This atutude is o.k. if it's a John Wayne movie, but not a piece of work that wants to be taken seriously. It really smacks of being "Saving Private Ryan" lite. In many parts of the US it is still believed that WWII was won by John Wayne and Bruce Willis, with nothing more then their bare hands and 7 helicopter gun ships! I hate how very little-if none at all-credit is given to Chuck Norris. After all, President Truman thought it more humane to nuke Hiroshima instead of sending him in! Some people think that he did Hiroshima a favour(!).
  6. The Empire did have its own theme, "from a certain point of view"; the Death Star motif. Try as I might, I cannot hear that motif in ROTJ (or TESB, for that matter-a lost oppertunity, there). Can anyone?
  7. Totally agree with both posts. I just skipped the opening interveiws. The problem with B.O.B. is that it semed to give very little-if none at all-credit to any other nation fighting in WWII. This atutude is o.k. if it's a John Wayne movie, but not a piece of work that wants to be taken seriously. It really smacks of being "Saving Private Ryan" lite. ANYway...back to 2001/2010. If Man got the prize for, essentially, being clever, then why did The Starchild destroy all the neuclear devices (in the book, at least?), and why is there the tired old Man-on-the-brink-of-neuclear-destruction sub-plot in 2010? Why would the NTIs let Man live if they posed a threat to The universe? Also, if the pilots of The Discovery were so good at there jobs, why was there a need for a HAL9000 Logic Computer to do all the "basic" stuff for them, AND WHY, IN 2010, IS CHANDRA AN AMERICAN???!!! Don't wait for the translation; answer me now!
  8. Lots of posts concerning "2001"/"2010", so lets take them in no particular order; yes "2010" is dated by the WWIII sub-plot, as is "The Abyss", which was, perhaps wisely, romoved from the released version. "2010" suffers from being, simply, a Peter Hayms film, that being a film populated by wiseasses, paranoids, and know-it-alls. This filmic attutude is fine if it's "Capricorn One", or "Outland"-both films I like, and which are filled with all three-but the subject matter as explored in "2010" needs more respect. The SFX in "2010" are brilliant, but (get ready for a surprise!) the SFX in "2001" are simply the best ever put onto film. What Trumbull, Pedersen, et. al. did, especially in the days before motion control, etc., was nothing short of miraculous! To have that sort of sheer grace up there on screen, compared to what the likes of Derek meddings, etc. were doing, was astonishing. BTW, if anyone doubts that the Stargate sequence is thrilling, then try to see it in 70mm, as I did in London a few years back-what a privilege. Surprisingly, no-one has mentioned the main point about "2001", being that Man has become so de-humamised that all this son et luminaire is taken for granted. It's no surprise that a lot of music in the film is used rather like supermarket, or elevator muzak, it being (in Kubrick's world, at least) so ordinary. I have allinged Alex North's score with the d.v.d., and it is painfully obvious that to have his music played against the film would have missed the point (as good a score as it is). Kubrick needed to have the audience hear familiar music, in order to get his point over. That Kubrick/Clarke dared to say that HAL9000-a computer??!!-is not only the most Human character in the film, but also the most interesting, and the one that the audience most identifies with, showed a prescience unparalleld in film making, which puts all other filmic "predictions" in the shade, for it goes right to the very soul of Man. How many people in this world give more attention, credence, and genuine love to their computers, rather than to other Human Beings? As visually gob-smacking as "2001: A Space Odyssey" is, I hope that The World does not go down that particular path-dull, soulless, and uninterested. I personally would not want a computer to think for me (and here, I am reminded of a line from another film that deals with computers; "Doing our business is what computers are for!") nor would I want it to control me, but it seems that a lot of people do, even if they do not realise it.
  9. ..like "The Immolation Scene"-The Towering Inferno, or "Is It A Bird?"-Star Wars, "Flying Arabs"(I'll let people figure that one out on their own) or "The Dual"-The Phantom Menace.
  10. Thanks for that, Diego, but do you know exactly WHY changes were made? I have never heard "The Beatles" in mono, but I would be sad if Ringo's "I've got blisters on my fingers" is not there.
  11. Wait, what would go on the Deluxe Sgt Peppers? Isn't everything recording around that time but not on there, on the MMT LP? Well, there's only 4 songs. Plenty of room on Past Masters. And the YS LP is stupid. I don't want George Martin score in my Beatles collection. It's not like we got the Help! score in the box anywhere. I think this was a missed opportunity to fix a problem with their CD era canon. Yea that's what I don't understand.... when I read that it took them 4 years to remaster everything, I assume that everything was getting remastered AND remixed. That we would be getting the definite mixes of everything, the correct (longest, whatever) version of every track, properly mixed to "normal" stereo standards... but i guess all they did was take the old masters and improve the sound quality. Another missed opportunity. Or maybe they are just planning on coming out with properly mixed stuff in another 20 years It would be a bit difficult to re-mix everything in what we would consider normal stereo by today's standards. There was an awful lot of bouncing, back then, because 16-track plus recording simply did not exist. I'm not sure if it is possible to seperate, say, the vocals form the rythmn guitar, if they are on the same track. If you want to read a rather good article about the remastering process, then please read the latest edition of Record Collector (the one with Jimi Hendrix at Woodstock on the front), as it has an interview with Alan Rouse.
  12. In case anyone is wondering, the saxophone solo in "...Rythmn Stick" is not, I repeat NOT overdubbed. there is footage of the sax. player on TOTP playing 2 saxes simultaneuosly.
  13. Thank's for the heads up, Diego! Bye the bye, what exactly is different about the mono mixes for "The Beatles"? P.s., thanks also for the info. on the "Yellow Submarine" songs.
  14. By "Signature Edition", do you mean the extended version of the film , with approximately 10 minutes of extra footage on it? If I am barking up the wrong tree, then please tell exactly what the signature edition is.
  15. O.k., there is a lot of stuff to get through, so here goes... Firstly, I like MMT a lot, but I do not regard it as canon (the C.D., that is, NOT the E.P.) even though I would not even contemplate it not being in my Beatles collection. The problem that I have is this: there are too many singles on it. The Beatles were always careful to release singles seperately from their albums, thus giving fans "value for money". It smacks of Capitol money-men trying to make a fast buck at The Beatles' expense. The Beatles always hated that they had little control over their overseas output. Having said that, MMT is rather good, and contains one of my all-time top 5 Beatles songs; namely "Baby, You're A Rich Man". This, coupled with the fact that all the songs date from 1967, make it an essential part of the catalogue. A delux "Sgt. Pepper" would not go amiss. I disagree with my friends suggestion that the "Yellow Submarine" songs should be placed on another L.P. (or C.D.). My question to you is: "where?" Since these songs were written and recorded over a period of at least 15 months, which L.P. (or C.D.) do they go on? Personally I am happy with "Yellow Submarine" as it is, but I feel that EMI should have taken the oppertunity to release the complete George Martin score (not unlike "Live And Let Die"). The question of "normal" stereo mixes is a good one. I like the mixes for (for example) "The Beatles", but I would not say that many of the mixes are "normal", especially in the context of what we the listeners take for granted to be normal, these days. The Beatles and George Martin did the best that they could with the technonolgy available, and, most of the time, the results are stunning. I'm sure that every Beatles fan would like to re-mix at least some of their songs, if they had the oppertunity, myself included, and the recent (ish) re-mixes on "Yellow Submarine Songtrack", "1", "Let It Be...Naked", and "Love", are fine examples. Out of interest, I think that the first L.P. to be given a primarilly stereo mix is "Abbey Road". By that, I mean that multi-track recording had progressed to the point of The Beatles not needing to "bounce" tracks.
  16. Not sure who you are refering to, John; me, or Stefan Cosman?
  17. You and I are probably one of the few here who actually saw the film with the title of Star Wars only. Resheath that lightsabre, my friend. I saw STAR WARS in the Summer of 1978 (several times) and again in a limited re-issue, in Jan, 1979, complete with a teaser trailer for THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK.
  18. It's an incredibly dull and uninspired performance. I just listened to all four original recordings in real-world chronological order, and you know what? I love 'em all. They all have something about them that I don't quite like - ANH goes too heavy on the horn in the final strain, ESB is mixed really poorly, ROTJ has some annoyingly bad trumpet moments, and TPM somewhat sacrifices unbridled enthusiasm for technical precision - but they are all wonderful listening experiences for me. It's a testament to how great the music is that after hearing four recordings of it in a row, I really wouldn't mind listening to it again. Even with it being so overplayed. EDIT: And I'm glad it wasn't reorchestrated, at least not in any significant way. It didn't need it. Of all six, I prefer ANH. The first note explodes from the spaekers. No other recording has ever been able recapture this quantum of absolute magic.
  19. The release of the box set last November made IJ+TTOD go up in my estimation 100%! I can't tell how long I had been waiting to get "Approaching The Stones" on c.d. (actually, it was just over 24 years!) Joking aside, the score is a worthy companion to ROTLA, and one that gives increased dividends every time that hear it. My only quibble, is that the percussion "bridge" music, and the "Anything Goes" finale are missing. Nothing beats "The Miracle Of The Ark", though...
  20. You're quite right, Diego, but can you tell me exactly when "All Together Now", "Hey, Bulldog", and "It's All Too Much" (IMO a forgotten classic-still prefer the "Yellow Submarine Songtrack" mix, though) were recorded? Before, or during "The Beatles" sessions? P.s., in my collection "Abbey Road" comes after "Let It Be", as I cannot accept that LIB could ever be the last thing that The Beatles did! Having said that, "LIB...Naked" is a HUGE improvement.
  21. funnily you left out the three officially released ones : none but the brave, hook and philosopher's stone. You are quite right, I had forgotten about these. In my defence ("D-FENS!") Hook is the Prologue (c.d., track one) and Harry Stoned And The Philosopher's pot is not on the c.d. If you listen carefully to the d.v.d., you will hear that it is not culled, or edited from existing material, but an original arrangement of the main themes.
  22. I don't understand this Luddite attitide, especially from a J.W. fan. Of course, one does not NEED to watch classic Who to enjoy the new stuff, but I believe you are selling yourself if you don't. Believe me, Stefan, there is a LOT more to Doctor Who than 4 series, and (soon to be ) 8 specials. What is it exactly that puts you of classic Who? Length of stories, lack of special effects, having to watch the whole thing out of order, what? Pixie is right, there are loads of Who stories that are brimming with wit, adventure, and humanity. Enough to last a lifetime, if necessary. O.k., so the special effects aren't, but the imagination more than makes for these shortcommings. Anyway, we all know what can happen when someone has an unlimited budget, but stunted imagination (Eps. I, II, and III, anyone?). Go on, give the old stuff a chance, child. You might like it, hmm? Swallow your pride, and have a Jelly baby!
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.