Is Nicholas Hooper a slightly gifted third-grader?

[Ollie 1,064]

Schindler's list might have benefited from not having music and the same can be said for Saving Private Ryan.

The music works in those films but not having any might have enhanced the drama.

[Henry B 50]

Dracula (the Bella Legosi one) instantly springs to mind. To say that a film needs a score to succeed is fundamentally wrong.

Well, you know, you could also have a movie without lighting direction - as in natural light only - but what you make up for in realism, you lose in dramatic control. Of course, a movie could just be like a play. I have seen videos of plays that held my interest. But what does that really illustrate other than it CAN work. Is making a film with no music like camping with little equipment? Just for the feeling of personal accomplishment? Considering many directors I've met don't like any music in films, I have to wonder what keeps them using music. There just must be something it adds.

Or something it subtracts.

The answer is very simple: a film can work both with or without music depending on its aim. Stop looking for a right answer.

[Red 75]

Indeed, Mr. Buck. I'm not saying one or the other, but that both are possibilities.

Saving Private Ryan is a very well-scored film.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

No Country For Old Men was excellently scored, meaning there was no score at all except for the end credits. Bravo, Carter Burwell, bravo!

[gkgyver 1,646]

Schindler's list might have benefited from not having music

You realise you are depraving Johnny of an Oscar here?

[indy4 155]

No one should score Harry Potter. Film music is inherently manipulative and dishonest and has no place in proper filmmaking.

Film music is responsible for 50% of the success of a movie. A score is the driving force of the emotional impact of the film on the audience. Without it, there is no proper film-making.

Unfortunately, no that's not quite it. Scores, at least great ones, have never been the driving force of the emotional impact of films. They've accentuated emotion and complemented it, or even brought out emotions in a scene not explicity imparted to the audience, but rarely is a score the driving force of the emotional impact.

Even if you've never seen the movie and music brings you to tears, the reason for that is because of the motion picture that is going on in your head as a result of the music.

The lack of understanding of this fact among many composers, producers, and directors, has given us the term "wallpaper."

Score is a very essential part of a film. As Spielberg, who is arguably the best living director (IMO, the best director period) said, "JW can cause a tear just forming on your eye to drop" (something like that, I forget excactly what it was).

And that thing about how if music makes you cry, even if you haven't seen the movie thingy, well, the music is still directly responsible for the tears. Most of the time, it isn't even a movie going on in your head, it is just the emotion of the music.

But I think what Hlao-roo was saying was sarcasm (after all, this is a film music board), so it's hardly worth arguing.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

I finally watched OotP a few days ago, and I couldn't believe how bad the music was. Constantly I kept thinking: Is this the British idea of a joke? Is NH a slightly gifted third-grader?

Maybe I am being too harsh (although I doubt it), but I thought this is one of the very, very few instances where the score managed to make the movie even worse than it was already. Yes, OotP is arguably the worst movie of the Potter series, and the music is by far the worst. This can't even compare to Williams and Doyle. When I watched GotF for the first time I thought Doyle did a so-so job, but Hooper makes Doyle sound like John Williams. And that's saying something!

Does anyone else have the feeling that the HP franchise is going downhill so fast, it can only be rescued if JW returned to score the final movie?

P.S. To be fair, OotP had the best performance of Daniel Radcliffe so far, I thought. Watson and Grint had apparently been demoted to supporting characters, but they did a good job, too. But that's all that's good about this movie.

What do you think?

what a really stupid post, but I'm not a bit surprised.

I think its a nice score better than GOF

[Jeshopk 8]

Dracula (the Bella Legosi one) instantly springs to mind. To say that a film needs a score to succeed is fundamentally wrong.

Well, you know, you could also have a movie without lighting direction - as in natural light only - but what you make up for in realism, you lose in dramatic control. Of course, a movie could just be like a play. I have seen videos of plays that held my interest. But what does that really illustrate other than it CAN work. Is making a film with no music like camping with little equipment? Just for the feeling of personal accomplishment? Considering many directors I've met don't like any music in films, I have to wonder what keeps them using music. There just must be something it adds.

Or something it subtracts.

The answer is very simple: a film can work both with or without music depending on its aim. Stop looking for a right answer.

I just read that FSM interview with Carter Burwell regarding his scoring of the new Coen Brothers film. The Coen Brothers have shied away from underscore in certain pictures (Big Lubowski) while embracing it in others (Hudsucker). For this film, they decided any underscore was too comforting, and lack of music was more unnerving. It was an interesting article, and Carter Burwell certainly is the complimentary antithesis of a John Williams when it comes to his ideas about scoring a movie. In fact, he and the Coen brothers, according to another interview, talk poorly about John Williams in that there should be a 'no John Williams clause' in Carter's projects - meaning no traditional orchestral underscore approach. But in the end, it is all a matter of personal taste. I admire directors who have control of their craft, so I don't fault them - but I do think if they were more concerned about their audience involvement than they were about their personal preferences, they would have gone the Fargo route for more of their films (.ie lean, but effectively present scoring - expertly spotted.)

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

Film music is responsible for 50% of the success of a movie. A score is the driving force of the emotional impact of the film on the audience. Without it, there is no proper film-making.

Where did you pull that statistic from?

The most powerful and personally emotional television or film I've seen rarely have memorable themes or any music at all. In a way, the lack of music is as much a manipulation of emotions as normal scoring - it plays with our expectations and forces us to feel something raw and real. One only has to experience the trauma of death, sickness or violence once in real life to be unnervingly touched by such depictions on screen.

And I still like Hooper's score. Yay for him.

[Damo 0]

Hans Zimmer should score DH, assisted by Klaus Badelt, Steve Jablonsky and 17 other composers.

The more composers there are, the higher the probability there will be at least one decent cue in such a score.

Probably not, though.

[Jeshopk 8]

In a way, the lack of music is as much a manipulation of emotions as normal scoring - it plays with our expectations and forces us to feel something raw and real.

For a certain verite style of editing and acting. Funny that reality shows have constant music, when that's supposed to be real life, yet movies attempting real life have none. Just an odd observation.

[Greg1138 3]

Goblet of Fart was a garbagee film. The score contributed to this by being garbagee too.

Order of the Phoenix was a good film. Not great, by any stretch of the imagination, but it was good.

The score contributed to this by being a good score. Not great, by any stretch of the imagination, but it was good.

I for one am not bothered by Hooper scoring the next movie - there are others I would much rather hear a Potter score by (David Arnold, Lee Holdridge, Danny Elfman, Alan Silvestri to name but a few) - but another score by Hooper has got to be a much better bet than another bowel-movement by Dork.....oh......sorry.....Doyle.

EDIT: Har-de-har-har....the classic Brit word S.h.i.t.e now comes out as garbagee!! How cool is that? This board has invented a new word!! The word "Garbagee" has been place into the lexicon purely because of Mr Williams!

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

I say give Murray Gold a go at Potter. He's great on Doctor Who, I just bought the season three soundtrack and it's ace. Especially love Martha's theme.

[Josh500 1,615]

what a really stupid post, but I'm not a bit surprised.

I'm surprised that you even bother posting here.

Goblet of Fart was a garbagee film. The score contributed to this by being garbagee too.

Order of the Phoenix was a good film. Not great, by any stretch of the imagination, but it was good.

The score contributed to this by being a good score. Not great, by any stretch of the imagination, but it was good.

Sounds like you're writing yourself a little poem there!

[Richard Penna 3,749]

I say give Murray Gold a go at Potter. He's great on Doctor Who, I just bought the season three soundtrack and it's ace. Especially love Martha's theme.

Yes, yes yes! Gold would be a perfect choice. He's come up with some really great themes for Doctor Who. Runaway Bride and The Doctor Forever are particularly awesome.

I think Arnold's style is too brassy and in-your-face for Potter. I constantly have to adjust the volume whenever I listen to Stargate or ID4 because of the constant harsh brass outbursts.

Goblet of Fart was a garbagee film. The score contributed to this by being garbagee too.

Order of the Phoenix was a good film. Not great, by any stretch of the imagination, but it was good.

The score contributed to this by being a good score. Not great, by any stretch of the imagination, but it was good.

More senseless trashing...

[Josh500 1,615]

I think we all agree that the Harry Potter franchise is slowly going downhill. Part of the reason (but certainly not the only reason) is that JW left the franchise . . .

OotP just can't compare to PS, CoS, and PoA!

[Red 75]

OOTP was better than Goblet of Fire in many ways, while not being on par with Prisoner of Azkaban. The franchise is hardly going downhill based on that.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Are we talking movie wise or score wise, Josh?

[Henry B 50]

Order of the Phoenix was mostly sensationalist trash. I much prefer Goblet of Fire - its main weakness is that it doesn't quite feel like Harry Potter. Fine in its own right, however.

[Josh500 1,615]

Are we talking movie wise or score wise, Josh?

Both, actually.

Some people here seem to prefer OotP over GoF, with some others it's the other way around. But both movies have many, many detractors, more than CoS did in its time, I think. That can't be ignored.

As a Chris Columbus fan (I think I'm the only one on this board, and proud of it, too) I attribute part of the reason to his departure . . .

[John Crichton 4]

I say give Murray Gold a go at Potter. He's great on Doctor Who, I just bought the season three soundtrack and it's ace. Especially love Martha's theme.

Yes, yes yes! Gold would be a perfect choice. He's come up with some really great themes for Doctor Who. Runaway Bride and The Doctor Forever are particularly awesome.

Hm, I don't know. Gold has had some good moments but there are times he needs to be restrained, sometimes he just gets too busy. The Lazarus Experiement, for example, really called for a restrained horror-type score rather that what we got, and don't even get me started on all that misplaced bombast over the Master's funeral pyre.

But Impossible Planet/Satan Pit is still one of the best scores I've heard in the last several years.

[Greg1138 3]

Goblet of Fire's main weaknesses (as a movie) are the horrific editing (which at one particular point makes one scene seem very much like 2 - the score does not help), the terrible pacing, some VERY dogy acting be people whom we already know are actually pretty good (I can only blame the director)....meh, I could go on (especially as I haven't even mentioned the score yet) - but surely I can't be the only one who has spotted this stuff?? Goblet of Fire is simply a badly made film. I will give it credit for bringing it all together for a great last half-hour, but by then it is much too late....

Murray Gold? Hmmmmm.......

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Great last half hour?

Not really, actually.

[Morlock 11]

Indeed. The last half hour is just as inept as the rest of it.

[Henry B 50]

Are we talking movie wise or score wise, Josh?

Both, actually.

Some people here seem to prefer OotP over GoF, with some others it's the other way around. But both movies have many, many detractors, more than CoS did in its time, I think. That can't be ignored.

As a Chris Columbus fan (I think I'm the only one on this board, and proud of it, too) I attribute part of the reason to his departure . . .

I'm comforted by the fact that no future Harry Potter film can be as bad as Chamber of Secrets.

[indy4 155]

I think Arnold's style is too brassy and in-your-face for Potter. I constantly have to adjust the volume whenever I listen to Stargate or ID4 because of the constant harsh brass outbursts.

"The Golden Egg"

I think we all agree that the Harry Potter franchise is slowly going downhill. Part of the reason (but certainly not the only reason) is that JW left the franchise . . .

OotP just can't compare to PS, CoS, and PoA!

I disagree. I think OotP was the best Potter film. The score was the second best score (only PoA could beat it).

[MSM 126]

Yes, but he is not John Williams.

Some people here think the Harry Potter films are as important as the Star Wars saga or the Indiana Jones films.

Aren't we talking about the music? I thought you yourself were such a PS score fan.

I'd like to see a potter score by Edward Shearmur or Brian Tyler.

[Ray Barnsbury 8]

Are we talking movie wise or score wise, Josh?

Both, actually.

Some people here seem to prefer OotP over GoF, with some others it's the other way around. But both movies have many, many detractors, more than CoS did in its time, I think. That can't be ignored.

As a Chris Columbus fan (I think I'm the only one on this board, and proud of it, too) I attribute part of the reason to his departure . . .

I'm comforted by the fact that no future Harry Potter film can be as bad as Chamber of Secrets.

Goblet came close; it's better as a standalone film, but it had such an amazing foundation to work off (the book) that it loses major points for hardly capturing any of that. At least Chamber didn't ruin a pivotal installment of the series.

[Richard Penna 3,749]

I think Arnold's style is too brassy and in-your-face for Potter. I constantly have to adjust the volume whenever I listen to Stargate or ID4 because of the constant harsh brass outbursts.

"The Golden Egg"

I think we all agree that the Harry Potter franchise is slowly going downhill. Part of the reason (but certainly not the only reason) is that JW left the franchise . . .

OotP just can't compare to PS, CoS, and PoA!

I disagree. I think OotP was the best Potter film. The score was the second best score (only PoA could beat it).

Me too. My dad and I agree that the films have been getting better and more mature.

Every time I see Chamber I see more and more flaws in it. It's just so pedestrian and doesn't take any chances with anything. That's Columbus for you.

[indy4 155]

Indeed!

[Josh500 1,615]

The fact is, I love the first 3 Potter films. The other 2 are okay, and I prefer GoF over OotP.

Part of the reason is of course that the first 3 are scored by JW. I can't ignore that, because the score is such an integral part of each movie. Another reason is that, in the first three, you really get a sense of "magic happening" . . . and I'm mainly talking about movie magic. Parts 4 and 5 fail to do so, IMO . . . or at least, don't succeed as well in that regard.

But again, this is just my opinion. I'm sure many disagree with me.

[Henry B 50]

The fact is, I love the first 3 Potter films. The other 2 are okay, and I prefer GoF over OotP.

Part of the reason is of course that the first 3 are scored by JW. I can't ignore that, because the score is such an integral part of each movie. Another reason is that, in the first three, you really get a sense of "magic happening" . . . and I'm mainly talking about movie magic. Parts 4 and 5 fail to do so, IMO . . . or at least, don't succeed as well in that regard.

But again, this is just my opinion. I'm sure many disagree with me.

Movie magic? It's more magical to light a sparkler and burn your eyes out with it. Chamber of Secrets is a light, tried-and-true, family-friendly sentimental durge without a sliver of ingenuity or daring. The only reason to like this film is if you enjoy formulas, not original works. Also a Home Alone 2 fan?

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

Hm, I don't know. Gold has had some good moments but there are times he needs to be restrained, sometimes he just gets too busy. The Lazarus Experiement, for example, really called for a restrained horror-type score rather that what we got, and don't even get me started on all that misplaced bombast over the Master's funeral pyre.

Haha, we've had this discussion before, especially about the funeral pyre music and I still agree. But I reckon he'd be on a bit more of a leash if working on an actual film, particularly one as big as Potter. He'd probably restrain himself - or the director would encourage it (assuming it was a competent director). Not saying that anyone involved in Who's production is incompetent, but it's probably much less an issue in television to capture the correct mood and reflection in music, mainly from a time and production point of view. Er, having trouble conveying what I'm saying here, my communication has broken down since being on holidays!

But Impossible Planet/Satan Pit is still one of the best scores I've heard in the last several years.

Oh yes, agreed!

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

I thought it was a decent score, but I felt it didn't have the climactic pay-off it should have had in the final act.

Exactly. He did nail the Room of Requirements montage tho imo

[Morlock 11]

That he did.

[John Crichton 4]

Hm, I don't know. Gold has had some good moments but there are times he needs to be restrained, sometimes he just gets too busy. The Lazarus Experiement, for example, really called for a restrained horror-type score rather that what we got, and don't even get me started on all that misplaced bombast over the Master's funeral pyre.

Haha, we've had this discussion before, especially about the funeral pyre music and I still agree. But I reckon he'd be on a bit more of a leash if working on an actual film, particularly one as big as Potter. He'd probably restrain himself - or the director would encourage it (assuming it was a competent director). Not saying that anyone involved in Who's production is incompetent, but it's probably much less an issue in television to capture the correct mood and reflection in music, mainly from a time and production point of view. Er, having trouble conveying what I'm saying here, my communication has broken down since being on holidays!

Heh, no I get what you're saying. And he does create some great stuff. Other than the 2 parter I mentioned, I think Father's Day, the Cyberman stories, Rose's theme, and the "psychotic" theme for the Master were all excellent. And you're right, if he worked on Potter the director would be looking over his shoulder quite a bit more. I think RTD and crew just let him do his own thing now, and I felt overall Series 3 was his weakest year. Still, I'm looking forward to getting the Series 3 CD when it comes out over here.

[indy4 155]

I thought it was a decent score, but I felt it didn't have the climactic pay-off it should have had in the final act.

Exactly. He did nail the Room of Requirements montage tho imo

....along with "Professor Umbridge," "Fireworks," "Flight of the Order of the Phoenix," "The Kiss," and more....

[gkgyver 1,646]

"Flight Of The Order Of The Phoenix" sounds like the theme from a second- rate superhero show out of the 80s.

[indy4 155]

You say that like it's a bad thing.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

Are we talking movie wise or score wise, Josh?

Both, actually.

Some people here seem to prefer OotP over GoF, with some others it's the other way around. But both movies have many, many detractors, more than CoS did in its time, I think. That can't be ignored.

As a Chris Columbus fan (I think I'm the only one on this board, and proud of it, too) I attribute part of the reason to his departure . . .

I'm comforted by the fact that no future Harry Potter film can be as bad as Chamber of Secrets.

CoS always came across to me as SS rehashed and polished up a bit and a bigger action climax instead of a dodgy 'aaaarrgghh' shout.

I thought it was a decent score, but I felt it didn't have the climactic pay-off it should have had in the final act.

Exactly. He did nail the Room of Requirements montage tho imo

....along with "Professor Umbridge," "Fireworks," "Flight of the Order of the Phoenix," "The Kiss," and more....

Those are hardly outstanding cues.

[gkgyver 1,646]

You say that like it's a bad thing.

It is a bad thing if we consider for a moment that we are NOT in the 80s, and neither is Harry Potter. The movie is set in post-millennial times.

It is also a bad thing if we consider for a moment that this movie is not a TV movie.

[John Crichton 4]

The movie is set in post-millennial times.

Which is weird since the timeline of the books is supposed to be early to mid 90s.

John- who thinks The Flight is one of the score's better cues

[indy4 155]

You say that like it's a bad thing.

It is a bad thing if we consider for a moment that we are NOT in the 80s, and neither is Harry Potter. The movie is set in post-millennial times.

It is also a bad thing if we consider for a moment that this movie is not a TV movie.

I know, I was kidding.

Seriously, though, I don't think it sounds like an 80s TV show, I think it's great.

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

Who can honestly say that Hooper did not nail the Room of Requirement and Umbridge montages and the build up into the Ministry (Harry's first trip, not the climax)?

Those were three huge moments for me while watching the film. Unfortunately I got nothing like that with Goblet at all.

[indy4 155]

I agree.

[Richard Penna 3,749]

Highlights for me are Room of Requirements, Flight of the OOtP and some of The Ministry of Magic. The rest, well it's ok - a very good TV movie score to me.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,070]

It is a bad thing if we consider for a moment that we are NOT in the 80s, and neither is Harry Potter. The movie is set in post-millennial times.

It is also a bad thing if we consider for a moment that this movie is not a TV movie.

As a connoisseur of bad 80's B movies for kicks-values...

I have to ask you, what specific 80's B movie music does the theme remind you of?

I certainly can't think of anything remotely similar.

[gkgyver 1,646]

Who can honestly say that Hooper did not nail the Room of Requirement and Umbridge montages and the build up into the Ministry (Harry's first trip, not the climax)?

The music fits, but from "nailing" it's a bit too far away.

The only cue I like is "Darkness Takes Over", and that's mainly because I thought it was written for the DUmbledore/Voldemort duel before I saw the film.