Jump to content

Was Goldsmith a scientologist?


BLUMENKOHL

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

He had every right to believe aliens put us here.

He just realised that his music was so out of this world that there's no other possibility that seemed likely.

By the way, believing that aliens put mankind on earth does not automatically make one a scientologist. Am I a scientologist?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay. What the ****** are you talking about? Are you talking about Jerry Goldsmith, The film composer?

If you referring to Jerry Goldsmith, then No. He is just a great film composer . Look his music for aliens does not mean anything that he a scientologist. You know that some of biographies of a person that you find can be bit false or not quite true. If Jerry Goldsmith was a scientologist he wouldn't be a film composer at all... or maybe he had some interest as a scientologist but he not a scientologist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have never been any aliens on this planet. Maybe Goldsmith said it while he was promoting some sci-fi flick of which he did the score and someone took it way too seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course there have been "aliens" on this planet, they were just here many thousands of years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, scientology is a lot more than believing aliens made humans. Scientology is a lot more wacked and ridiculous than that.

It's always like that. All groups and religions have found one tiny shred of truth and then cling to it with all the arrogance on this world, and build more and more stories around it until even that shred is lost.

But the other way around is sickening as well. When people think they can judge a person's (or many persons') view (that he achieved by work and years of research) based on nothing more than being an ignorant jerk.

If you referring to Jerry Goldsmith, then No. He is just a great film composer . Look his music for aliens does not mean anything that he a scientologist.

I think you're caught in a mix-up of evaluating a person's abilities, character and beliefs, and for some strange reason think one has something to do with the other.

Does Zimmer's Da Vinci Code make him less a Catholic, more a Catholic ...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally couldn't give a fart in a hurricane if he was a Scientologist. Tom Cruise is a damn good actor - does being a Scientologist make him any less of a person?

This is surely the most basic reason why discussion of Religion is frowned upon on these boards: We all make our own choices and we all have our own beliefs - they do not make us any better or worse as a person. So what if he WAS a Scientologist - does it really matter THAT much??? He was however a fantastic composer - that is the bit that matters, people!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's also one in a mug that he has on his desk in the Karlin doc.

Morlock- who was expecting Stefan's usual post pertaining to such matters....ROTFLMAO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Williams stated years ago in an interview that he wasn't religious, I believe. But I think he's also talked about music being inspired by divinity, so I would guess that he's spiritual without practicing much of an organized religion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know. There's that (IMO) pretty lame fanfare. Kind of turned me off the score for a little while. Than I got to the real, ass-kickin fanfare, as well as the terrifc action music (including the most imaginative cue to come from Orff-temp tracking) and slightely Barry-esque, but still quite attractive, love theme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I must say that my favorite JG score is probably Masada, so I would assume his Jewish faith might have helped find the right inspiration.

Masada was also one of the few projects he actually went after himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you defending Scientology gkgyver? Baring in mind that this thread isn't an attack on Scientology of course.

I'm not defending anyone, and certainly not religious groups that claim to have the ultimate truth and others are unworthy peasants.

I am, however, always extremely "agitated" when a person has a specific belief (i.e. believing extraterrestrials started human evolution) that happens to be part of another person's or group's belief system that happens to be disrespected by the general public because it happens to be bad-mouthed by the media, and all of a sudden that person is extremely in danger of being marked as a member of that group.

I realise this is in some ways a religious discussion and will probably be closed, in the slim chance it will go on in a constructive way (which is extremely unlikely considering the rather immature and naive nature of some people's minds), but since this is a matter that I take very seriously, I will say a few things.

I wish people would stop thinking in this way of putting everything into a special, pre-existent category as soon as they heard it. As soon as you exit the classroom and start looking at religious texts and interpretations from an objective point of view, the "knowledge" you get in school can be nothing more than wishful thinking.

That certainly holds true for all of the "big" religions.

The "Exegese" (don't know English word; interpretations of religious texts) has become so complex that even the most knowledgable experts lost a clear overview. The texts in the Bible have been written down a good 50 years after Jesus died. And since then, they've been translated, re-translated, re-edited and "modernised" countless times. In reality, there's virtually no passage where Jesus is called the messiah verbatim. In the most modern bibles, the name Jesus or Christ has been put when it seemed to fit.

The most pretentious thing is that it is said cultures like the Aztecs have their beliefs from Christian missionaries; but these people and their beliefs existed a LONG time before that.

And you start to wonder, why is this kind of discussion always surpressed? I know, I know, to not hurt other people's personal feelings. So, is it better to leave them on some sort of fluffy cloud that is bound to disappear when the sky clears up?

All big religions have so many paradoxons that it makes anyone's head explode. The dogmatic churches as they exist today are nothing more than a collection of fluffy dreams.

Humanity *desparately* needs to let go of pre-determined thinking very quickly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

disrespected by the general public because it happens to be bad-mouthed by the media, and

all of a sudden that person is extremely in danger of being marked as a member of that group.

Most 'people' are 'sheeple', unfortunately. Including myself, at times. It's easy to be. Easy to be fed and then led. But I try my hardest to analyse and possibly later challenge and discard any concept I may have adopted (no matter how prescious that concept is held to my heart. Or, how easily I rejected it as a concept). It's a hard way to live, but an honest way to live.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Anyway.......we delivered the bomb. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.