Jump to content

Braveheart


Braveheart (James Horner)  

63 members have voted

  1. 1. How do you rate this score?

    • 5 stars
      26
    • 4,5 stars
      9
    • 4 stars
      15
    • 3,5 stars
      3
    • 3 stars
      7
    • 2,5 stars
      0
    • 2 stars
      1
    • 1,5 stars
      0
    • 1 stars
      2
    • I'm not familiar with this score
      1


Recommended Posts

2. With two albums released, are we missing a lot of music?

Yes, because the second album (More Music From Braveheart) had only like 5 minutes of unreleased music to add to the original release. The rest was traditional Scottish music that didn't appear in the film, dialogue-only tracks, or tracks with music that was already on the original release (but this time, with dialogue over it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. With two albums released, are we missing a lot of music?

Yes, because the second album (More Music From Braveheart) had only like 5 minutes of unreleased music to add to the original release. The rest was traditional Scottish music that didn't appear in the film, dialogue-only tracks, or tracks with music that was already on the original release (but this time, with dialogue over it).

Little more then 5 minutes, but not much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is the label's attitude ignorance or pure unwilligness?

A bit of both, I guess.

According to Filmtracks' we have all the highlights.

Maybe we do (don't remember if what's left unreleased is noteworthy or not), but there's still a lot missing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now that we're talking missing music anyway, how exactly do these things work? Did the label need Horner's permission to butcher his music, was he the one who picked the new tracks, or does the label do whatever it wants even if Horner had demanded a 5.1 surround sound DVD and three CDs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These kind of major label expansions are pretty much always done with the composer's input.

It's our beloved specialty labels that sometimes get to make perfect expansions without any composer interference (especially because a lot of times the composer has passed when the specialty label is working on it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But what there is is crucial, i. e. film version of 'For the Love of a Princess' and a brute attack cue for the beginning of the Falkirk battle. I guess there is some more variety to it than the endless same-y repeats of the Murron love theme on the album.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the concert version, so yeah. Horner could have included the delirious schmaltz bridge in the end credits instead of just repeating the concert version but wish in one hand, shit in the other...

It's not a very varied score, though, so i am not sure i even need the original album. An academic debate, since i traded it on ebay anyway. Or better, gifted...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's really only nitpicking about semantics. Williams also writes album versions of his main themes but they are routinely dubbed concert versions for good reason. If the score is popular enough that's what will be played in concerts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the film is historically inaccurate, you can't deny that, but the bigger picture remains that Scotland was/is being governed by someone else.

Someone else? Mel Gibson might have made you think that but it's inaccurate I'm afraid. They're a part of the UK mate, they voted in a referendum to continue to be at the end of last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if you look at it logically, it doesn't make sense. Scotland is a country on its own with its own history and culture, so why shouldn't the Scots have their proper government? Why shouldn't the English have their own government? I'm not being anti-British here, but the UK doesn't make sense to me because there's clearly not a strong UK identity. (Am I allowed to post such things here?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That doesn't make much sense mate.

We have the EU, even though there's virtually no united European identity in any of the population anywhere.

The United Kingdom makes perfect sense when seen in its proper historical and geographical context.

Great Britain is afterall an island.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are Belgian right? To many of us who aren't from Belgium your whole socio/political system between the Flemish and the Wallonians make no sense.

Well I'm not a big fan of the EU either...

Yeah, though I'm sure its had its uses. And we didn't have a third world war here so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suuure!

Anyway, I agree with Lee.

Braveheart is a smashing film, but really not one that should be confused with actual history. Nor should we draw any political conclusions from it.

Watch The Thick Of It for that, Manneke!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if you look at it logically, it doesn't make sense. Scotland is a country on its own with its own history and culture, so why shouldn't the Scots have their proper government? Why shouldn't the English have their own government? I'm not being anti-British here, but the UK doesn't make sense to me because there's clearly not a strong UK identity. (Am I allowed to post such things here?)

04 - In order to avoid controversial off-topic debates, political and religious references are NOT ALLOWED ON ANY OF THE FORUMS.

Bye!

:wave:

It was nice knowing you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.