So, what JW scores are not 5 stars, are not masterpieces, they all cannot be?

[A24 4,346]

When Williams "tries too hard" to write serious music it doesn't work IMO.

Where did I say he should do serious music?

[King Mark 3,631]

Well ,I supposed you want him to stop scoring blockbuster type movies and do serious films like in the 90's (which I was glad when he got over that phase)

[A24 4,346]

I think you want Williams to morph into something he's not ,or beyond his ability .

Yes, I do, I want to challenge him to rise above the "confort zone". He already did Star Wars and Raiders a long time ago. I've heard it. Show me something new!

Well ,I supposed you want him to stop scoring blockbuster type movies and do serious films like in the 90's (which I was glad when he got over that phase)

He did serious movies in the 80s too. I really don't think Williams sees it as a phase.

[Nick Parker 3,040]

I still want John Williams to score a film noir!

[indy4 155]

"Irina's Theme"

[Luke Skywalker 1,795]

Giacchino's Star Trek > Indy 4. And it's not even close.

I agree,

I'm sure Mr Giacchino does not dare to think like that, or i hope he doesnt

[Datameister 2,044]

He's stated his admiration for John Williams before...

[Josh500 1,615]

We know his work sounds different if he writes for Oliver Stone or Alan Parker. I say more of those and less Raiders and less Prequels! Who's with me?! (endless echo in an empty hall) How would Williams sound if he would do a score for Steven Soderbergh, for instance? Doesn't that sound intriguing to you guys? (hey, where is everybody?)

New horizons, different challenges!

Alex

You're acting like he does nothing but blockbusters!

I think he's one of the most versatile film composers... if not the most versatile. After all, isn't he the one who did Jurassic Park followed by Schindler's List? And then Home Alone followed by JFK? Give him some break! I think you'd be talking about new horizons, no matter what he did!

[publicist 4,643]

I think he's one of the most versatile film composers... if not the most versatile. After all, isn't he the one who did Jurassic Park followed by Schindler's List? And then Home Alone followed by JFK?

John Williams. as the most versatile of film composers. Let me think about it.

Nope..computer says NO in a clear and loud voice.

[Josh500 1,615]

I think he's one of the most versatile film composers... if not the most versatile. After all, isn't he the one who did Jurassic Park followed by Schindler's List? And then Home Alone followed by JFK?

John Williams. as the most verstaile of film composers. Let me think about it.

Nope..computer says NO in a clear and loud voice.

So who is more versatile?

(I thought you were a computer. No one talks like that!)

[Henry B 50]

I think he's one of the most versatile film composers... if not the most versatile. After all, isn't he the one who did Jurassic Park followed by Schindler's List? And then Home Alone followed by JFK?

John Williams. as the most verstaile of film composers. Let me think about it.

Nope..computer says NO in a clear and loud voice.

So who is more versatile?

Jerry Goldsmith is the obvious answer, but there are many.

[Josh500 1,615]

Jerry Goldsmith is the obvious answer, but there are many.

No. Jerry Goldsmith composed many more scores, but that doesn't make him a more versatile composer.

Yeah many. Who?

[Nick Parker 3,040]

To use the Merriam-Webster definition of "versatile":

1. Embracing a variety of subjects, fields, or skills; also : turning with ease from one thing to another

Though I may not be a fan of Jerry Goldsmith, I look at his oeuvre and think "Wow, look at all the different types of films he scored!"

What fits your criteria of versatility, Josh?

[Henry B 50]

Jerry Goldsmith is the obvious answer, but there are many.

No. Jerry Goldsmith composed many more scores, but that doesn't make him a more versatile composer.

Yeah many. Who?

You assume that I was only talking about the quantity of Goldsmith's output.

[Josh500 1,615]

To use the Merriam-Webster definition of "versatile":

1. Embracing a variety of subjects, fields, or skills; also : turning with ease from one thing to another

Though I may not be a fan of Jerry Goldsmith, I look at his oeuvre and think "Wow, look at all the different types of films he scored!"

What fits your criteria of versatility, Josh?

My criteria?

sci-fi opera: Star Wars

science fiction: A.I.

sci-fi noir: Minority Report

children's fairytale: Hook

sci-fi fantasy: Jurassic Park

Christmas comedy: Home Alone

comedy: The Terminal

children's fantasy: Harry Potter

adventure: Indiana Jones

war movie: Schindler's List

horror: Jaws

western: The Missouri Breaks

crime story: Presumed Innocent

etc.

I'm not saying JW was more versatile than JG, but JG was certainly not more versatile than JW.

But there are not many more composers who are or were that versatile.

Jerry Goldsmith is the obvious answer, but there are many.

No. Jerry Goldsmith composed many more scores, but that doesn't make him a more versatile composer.

Yeah many. Who?

You assume that I was only talking about the quantity of Goldsmith's output.

No. So who?

[Henry B 50]

Well, Josh, I define a composer's versatility not by the diversity of the films he scores (though Goldsmith certainly matches Williams in that department) but by the diversity in the music he writes. I think it's very hard to find a common thread between scores like Alien and Looney Toons: Back in Action. That's not to say that Williams never steps out of his comfort zone (e.g. Images, Sleepers), but I find it happens less often than it did with Goldsmith.

[John Crichton 4]

Giacchino's Star Trek > Indy 4. And it's not even close.

Much as I hate to disagree with a fellow Who fan, I thought the new Star Trek score was by far the weakest part of the film. That silly heroic theme over and over again. A neopolitan 6th chord gets extremely old if it's over used.

I thought that as well at first (even though I wouldn't know a neopolitan 6th chord from a TARDIS), but the more you listen to it the more you realize the complex thematic layers that have been built into the score. It really rewards the effort put in to it. But the rest of the movie is so good I might still agree that the score is the weakest part.

[Josh500 1,615]

Well, Josh, I define a composer's versatility not by the diversity of the films he scores (though Goldsmith certainly matches Williams in that department) but by the diversity in the music he writes. I think it's very hard to find a common thread between scores like Alien and Looney Toons: Back in Action. That's not to say that Williams never steps out of his comfort zone (e.g. Images, Sleepers), but I find it happens less often than it did with Goldsmith.

Well, don't make up your own definitions! Besides, JW's 60s scores sound quite different from his 80s scores, don't you think?

And don't eschew my question. Who?

[Diego 21]

I wouldn't really put the SW scores and the Indy ones as different types of scores really.

[John Crichton 4]

Well, Josh, I define a composer's versatility not by the diversity of the films he scores (though Goldsmith certainly matches Williams in that department) but by the diversity in the music he writes. I think it's very hard to find a common thread between scores like Alien and Looney Toons: Back in Action. That's not to say that Williams never steps out of his comfort zone (e.g. Images, Sleepers), but I find it happens less often than it did with Goldsmith.

Goldsmith was more innovative than Williams, period, at least on the electronics front if nothing else. Whether one is better than the other I leave up to the listener.

[Diego 21]

Well, Josh, I define a composer's versatility not by the diversity of the films he scores (though Goldsmith certainly matches Williams in that department) but by the diversity in the music he writes. I think it's very hard to find a common thread between scores like Alien and Looney Toons: Back in Action. That's not to say that Williams never steps out of his comfort zone (e.g. Images, Sleepers), but I find it happens less often than it did with Goldsmith.

Nah... The Omen and Looney Tunes: Back in Action are basically the same thing!

[Josh500 1,615]

I wouldn't really put the SW scores and the Indy ones as different types of scores really.

Nick asked me what my criteria of versatility is. My answer: the many different types of genres one dabbles in.

Whether these scores sound different to your own ears or not, is your own business.

[Henry B 50]

Well, Josh, I define a composer's versatility not by the diversity of the films he scores (though Goldsmith certainly matches Williams in that department) but by the diversity in the music he writes. I think it's very hard to find a common thread between scores like Alien and Looney Toons: Back in Action. That's not to say that Williams never steps out of his comfort zone (e.g. Images, Sleepers), but I find it happens less often than it did with Goldsmith.

Well, don't make up your own definitions! Besides, JW's 60s scores sound quite different from his 80s scores, don't you think?

You get to make up definitions, but I don't? Also, please stop putting words in my mouth. Of course I don't think that all Williams scores sound the same. I just think he has a distinct style that I can usually detect. Goldsmith was more experimental in the 60s, 70s and 80s but developed a style even more recognizable than Williams' in the 90s. Air Force One, First Contact, etc. I'm not much a fan of that style. Very diatonic and pared down.

And don't eschew my question. Who?

Well, most of the most versatile composers aren't very good. They're nebulous because they aren't creative or bold enough to forge their own style. So in that respect, I think many TV commercial jingle composers are more versatile than Williams because they don't bring their ego to the table, but I don't think they're better. It's like Stravinsky said: if you don't develop a personal style after a year or two of study, you probably never will.

[Josh500 1,615]

Well, Josh, I define a composer's versatility not by the diversity of the films he scores (though Goldsmith certainly matches Williams in that department) but by the diversity in the music he writes. I think it's very hard to find a common thread between scores like Alien and Looney Toons: Back in Action. That's not to say that Williams never steps out of his comfort zone (e.g. Images, Sleepers), but I find it happens less often than it did with Goldsmith.

Well, don't make up your own definitions! Besides, JW's 60s scores sound quite different from his 80s scores, don't you think?

You get to make up definitions, but I don't? Also, please stop putting words in my mouth. Of course I don't think that all Williams scores sound the same. I just think he has a distinct style that I can usually detect. Goldsmith was more experimental in the 60s, 70s and 80s but developed a style even more recognizable than Williams' in the 90s. Air Force One, First Contact, etc. I'm not much a fan of that style. Very diatonic and pared down.

And don't eschew my question. Who?

Well, most of the most versatile composers aren't very good. They're nebulous because they aren't creative or bold enough to forge their own style. So in that respect, I think many TV commercial jingle composers are more versatile than Williams because they don't bring their ego to the table, but I don't think they're better. It's like Stravinsky said: if you don't develop a personal style after a year or two of study, you probably never will.

No, I don't make up the definitions. I go by the usual definition of the word "versatility."

JG was more experimental or even innovative, I give you that. But not more versatile.

TV commerical jingle composers? You're kidding right?

[Diego 21]

Oh they're different, and I've mentioned how much I love them both several times, but really both have big heroic brassy themes (Luke's theme and the Raiders march), both have a love theme (Princess Leia and Marion theme), etc.

There's not a single note in Raiders that I would mistake for Star Wars music, but they do follow the same pattern.

[Datameister 2,044]

There's not a single note in Raiders that I would mistake for Star Wars music, but they do follow the same pattern.

I love both scores to death - two of my very favorites - but you need to compare the passage in "The Idol Temple" when Indy is struggling up the vines out of the pit to the similar whiny muted brass in a few parts of the Battle of Yavin.

[indy4 155]

Nick asked me what my criteria of versatility is. My answer: the many different types of genres one dabbles in.

So wouldn't that mean Hans Zimmer was exploring versatility when he scored Pirates of the Caribbean and Gladiator, because one's about pirates and one's about gladiators? Even though the scores themselves are, at many parts, interchangeable? I'm not saying I disagree with you about JW (I do think he's a very varied composer, in fact that's my favorite aspects about his work), but this definition of versatile is illegitimate.

[Diego 21]

And I would say that both Indy and Jurassic Park are basically adventure movies, one has supernatural ancient aritfacts (fantasy and a bit of science) the other has dinosaurs coming back through genetics (again fantasy and a bit of science), they're not really day and night, are they??

[indy4 155]

The film genres, maybe not. But the scores are very different.

[Josh500 1,615]

Nick asked me what my criteria of versatility is. My answer: the many different types of genres one dabbles in.

So wouldn't that mean Hans Zimmer was exploring versatility when he scored Pirates of the Caribbean and Gladiator, because one's about pirates and one's about gladiators? Even though the scores themselves are, at many parts, interchangeable? I'm not saying I disagree with you about JW (I do think he's a very varied composer, in fact that's my favorite aspects about his work), but this definition of versatile is illegitimate.

Vesatile means in this case, one can be used for many projects.

I'm not saying Hans Zimmer is not versatile. Sure he is. Only problem is, HZ is also (mostly) an abysmal composer.

[Diego 21]

The film genres, maybe not. But the scores are very different.

I wouldn't say very different. My point is that calling Hook a "children's fairy tale" genre and Harry Potter a "children's fantasy" genre seems like pushing it too far, they're both fantasy.

[indy4 155]

Nick asked me what my criteria of versatility is. My answer: the many different types of genres one dabbles in.

So wouldn't that mean Hans Zimmer was exploring versatility when he scored Pirates of the Caribbean and Gladiator, because one's about pirates and one's about gladiators? Even though the scores themselves are, at many parts, interchangeable? I'm not saying I disagree with you about JW (I do think he's a very varied composer, in fact that's my favorite aspects about his work), but this definition of versatile is illegitimate.

Vesatile means in this case, one can be used for many projects.

Well then I'm not totally sure it's really a flattering thing. Any bozo could sign on to score a myriad of different genres of films, but if they score them with the same generic style of music then it really doesn't prove their worth. That's what I was trying to say with the Zimmer example.

[Ollie 1,059]

Jerry Goldsmith was more versatile than Williams.

[Henry B 50]

Well, Josh, I define a composer's versatility not by the diversity of the films he scores (though Goldsmith certainly matches Williams in that department) but by the diversity in the music he writes. I think it's very hard to find a common thread between scores like Alien and Looney Toons: Back in Action. That's not to say that Williams never steps out of his comfort zone (e.g. Images, Sleepers), but I find it happens less often than it did with Goldsmith.

Well, don't make up your own definitions! Besides, JW's 60s scores sound quite different from his 80s scores, don't you think?

You get to make up definitions, but I don't? Also, please stop putting words in my mouth. Of course I don't think that all Williams scores sound the same. I just think he has a distinct style that I can usually detect. Goldsmith was more experimental in the 60s, 70s and 80s but developed a style even more recognizable than Williams' in the 90s. Air Force One, First Contact, etc. I'm not much a fan of that style. Very diatonic and pared down.

And don't eschew my question. Who?

Well, most of the most versatile composers aren't very good. They're nebulous because they aren't creative or bold enough to forge their own style. So in that respect, I think many TV commercial jingle composers are more versatile than Williams because they don't bring their ego to the table, but I don't think they're better. It's like Stravinsky said: if you don't develop a personal style after a year or two of study, you probably never will.

No, I don't make up the definitions. I go by the usual definition of the word "versatility."

JG was more experimental or even innovative, I give you that. But not more versatile.

TV commerical jingle composers? You're kidding right?

You're not even listening to anything I'm saying. TV commercial jingle composers because they've studied every stylistic cliche in the book and can whip up a piece of generic music in any style with no recognizable signature on their own. I said that this doesn't make them better composers, musically, just more flexible. Williams' talents are such that he can't help but make scores his own, to an extent, rather than pure servants of their films.

(Predicted response: "So you're saying TV jingle composers are BETTER than Williams??!???")

I have no idea what you're talking about as far as versatility goes. I'm judging the music itself, whereas you're only judging the subjects written for (an arena in which Goldsmith has much more "versatility"). If Williams wrote a score for a sci fi adventure, then reused that same score note-for-note for a romantic comedy, would that make him a versatile composer? Just because Williams has a wide variety of genres under his belt (many of them produced by the stylistically distinctive Spielberg) doesn't mean he's the most versatile at scoring said genres. Indy4 stated it pretty well, but you ignored him. And anyway, Goldsmith, with something like three hundred films under his belt, has Williams beat in terms of the sheer amount of what he has written for, but that's not the point.

(Predicted response: "So you're saying Williams writes the SAME score for EVERY film!?!!???!??")

[Nick Parker 3,040]

You forgot a few emoticons in there, Henry.

[Ollie 1,059]

[Koray Savas 2,251]

I'm with Henry.

[Hlao-roo 389]

Don't listen to these haters, Josh. They're obviously not real John Williams fans.

[publicist 4,643]

Don't listen to these haters, Josh. They're obviously not real John Williams fans.

I guess you have to be 'real' in a rather crude way to be counted as one. Williams is a versatile composer...i guess nobody denies that. But on a messageboard with a rather narrow focus, living mostly on the strength of 'Star Wars', 'Indiana Jones' and 'Harry Potter', it should be clear that it's not exactly his versatility on which his success is based. And to define versatility by genres tackled...please! Even 90's John Barry has an eclectic filmography.

But what is it that makes other composers like say Morricone, Goldsmith or even the Zimmer factory more versatile? For one, they all have done a lot of junk. Silly as it sounds, this in some ways seems to be a springboard for more creative musical decisions. Williams is mainly a 'red carpet' composer who is chosen for prestige films and his music is often expected to be a further enhancement of this status. So in reality, even if 'Angela's Ashes', 'Seven Years in Tibet', 'Memoirs of a Geisha' or 'Born on the Fourth of July' are different genres, the music has to follow certain expectations and hopefully generate Award nominations.

I love Williams doing things like 'BotF' or 'Angela's Ashes', and i love 'The Lost World' and 'Episode 1', too. So it's not about being critical of him. It's just that i find it not that helpful when he is blindly praised as the supreme being of film composers.

[A24 4,346]

Publicist has said some good things. As a composer of film music, Williams is trapped in his own success. People will always expect him to do what he already has done. Like all other huge artists, he has very little freedom. I guess that's why he writes them concertos, to feel free. I wish he had more freedom in his film composer career though.

Alex

[Jeshopk 8]

This is all very cynical. Williams had his decades of writing for Junk, and I am pretty sure he'd rather not go back to that. He could have sought out another Earthquake if he really wanted to get his funk on again. The man was just trying to pay the bills back then, and I am sure he's happy he can write how he wants now, without concern for anything but the film and the music. Jerry was slumming it when he wrote Rent-a-Cop. I'm happy Williams hasn't had to sink so low in a while.

[Desplat13 1]

As far as musically versatile, Giacchino really is up there, not at the top of course, simply because he has not had enough time to put out enough different types of works. But, from what I have heard, each on has a very distinctive style. I really feel like styles is where he really is at his strongest.

[Josh500 1,615]

You're not even listening to anything I'm saying. TV commercial jingle composers because they've studied every stylistic cliche in the book and can whip up a piece of generic music in any style with no recognizable signature on their own. I said that this doesn't make them better composers, musically, just more flexible. Williams' talents are such that he can't help but make scores his own, to an extent, rather than pure servants of their films.

(Predicted response: "So you're saying TV jingle composers are BETTER than Williams??!???")

You know, it's hard to take you seriously when you can't keep your calm even during these "friendly" discussions. Your "predicted responses" are unnecessary... do you really think those'll be my responses, or are you just looking to be a smartass and receive the support from the others?

Anyway, I know what you're trying to say, even though I disagree. These TV jingle composers you keep referring to (BTW, you got any specific names? I mean, no offense, but you referring to those TV jingle composers reminds me of that murder suspect who kept referring to the shaggy, one-armed man!) they should be able to come up with music for any given scenario. You say, "TV commercial jingle composers because they've studied every stylistic cliche in the book and can whip up a piece of generic music in any style with no recognizable signature on their own." But have you ever stopped to consider that quantity does mean something here? Those TV jingle fellows write... what? A 30-second piece, at most a minute tune? Even if they wrote 50 of them in any given year, they don't even come close to the amount that Williams produces. And it's hard to imprint your own signature on a bunch of 1-minute tunes that are probably marred by voice-overs, as well.

So why does quantity mean something here? I'll explain. Considering how much music Williams writes, even if you took away all the cues that sound "kinda similiar" (in your ears), you'd be left with much more diversity that can be traced to any one single composer (with the possible exception of JG). But I'm starting to suspect why you think the way you think. Williams just happens to utilize the traditional orchestra most frequently. I think that's what's on your mind, subconsciously or not. Goldsmith and those TV jingle composers might use soup cans and saltshakers and frying pans to create their music, which Williams never did or will, so far as we know. So I suspect, in your eyes, that make him less versatile, less flexible. But don't forget that the standard classical orchestra (with the help of the occasional ethnic instruments and percussions as well as electronic instruments) can be incredibly versatile and flexible, too. Certainly more so than a soup can.

I have no idea what you're talking about as far as versatility goes. I'm judging the music itself, whereas you're only judging the subjects written for (an arena in which Goldsmith has much more "versatility"). If Williams wrote a score for a sci fi adventure, then reused that same score note-for-note for a romantic comedy, would that make him a versatile composer? Just because Williams has a wide variety of genres under his belt (many of them produced by the stylistically distinctive Spielberg) doesn't mean he's the most versatile at scoring said genres. Indy4 stated it pretty well, but you ignored him. And anyway, Goldsmith, with something like three hundred films under his belt, has Williams beat in terms of the sheer amount of what he has written for, but that's not the point.

(Predicted response: "So you're saying Williams writes the SAME score for EVERY film!?!!???!??")

You're incredibly near-sighted. No doubt you're thinking OK, Attack of the Clones and Chamber of Secrets had an action motif that sounded similar (hell, the same!), so Williams is so limited. Any TV-jingle composer is more versatile and flexible. But consider this:

JW uses ethnic instruments and writes (quasi-)ethnical music: Memoirs of a Geisha, Amistad, Far and Away

JW writes choir music: Rosewood, Home Alone, Jurassic Park, Phantom Menace

JW uses electronic music (very infrequently but he does): A.I., Presumed Innocent

JW writes music for the piano: Sabrina, Presumed Innocent, Angela's Ashes etc.

JW writes children's songs: Home Alone, Hook

JW writes songs in Latin or some other dead or invented language: Esultate Justi, Duel of the Fates

JW even writes jazz music: Terminal, Home Alone 2, Catch Me If You Can

etc.

You might notice, these examples have nothing to do with genre. Just the type of different music he creates.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

Jerry was slumming it when he wrote Rent-a-Cop. I'm happy Williams hasn't had to sink so low in a while.

What about Attack of the Clones?

[Henry B 50]

You're not even listening to anything I'm saying. TV commercial jingle composers because they've studied every stylistic cliche in the book and can whip up a piece of generic music in any style with no recognizable signature on their own. I said that this doesn't make them better composers, musically, just more flexible. Williams' talents are such that he can't help but make scores his own, to an extent, rather than pure servants of their films.

(Predicted response: "So you're saying TV jingle composers are BETTER than Williams??!???")

You know, it's hard to take you seriously when you can't keep your calm even during these "friendly" discussions. Your "predicted responses" are unnecessary... do you really think those'll be my responses, or are you just looking to be a smartass and receive the support from the others?

Anyway, I know what you're trying to say, even though I disagree. These TV jingle composers you keep referring to (BTW, you got any specific names? I mean, no offense, but you referring to those TV jingle composers reminds me of that murder suspect who kept referring to the shaggy, one-armed man!) they should be able to come up with music for any given scenario. You say, "TV commercial jingle composers because they've studied every stylistic cliche in the book and can whip up a piece of generic music in any style with no recognizable signature on their own." But have you ever stopped to consider that quantity does mean something here? Those TV jingle fellows write... what? A 30-second piece, at most a minute tune? Even if they wrote 50 of them in any given year, they don't even come close to the amount that Williams produces. And it's hard to imprint your own signature on a bunch of 1-minute tunes that are probably marred by voice-overs, as well.

So why does quantity mean something here? I'll explain. Considering how much music Williams writes, even if you took away all the cues that sound "kinda similiar" (in your ears), you'd be left with much more diversity that can be traced to any one single composer (with the possible exception of JG). But I'm starting to suspect why you think the way you think. Williams just happens to utilize the traditional orchestra most frequently. I think that's what's on your mind, subconsciously or not. Goldsmith and these TV jingle composers might use soup cans and saltshakers and frying pans to create their music, which Williams never did or will, so far as we know. So I suspect, in your eyes, that make him less versatile, less flexible. But don't forget that the standard classical orchestra (with the help of the occasional ethnic instruments and percussions as well as electronic instruments) can be incredibly versatile and flexible, too, certainly more so than a soup can.

So my predicted response was correct. My point is simply that a versatile composer is one that can serve a great variety of purposes with his music. To be sure, Williams is versatile (something you seem to think I don't believe), but he is not the very most. Because of his sheer talent, his musicality sometimes gets in the way of his scoring mentality. Sometimes. (Predicted response: "ALL THE TIME!?!??") And no, I don't know the names of obscure TV composers (aside from Williams' own sons, heh). I don't see why it's relevant. Do I need to prove to you that these people exist? Try turning your TV on. As far as big name film composers, how about John Debney? He really has no recognizable style; he blends, chameleon like, into whatever genre he's working on.

The symphony orchestra is a tried and true musical setup. I'd never wish it to be abandoned because it works so well (despite the efforts of modern film composers to eradicate the woodwind section). Does Williams use it too much? Well, no, it's not that it can be used too much; only inappropriately. There are times that I feel Williams should use a sparser texture. For example, the end of Memoirs of a Geisha ("Confluence") is a boisterous cue infused with Western emotionalism that I just don't think fits the character of the score. Williams fell back on convention there, even if he did so in an excellent manner. That's not to say that I think only Williams is guilty of this. Goldsmith did it too, but his filmography is so vast that I don't have enough of a picture of it to comment.

I have no idea what you're talking about as far as versatility goes. I'm judging the music itself, whereas you're only judging the subjects written for (an arena in which Goldsmith has much more "versatility"). If Williams wrote a score for a sci fi adventure, then reused that same score note-for-note for a romantic comedy, would that make him a versatile composer? Just because Williams has a wide variety of genres under his belt (many of them produced by the stylistically distinctive Spielberg) doesn't mean he's the most versatile at scoring said genres. Indy4 stated it pretty well, but you ignored him. And anyway, Goldsmith, with something like three hundred films under his belt, has Williams beat in terms of the sheer amount of what he has written for, but that's not the point.

(Predicted response: "So you're saying Williams writes the SAME score for EVERY film!?!!???!??")

You're incredibly near-sighted. No doubt you're thinking OK, Attack of the Clones and Chamber of Secrets had an action motif that sounded similar (hell, the same!), so Williams is so limited. Any TV-jingle composer is more versatile and flexible. But consider this:

JW uses ethnic instruments and writes (quasi-)ethnical music: Memoirs of a Geisha, Amistad, Far and Away

JW writes choir music: Rosewood, Home Alone, Jurassic Park, Phantom Menace

JW uses eletronic music (very infrequently but he does): A.I., Presumed Innocent

JW writes music for the piano: Sabrina, Presumed Innocent, Angela's Ashes etc.

JW writes children's songs: Home Alone, Hook

JW writes songs in Latin or some other dead or invented language: Esultate Justi, Duel of the Fates

JW even writes jazz music: Terminal, Home Alone 2, Catch Me If You Can

etc.

You might notice, these examples have nothing to do with genre. Just the type of different music he creates.

I've done all of those things (well, except for the Latin), and I'm a twenty-year-old amateur. You're defining music in such superficial terms. It's so much more than "ethnic instruments" and "invented languages."

[Josh500 1,615]

So my predicted response was correct. My point is simply that a versatile composer is one that can serve a great variety of purposes with his music. To be sure, Williams is versatile (something you seem to think I don't believe), but he is not the very most. Because of his sheer talent, his musicality sometimes gets in the way of his scoring mentality. Sometimes. (Predicted response: "ALL THE TIME!?!??") And no I don't know the names of obscure TV composers (aside from Williams' own sons, heh). I don't see why it's relevant. Do I need to prove to you that these people exist? Try turning your TV on. As far as big name film composers, how about John Debney? He really has no recognizable style; he blends, chameleon like, into whatever genre he's working on.

You know what? I'm not out to bash John Debney here, but you're confusing "uneven" with "versatile."

And BTW, how do you know those jingle tunes are composed by one man?

You're defining music in such superficial terms. It's so much more than "ethnic instruments" and "invented languages."

According to you, what you define "much more" is "not having your own signature"... which is quite ridiculous.

Generally, the only JW signature to speak of is that he writes consistently good music. (Predicted respone: NO WAY! My answer: I said "generally.")

[Charlie Brigden 7]

You know what? I'm not out to bash John Debney here, but you're confusing "uneven" with "versatile."

lololololol

[Henry B 50]

Oh Josh, you're not a very receptive listener. That comment about "much more" couldn't be farther from the truth. You see, the anonymous composers of which I speak are defined by superficial criteria like genre, instrumentation and language because they have no style of their own. Williams rises above these values with a distinctly personal sort of music. The disadvantage of this is that sometimes the music gets too personal; that is, Williams falls into habits that no uppity film with its unique needs has the strength to challenge. We see these habits break down when Williams does his best work. The Lost World, A.I., Prisoner of Azkaban; they all show the labor of Williams' considerations. It's like he carefully studied the film and deliberated furiously over how to score it; not that he normally has no regard for the needs of a film, but in these cases he went above and beyond. Except for The Lost World ... I dunno what inspired him to write that.

[Josh500 1,615]

Oh Josh, you're not a very receptive listener. That comment about "much more" couldn't be farther from the truth. You see, the anonymous composers of which I speak are defined by superficial criteria like genre, instrumentation and language because they have no style of their own. Williams rises above these values with a distinctly personal sort of music. The disadvantage of this is that sometimes the music gets too personal; that is, Williams falls into habits that no uppity film with its unique needs has the strength to challenge. We see these habits break down when Williams does his best work. The Lost World, A.I., Prisoner of Azkaban; they all show the labor of Williams' considerations. It's like he carefully studied the film and deliberated furiously over how to score it; not that he normally has no regard for the needs of a film, but in these cases he went above and beyond. Except for The Lost World ... I dunno what inspired him to write that.

You're overthinking it.

First of all, writing music without signature doesn't make you versatile. It makes you uneven. Also, again, in JW's case, it has to do with the quantity. With the amount of music he creates, you don't seriously expect him to reinvent himself anew with every cue or track (or even score), do you?

And anyway, stop with the jingle composers. You can't seriously back that claim up, and you know it.

[Ollie 1,059]

Jerry was slumming it when he wrote Rent-a-Cop. I'm happy Williams hasn't had to sink so low in a while.

What about Attack of the Clones?

Goldsmith's "slumming" brought us some damn fine film scores.