What does Jerry Goldsmith's music have what John Williams's music doesn't?

[Josh500 1,615]

What do you think?

I am looking forward to many informed answers (especially since many of you seem to have an extensive JG collection).

Personally, I can't think of a thing (but then I don't know many JG soundtracks, only the creme de la creme). All I can say is, JG's music often lacks the complex orchestration of JW's music...

BTW, I've heard people say that JG was more experimental, but I am not sure I agree. He may have been more experimental, but that doesn't mean he was always successful.

[filmmusic 1,826]

Hmmm. the first thing that comes in my mind is that Goldsmith frequently uses synths even for themes while Williams rarely does..

[King Mark 3,631]

He's still a distant second to Williams in my books. He has some great scores nd some scores with a few great cues, but I can listen to several albums in a row where there's nothing I like. Never happens with Williams

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Goldsmith scores are more organic in structure, relying not so much on individual setpieces.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

I think Goldsmith was perhaps a bit more chameleonic than Williams. I mean, you listen to a JW score and you know it's a JW score (not a bad thing before people complain!) but while JG scores can often be similarly identified, they tend more to immerse themselves in the film itself, or themes or atmosphere of the film. If that makes sense. Also, Goldsmith tended to sometimes score some genres JW stayed away from, so he perhaps had a bit more variety (horrors, action, a lot of westerns).

I'm not sure experimental is the right term, but Goldsmith did tend to go more avant-garde on some occasions. Although, PLANET OF THE APES is an example of Goldsmith being experimental and successful.

And yes, he was very good at getting the best out of orchestras and electronics.

[Andy 4,119]

Organic, yes. Sort of a holistic approach to film scoring.

[Josh500 1,615]

I think Goldsmith was perhaps a bit more chameleonic than Williams. I mean, you listen to a JW score and you know it's a JW score (not a bad thing before people complain!) but while JG scores can often be similarly identified, they tend more to immerse themselves in the film itself, or themes or atmosphere of the film. If that makes sense. Also, Goldsmith tended to sometimes score some genres JW stayed away from, so he perhaps had a bit more variety (horrors, action, a lot of westerns).

I'm not sure experimental is the right term, but Goldsmith did tend to go more avant-garde on some occasions. Although, PLANET OF THE APES is an example of Goldsmith being experimental and successful.

And yes, he was very good at getting the best out of orchestras and electronics.

As far as variety goes, both are about the same, I would say. I mean JW wrote Star Wars, Schindler's List, E.T., Munich, Jaws, Indiana Jones, Sabrina (basically every genre that JG did, except for the erotic thriller).

I also think it's NOT always instantly recognizable that JW wrote a score. Many of the similar ones, yes, like Star Wars and Superman (but that goes for JG too). If you didn't know, who would guess that JW wrote Sabrina, Schindler's List, even A.I. or Amistad or Memoirs of a Geisha?

[Trent B 337]

Goldsmith scores are more organic in structure, relying not so much on individual setpieces.

I agree.

[Josh500 1,615]

Also, JG's music has incredible depth in most cases, but the thing is, JW's music has even more depth... sometimes to a point where it positively boggles your mind.

[John Crichton 4]

Goldsmith scores are more organic in structure, relying not so much on individual setpieces.

Yes. His themes tend to be more subtle and woven into the underscore too. And there's an observation I read at some point, I don't remember where, that said (paraphrasing here): Williams scored more kinetically, focusing on what's onscreen. Goldsmith wrote more psychologically, getting into the character's heads.

And synths/electronics.

[King Mark 3,631]

For Goldsmith I mostly like his stuff from 1976 (The Omen) to 1986 (Legend). The years where he wrote Alien,Secret of Nimh ,Poltergeist,Final Conflict,Night Crossing...

I hardly listen to his post 1990 stuff

[Josh500 1,615]

And there's an observation I read at some point, I don't remember where, that said (paraphrasing here): Williams scored more kinetically, focusing on what's onscreen. Goldsmith wrote more psychologically, getting into the character's heads.

Sounds good, but I don't agree with this. That's too facile an observation, I think.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

No, Jerry Goldsmith tended to score the emotion on the screen, rather then the action. More what the characters are feeling then what the audience is supposed to feel.

[Josh500 1,615]

I'm not sure experimental is the right term, but Goldsmith did tend to go more avant-garde on some occasions. Although, PLANET OF THE APES is an example of Goldsmith being experimental and successful.

Yes. So we could say that that's one thing JG did have over JW... ?

No, Jerry Goldsmith tended to score the emotion on the screen, rather then the action. More what the characters are feeling then what the audience is supposed to feel.

Interesting observation...

Although when you consider Poltergeist and Basic Instinct and Rambo... would you say that's true? Possibly, but I'm not so sure.

[Datameister 2,041]

It's an important observation about Goldsmith's and Williams' very different approaches, and Goldsmith even talked about it while he was alive. He tended to build a theme and perhaps several minor motifs that were representative of the mentality of the film as a whole, the idea being that audiences would leave the theater remembering the musical identity of the whole movie. John Williams tends to be more driven by leitmotif and by whatever is appropriate to each scene, focusing on how to convey all the different emotions and ideas individually. Both are valid ways of working, and there are scores by both men that cross over into each other's preferences, but the difference is there.

As far as electronics go, I'd say Goldsmith uses them more prominently, but not more frequently. Williams uses synths all over the place, but they're mostly very subtle. They're just there to color what the orchestra is doing, whereas Goldsmith wasn't afraid to truly bring synths to the forefront at times.

I'd also say that at least in Goldsmith's more consonant scores, he had this ability to craft a melody that goes exactly where you expect it to - but in a satisfying way, not in an "oh, that's way too obvious" way. Williams' melodies tend to be slightly less predictable. I'm not trying to make a judgment here on which is better...it's just a difference I've noticed.

On the whole, I definitely prefer Williams, but Goldsmith still astounds me. I'm looking forward to slowly becoming more familiar with his oeuvre over the years.

[Diego 21]

Out of curiosity, and I mean no offense whatsoever, but why the sudden interest in Goldsmith, Josh??

[Josh500 1,615]

Out of curiosity, and I mean no offense whatsoever, but why the sudden interest in Goldsmith, Josh??

Maybe the lack of a new JW score.

It's an important observation about Goldsmith's and Williams' very different approaches, and Goldsmith even talked about it while he was alive. He tended to build a theme and perhaps several minor motifs that were representative of the mentality of the film as a whole, the idea being that audiences would leave the theater remembering the musical identity of the whole movie. John Williams tends to be more driven by leitmotif and by whatever is appropriate to each scene, focusing on how to convey all the different emotions and ideas individually. Both are valid ways of working, and there are scores by both men that cross over into each other's preferences, but the difference is there.

Hmmmm, can you come up with examples, datameister? Up for a challenge? What is something JG did in these scores that JW would not have done and didn't do in the corresponding scores?

Star Trek - Star Wars

Basic Instinct - Presumed Innocent

Dennis the Menace - Home Alone

Poltergeist - E.T.

[Marian Schedenig 8,191]

Goldsmith scores are more organic in structure, relying not so much on individual setpieces.

That's the textbook definition, basically. I believe Goldsmith even explained it himself along those lines.

No, Jerry Goldsmith tended to score the emotion on the screen, rather then the action. More what the characters are feeling then what the audience is supposed to feel.

Interesting observation...

Although when you consider Poltergeist and Basic Instinct and Rambo... would you say that's true? Possibly, but I'm not so sure.

Yes. Of course, when the movie shifts to action, there often is action music as well. But it's kept together by the emotional threads of the drama. I haven't seen Basic Instinct in a while, or listened to it (it's a good score, but I don't rank it quite as highly as most do), but I believe the Prometheus liner notes mention that there's a moment in it where the film itself cuts away, while Goldsmith music continues to score the previous scene. A similar thing happens in Hollow Man, where Goldsmith scores a rape while Verhoeven cuts away and shows Kevin Bacon driving a car instead.

Personally, I can't think of a thing (but then I don't know many JG soundtracks, only the creme de la creme). All I can say is, JG's music often lacks the complex orchestration of JW's music...

BTW, I've heard people say that JG was more experimental, but I am not sure I agree. He may have been more experimental, but that doesn't mean he was always successful.

First, you have to distinguish between early Goldsmith and late Goldsmith, and early Williams and late Williams. Until the mid-80s, Williams didn't write a lot of "experimental" or avant garde music, and his orchestrations were usually very elaborate, but traditional (exceptions like Images exist, obviously). At the same time (and before that, when Williams only started toying with light comedy scores), Goldsmith wrote complex serial scores with highly original orchestrations, and continued to do so until the early to mid 80s (Freud, POTA and Alien are just three examples).

Williams seems to really have come into his specific personal style around the time of Jurassic Park, I'd say, and since then his orchestrations have begun to really become mindboggling in complexity. Goldsmith, after his classic 82/83 high point, started a heavy synth phase and at the same time begun streamlining his orchestrations, leading through Rambo 2 to Total Recall. Subsequently, he mostly stuck to this style, which was very focused and relied more on rhythmic complexity and perhaps clear counterpoints rather than a polyphonic wall of sound. Total Recall is perhaps the point where the old(er) and new Goldsmith blend the most, and I regard it as one of the most complex scores out there.

So if Goldsmith became less complex than Williams in his later years, don't forget that he started out in the 60s at a level of complexity Williams reached only 20 to 30 years later. Which of course doesn't have to mean either composer was superior or inferior in their respective eras. Also, The Mummy, one of the last highlights of Goldsmith's final era, is still awesomely sophisticated.

Star Trek - Star Wars

Goldsmith's set piece is The Enterprise, a lengthy adagio entirely based on the score's main theme. Williams has TIE Fighter Attack (based partly on the rebel fanfare) and The Asteroid Field, which are deliberate separated pieces. A similar case is The Basket Game in Raiders.

[Ollie 1,059]

What Marian said.

[Luke Skywalker 1,795]

What does Jerry Goldsmith's music have what John Williams's music doesn't?

Being attached to awful movies for the most part.

[Marian Schedenig 8,191]

Two things I forgot to mention:

1) Williams has developed a tendency to overscore. Goldsmith always preferred to use less music rather than more; in fact, some of his streamlined orchestration may be attributed to "those damn helicopters". Which also explains why Williams' scores are usually much lengthier. The only two cases I can think of where Goldsmith's music seemed a bit too prominent to me are The Omen (yes, seriously; I just don't think the movie is anything more than quite good, and the score takes on so much life of its own that there are times when the movie seems to drag behind) and The Mummy (which I thought was crap as a movie. The music sometimes bothered me in a way that I didn't know why there was such a prominent score for some scenes; it nearly feels like Goldsmith decided to just write the music without caring for the movie).

2) While both composers have maintained an amazingly high level of quality throughout their careers, Goldsmith was the one who was more often "less successful". Neither has written a lot of true stinkers, and even their "worst" scores usually have aspects that make them worthy to some extent, but with Goldsmith, there's a list of scores where I wonder if he was really trying to give his best or just throwing out notes to get paid (but even those scores often contain the seeds for some later masterpiece). With Williams, the only two scores that come to my mind right now are Sabrina (yes, I really don't like it) and Presumed Innocent (which still has a cool theme), although I do have something of a problem with many of his later scores, which are highly accomplished but often don't really connect with me.

And one more comment on how Goldsmith is always regarded as the composer who had to score only shit movies while Williams got the great stuff: Goldsmith has scored his share of true classics and maintained lengthy collaborations with several notable directors. Williams, in his blockbuster era, scored all those hugely popular and successful movies, but that doesn't automatically make them the best films ever made (although many of them are very good indeed). Planet of the Apes, Alien and supposedly Patton (which I've only partially seen, many years ago) are but three examples of notable films Goldsmith scored. More crap (usually with great scores) than Williams, but as far as cinematic highlights goes, he's not as far behind as is often claimed.

[Datameister 2,041]

Hmmmm, can you come up with examples, datameister? Up for a challenge? What is something JG did in these scores that JW would not have done and didn't do in the corresponding scores?

Star Trek - Star Wars

Basic Instinct - Presumed Innocent

Dennis the Menace - Home Alone

Poltergeist - E.T.

The only pair for which I've heard both scores is the first, but it will suffice. So, clearly, Star Wars is very leitmotivic, with at least six major musical ideas (Luke's theme, Leia's theme, Ben's theme, the Death Star motif, the Imperial motif, the Rebel fanfare) in addition to lesser ones that are just used for certain scenes (the Jawa music, etc.). In other words, there is no single theme that creates the identity of the score - the main title may be what most people know the best, but most of the score is completely unrelated to that theme. Then look at TMP - the vast majority of the score is a weird soundscape dominated by blaster beam and atmospheric orchestral wanderings, featuring a theme of sorts for V'Ger and another motif for Starfleet. Ilia's theme makes some appearances and merges with the V'Ger music. Goldsmith later wrote the actual main theme, which is used relatively sparsely - but when it is used, it gets a full sort of concert arrangement. But again, the score is dominated by a very specific soundscape that uses just a few themes in conjunction with each other.

[Luke Skywalker 1,795]

And one more comment on how Goldsmith is always regarded as the composer who had to score only shit movies while Williams got the great stuff: Goldsmith has scored his share of true classics and maintained lengthy collaborations with several notable directors. Williams, in his blockbuster era, scored all those hugely popular and successful movies, but that doesn't automatically make them the best films ever made (although many of them are very good indeed). Planet of the Apes, Alien and supposedly Patton (which I've only partially seen, many years ago) are but three examples of notable films Goldsmith scored. More crap (usually with great scores) than Williams, but as far as cinematic highlights goes, he's not as far behind as is often claimed.

Take it easy, i said 'for the most part' for a reason

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Goldsmith has First Blood in his catalog. Williams has never done anything quite like it. We're talking definitive action film scoring. But then, JW has ROTLA and Goldsmith doesn't have anything like it.

[Marian Schedenig 8,191]

Take it easy, i said 'for the most part' for a reason

Actually, when I began typing that, you hadn't even posted your comment yet. I only saw it after submitting mine.

[Diego 21]

What does Jerry Goldsmith's music have what John Williams's music doesn't?

Being attached to awful movies for the most part.

I'd say with the prequels and Indy 4, Williams is certainly catching up.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

I think Goldsmith was perhaps a bit more chameleonic than Williams.

Williams used that exact word to describe Goldsmith as well. Don't know if that's why you used it or not.

Here's the quote:

His chameleon adaptability was a prerequisite to longevity and success in Hollywood. We used to call him Gorgeous. He was the golden boy, a beautiful presence. His music had a freshness, and he had a freshness.

[Hlao-roo 389]

No, Jerry Goldsmith tended to score the emotion on the screen, rather then the action. More what the characters are feeling then what the audience is supposed to feel.

I think more is made of this than is warranted. The vast majority of the time, what we might deduce the characters are feeling tends to dovetail fairly evenly with what the audience might be expected to feel.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

But then, JW has ROTLA and Goldsmith doesn't have anything like it.

King Solomon's Mines.

[Josh500 1,615]

Two things I forgot to mention:

1) Williams has developed a tendency to overscore. Goldsmith always preferred to use less music rather than more; in fact, some of his streamlined orchestration may be attributed to "those damn helicopters". Which also explains why Williams' scores are usually much lengthier. The only two cases I can think of where Goldsmith's music seemed a bit too prominent to me are The Omen (yes, seriously; I just don't think the movie is anything more than quite good, and the score takes on so much life of its own that there are times when the movie seems to drag behind) and The Mummy (which I thought was crap as a movie. The music sometimes bothered me in a way that I didn't know why there was such a prominent score for some scenes; it nearly feels like Goldsmith decided to just write the music without caring for the movie).

2) While both composers have maintained an amazingly high level of quality throughout their careers, Goldsmith was the one who was more often "less successful". Neither has written a lot of true stinkers, and even their "worst" scores usually have aspects that make them worthy to some extent, but with Goldsmith, there's a list of scores where I wonder if he was really trying to give his best or just throwing out notes to get paid (but even those scores often contain the seeds for some later masterpiece). With Williams, the only two scores that come to my mind right now are Sabrina (yes, I really don't like it) and Presumed Innocent (which still has a cool theme), although I do have something of a problem with many of his later scores, which are highly accomplished but often don't really connect with me.

And one more comment on how Goldsmith is always regarded as the composer who had to score only shit movies while Williams got the great stuff: Goldsmith has scored his share of true classics and maintained lengthy collaborations with several notable directors. Williams, in his blockbuster era, scored all those hugely popular and successful movies, but that doesn't automatically make them the best films ever made (although many of them are very good indeed). Planet of the Apes, Alien and supposedly Patton (which I've only partially seen, many years ago) are but three examples of notable films Goldsmith scored. More crap (usually with great scores) than Williams, but as far as cinematic highlights goes, he's not as far behind as is often claimed.

Very insightful, Marian, thanks!

BTW, I don't think Williams tends to overscore. He writes more music (much more music, actually) for certain type of movies, but that's because he feels that's what's needed. But I don't think it's overscoring. When you look at Schindler's List and Saving Private Ryan for comparison, Williams seems to know exactly how much music to use for what type of movies.

[Datameister 2,041]

We also have to remember that the composers are not the only ones involved in the spotting sessions. While they obviously have a big say in how much music gets written, a director can certainly ask for more music than the film really needs - or less.

[Josh500 1,615]

The only pair for which I've heard both scores is the first, but it will suffice. So, clearly, Star Wars is very leitmotivic, with at least six major musical ideas (Luke's theme, Leia's theme, Ben's theme, the Death Star motif, the Imperial motif, the Rebel fanfare) in addition to lesser ones that are just used for certain scenes (the Jawa music, etc.). In other words, there is no single theme that creates the identity of the score - the main title may be what most people know the best, but most of the score is completely unrelated to that theme. Then look at TMP - the vast majority of the score is a weird soundscape dominated by blaster beam and atmospheric orchestral wanderings, featuring a theme of sorts for V'Ger and another motif for Starfleet. Ilia's theme makes some appearances and merges with the V'Ger music. Goldsmith later wrote the actual main theme, which is used relatively sparsely - but when it is used, it gets a full sort of concert arrangement. But again, the score is dominated by a very specific soundscape that uses just a few themes in conjunction with each other.

Hmmm, I see what you mean. But doesn't that just mean that Goldsmith generally wrote less themes for each movie (or conversely that JW wrote many more themes)?

But then, to balance it off, as it were, Goldsmith scored many more movies than JW does.

Oh, one other pair came to me just now:

Total Recall - Minority Report

[Datameister 2,041]

That's part of it, yes - Goldsmith tended to use fewer themes. Again, the idea was that he was more focused on developing the right mood and tone and musical identity for the entire film, rather than on developing the right mood and tone and musical identity for individual scenes and characters. Whether Goldsmith had the right idea or not is a personal opinion...I tend to prefer Williams' approach, but I see merit in both.

[Josh500 1,615]

That's part of it, yes - Goldsmith tended to use fewer themes. Again, the idea was that he was more focused on developing the right mood and tone and musical identity for the entire film, rather than on developing the right mood and tone and musical identity for individual scenes and characters. Whether Goldsmith had the right idea or not is a personal opinion...I tend to prefer Williams' approach, but I see merit in both.

Yes. But then again, it may also have to do with the types of movies they scored, rather than different approaches in scoring.

I mean, when you score movies like Star Wars, Harry Potter, Indiana Jones, etc. you almost have to write many themes. You cannot get around it, if you want to deliver the best score that you possibly can come up with. And I think it's fair to say that JW scored more movies of this kind than JG did during his career.

[Datameister 2,041]

That may have been a factor, sure. But Goldsmith said outright that he liked to write a central theme and a few minor motifs to help the film have a strong musical identity. This isn't just some theory that fans have come up with.

[Josh500 1,615]

Yes, and you are right!

Most Goldsmith scores have one major theme (Poltergeist, Basic Instinct, etc.).

Most Williams scores have one major theme and many secondary themes (or, in some cases, several major themes).

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

What does Jerry Goldsmith's music have what John Williams's music doesn't?

Balls.

Bigger ones, at least.

[Datameister 2,041]

Size matters not.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

That's what you say.

[publicist 4,643]

Or as i use to say, Goldsmith couldn't write BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY (now he's deceased it's even more unlikely), Williams couldn't write GREMLINS (or substitute whatever titles you like).

But basically it's all about Penis Size®: my composer is bigger than yours!!

(and i didn't even get into the more silly notions like JOHN WILLIAMS IS THE MODERN MOZART)

[Naïve Old Fart 9,514]

If you ask me (and you haven't), Goldsmith and Williams are two sides of the same coin, or, perhaps, two sides of the same brain. While Williams caters more for the heart, however, Goldsmith's music is definitely more for the head.

The differences in sound (and here I mean how the scores are recorded) is apparent. All you have to do is to put "ST:TMP" side-by-side with "1941" (scores which were recorded within weeks of each other) to hear that Goldsmith likes to capture a "harder", more "gutsy" sound, with lots of upper mid-range while Williams likes things to sound altogether more "smooth". I believe that this is not the result of different studios, or even different engineers (John Neal Vs Bruce Botnik), or even the fact that "ST:TMP" was a digital recording (probably a first for a soundtrack), but probably reflects each other's personalities.

The use of synthesisers in Goldsmith's music, is something that I wholeheartedly endorse, and welcome, and I regret that Williams has never composed an all-synthesied score, which makes the appearence of electronics in cues such as "Everybody Runs" such a delight.

Both composers were/are at the top of their game, and both composers have made music that has become part of the world musical landscape. What does Goldsmith, that Williams doesn't? Anyone's guess. I do maintain that it IS easy to imagine "Superman" written by Goldsmith, or "The Omen" written by Williams (those who can't/won't do not have much of an imagination), but, the question is: "would these scores be as effective as what is already written?" Answer: probably not.

I hope to continue to listen the superb music of both Goldsmith, and Williams until the day I die, and, although Williams will ALWAYS be my no.1 musical hero (making, quite simply, the most exciting music I have ever heard), the music of the late, very, very much missed Mr. Jerry Goldsmith will always ocupy the no.2 slot, and that's not bad by any standard!

[Ollie 1,059]

I will say Goldsmith didn't Mickey Mouse as much as Williams did (does).

What does Jerry Goldsmith's music have what John Williams's music doesn't?

Balls.

Bigger ones, at least.

I was going to post that yesterday. However I would have said that both had cajones, but Goldsmith's may have had more hair on them.

[Maxxie 1]

I've always thought John Williams scores have a more 'classical' sound and feel to them, and yes they do seem to be more complex than Jerry Goldsmith's scores, which sometimes works, sometimes doesn't.

I haven't heard too many Jerry Goldsmith scores, but from the ones I have heard (more recent ones) I can say that I absolutely love that BOOM CRASH sound that he seemed to use a lot (yes, I'm looking at you Star Trek: First Contact, Air Force One, The Mummy etc!!)

[Desplat13 1]

If you didn't know, who would guess that JW wrote Sabrina, Schindler's List, even A.I. or Amistad or Memoirs of a Geisha?

Well, I haven't heard Sabrina or Amistad, but I feel pretty confident that I would have guessed he scored any of the others without already knowing it.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

I think Goldsmith was perhaps a bit more chameleonic than Williams.

Williams used that exact word to describe Goldsmith as well. Don't know if that's why you used it or not.

Here's the quote:

His chameleon adaptability was a prerequisite to longevity and success in Hollywood. We used to call him Gorgeous. He was the golden boy, a beautiful presence. His music had a freshness, and he had a freshness.

Ha! Nope, I hadn't heard that before.

[Josh500 1,615]

If you ask me (and you haven't), Goldsmith and Williams are two sides of the same coin, or, perhaps, two sides of the same brain. While Williams caters more for the heart, however, Goldsmith's music is definitely more for the head.

The differences in sound (and here I mean how the scores are recorded) is apparent. All you have to do is to put "ST:TMP" side-by-side with "1941" (scores which were recorded within weeks of each other) to hear that Goldsmith likes to capture a "harder", more "gutsy" sound, with lots of upper mid-range while Williams likes things to sound altogether more "smooth". I believe that this is not the result of different studios, or even different engineers (John Neal Vs Bruce Botnik), or even the fact that "ST:TMP" was a digital recording (probably a first for a soundtrack), but probably reflects each other's personalities.

The use of synthesisers in Goldsmith's music, is something that I wholeheartedly endorse, and welcome, and I regret that Williams has never composed an all-synthesied score, which makes the appearence of electronics in cues such as "Everybody Runs" such a delight.

Both composers were/are at the top of their game, and both composers have made music that has become part of the world musical landscape. What does Goldsmith, that Williams doesn't? Anyone's guess. I do maintain that it IS easy to imagine "Superman" written by Goldsmith, or "The Omen" written by Williams (those who can't/won't do not have much of an imagination), but, the question is: "would these scores be as effective as what is already written?" Answer: probably not.

I hope to continue to listen the superb music of both Goldsmith, and Williams until the day I die, and, although Williams will ALWAYS be my no.1 musical hero (making, quite simply, the most exciting music I have ever heard), the music of the late, very, very much missed Mr. Jerry Goldsmith will always ocupy the no.2 slot, and that's not bad by any standard!

Thanks for this post! You make several good points, and I agree with most of them.

You said: "What does Goldsmith, that Williams doesn't? Anyone's guess. I do maintain that it IS easy to imagine "Superman" written by Goldsmith, or "The Omen" written by Williams (those who can't/won't do not have much of an imagination), but, the question is: "would these scores be as effective as what is already written?" Answer: probably not."

You know, that was exactly my point. When I asked "What does Jerry Goldsmith's music have what John Williams's music doesn't?" I was basically asking, "What, if anything, do you think Jerry would have done better than JW if he had scored the JW movies?" See, I can imagine JW writing even better scores for the movies Goldsmith scored, but not the other way round. For example, I can imagine JW doing a much better job on Poltergeist and Star Trek and Rambo etc. than JG did, but I can't imagine JG doing a better job than JW did on E.T. or Star Wars or A.I.. That is, of course, I am talking of most movies, not all movies. Basic Instinct, for one, was the perfect JG score. Even JW couldn't have topped it, I am certain.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

I can imagine JW doing a much better job on Poltergeist and Star Trek and Rambo etc. than JG did, but I can't imagine JG doing a better job than JW did on E.T. or Star Wars or A.I.. That is, of course, I am talking of most movies, not all movies. Basic Instinct, for one, was the perfect JG score. Even JW couldn't have topped it, I am certain.

So what's wrong with POLTERGEIST, STAR TREK and RAMBO exactly?

[Josh500 1,615]

I can imagine JW doing a much better job on Poltergeist and Star Trek and Rambo etc. than JG did, but I can't imagine JG doing a better job than JW did on E.T. or Star Wars or A.I.. That is, of course, I am talking of most movies, not all movies. Basic Instinct, for one, was the perfect JG score. Even JW couldn't have topped it, I am certain.

So what's wrong with POLTERGEIST, STAR TREK and RAMBO exactly?

Except for Sly's thick accent in Rambo, you mean?

[Charlie Brigden 7]

I can imagine JW doing a much better job on Poltergeist and Star Trek and Rambo etc. than JG did, but I can't imagine JG doing a better job than JW did on E.T. or Star Wars or A.I.. That is, of course, I am talking of most movies, not all movies. Basic Instinct, for one, was the perfect JG score. Even JW couldn't have topped it, I am certain.

So what's wrong with POLTERGEIST, STAR TREK and RAMBO exactly?

Except for Sly's thick accent in Rambo, you mean?

Stallone is a god. Fear him.

But my post came from your phrase "much better", as if to say those three scores aren't really all that. Which is of course total lunacy.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I can imagine JW doing a much better job on Poltergeist and Star Trek and Rambo etc. than JG did, but I can't imagine JG doing a better job than JW did on E.T. or Star Wars or A.I..

Beg yours?