What Is Your 5 Least Favorite John Williams Scores

[publicist 4,643]

By the way, the robot doesn't "learn" to love.

I didn't say it was profound, in fact there are points in the film where it avoids going deeper into the subject matter I said people aren't used to this kind of film, because the internal world of a large part of the public is nothing like this film (I thought otherwise for a long time but I was proven wrong again and again).

I await your analysis. Sometimes, reading on a film is more interesting than watching it. Pauline Kael had a long line of essays much more stimulating and sociologically sound than the long-forgotten movies they were about.

and....i don't care what the robot does or doesn't, i care for the explanation why this very film is held in such regard by some people. I find it sketchy at best and just not up to it on a narrative basis.

[Romão 2,274]

Most people aren't chosing JW's worst scores, only the ones they like less or simply can't enjoy. It's a big difference

Please explain the difference to me.

I love Wagner's Operas. But I can't get through Tristan and Isolde. I just find it hard to sit through and I can only listen to highlights. But I'd never dare to call it a bad opera or inferior music

[Ricard 2,245]

"I think Citizen Kane is a perfectly good film because of this and this and this, but I'll never be so passionate about it like I can be with a perfectly good film like Shichinin no samurai for this and this and this reason involving my own tastes".

I love Wagner's Operas. But I can't get through Tristan and Isolde. I just find it hard to sit through and I can only listen to highlights. But I'd never dare to call it a bad opera or inferior music

I'm still waiting for a proper explanation.

[Jeffrey 0]

Worst as film music: "Monsignor," because it is a brilliantly over-the-top score for a horribly over-the-top film.

Worst as a listening experience: "Presumed Innocent," because the main theme is not only the best thing about it, it's practically the only thing about it. (There is the family theme, i suppose, but that was better in "JFK.")

[NickTintin 0]

Not sure I could come up with five but I have never cared for Presumed Innocent. I even watched the film again recently, and it has, as does Williams score for me...such a lifetime TV movie vibe.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Definitely has the TV movie feel. A climactic scene with Harrison Ford in the basement is just outrageous scoring by JW. Not sure if it was what the director intended, but it got a laugh out of me.

[Romão 2,274]

"I think Citizen Kane is a perfectly good film because of this and this and this, but I'll never be so passionate about it like I can be with a perfectly good film like Shichinin no samurai for this and this and this reason involving my own tastes".

I love Wagner's Operas. But I can't get through Tristan and Isolde. I just find it hard to sit through and I can only listen to highlights. But I'd never dare to call it a bad opera or inferior music

I'm still waiting for a proper explanation.

What I mean to say is that quite often I am unable to enjoy a certain piece of music due to my own limitations as a listener, and not due to any fault in the music. And sometimes your enjoyment might be diminished, but you can still be able to recognize and admire the great quality of the music. Sometimes music is just too good to be enjoyed right away, it can take several years for it to click. One such example in my life are some of Mahler's symphonies

[crocodile 8,018]

I'm not sure if that's what Merkel has in mind, but some people make a distinction between "enjoyable music" and "great music".

Karol

[Sandor 797]

A thread which includes Jaws, Hook, Jurassic Park and Schindler's List as potential candidates for a 'Top 5 Worst John Williams Scores' is best avoided by me...

[Brónach 1,302]

This thread is a failure!

[publicist 4,643]

I'm not sure if that's what Merkel has in mind, but some people make a distinction between "enjoyable music" and "great music".

Karol

Or are humble enough to realize that a Alex-North-score they hate may be a greater musical accomplishment than JURASSIC PARK.

[KK 3,307]

What is wrong with this thread?!?!?

Attack of the Clones, Return of the Jedi, Munich, Jurassic Park, Hook, Schindler's List, Jaws?!?

Why are ANY of these scores on anybody's worst JW scores list?! Next, you're going to tell me Star Wars is the most atrocious thing the man has ever created! I'm pretty sure I'm on the wrong thread then....

Its understandable if you didn't connect with those score, but to claim they're his worst is absolutely ridiculous....seriously, I can't understand it.

Like many others have said, I really can't make a "worst JW scores" list, because JW has always managed to consistently produce high quality work. Even his lowest surpass the quality of the average score. But if we wanted to list his 5 weakest scores, I suppose they might look like this (in no particular order):

- Heartbeeps

- The Missouri Breaks

- Sabrina

- Sleepers

- The Paper Chase

This is discluding any of his 60s material.

I've also seen Presumed Innocent on a couple of lists which is odd because I consider the score to be rather brilliant. It may not appeal due to its synthy nature, but it has an impressive theme and it brilliantly sets the pace and tone of the film. An excellent thriller score, a very solid **** score for me.

- KK

[Wojo 2,453]

Star Wars is the most atrocious thing the man has ever created!

Thanks! Instant signature material!

[Matt C 455]

Saving Private Ryan

War of the Worlds

Poseidon Adventure

The Lost World: Jurassic Park

[Hlao-roo 389]

Jaws

Star Wars

The Empire Strikes Back

Raiders of the Lost Ark

E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial

Runners-up:

Close Encounters of the Third Kind

The Fury

Superman

Return of the Jedi

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom

"I think Citizen Kane is a perfectly good film because of this and this and this, but I'll never be so passionate about it like I can be with a perfectly good film like Shichinin no samurai for this and this and this reason involving my own tastes".

I love Wagner's Operas. But I can't get through Tristan and Isolde. I just find it hard to sit through and I can only listen to highlights. But I'd never dare to call it a bad opera or inferior music

I'm still waiting for a proper explanation.

What I mean to say is that quite often I am unable to enjoy a certain piece of music due to my own limitations as a listener, and not due to any fault in the music. And sometimes your enjoyment might be diminished, but you can still be able to recognize and admire the great quality of the music. Sometimes music is just too good to be enjoyed right away, it can take several years for it to click. One such example in my life are some of Mahler's symphonies

I disagree. If you can't enjoy a piece of music, it's clearly the music's fault.

[Jilal 569]

What is wrong with this thread?!?!?

Attack of the Clones, Return of the Jedi, Munich, Jurassic Park, Hook, Schindler's List, Jaws?!?

Why are ANY of these scores on anybody's worst JW scores list?! Next, you're going to tell me Star Wars is the most atrocious thing the man has ever created! I'm pretty sure I'm on the wrong thread then....

Its understandable if you didn't connect with those score, but to claim they're his worst is absolutely ridiculous....seriously, I can't understand it.

Like many others have said, I really can't make a "worst JW scores" list, because JW has always managed to consistently produce high quality work. Even his lowest surpass the quality of the average score. But if we wanted to list his 5 weakest scores, I suppose they might look like this (in no particular order):

- Heartbeeps

- The Missouri Breaks

- Sabrina

- Sleepers

- The Paper Chase

This is discluding any of his 60s material.

I've also seen Presumed Innocent on a couple of lists which is odd because I consider the score to be rather brilliant. It may not appeal due to its synthy nature, but it has an impressive theme and it brilliantly sets the pace and tone of the film. An excellent thriller score, a very solid **** score for me.

- KK

Well said K.K. These are indeed very good JW scores that shouldn't be on anyone's list.

[MSM 126]

Everyone who doesn't like Sabrina please send your copies to me, I can use some spare ones

[A24 4,345]

Sabrina is John Williams' female side.

Alex - betting that's a statement nobody heard before!

[Charlie Brigden 7]

Sabrina would be miles better with some huge fanfares and music to score lightsaber duels with. Also dinosaurs.

[Ricard 2,245]

What I mean to say is that quite often I am unable to enjoy a certain piece of music due to my own limitations as a listener, and not due to any fault in the music. And sometimes your enjoyment might be diminished, but you can still be able to recognize and admire the great quality of the music. Sometimes music is just too good to be enjoyed right away, it can take several years for it to click. One such example in my life are some of Mahler's symphonies

If you can't enjoy it how can you recognize and admire its great quality? Because other people told you it's good?

I for once can't stand 99,99% of Hip Hop "music" and I will never recognize the "quality" of a genre that is pure crap.

I've also seen Presumed Innocent on a couple of lists which is odd because I consider the score to be rather brilliant. It may not appeal due to its synthy nature, but it has an impressive theme and it brilliantly sets the pace and tone of the film. An excellent thriller score, a very solid **** score for me.

YES!

[MSM 126]

2) Jaws (no idea what's so great about it, the tune is great of course, but the album?)

Instafail!!!

You have no business calling yourself a JW fan.

Being a JWFan isn't about blindfolded following the main public. At least I have the guts to post a list that is well considered.

I am not saying Jaws is a bad score, I think it is a very effective score, and of course the theme is brilliant. As a score on its own, it is not a very interesting listening experience IMO. There are dozens of of scores easily more interesting than Jaws, so it ends up somewhere low on the list.

[Richard Penna 3,694]

I don't think Quint was being entirely serious. Individual tastes are too random to make that sort of judgement seriously.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

SCHINDLER'S LIST (Wojciech Kilar would been perfect, but no, nothing comes between Spielberg and Williams's bromance)

Kilar's (mostly unreleased) score for another major Holocaust movie,The Pianist, is hardly a masterpiece.

Who said he would have written the extant same score for SCHINDLER'S LIST? John Williams ruined that film. He turned real human drama into maudlin, almost comical melodrama. The obnoxious choral moments are the worst.

[publicist 4,643]

Who said he would have written the extant same score for SCHINDLER'S LIST? John Williams ruined that film. He turned real human drama into maudlin, almost comical melodrama. The obnoxious choral moments are the worst.

That's me posting under a different name.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yeah that is the problem with Promethues. We don't really need him, we have enough vinegar pissers here....

[Romão 2,274]

What I mean to say is that quite often I am unable to enjoy a certain piece of music due to my own limitations as a listener, and not due to any fault in the music. And sometimes your enjoyment might be diminished, but you can still be able to recognize and admire the great quality of the music. Sometimes music is just too good to be enjoyed right away, it can take several years for it to click. One such example in my life are some of Mahler's symphonies

If you can't enjoy it how can you recognize and admire its great quality? Because other people told you it's good?

I for once can't stand 99,99% of Hip Hop "music" and I will never recognize the "quality" of a genre that is pure crap.

Because quality and enjoyment don't always go hand in hand. Looney Toons back in Action is one of the most fun and enjoyable things Goldsmith has ever written. I'd hardly call it one of his masterpieces, though.

And sometimes great music is not easy to listen to very often. And I trust my own taste to make much better judgements of enjoyability than musical quality

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Everyone who doesn't like Sabrina please send your copies to me, I can use some spare ones

Good score. Always, Sabrina, Stepmom, Accidental Tourist, Stanley & Iris, etc. are lovely, intimate scores.

The thread that has existed a hundred times or more before and always turned into the same kinds of posts and arguments that ultimately establish what brings many of us together as JW fans, what makes us all different and just what a diverse composer Williams is.

[Ricard 2,245]

There is not one single score in my top JW worst list.

[Thor 7,518]

There is not one single score in my top JW worst list.

Now that's an enigmatic post right there.

[tharpdevenport 4]

Off the top of my head I haven't heard a Williams scored I hated, but I hgeard ones I really didn't like. Though "Minority Report" came very, very close to making the "hated" list.

Now, some I don't like would include:

"War of the Worlds"

"Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith" (this one I disliked so much, I withheld none of my opinion when somebody leaked the CD early and I downloaded the tracks to give it a try; I deleted the tracks, NO THANKS)

Now, I did hear some concert piece by him that I hated with a passion.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

Really can't understand that dislike of ROTS. Explain yourself, mate.

[Goldsmithfan 6]

The Empire Strikes Back

Temple of Doom

E. T.

Attack of the Clones

Jurassic Park

Oh, wait, those are my favorites. Crap.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,551]

Sabrina would be miles better with some huge fanfares and music to score lightsaber duels with. Also dinosaurs.

Not even a T-rex could swallow Harrison Ford's ego.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

What I mean to say is that quite often I am unable to enjoy a certain piece of music due to my own limitations as a listener, and not due to any fault in the music. And sometimes your enjoyment might be diminished, but you can still be able to recognize and admire the great quality of the music. Sometimes music is just too good to be enjoyed right away, it can take several years for it to click. One such example in my life are some of Mahler's symphonies

If you can't enjoy it how can you recognize and admire its great quality? Because other people told you it's good?

I for once can't stand 99,99% of Hip Hop "music" and I will never recognize the "quality" of a genre that is pure crap.

Because quality and enjoyment don't always go hand in hand. Looney Toons back in Action is one of the most fun and enjoyable things Goldsmith has ever written. I'd hardly call it one of his masterpieces, though.

And sometimes great music is not easy to listen to very often. And I trust my own taste to make much better judgements of enjoyability than musical quality

Music is subjective. You can't define good music, therefore there can't be good music that can't be enjoyed. It just becomes someone else's taste in music. It's possible to recognize the work put into something, but if someone works their ass off on something and I still don't enjoy it, it's still not good.

[Brónach 1,302]

That would mean for me that a lot of preRomantic music is just not good. Also, the main theme from War Horse, going up and down without packing any punch, meh!!

You know, sometimes I don't completely trust my taste. It's has deceived me in the past. It's a given I'm not infallible. It's also not only a factor of enjoyment, but of knowledge. The same way the viewing of a film can influence an opinion on how good a film score actually is.

[Trent B 337]

"Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith" (this one I disliked so much, I withheld none of my opinion when somebody leaked the CD early and I downloaded the tracks to give it a try; I deleted the tracks, NO THANKS)

If the fact you hate the score for ROTS....then there's no hope for you.

The OST for ROTS is a good listen but the previously unreleased tracks found in the games combined with the OST makes it a much better experience.

[Brónach 1,302]

I like several moments in the OSt but I'm holding my opinion until I listen to it properly.

[publicist 4,643]

Music is subjective. You can't define good music, therefore there can't be good music that can't be enjoyed. It just becomes someone else's taste in music. It's possible to recognize the work put into something, but if someone works their ass off on something and I still don't enjoy it, it's still not good.

Nah, you can define it, the criteria exist, as we discussed in another thread. I don't say they are right or important, but it's naive to assume that the development of the music in western society is only due to 'one man's meat is another man's poison.'. It doesn't work that way.

[The Dark Trilogy 39]

What I mean to say is that quite often I am unable to enjoy a certain piece of music due to my own limitations as a listener, and not due to any fault in the music. And sometimes your enjoyment might be diminished, but you can still be able to recognize and admire the great quality of the music. Sometimes music is just too good to be enjoyed right away, it can take several years for it to click. One such example in my life are some of Mahler's symphonies

If you can't enjoy it how can you recognize and admire its great quality? Because other people told you it's good?

I for once can't stand 99,99% of Hip Hop "music" and I will never recognize the "quality" of a genre that is pure crap.

Because quality and enjoyment don't always go hand in hand. Looney Toons back in Action is one of the most fun and enjoyable things Goldsmith has ever written. I'd hardly call it one of his masterpieces, though.

And sometimes great music is not easy to listen to very often. And I trust my own taste to make much better judgements of enjoyability than musical quality

Music is subjective. You can't define good music, therefore there can't be good music that can't be enjoyed. It just becomes someone else's taste in music. It's possible to recognize the work put into something, but if someone works their ass off on something and I still don't enjoy it, it's still not good.

No. You can define good music. That fact that you can study music implies that you can do something right or wrong in terms of composition. Technique, structure, etc. you can build up are values that someone (musicologists) can rate. So composition is about 75%, then comes the subjective factor of 25%.

Look at me. There are music which is objective good, but subjective I do not like it. But would not rate a score to be poor only because I do not like it. Objective goes over subjective.

I know, hard to believe but that is fact.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

I agree, although I find it harder to quantify with music as I do with films, probably because I've spent far more time studying the latter, both personally and academically. There are a ton of films I understand are of a good quality, but it doesn't mean I like them.

[publicist 4,643]

There are a ton of films I understand are of a good quality, but it doesn't mean I like them.

But that's the point. Being humble enough to realize that your own tastes and likings are not the final word on everything. You can find such views in abundance and they betray an unhealthy consumer-attitude on all creative matters.

[Ricard 2,245]

No. You can define good music. That fact that you can study music implies that you can do something right or wrong in terms of composition. Technique, structure, etc. you can build up are values that someone (musicologists) can rate. So composition is about 75%, then comes the subjective factor of 25%.

Look at me. There are music which is objective good, but subjective I do not like it. But would not rate a score to be poor only because I do not like it. Objective goes over subjective.

I know, hard to believe but that is fact.

The musicologists' opinions change through the years/decades/centuries (and the same can be applied to music and film critics, or art critics/experts in general). That automatically invalidates their views as "objective". They are just a (necessary) guide for the study of the history of art. But art is not science.

I know, hard to believe but that is fact.

[Joni Wiljami 1,206]

But you can approach music scientifically : I think POA is 67% better score than Home Alone II

[Brónach 1,302]

But art is not science.

This is partially the reason why I ended up preferring it over art. You can discuss about science and actually get somewhere.

Discussions over art sometimes drive me nuts.

[publicist 4,643]

But you can approach music scientifically : I think POA is 67% better score than Home Alone II

You is not enough.

[Thor 7,518]

As always, the answer is somewhere inbetween. I made a thread on this issue over at FSM awhile back:

http://www.filmscore...mID=1&archive=1

Basically, there are more 'objective' criteria by which to judge the quality of music, but most of them will always have a certain tinge of subjectivity involved. You can't escape that in art criticism of any kind. But it's important to separate between personal preference (always subjective, of course) and a more detached, musicological analysis of a piece.

[publicist 4,643]

The musicologists' opinions change through the years/decades/centuries (and the same can be applied to music and film critics, or art critics/experts in general). That automatically invalidates their views as "objective". They are just a (necessary) guide for the study of the history of art. But art is not science.

Still, that doesn't automatically mean that we are better served by vox populi. This particular discussion has more to do with people aggressively rejecting any criteria above their own opinion as irrelevant and if they are right.

[Romão 2,274]

My opinion stands, one's own assessment of quality and enjoyability go hand in hand often, but there are always plenty of exceptions.

My brother has had a very vast musical education (I have had none). He cannot stand Wagner's music. But still considers him to be a master composer

[Faleel 5,359]

Thread title fixed.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Really can't understand that dislike of ROTS. Explain yourself, mate.

It's a bit "meh" in the grand scheme of JW. Many of us are, of course, entertained by this type of writing. Still, it isn't as strong as others of this style from the era and feels like the same old song and dance, my friend. The new themes aren't as strong, not that there are many of those. Just analyzing JW's 2005 scores, it's clearly the least interesting (and I barely listen to Munich). It's pretty inconsequential in JW's body of work.

I don't dislike it, it's pretty entertaining. But I can sort of understand disliking it.