Why John Williams might be as good as the most enthusiastic fanboy says

[indy4 155]

I've noticed that on this MB there can sometimes be a condescension aimed at those that appreciate all or most of JW's scores very enthusiastically. The general feeling that certain members are creating is that these people are blind fanboys who will enjoy anything that JW creates.

The thing is, John Williams is good. He's been musically trained for 70+ years, and has studied at some of the best schools in the world and with some of the best teachers in the world. He's had tons of experience performing, arranging and conducting, and all of these skills have contributed towards his composing abilities. He's very selective about selecting projects that he feels will give him artistic freedom and/or inspiration. And the projects he accepts are big deals--he knows a lot of people are going to be listening to his works, often times hundreds of millions. Even his concert works are performed by some of the greatest orchestras/conductors in the world and at some of the greatest venues in the world. He's going to be putting in a good deal of effort into his scores. So it makes sense that a vast majority of his works--maybe even all past a certain point--would be good, even great.

I'm not trying to say that everybody who doesn't appreciate most of JW's works is a fool--you are absolutely entitled to your own opinion, and free to vehemently hate whatever JW work you do. But could we tone down the pressure to not be incredibly enthusiastic about JW's entire discography? There's no reason necessarily why all his works shouldn't be great, just as there's no reason necessarily why they should.

[King Mark 3,625]

Well, his music contains moments of extraordinary beauty that no other composer can match, including all the dead classical ones

His underscore also has a lot more layers of complexity than any other film composers. And it's more than just weaving motifs in and out, it's like the notes and orchestrations are always placed at exactly the right moment. Buckbeak's Flight is a good example...you could just think it's fairly simple at first but once you start listening it's very complex.There's also the way he modulates his chords but I'm not music literate enough to explain it. And he's also excellent at bring out the pure beauty of some instruments,especially the strings and the horns

A simple RCP power anthem is exactly the opposite, it's simple, loud and obnoxious and you get tired of it very quickly.

Other composers have come close to matching Williams best moments (I'm thinking of a isolated tracks by Goldsmith,Horner,Barry or Morricone) but I still don't think it's to the same level as Williams. Or if you listen to something like Super8 by Gia, it sounds overall pretty good and it's a pleasing experience, but then you listen to E.T. right after and know the two scores aren't even in the same league

[Ren 75]

I understand your sentiment. I do believe though that the majority are with you though with a certain appreciation for certain eras or scores due to their listening preference.

To the newbie though if could seem quite intimidating.

[publicist 4,643]

I've noticed that on this MB there can sometimes be a condescension aimed at those that appreciate all or most of JW's scores very enthusiastically. The general feeling that certain members are creating is that these people are blind fanboys who will enjoy anything that JW creates.

The thing is, John Williams is good. He's been musically trained for 70+ years, and has studied at some of the best schools in the world and with some of the best teachers in the world. He's had tons of experience performing, arranging and conducting, and all of these skills have contributed towards his composing abilities. He's very selective about selecting projects that he feels will give him artistic freedom and/or inspiration. And the projects he accepts are big deals--he knows a lot of people are going to be listening to his works, often times hundreds of millions. Even his concert works are performed by some of the greatest orchestras/conductors in the world and at some of the greatest venues in the world. He's going to be putting in a good deal of effort into his scores. So it makes sense that a vast majority of his works--maybe even all past a certain point--would be good, even great.

I'm not trying to say that everybody who doesn't appreciate most of JW's works is a fool--you are absolutely entitled to your own opinion, and free to vehemently hate whatever JW work you do. But could we tone down the pressure to not be incredibly enthusiastic about JW's entire discography? There's no reason necessarily why all his works shouldn't be great, just as there's no reason necessarily why they should.

Congratulations on coming out!

[indy4 155]

lol, thank you. Several times when I was writing this post it felt like I was coming out of the closet, even though I feel I've been pretty vocal on the MB about my immense appreciation for almost all of JW's works.

I understand your sentiment. I do believe though that the majority are with you though with a certain appreciation for certain eras or scores due to their listening preference.

To the newbie though if could seem quite intimidating.

Oh yeah, most people here are fine with this type of thing. But there are a few posters that seem to believe that one's credibility increases with each JW score one dislikes. I'm just saying that while there's nothing wrong with disliking a JW score, there's nothing wrong with liking one either.

[Ricard 2,242]

Well, his music contains moments of extraordinary beauty that no other composer can match, including all the dead classical ones

His underscore also has a lot more layers of complexity than any other film composers. And it's more than just weaving motifs in and out, it's like the notes and orchestrations are always placed at exactly the right moment. Buckbeak's Flight is a good example...you could just think it's fairly simple at first but once you start listening it's very complex.There's also the way he modulates his chords but I'm not music literate enough to explain it. And he's also excellent at bring out the pure beauty of some instruments,especially the strings and the horns

A simple RCP power anthem is exactly the opposite, it's simple, loud and obnoxious and you get tired of it very quickly.

Other composers have come close to matching Williams best moments (I'm thinking of a isolated tracks by Goldsmith,Horner,Barry or Morricone) but I still don't think it's to the same level as Williams. Or if you listen to something like Super8 by Gia, it sounds overall pretty good and it's a pleasing experience, but then you listen to E.T. right after and know the two scores aren't even in the same league

[A24 4,326]

I love Williams like the next member here but what about the Hollywood element in his music? Doesn't that cheapen it a bit?

Alex - bringer of balance in the universe

[publicist 4,643]

I'm rather pragmatic about it: if i like something by JW or anyone else, i like it, if i don't, i don't. Everything else seems too much hard work considering the gazillions of musical notes out there.

[TownerFan 4,983]

It's part of the nature of the discussion boards on the internet: even this is a place called John Williams FAN (hence it should be natural to see people appreciating his work with enthusiasm in a broad sense), there will be always people who wants to put them in a narrow and stick labels on them such as "fanboy", "hypocritical dumb", etc. As time goes by and members get more and more used to each other, it happens more often than not that the subject of the discussions slowly slips from the object itself (i.e. the music) to the way we talk about it.

I must say this place is full of smart and clever people who are able to articulate very well why they love Williams' music. But sometimes my impression is that there are also people however who first and foremost want to stick themselves out of the bunch, entitling themselves to risky, unpopular opinions ("You know what? The music of Star Wars pretty much sucks" or sentences like that) just for the sake of show off how much different and original they are. Of course, the exchange of even wildly different opinions is the salt of a place like this, it would be really boring if everyone would enjoy the same things at the same level.

It's also the reason why I never posted too much and I'm even doing it less than ever now, because other than family/job obligations prevent me to spend too much time around here, I'm not that into throwing myself into the fray of debate just for the sake of itself. I'll leave to you the pleasure to slay off with each other

As for not being ashamed of showing my own enthusiasm for Williams' music, well, I listen to the Man's music since I was 5-years old. I don't think I need to justify myself for liking it so dearly and deeply.

[Datameister 2,037]

Yeah, that phenomenon isn't unique to this site or this area of interest. Best to just accept the fact that no matter what your opinion is, there will always be someone who disagrees with it, perhaps even rudely. Life is more fun that way. Not that it hurts to keep an open mind to others' opinions, though.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[indy4 155]

I love Williams like the next member here but what about the Hollywood element in his music? Doesn't that cheapen it a bit?

Alex - bringer of balance in the universe

Why would that necessarily cheapen it? I think you could definitely point out many examples of a Hollywood film/score that is cheap, but why is that inherently true in every Hollywood film/score?

The thing is, John Williams is good. He's been musically trained for 70+ years, and has studied at some of the best schools in the world and with some of the best teachers in the world. He's had tons of experience performing, arranging and conducting, and all of these skills have contributed towards his composing abilities. He's very selective about selecting projects that he feels will give him artistic freedom and/or inspiration. And the projects he accepts are big deals--he knows a lot of people are going to be listening to his works, often times hundreds of millions. Even his concert works are performed by some of the greatest orchestras/conductors in the world and at some of the greatest venues in the world. He's going to be putting in a good deal of effort into his scores. So it makes sense that a vast majority of his works--maybe even all past a certain point--would be good, even great.

There is one thing that bugs me in what you're saying: if I understand correctly, you're saying "John Williams is highly trained, he works hard, he has experience, hence his music must be good". But the thing is: this is music we're talking about. This is art. And as far as I'm concerned, working hard in art doesn't necessarily leads to good results. Now, I'm not trying to say that most of JW's output is pure shit or anything, just that saying "He puts a lot of heart into it, so the music he writes must be, at least partially, great" doesn't prove anything to me.

That's not quite what I'm saying. I'm saying that because he's highly trained, etc., then it's very possible that all of his works will be good. That doesn't mean it's necessarily true. My beef is that I see member A talking down to member B because member B seems to like everything Williams composes. Member A's implied argument is that JW's works can't all be good--there has to be at least a couple stinkers, and the person that's able to recognize and admit the most amount of stinkers has the strongest sense of taste and/or lack of bias. I'm just saying that this doesn't have to be true--there doesn't have to be any stinkers given Williams' extraordinary credentials--and would make sense if all or most of JW's works were good, regardless of whether they actually are.

I agree with what you wrote in your post.

I'm rather pragmatic about it: if i like something by JW or anyone else, i like it, if i don't, i don't. Everything else seems too much hard work considering the gazillions of musical notes out there.

I think that's fine. I'm not questioning those that dislike some or most of JW's output, I'm questioning those that consider the opinions of those that appreciate all or most of JW's output to be invalid.

[Josh500 1,615]

Well, his music contains moments of extraordinary beauty that no other composer can match, including all the dead classical ones

His underscore also has a lot more layers of complexity than any other film composers. And it's more than just weaving motifs in and out, it's like the notes and orchestrations are always placed at exactly the right moment. Buckbeak's Flight is a good example...you could just think it's fairly simple at first but once you start listening it's very complex.There's also the way he modulates his chords but I'm not music literate enough to explain it. And he's also excellent at bring out the pure beauty of some instruments,especially the strings and the horns

A simple RCP power anthem is exactly the opposite, it's simple, loud and obnoxious and you get tired of it very quickly.

Other composers have come close to matching Williams best moments (I'm thinking of a isolated tracks by Goldsmith,Horner,Barry or Morricone) but I still don't think it's to the same level as Williams. Or if you listen to something like Super8 by Gia, it sounds overall pretty good and it's a pleasing experience, but then you listen to E.T. right after and know the two scores aren't even in the same league

Well, said, I agree!

I'd add that, besides being a master at composition and orchestration, JW also has a much deeper understanding of any given scene in a movie... many of his cues are written in a fashion that no other composer would even consider, and I am not just talking about the orchestration. Many of his scores speak truly to the heart (instead of just accompanying what's on the screen), which adds tremendously to the movie-watching experience.

Sure, the man has written pieces that I personally dislike too (no surprise considering his output), but hell, the majority of his stuff is impressive enough.

The thing is, John Williams is good.

No shit!

[publicist 4,643]

That's not quite what I'm saying. I'm saying that because he's highly trained, etc., then it's very possible that all of his works will be good. That doesn't mean it's necessarily true. My beef is that I see member A talking down to member B because member B seems to like everything Williams composes. Member A's implied argument is that JW's works can't all be good--there has to be at least a couple stinkers, and the person that's able to recognize and admit the most amount of stinkers has the strongest sense of taste and/or lack of bias. I'm just saying that this doesn't have to be true--there doesn't have to be any stinkers given Williams' extraordinary credentials--and would make sense if all or most of JW's works were good, regardless of whether they actually are.

What you really want to say is 'i have scientific proof that my favourite composer is a genius (hence, all of his output)'. We've gone through this before and it really doesn't matter...i just find it a bit laborious to invest yourself in every 20-second-bridging cue with wide-eyed amazement at the musical genius at work. Is it really necessary?

[Josh500 1,615]

I've noticed that on this MB there can sometimes be a condescension aimed at those that appreciate all or most of JW's scores very enthusiastically. The general feeling that certain members are creating is that these people are blind fanboys who will enjoy anything that JW creates.

I agree.

Voicing one's opinions is okay, even encouraged. Attacking and belittling other people's opinions is definitely uncool.

The thing is, John Williams is good. He's been musically trained for 70+ years, and has studied at some of the best schools in the world and with some of the best teachers in the world. He's had tons of experience performing, arranging and conducting, and all of these skills have contributed towards his composing abilities. He's very selective about selecting projects that he feels will give him artistic freedom and/or inspiration. And the projects he accepts are big deals--he knows a lot of people are going to be listening to his works, often times hundreds of millions. Even his concert works are performed by some of the greatest orchestras/conductors in the world and at some of the greatest venues in the world. He's going to be putting in a good deal of effort into his scores. So it makes sense that a vast majority of his works--maybe even all past a certain point--would be good, even great.

No. This paragraph does not make sense.

He is great, sure, but not for the reasons you stated...

[Brónach 1,301]

I love Williams like the next member here but what about the Hollywood element in his music? Doesn't that cheapen it a bit?

I'm not sure I understand what the "Hollywood element" is.

[alicebrallice 134]

Yeah, that phenomenon isn't unique to this site or this area of interest. Best to just accept the fact that no matter what your opinion is, there will always be someone who disagrees with it, perhaps even rudely. Life is more fun that way. Not that it hurts to keep an open mind to others' opinions, though.

this.

I'd also add that, besides being a master at composition and orchestration, JW also has a much deeper understanding of any given scene in a movie... many of his cues are written in a fashion that no other composer would even consider, and I am not just talking about the orchestration.

compared to, let's say every other film composer? and could you give me a few examples that supports your statement/opinion? I'm genuinely curious.

Many of his scores speak truly to the heart (instead of just accompanying what's on the screen), which adds tremendously to the movie-watching experience.

indeed but that says almost as much about you.

[Josh500 1,615]

I love Williams like the next member here but what about the Hollywood element in his music? Doesn't that cheapen it a bit?

I'm not sure I understand what the "Hollywood element" is.

JW himself partly defines Hollywood! He (along with Spielberg etc.) is the best Hollywood has to offer!

So that statement doesn't make sense, either. Without JW, Spielberg, etc. Hollywood might be regarded as more inferior. But Hollywood definitely doesn't "cheapen" JW's music.

I'd also add that, besides being a master at composition and orchestration, JW also has a much deeper understanding of any given scene in a movie... many of his cues are written in a fashion that no other composer would even consider, and I am not just talking about the orchestration.

compared to, let's say every other film composer? and could you give me a few examples that supports your statement/opinion? I'm genuinely curious.

Well, compared to most other film composer, let's say.

There are way too many examples to list here, but some that come to mind for me:

1. "David's Arrival" from A.I. The English horn solo when David's "parents" are fighting. The way this brief cue is written... oh wow. It's really indescribably perfect. This was enough to bring a lump to my throat, what would otherwise have been mundane marital fighting scene.

2. "Back to America" from Angela's Ashes. I can picture other composers writing a lush, heartwarming piece, but a piece of this level? No. This piece alone makes the ending worthwhile.

3. The "Friendship Theme" from War Horse. This is such a profound, meaningful piece, I can't imagine any other composer coming up with a comparable theme for this special friendship, either.

Many of his scores speak truly to the heart (instead of just accompanying what's on the screen), which adds tremendously to the movie-watching experience.

indeed but that says almost as much about you.

Maybe. Probably.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Josh500 1,615]

I'd add that, besides being a master at composition and orchestration, JW also has a much deeper understanding of any given scene in a movie... many of his cues are written in a fashion that no other composer would even consider

See, that's something I hate reading. Not only is this disrespectful to other composers, but it also shows a narrow-mindedness that I cannot allow! And I think that's the main reason why some members here feel the need to denigrate other members who say such things.

I am really not sure whether you are serious or joking half the time, but I'll just assume you are serious here...

Read (again) what I said here:

Voicing one's opinions is okay, even encouraged. Attacking and belittling other people's opinions is definitely uncool.

I just expressed my opinion. If you have a different opinion, fine, let's hear it.

But if you hate reading other people's opinions, maybe this (or any other) MB is not the right place for you to hang out.

[publicist 4,643]

To be fair, Josh wears his fool's cap since a very long time and a post of his without flowery hyperbole would be almost offensive.

[Josh500 1,615]

To be fair, Josh wears his fool's cap since a very long time and a post of his without flowery hyperbole would be almost offensive.

Bwaahahha. Good one!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Josh500 1,615]

I love Williams' music / I love Williams' scores / I love Williams' [insert something you love about him] is an opinion.

Here, it feels like you're stating a fact.

I'd add that, besides being a master at composition and orchestration, JW also has a much deeper understanding of any given scene in a movie... many of his cues are written in a fashion that no other composer would even consider.

Maybe if you had added a "I think", or "In my opinion", things would have been different. But you didn't, did you!!

Well, of course I am just expressing my opinon! We all are. I said, "I'd add that.." didn't I?

By the way, I wouldn't feel offended if you expressed the most admiration for a composer other than JW! Why would I?

And people who are are probably way too sensitive.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

It's not because you add somethig that it means it's an opinion§ You can add facts as well! Look:

"I'd add that 80% of the world's population has hair". See, I added a fact.

[Josh500 1,615]

I'm rather pragmatic about it: if i like something by JW or anyone else, i like it, if i don't, i don't. Everything else seems too much hard work considering the gazillions of musical notes out there.

Is this supposed to mean anything? You like it, you don't like it. And anything else is too much work for you.

Congratulations! This is for you. (It's even got German colors!)

[Salacius 7]

.

[Josh500 1,615]

Most important for me is that John’s music has heart and soul, eloquence, power and complex beauty.

As Spielberg said, “John's music bypasses the brain and goes straight to the heart”.

Spielberg might just be the biggest JW fanboy of all!

[A24 4,326]

Why would that necessarily cheapen it?

Well, besides of creating a certain predictable sound, one typical aspect of a Hollywood score is the Mickey Mousing approach, where the music mirrors the action seen on the screen. It's then when the music often becomes more obsolete rather than adding anything, IMO. This is often annoying when watching a film but it usually doesn't lead to music that is interesting to listen to on its own, outside a few exceptions, of course like Indy's First Adventure. One of the major reasons why the first Star Wars score is so great is that when you listen to it, it's feels like music is written separately from the movie, as if it was meant to stand on its own. It's like Lucas selected existing classical music tracks (like Kubrick did with 2001: A Space Odyssey) and placed it over the images.

Alex

[Quintus 5,399]

Well, his music contains moments of extraordinary beauty that no other composer can match, including all the dead classical ones

His underscore also has a lot more layers of complexity than any other film composers. And it's more than just weaving motifs in and out, it's like the notes and orchestrations are always placed at exactly the right moment. Buckbeak's Flight is a good example...you could just think it's fairly simple at first but once you start listening it's very complex.There's also the way he modulates his chords but I'm not music literate enough to explain it. And he's also excellent at bring out the pure beauty of some instruments,especially the strings and the horns

A simple RCP power anthem is exactly the opposite, it's simple, loud and obnoxious and you get tired of it very quickly.

Other composers have come close to matching Williams best moments (I'm thinking of a isolated tracks by Goldsmith,Horner,Barry or Morricone) but I still don't think it's to the same level as Williams. Or if you listen to something like Super8 by Gia, it sounds overall pretty good and it's a pleasing experience, but then you listen to E.T. right after and know the two scores aren't even in the same league

I agree, but not with the popular notion (here) that simplistic and "obnoxious" music should be automatically written off just because it lacks the complexity and 'subtlety' of John Williams' own brand of sophisticated bombast. Pop score isn't entirely without merit, as you and your cronies would have us believe.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Pop scores are like a Big Mac menu with extra fries and a giant cola. Sometimes you really want one, but it's not the same a a Heston Blumenthal recipe of sautéed duck.

[Richard Penna 3,671]

The problem that I routinely have is actually not people 'overpraising' Williams' music. I've enjoyed loads of scores recently that others have dismissed entirely. It's called taste, and it's absolutely natural. I have no problems with Star Wars getting the praise it does - it's great music, but emotionally, it does nothing for me.

But it seems that whenever a non-Williams score is examined and some discussion point or flaw is raised about it, the remark I seem to see time and time again is "well of course Williams would've got that right", as if it's a cast iron fact that anything that a particular composer can do, Williams can do it better. I think that's incredibly disrespectful to the other composer in question. If you hire Williams, you're going to get a score with loads of thought behind it, but it doesn't mean that by default, no one else will match him.

For example, I'll repeat for the record that I think Williams' ambient music is not his strong point. I can think of at least 3 current working composers whose lower-key material is far, far more interesting to me than JW's. If I compare The Greenhouse Effect and a key cue from Hirshfelder's Sanctum score, the latter is a tense, inventive cue to me, and the former is just boring. I think I can reflect some others' opinions that a lot of the lower-key material in KotCS is pretty boring, and I've heard material from other composers that suggests to me they would have made those scenes more interesting.

[publicist 4,643]

I'm rather pragmatic about it: if i like something by JW or anyone else, i like it, if i don't, i don't. Everything else seems too much hard work considering the gazillions of musical notes out there.

Is this supposed to mean anything? You like it, you don't like it. And anything else is too much work for you.

Congratulations! This is for you. (It's even got German colors!)

[Josh500 1,615]

The problem that I routinely have is actually not people 'overpraising' Williams' music. I've enjoyed loads of scores recently that others have dismissed entirely. It's called taste, and it's absolutely natural. I have no problems with Star Wars getting the praise it does - it's great music, but emotionally, it does nothing for me.

But it seems that whenever a non-Williams score is examined and some discussion point or flaw is raised about it, the remark I seem to see time and time again is "well of course Williams would've got that right", as if it's a cast iron fact that anything that a particular composer can do, Williams can do it better. I think that's incredibly disrespectful to the other composer in question. If you hire Williams, you're going to get a score with loads of thought behind it, but it doesn't mean that by default, no one else will match him.

For example, I'll repeat for the record that I think Williams' ambient music is not his strong point. I can think of at least 3 current working composers whose lower-key material is far, far more interesting to me than JW's. If I compare The Greenhouse Effect and a key cue from Hirshfelder's Sanctum score, the latter is a tense, inventive cue to me, and the former is just boring. I think I can reflect some others' opinions that a lot of the lower-key material in KotCS is pretty boring, and I've heard material from other composers that suggests to me they would have made those scenes more interesting.

I appreciate what you're saying, but like somebody else pointed out, this is a JW fan site.

So it stands to reason that most (though not all) people here consider JW to be the best. That's neither good nor bad, just a fact. So it further stands to reason that most people here will praise JW over any other composer, not because they blindly believe JW is always better (although some people are like that) but because they genuinely believe so.

[alicebrallice 134]

indeed but that says almost as much about you.

Maybe. Probably.

you understand what I'm saying, though?

none of those examples you presented supports the opinion you (quite disrespectfully) advertised in a convincing way. you just named a couple of pieces you like. they're heartwarming, they're meaningful, they're perfect... whatever. that doesn't mean JW automatically has a deeper understanding of any given scene in a movie than any other film composer.

[Josh500 1,615]

I'm not trying to say that everybody who doesn't appreciate most of JW's works is a fool--you are absolutely entitled to your own opinion, and free to vehemently hate whatever JW work you do. But could we tone down the pressure to not be incredibly enthusiastic about JW's entire discography? There's no reason necessarily why all his works shouldn't be great, just as there's no reason necessarily why they should.

I actually agree with this 100%. And it's not just on this MB, there are people like that anywhere, unfortunately.

indeed but that says almost as much about you.

Maybe. Probably.

you understand what I'm saying, though?

none of those examples you presented supports the opinion you (quite disrespectfully) advertised in a convincing way. you just named a couple of pieces you like. they're heartwarming, they're meaningful, they're perfect... whatever. that doesn't mean JW automatically has a deeper understanding of any given scene in a movie than any other film composer.

Was what I said here in any way disrespectful to you? If so, I apologize, and I really meant no disrespect. (I wonder why, though.)

You asked me to give you a few examples why I think so. I did. You don't agree with me, that's fine, but that doesn't change my opinion.

[alicebrallice 134]

Was what I said here in any way disrespectful to you? If so, I apologize, and I really meant no disrespect. (I wonder why, though.)

You asked me to give you a few examples why I think so. I did. You don't agree with me, that's fine, but that doesn't change my opinion.

lol of course it wasn't disrespectful to me, though it was to other composers.

can you see why I think your statement is wrong? even if JW was my favorite composer I'd never formulate my admiration is such ways, and based on your examples to support it, it certainly doesn't make any sense.

[Quintus 5,399]

Objectivity is in painfully short supply here, Alice.

[Josh500 1,615]

Was what I said here in any way disrespectful to you? If so, I apologize, and I really meant no disrespect. (I wonder why, though.)

You asked me to give you a few examples why I think so. I did. You don't agree with me, that's fine, but that doesn't change my opinion.

lol of course it wasn't disrespectful to me, though it was to other composers.

can you see why I think your statement is wrong? even if JW was my favorite composer I'd never formulate my admiration is such ways, and based on your examples to support it, it certainly doesn't make any sense.

Hmmm, well, I can see why my statement earlier may be taken as a jab against other composers, but again, I really meant to disrespect, and there's no need to be offended. Like I said, I was just expressing my own personal opinion (this is what I think), explaining why I admire JW, like many others have done before and after me: Indy4, Maurizio, KM etc.

It would be more relevant and helpful to the discussion, I think, if you told us why you disagree with me, why some other composer (say, Thomas Newman) has a better understanding of a movie scene, etc.

This is music--art--we're dealing with here, so everything is subjective. There is no right or wrong here. It's all a matter of personal taste.

[Quintus 5,399]

But Josh, personal taste and measured critique aren't mutually exclusive of each other.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Wojo 2,453]

Well, his music contains moments of extraordinary beauty that no other composer can match, including all the dead classical ones

This opening opinion is pure blind fanboy arrogance -- which naturally gets a thumbs up across the board from the other fanboys -- but it nullifies any objectivity you tried to maintain for the rest of your argument. #1, you don't listen to enough dead classical composers to make this statement, and #2, only a little man makes himself feel better by raising Williams up by putting his predecessors and contemporaries down. Which is all the rest of your argument does.

If putting Williams on the top pedestal as the bestest music maker in all of history makes you feel better, go for it, but it's a crock of shit, really. Williams never asked for any of this blind fanboy devotion or intended for his "art" to be a competitive activity that would have people rating him superior than any artist that came before -- artists whose shoulders he stood atop in order to satisfy the emotional needs of a frikking movie -- yet you feel obligated to give it as if the sun won't shine or the crops won't grow unless you provide your love, faith, devotion, and undying loyalty.

[Brónach 1,301]

I agree, that was a quite exaggerated and pointless remark.

[publicist 4,643]

"Measured critique". Now, that's an hilarious expression.

And surely the antidote to knee-jerk messageboard conversations. It's rather moot discussing, anyway. We all have learned that being a fan of one composer includes the irresistible urge to put other composers down (thanks again to Josh for so majestically proving this point). It's the same with sports, music, literature and so on.

But in the end, it's all about taking online discussions too serious.

[Quintus 5,399]

"Measured critique". Now, that's an hilarious expression.

I'm sure it is, in your world of breathtakingly unfunny "comedy". Not that I'd ever want to discourage you from acting the office joker with your Tweety Pie bow-tie sitting happily below your chin.

[publicist 4,643]

We have lots of fun where i live!

[alicebrallice 134]

It would be more relevant and helpful to the discussion, I think, if you told us why you disagree with me, why some other composer (say, Thomas Newman) has a better understanding of a movie scene, etc.

This is music--art--we're dealing with here, so everything is subjective. There is no right or wrong here. It's all a matter of personal taste.

if you could just describe what a deeper understanding of a movie scene would result in, in your opinion?

why I disagree with you? why I think your statement is wrong? that JW has a deeper and better understanding of any given scene in a movie than any other film composer? because you don't have the knowledge or examples to support it. no one has. how does one measure such things? you make it sound like it would automatically result in a better and more complex, memorable and beautiful piece of music when that's not the case at all. he could have a different understanding that you happen to prefer. why say it's deeper?

and that's why I wouldn't and never have stated such things. even about thomas newman.

[Quintus 5,399]

We have lots of fun where i live!

Methinks you jumped the gun (you posted whilst I was replying to BB )

Anyway, I edited in the quote part. Don't you just hate it when that happens?

Well, his music contains moments of extraordinary beauty that no other composer can match, including all the dead classical ones

This opening opinion is pure blind fanboy arrogance -- which naturally gets a thumbs up across the board from the other fanboys -- but it nullifies any objectivity you tried to maintain for the rest of your argument. #1, you don't listen to enough dead classical composers to make this statement, and #2, only a little man makes himself feel better by raising Williams up by putting his predecessors and contemporaries down. Which is all the rest of your argument does.

If putting Williams on the top pedestal as the bestest music maker in all of history makes you feel better, go for it, but it's a crock of shit, really. Williams never asked for any of this blind fanboy devotion or intended for his "art" to be a competitive activity that would have people rating him superior than any artist that came before -- artists whose shoulders he stood atop in order to satisfy the emotional needs of a frikking movie -- yet you feel obligated to give it as if the sun won't shine or the crops won't grow unless you provide your love, faith, devotion, and undying loyalty.

What else did you expect? This is KM we're talking about.

[Ren 75]

king mark, on 10 July 2012 - 02:21 AM, said:

Well, his music contains moments of extraordinary beauty that no other composer can match, including all the dead classical ones

uhhhhhhh, wow.

Can I just say, "Respighi, Pines of Rome" Orff "Ave Formossissima"

[Wojo 2,453]

This is the same KM that says everything John Williams did before a certain point -- either pre-Jaws or in the early 60s -- is irrelevant. You can't put a man on a pedestal like that with strings attached. And then get so many people to like it, give it thumbs up, or other heaping piles of unreserved agreement, but not say anything in response to the stupidity.