The Definitive John Williams Plagiarism/Homage Thread

[Tom 5,562]

1 hour ago, GerateWohl said:

Or he travelled back to inspire Dvorak.

 

[Loert 2,934]

I was listening to Charles Mingus' "What Is This Thing Called Love" and came across this trumpet lick at 0:31 which sounded familiar:

 

 

(3:41)

 

[BB-8 4,893]

I can hear a shark...

https://youtu.be/v5jXUhdMygs?feature=shared&t=1870

[Muad'Dib 1,929]

 

Kylo Ren?

[BB-8 4,893]

But they're all dead...and loving it.

[Jay 42,232]

17 hours ago, Muad'Dib said:

 

Kylo Ren?

 

I never heard that before, that's fun stuff!

[Nemesis 280]

22 hours ago, Muad'Dib said:

 

Kylo Ren?

 

That has strong Map Room Dawn vibes!

[BB-8 4,893]

38 minutes ago, Nemesis said:

 

That has strong Map Room Dawn vibes!

Also some Goldsmith vibes.

[Darth Mulder 157]

 

 

 

 

[Jurassic Shark 14,820]

Are you saying JW is a thief?

[Jesse 71]

On 18/05/2025 at 11:13 AM, Darth Mulder said:

 

 

 

 

Isn't there a classical piece that also sounds quite similar to Hook-Napped?
I forgot which one it was—does anybody know?

[Loert 2,934]

2 hours ago, Jesse said:

Isn't there a classical piece that also sounds quite similar to Hook-Napped?
I forgot which one it was—does anybody know?

 

Maybe not the one but it reminds me of Franck's "Le chasseur maudit". Particularly moments like this:

 

 

The Hook track has the same swirling strings/winds, though unlike the Franck they form more of the foreground.

[Jurassic Shark 14,820]

7:45

 

[Jesse 71]

I remembered wich piece i was thinking of that sounded similar to "Hook-Napped". It was "Night on Bald Mountain" by Mussorgsky.
 

Of wich the very beginning actually also has a similar Idea to this: 
At 3:56

 

[Tom 5,562]

On 18/05/2025 at 4:20 AM, Jurassic Shark said:

Are you saying JW is a thief?

Only of books.  

[Romão 2,403]

On 23/04/2025 at 4:55 PM, Jay said:

 

I never heard that before, that's fun stuff!

 

It's one my holy grails

[Jesse 71]

On 19/05/2025 at 9:16 PM, Jesse said:

I remembered wich piece i was thinking of that sounded similar to "Hook-Napped". It was "Night on Bald Mountain" by Mussorgsky.
 

Of wich the very beginning actually also has a similar Idea to this: 
At 3:56

 

Can someone tell me if the timestamp i included in the video on the bottom is working cause its not working when i press play. Just for me to know for the future

[bruce marshall 1,437]

🤔

[Maurizio 5,781]

This whole thread makes me think how Williams has been probably the most scrutinized composer in history when it comes to the alleged "theft" in his music. It's really incredible that there are still people spending time in wanting to bring the final proof that JW is "a scam."

 

Are there other examples of composers getting this kind of constant, hammering scrutiny ever or since? Were Mozart and Beethoven pointed like this during their times? It's known that Stravinsky got slack because of the way he systematically reused folkloric material in some of his compositions, but none like the one that Williams is getting since... well, almost 50 years now.

 

My question is: what all these examples should prove, in the end? Artistic dishonesty? Lack of imagination? Shameless attitude towards musical creation?

 

I honestly believe that 99% of such critique always comes from a point of total lack of understanding of how music works and are just a way to instill drops of poison towards how an artist is perceived by the audience.

[GerateWohl 5,875]

44 minutes ago, Maurizio said:

This whole thread makes me think how Williams has been probably the most scrutinized composer in history when it comes to the alleged "theft" in his music. It's really incredible that there are still people spending time in wanting to bring the final proof that JW is "a scam."

 

Are there other examples of composers getting this kind of constant, hammering scrutiny ever or since? Were Mozart and Beethoven pointed like this during their times? It's known that Stravinsky got slack because of the way he systematically reused folkloric material in some of his compositions, but none like the one that Williams is getting since... well, almost 50 years now.

 

My question is: what all these examples should prove, in the end? Artistic dishonesty? Lack of imagination? Shameless attitude towards musical creation?

 

I honestly believe that 99% of such critique always comes from a point of total lack of understanding of how music works and are just a way to instill drops of poison towards how an artist is perceived by the audience.

Why are you seing these findings or comparisons as any kind of criticism? And ŵhy are you asuming that people who compare music to other music are lacking an understanding how music works? It's just a way to deal with the music, evaluate possible influences. Comparison is one of the fundamental tools if not the most basic tool of describing something, classifying it for yourself, finding new ways to experience it.

A musical composition is not a fingerprint. Why should it not be compared? Why should similarities not be evaluated? What kind of musical understanding is that?

[Jurassic Shark 14,820]

The drama...

[BachSkywalker 106]

1 hour ago, Maurizio said:

This whole thread makes me think how Williams has been probably the most scrutinized composer in history when it comes to the alleged "theft" in his music. It's really incredible that there are still people spending time in wanting to bring the final proof that JW is "a scam."

 

Are there other examples of composers getting this kind of constant, hammering scrutiny ever or since? Were Mozart and Beethoven pointed like this during their times? It's known that Stravinsky got slack because of the way he systematically reused folkloric material in some of his compositions, but none like the one that Williams is getting since... well, almost 50 years now.

 

My question is: what all these examples should prove, in the end? Artistic dishonesty? Lack of imagination? Shameless attitude towards musical creation?

 

I honestly believe that 99% of such critique always comes from a point of total lack of understanding of how music works and are just a way to instill drops of poison towards how an artist is perceived by the audience.

Yes, many classical composers have been criticized for similar things. Stravinsky supposedly derided Vivaldi as self-plagiarizing, saying that he wrote the same concerto 500 times over. It's probably more pronounced now as we have access to way more music, not to mention copyright laws are more stringent than in earlier times. 

 

As for Williams, my sense is that he gets more flack for this kind of thing because he has a level of fame and recognition that most composers don't even remotely have. I think it also can be attributed to the fact that film music is still not seen on the same level of sophistication as "concert hall music", although that does seem to be every so slowly changing. 

[Jurassic Shark 14,820]

On 19/05/2025 at 9:16 PM, Jesse said:

I remembered wich piece i was thinking of that sounded similar to "Hook-Napped". It was "Night on Bald Mountain" by Mussorgsky.
 

Of wich the very beginning actually also has a similar Idea to this: 
At 3:56

 

 

Theft!

[Maurizio 5,781]

23 minutes ago, GerateWohl said:

Why are you seing these findings or comparisons as any kind of criticism? And ŵhy are you asuming that people who compare music to other music are lacking an understanding how music works? It's just a way to deal with the music, evaluate possible influences. Comparison is one of the fundamental tools if not the most basic tool of describing something, classifying it for yourself, finding new ways to experience it.

A musical composition is not a fingerprint. Why should it not be compared? Why should similarities not be evaluated? What kind of musical understanding is that?

 

I was not referring to specific people or examples made by members here of course, but more to the general attitude that critics had towards John Williams and his allegedly tendency to steal from others that is also exemplified by some of the examples here. Mind you, I respect anyone's opinion and in this thread I agree it's mostly an innocent and fun game to just find similarities. However, many people take this attitude too damn seriously and I usually find it a sterile exercise and something that usually has a hidden agenda of discrediting the artist, especially when using poisonous words like "plagiarism".

 

Almost all music is literally based around the concept of repetition and imitation. Every composer in history (at least those who learned to respect their muse) are part of a continuum. Once one accept it, then it's much more liberating to enjoy pretty much every piece of music without the need of cataloguing it, indexing it and finally rank it.

 

Just my two cents, of course.

[Edmilson 10,347]

16 minutes ago, Jurassic Shark said:

 

Theft!

"The Theme Thief"

[Jurassic Shark 14,820]

20 minutes ago, Maurizio said:

I was not referring to specific people or examples made by members here of course

 

Are you saying you were not referring to the examples made in this thread in the following paragraph?

 

1 hour ago, Maurizio said:

My question is: what all these examples should prove, in the end? Artistic dishonesty? Lack of imagination? Shameless attitude towards musical creation?

 

[GerateWohl 5,875]

3 hours ago, Maurizio said:

However, many people take this attitude too damn seriously and I usually find it a sterile exercise and something that usually has a hidden agenda of discrediting the artist, especially when using poisonous words like "plagiarism".

I still don't see the point why you see that attitude in any posters in this thread. I think, it's just kind of a conspiracy theory of yours.

 

The intentions might be different in a classical music purists forum. But we are here in a John Williams fan forum. 

[Loert 2,934]

We post these similarities because we are fans of JW's music and discovering the music that influenced him is what fans do.

 

It is not a critique of John Williams at all to make such a comparison by itself...it is only a critique when you follow the comparison with some kind of additional charge of deliberate plagiarism or theft. People who make such accusations often don't understand how musical composition works, or at least don't want to understand. Mostly they are only interested in signalling their supposed "knowledge" of classical music to make themselves appear smarter than they really are.

 

I should add that JWFan is also a very "ironical" forum and sometimes when I make a comparison I do it in a kind of tongue-in-cheek way, as if I'm criticising JW when I'm really not.

19 hours ago, Jesse said:

Can someone tell me if the timestamp i included in the video on the bottom is working cause its not working when i press play. Just for me to know for the future

 

Not working for me mate. Your link should end in something like

?t=104

or

?t=56

(where the number at the end is the timestamp in seconds you want to start playback from)

[bruce marshall 1,437]

2 hours ago, GerateWohl said:

 

 

The intentions might be different in a classical music purists forum. But we are here in a John Williams fan forum. 

Yup

2 hours ago, Loert said:

We post these similarities because we are fans of JW's music and discovering the music that influenced him is what fans do.

 

It is not a critique of John Williams at all to make such a comparison by itself...it is only a critique when you follow the comparison with some kind of additional charge of deliberate plagiarism or theft. People who make such accusations often don't understand how musical composition works, or at least don't want to understand. Mostly they are only interested in signalling their supposed "knowledge" of classical music to make themselves appear smarter than they really are.

 

I should add that JWFan is also a very "ironical" forum ...

Yep

[Jesse 71]

10 hours ago, Maurizio said:

This whole thread makes me think how Williams has been probably the most scrutinized composer in history when it comes to the alleged "theft" in his music. It's really incredible that there are still people spending time in wanting to bring the final proof that JW is "a scam."

 

Are there other examples of composers getting this kind of constant, hammering scrutiny ever or since? Were Mozart and Beethoven pointed like this during their times? It's known that Stravinsky got slack because of the way he systematically reused folkloric material in some of his compositions, but none like the one that Williams is getting since... well, almost 50 years now.

 

My question is: what all these examples should prove, in the end? Artistic dishonesty? Lack of imagination? Shameless attitude towards musical creation?

 

I honestly believe that 99% of such critique always comes from a point of total lack of understanding of how music works and are just a way to instill drops of poison towards how an artist is perceived by the audience.

This sort of talk mostly comes from musically inept people with no knowledge of Williams’ music, who once heard that Star Wars was apparently stolen from Holst and are now trying to sound smart and superior, showcasing how deep they are into classical music. As you and Loert already pointed out quite adequately, these people don’t really understand how music works. But I don’t think you have to worry about many people in this thread thinking that way.
I, for one, find the connections between music quite interesting, whether it’s between Beethoven and Brahms, or Williams and Ravel, or whether it’s even a conscious or totally incidental connection.

I think these sorts of accusations were and still are thrown at Williams disproportionately often, mainly because he is so famous and popular even among regular people. When something is popular, it always invites others to dislike or look down on it.

But the good thing is, with time, as with all things, the longer ago they were, the respect and reverence for John Williams will only increase, and clueless people claiming that he is actually a fraud will be fewer and fewer, as Williams' status as an established composer and a legend will increase further and further, especially after he is gone.

5 hours ago, Loert said:

Not working for me mate. Your link should end in something like

?t=104

or

?t=56

(where the number at the end is the timestamp in seconds you want to start playback from)

Interesting, because I know how it works, and the link I posted did have a timestamp at the end. But for some reason it sometimes still doesn’t work. I say sometimes because it has worked in other threads where I posted links with timestamps.

[bruce marshall 1,437]

On 21/02/2023 at 12:41 PM, Sunshine Reger said:

My contributions to this thread are usually in jest. While Saint-Saëns was a titan in his own right, and an underrated one, too, Williams is still the better composer of the two imho.

The arrangement of his Organ Symphony by Westlake in BABE - " If I Had Words"- is  a definite improvement and has become the definitive version!

[Maurizio 5,781]

15 hours ago, Jurassic Shark said:

Are you saying you were not referring to the examples made in this thread in the following paragraph?

 

Some of the examples made in this 10+ years conversation are indeed some of the dear warhorses of Williams' detractors, but I wasn't necessarily pointing out at them or, worse, at the people who posted them here. As I was going thru the thread, some reflections popped out in my mind and I posed them as the questions I made above.

 

12 hours ago, GerateWohl said:

I still don't see the point why you see that attitude in any posters in this thread. I think, it's just kind of a conspiracy theory of yours.

 

The intentions might be different in a classical music purists forum. But we are here in a John Williams fan forum. 

 

No "conspiracy theory" whatsoever, mate. And my comments weren't an accusation of any sorts to any of the posters of this thread. Sorry if this touched you personally and sorry if my comments came off as confrontational or disparaging. It wasn't my intention at all. As I said above, they're just reflections that popped out in my mind in a thread that has the word "plagiarism" in its title... I know 99% of the members here don't use that word disparagingly towards JW and a lot of the examples are made more either in jest or as innocent discoveries than as a serious attempt of discrediting JW, so really, no hard feelings toward anyone on my part!

 

11 hours ago, Loert said:

We post these similarities because we are fans of JW's music and discovering the music that influenced him is what fans do.

 

It is not a critique of John Williams at all to make such a comparison by itself...it is only a critique when you follow the comparison with some kind of additional charge of deliberate plagiarism or theft. People who make such accusations often don't understand how musical composition works, or at least don't want to understand. Mostly they are only interested in signalling their supposed "knowledge" of classical music to make themselves appear smarter than they really are.

 

I should add that JWFan is also a very "ironical" forum and sometimes when I make a comparison I do it in a kind of tongue-in-cheek way, as if I'm criticising JW when I'm really not.

 

Yes! All of this. Thank you so much for his comment @Loert... It was exactly the type of reply I hoped for. I think you're so right when you mention how people using these claims as accusations don't understand (or don't want to) how musical creation takes place and it's used more as a virtue signaling-type of attitude.

 

6 hours ago, Jesse said:

This sort of talk mostly comes from musically inept people with no knowledge of Williams’ music, who once heard that Star Wars was apparently stolen from Holst and are now trying to sound smart and superior, showcasing how deep they are into classical music. As you and Loert already pointed out quite adequately, these people don’t really understand how music works. But I don’t think you have to worry about many people in this thread thinking that way.
I, for one, find the connections between music quite interesting, whether it’s between Beethoven and Brahms, or Williams and Ravel, or whether it’s even a conscious or totally incidental connection.

I think these sorts of accusations were and still are thrown at Williams disproportionately often, mainly because he is so famous and popular even among regular people. When something is popular, it always invites others to dislike or look down on it.

But the good thing is, with time, as with all things, the longer ago they were, the respect and reverence for John Williams will only increase, and clueless people claiming that he is actually a fraud will be fewer and fewer, as Williams' status as an established composer and a legend will increase further and further, especially after he is gone.

 

Very well said. Thank you so much for this comment. You too perfectly got what I meant with my questions. Again, I don't have any problem whatsoever with anyone who just points out a similarity, either deliberate or unconscious, in any piece by John Williams (or any other composer in that regard). I made this too many times in my life and got to discover a lot of great music and great composers because of it (Walton! Borodin! Delius!). I agree that virtuall all the fans here have the same attitude and that's fine. I just find it curious how this relate to the criticism that JW got for decades now in relation to this same topic and how it became a sort of trope even among his fans. But again, it's all good

[aj_vader 598]

Forgive the emotion here but this accusation of "John Williams is a thief" comes up time and time again, and it’s almost always centred around the comparison to Holst’s The Planets, particularly Mars. But when you actually break it down, we’re really only talking about one or two Star Wars cues that bear an audible resemblance, and even then, it's important to note that Mars was temp-tracked into the film by Lucas himself. Williams was asked to work within that textural and harmonic world. (Just for the few people that didn't already know that). I know that there are many more comparisons beyond Mars and Star Wars, I am just focusing on that because it's the one that I see coming up the most. 

 

Over the course of his career, Williams has composed an immense body of work. In the world of film scoring, to be entirely 100 per cent original is not only unrealistic, but it would likely result in something too contemporary or abstract to connect emotionally with the audience. In the film industry, if the music does not resonate on a broad emotional level, the composer simply will not get hired. Williams’ job has always been to write music that supports the story while appealing to a huge, diverse, global audience. That inevitably means drawing on musical languages that already carry strong cultural and emotional associations.

 

Holst’s Mars has, for better or worse, become the defining sound for war in orchestral music. That sound world now exists as part of the broader film scoring vocabulary, and Williams tapped into that, just as countless others have. But the crucial difference with Williams is that his music says something. It does not hide behind static textures or aimless harmonic pads, as much contemporary film and television music does. It is expressive, structured, and emotionally direct, which naturally makes its influences more visible.

 

I think that is part of why people feel compelled to single him out. His music is bold, confident, and draws on tradition. Perhaps there is also something deeper at play. Many of the accusations seem less about Williams himself and more about a protective instinct over the classical music. The truth is that film music, and especially Williams’ music, has become more culturally visible and beloved than much of the traditional concert repertoire. That popularity can make some feel defensive, as though the legitimacy of classical music is being undermined and things can become very emotive which I of course understand, just look at me here doing the same thing but in reverse, the irony is not lost on me. In reality, Williams has done more to introduce audiences to orchestral music than almost anyone alive, and I believe that deserves recognition rather than cynicism. Of course this is extremely biased towards Williams and I am naturally a John Williams fan though and through, but I like to think I am being objective here. 

 

As I undertstand it, It was considered a form of flattery and a doffing of the cap to other composers when they 'quoted' each others work. 

 

Check out 'Ode to Joy' by Mozart... 0.53

 

 

This was written before Beethoven's 9th Symphony for clarity. 

 

I think the concept of copyright has played a significant role in shaping this modern perception of music as something that can be wholly owned and fuels this specific narrative of 'Williams is a thief'. But in truth, nobody really owns music. As composers, we/they are all borrowing from a shared musical language that has evolved over centuries. When someone writes a piece of music, to me it simply means they arrived at that particular combination of sounds first (in layman's terms). This idea of strict ownership over musical ideas feels contrary to the spirit of creativity. It shifts the focus away from artistic expression and towards commercial control. While protecting creative work is of course important, this possessiveness around musical material often ends up stifling discussion and undermining the collaborative, evolving nature of the art form itself.

[Mr. Hooper 4,953]

Yeah, if I see another "clever" Holst comment under a John Williams YouTube video, I think I'll puke.

 

And the part in 'Main Title' that is practically a note-for-note copy is such a blatant and undisguised tip of the hat to Holst that to accuse Williams of "theft" would be to insult the man's intelligence.

 

He clearly wasn't trying to fool anyone here, guys. Lucas wanted Holst, so he gave him some.

[aj_vader 598]

31 minutes ago, Mr. Hooper said:

Yeah, if I see another "clever" Holst comment under a John Williams YouTube video, I think I'll puke.

 

And the part in 'Main Title' that is practically a note-for-note copy is such a blatant and undisguised tip of the hat to Holst that to accuse Williams of "theft" would be to insult the man's intelligence.

 

He clearly wasn't trying to fool anyone here, guys. Lucas wanted Holst, so he gave him some.

Absolutely. 

 

From the new Disney documentary on Williams, it's highlighted how much the editor on Star Wars had an influence on the score, I don't know how accurate it is but they show specific recordings of classical music and he mentioned having discussions with Williams. I always thought Williams was answerable to Lucas only really, but it sounds more like the editor and the producer had a bigger 'say' in the music. 

[Poor_Man_S_HirschFeld 39]

I believe that this kind of snobbish attitude toward Williams will eventually recede entirely, as his position within the orchestral music canon becomes increasingly secure.

I generally do not pay attention to such comments when they appear on YouTube or classical music forums. That said, I understand how frustrating it can be when these opinions are voiced on television or radio by presenters who should know better—and who can’t be challenged in real time.

I also agree that both the modern definition of copyright and the Romantic-era concept of "originality" have shaped our current attitudes toward the reworking of existing artistic material. However, I don't think we should give artists a free pass when it comes to outright plagiarism only because "art doesn't happen in a vacuum".

There was a well-known, and admittedly very funny, comedian in Italy who copied entire routines from American comedians. When confronted, he tried to defend himself behind academic jargon and claiming he was 'quoting' in the same way that Monk riffed on Duke Ellington. But it was obvious he had simply taken advantage of the fact that performers like George Carlin or Emo Phillips were virtually unknown in Italy at the time.

 

This is the very reason why I cherish both academic discourse and fan-community based discussions: when done honestly they help bring clarity on the matter.

[GerateWohl 5,875]

Just another cent on the "snobbish attitude towards Williams" from classical music fans.

I could complain about it, but actually I don't care and I should rather blame myself as I show almost the same snobbish attitude like many other John Williams fans when it comes to other modern film music composers. Like Hans Zimmer, Lorne Balfe etc.

 

Of course I claim, there are reasons for that and I have good arguments.

But probably the classical music experts have good arguments, too. 

The plagiarism argument is a very weak one in my view and I tend to not accept that, but there might be others.

I don't care.

 

The point I just want to make is, that before going into those emotional discussions like Maurizio did, we all should first sweep in front of our own door.

 

 

[Maurizio 5,781]

On 22/05/2025 at 1:41 PM, aj_vader said:

I think that is part of why people feel compelled to single him out. His music is bold, confident, and draws on tradition. Perhaps there is also something deeper at play. Many of the accusations seem less about Williams himself and more about a protective instinct over the classical music. The truth is that film music, and especially Williams’ music, has become more culturally visible and beloved than much of the traditional concert repertoire. That popularity can make some feel defensive, as though the legitimacy of classical music is being undermined and things can become very emotive which I of course understand, just look at me here doing the same thing but in reverse, the irony is not lost on me. In reality, Williams has done more to introduce audiences to orchestral music than almost anyone alive, and I believe that deserves recognition rather than cynicism. Of course this is extremely biased towards Williams and I am naturally a John Williams fan though and through, but I like to think I am being objective here.

 

You made a lot of very good and interesting points here. For decades, classical music elites acted as gatekeepers and this was a consequence of the post-WW2 political climate (check out John Mauceri's The War On Music, he offers some very interesting and provocative thoughts about all this) and film music ended up being flushed down the toilet because it represented something considered too commercial and lowbrow to be accepted within those strict parameters. The issue was that such elites turned the classical sphere into a ghetto where the audience was also thrown out of the hall, because a lot of the music written for the concert hall became difficult to relate with to the point of being unreachable unless you were a musical egghead. The worldwide success of John Williams was a sort of unexpected big bang that fired a renewed interest into something that had solid roots in classical tradition, but was extremely accessible, tuneful and relatable at the same time (the fact the music was attached to extremely popular films was a big push for sure, but we wouldn't be here discussing it if it wasn't something with real intrinsic value). So Williams and his music became the easy target for the snobs, or the musical intellighentsia, because he was a) contaminated with the commercial world of Hollywood and b) used a musical vernacular that was either ridiculed or fingerpointed as "theft". A lot has happened since then and I think we're now at a point where Williams survived all of those critics and was also able to win back some of them, so we probably shouldn't worry that much. But I think I'm being objective when I note that Williams has probably been the most scrutinized orchestral composer of the last 50 years.

 

2 hours ago, Poor_Man_S_HirschFeld said:

I generally do not pay attention to such comments when they appear on YouTube or classical music forums. That said, I understand how frustrating it can be when these opinions are voiced on television or radio by presenters who should know better—and who can’t be challenged in real time.

I also agree that both the modern definition of copyright and the Romantic-era concept of "originality" have shaped our current attitudes toward the reworking of existing artistic material. However, I don't think we should give artists a free pass when it comes to outright plagiarism only because "art doesn't happen in a vacuum".

There was a well-known, and admittedly very funny, comedian in Italy who copied entire routines from American comedians. When confronted, he tried to defend himself behind academic jargon and claiming he was 'quoting' in the same way that Monk riffed on Duke Ellington. But it was obvious he had simply taken advantage of the fact that performers like George Carlin or Emo Phillips were virtually unknown in Italy at the time.

 

I think it all boils down to the artist's integrity to survive any criticism of stealing/borrowing from other works. When done brazenly and with the mere intent of cutting corners short, I think one always ends up being exposed, especially in this era where pretty much everything is available at fingertips. In the case of film scores, we all know how temp track love and directors' very specific requests put composers into a very narrow corner and sometimes they just have to bow and do the copy. But there are ways to oblige without losing integrity and also with great gusto. I think that the first Star Wars score is a shining example of that.

 

On 22/05/2025 at 2:27 PM, aj_vader said:

From the new Disney documentary on Williams, it's highlighted how much the editor on Star Wars had an influence on the score, I don't know how accurate it is but they show specific recordings of classical music and he mentioned having discussions with Williams. I always thought Williams was answerable to Lucas only really, but it sounds more like the editor and the producer had a bigger 'say' in the music. 

 

It was a very collaborative effort in the end. Lucas had a specific idea of the sound he wanted, i.e. the classical symphonic style of early Hollywood films, but the temp track was put together by the editors, primarily Paul Hirsch, who was the one who suggested using excerpts from The Planets, etc. Hirsch explains the process very well (and with lots of behind the scenes stories) in his book A Long Time Ago, In a Cutting Room Far Far Away... Check it out.

 

1 hour ago, GerateWohl said:

Just another cent on the "snobbish attitude towards Williams" from classical music fans.

I could complain about it, but actually I don't care and I should rather blame myself as I show almost the same snobbish attitude like many other John Williams fans when it comes to other modern film music composers. Like Hans Zimmer, Lorne Balfe etc.

 

Of course I claim, there are reasons for that and I have good arguments.

But probably the classical music experts have good arguments, too. 

The plagiarism argument is a very weak one in my view and I tend to not accept that, but there might be others.

I don't care.

 

The point I just want to make is, that before going into those emotional discussions like Maurizio did, we all should first sweep in front of our own door.

 

I frankly don't understand your point and why such discussion should be turned into a moral debate. I don't think we're being emotional here. Some people (myself included) sometimes feel perhaps obliged to speak "in defense" of a favorite artist, but that wasn't the ignition of my thoughts I shared here. I'm well aware we all have bias toward things we're passionate about, but always shielding behing subjectivism is a quick way to get out of what could be a healthy discussion on these subjects.

[GerateWohl 5,875]

38 minutes ago, Maurizio said:

I frankly don't understand your point and why such discussion should be turned into a moral debate. I don't think we're being emotional here. Some people (myself included) sometimes feel perhaps obliged to speak "in defense" of a favorite artist, but that wasn't the ignition of my thoughts I shared here. I'm well aware we all have bias toward things we're passionate about, but always shielding behing subjectivism is a quick way to get out of what could be a healthy discussion on these subjects.

My point is just about widening the view of our point and adding context.

I was here just addind a thought to PPoor_Man_S_HirschFel's comment about musical snobs. No moral discussion intended. 

[bruce marshall 1,437]

Did you know.....?

Virtually every Tchaicovsky composition was panned on first performance, even Swan Lake!

Classical music critics don't even know anything about their alleged field of expertise, let alone film music or ballet

 

" Time kills critics"

[bruce marshall 1,437]

JW isn't the only victim of ignorant music critics 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/JohnBarryAppreciationSociety/permalink/10161651075540770/

[Tom Guernsey 3,191]

I always wonder what critics who complain about film music actually want film music to be? I guess in an ideal world it would be totally original (hah) and composers would have months or years to write the music. Even in ideal circumstances, composers don’t get very long to write the music for a film. Do critics expect every score to be dripping in originality? Is that the most important thing to them? It often feels like that’s the case to the exclusion of everything else.

 

I also find it particularly aggravating that critics who complained about film music often don’t seem to acknowledge the immense technical achievement of a long and complex score. So the theme from Star Wars sounds like Korngold or Holst or whatever. That’s not the be and end all of the score. They spent so long fixating on it sounding a bit like this or a bit like that, that all the good things and technical achievement of film music is completely missed by them. The ability to write two hours of music that hits any number of emotional beats as well as fitting to the picture in terms of timing has got to be a very challenging way to write. Especially longer ago when it was all on paper and with a Moviola and not on a computer with a million assistant composers.
 

Another thing I remember was from when I was at university, there were a couple of other people my age on film music mailing lists and newsgroups who were at university doing music. They start off being big film music fans but seem to have it beaten out of them by their tutors and just end up finding all the things wrong with John Williams or whoever. It was kind of depressing!

[GerateWohl 5,875]

40 minutes ago, Tom Guernsey said:

I always wonder what critics who complain about film music actually want film music to be?

I don't think that's the right question. They don't want better film music. Music to picture is already a crutch. Absolute music must stand on its own feet. A song that gets to the top of the charts only because it has a cool video clip or is song by a film star doesn't deserve to be called a great song because of that.

 

It's like asking a classic buffs, what would you like elevator music to be like? They would say, they don't care because in principle they see no value in elevator music.

[Tom 5,562]

On 22/05/2025 at 6:41 AM, aj_vader said:

Forgive the emotion here but this accusation of "John Williams is a thief" comes up time and time again

In all fairness, he did steal my heart.   

[bruce marshall 1,437]

On the other hand....

The folks at FSM/O never criticize. They even loved TPM!🙄

[Tom Guernsey 3,191]

7 hours ago, GerateWohl said:

I don't think that's the right question. They don't want better film music. Music to picture is already a crutch. Absolute music must stand on its own feet. A song that gets to the top of the charts only because it has a cool video clip or is song by a film star doesn't deserve to be called a great song because of that.

 

It's like asking a classic buffs, what would you like elevator music to be like? They would say, they don't care because in principle they see no value in elevator music.

Yeah, but if that's the case, they should just ignore it and stop complaining. Although I didn't really mean to put a question mark... was meant less more as a pondering statement than a direct question. I mean, I don't like rap or R'N'B or most pop music or heavy metal, but I don't go round complaining about it.

[bruce marshall 1,437]

If you play these two pieces overlapping each other they form a third composition!

Must be in the same key😎

 

 

 

 

[aj_vader 598]

On 24/05/2025 at 10:21 AM, GerateWohl said:

I don't think that's the right question. They don't want better film music. Music to picture is already a crutch. Absolute music must stand on its own feet.

 

Yes this is commonly what has been said by those types of critics. Some classical music critics have argued that film music is somehow 'lesser' because it is written to support the visuals, that it is not 'real' music because it serves another artform. But this is such a narrow view, especially when you consider how much classical music was written to serve something else as well. Dare I say Tchaikovsky’s Swan Lake, written for ballet, or Bizet’s Carmen, written for Opera. Mendelssohn composed music specifically to accompany Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream and Handel’s oratorios were created for religious stories. All of these are examples of composers working within another artform, just like film composers do today. So if anyone were to dismiss film music for being collaborative or functional, they would also need to question much of the classical repertoire, we would have to dismiss a huge part of the classical tradition as well, which we have thoroughly established and qualified in this thread as this is the very tradition from which most film music stylistically originates. The truth is, great music has always worked alongside other artforms, and film scores are just a modern version of that tradition. I think this ties back to what I mentioned earlier in the thread, the hostility toward film music likely stems from its popularity and the fact that it has taken the classical tradition and expanded on it in new and accessible ways. Do I dare say John Williams has been at the forefront of this? Yes, absolutely.

 

 

[Arnaud2 44]

Film music is to music what illustration art is to painting. The snobbery is very much alive. I wonder how Opera music manages to avoid the criticism and how scenes taken from the Bible, Greek mythology, military history or commissioned portraits as can be seen in every great museum in the world are not recognized for what they really are: commercial illustrations.

 

This thread is simultaneously funny, irritating and educational. It’s always wonderful to learn of great music one has never heard before. Thank you to those who share sometimes little known pieces in good spirit.

 

But for other posters who don’t seem to have much of an ear for music or an understanding of the music continuum it seems to be a somewhat pathetic challenge as soon as they hear a couple of notes that vaguely reminds them of something JW has written.

 

But on the whole, my feeling is that the title of this thread should not contain the word ‘plagiarism’. ‘Possible influences’ would be more benevolent and constructive.

 

It pains me that silly Williams haters can visit this great site kept alive by admirers of the Maestro’s work, find this thread on the first page and rejoice that Williams fans talk openly about plagiarism (as if it was a given) and can then use it to spread the silliest accusations.

 

 

 

 

On 23/5/2025 at 3:16 PM, GerateWohl said:

Just another cent on the "snobbish attitude towards Williams" from classical music fans.

I could complain about it, but actually I don't care and I should rather blame myself as I show almost the same snobbish attitude like many other John Williams fans when it comes to other modern film music composers. Like Hans Zimmer, Lorne Balfe etc.

 

Of course I claim, there are reasons for that and I have good arguments.

But probably the classical music experts have good arguments, too. 

The plagiarism argument is a very weak one in my view and I tend to not accept that, but there might be others.

I don't care.

 

The point I just want to make is, that before going into those emotional discussions like Maurizio did, we all should first sweep in front of our own door.

 

 

I don’t appreciate much of what I know of Hans Zimmer’s work but I can safely say there is no snobbery in my attitude. I’m sure the man has considerable talents. His approach to film music and his organization is more akin to a factory so very far from all traditional composers like Williams. I guess the next natural (or rather unnatural) step for a music factory is to use AI. A work of art reflects an artist’s point of view, some might say a bit of their soul. There lies the generosity of the artist in his gift to us. I was invited to a Zimmer concert recently and was surprised by how much the lack of generosity was showing. The bigger the orchestra the more it was obvious. It made me feel even more love and gratitude for Williams, Goldsmith and their peers.

[bruce marshall 1,437]

Fyi 

John Williams is not a " traditional" composer.

The vast majority of popular music ever created is the product of two or more people ( have you seen his jazz lps?)

A composer sitting alone at his desk, pencil and paper in hand, and writing music is an anomaly.

To hold up JW as the only  model of what a composer should be is ludicrous.

He is an artist who works in the way that is best for him. Others , have different traditions. Sometimes, I think JW fans are bigger snobs than the critics they disdain!

 

Btw I take the use of the word " plagiarism" in the thread title to be ironic/winking 😉: it's making fun of the idiots who use the term in earnest

 

PS I really don't care about the methods a composer uses. It's the end result that counts.

Zimmer critics ( who seem to be disproportionately JW fans)obsess over process - which is truly irrelevant. They scrutinize  ' credits' and don't seem to care about the quality of the music.

 

I don't get it 😵‍💫