Do you have to watch the movie first before listening to its score?

[Chewy 2,391]

A question I've asked myself many times! When a new score from a composer that I like comes out, I usually always listen to it even if I don't know anything about the movie!

[Lord Zimmer 211]

No, but I guess it would be kind of unfair to the composer to say the OST is 'bad' if you don't like it listening to it without context because it might work well within the movie. However it's something I have done a lot, particularly if the movie itself doesn't interest me very much but the composers work does (e.g. JNH).

[Jurassic Shark 12,075]

The question could just as well have been rephrased to Do you have OCD?

[John 2,032]

Not really. For scores to movies I haven’t seen, I listen to them purely as a separate work of music, free from the context of the film. 

[Ollie 1,059]

Nope, I always listen to the score first if it comes out before the film.

 

 

[Oomoog the Ecstatic 314]

I always watch the movie muted with subtitles first, so I can score it in my head. Then I listen to the lesser, pathetic score and make critiques and comparisons.

[Jurassic Shark 12,075]

I believe you.

[The Illustrious Jerry 3,356]

No, although I have enjoyed many film scores to movies I've seen, perhaps even more so in context with the actual film. But it's not always necessary. I think some of the very best scores remain that way even in isolation from the film to which they accompany. 

 

Granted, it's always cool to play it out in your head like a mini spotting session (i.e. "So at this point so-and-so is doing this, and it's interestingly underscored in this way..."). I do this all the time to film scores I know well enough in terms of their on-screen counterparts. 

 

But some of my favourite film scores are to films I've never seen, and I take them as wonderful pieces of music without feeling the need to have context. In some cases, soundtracks are so enjoyable that I watch the film just because. In other scenarios, I don't want to   lower my esteem for them by being dissapointed with the context.

 

At this point, everything I listen to has been kept on pretty good tabs in terms of having the film to score experience that is the most enjoyable, whether that mean not viewing it for a certain amount of time or ever.

 

That's where I stand on the question. I think that that limitation is unnecessary, especially if you love a score but don't even care for the film it goes to. 

[Thor 7,504]

No, never.

[Bilbo 3,709]

Depends on the composer. 

 

Horner, Williams, Shore etc. no problem.

 

Some modern stuff? Nah, need to see the film for context

[Loert 2,511]

No, because I don't have time to watch the movie to every score I listen to!

[Kasey Kockroach 2,344]

No, because that would require watching War Horse.

[The Illustrious Jerry 3,356]

27 minutes ago, Bilbo said:

Depends on the composer. 

 

Horner, Williams, Shore etc. no problem.

Shore is a really cool example, in my opinion. I remember listening to the OST for The Fellowship of the Ring before I saw the film, and I've always loved those scores.

 

Shore delivers such an operatic magnum opus that it works incredibly well without context, and possibly even better with. Heck, he arranged a concert symphony based off written material, and that certainly requires no context. I suppose it helps to understand the relation of the themes to the characters and why they take on that role, especially with such an extensive Wagnerian leitmotific catalogue. 

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Film first. I AM a film fan first score fan second.

What a bunch of weirdos 

[Bespin 8,481]

Yes, when it’s possible.

 

Except for suites, film music can’t really be dissociated from the movie it was composed for. The music is often tracked with the action in the movie, it flows depending of the editing of each scenes too, etc.

 

To see the movie helps to understand what’s going on the screen when the music is louder or quieter, etc.

 

It also alllow to judge the ability of a composer to write the proper music for a certain scene. 

 

 

 

[Oomoog the Ecstatic 314]

I prefer video games to films, but only due to the best ones telling a much more tangible story and atmosphere that literally transports your whole body to a new existence: I could only perfectly understand this phenomenon once I played games like Grim Fandango and Until Dawn, highly story-based exploration games, but there are a lot of other good ones.

 

Although I admit my favorite movies are the 3 Ms: Mulholland Drive, The Matrix, and Memento, movies altogether provide just a different type of experience, it's hard to explain. They're more focused, where as games for me are more reflective, holistic and real. Yes I think it's an upward trend in evolution that provides a lot of duds just like anything else has.

[Fabulin 3,511]

.

[Chen G. 3,949]

44 minutes ago, The Illustrious Jerry said:

Shore delivers such an operatic [score...]that it works incredibly well without context.

 

Bu...but the whole point of opera is that it is music set to live action! 

 

Personally, if a score has a concert arrangement, I could listen to that after the manner of an overture. But I always consider the film the ultimate presentation of the score, and that's where it should be heard first.

 

A lot of the power of film music, especially one which is leitmotivic in nature, is in its associative power: it evokes images and beats from the film in your mind. The impact of such music is therefore highly dependant on whether the images and actions it conjures up are something which you liked as a viewer.

[John 2,032]

Stop

[Oomoog the Ecstatic 314]

36 minutes ago, Fabulin said:

Oh my

 

I know! It's pretty bad. I don't watch enough movies, and I created this algorithmic software that recommended me thousands of them to watch. No time. And when I watch older movies, they never become favorites. I think the minds of young people have evolved to a different dimension of perception, whether it's good or bad seems subjective. Now I'm more into VR than movies, I've had alien adventures on other planets and frightening experiences that dwarf any movie I've ever seen, because everything nowadays feels much more real. My dream is to become a computer, although soon the computers probably won't want us.

[bollemanneke 3,348]

Yes. I stopped listening to scores I didn't know the stories about a long time ago. Music only works in context for me.

[Fabulin 3,511]

 

.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Scores are usually presented best in the movies themselves. For instance, Attack of the Clones.

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

This is a twofold question.

 

Do I have to see the film first to appreciate the score? No. At least not most of the time. In fact, I have tons of soundtrack CDs where I've never seen the film the music was written for. In quite a lot of cases, I'm interested in seeing the movie at some point, but by far not in all, and when I am, it's mostly because the music and/or the track titles have triggered my interest in the story, not because I want more context for the music.

 

But, as I've said before, I've come to consciously enjoy first experiencing a score to a long expected film in the film. Mostly because it heightens the impact of the film, but also because it can do that for the music, if it's a film I'm really interested in. First hearing the history of the Ring motif while seeing the words "The Lord of the Rings" appear on screen after feverishly waiting for it for years was a stunning moment. And I can barely imagine what it must have been like to sit in a theatre in 1977 and hear that opening blast of the Star Wars main title.

2 hours ago, Chen G. said:

A lot of the power of film music, especially one which is leitmotivic in nature, is in its associative power: it evokes images and beats from the film in your mind. The impact of such music is therefore highly dependant on whether the images and actions it conjures up are something which you liked as a viewer.

 

No. There are plenty of cases where I did *not* like the film, or parts of it, or at least not nearly as much as the music. If the music is good, I don't have to think of the film while listening to it. There are even cases where I appreciate the story the film fails to tell well, because the music does it so much better. Case in point: The Omen. Not a bad film, by any means, but I've always though it doesn't live up to its potential. But the music does. It actually sometimes makes me long to see the film again, and when I do watch it, I'm reminded of why I'm always somewhat disappointed by it - because it doesn't do the story justice on the same level the music does. If that made me appreciate the music any less, a significant number of my favourite scores wouldn't be favourites. 

[SteveMc 2,674]

2 hours ago, Chen G. said:

The impact of such music is therefore highly dependant on whether the images and actions it conjures up are something which you liked as a viewer.

No.

[Ii2 210]

2 hours ago, Fabulin said:

Yes. There has been debates on if Borodin is human.

[SteveMc 2,674]

For me, the music is primary.  Howe a score works on its own is more important than how it works in context.  Most times, I have heard the score first, like for Schindler's List, or Ben-Hur.  Other favorite scores, like An American Tail, Empire of the sun, Patton, Superman, were first heard when watching the movie.  They are revisited often, but apart from the films.  I don't rely on memories of their images to enjoy the scores.  I let the music speak for itself, and if, like with many Classical composers, the music has or is helping a story, I have that in back of mind too.  But, that, to me, should not be the primary focus.  If we let the films themselves completely dictate how we approach or how we feel about film scores, we are proving right those who think film music is a lesser art form, dependent as it is on another.

[Arpy 4,145]

My experience has been quite varied on this topic. I used to race to hear the score before seeing the film, trying to absorb everything I could about the music and listening to it as a separate piece, but nowadays I've often found the musical experience less enjoyable than if I had heard the score with the film. When I was a child and later a teenager, my only way to listen to the music most of the time was through the film (before I knew I was a film score fan). Back then my love for film music came from experiencing it in the film.

 

My approach these days is to listen to maybe one or two cues or tracks, then I make time to see the film because the context of most scores is the primary point of engagement with the music - it's how I can establish any bond or link with the themes and characters. So unlike many of the responses here, the contextual basis is the most important thing for me because it's a part of the fabric and the reason for the music existing.

 

This isn't to say that I don't enjoy listening to scores removed from their context, in fact most of my listening habits around film scores would be listening to the scores as good 'mood' music, and that's especially the case for shit films with good scores!

[publicist 4,643]

5 hours ago, Marian Schedenig said:

 It actually sometimes makes me long to see the film again, and when I do watch it, I'm reminded of why I'm always somewhat disappointed by it - because it doesn't do the story justice on the same level the music does. If that made me appreciate the music any less, a significant number of my favourite scores wouldn't be favourites. 

 

Not less, but my imagination sure did worked overtime on (i remember in particular) 'Night Crossing', 'The Fury' and 'Lionheart' so sseing those seemed to dwarf them just a bit. 'The Fury' i learned to appreciate a bit more (but that carousel scene remains a huge disappointment) but with the other two it was a total loss. The same for many of Morricone's more imaginative thriller scores from the early 70's where the professional sheen of the music towered over the threadbare stuff with jerky edits tc.

[Nick Parker 3,040]

I would  figure most of us here would say "No" to the topic question, with the standard example of Goldsmith. But asking a question riding off of Marian in the opposite direction:  have there been any times when you heard the music in a film and disliked it, only to discover it in a standalone format and enjoy it much more? 

 

I remember watching The Terminal as a freshman in high school; I enjoyed everything about the movie except the score. As my class watched it, I thought, Man, this would be so much better if John Williams did the music." ... A couple months later, I was browsing Amazon for Williams albums to add to my then starting-out collection, and guess what I find!

 

After acknowledging the cognitive dissonance from buying the album purely because of Williams' name even after having not liked the music at all in the film, I gave it a listen...and the conclusion I reached was I had no idea what the hell I was paying attention to when I saw the movie. Most of the tracks were awesome! 

 

Since then I'd become a little more wary of totally trusting my first instincts there.

[Holko 9,526]

It's perfectly fine to just look at it as a piece of music, pretend the movie doesn't exist. I myself have virtually no memories of Lincoln, have never seen and not planning to see Memoirs of a Geisha and The Post, but like all 3 of the OSTs fine enough. However you're then overlooking all the aspects specific to it being a score: spotting; strange choices in the middle of cues that are not apparent without the picture; how the composer accentuates sync points or makes them disappear; the exact meaning and connections of themes through seeing everything they underscore, stuff like that, which were all very intentionally done by the composer and intended to be a part of the score - so it's a format where you can only get the full intent by watching the film as well. Though at times it's cut up or has bits dialled out, so sometimes I even do a quick little iso score with all the cues, removed or tracked over or dialled down or rescored to fully make sense of them. Frequently have I listened to bits of a score until knowing them by heart, then marvelled at sync points and the purpose of little flourishes after seeing its film again after years - like E.T.'s finale.

 

The three scores I own where I don't really like the film and not planning to see it again are Superman, Lost World: Jurassic Park and Solo's OST.

 

To Nick: I decide I wouldn't much like to listen to scores on their own when I hear them in film relatively often - until I do hear something special and decide to give it a chance on its own as well. Still I usually watch the film first if I'm interested in both it and the score, or even mostly just the score, I guess I like experiencing new films more than sitting down and doing nothing but listening to something new I don't have any anchor for.

 

SWs I always see first - that was easy with TLJ which I saw the day before opening day, it was not the case with Solo where Powell was pretty much my only interest in the whole thing, and Rogue One deterred me from wanting to listen to the score on its own very quickly. I can't wait for How to Train Your Dragon 3 to arrive digitally so I can finally see it and listen to the score afterwards for the first time!

[A24 4,333]

9 hours ago, bollemanneke said:

Yes. I stopped listening to scores I didn't know the stories about a long time ago. Music only works in context for me.

 

Strange. Can't you make up your own context? It's music after all. It doesn't need context.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

10 hours ago, The Illustrious Jerry said:

Heck, he arranged a concert symphony based off written material.

 

Actually I think John Mauceri did that.

 

1 minute ago, Alexcremers said:

 

Strange. Can't you make up your own context? It's music after all.

 

Exactly! When I listen to a score I usually don't think of the film or scene it was written for at all.

[A24 4,333]

4 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

Exactly! When I listen to a score I usually don't think of the film or scene it was written for at all.

 

Well, that's something we have in common then. I think the emotions music can give you often transcends the images it was written for. 

[Arpy 4,145]

@Nick Parker Good question! Several times I've experienced that, the most prominent examples have been Memoirs of a Geisha, Spider-Man Homecoming, The Hobbit scores (many times). I don't know how much that is to do with the mixing or the editing or how the writing fits the visuals...

 

Sometimes hearing it in context first can be the worst way because it's something competing for attention with the visuals, story and sfx and often I leave the cinemas with a romanticized version of the music in my mind to be disappointed when I listen to it on the album and it doesn't match the version in my memory!

[Nick Parker 3,040]

6 hours ago, Arpy said:

Sometimes hearing it in context first can be the worst way because it's something competing for attention with the visuals, story and sfx and often I leave the cinemas with a romanticized version of the music in my mind to be disappointed when I listen to it on the album and it doesn't match the version in my memory!

 

Going off of what several others such as Alex and Steef were saying, I think there are definitely times when associating the music with its intended context--there's that word again--can hurt the music, or at least your perception of it. I don't listen to much film music, but even with someone like John Williams, with a more rarefied selection of films than some other film composers...do you _really_ want to imagine, I don't know, Kevin Costner sitting on a bench with Donald Sutherland when you listen to something as profoundly stirring as "Arlington"?

 

In fact, on some level, I wouldn't be surprised if it's one of the reasons all of us are attracted to Williams' music: being the real composer he is, I suspect that after he gets the general feeling and timing for a scene down in his head, he turns off the film in a sense--that context-- and just writes music with those abstract goalposts somewhere other than the very front of his brain.

 

And of course there's all the concert suites he writes. Really think Williams could write such a full-bodied, melancholy powerhouse as "Reflections" by just sticking with scenes of Christopher Walken hunched in a bar?