Jump to content
TheUlyssesian

Thomas Newman's 1917 (2019)

Recommended Posts

Newman finally wins his Oscar?

 

First reactions for Sam Mendes' film out. Honest to god - these reactions feel like 'plants'. First of all, even with all of these being critics or media people, I refuse to believe all of them know who Thomas Newman is and are familiar with his style and work. Secondly, the score is not this insistently called out in film reactions these days at all. Maybe for Star Wars but not usually. And thirdly, even if the score is called out in reactions, the composer isn't usually name-checked so prominently. So all these reactions feel a big engineered or staged. But nevertheless something to look forward to. I like Newman. His work for Pixar for example is always excellent and he's a good composer.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, First TROS March Accolyte said:

Each of those shills should be asked straight if they realize that they are trying to steal the Oscar away from The Rise of Skywalker.

 

I have no hopes of Williams winning in any case. So with him out, it is at least going to a good composer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, TheUlyssesian said:

He has 3 already! 

And how many does the Newman tribe have at this point? This is just not an argument. May the best score win. At least with Shore winning against Williams it would feel the least like a spit to the face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Promising feedback. I'm really looking forward this, and have been ever since I saw the trailer awhile back. It apparently premieres in Norway on January 24th, so about a month after the US. Guess I'll just have to be patient for a couple of months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Coppola was right. Perhaps war films can never truly be anti-war because even if they show unspeakable horrors it is usually exciting to watch and thus, paradoxically, they fetishise what they're trying to condemn...to some extent.

 

Karol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Though that seems a rhetoric to me, more than an absolute truth, as i have seen plenty of war (anti-war?) movies that did a good job of counteracting that. Only recently i saw 'Hacksaw Ridge' which was a twisted ode to a guy that was a pacifist while simultaneously fetishizing battle - no mean feat, but it was Mel Gibson, so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, crocodile said:

Perhaps war films can never truly be anti-war because even if they show unspeakable horrors it is usually exciting to watch and thus, paradoxically, they fetishise what they're trying to condemn...to some extent.

Focus on the fallout, effects and consequences instead of directly on the action of war itself! Done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Edmilson said:

Wait, Thomas Newman's orchestral masterpiece? I mean, he never was all that orchestral, and whenever I think about this movie an orchestral score is the last thing that comes to my mind. But let's see.

 

His more experimental stuff no, but for his typical drama score there's plenty of orchestra, just usually not a very big one.

 

In this case, it might just be a critic who's not into scores thinking 'music = orchestra' without really listening to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, crocodile said:

Maybe Coppola was right. Perhaps war films can never truly be anti-war because even if they show unspeakable horrors it is usually exciting to watch and thus, paradoxically, they fetishise what they're trying to condemn...to some extent.

 

Karol

The Thin Red Line

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IndieWire's review gave us a little more description of Newman's score:

 

Quote

The trick of “1917” is to make every thing that is seen matter all the more. Thankfully, Mendes has been assisted by the best in the business, from production designer Dennis Gassner and his many yards of real trenches and costume designer Jacqueline Durran’s functional and work-worn uniforms to composer Thomas Newman, turning in his boldest and best work yet, a never sentimental and wholly original entry into the pantheon of war movie scores. And that’s to say nothing of Roger Deakins’ cinematography, always stunning but here shaped into something of a revelation.

 

...“1917” will inevitably engender comparisons to the classic tales that have come beforehand (the “Odyssey” similarities are baked right in), but Mendes has also keenly imagined it as something of a horror film, complete with an often unbearably tense score...

 

https://www.indiewire.com/2019/11/1917-review-sam-mendes-single-take-wwi-1202192008/

 

This seems like the kind of score movie critics these days seem to love: a tense, nervous score, that completely forgets about emotion and it is all about depicting the grim situation of the war, that works well on the context of the movie, but is not very pleasant to listen on the album... much like Dunkirk.

 

If that's true, I'll probably not listen to the OST as much, but if this gets Newman his late Oscar, so I'll be happy for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that Newman, after years of having beaten his sound to death (to the point where it must come off as anonymous wallpaper to most critics) is getting such attention from mainstream critics gives me hope that he's really dug into something for this. Cautiously optimistic!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Edmilson said:

IndieWire's review gave us a little more description of Newman's score:

 

 

https://www.indiewire.com/2019/11/1917-review-sam-mendes-single-take-wwi-1202192008/

 

This seems like the kind of score movie critics these days seem to love: a tense, nervous score, that completely forgets about emotion and it is all about depicting the grim situation of the war, that works well on the context of the movie, but is not very pleasant to listen on the album... much like Dunkirk.

 

If that's true, I'll probably not listen to the OST as much, but if this gets Newman his late Oscar, so I'll be happy for him.

 

I think Newman is melodic most of the times. I don't think he would stoop to the level of Dunkirk ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, he definitely deserves it, historically speaking. But I'll wait with any predictions untill I see who he's up against, and obviously untill I've seen the film and heard the score.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Thor said:

Well, he definitely deserves it, historically speaking. But I'll wait with any predictions untill I see who he's up against, and obviously untill I've seen the film and heard the score.

Yes, there is someone who deserves the 2020 Oscar, historically speaking. Someone who has been robbed of obvious Oscars a dozen times already.

John Williams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, First TROS March Accolyte said:

Yes, there is someone who deserves the 2020 Oscar, historically speaking. Someone who has been robbed of obvious Oscars a dozen times already.

John Williams.

 

Ha, ha. You jester!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a controversial opinion, but for me Newman should have won in 94 for The Shawshank Redemption. I like The Lion King, and of course the music is tremendously popular, but I love Shawshank's score even more.

 

Zimmer, on the other hand, should've won in 98, either for The Thin Red Line or The Prince of Egypt (which I like more than Lion King), or even both!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Edmilson said:

This is a controversial opinion, but for me Newman should have won in 94 for The Shawshank Redemption. I like The Lion King, and of course the music is tremendously popular, but I love Shawshank's score even more.

 

Zimmer, on the other hand, should've won in 98, either for The Thin Red Line or The Prince of Egypt (which I like more than Lion King), or even both!

 

Of the scores nominated in '94, I would award Shawshank.  Actually it wouldn't even be close as much as I love the Forrest Gump score.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I'm concerned, If not for the Lion King, the award was Goldsmith's, for The Shadow.

35 minutes ago, Richard Penna said:

Williams has oscars. Newman doesn't. :) 

Should Oscars really be about "who exists" instead of "what is the best score of the year"? Should they be about reparations for previous losses if said losses were justified?

I think covering up past injustices with new ones in the name of "balance" is just stupid. It reminds me of politics: your party gets this office,  so our gets that one. 

 

Williams should have 16 Oscars so far. This would send the right message about hard work and it's effects.

Spoiler

(1975) Earthquake, (1976) Jaws, (1978) Star Wars, (1981) ESB, (1982) Raiders, (1983) ET, (1984) ROTJ, (1985) TOD, (1994) JP, (1998) TLW, (2000) TPM, (2006) ROTS, (2013) Lincoln - I suppose, (2016) TFA, (2018) TLJ, (2020) TROS. No opinion about the Fiddler win. Maybe a score or two more, like KOTCS, could have won as well where competition was weaker.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, here's what was nominated for Best Score at the '95 Oscars (for '94 scores)

 

The Lion King – Hans Zimmer
Forrest Gump – Alan Silvestri
Interview with the Vampire – Elliot Goldenthal
Little Women – Thomas Newman
The Shawshank Redemption – Thomas Newman

 

Out of all those scores, I like Shawshank the most.

 

But out of all scores released in 94, I've listened to Stargate, Speed, City Slickers II: The Legend of Curly's Gold, The Shadow, True Lies, and Drop Zone much more than any of the nominated ones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno.  Seems weird to me to listen to Desplat's album and in your head be thinking about Newman's 1994 score while doing so.  Will you also compare it to Elliott's 2018 score, Earl's 2017 score, Bernstein's 1978 score, Deutsch's 1949 score, Steiner's 1933 score, etc?

 

(Why has this one book been adapted so many times, any way?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jay said:

Hmm, here's what was nominated for Best Score at the '95 Oscars (for '94 scores)

 

The Lion King – Hans Zimmer
Forrest Gump – Alan Silvestri
Interview with the Vampire – Elliot Goldenthal
Little Women – Thomas Newman
The Shawshank Redemption – Thomas Newman

 

Out of all those scores, I like Shawshank the most.

 

 

It was a pretty great year, I like all of those scores (although I personally would replace Goldenthal's Interview for James Horner's Legends of the Fall). But, for me, Newman's Shawshank deserved the Oscar that year, it is simply one of my favorite scores of all time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, First TROS March Accolyte said:

As far as I'm concerned, If not for the Lion King, the award was Goldsmith's, for The Shadow.

Should Oscars really be about "who exists" instead of "what is the best score of the year"? Should they be about reparations for previous losses if said losses were justified?

I think covering up past injustices with new ones in the name of "balance" is just stupid. It reminds me of politics: your party gets this office,  so our gets that one. 

 

Williams should have 16 Oscars so far. This would send the right message about hard work and it's effects.

  Hide contents

(1975) Earthquake, (1976) Jaws, (1978) Star Wars, (1981) ESB, (1982) Raiders, (1983) ET, (1984) ROTJ, (1985) TOD, (1994) JP, (1998) TLW, (2000) TPM, (2006) ROTS, (2013) Lincoln - I suppose, (2016) TFA, (2018) TLJ, (2020) TROS. No opinion about the Fiddler win. Maybe a score or two more, like KOTCS, could have won as well where competition was weaker.

 

 

It is ridiculous that Williams hasn't won an oscar for anything since 1993, but that's overkill. I do get tired of the idea that he gets a token nomination most years, as if it's a given that anything he writes is automatically one of the best five scores of the year.

 

But to cast a net over the whole thing, choosing one single 'best' anything is stupid, especially in a field as wide as film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Edmilson said:

This is a controversial opinion, but for me Newman should have won in 94 for The Shawshank Redemption. I like The Lion King, and of course the music is tremendously popular, but I love Shawshank's score even more.

 

Zimmer, on the other hand, should've won in 98, either for The Thin Red Line or The Prince of Egypt (which I like more than Lion King), or even both!

 

Yup. Shawshank should have gotten Coolman his Oscar. And The Thin Red Line should have been Zimmer's.

 

I would have also accepted American Beauty, just for its novelty and what it ultimately did for film music going forward, but its certainly no match for Corigliano.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If TROS get nominated for original score, it'll probably be up against VERY well reviewed films like Thomas Newman's 1917 and Desplat's Little Women. JJ Abrams really needs to knock TROS out of the park for JW to have a chance against those other films. The elusive 6th Oscar proving to be a difficult to obtain again. Btw, I really thought Memoirs of a Geisha was gonna win in 2006. :(

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Newman also could have won in 2004 for Lemony Snicket over the very weak and boring Finding Neverland. Actually, that year pratically every single one of the nominated scores were better than the one that actually won: Lemony Snicket, JNH's The Village, JW's Prisoner of Azkaban and even Debney's Passion of the Christ.

 

As for Williams, he may have been nominated almost every single year since Schindler's List, but I guess the only times he was close to win were in 2005 with Memories of a Geisha and Munich and in 2011 with Tintin and War Horse. On both cases, having two nominated scores may not have been good for him, since it split the votes, much like Horner in 95 with Braveheart and Apollo 13.

 

On 2002 and 2004 he had great scores (CMIYC and PoA) but they were going against strong competitors, which ended up favoring a very dull winner. And on the other years the winner was simply "cooler" on the Academy's eyes: Titanic in 97, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon in 2000, Fellowship of the Ring in 2001, Life of Pi in 2012, Gravity in 2013, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...