Classical Composer Writes Three Tracks for Star Wars Heir to the Empire

[DarthDementous 1,209]

this is so unbelievably cool, it's like a glimpse into an alternate universe where John Williams scored the ST but it was the Thrawn Trilogy:

 

[SilverTrumpet 642]

(This is pretty great)

[Sunshine Reger 3,583]

.

[WilliamsStarShip2282 318]

they should call this guy to score all the spin off movies. 1000% serious, somebody call Disney

[Jurassic Shark 12,902]

I just did. Nobody picked up the phone.

[WilliamsStarShip2282 318]

Is there anyplace to download a legit recording of this?

 

[Holko 10,127]

Eh.

Battle is just bits of other SW battle music mashed together badly.

 

I'm no huge fan of the books, but isn't Thrawn a calm, cultured, calculated art enthusiast? Who arrives and knows exactly what your preferred maneuvers will be and just watches his already perfect plan unfold into his victory? Who reacts to his servant stabbing him to death with "Ooh, nicely done!" How the hell do you arrive from that to a meh big threatening brassy Imperial March wannabe? At least make it an Emperor knockoff, the low moody scheming would fit better. Or even something like Anthem of Evil would for him better.

 

Luke and Mara is royalty free Across the Stars down to the exact structure and instrumentation of the concert piece, just without a good melody.

[Luke Skywalker 1,932]

The composer was the conductor of the Ubeda film score festival concerts, irrc!

[SteveMc 2,675]

This music has some Star Wars feel, but it is pretty much by the numbers.

[Tydirium 1,254]

The theme for Thrawn is quite good.

[Jurassic Shark 12,902]

At least this guy should get some credit for writing the first ever love theme of the SW saga.

[Joni Wiljami 1,208]

1 hour ago, Jurassic Shark said:

At least this guy should get some credit for writing the first ever love theme of the SW saga.

 

Joke is of course funny as hell but

sadly the weakest part of this is just the

love theme. So bad. 

[TheUlyssesian 2,576]

I liked that. There's definitely potential.

 

Is it much better than what Gia did though?

[Sunshine Reger 3,583]

.

[Will 2,230]

Enjoyed this! Although part of "The Battle" sounds close to identical to "Get 'Em R-2" (perhaps that's intentional, of course). 

[DarthDementous 1,209]

on the topic of Thrawn's theme, I'd say it does a good job conveying the might of this new Remnant Empire while also adding a sense of sophistication and elegance to the march befitting of a character like Thrawn. he's undoubtedly the villain of Heir to the Empire so it makes sense to focus on the intimidating and militaristic dominating aspect of his character with the main theme, and then in the second part of the theme explore the more romantic and contemplative side of him.

[Obi 409]

This classical composer has a name ?

[King Mark 3,679]

No, the only thing that matters is that's he's a classical composer therefore automatically better than JW

[Sunshine Reger 3,583]

Williams is in the crossfire of snobs who repeat at nauseam that he is a "thief", that he doesn't modulate themes to other keys like symphonists do, doesn't write for opera (lol), and slobs, who enjoy him as much as any "epic" pop sound---and no more, and generally don't give a damn whether there are 30 staves of skilled writing sounding in their headphones, or computer-generated ambience and vague tapestry.

 

Snobs, if pressed, choose Herrmann, Morricone, or Takemitsu over Williams on his home turf, or else insist on ghetto-ing him under the label of "film music", away from "classical music", which somehow sooner has place for Stockhausen and Cage than for him.

 

Slobs think Zimmer is greater, or have nearly forgotten him.

 

He is nowhere to be found on the lists of recommended most important or influential contemporary composers, or on ranking lists of classical composers.

 

I don't know what to think.

[Remco 687]

That’s a bit pessimistic man. He just made his debut with the VP and he’s still seen by many as (one of the) greatest film composers ever.

 

These snobs and slobs are a small amount of people in the end anyway.

 

But yeah, can somebody explain why snobs generally seem to believe that Morricone is more of a ‘real’ composer as opposed to a ‘commercial’ one like Williams? 

[Dixon Hill 4,236]

10 hours ago, Fabulin said:

Williams is in the crossfire of snobs who repeat at nauseam that he is a "thief", that he doesn't modulate themes to other keys like symphonists do, doesn't write for opera (lol), and slobs, who enjoy him as much as any "epic" pop sound---and no more, and generally don't give a damn whether there are 30 staves of skilled writing sounding in their headphones, or computer-generated ambience and vague tapestry.

 

Snobs, if pressed, choose Herrmann, Morricone, or Takemitsu over Williams on his home turf, or else insist on ghetto-ing him under the label of "film music", away from "classical music", which somehow sooner has place for Stockhausen and Cage than for him.

 

Slobs think Zimmer is greater, or have nearly forgotten him.

 

He is nowhere to be found on the lists of recommended most important or influential contemporary composers, or on ranking lists of classical composers.

 

I don't know what to think.

 

He's fine.

[Luke Skywalker 1,932]

22 hours ago, Obi said:

This classical composer has a name ?

Arturo Diez-Boscovich

[Sunshine Reger 3,583]

2 hours ago, Remco said:

That’s a bit pessimistic man. He just made his debut with the VP and he’s still seen by many as (one of the) greatest film composers ever.

 

These snobs and slobs are a small amount of people in the end anyway.

 

But yeah, can somebody explain why snobs generally seem to believe that Morricone is more of a ‘real’ composer as opposed to a ‘commercial’ one like Williams? 

 

Debut which had 1/2 of its reviews written by JWFan members, or people they know. It wasn't picked up by major classical journals or news of any sort.

 

"One of the greatest" and "arguably one of the most..." are weasel phrases that patronizingly put him merely into the front rank of film composers, as if he wasn't a poet laureate of their kind for the past 4 decades (nearly half of the history of the medium so far).

 

The use of his first name in every mention on the web shows that he is not an established name, like Mahler or Shostakovich for example. That is one of the marks of someone having a fame of "a classic".

 

He is also 90% of time tied to his Oscar record in mentions. Something very superficial as far as the standards of classical music journalism are concerned (at least in regards to composers).

 

Snobs are an influential "small amount of people", and slobs are not a small number of people at all.

[KK 3,308]

Oh please!

 

Williams is widely respected across popular contemporary conductors and composers, largely for his technique and firm grasp over tradition. Maybe less so as an innovator or a significant contributor to contemporary classical vocabulary, but that's reasonable. The fact of the matter is, he's probably the most widely performed composer in concert halls of our time, and he's gotten just about every major award any conservatory-centric composer could dream of. But at the end of the day, his film work is simply far more popular than his concert work and it informs the bulk of his career, hence he will always be labelled as a Hollywood man first. And he knows that. His contribution to popular music is markedly different to that of Mahler and Shostakovich did, so any comparison there is hardly warranted. And yet, the average person on the street will probably be able to quote Williams, in work and name, over Mahler or Shostakovich. Certainly over Corigliano, Adams, Saariaho, Wolfe, Ades, etc etc.

 

And let's be real. Williams is a millionaire and man of privilege who has earned the kind of respect and honours across both worlds of film and the concert hall in a way that no one before him ever has, and no one after him ever will. None of his contemporaries could claim similar success. So he certainly needs no defending. Any more whining really just speaks to fanboy entitlement.

[DarthDementous 1,209]

I like how by merely having 'classical composer' in the title sparks this kind of debate 

[karelm 3,014]

On 4/5/2020 at 6:16 AM, Obi said:

This classical composer has a name ?

No.  He's the Man with No Name.

 

[Remco 687]

On 4/6/2020 at 1:42 PM, Fabulin said:

 

Debut which had 1/2 of its reviews written by JWFan members, or people they know. It wasn't picked up by major classical journals or news of any sort.

 

"One of the greatest" and "arguably one of the most..." are weasel phrases that patronizingly put him merely into the front rank of film composers, as if he wasn't a poet laureate of their kind for the past 4 decades (nearly half of the history of the medium so far).

 

The use of his first name in every mention on the web shows that he is not an established name, like Mahler or Shostakovich for example. That is one of the marks of someone having a fame of "a classic".

 

He is also 90% of time tied to his Oscar record in mentions. Something very superficial as far as the standards of classical music journalism are concerned (at least in regards to composers).

 

Snobs are an influential "small amount of people", and slobs are not a small number of people at all.

Sorry man, but it’d be better if you’d stop wishing Williams to be put in that ‘category’. That will never happen because he’s a totally unique figure in musical history. And he’s widely respected for that. And yes, his debut with the VP is MAJOR recognition of that, it doesn’t have to be praised by Norman Lebrecht or some other snob in order to legitimize the greatness of these two concerts. I think @KK put it wonderfully.

[WilliamsStarShip2282 318]

Here here. I think it is profoundly stupid to give a shit about what critics say anyway, since when has a critic EVER been correct about a composer being worth while? They cling to whatever is the "sophisticated" and "elite" ideology of the day, mainly because they have no palette at all for anything, and they're usually very bitter people who found out late in life that they have no talent for music and do anything they can to act like they're "in the club". But most importantly, this is the digital age where we can basically find (almost) whatever we want online. So why does anyone give a f*** (are we allowed to swear on here?) about what some goon says? Listen for yourself and make your own damn decision.

 

And yes, JW's appearance with the VP was probably not mentioned outside of his fan base because the people who won't write about it are the same pinheads that think it's a good idea to cover the last three Mozart symphonies that have been recorded 10000000000000000000000000 times and how they found some dudes interpretation of Beethoven's 6th to be distasteful, but naturally does not explain the reasoning behind that conclusion. Besides reading an article on tooth drilling equipment, I can't think of anything less boring than a critic's (of any kind) review of something.

 

And it is true, Williams is a musician that has never existed, nor accomplished so much in one career. The people who mention the oscars are the ones who are cheap people who only care about that, so why are you even reading/ watching that? Regardless of any film accomplishment, he has written pieces (at request) for Anne-Sophie Mutter, Yo-yo Ma, Itzhak Perlman, Lang Lang, Gil Shaham, and that's just a small percentage. He's written a concerto for nearly every instrument and numerous orchestral works, with the musicians who premiere/ record them having nothing but praise for the mastery of the writing. In the orchestral world, he is currently the most performed composer on earth AND is one of the most accomplished composers in the world just for his concert music alone.

 

So...... with just that, is there seriously anyone who would be , I shall use the word, dumb enough to question his merit? Seems to me they're people who feel too uncomfortable and insecure making decisions for themselves and require others to tell them how to think and/or people with a grudge against him for whatever reason and just s*** talk for spite.

 

---------------------------------------------------------mic drop--------------------------------------------------------

On 4/6/2020 at 6:53 AM, Fabulin said:

Williams is in the crossfire of snobs who repeat at nauseam that he is a "thief", that he doesn't modulate themes to other keys like symphonists do, doesn't write for opera (lol), and slobs, who enjoy him as much as any "epic" pop sound---and no more, and generally don't give a damn whether there are 30 staves of skilled writing sounding in their headphones, or computer-generated ambience and vague tapestry.

 

 

I think whatever critic who has said he doesn't modulate is deaf. He is the king of modulation.

[gkgyver 1,647]

Better than much of ROS. 

 

Don't @  me. 

[Oomoog the Ecstatic 314]

Cool, I was wondering what happened to David Cope.

[Bayesian 1,428]

11 hours ago, WilliamsStarShip2282 said:

Here here. I think it is profoundly stupid to give a shit about what critics say anyway, since when has a critic EVER been correct about a composer being worth while? They cling to whatever is the "sophisticated" and "elite" ideology of the day, mainly because they have no palette at all for anything, and they're usually very bitter people who found out late in life that they have no talent for music and do anything they can to act like they're "in the club". But most importantly, this is the digital age where we can basically find (almost) whatever we want online. So why does anyone give a f*** (are we allowed to swear on here?) about what some goon says? Listen for yourself and make your own damn decision.

 

And yes, JW's appearance with the VP was probably not mentioned outside of his fan base because the people who won't write about it are the same pinheads that think it's a good idea to cover the last three Mozart symphonies that have been recorded 10000000000000000000000000 times and how they found some dudes interpretation of Beethoven's 6th to be distasteful, but naturally does not explain the reasoning behind that conclusion. Besides reading an article on tooth drilling equipment, I can't think of anything less boring than a critic's (of any kind) review of something.

Critics can definitely be worth reading if they don’t act like PR agents for their preferred artists or mudslingers against the ones they don’t.
 

On that note, I would bet money 90% of the people who dismiss JW because he “plagiarizes” stole the argument themselves from someone else (irony at its finest). The other 10% fail to bring in the countless examples from other composers (ahem, Horner). Either way, 100% of them simply come across as sad attempts to take JW down a peg—as if he didn’t entirely earn the peg he’s on. As they say, opinions are like assholes...

[WilliamsStarShip2282 318]

I think the whole plagiarism is just a slight to do whatever they an to put him down. The great "masters" did it all the time, but they take a concept and re-work it (at least the good ones). I was just listening to Copland's 3rd Symphony yesterday (generally a nice piece). But talk about stealing stuff, there's a passage in the second movement lifted from "Young Person's Guide for the Orchestra", plus some other things in the third movement. And same thing goes for Godfather 2 when everyone is trying to escape Cuba, it's the second tableaux of Le Sacre with the godfather theme on top (although I feel like that one was due to laziness to write something).

[Loert 2,629]

7 hours ago, WilliamsStarShip2282 said:

it's the second tableaux of Le Sacre with the godfather theme on top

 

Le Sacre, which is really just a collage of Slavic folk tunes and rhythms played by a big orchestra.

 

On the subject of plagiarism in general, I've come to realise that the more distinctive a composer tries to make their music (specifically melodically), the more likely it will actually get accused of plagiarism, because a distinctive piece of music will be similar to only a few other pieces...but there will be a few, and those few will get picked up. For example, the first five notes of the Star Wars theme bear little resemblance to most other melodies in music, so when somebody stumbles upon something like Kings Row, it is a bit like uncovering gold dust, because of how rare it is for another melody to match the first five notes of Star Wars. Yet when a composer like Hans Zimmer uses the vi - I - V - II chord progression, nobody calls it plagiarism, because so many other pieces have used it as well (this is not a dis of HZ by the way). So ultimately, all these accusations of plagiarism are really just an assault on distinctiveness, and hence individuality. Just my two pennies!

[WilliamsStarShip2282 318]