 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Nov 11, 2013 - 8:19 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
OnyaBirri
(Member)
|
Considering the number of film scores I have and the amount of film music I listen to, I'm surprised to say that I am increasingly finding a lack of a film score on a film a very effective device.
I just saw "Blue is the Warmest Color," which I believe has no score whatsoever, with music used only sparingly as very occasional source music. I felt completely drawn in. I felt the same way when I was on a John Cassavetes jag several months back.
I am starting to feel that a lack of a score adds an element of realism and, in a strange way, produces a somewhat unsettling, voyeuristic feeling in these situations. (Films with very sparse sores, such as "Blow-Up" and "The Conversation" produce a similar response in me). Films with music - especially music I like - tend to produce for me a more "cinematic" experience and make me feel consciously like I'm watching a film. It is often an otherworldly experience. These are generalizations, but I have become more aware of these differences in recent years.
So, I am starting to wonder whether 1) a good film even needs a score; 2) if viewers at a certain point may become more sophisticated and not want to feel like they're being manipulated, and/or 3) if this may be generational, or tied to the experience of living during a certain time.
I'm assuming the responses are going to skew toward the pro-music side of the spectrum, given the forum, but I'm interested to hear if anyone else shares these views.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like a balance. But I’m learning to really appreciate scenes with no score. You get to hear the world. Tires in the rain. Wind. Clocks. If it’s a pretend world (sci-fi, fantasy) you really get to feel part of it.
I think a lot of films are way overscored these days. I remember noticing in Fellowship of the Rings that films had gotten so bombastic that you couldn’t call the audience’s attention with noise. You had to do it with silence.
And I LOVED 1941, film and score.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Nov 11, 2013 - 12:31 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
.
(Member)
|
Maybe it's that film isn't really more realistic, we just think it is. Film seems to present a sort of "imagined reality", as though we are seeing into someone's memory of a story rather than seeing the story happen before our very eyes as in a play. After all, we're not in control of all those camera angles and cuts in editing in film, but that may be more the way we recall stories in our mind.
Yes, I suppose if, in a "realistic" film, a character is sitting sadly in a chair thinking back to a lost love, a musical theme relating to that love will appear to tell us what he's thinking about. Whereas, within the conventions of a play, the actor would be free to speak aloud to himself about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is very little film scoring these days that I feel does what film music should do - we get a lot of sustained chords and pad, a lot of busy thumping, and it's pretty much wall-to-wall if you include songs and source cues. It's mind-numbing, aural wallpaper and it's why I dislike so many of today's movies, but producers and directors get in these modes and it takes someone adventurous to change the mode, after which all producers and directors want is the new mode. Not all scores today, but certainly most of them.
Movies with sparse scores (our recent Heaven Can Wait is a good example) can work beautifully - just the right amount of music to get the job done. But then, you have to have creatives who understand the function and use of film music. Fail Safe is a great movie with no dramatic scoring at all. Coma's first dramatic cue comes well into the film, and it's brilliant when it does - whoever made that decision really understood how potent the cue would be when it finally appeared.
I, of course, collect soundtrack CDs on all films that have no score. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Nov 11, 2013 - 1:41 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Tall Guy
(Member)
|
Why is it only music is manipulative, and why is it a bad thing? What about the acting? The editing? The script? The songs? The whole thing is meant to be manipulative. That's what story telling is about. Some films are fine without music, but most films are not fine with the ambient noise heard nowadays.
Of course, the word "art" comes from "artifice."
You sure? I thought it was from the word "artichoke".
There's much to agree with in Solium's post (above) - we inhabit a funny little world where the music often counts for more than the thing for which it was written, and where directors/producers are "idiots" for not using our favourite composers, or - worse - rejecting them if they don't meet the owner's vision.
Where I disagree is the statement that "most films are not fine with the ambient noise heard nowadays", because this is strictly subjective and my view is that some films need that approach - and others deserve it. It's tempting to want all films to be scored in those ways that most appeal to us, but we devalue the vision and ability of the film-makers if we don't allow for other approaches. And after all, they're making films, and (in the main) we're not.
TG
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Nov 12, 2013 - 4:30 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
follow me
(Member)
|
I am starting to feel that a lack of a score adds an element of realism and, in a strange way, produces a somewhat unsettling, voyeuristic feeling in these situations. (Films with very sparse sores, such as "Blow-Up" and "The Conversation" produce a similar response in me). Films with music - especially music I like - tend to produce for me a more "cinematic" experience and make me feel consciously like I'm watching a film. It is often an otherworldly experience.
Exactly. If you strive for utmost realism, then you should avoid using film music. There is no score accompanying real life either. And yes, films with music produce a more cinematic experience, hence it is absolutely necessary to have a great score in phantasy-films like the James Bond-films. And then there are the 80% of films that are somewhere in-between: they should be scored with just the right amount of music, certainly not needing wall-to-wall scores.
Is it that film is an inherently more artificial medium because it consists of pre-recorded images rather than in-person flesh and blood? In other words, do we feel more of a personal connection to the actors in play and so need no emotional cues from music?
No, film is much more realistic. In the theatre you can NEVER forget that you are sitting in a theatre and that these are actors on the stage. In the end, of course, neither film nor theatre are realistic, but film FEELS realistic and stage plays certainly never.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
