 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Sep 7, 2011 - 11:35 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
KubrickFan
(Member)
|
... MV had said he stopped using the term "complete" since the nitpickers always find something they feel is missing to stir up some stink ...
 Sorry but it does not make sense. How can I "feel" that something is missing when the score is objectively complete? Some example, please?
Sorry, I don't recall exactly which case MV was referring to, maybe it was over Batman . In that case someone was going on about cues they insisted had been recorded but not included on the set since umm.... they'd read about it in a book... yeah...
But basically MV got tired of it and changed his wording. Someone can probably find the actual thread about it
I do know there was some complaining about Batman (for whatever reason), but that already had the Expanded Archival Edition label, so it's probably a different title. It doesn't really matter, either way, does it? If a few small cues are missing, it wouldn't really matter. At least, to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Throughout the movie, Jerry's score is always accessible in tone, spotting, etc., adding emotional resonance to individual scenes but not forgetting--just as importantly (and as alluded to)--to tie the individual scenes together and help make them feel like a collective whole. Simply put, the score does everything a score basically ought to do.
you can use that very same ¿argument? about 100.000.000 scores. In exact words! Congrats!!!
(and, hey, I love FOREVER YOUNG CD).
Definitely can't, actually. Very, very few scores are this thematically accessible, clear, focused, and consistent. From a communicative standpoint (i.e., the only standpoint that matters in judging a score as such), the work is a textbook example of how to score a film.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
