 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 30, 2015 - 4:32 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
The Thing
(Member)
|
As we said before, the quality of these re-recordings are good, bad and in parts, ugly. If ever there were three scores that were special because if the unique performers who collaborated on the original recordings in 64-66, it is the Dollars films. The combined efforts of Morricone, Alessandroni, nicolai, edda del orso, gianna spagnulo, franco de gemini, Bruno d'amario, franco catania, franco Cosacchi, michele lacerenza, et al - all geniuses in their own fields whose talents came to their peak on these three recordings and made them what they were. A meeting of minds like this is part of history and cannot be replicated. And such breathtaking serendipity should count for more appreciation over a few missing tracks. Just my opinion only, for what its worth.
The new recordings and their orchestration are not awful but anyone unfamiar with the scores should listen to track samples on itunes or something to these and the originals and not compare, just hear the difference.
But we've still got the originals available on CD to enjoy.
This is a new recording, and I'll appreciate it for what it is.
Just like I appreciate this for what it is (and absolutely love it):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBPtuiaAXi4&feature=youtu.be&t=4m10s
It's still Morricone's music, just another variation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I received this set, and can say that I'm damn glad that I ordered these.
These recreations are so careful and exact, that when the deviations do occur, they stick out that much more. It's also where those moments where they falter — “Sixty Seconds To What?” and “The Ecstasy of Gold” are major setpieces of their respective scores — really seem to emphasize them.
On the other hand, that attention to detail means that there the bulk of For a Few Dollars More and quite a few very entertaining additional cues from The Good, the Bad and the Ugly are now represented for the first time on disc in stereo and without sound effects. I really like being able to listen to the scores in this form.
By the way, that BBC concert was a trip! Very entertaining! That last performance of The Good, the Bad and the Ugly with the audience participation looked like so much fun!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mine arrived today.
The packaging is a standard cd case rather like the ones FSM used for their box sets.
The booklet is informative, all in all it's a very nice presentation of the three re-recordings.
They're not the original versions, but 90% of the tracks are excellent and until someone releases the original they're the best we have and well worth adding to your collection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting point. I realize I had never given it a thorough thought: that interpretation was the one I unconsciously gave to the plot from the first time I saw the movie, and nothing made me come back to it, until your post.
But indeed there is nothing in the movie which ascertains the fact that the woman was Indio’s girlfriend. However there are a couple of hints that it is the case (only hints, no proofs): He enters the room as if it was at his place, without making any noise; and it’s easy to tell that this event has affected him enormously, as he keeps having flashbacks of the scene. He even kept the watch with the girl’s portrait. Why would he, if the woman didn’t mean anything special to him? He has killed so many people in his life, or has had people killed (even a woman and a baby at the beginning of the film), without any apparent remorse.
Now that I think of it, that’s what must have worked in my subconscious while watching the movie. But since it is still an interpretation, I shouldn’t have ascertained it like I did. Sorry about this.
Didier
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the novelization (by Joe Millard) it states that the girl is Mortimer's sister and that Indio sees her and her husband through the window. The watch is Mortimer's wedding present to his sister, Indio is consumed by desire for both the girl and the watch, so he enters the house, kills the husband, rapes the girl and she then shoots herself with Indio's own pistol. Indio then leaves, taking the watch but leaving the pistol, with his name engraved on the butt, in the dead girls hand, which is how Mortimer knows that Indio is responsible for what happens to the couple.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am genuinely enjoying this set.
The only thing is, you can't need for this to be a perfect forgery of those original recordings. If you do, you'll be disappointed.
These recreations are SURPRISINGLY GOOD in parts, but so painfully not the real thing in others.
As others have said, it's a mixed bag.
But, with allowances made for it not sounding exactly the same, it is a very enjoyable and pleasing experience. It's nice to hear the COMPLETE score of IL BUONO, etc, even if at times you know you're listening to a pale-ish imitation. It retains the original charm and quirkiness. It captures the ESSENCE of what we loved about these scores even if it fails to reproduce it exactly.
You asked for good and bad spots.
Well, as an illustration, the recreation of the main title of THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY is brilliant.
And on the downside, "The Ecstasy Of Gold" just doesn't get the energy together. It's okay, but if the original soared really high, this flies just slightly below cloud level.
Expect an enjoyable but flawed set and you'll get what you expected.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Didier Thunus's liner notes are very informative on the music itself but there are no details given at all about the orchestra except for the name. The Solisti e Orchestra del Cinema Italiano's website address (as it's given on the booklet anyway) doesn't seem to exist and so I'm left wanting to know who they are and the names of the vocalists etc.
It's pretty obvious that SOME of the instrumentation is synthesized rather than performed acoustically. So I doubt it is an orchestra in the way we think.
But to be honest, while you can always tell the difference between a synthetically created string or horn section and a live one, it has often occurred to me that as this technology gets better, fan created, computer-based recreations of lost film music, which can be continuously improved and tweaked, may eventually prove to be an ACCEPTABLE (but not preferable) way of recreating lost film music where no one can raise the $50K needed for a genuine acoustic recording.
Not that I *WANT* things to turn out that way, I'm just saying they could. And perhaps we're starting to see that in this very set.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I decided to purchase this set after reading some of the reviews on this re-recording. The producers of this did a nice job trying to give a stereo sound to a set of recordings nearly 50 years ago. I give them an A-. The problem with me is that I have accepted the original recordings in their flat mono sound as definitive and when a stereo version comes forth it sounds great but slightly alien. I probably will never be satisfied 100% but for $10 on Amazon it is definitely worth it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But to be honest, while you can always tell the difference between a synthetically created string or horn section and a live one, it has often occurred to me that as this technology gets better, fan created, computer-based recreations of lost film music, which can be continuously improved and tweaked, may eventually prove to be an ACCEPTABLE (but not preferable) way of recreating lost film music where no one can raise the $50K needed for a genuine acoustic recording.
Like saying a plastic rose bush in the garden is acceptable for people who don't want to spend money on fertilizer and time doing pruning.
Not really, but if you insist on that metaphor, then yes when the cost of growing the real rose bush is $50,000.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
