Those of you with long memories - at least into the last Century - will recall that for a while Film Music was just not heard at all in the Concert Hall. In the UK at least it took Sydney Samuelson to put in place the series of FILMHARMONIC Concerts starting in 1970, when Henry Mancini. Ron Goodwin, Elmer Bernstein and Muir Mathieson conducted portions of their own music, or in Mathieson's case William Walton etc. It kicked started a virtual new career for Ron Goodwin, who by that time was doing less and less scores, and now he would travel the World conducting Concerts of his music. As it did for Henry Mancini. Both John Williams and Jerry Goldsmith found they were being asked to conduct Concerts of their music,, after appearing at FILMHARMONIC to a point that The Proms in the UK regularly program in Concert of varying quality. Witness the rather bland John Williams Concert this year. Years ago Concerts by the equivalent of James Newton Howard and Michael Giacchino would not have been considered, now they play to full houses
Now we are getting Films being shown with live music being played. Not just the wonderful scores by Carl Davis for Silent Movies which are joy in themselves, but PSYCHO, BRIEF ENCOUNTER and CASINO ROYALE ETC all with music being played LIVE.
Last week there was a Concert by the esteemed BBC Concert Orchestra of Music of Film Noir Films. I heard it on Radio 3 last night, and to be honest, I found it pretty boring. A friend who was there said it wasn't particularly well attended, . The could be down to the time of the year, bad weather, one of many reasons , and yes maybe the repertoire. Maybe Concerts like this could be more varied, of well known and more obsure titles.
Which brings me finally to my other favourite Composer Sir Andre Previn. In discussion with Antony Hopkins in a very enteraining tome MUSIC FACE TO FACE , he states and I quote, " Some of my colleagues in Hollywood make it a practice to concoct suites for concert use of their movie score material. I don't think this ever works. Please don't remind me of Prokofiev's NEVSKY or Walton's HENRY V because these are the exceptions proving the rule. Most film music, no matter how brilliantly effective it is in conjunction with the visual image, is too devoid of form to stand up in the concert hall"
One wonders what Sir Andre would think now - things have changed so much - and this book was 1971 after all, and considering his great Film music chum from the Fifties on, John Williams made a second career of conducting his film scores in the Concert Hall.
Film Music may have found respectability, but it proves, it has to be the RIGHT Film Music!!
The relative glut of rerecordings and remasters re film scores is ample proof that Hopkins didn't know much about music.
Ben-Hur, Psycho, Vertigo, Fahrenheit 451, The Omen, Close Encounters, El Cid, The Robe, Fall of the Roman Empire...all stand up. And there are plenty more.
Just as there is kind meh music even from the greatest composers (Beethoven's 1st Symphony was kind of fun...in an ENTIRELY Haydn and Mozart fashion. Nothing of Beethoven's innovative and super dramatic musical personality is in evidence there, and one could skirt saying the same about the second), there is film music that relies most often on effects and is kind of hard to call great absolute music (I'll let members come up with their own examples).
When something is rerecorded, remixed/mastered, repackaged again and again, at incredible expense that the producers might NEVER be able to recoup...it means that music is already immortal imo. People won't let it die, and will pay seriously good money for it. More than ever now it seems.
Which brings me finally to my other favourite Composer Sir Andre Previn. In discussion with Antony Hopkins in a very enteraining tome MUSIC FACE TO FACE , he states and I quote, " Some of my colleagues in Hollywood make it a practice to concoct suites for concert use of their movie score material. I don't think this ever works. Please don't remind me of Prokofiev's NEVSKY or Walton's HENRY V because these are the exceptions proving the rule. Most film music, no matter how brilliantly effective it is in conjunction with the visual image, is too devoid of form to stand up in the concert hall"
Previn certainly wouldn't be interested in going to hear a suite from "Titanic" performed in the concert hall. I watched a documentary about him recently and he was particularly dismissive of that score.
I often wonder though, how many people attend concert performances of film music because they are fans of the composer or the actual music? Recently I've been to John Williams and Morricone film music concerts, and it seemed to me people weren't that familiar with a lot of the music and just wanted to hear the stuff from the big films they know. I have my doubts that many people who attend these shows actually listen to the music for themselves away from the screen.
Previn (also one of my favourites) trod a very narrow line back in the days after he left Hollywood. On one hand he was Mr. Modernity whose commentaries avoided the obvious in the same way his harmonics avoided resolution. This Andre was keen to appear the man of taste, thrusting the envelope. Against this, he was also a great enthusiast for good film music, who loved doing it. Where the two Venn diagrams overlap was this stance of buying credibility for the film music art, by, paradoxically, dissing it to classical audiences. In this way he made it palatable whilst affecting a superiority over it, so allowing the snobs a window to countenance it and save face.
A lot of folk had to live like that back then. He was also an Anglophile, and you can bet he was quoting Ralph Vaughan-Williams, who also stated that converting film scores into short suites was the surest way to consign them to oblivion.
Previn (also one of my favourites) trod a very narrow line back in the days after he left Hollywood. On one hand he was Mr. Modernity whose commentaries avoided the obvious in the same way his harmonics avoided resolution. This Andre was keen to appear the man of taste, thrusting the envelope. Against this, he was also a great enthusiast for good film music, who loved doing it. Where the two Venn diagrams overlap was this stance of buying credibility for the film music art, by, paradoxically, dissing it to classical audiences. In this way he made it palatable whilst affecting a superiority over it, so allowing the snobs a window to countenance it and save face.
A lot of folk had to live like that back then. He was also an Anglophile, and you can bet he was quoting Ralph Vaughan-Williams, who also stated that converting film scores into short suites was the surest way to consign them to oblivion.
Anyhow, it's certainly true today ...
Imagine Ben Hur, The Omen, or Vertigo existing only as soundtrack suites....
One wonders what Sir Andre would think now - things have changed so much - and this book was 1971 after all, and considering his great Film music chum from the Fifties on, John Williams made a second career of conducting his film scores in the Concert Hall.
I reckon Previn started changing his tune (pardon the pun!) in the late 70s, when he invited Miklos Rozsa and John Williams onto his show "Previn and the Pittsburgh" to conduct their music. Previn also conducted a suite from Goldsmith's Blue Max.
I think the prejudice against film music stems entirely from the notion that it was written for movies (and thus automatically "hackwork" or "not real music"), rather than an objective consideration of the music itself.
Years ago on this board, someone (I forget who) passed along the story of when he was working in a classical record store, and how he would, from time to time, play the Conan The Barbarian soundtrack. This prompted more than a few enthusiastic queries from customers -- "Wow, what is that piece?" But when informed of the music's true identity, most of them completely lost interest.
I reckon Previn started changing his tune (pardon the pun!) in the late 70s, when he invited Miklos Rozsa and John Williams onto his show "Previn and the Pittsburgh" to conduct their music. Previn also conducted a suite from Goldsmith's Blue Max.
I always thought Previn was very condescending in that interview and I don't know why he bothered to write about his days in Hollywood; "No Minor Chords", when all he did in the book was sneer at the film industry and his old colleagues. He couldn't even get his facts right; stating one of Rozsa's films as being BARABBAS. Sorry...not a fan!
I'm guessing there has been a history of bleed-in. My grandfather overwhelmingly listened to the past masters: Beethoven, Bach, Haydn, Verdi. But the anomalies in such a one dimensional collection were the Savini/Ben Hur LP (he never played it around me), Planet of the Apes, Psycho. A couple I can't recall, but there were about half a dozen film scores among his LPs.
And I've seen Ben Hur in many other "strictly CLAHS-SICAL music, sniff!" collections.
The relative glut of rerecordings and remasters re film scores is ample proof that Hopkins didn't know much about music.
I could be wrong.
I'm afraid you are about Hopkins, WagnerAlmighty. In fact he is a pretty good composer himself and he's even dabbled in film composition. Here's a pretty cool orchestral album of his... And the Waltz Goes On is quite an earworm IMO:
Of course, Andre Previn was a superb film composer, one of the greatest of the Golden Age IMO. I think if he'd stayed in the biz he might have the stature of John Williams now. He must've been really soured on Hollywood by something because he's been a complete jerk about film music ever since he left. Or else he's just an insufferable snob. Doesn't stop me from being blown away by so many of his film scores...I only wish more of his concert music had the spark and vitality of his film music.
Years ago on this board, someone (I forget who) passed along the story of when he was working in a classical record store, and how he would, from time to time, play the Conan The Barbarian soundtrack. This prompted more than a few enthusiastic queries from customers -- "Wow, what is that piece?" But when informed of the music's true identity, most of them completely lost interest.
I think that was probably me, when I was working at Joel's Classical Shop. I played the Tadlow Conan in the shop a lot. I wouldn't say "most" of them lost interest when I told them what it was but a decent number of them certainly did! But thankfully I also made some converts to film music there, using that and other scores.
I do find it hilarious and frustrating that most classical snobs will often count film music as "real" music when it's written by Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Vaughan Williams, or Copland...but mention Miklos Rozsa or Bernard Herrmann or even Korngold and they more often get dismissive. To say nothing of great composers who didn't write concert music at all such as Alfred Newman or Hugo Friedhofer. There's this idea that composers resorted to writing film music because they couldn't write good enough concert music. Ugh.
you can bet he was quoting Ralph Vaughan-Williams, who also stated that converting film scores into short suites was the surest way to consign them to oblivion.
Riiiiiight, Ralph -- instead you convert the film score into a "symphony" and then it lasts the test of time, haha! I guess from a marketing perspective RVW may have been onto something when it comes to the classical snob mindset...Prokofiev wrote the "Alexander Nevsky Cantata" and that was just a suite from the film score, really.
That's very interesting about Hopkins. He's still wrong.
I've worked for the Santa Fe Opera for the past five years, L.A. Philharmonic for three and a half years, Houston Symphony for one, and also for two years managed the last independent classical music shop left in North America...you wouldn't BELIEVE the number of people I've met who I judge to be wrong-headed about music in so many diversely frustrating ways, yet who themselves indisputably know a great deal about music.
That's very interesting about Hopkins. He's still wrong.
It's Previn the quote is attributed to in the original post, not Hopkins.
Previn could certainly be an interesting composer. I could be wrong again, but didn't he have a problem with Herrmann? I think Bernard referred to him as "that jazz guy" and would often intentionally forget the latter's name. Not positive, but I have read that in more than one source.
I don't ultimately care what anyone has to say about film music vs concert music. The best scores speak for themselves, and become more highly regarded as time goes on. I've been part of the scholastic end of music education for years and can say for a fact that film scores have had a place on the curriculum, especially in this century. There's no condescension toward it as a genre at all.
I imagine that's not true for some schools, but I have teacher friends from several different institutions who would vouch for the above.
When I first got into this music I tried to find books about it. The few tomes available almost exclusively focused on classical composers who composed for films
Prokoviev, Shostakovich, Bliss, Copland etc. Even those that analysed Hollywood only took seriously the Golden Agers who wrote purely symphonic music in the style of 19th century concert composers!!!
You would never see the names "Barry, John" or "Morricone, Ennio" in the index.
Like Franz Liszt (Roger DaltreY) says in LISZTOMANIA... "TIME KILLS CRITICS, not swords" brm
That's very interesting about Hopkins. He's still wrong.
...... I've been part of the scholastic end of music education for years and can say for a fact that film scores have had a place on the curriculum, especially in this century. There's no condescension toward it as a genre at all. .
The sad thing is, music appreciation is undergoing a seeming descent in to extinction in schools today. I believe people should listen to what they want to, because music is for everyone. However, I always feel a little sad when I hear that someone has never really sat down and at least somewhat attentively listened to....oh, say Beethoven's opus 132 or Bach's Violin Sonata in G minor. There's so much you can get out of that music (same could be said for Ben Hur or Planet of the Apes, etc.). The music mentioned can take you on quite a journey given even half a chance.
I know back not even fifty years music ago was a required course in the schools. It's saddening to me that's not the case anymore.
That's very interesting about Hopkins. He's still wrong.
It's Previn the quote is attributed to in the original post, not Hopkins.
Yeah, true - and I think we've got the wrong Hopkins too. It's the late British composer/writer/broadcaster Antony Hopkins (as correctly spelled in the original post), not the actor and occasional composer with the H.
Anyway, I don't have much to add at the moment to the topic except to say that Previn is one of my favourite composers. We've had plenty of threads about his work. There was a good one a while back which was I think an interview with him for an English newspaper (?) - Most entertaining, and I love how he dropped "interesting" into his conversations so much, whilst poo-pooing (I think half of it was a jest) Hollywood, "Hollywood composers" and his own Hollywood work. You have to take things like, "THE FOUR HORSEMEN OF THE APOCALYPSE is one of my film scores I'm slightly less embarrassed about" with a pinch of salt. Then he'd go on to say, "Oh yes, Jerry Goldsmith, really interesting music!" - which is high praise indeed. I love Previn.
I'll try to get back on track soon and mention The Respectability of Film Music.
That's very interesting about Hopkins. He's still wrong.
It's Previn the quote is attributed to in the original post, not Hopkins.
Yeah, true - and I think we've got the wrong Hopkins too. It's the late British composer/writer/broadcaster Antony Hopkins (as correctly spelled in the original post), not the actor and occasional composer with the H.
Anyway, I don't have much to add at the moment to the topic except to say that Previn is one of my favourite composers. We've had plenty of threads about his work. There was a good one a while back which was I think an interview with him for an English newspaper (?) - Most entertaining, and I love how he dropped "interesting" into his conversations so much, whilst poo-pooing (I think half of it was a jest) Hollywood, "Hollywood composers" and his own Hollywood work. You have to take things like, "THE FOUR HORSEMEN OF THE APOCALYPSE is one of my film scores I'm slightly less embarrassed about" with a pinch of salt. Then he'd go on to say, "Oh yes, Jerry Goldsmith, really interesting music!" - which is high praise indeed. I love Previn.
I'll try to get back on track soon and mention The Respectability of Film Music".
I always kind of lumped in Previn with Boulez as two composers whose music was...well, mostly just interesting. I was never moved by either. Schoenberg and Bartok were my preferred.
I'd rather listen to the worse score by Rozsa than pretty much anything by Previn and Boulez. But that's just me. I'm first to admit that Previn made more than a few daring harmonic risks in his music, and was a whole lot more interesting that the majority of younger composers that jumped on that absurb "minimalist" bandwagon just because they perceive Zimmer did. In fact, I think a lot of young composers could learn a lot from Previn's compositions.
I also think Previn might have been a bit motivated by jealousy of composers like Goldsmith in that interview. No offense to his fans (all of whom I respect for liking interesting music).
WagAL (you don't mind if I call you WagAl, do you?) - Are you talking about Previn's film scores, concert works or both? Criswell predicts that someone will post a lot of links to great Previn scores and WagAl will come back as a fan, like she did on the Westerns thread!
