beyond the variations on some themes, I love some unreleased bits of NEW music, melodically speaking, like Woolsey's speech, the family video (boy missing his dad) or the militaristic piece already mentioned.
all in all is 50 min of complete JG score, + alternate and unused bits
"Matinee" is one of the best (if not The best) Joe Dante/Jerry Goldsmith collaborations.
The fact that the movie is superb and will hopefully grow in reputation (if more people see it as time goes by) might mean a specialty label will be interested in releasing a two-disc definitive CD set?
It would also be so much fun to have the movie-within-a-movie non-Jerry Goldsmith music included.
I have a longer version which clocks in at 73:09 seconds that I got from Joe Dante's editor and it's a GREAT listen. Varèse's album was 37:56 long and the version I have with PERFECT sound is 73:09, so that's almost 36 MORE minutes of music. I too would absolutely LOVE an expanded edition of this at some point out for the masses in that deluxe treatment style that The Bande does!
I'm wondering, does expanded Jerry Goldsmith scores sell? I was under the impression that pretty much all expanded Goldsmith scores sell pretty darn good. ESPECIALLY stuff from that 80's and 90's era. I would be SHOCKED if this ever did get expanded upon that it flopped. I'd easily buy a copy and I think a lot of you guys would too. If Varèse doesn't do it, it's a given that La-La Land or someone else would grab it and give it a great treatment that WOULD sell! Just as long as SOMEONE expands this great score, I'll be happy!
WOAH! Your post manages to be SMUG, PATRONISING and INCRIMINATING *and* it promotes a BOOTLEG for a title owned by your employer... !! Way to go, DMD.
Why? He now represents a major soundtrack label and when he posts something about a copy of music that he owns that is not available to the public, it makes one wonder why he would have admitted it here on a board that doe not allow talk of *ootlegs! This is wrong in so many levels, but he works for one of the labels so it is okay?
Why? He now represents a major soundtrack label and when he posts something about a copy of music that he owns that is not available to the public, it makes one wonder why he would have admitted it here on a board that doe not allow talk of *ootlegs! This is wrong in so many levels, but he works for one of the labels so it is okay?
Don't be ridiculous.
When Jerry Goldsmith got a tape of Alex North's 2001 before it was released, he became a bootlegger?
I would argue that it becomes a bootleg when he shares the recording with a third party — for profit or not. Now it is a private copy, given to him with full knowledge of the right holder.
Why? He now represents a major soundtrack label and when he posts something about a copy of music that he owns that is not available to the public, it makes one wonder why he would have admitted it here on a board that doe not allow talk of *ootlegs! This is wrong in so many levels, but he works for one of the labels so it is okay?
Considering the source, I don't really think it counts as a bootleg. He received it from someone who worked on the film.
I received a couple of scores of John Murphy himself that aren't released. Does that make me a bootlegger?
When Jerry Goldsmith got a tape of Alex North's 2001 before it was released, he became a bootlegger?
I would argue that it becomes a bootleg when he shares the recording with a third party — for profit or not. Now it is a private copy, given to him with full knowledge of the right holder.
But very few composers - including Goldsmith - actually held the ownership rights to their own music. In the case of Matinee, there's still a piper to be paid and legal ramifications that cannot really be brushed away, you know?
Getting unreleased music - regardless of the source - and coming onto this site to talk about it seems to have always been against the forum rules. And it should be. Is there an enormous underground soundtrack trading world? Sure. I'd wager that the vast majority of people on this board have participated in / benefited from it at one time or another.
But I think it's really important to keep it clean here. There's a thin line between our discussions here, and what happens on some of the illegal trading sites, and I really don't want to see this board turn into that.
DMD _could_ have said something vague about having seen the movie again recently and used that a way to discuss the music he's been listening to recently, but instead he went into a commercially unavailable score in great detail, and even named the person he got it from.... all of which really seems wrong to me.
Whatever, man! Let's not ruin another innocent post by DMD with all this talk of legality and rules. Don't let these people get you down, DMD! If you could maybe just give us all Marshall's email address and we could all ask for a link or a physical CD. Thanks!!!!!!!!!!
Why? He now represents a major soundtrack label and when he posts something about a copy of music that he owns that is not available to the public, it makes one wonder why he would have admitted it here on a board that doe not allow talk of *ootlegs! This is wrong in so many levels, but he works for one of the labels so it is okay?
Don't be ridiculous.
When Jerry Goldsmith got a tape of Alex North's 2001 before it was released, he became a bootlegger?
I would argue that it becomes a bootleg when he shares the recording with a third party — for profit or not. Now it is a private copy, given to him with full knowledge of the right holder.
I have no dog in the fight but, thirds time the charm? A boot is any unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material. Be it first party or third party the number matters not. I don't think an editor of a film quantifies as authorized either, since they don't own the material.
Should the editor-guy have given DMD a cd of the recordings? No, but these things happen. Should DMD have said here that he got it? Perhaps not, but hey, we're amongst friends, are we not? Those few responses he got for 'spilling the beans' are exaggerating to say the least.
Should DMD share the recording? Absolutely not! But I thinks that's a no-brainer.
Should the editor-guy have given DMD a cd of the recordings? No, but these things happen. Should DMD have said here that he got it? Perhaps not, but hey, we're amongst friends, are we not? Those few responses he got for 'spilling the beans' are exaggerating to say the least.
Should DMD share the recording? Absolutely not! But I thinks that's a no-brainer.
I agree with everything you said here. "Let He Who Is Without Sin Cast the First Stone."
Well, I'm "not without sin", but I also have never gotten a non-commercial release and then come onto this site to tell you all about it. The house rules are against it, and since this forum is FSM's party, they have every right to prohibit discussion of non-legal materials.
Additionally, I'm guessing that Shaun's response was supposed to be a liiiittle tounge in cheek.
