 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Aug 2, 2002 - 12:50 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
joan hue
(Member)
|
Metaphor123 in his thread about 5 Star Scores felt that Edward Scissorhand’s score
transcended the mood and tone of the picture. He states, “It calls attention to itself.
Some people think a good score should never do this. I have found, more often than not,
this is exactly what a good scores does.” I think it might be educational and just plain fun
to discuss that idea.
“Composers had to submit to the myth propagated by past Hollywood film makers that
film music is only good and effective when nobody notices it....music was merely a
subordinate detail--a window dressing,” “As with good cutting, the audience is not as a
rule suppose to be conscious of the music.” (John Huston) “And, just as the ideal cutting
is the kind you don’t notice as cutting, so with music.” (Hitchcock.) All quotations from
Stephen Armstrong’s excellent FSM article The Sound of Murder. (Volume 7, Number 5)
Personally, I tend to agree to Metaphor123, especially if it is an outstanding score. Yep,
my logic and profundity just disintegrated a WEE bit because what I’m really saying is
that if I like the score, I don’t mind it standing out; if I don’t care for it, I shouldn’t be
consciously aware of it. Talk about Valley Girl Erudition.  ( But I admit that it’s
kind of how I feel and think.)
On a more serious note, I really don’t see what is wrong with noticing the variable artistic
aspects of a movie. Most of us tend to see a seamless whole upon INITIAL viewing.
Various components combine and affect us subliminally. It is usually during
REFLECTION or a SECOND viewing that we notice the individual parts that meld into a
whole. (Being filmscore lovers, we are probably more discerning in our listening
experiences than the average audience member.) I remember the first time I watched A
Fistful Of Dollars in the theater. Everyone noticed the music. In The Good, the Bad, The
Ugly who doesn’t grin when the three characters are introduced to Morricone’s “wha ah
wha ah a wha wha wha” motif ? Morricone’s western music calls attention to itself as
much as Leone’s ubiquitous close ups and infinite pauses before gunslingers draw their
guns. Orson Welles’ camera angles screamed “observe and notice me!” (or crook your
neck.) The cinematography in The Road to Perdition was dark and brooding when Hanks
is near Chicago or with the mob. With them, he has condemned himself to Perdition .
Ironically however, the town of Perdition exists as a haven maybe for safety and
redemption. As Hanks and son draw nearer the town, sun and light fill the screen. Two
sides of Perdition enhanced via cinematography. Two sides of the theme, “The sins of the
fathers are visited upon their sons,” are developed in shadow and light.
I see a poem as a whole. But I also note the word usage, symbols, and the sounds of
language, and how when all mixed together, they contribute to the whole. Or they may not
contribute. It is really about quality. A terrible score that is too loud or out of sync (for no
apparent purpose such as irony) with the visuals calls attention to itself for all the wrong
reasons. Still, I don’t see a problem with a solid score calling attention to itself any more
than noticing superb or horrid acting, consequential or wretched cinematography, the
quality of the dialogue and plot, etc. But to keep from being stoned, I’ll gutlessly add,
there ARE always exceptions. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A lot of things have changed about movies during the last thirty years, and one of those things is the audience.
Those quotes from Huston and Hitchcock probably best describe the audience who will see the picture one time only. As you said, Joan, we're less likely to dissect any film on the first viewing.
Remember too that Huston and Hitchcock both made films at a time when television didn't exist, so there wasn't anywhere for a film to go after it had run its course in theatres, hence little or no possibilities for repeat viewings.
When I was a teenager (in the 1960's), I was considered "weird" by most of my peers, because of my love for cinema. I would watch films many times, while the rest were satisfied with one viewing. Today, unlike thirty years ago, there are more movie lovers like me. In fact, it's gone to the extreme, with many teenagers racking up dozens of viewings of the newest Star Wars or Austin Powers flicks.
I've said all of that to say this: I don't believe those comments by Huston and Hitchcock apply to the movie audience of today.
If Hitchcock didn't want film music to call attention to itself, he never would have hired Bernard Herrmann once!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funny, Joan, sometimes I think we share a brain.
I glimpsed past that part of the in print FSM this evening and shook my head in disgust.
A score ought to be noticed. A film composer ought to do what he can to make a score accessible to audience members. In turn, audience members ought to rely upon their ears as well as their eyes.
Great topic!
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Aug 2, 2002 - 1:50 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Howard L
(Member)
|
OK now we are entering the realm of the spin-off post I had hoped to create from another thread.
You know the difference bewteen listening and hearing, right? Say, for instance, you're lounging on a chair with the windows open trying to fall asleep. Outside, the cacophony of a million cicadas is going full-tilt. We are talking "nature's soundtrack" here. In spite of the ferocious din, you have no trouble falling asleep. Why? Because you aren't listening to them. You hear them, but you aren't listening.
Translation: hearing is passive and unless your ears are clogged you can't help but hear. Listening is active, it requires concentration ("attention must be paid"). And now to apply it to film music and this thread: there are some folks who either don't listen or who don't want to listen to the music. They think the visual's the thing, "visual" to include dialogue for the purpose of this principle. Oh they hear the music, alright, but that's where it ends.
There are additional related reasons why folks refuse to listen. One is the old auteur theory out of Film 101. This theory disdains outside influences such as music. This theory says music distorts the purity of a director's vision. Hey Dan, you know that film student who pop-poo'd film music in the first installment of your FSDaily series? She is an extreme example of a non-film music listener. She is, moreover, what I'd call a principled non-film music listener along the above lines of reason: To acknowledge the music is to distort the purity of film as a distinct self-contained artform.
The moderates, in this vein, are thus attracted to what I call functional-only scores a/k/a neutral a/k/a unmemorable music. They concede that it's okay for music to be heard but once you step over into the listening arena you have compromised the purity of film. The Huston-Hitchcock comments bespeak this moderate attitude. Film music fans who champion composers of this category often say things like "the music didn't get in the way" and praise them for "minimalist" tendencies.
Film music advocates take the listening stance and broaden the "purpose" of film to include what Spielberg calls enhancing "the motion picture experience". As such, music is an additive that seasons like salt; without it the picture tastes just plain bland. True, there can also be too much salt and there are some films that really hardly need any, but overall salt is a marvelous additive. And is meant to be tasted.
"The picture wasn't that good because of all the music."
"The picture was really good thanks in no small part to the music."
To be continued (?)...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"most husbands (like mine) hear their wives, but in self defense (and to avoid remembering honey-do chores), they never listen."
Somebody called "bulleteyes" will most assuredly agree with that statement, Joan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Aug 2, 2002 - 6:21 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Sir T.
(Member)
|
Sometimes a great score doesn't fit a great picture as it calls for too much attention.
"On the Waterfront" is one of my favorite scores, listened to apart from the film. But within the movie, it sounds out of place, too emphatic, more particularly so in the opening scene. It is indeed great music, but in this case inappropriate too.
Kazan disliked it and stated, in a book of conversations, he preferred the more discreet scores of Kenyon Hopkins or David Amram.
In the same perspective, when shooting "The Last Tycoon" he sent a note to Sam Spiegel, expressing worries that Maurice Jarre - Spiegel's choice not Kazan's - might come up with a score à la Zhivago that would harm the picture. A note Spiegel promptly gave to Jarre.
(No, Original! Comments about Maurice Jarre are not requested.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Aug 2, 2002 - 4:34 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
WLW
(Member)
|
This is a very interesting thread. To me, there is certainly no black-and-white answer to this. And, because there are differing "levels" of hearing/listening (amount of attention paid), it is hard to discuss. But, it is equally hard to argue that of the most popular films in history, Gone With the Wind, The Sound of Music, Star Wars, etc. music was definately a "noticeable" quantity that stood out.
I think it depends on the picture. Some directors think about how music can work for there film from the start, and thus, tend to create something with "room" for music to make a statement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Aug 2, 2002 - 6:10 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
mtodd
(Member)
|
"On the Waterfront" is one of my favorite scores, listened to apart from the film. But within the movie, it sounds out of place, too emphatic, more particularly so in the opening scene. It is indeed great music, but in this case inappropriate too.
Kazan disliked it and stated, in a book of conversations, he preferred the more discreet scores of Kenyon Hopkins or David Amram.
I think that says more about Spiegel &Kzan than Bernstein--who got a nomination for that score.
When Jack Garfein made The Strange One in 1957 he made the mistake of including African Americans in the film, pissing Spiegel off. As "punishment" Spiegel took over some post production and selected Kenyon Hopkins to score. Garfein had no say, and as he later got Copland to do his next film, that points up a disparity in tastes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On the Waterfront has taken quite a bit of abuse. Roy Prendergrast's wonderful book about film music slams it and mentions the opening music as being particularly egregious.
The percussion adds an appropriately propulsive momentum to the scene (building up to the stoolie's murder), and it's certainly a distinctive contribution. The tempo of the music isn't obligated to reflect the pace of the action on screen; just ask the other Bernstein
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Aug 3, 2002 - 5:26 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Sir T.
(Member)
|
Okay, I went back to my old copy of "Kazan par Kazan".
In the book, Kazan claims the music has been detrimental to the movie. He thinks the opening murder scene was strong enough by itself and Bersntein's music made it look like an opera with a pit orchestra, and set the picture off in the wrong direction.
Of course he explains later that Bernstein had too much personality for his taste - he calls him the most egocentric and conceited musician he's worked with, yet, he adds that he likes him nevertheless - and film music should be written by someone more willing to serve the director, to submit himself to his vision and help him fullfill it.
Like Hitchcock and Huston, he gives the impression that he doesn't tolerate to see his creative authority over the movie being challenged, that the film should be seen as his and only his.
That being said, I still think he's right about ON THE WATERFRONT, though, as I've said before, it is indeed a stunning piece of music, to be enjoyed on its own.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I seem to recall a quote by Jerry Goldsmith (please feel very free to correct me if I got this wrong!), when he stated that he truly felt his score for The Wind And The Lion was going to win the Oscar...until he sat in a theatre and listened to the opening "Shark Theme" from Jaws. That's when he knew that his music would lose the award.
WHY?
Because Jaws was certain to be the bigget hit of the year?
Not entirely...because that music would GET ATTENTION!
PLUS, the attention of many more filmgoers who would never see TW&TL.
Want an Oscar?
Demand ATTENTION!
In my way of thinking, if there were any real justice at the Oscars, John & Jerry would have both received awards that year, just as Wallace Beery, Frederick March, Katherine Hepburn & Barbra Steisand did.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Aug 6, 2002 - 8:58 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Thor
(Member)
|
The urban legend that says "invisible film music is the best film music" has been countered in numerous texts, both scholarly and not. Mostly because it lacks a certain degree of nuance. I'll elaborate on this - among other things - in an upcoming article here on FSM. 'Invisible' connotes some sort of complete absence and passive "feeding" of an audience, which is an unsatisfactory definition.
Adorno and Eisler, for example, were among those who found the "invisible" scoring of the classical Hollywood paradigm absolutely abhorring. It represented stagnation and hegemonial passivity. According to them, the best film music was the one you noticed. However, that particular brand of music had to be avant-gardistic and modernistic - frequently atonal; almost always dissonant. The irony is that Eisler himself was a film composer (though not a particularly prolific one) who frequently embraced nuances of the tonal in his scores.
Personally, I prefer scores that somehow "hit you in the face", that have a certain amount of "wow"-factor - either because they elaborate on a symbol, atmosphere or feeling alluded to in the visuals or because they play upon the exploitation of ALL of these simultaneously....AND forward a possible narrative. The end of the aforementioned ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST, for example, where Morricone and Leone janks up the music volume with an unashamedly simple minor-moded melody that releases all the agony and determination of revenge that the Harmonica Man has carried with him - introvertly - throughout the film. Fantastic.
NP: "Goodbye Yellow Brick Road" (Elton John) - a SUPERB album!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Ford's opinion of Alex North's score for "Cheyenne Autumn":
"Too loud and too damned much of it!"
You can't please all the people all the time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
) "When I was a teenager (in the 1960's), I was considered weird by most of my peers..."
