 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jul 10, 2018 - 8:26 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
townerbarry
(Member)
|
Dude...u fail. And Big Time..you seem to never ever listen to let’s say A round table of Composers that speak about Directors that have no clue...about movie music.
Noted, townerbarry. But I happen to disagree. Of course, composers have these funny stories. Music is what composers are responsible for, so yes, they have strongly held opinions about what they do. If you watch a roundtable of special effects guys, they also have funny stories about directors being clueless about their field. Same for production designers, and lighting technicians, and on and on down the line. Directors are responsible for a film as a whole, and hire experts in the many individual fields that make up this collaborative medium.
And yes, of course, some directors know more about any of these fields than others.
And of course, people who are passionate about their craft (whatever field it is) don't like having their opinions second-guessed by directors, producers, or studio execs.
(As a television writer, I felt that way about the network executive who gave me script notes three hours ago.)
And naturally here on this board, we take it as dogma that Barbra Streisand and Robert Redford were idiotic to fire John Barry. But personally, I don't find it hard to believe that Barry couldn't give them what they needed.
(As a television producer, I have twice had to fire composers – and it's incredibly painful to fire people – when they repeatedly missed the mark. I'm sure they disagreed. I can live with that. I had to do it.)
I'm sure I've convinced you of absolutely nothing. So be it. But statements that most directors don't know anything about music may make us feel superior, but they're not rooted in any reality, no matter what you choose to believe.
U Proved My Point ...Directors are Clueless.
And John Barry said on British Morning Show, that Working with Barbra Streisand was THE Worst experience of his career.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Streisand is an exception which I wouldn't use to prove a rule; she's one of three notable score rejectors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And John Barry said on British Morning Show, that Working with Barbra Streisand was THE Worst experience of his career.
I'm sure he did. Now please explain what that proves.
That Director knows nothing.
Well, she did know that James Newton Howard´s score for "The Prince of Tides" worked extremely well.
The same applies for Robert Redford choosing Thomas Newman for "The Horse Whisperer" instead.
Make no mistake, I love John Barry´s work. But I can imagine why his style did not work for those two films.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jul 10, 2018 - 11:48 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
.
(Member)
|
Ask an advertising client if the agency's account manager knows a lot about copywriting or design, and the client might say "Yes, he is so knowledgeable I can't imagine being without his creative expertise and guidance". On the other hand, ask the agency's design or copywriting teams what they think of the same account manager's creative input, and they might say they'd like him kept as far away from them as possible and to stick to providing media plans and cost estimates.
Then there's the other kind of relationship where the client thinks of himself as creative-minded and has little time for a slick account manager in a smart suit, preferring to work closely with the pony-tailed Creative Director. In this case, the creative team might be delighted to be bypassing the account manager and enjoying more direct communication with the client decision-maker. Alternatively, they might end up berating the account manager for not getting the client off their backs.
Whichever way these things manifest themselves, it's par for the course and is something a hired photographer or writer or illustrator – or composer – should be professional enough to handle without resorting to excuses about someone else being horrible to work for and responsible for a poor result. In my experience, the ones doing the moaning are most often the ones who are least collaborative and most difficult.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WillGoldNewtonBarryGrusin:
And you know that because you read some articles or saw some interviews? Or were you involved in the creation of scores done by Williams, Horner and Zimmer?
You are filibustering here in many posts up to the point when it just gets tiring to go on reading, just because you claim to know more. But then you just go on and on about the same points.
It would be more refreshing and effective if you just stated: I like Horner and Zimmer more than Williams. That is a perfectly fine opinion even if I don't share it.
REPLY:
Horner spoke very frankly about his vehement disagreements with directors and even the flawed approaches of his fellow composers. Specifically about his time on The New World and Troy in a somewhat infamous interview which I'm sure many of the aficionados here can confirm their familiarity with. Zimmer was very candid about his pragmatic aesthetic arguments with (and defiance of) Terrence Malick when working on The Thin Red Line together, which you may access on the supplemental materials of the Criterion release.
To appease you, I'll make it simple: Horner and Zimmer are better than Williams at some specific things in regard to storytelling assistance. I just thought I'd attempt to explain why. But fingers seem to be already resolutely plugged in ears when it comes to disenchanting a deity.
Now, what I would maintain I do know more about than probably anyone here is the intricacies of craft that go into the overall cumulative collaboration of cinematic storytelling. I don't wish to present my credentials, but if you were to actually inspect the specific contextual elements I'm referencing in my challenges and critiques - they do bear fruit.
*
Kev McGann:
I can now visualise octagon sitting down in a room, ala James McAvoy in SPLIT, wondering who's go is it next.
Wagner Almighty?
Aidabaibadaiba?
Invent a new one?
REPLY:
If my phrasing has too much verbiage to be considered fairly, then I'm not no certain that is really my dilemma to sort out. If anything, I would suppose talking up to someone is showing them regard. Many of the people here throughout various threads have taken upon themselves to be demonstratively reactionary and rude with derogatory personal lambastes or snarky insinuations. I explain my points, but instead of an appreciative reply or dignified disagreement, I've often been met with not only complaint, but unwarranted jabs taken at my expense. Well, I'm a big boy, but I prefer a civil conversation. Thank you.
*
SchiffyM:
I, too, am wondering where this claim comes from. Zimmer is famously accommodating (nothing wrong with that), and the sheer number of revisions Horner did for "Avatar" suggests he didn't say "no" to James Cameron a whole lot (again, nothing wrong with that – the man was his boss). It's funny how sometimes Horner's blatant swipes from the classics have been defended on this board as something a director demanded, and yet here comes the opposite argument. I would guess that neither is really true.
I would also say that any composer who refuses to compromise with a director may possibly be a brilliant composer, but is a terrible film composer. Would you defend a costume designer who refuses to dress a character how the director wishes, or a cinematographer who won't frame a shot as the director has instructed? A composer should argue for his creative vision, of course (and of course John Williams does this, as do all composers but the greenest and most desperate). But he is serving the director, producer, and studio. If he bristles at that, he should compose a concert piece.
REPLY:
I should have explained more clearly; it's not that I think arguing in and of itself is a wonderful virtuous attribute, but arguing for the correct purpose with the right intention toward making a better resolution is. Certainly no one ought to be abused or abusive when working together for a common goal. However, sometimes artistically it is necessary to take a stand if you feel the whole is being detrimentally compromised. And in those rare cases, when ego has been adequately placed in check yet reasonable solutions cannot be collaboratively achieved, it can become the most noble thing to just step away and refuse to participate in damaged enterprises.
As far as Horner swiping from various classical inspirations. There's fair validity to those criticisms, but they just don't really factor into the particular aspect of storytelling prowess that I have been attempting to allude to and cosmetically detail. Unfortunately, some have gotten a bit bent out of shape, misconstruing my objectives. However you are polite and pointed, and I appreciate that. Also I quite agree with you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And John Barry said on British Morning Show, that Working with Barbra Streisand was THE Worst experience of his career.
I'm sure he did. Now please explain what that proves.
That Director knows nothing.
I'm on Barry's side. But it's interesting because, of course, Streisand is a rather accomplished musical performer. I think we can at least all agree the replacement score on that film (Prince Of Tides) from James Newton Howard was pretty great.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And John Barry said on British Morning Show, that Working with Barbra Streisand was THE Worst experience of his career.
I'm sure he did. Now please explain what that proves.
That Director knows nothing.
Well, she did know that James Newton Howard´s score for "The Prince of Tides" worked extremely well.
The same applies for Robert Redford choosing Thomas Newman for "The Horse Whisperer" instead.
Make no mistake, I love John Barry´s work. But I can imagine why his style did not work for those two films.
Yes exactly. Agreed.
Perhaps you stated your assessment more elegantly than me, as I am apparently obnoxiously verbose for these proceedings, but your point is precisely in concordance with what I've been somewhat derided for saying here. Which is only that just because a composer writes an astonishingly beautiful movement of music, it does not necessarily mean that it's from the appropriate perspective to coalesce with the wants and intents of the storytelling within the film itself.
No one could possibly in good conscience argue that John Barry's "Moviola" and "The Beyondness Of Things" aren't musically lush and poignant - but perhaps it just didn't say what needed to be said (in the vein it needed to be said in) for "Prince Of Tides" or "The Horse Whisperer".
Anyway. we reaped the benefits, because those rejections resulted in what I consider to be career highlighting perfection from James Newton Howard and Thomas Newman, respectively.
But for some reason, if one asserts that the infallible John Williams might at times write something inappropriate for how you surmise the emotionality of the story ought to be progressing most effectively - well, it's a big no-no amongst the guardian horde here apparently. It's a most heinous heretical claim, ostensibly deserving of all manner of irrelevant intimate derogation. I mention it because yes, actually I do find such petty strong-arming to be both pitifully silly yet also personally dispiriting. Though I suspect the less knee jerk constituents quietly comprehend sound logic without harboring animus. If someone reads that gentle dismay and finds its passive rebuke unreflective of their own conduct, then please do not take it to heart, as it is not an allusion toward those of decent and fair standing. It's only a lament at a shamefully abusive element residing here that derive satisfaction in piling on with insidious snark rather than insightful independent thoughts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect it's about 50/50. After reading a number of interviews, listening to a number of interviews, and talking to composers in e-mail, I've found two sides of the coin: the directors who know how music works, maybe some terminology, and appreciate film scores; and then there are the ones I've heard composers complain about who know nothing about music, don't understand how it should functions, don't care and basically want wall paper they can edit up and change around as needed, don't really care about composer, sometimes even letting a situation develop where multiple producers will be tugging at a composer to "do it this way" or "do it that way" and you have to decide who to please. But in the end it doesn't amount to much; a real comprehensive study would be needed, and I can't imagine all parties being fully honest.
Good points. I'd add that a director who doesn't appreciate music, has very little sense of true art. Because music is the most involving art - the most resonant, the most immediate, the closest reflection of the spirit - which is what art ultimately aspires to be. The internal and eternal essences expressed. Therefore a director with no musical sensibility is likely crafting very vapid and soulless works, bankrupt of any lasting value to anything other than our eventual robot overlords.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jul 10, 2018 - 7:14 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Adam S
(Member)
|
But for some reason, if one asserts that the infallible John Williams might at times write something inappropriate for how you surmise the emotionality of the story ought to be progressing most effectively - well, it's a big no-no amongst the guardian horde here apparently. It's a most heinous heretical claim, ostensibly deserving of all manner of irrelevant intimate derogation. I mention it because yes, actually I do find such petty strong-arming to be both pitifully silly yet also personally dispiriting. Though I suspect the less knee jerk constituents quietly comprehend sound logic without harboring animus. If someone reads that gentle dismay and finds its passive rebuke unreflective of their own conduct, then please do not take it to heart, as it is not an allusion toward those of decent and fair standing. It's only a lament at a shamefully abusive element residing here that derive satisfaction in piling on with insidious snark rather than insightful independent thoughts.
From my perspective, your "crime" isn't criticizing Williams but, rather, doing so in a way that hardly constitutes "sound logic." I'm open to the idea that Spielberg reigns in Williams, a claim you made, but it would be nice to have that connected to some direct evidence. And what little direct evidence we have says the exact opposite, which makes the claim even more problematic.
I've actually heard lots of criticisms of Williams and dialog scenes but usually it is in the context of something like Amistad where the music becomes pretty syrupy with the Americana in the court room scenes just to take one example. I generally defend it as consistent with what Spielberg is trying to do but I can certainly understand the sentiment against it.
That's just one small part of what you've said but, again, the issue isn't the criticism - no one is above criticism - it is the emphasis on rhetoric over substantive analysis - examples, quotes, etc. Not the worst thing in the world but you shouldn't be surprised by the pushback if what you're saying doesn't make very good sense.
- Adam
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You all fucking know it's going to be someone shitty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bring back David Arnold !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bring back David Arnold !
Bring him back from where? David Arnold has never been involved in the Avatar franchise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
