101

(40 replies, posted in Episodes)

How many goddamn "chosen ones" does the world need?

102

(56 replies, posted in Episodes)

I love how this thread has garnered a (now) total of 10 posts since 2000 and fucking 9. It's as if everyone saw what it was and just went, "...mehNO."

Please, please actually call this album "An Album Called Leroy: Adventures in Faking This." Or at least one of the two halves.

All 3 possibilities have the most of the ring.

104

(40 replies, posted in Episodes)

AshDigital wrote:

Great episode - Would have loved to have Alex and the others from the musical spinoff on the show.

Glad to see someone appreciates me.

But in all seriousness, I would have just been sitting there silently pooping my pants with glee. I mean, come on--the main theme actually sounds like someone is yelling SUPERMAN!

Dammit Williams, you genius bastard.

Once I get a free couple hours I'll check this episode out and actually have something to contribute to the conversation--other than my usual John Williams worship, of course.

105

(162 replies, posted in Off Topic)

bullet3 wrote:

I am SO sick of the rising strings with banging percussion for 2 hours, there is no reason to settle for this kind of blandness.

Remember that composers hardly have the last say in what they're doing. Some of my best work has been rejected immediately, and some of my worst has been lovingly embraced by the director. Even a guy with Zimmer's renown has to answer to the director and the producers. Do you really think that the board of WB would take any chances with their main summer blockbuster?

Besides, I don't think you're listening hard enough. I'd say he got away with a whole lot that most composers couldn't do on a big movie like this. Sure, the action moments are "action-y"--what else is he going to do? But the rest of the film is pretty damn creative.

bullet3 wrote:

Alexander Desplat, John Powell, or Jeremy Soule could've nailed this score and done amazing things with it. I've defended Zimmer a lot in the past, but I kinda think he dropped the ball here, and he's really been coasting since Sherlock Holmes and Rango.

Agreed that any of those guys could have done a better job (Desplat is, in my opinion, the best A-list composer right now--except for Mr. Williams, of course).

106

(162 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Teague wrote:

Tell me about Superman, as if you had only seen this movie. Don't tell me what happened to Superman, tell me about him. Describe Superman as a person. Imagine you're setting me up on a date with him. Who is he?

Right? Nothing.

That's the great thing about this movie, though. They know that everyone knows his story, so it's not worth spending a bunch of time on. Compare that to The Amazing Spiderman--I found MoS's approach very refreshing.

Teague wrote:

Disliked score. Come at me Alex.

Sigh...you and I both know that if you give me an hour I will convince you why this score is brilliant. Just like every other Zimmer score.

107

(162 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Ewing wrote:

I found the perfect guy to play literally every character ever.

SPOILER Show
http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2010-06-12-Bryan_Cranston_517x307.jpg

FTFY.

108

(86 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Man, that Episode I poster is tasteful. The entire time surrounding that ad campaign...magical.

Ugh.

While we're on the Star Wars theme, though...I love this Polish Return of the Jedi poster.

http://i.imgur.com/J6bOB.jpg

And this Children of Men poster was just fantastic.

http://www.impawards.com/2006/posters/children_of_men_ver2.jpg

109

(162 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Saw it last night at midnight (IMAX 3D).

My god, it was brilliant. I loved it. Absolutely loved it.

And Zimmer's score was really fantastic. There's a clear homage to Williams' theme, but it's completely original and very moving.

fireproof78 wrote:

Respectfully, regarding Tolkien and allegory, he did hate it and he that isn't what he wrote in LOTR or the Hobbit. Allegory is literally a 1 to 1 representation of a person to another, such as Lewis' Narnia where Aslan is Jesus. Tolkien was not favorable towards allegory, and his writings, his letters all reflect that. He drew inspiration from mythological and historical figures, but they were not directly a representation.

I believe LOTR is a metaphor in some places, but not everything can be viewed as a metaphor and I don't think anything could be described as an allegory in terms of TOLKIEN's intent.

Excellent point. I tend to equate metaphor and allegory, and that's definitely not right. Thanks for the correction.

avatar wrote:
Alex wrote:

It's Star Wars all over again.

Over-use of CG was the Prequels' least problem. Poor child actors, mismatched casting, monotone line delivery, infantile Jar-Jar, flat directing, and ruining the original trilogy with unwanted wtf revelations (midi-chlorians) are some of Lucas' many sins.

Peter Jackson hasn't quite stooped so low yet. And he hasn't fucked with the original trilogy.

Fair point. Though, many of the problems with the story are (thankfully) taken care of because this prequel was already written.

Syl wrote:

I do get that in every Tolkien adaptation there will be a female part expanded or inserted, as he is mostly writing about dudes (with a few exeptions here and there), but seriosly, who is that elven chick?

Given the time in which the books were written, I've always felt that the low quantity of female characters in Tolkien's work is actually a good thing in terms of feminism. All of his female characters are strong and unique; focusing on what a single female could do was far more meaningful and interesting than having a ton of women in the book/film simply to have them there. Quality over quantity brings the characters' allegorical and poetic importance to the forefront.

Consider Eowyn's story: she is a symbol of feminine strength. In the Middle Earth mythology, that is her role--the idealized feminine realized through struggle. Her entire story revolves around being doubted as a woman and then proving that women can be just as strong, or stronger/more influential, than men. If every woman character did that, it wouldn't matter as much.

And I know Tolkien said he hated allegory. We all know that's bullshit.

Jackson's approach seems to be the opposite: rather than trying to underline a woman's story line in order to outline the genders' strengths, he's poising a preemptive strike by simply throwing in a female character with a lot of screen time but without much depth. It's like he's saying, "See? She has tons of screen time! Don't get mad at me about there being so many dudes!" As if he would be the one to blame in the first place.

Again, quality over quantity--except Jackson picked the wrong one.

Syl wrote:

Btw I still dont get why they go for the hobbit and not for the story of Hurin´s Sons or the story of Luthien and Beren, if they want to go all lenghty and epic on it. Those are material for the format they want.

The Tolkien estate won't give them the rights and they never will.

auralstimulation wrote:

What I missed from the Hobbit was the colour grading they did back in LOTR. There was a desaturated, subtle blue-y green tint  to the world and they weren't afraid to get grainy. That made the whole thing feel so much more like an old story. Couple that with models and prosthetics and PJ's never ending mantra of "it has to feel like it's real" and you end up with a world you feel you could walk right into.

Ah, never mind--looks like we agree after all.

Duuude, remember when Faramir is taking Frodo/Sam/Gollum to Osgiliath? It's basically black and white with a bit of green. Such amazing color grading.

auralstimulation wrote:

There are definitely some cartoonish effects. I guess you could say it's staying consistent with LOTR in that respect.

By "staying consistent," don't you mean "it's completely opposite?" The thing that I loved about LOTR is how gritty and real it was. I can lose myself in those movies because, oddly enough, makeup and miniatures (err, big-iatures) make for a deeper cinematic experience than CGI. The Hobbit looks like a video game, and I'm completely aware that I'm watching an actor reacting to a green screen.

It's Star Wars all over again.

A ridiculously insightful, hour-long video with the best pair in filmmaking/composing, talking about their inspiration and their collaboration. Filmmakers, take note: Spielberg is the perfect example of what to do when dealing with a composer.

This is just Part 1 of 4.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcc_7DDi … A7Zr8pj0QN

Teague wrote:

In the absence of a musical number or a "quick funny song" prompt, you're just a guy with the ability to say something to the world. What do you say? How do you say it? What are you going to sing about, and by the way, pick a style.

Styles exist because certain combinations of sounds worked in concert with certain ideals in the heads of the styles' originators at the time of said style's conception. Therefore thinking specifically about styles is the best way to either have a very clear idea of the song from the beginning, or to write yourself into a wall. Unfortunately it's usually the latter.

Also:

What you're saying and how you say it are inseparable. Obvious example: the general idea of "I love this girl and she doesn't love me back" has been stated countless times in countless songs, but the way one says it is what keeps it fresh. Not that you don't know this, but it's worth repeating.

116

(31 replies, posted in Creations)

These are fantastic, man. Really digging your voice!

Ah, yes, of course. It was DIF at the time, and there's just too many acronyms (by exactly 1) now: FIYH and WAYDM.

Tomahawk wrote:

Fun Fact: WAYDM DID talk about LOTR all damn day.

Pardon my ignorance, but what is WAYDM?

Oh my god I could talk about LOTR all damn day.

I'd have to double-check, but as we 1) aren't selling it/making money off of it, 2) aren't actually using any parts of the film other than to say "we're checking this movie out today, watch it with us," and/or 3) using another entity's likeness (as DI--I mean, FIYH so coldly found out), then there's no copyright infringement.

But let's say none of that's a problem and I decided that this podcast will include the pause/rewind stuff.

That would take a long time. Your podcast is already +/- 2 hours without all of that. In a linear format, the time is fine. But when you're stopping, rewinding, pausing to talk, and going again, you could add some serious, serious time. Especially if you've already seen the movie--you'd find yourself 2 hours in but only halfway through the movie, and I guarantee people who could antsy.

Maybe this sort of thing would make a better blog?

120

(35 replies, posted in Off Topic)

My friend is a ridiculous genius and can do, if I remember correctly, a 12-sided cube in under 2 minutes. I'll go and dig up the video posthaste.

Shackman wrote:

This is my kinda thread.

I'd love another (17 or so) podcasts talking about scoring and soundtracks.  it's obviously harder to do, but it might be interesting to cover an entire movie and breakdown the scoring and how it evolves and changes over the film....when themes repeat and how it relates to the action on screen.

Yes. YES.

You know what? I might just...you know...do that. I could already talk about, like, a hundred scores/movies, and analyzing others would give me an excuse to do just that...

Teague...podcast via Skype? Somehow?

Edit: You know what, you've got me thinking. There's one huge problem that a scoring podcast taking one movie at a time faces. And that's the fact that to really analyze it and see what's going on, like what you're talking about, you've got to really listen and watch a few times--especially if you aren't a musician. The big "hey here's the giant main theme!" moments are easy, but I guarantee you can't hum what's going on when Ben Kenobi is giving Luke his father's lightsaber. Moments like that are where the real meat of a score is, and because 90% of big budget feature films are scored really well, you don't notice 90% of a film's music at all. It just fits right into the drama and right into your subconscious. As it should.

So we'd have to pause and rewind and stuff if we want there to be an actual discussion and for the people at home to follow it. Doing the "aaannd hit play...now" format would fall apart. I think.

I have no idea what you're referring to, but I like it.

Ah, the ol' switcherHolden.

auralstimulation wrote:

Alex, you've really inspired me to keep going. You've hit the nail on the head with loving the 4 bar "chunk" of music and being afraid to branch out from there. That's me in a nutshell.

I'd like to think that eventually I'll break through that wall.

I'll let you know when I have something up. I really appreciate you taking the time.

Btw, I had a second listen to the soundtracks episode. That episode is so stupidly my bag it wasn't even funny. I was geeking out the whole time. What you guys were doing with adding the lower end counterpoint to the Tron theme: bad. fuckin'. ass.

Teague, we're gonna need another one of those, m'kay?

Ha, as soon as I move out to LA! It might be little bit, though...

Side-note: I'm not seeing that episode in the sidebar of the main page. WHAT THE HELL HOLDEN.

In regards to taking the time--no problem. Music is meant to be shared.

Absolutely! I'd be happy to take a look.

Writing is damn hard. I mean--before I arrived at Berklee, I was an instrumentalist only. Something clicked when I stepped foot in Boston, but it was still nearly 3 years before I finished a piece of music. And another year before I wrote something that I liked. And I was writing just about everyday over those 4 years.

I have an entire 3TB hard drive full of unfinished pieces of music, scraps of ideas...and another (physical) filing cabinet full of others. Probably hundreds or even thousands, just sitting there. Whether those ideas amount to anything--whether they're even touched at all--isn't the point. The point is that you simply write, write, write, and maybe one day you'll write something that truly fulfills you.

Trust me--it's impossible to run out of ideas. The whole "4 bars" thing is just temporary. It's a wall that you have to work through, but you can work through it. It generally stems not from a lack of ideas, but from loving your original 4 bar "chunk" of music too much--deviating from it can be a fearful act. In my case, at least; it took me a long time to realize this.

On top of all that, production is very difficult. A complete different world from writing, but in this age the two must and do inform each other. Sometimes I envy Beethoven for not having to deal with computers, mixing, etc, but then I realize that I'm being silly--what could he have done if he had complete and immediate control over his music? If he had a synthesizer?

So, keep cracking at all that as well. The internet is full of tons of great mixing tips, EQ and compression tutorials, etc.

Anyways, looking forward to the track!