ron@wjvax.UUCP (Ron Christian) (05/21/85)
**** A while back when I was writing by review of LADYHAWKE I made a statement that bothered me at the time and I was surprised nobody took me to task on it. I said: >And speaking of things out of place, Andrew Powell's rock >score is totally inappropriate. He takes scenes that >otherwise have a beautiful period and wreaks real havoc with >the spirit and texture of the film. [deleted...] The music of the age that LADYHAWKE is set in did not have music much like anything that we currently hear in films, -- why does certain music in films sound appropriate to the period and other music does not? There seems to be something in the scores of some films that make them seem to fit into a period of history, but for the life of me I am not sure what there is in the music that makes it seem that way. [deleted...] Mark Leeper ...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper *** Mark, I didn't see either of the other two movies you mentioned, so didn't feel qualified to comment on them and therefor deleted those parts from your text. I did not like much of the music of Ladyhawke, and will try to convey my feelings on why. I think you are really close. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are trying to say that although the music seemed anacronistic, a different score (say, a orchestral arrangement) would seem more appropriate, even though it's just as anacronistic. Why? One could argue that orchestral music, for instance, is 'timeless', equally appropriate for 'A long time ago in a galaxy far far away', the middle ages, or the present. But, I have a feeling that a synthesized score without the rock-and-roll drums would have been wonderful for Ladyhawke. Some of the quieter music fit the scenes so well I hardly noticed it. Part of the problem, then, is the rock (or pop) feel of the main theme. It included a lot of pop music cliches that are inextricably tied to a particular era. And it's the wrong era. Here's the other part: Some music mediums are more 'transparent' than others. For instance, orchestral music can set a mood without making a statement. You can watch, oh, Quest for Fire without thinking 'Gee, they didn't have violins in the stone age'. I think the same is true for synthesized music. It's not strongly typed. But throw in the drum kit and electric gituar and suddenly your *instruments* themselves are making a musical statement. Tied to an era. And sound funny in other settings. So the question of how appropriate a score is boils down to two parts: 1) Does the compositional style fit, and 2) do the instruments lend themselves to establishing the correct mood. The score to Ladyhawke blew it on both counts. That's all I've got. This is as hard as defining the concept of 'quality'. -- __ Ron Christian (Watkins-Johnson Co. San Jose, Calif.) {pesnta,twg,ios,qubix,turtlevax,tymix,vecpyr,certes}!wjvax!ron "What do you mean you backed it up the wrong direction???"
datanguay@watdaisy.UUCP (David Tanguay) (05/23/85)
Rock (or pop) music is more jarring than orchestral. It draws attention to itself and away from the movie. The movie's scene, then, must draw more attention than the music, and to do so the scene must be visually exciting (frantic, loud - I'm not sure of what word I want). In the fight scenes of Flash Gordon the music (by Queen) did not overpower the scenes and seemed (to me) appropriate. This type of scene would by very rare, however, in a movie set in a (pseudo-)historical setting, and if pop was used in an appropriate scene in one of these movies, it would break up the aural continuity of the movie (assuming appropriate music was used throughout the other, less wild scenes). All this closet philosophising (?) aside, I think the *real* reason it doesn't sound right is because we've all spent 20+ years watching historical films with an orchestral arrangement, and so we associate a historical setting with that type of music. Orchestral music was used initially because that was the type of music that the public would associate with grandeur (i.e. same reason for all those movies being made "with a cast of thousands"). There's my two bits, anyhoooo ... Daiv Tanguay
reiher@ucla-cs.UUCP (05/24/85)
In article <759@mtgzz.UUCP> leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) writes: >The implication to me of what I myself am saying is that a more >traditional score is more appropriate. I really do believe that, but I >am not sure why. The score to a film like BECKET really does seem to >have the feel of the period to me. But intellectually I don't know how >that could possibly be. In the time of BECKET or LADYHAWKE music was, >I believe, quite different than it is today. ... >The music of the age >that LADYHAWKE is set in did not have music much like anything that we >currently hear in films, -- why does certain music in films sound >appropriate to the period and other music does not? There seems to be >something in the scores of some films that make them seem to fit into a >period of history, but for the life of me I am not sure what there is >in the music that makes it seem that way. > I would say that scores of people like Max Steiner and Korngold in the old Hollywood films set in the Middle Ages/Renaissance periods sound more appropriate because they are, in a sense, emulations of classical music. Almost everyone, even many of us who intellectually know better, have a tendancy to associate classical music, in general, with the remote past. The fact that Beethovin's music would actually have been out of place in the 13th century doesn't make a lot of difference to us. For Americans, at least, classical music seems to sound "right" for anything between the fall of Rome and the twentieth century. Another point is that two of the most popular forms of classical music, romantic and baroque, tend to conjure up particular feelings. Much romantic classical music tends to be heroic, making the style perfect for swashbucklers. Baroque music, with its cleverness and complexity, conjures up the image of a royal court, with its precisely polite manners and decorum. (Remember, we're talking popular perceptions here, not reality.) Finally, there is the question of indoctrination. Most of us grew up with Hollywood romantic scores to back up adventure films, etc., so that's what sounds right. What I find especially interesting is composers who can work against type, who can use a different type of music to get the proper feel. A good instance was in a French desert imperialism film I saw recently, "Fort Saganne". The score was largely based on a theme originally introduced on the cello, a theme that was rather thoughtful and a bit brooding. Imagine my surprise when it proved perfect for a desert battle between Bedouins and French colonial troops. In another instance, "Blanche", a French film set in the Middle Ages, went back to authentic music of the period rather than Romantic music in the style of the 19th century. It contributed a rather different feel to the film. One could say that the producers of "Ladyhawke" were hoping for something of this kind from the rock score. They didn't get it, in my opinion. It just sounded wrong. -- Peter Reiher reiher@ucla-cs.arpa soon to be reiher@LOCUS.UCLA.EDA {...ihnp4,ucbvax,sdcrdcf}!ucla-cs!reiher
leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (05/24/85)
A while back when I was writing by review of LADYHAWKE I made a statement that bothered me at the time and I was surprised nobody took me to task on it. I said: >And speaking of things out of place, Andrew Powell's rock >score is totally inappropriate. He takes scenes that >otherwise have a beautiful period and wreaks real havoc with >the spirit and texture of the film. The implication to me of what I myself am saying is that a more traditional score is more appropriate. I really do believe that, but I am not sure why. The score to a film like BECKET really does seem to have the feel of the period to me. But intellectually I don't know how that could possibly be. In the time of BECKET or LADYHAWKE music was, I believe, quite different than it is today. Instruments were much cruder and the music was of a different style. The music of the age that LADYHAWKE is set in did not have music much like anything that we currently hear in films, -- why does certain music in films sound appropriate to the period and other music does not? There seems to be something in the scores of some films that make them seem to fit into a period of history, but for the life of me I am not sure what there is in the music that makes it seem that way. Another film that this has struck me with is the film WITCHFINDER GENERAL (aka CONQUERER WORM). In the middle of nowhere this film pulls out a musical theme that is peaceful and surprisingly beautiful -- quite out of keeping with this otherwise rather jarring historical/horror film. It really has the feel (for me) of England at the time of Cromwell. I don't think that it really sounds like an old English ballad, but it has something that sounds right. Anybody out there know why that is? Does anybody even understand the question? Mark Leeper ...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper
no4pag@ihuxm.UUCP (Gail Valentine) (05/24/85)
> > Rock (or pop) music is more jarring than orchestral. It draws attention > to itself and away from the movie. The movie's scene, then, must draw > more attention than the music, and to do so the scene must be visually > exciting (frantic, loud - I'm not sure of what word I want). In the > fight scenes of Flash Gordon the music (by Queen) did not overpower the > scenes and seemed (to me) appropriate. This type of scene would by very > rare, however, in a movie set in a (pseudo-)historical setting, and if > pop was used in an appropriate scene in one of these movies, it would > break up the aural continuity of the movie (assuming appropriate music > was used throughout the other, less wild scenes). > All this closet philosophising (?) aside, I think the *real* reason it > doesn't sound right is because we've all spent 20+ years watching > historical films with an orchestral arrangement, and so we associate > a historical setting with that type of music. Orchestral music was > used initially because that was the type of music that the public would > associate with grandeur (i.e. same reason for all those movies being made > "with a cast of thousands"). > There's my two bits, anyhoooo ... > > Daiv Tanguay I had a completely different reaction to the music in LADYHAWK -- probably because the kid (drat, whatisname, anyway) was so out of context for the nominal time of the piece, I mentally assigned it to "no-time" and therefore found the music totally undisturbing in context and often appropriate to the action. Music of another sort would have put the kid even more out of context, as it was, I saw it as providing a slim effort at bringing the whole thing together. -- Gail Valentine ihuxm!no4pag
leeper@mtgzz.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (05/29/85)
On why some scores seem appropriate to some periods of history and others do not: >I did not like much of the music of Ladyhawke, and will try to >convey my feelings on why. > >I think you are really close. Correct me if I'm wrong, but >you are trying to say that although the music seemed >anacronistic, a different score (say, a orchestral >arrangement) would seem more appropriate, even though it's >just as anacronistic. Why? Yes, that is what I am asking. In specific it would have a feel of that specific period. I guess Basil Polidouris' spectacular score for CONAN THE BARBARIAN is another example. It feels right for the period. The rock score that Dino DeLaurentiis at first wanted would have felt wrong. Whatever I am responding to, it is not the music of the period. I think the music was pretty primitive. I guess it is just music reminiscent of older music line Carmina Berana so it feels old enough in style, even though Carmina Berana could not possibly have come from whatever age the Hyperborean age really corresponds to. > >One could argue that orchestral music, for instance, is >'timeless', But it really isn't! That is my point. >equally appropriate for 'A long time ago in a >galaxy far far away', the middle ages, or the present. I agree with all but middle ages. Unless you are not really trying to capture a feel of the period. Then of this choice, only the present is accurate. >But, I have a feeling that a synthesized score without the >rock-and-roll drums would have been wonderful for Ladyhawke. I would have thought so, but I am not sure why. >Some of the quieter music fit the scenes so well I hardly >noticed it. Part of the problem, then, is the rock (or pop) >feel of the main theme. It included a lot of pop music >cliches that are inextricably tied to a particular era. And >it's the wrong era. The rock music score might attach to a 10-year period, the orchestral to an 80-year period. That's a wild guess. I don't know much about music history. > >Here's the other part: Some music mediums are more >'transparent' than others. For instance, orchestral music >can set a mood without making a statement. You can watch, >oh, Quest for Fire without thinking 'Gee, they didn't have >violins in the stone age'. I think the same is true for >synthesized music. It's not strongly typed. But throw in >the drum kit and electric gituar and suddenly your >*instruments* themselves are making a musical statement. >Tied to an era. And sound funny in other settings. Yes, but why. The piano should tie the film to the 19th or 20th century but does not sould out of place in a film set in the middle ages. I guess, to give a film the right feel, use of few noticable equivalents of the instruments of the period. The score for JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS has a measured drum beat, but like that of the man who beat the drum for the galley slaves. > >So the question of how appropriate a score is boils down to >two parts: 1) Does the compositional style fit, and 2) do >the instruments lend themselves to establishing the correct >mood. The score to Ladyhawke blew it on both counts. > >That's all I've got. This is as hard as defining the >concept of 'quality'. -- __ Well, we may have beat the topic to death. But I think we are getting closer to the answer. Thank you. Mark Leeper ...ihnp4!mtgzz!leeper