Why?

Star Wars
Jaws
Raiders of the Lost Ark
Jurassic Park

Who is Goldsmith? He did the Star trek theme.
Who is Horner? If you're lucky, someone might remember his name on the poster for Titanic.
Who is Barry? He's the Bond guy (MAYBE...he hasn't done a Bond film in almost ten years!).
Who is Morricone? Isn't he Italian?
Who is Silvestri? Isn't he a cat? You know, Tweety-bird's enemy?

The household name argument doesn't work. Goldsmith is known in MANY different circles. The Patton theme is an example of a well-known work that is played OFTEN in bands across the schools of America...along with the Souza march...Hell, when one thinks of Patton, arguably the greatest Americna strategist in this country's history, one associates him with the music Goldsmith wrote for him and the rousing speech George C. Scott performed with such bravura!

I don't think there were, seriously, any household names created in the 90's. And EVERY composer had his no-name films...(Did ANYONE see Stanley and Iris, or Jack the Bear or House of Cards or Carried Away?)

That Goldsmith works so often for so many different films can perhaps be summed up in one statement...GOLDSMITH LOVES WHAT HE DOES. He loves to work. He loves the challenge of finding something in a character and bringing it out onscreen.

In my opinion, Williams plays it safe by only scoring films that Spielberg directs or that have such OBVIOUS HUMANITY that it isn't much of a challenge (from a creative point of view...I will NEVER dispute his technical mastery). Horner NEVER scores for character (he has said as much), but rather scores for, again, the OBVIOUS EMOTION.

NEVER, and I am quite aware of the absolute I am making here, will there be a composer who will write a score and have the DIRECTOR OF THAT FILM...someone who has already poured over a year of his life into the film...come up to him and say...I never would have thought of this film as a love story! That's brilliant! I am paraphrasing that director's remarks...but the point being this: If Goldsmith had scored for the scene, that would never have happened. He scored for the characters...(the film I am referring to, by the way, is Logan's Run). A similar story can be said for POLTERGEIST. A truly inspired and terrifying ghost story...except, Goldsmith scored the film as a love story...the love of a family...and it WORKS ON EVERY LEVEL. The horrifying scenes with the face peeling and the ghost attack are even more intense because the music helped us get closer to the family, for me...especially...the JoBeth Williams character. One of the GREATEST cinematic moments in my life came when she was about to enter "the other side" to get her daughter from the beast...and her and her husband embrace...I was absolutely mortified that she might fail!! That she succeeds was such a relief that I was near tears...(and dammit, it wasn't over!!)

On a more recent note...THE HAUNTING. As I have mentioned in previous threads, I HATED this score when I first heard it...I WANTED it to be ALIEN...I wanted it to freak me out with all kinds of dissonance...instead, there was this peaceful, elegant music that, in my mind, had no place in a horror film. (I should have remembered Poltergeist...)

Again, Goldsmith scored for the character, a lonely, tragic human whose family for all intents and purposes, is dead to her (both physically and figuratively, when she asks her sister, her hideous brother-in-law and demon-spawned child, to LEAVE MY HOME.). She is alone...ands eventually finds everything she needs to do at Hill House, an entity that has it's own sinister theme that I find quite chilling and wonderful simultaneously.

GOLDSMITH has not only adapted to the changing musical tastes of the world, but has kept his integrity and consistantly used his strengths, finding the humanity in the characters of the films he scores, to write some of the best music the century could ever hope to see and hear.

I hope this...ummm...novel...helps people to understand WHY I think Goldsmith is the best out there...and why I would implicitly trust his musical sensibilities and follow him anywhere he wanted to take me.

Joe

I would like your thoughts on this topic.

Thanks!!!

Nixon was not a save film by all means.

Otherwise with Goldsmith, I agree. An excellent composer. OH yeah, and you just made Jeron very happy.

Good point on Goldsmith tho, definately has a larger effect than most people relaize. You say he adds stuff to the movie that the director never realized? Possibly true, but that can be hit and miss. I didnt care for the score for the Haunting at all, it was f*cking boring. Scoring for characters is good in character driven scenes, but sometimes the characters SUCK and so maybe we shouldnt be paying attention to them.
My favorite score of Jerry's is Ghost and the Darkness. Now that doesnt strike me as a character driven score, so what gives Joe?
One thing: Im glad you are grading his scores based on their effect in the movie. Many people around here sometimes forget that the score is written for a movie, not for us.

Williams scores for other films buddy, its Spielberg who never directs without him. Get your facts strait.

Oh, and Schindler's List and Braveheart kick the sh*t out of any Goldsmith score(that isnt an insult). Goldsmith can be damn good, quite often is, but even his best cannot compare.

Your post was really more of a Novella than a novel

I will put myself in the line of fire and say that I thought Braveheart was a tedious bore of a score. All formless, structureless ambience. It didn't help that the music insisted on asserting itself in scenes that would have been better served with no music at all. I know this score is loved by a lot of you guys and I know you'll continue to love it. I haven't played mine in years.

For a film about the defiance of one man against an empire and his effects on his people see Spartacus. Both film and score tower above Braveheart.

Seondly, I actually have my facts quite in order. My statement was that Williams scores films for Spielberg AND films in which the emotions attached to the characters are OBVIOUS. Angela's Ashes had obvious emotional attachments to it...as did Stanley and Iris and Sleepers. To a lesser extent, Presumed Innocent, which is one of my favorites of Williams' repetoir, is a subtle thriller and Williams' scored the layers of complexity perfectly. What I mean when I say he plays it safe is that he doesn't attach himself to films that might be considered weak (Goldsmith does this all to often...and please don't tell me MOM AND DAD SAVE THE WORLD is a strong film...hehehe). This is to his credit, but he also misses out on opportunities to create something completely different...and, perhaps, elevate a film above what it could be (Goldsmith has often commented publicly on his own ego...and that one HAS to have a strong ego to make it in the business...he is SOOOO right on with that!).

Lastly, I will be the first to agree with you that Schindler's List is perhaps one of the top scores of the century (going out on a limb there!!). Although not an easy listen apart from the film, what it does IN the film is extraordinary...and well deserves all the praise it has received.
Being a huge Hornerphile...that is...having followed his career since it's inception, I can, with a clear conscience, state that Braveheart is NOT that great of a score. On the contrary, it is my opinion that Braveheart is one of Horner's weaker efforts. Though not a bad score by any stretch, his work on Gibson's MAN WITHOUT A FACE is much more powerful I believe. Braveheart is over-the-top, and the music just doesn't seem to go with it at MOST points. His music for the climatic battle scene is pretty standard and does NOT elevate it beyond a bloody/gory bru-ha-ha. In my opinion, Goldsmith's weakest efforts surpass this particular Horner score. On the other hand, you will have a hard time convincing me that anyone else could have scored WRATH OF KHAN better than Horner. Or KRULL, or COCOON. In more recent efforts, FIELD OF DREAMS, SNEAKERS and even the subtle beauty of SPITFIRE GRILL are much better examples of fine scoring.

Two more of these and I can publish them in book form and call them...ummmm...Dissonant Seasons (bad Stephen King joke...sorry).

HAL: im laughing, sorry. basically i cannot take seriously the opinions of people who consider Braveheart to be "a tedious bore of a score(that was especially funny). All formless, structureless ambience." what are you on man? give me some of that ****, cause it must be GOOD if it makes Braveheart seem weak. And then in the same breath you trivialize Schindler's List, WOW. Im sorry for you. I truly am.

And as far as opinions go I could just as easily trivialize yours. Maybe you should spend more time talking about exactly WHY Braveheart is so great and not make flat statements to that effect.

In Schindler's List, Williams scored the emotions of the main character.

You can take your own pick. I prefer Goldsmith's brilliantly complex composition.

Again, I have said this before, the reason of the success of the movie Titanic and the subsequent cd release is multifold. There are many, many reasons. It has a lot to do with the story itself and the visual effects. It has a lot to do with Leornado Di Caprio and the millions and millions of girls who watched the move over and over again just to see his face. It has a lot to do with a score that was written in a new age/Irish or celtic tradition, which at the time was very popular and contiunes to be with the general public. The arguemt that more people know about James Horner than Goldsmith just because of one album is weak if not very weak. I could guarantee that most people who bought the soundtrack would not be able to tell you the composer's name. In fact, I bet there are a lot of people who may have Star Wars who don't have a clue who John Williams is. To even suggest that James Horner has a better name recognitian than Jerry Goldsmith is...well...imaginative at best.

Horner writed beautiful melodies and Braveheart is defentely one of the most beautiful composed scores ever written. To me it fits the film like a glove much better than Titanic, although that one was very well done as well. He is a gifted composer and I like his scores very much.

Goldsmith is a master. No one composes intense, adrealene pieces like him. He also can write beautiful melodies. His choices of films he has composed just shows the deversity he has. He likes to apply his talent to different kind of films. Teacher's teach different subjects because they eventually get bored teaching the same thing over and over again. I'm pretty sure composers like to compose to different emotional films than always the same.

John Williams, well...what can one say about him. He is just sooooo good. His Schindler's List is a masterpiece. For me it is even a pleasant listenig. That piece can get tears in my eyes. To compare this piece with Goldsmith's QB is misguided. Goldsmith composed the score on the basis of the horrors of the Holocaust. His score was complicated and in many ways structured more towards the modernistic styles rather than the romantic period. The film itself focused on the same thing, the pure horror of the situation.

Schindler's List on the other hand focused on the emotional aspects of the man Schindler. The Holocaust was a backdrop, a supporting part of the movie, the focus was primaruly on Schindler and the jews on his list. The score efectively focused on this human aspect. Here, the horror spoke for itself, it didnt't need emotional, musical underwritings. Hence we have a very yiddish, emotional and depressing and sad score.

Both scores are great and fit the film. It is simply a case of preference as to the listening experinece.

Scott

Specific case in point: "Betrayal," when Wallace learns he's been, well, betrayed. Gibson intercuts between Wallace's wounded face and those of the betrayer (I don't remember much about the WHY of this sequence, just being impressed at the technique) -- and Horner's music is properly anguished and, I'd say, character-specific.