Do you prefer Complete Scores (like North by Northwest), or would you prefer a score to be edited for a more coherent listening experience, even if meant only having 30 minutes to listen to?

PeterK

NP - "Echoes from Ossian" from the new Hamlet song soundtrack

Rhino's Superman has too many "Can you Read My Mind" tracks. But better that way than leave anything out, if you ask me.

BTW, I ALWAYS listen to the complete CD, I hardly ever use the program function of my player to leave out certain tracks.

On the other hand, re: "listening experience" -- it does occur to me that Goldsmith, for instance, has grown less interested in structuring his discs the way he did during the days of LPs -- THE MUMMY, for example, is about an hour of score, simply played chronologically. He clearly enjoyed thinking out his LPs, mixing up the cues and presenting his themes and developments of same in a particular order. Now he doesn't seem to do that, in part, I think, because of the different listening experience inherent in the CD (you don't have to turn it over.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by H Rocco:
He clearly enjoyed thinking out his LPs, mixing up the cues and presenting his themes and developments of same in a particular order.

---

This still annoys me. Sure, the movie dictates which theme is to be used when, but in the end, the composer usually still tries to introduce and develop the themes in a score. One of the best examples: The Rebel Blockade Runner sequence, an exposition of many of the score's themes. Or remember Leonard Rosenman's comments on the re-release of his Lord of the Rings score, in chronological order: That now for the first time the themes are DEVELOPED from the beginning to the end of the CD, and the fully-developed march version of the main theme is heard only at the end.

Well, as I've said numerous times, I don't really get the "completeness mania".

It is a known fact that I listen to the MUSIC, and care less about the movie or the track titles. As a consequence, I am satisfied when composers and producers arrange the albums to flow like any other classical recording (but don't take away the grittiness of the original score!). It is only when releases such as THE PHANTOM MENACE comes along, clearly leaving off a lot of strongly listenable and new themes/motifs, that I groan. And even that is a minor groan.

Otherwise, I think that soundtracks which are TOO complete ruin the listening experience to a certain degree because they get too damn repetitive in the end. I picked up the expanded BORN ON THE 4TH OF JULY, LAST CRUSADE and HOOK in my Williams mania only to sell them again, because I felt that the main themes and motifs were repeated ad nauseaum.

And I am like Marian: When I put on a film score CD, I listen to it from beginning to end - not to reexperience the mood of the movie in any way, but to get the gradual musical development. If a too-complete, poorly arranged album never gets anywhere musically and lingers on with the 150th repeat of the main theme, I am completely put off, to say the least.

[This message has been edited by Thor (edited 28 April 2000).]

Again, Richard Kraft in his FSM interview said that 30 minutes was the "ideal" length of a film score.

#@!^%*^%%$##@$^^%$

Short scores only leave me wanting more. And completism/archivism is not a crime. If every note of a score is out there, everyone gets their favorite cues and no one needs to sweat for boots.

NP: The Handmaid's Tale (Ryuichi Sakamoto)

But first, just why are you guys asking this question? You also asked about original scores vs. re-recordings----are you actually taking this information over to someone who might use it in some way or is this all speculation?

In any case, as I said in the topic about re-recordings, my ideal situation would be where the re-record was of such quality that it could replace the original in a re-mix of the film elements (actually they did this with the recent version of Welles' Othello, re-recorded the score and mixed it with the film). Here, too, on the topic of long scores vs short scores, I have an ideal situation, the best IMHO of all possibilities to shoot for.

I understand the idea of an album for listening--short, no repetition, cues arranged in an order for listening, maybe re-arrangements and re-recordings to make the whole thing more accessible. They've been issuing these for years and they're not horrible.

But for me, I do have an archivist mentality. There's no way I can listen to all the music there is in one lifetime--but I believe in its preservation. In terms of today's recordings, it seems that unless lost somehow, they'll remain in quality just as they were recorded. When it comes to earlier recordings on tape or acetates, we all know just how unkind age has been on these things. We know about the mix-downs, the thrown-out sheet music. Plainly, Hollywood views cinema as a product and I think this still goes. People in Hollywood don't care about movies or art, they just want to be rich and famous so they can travel, eat well, snort drugs, live fine, and get laid a lot. Haste, Waste, and Lack of Taste as a DP friend of mine once said. Hollywood can't be trusted to take care of their own.

If it were up to me, I'd take the studios by force and put all this material in a central archive, make it available to everyone in a variety of formats. An exaggeration of course, because even if I buy boots, I still believe in copyright and property rights. Still, it reflects how I feel. How's this for fanatisicm?: We should have everything!--every note from television, every note of every score from the very first silent down to the latest release no matter what the quality of the music. There's no way I could possibly listen to all that music or would want to, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be preserved and available.

So, long scores vs short scores? I think the whole question becomes irrelevant in the face of what I've suggested.

People can create their own listening experiences from the amount of material available--what matters is that the available material be abundant.

NP: Ride of the Valkyries (just kidding)

--------------------------------------------------------
Ex1 - "How can we make more profit over this movie"?

Ex2 - "Lets release two albums with the soundtrack: one with the score and another with songs featured in the movie plus other inspired by it!"

Ex1 - "Great!! But are you sure the score album's a great idea? I mean... it's only classical music. You can't put in on MTV!"

Ex2 - "Of course it is. There's lots of film score buffs all over the world. You never met one, since most of them live in dungeons and spend all their lifes in discussion boards fighting to prove composer a sucks while composer b rules, but they exist!"

Ex3 - "Hei! I've an even better idea! Why don't we release just a fraction of the score first - just about 30 minutes? They'll buy it for sure. They will start to ask for more music. Then, months later we can release the Volume 2 with more music!"

Ex2 - "Indeed!! And some years latter we can release the "Expanded Edition" of it, with more unreleased cues and an interview with the composer in the last track!!! They'll have to buy it for sure..."

Ex3 - "You're a genious! And decades latter we can release a double album "Complete Score" definitive release of it. Obviously they'll have to got it...!!"

Ex1 - "Yeah!!! I'm liking it. Endless profit over one single product which we already paid for..."
--------------------------------------------------------

Personally IMO, I want as much as possible. However I am not so fanatical about it to want every single second of every single score. As long as the scores have an good portion of the music, I think that is fine.

I would like to say though, *any* complete score that is no longer than 60-75 minutes. Should be released complete. Since it would not be too much trouble to do so, not counting reuse that is. As for scores over 75 minutes, if they released the better cues and had an good portion of the music I think that would be fine as well.

It just *does not have* to be complete. Personally I think anyone who says otherwise is just being unrealistic. Sure it would be nice, but in most cases it is just not needed. I would assume there are only an few complete scores over 75-100 minutes we truly need every piece of music.

However this is all just tastes and points of views. Unfortunately everyone has their
own feelings as to what is needed to be included. And what should be complete.

Regards,
Sean Robert Abbey

quote:

---

Originally posted by sabbey:
Unfortunately everyone has their
own feelings as to what is needed to be included. And what should be complete.

---

Perhaps the ideal that would satisfy most of us:

1) Deserving scores are released complete and chronological.

2) If the score is repetitive, or if the composer feels the music should be re-arranged for a more coherent listening experience, he does that. All the rest of the score gets packed at the end of the CD as bonus tracks. Tracking should be generous enough to allow everybody the reprogramming into any other desired order.

But first, just why are you guys asking this question? You also asked about original scores vs. re-recordings----are you actually taking this information over to someone who might use it in some way or is this all speculation?<<

Well, the questions are actually my own interests in knowing what other people think about those subjects.

The answers will certainly help when we come to the stage of publishing scores though

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nicolai P. Zwar:
Thor has some good points. I'm not THAT nuts about having every single note of every single score in order either. That's perhaps because I look at a soundtrack album as a MUSICAL album, not as a movie tie in. Movies that bear such repeated viewing to the degree that I actually connect the music and the scenes, note for note, hit for hit, are far and few in between these days.

Perhaps the ideal that would satisfy most of us:

1) Deserving scores are released complete and chronological.

2) If the score is repetitive, or if the composer feels the music should be re-arranged for a more coherent listening experience, he does that. All the rest of the score gets packed at the end of the CD as bonus tracks. Tracking should be generous enough to allow everybody the reprogramming into any other desired order.

Sadly of course, that is very very unlikely to happen, especially considering the enormous re-use fees that would have to be paid just for "bonus" tracks only a handful of devotees appreciate anyway.

---

Thanks,

This sounds like a very good way of doing it

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nicolai P. Zwar:
Perhaps the ideal that would satisfy most of us:

1) Deserving scores are released complete and chronological.

2) If the score is repetitive, or if the composer feels the music should be re-arranged for a more coherent listening experience, he does that. All the rest of the score gets packed at the end of the CD as bonus tracks. Tracking should be generous enough to allow everybody the reprogramming into any other desired order.

---

No, can't agree.
1) What are "deserving scores"?
2) Repetitive: I admit that some scores are too repetitive for my tastes. That's why, although I love Herrmann's scores, I seldom play them on CD. But: Most of the time, repetition is development of the material. E.g., "Binary Sunset" from Star Wars could classify as a repetition. If you'd leave it out from the score album, I'd have to kill you.

This reminds me a bit of Austrian TV. They used to play operas and concerts sometimes. Now, if they do this at all, they show truncated version, edited so that the result isn't too long for general audience. Or, I read at the IMDb that Branagh's Hamlet (which I unfortunately didn't yet have the chance to see) was intially shown in a truncated version in some cinemas, leaving out large portions of Shakespeare's play. Until the studios realized that nobody wanted to see it in this form and subsequently released the complete movie everywhere.

Well, Marian, this is of course subjective. If possible, I would say it's a composer's call. Obviously, I did not mean to imply that thematic developement of musical ideas should qualify as "repetitive" by default (Philip Glass scores would last how long without repetition... eight minutes?).

And to No.2: No, I certainly would NOT let out "Binary Sunset" from a STAR WARS release.

It's just that, for example, if you have a composer who insits that a certain arrangement of cues is the best way to listen to the music apart from the images, or that certain cues should not be included because they are redundant, the "left over" material could be included at the end of the disc. One could finally program them into a chronological sequence again if one wanted to, so I would guess this would be the "best of both worlds".

NP: Howard Shore NOBODY'S FOOL
London Philharmonic Orchestra/London Metropolitan Orchestra/Shore (Milan)

Lou Goldberg and I are as one on this subject: the complete film score represents the complete vision of the composer, at least AT THE TIME. Does the composer have a right to suppress certain works? Not, I think, when they've already been committed to a film. He or she may write something that doesn't feel right, and so into the trash with it, but that doesn't apply to a film. Once it's been recorded and applied, it exists. In a certain sense, it's public domain. An artist may create only for the artist's own sake, but once the artist shows it to the rest of the world, then it's become a realer thing than it was, back in the studio. (I would not include cues the composer rehearsed and disliked, or cues the composer recorded and rejected. On the other hand there's the odd case of Goldsmith's ALIEN, which album he obviously structured to reflect the score that we DON'T hear in the film.)

I just read a fascinating book about the legal struggles waged by the family of author John Cheever, with a small publishing house that wished to release a huge anthology of public domain stories he had written -- AND PUBLISHED. Things that already existed in the larger world. Not things Cheever had balled up and tossed in the fire, nor things he had never intended for public release: things he HAD PUBLISHED, for good or for ill. Through sheer legal bullying (which financially the Cheevers could afford to do more than the publishers could withstand), they were able to reduce the number of stories, size of publication, and so on ... in short, they killed it. And not to protect Cheever's reputation, either -- the surviving family has published no fewer than FIVE scandalous books dissecting his frequently dreadful personality and behavior. One of them, his "Letters," comprising work he NEVER intended to be published, and the other, his scabrous "Journals," comprising work he MIGHT not have wanted seen. No, they did it because they didn't want anyone else profiting off of stuff that THEY felt THEY had a right to. And they published the other books because they wanted the money.

That is only a recent example. Here's a hypothetical one: Would any of you protest if old unknown musical sketches by Mozart or Beethoven turned up, and recorded? "He didn't mean them to be performed" -- who would say that of those so long dead, and so revered? Nobody, probably not even whatever descendants they left behind who could not legally profit from it. And yet it would be arguable that they didn't mean them to be heard. We'd want to hear it anyway. The ethics become impossible.

Akira Ifukube is fond of revising his old classical pieces, just as Tennessee Williams was fond of revising his old plays. That's their privilege as long as they live and wish to do it, but that doesn't mean that the old versions lack merit, or should never be accessed. I'll draw a more stringent line here: I was at Ifukube's place in the summer of 1990, the very day it was announced that an old score of his had been discovered in mainland China, one that had been commissioned for the ruling Japanese colonel, Amagasu (played by Ryuichi Sakamoto in THE LAST EMPEROR, by the way.) It was one of many such scores somewhat coerced from a number of well-known Japanese composers at the time. Most of the surviving composers whom the newspapers contacted were thrilled that the music had turned up again -- all but Ifukube. "It was a premature work," he growled, pantomiming tearing the thing up. "I'd rather see it destroyed."

But then he reflected that if given a chance to revise it, he wouldn't mind seeing it performed. Now, here is the line, perhaps a thin and intransigent one, I'm hoping to draw: there are no recordings of this music, in fact it was never performed anywhere, and if Ifukube got his mitts on it and wished to rip it to shreds, again, I guess that's his privilege. And yet I see it as an act of violence against his own art, his own craft. But then that is perhaps a selfish distinction (I wanna hear everything he did!) And it would be a telling illustration of that particular stage of his development (he'd been composing for ten years at best by then, and most of the stuff from that period IS still available.)

If it were ever recorded, though, I'd say we have a right to hear every note of it that could be found.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marian Schedenig:

And that's why everthing should be complete.

---

Well sure! I too would love that to happen. However since it is not going to happen anytime soon if ever, everyone should just lighten up an bit and realize that.

I think it is more realistic to hope for and even try to change the system of releasing these scores, so more music is released.

However there is no way we will always get complete scores of everything. Hopefully we can get more complete scores more often though.

Regards,
Sean Robert Abbey

Secondly, I realize that many people do love to listen to soundtrack albums, and derive an enormous amount of pleasure from them as stand-alone experiences.

So, though I am fascinated by film music, I really only appreciate it fully within its intended movie. That’s just my personal feeling and I don’t wish to in any way criticise anyone’s desire to listen to soundtrack albums….let’s just say it is my loss.

Paradoxically, partly because of that, I believe there is a strong case for presenting ALL of a movie’s music on the album. I say this as someone who collects albums, not to enjoy the music, but just…..because. You know, like some people collect movie memorabilia, toby-jugs or drain covers. An authentic and complete drain cover, is far more valuable to the collector than a hastily constructed and incomplete ‘replica’.

Having said that, I believe there is also a strong case for a film composer to rearrange and even recompose his score especially for stand-alone consumption, simply in an attempt to make his music more accessible to a wider range of listeners….something that would benefit the film composer, the movies AND the music-lover….one would think. Now, this appears to have happened, to a large degree, with Goldsmith’s FIERCE CREATURES (movie *1/2 score **1/2 album ***1/2) album for example. Perhaps someone with a great knowledge of and insight into the film industry, like H Rocco, may throw some light on the events surrounding Goldsmith’s scoring of FIERCE CREATURES. Within the movie, I felt, Goldsmith’s music was rather anonymous, but on the album it seemed to me that Goldsmith had put considerable effort into fleshing out his themes. Rather sketchy musical elements heard within the movie, appear to have been substantially developed for the album, the wonderful ‘Trained Seals’ for instance. Whatever, the end result was a moderately successful film score, and a very entertaining and completely different album. Surely, from a purely musical point of view, the more ‘developed’ FIERCE CREATURES music heard on the album is preferable to an album that ONLY authentically duplicated what we heard in the movie. Then again, I’m sort of contradicting myself here, because the collector of film score albums like myself, would surely PREFER to have an authentic representation of the music heard within the movie. But as a lover of music, I would prefer to have a fully-musically developed album. Perhaps the FIERCE CREATURES album is a happy compromise, or maybe it is a failed attempt to have the best of both worlds. You see the dilemma.

Sometimes of course the music heard within a movie is SO good, and the nature of the movie itself ALLOWS the film composer to create more ‘meaningful’ passages of music, that the album is almost BOUND to make a satisfactory stand-alone listen with only a little tinkering, if any. Goldsmith’s STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE (movie *1/2 score *****) for instance.

Even with a great score like that though, I still believe much work COULD have been done to realize the FULL potential of what Goldsmith wrote for that movie. However, it is at this point that I must remind myself that the film composers’ main purpose is to write movie music, and any external distractions may just compromise the film composer’s true aims and priorities; you see, to my mind, a great classical piece, or a successful pop song, is a completely different animal to a successful dramatic score, and the composer of stand-alone pieces will probably initially approach his task in a completely different way to the film composer. Indeed, the further the film composer moves his music away from what he originally wrote for the movie, the less reason there would be for the film music fan to purchase the album, indeed, there is an argument that the more successful a piece of dramatic score, the LESS likely it is to succeed as a stand-alone experience. On the other hand, perhaps, there would be more reason for the stand-alone music lover to purchase the album if the music is ‘transformed’ from what was originally written as dramatic score. Either the correct balance for the album should be sought, if that is ever possible, or maybe different versions of a soundtrack album could be published, an authentic movie version and a developed and musically enhanced version. Anyway, it’s all hypothetical as currently there seems to be little incentive for the film composer to really apply himself as a fully-fledged stand-alone composer, especially with the apparently astronomical fees that some successful film composers’ garner today…and that’s fine with me. A film composer with one eye on the stand-alone album market, might just make for a LESSER composer of dramatic score.

Personally, I don’t see film scores as necessarily being the work of a single individual, but more as the combined effort of a number of people. After all, the movie itself DRIVES the film composer; the film composer is not just inspired by the movie, he is also ‘restricted’ by it. Not only that, sometimes, it is just as important that the film composer incorporates existing material into his score (an art-form in itself), and successfully works with source music heard within the movie. Often a film composers’ main task is to create a ‘bridging’ score, as Goldsmith did in LA CONFIDENTIAL (movie **** score *1/2) and Zimmer with THE FAN (movie ** score ****1/2). I believe this task is a lot more difficult than it appears, and merely reinforces my opinion that the film composer does so much more than just COMPOSES music per se; he also adapts, incorporates and arranges existing ideas and compositions into his movies, elements of his art of equal importance to the ability to COMPOSE fresh thematic material.

For all of the above reasons, I don’t see Horner’s plagiarism as a bad thing. His Khachaturian in ALIENS and his Prokofiev in STAR TREK III, perfectly suited those movies. Having said that, I believe there is a strong argument for such borrowings to be credited at the end of the movie….but that, after all, is just a technical point. Hearing the same Khachaturian in ALIENS and PATRIOT GAMES doesn’t bother me….as long as the music is appropriate, and it certainly was in ALIENS. I tend to take each movie as a separate entity. With sequels it is different, surely we ALL welcomed Frizzel’s (or the filmmakers) appropriate Goldsmith statements in ALIEN RESURRECTION. But, as to the album, would the Goldsmith thematic material taint Frizzel’s work? How would the Goldsmith fan feel if the boot was on the other foot….like the Williams quote in SUPERGIRL, did that taint the SUPERGIRL album?….did the Williams even appear on the SUPERGIRL album?…if it didn’t, surely the SUPERGIRL album wasn’t ‘authentic’ as a reflection of the movie, if it was, maybe it’s not a fair reflection of Goldsmith’s work? But then again, Goldsmith purposely incorporated the Williams……so many questions.

Likewise, I don’t see a composer’s pandering to current fads, or re-use of his OWN music, to be a bad thing…..just so long as it is appropriate within the movie. On the other hand, I don’t just see Zimmer and Horner as the best of the current film composers BECAUSE they borrow and re-use, it is just that, to me, they give the movie exactly what it musically requires…..UNCONDITIONALLY.

They may be selling their musical souls to the devil, but they’re providing damn fine musical accompaniment to their movies….in my opinion.

So, having said all of that, the chances of a film score album making a satisfactory stand-alone listen, especially if it is complete AND in chronological order, are remote, I believe. Also, an authentic and complete album SHOULD contain all source music; source music often being as important a ‘mood setter’ as dramatic score itself.

As I have said above, to me, save for a few notable exceptions, a movie score can only make a truly satisfactory stand-alone listen with substantial further development and arrangement. The purpose of a film score is NOT always to make music that makes musical sense, it is often very much as a supporting and insubstantial element within the movie mix, frequently setting mood. Without the images to support it, film music is too often meaningless and without purpose. Only with the greatest of reconstruction can a soundtrack album make a satisfactory stand-alone listen….in my opinion.

Finally, I should reiterate, I don’t see film music as being inferior to stand-alone music in ANY way. It is just that film music is best heard where it was intended to be heard….in the movie, particularly if the film composer is constantly recycling his existing work and the work of other composers. But, I believe that many fine film scores have the POTENTIAL to also make great albums….but only with much reconstruction, deletion, rearrangement and adaptation.

So, I’ll enjoy Williams’s music within his movies and Beethoven on the hifi, but either way, both of these composers provide great music in their own contrasting mediums.

Maybe one day, there will be more stand-alone compositions released containing themes composed for film, or associated with a certain movie, you know, ‘an album by composer X, based on themes suggested by movie Y’.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nicolai P. Zwar:
"1) What are "deserving scores"?"

Well, Marian, this is of course subjective. If possible, I would say it's a composer's call.

---

But the composer's call often isn't the best (for us collectors). The Episode 1 album is what Williams wanted, e.g.

The point that it's subjective is the reason why I think that every score release should be complete.

quote:

---

It's just that, for example, if you have a composer who insits that a certain arrangement of cues is the best way to listen to the music apart from the images, or that certain cues should not be included because they are redundant, the "left over" material could be included at the end of the disc. One could finally program them into a chronological sequence again if one wanted to, so I would guess this would be the "best of both worlds".

---

Ok, having those tracks at the end of the album wouldn't be the best choice for me, but I think it's a good compromise.

Regarding cues that are edited together: I don't think that's the right thing to do. They should be released as they were written and recorded. If the composer wants to change something, why not write a concert suite? Williams does this all the time, so why change the cues on the score CD as well?

His H'ness has a good point. I really think, if it's in the movie, it should be released. Why? Because if I hear it in the movie and like it, I'll be ****ed of if it isn't on the CD. On the other hand, if something has been written, I'd usually like to hear it, but I won't MISS it because I don't know it.

As far as the FIERCE CREATURES album: my understanding is that Varese wanted to do an album, there wasn't enough music in the film to justify it, so Goldsmith revamped the whole thing. He also said he did the same thing on DAMIEN OMEN II, where he felt there wasn't enough music in the film to warrant an album, so he wrote and restructured some more. THE SWARM and CAPRICORN ONE were rewritten and restructured as well, not to mention UNDER FIRE ("Bajo Fuego" doesn't appear anywhere in the film). Note that all three of the latter were Warner Bros. Records productions, while OMEN II was a Fox film (as was ALIEN, for which Goldsmith ALSO rerecorded and reconstructed his score for an album.) This kind of thing doesn't seem to happen too much anymore.

Daniel 2---I have a friend who loves film music as part of his experience of watching movies but can't stand to listen to a note of it on its own. I agree that the purpose of a score is not to be a stand alone experience. In a way, all of us are lucky to have any of this music to listen to at all.

Sean & Thor---I realize that my ideal archive of everything is a pipe dream, what I want vs what we can get. Personally, I do not need to have every note of a score to be happy with what I'm listening to. On the other hand, I do miss favorite cues when they're not there. Take Matinee--great military cue in there but Varese left it off the CD because they felt it clashed with the rest of the score which sounded much different. A loss in my opinion.

Lux--You are so right! I'm going to start calling you Deluxe. What a pain to spend $$$$$ for 2 extra cues of a score I already own--why don't they just issue it all in the first place?

H Rocco--Some of this will build on things Daniel 2 said. I don't object to composers re-working or re-recording their music for a soundtrack album. Sometimes the results are wonderful--Jarre's reworked Doctor Zhivago soundtrack from the 60s is delightful and so are the original tracks on the 30th Anniversary CD--I'm glad to have both versions and would be missing out if there were only one. I like the "orig. soundtrack" of CE3K and the Collector's edition of original tracks. There are lots of these examples.

Composers have suppressed and even destroyed their works. I don't like it but it's not up to me. If Jerry says no Vanishing CD, I'm lucky to get a boot, but it IS black market, just not what the original RX was made out for. Sinatra suppressed Manchurian Candidate for years. Hawks wanted the only existing print of Trent's Last Case destroyed because he was ashamed of it. Rozsa suppressed his symphony because of criticism and years later recanted. This is a case of someone coming to know better. Rozsa could have destroyed it and then we wouldn't have it at all. Herrmann suppressed a lot of his early pieces and wouldn't let the ones that did come to light pass without rewriting them and I'd love to find a way around that decision somehow. But, it's not what he wanted--and it's really his idea of his reputation at stake. Should he have stuff out there that he thinks makes him look bad?

When you say that once a score has been released to the public on a film's soundtrack "In a certain sense, it's public domain..." boy how I wish you were right. It's how I FEEL things should be--that once released, this stuff belongs to us, the people who care and appreciate it. Sometimes our trying to get the material we want reminds me of a custody battle between a loving parent and a manipulative, uncaring one.

But here's the skinny--Once, I wanted to create a video for the local cable access channel. It was going to be about my favorite films and favorite directors and favorite themes and tendencies I like in movies. I wanted to use film clips and talk over them. I learned I couldn't do it. Had to get permission. Even those who said yes wanted royalties. I couldn't use stills. Even video box designs were under copyright. And so I realized that all these images, all these memories, all these experiences that I've considered mine from the age of 8, they don't belong to me at all. I don't own them--I can only rent the dream. I can ride the ferris wheel but the wheel has another owner. And the more I learn about the owner, the more of a scumbag he turns out to be. But what am I supposed to do, end capitalism, take his rights away by force just because I don't like what he's doing with what really belongs to him? The studios, the companies, they are the people who are working to provide me the dream to begin with. I owe them gratitude actually. But, once again, I'm up against the gap between what I want and what the world actually provides. All I can hope is that someday a person with a like-minded agenda gets into a position to do something about it.

NP: Bonjour Tristesse (Georges Auric)

Stuart McDonald http://www.hollywoodcomposers.com <HR size=1></BLOCKQUOTE>

I do tend to prefer complete scores so that I can hear all the nuances of a film score and not be shortchanged when I buy a soundtrack. Although I've got the LOTR scores, I yearn for a complete Star Wars saga boxed set. The recent releases haven't made me feel good and satisfied, as the ROTJ score doesn't include the variants and outtakes, and because Lucasfilm hasn't put out a complete release of the prequel trilogy soundtracks with copious annotated scores. I also long for aomplete releases of the Rodgers & Hammerstein film soundtracks, such that they can include the underscores, especially the film soundtracks of The King and I and The Sound of Music. Alfred Newman and Irwin Kostal really did a superb job in the underscore.

quote:

---

Originally posted by BigT1981:
I hate when new people boost up threads that are old and buried especially ones that are SEVEN YEARS OLD....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BigT1981:
I hate when new people boost up threads that are old and buried especially ones that are SEVEN YEARS OLD....

---