quote:

---

Originally posted by PeterK:
Eh, quit "egging" on the FishChip.

---

Hmmm. FishChips with eggs!

I don't think there should be one topic devoted to Horner bashing. I think everyone should bash him on every topic as much and as often as possible.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lou Goldberg:
James Horner is the Anti-Christ.

---

Horner is just the court's fool!

You mean your post, which was the last one until this one I just posted??

This lad is indeed exotic!

"Nah...! Hamzinnzer is the anti-christ."

My only comment would be that I think that we're putting WAY too much emphasis solely on the aesthetic component of film music.

Mr. Horner should not use pre-existing MUSIC (literally the same NOTES) in his scores. However, after much thought about the subject, I would be much more critical of the composer if he did not have a keen dramatic insight, generally speaking.

Of course, Jerry Goldsmith and other film composers are going to rely on pre-existing musical IDEAS, etc., in writing scores. Film music has to be accessible, and for a film composer to be able to communicate to his audience, he has to speak in a language that his listener understands.

Jerry Goldsmith writes music that is relatively inventive in as much as film music can or should be, but, what makes him the superior craftsman is the way in which he organizes a musical statement. He is one of the most exceptional musical communicators that there has ever been--if not THE best.

I don't fault a composer such as Goldsmith for his reliance on other composers' styles, but, rather praise him. Ultimately, my concern is not with the music itself but with its dramatic implication--how the music is used for communicative purposes *within a film to which it is wed.*