It's definitely action packed, but wasn't quite what I was expecting. It's very complex action music, like JP3 there is always a ton going on. Ton of percussion, that's for sure. After two listens, I haven't really identified a main theme, which is somewhat odd, but I think all of the material will grow on me as time continues... If you've heard the score I wanna hear your comments, and check out my fabulous web site for a full review up in the next day or two

Jason, CALL ME!

Dan

Matt

Mike

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hornerfan:
That "Main Title Deconstruction" track is a neat idea.

---

It's just the end titles, with a "fancy track name".

Dan

quote:

---

Originally posted by TimT:
it reminded me of some good Twighlight Zone episodes.

---

Yeah, but where was Rod Serling when you needed him??

quote:

---

Or maybe the print I saw isn't the one due Friday.

---

The film is done - what you saw is the final.

quote:

---

The only thing I didn't like was that the two females (Human and Ape) both wore lipstick. Where would they get that? Especially the human one, who was a slave.

---

Oh, well, they get their lipstick from Rick Baker.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hornerfan:
By the way, the score is in no way themeless/motifless (is that a word?). There are two, if not three, motifs and themes in the score. If you can't hear them, you must be deaf!

---

Yep. I'm only my third day of listening to the score and I haven't seen the movie yet, but I count at least 4 themes/motives that Elfman uses:

1. The main theme - Track 1, (0:55 - 1:00), heard in the low brass.
2. The Ape theme - Track 4, (0:51 - 1:00), heard again in the low brass
3. The Love theme - Track 2 (2:40 - 2:47), heard in the flutes
4. Thade's theme - Track 10 (1:11 - 1:46)
heard between the horns and the woodwinds

I haven't seen the film, so I'm only **guessing** what those themes correspond to. I have a feeling there's more too. Elfman uses all his themes quite a bit. The entire score is really built upon all 4. It's interesting hearing all the different variations he comes up with. And then there's all of the rhythmic motives he uses too- most prominent being that 3 note pattern he uses in the main titles...

Tim

Sure, I would have liked the theme to be more prominent, but at least there ARE themes, no matter what people say!
I only hope the film is a good

Mike

Mike

The score worked pretty well with the movie. But God am I happy I didn't buy this.

Elfman thinks he's Kodo, but can't achieve half of what Kodo do.

Theme or not, doesn't bother me. As long as the score is exciting in other ways. This one was just noise. I'll go record the noise on the nearest highway. It'll give me something more musical than Elfman's POTA.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hornerfan:
Hey Goldwasser. Care to retract your earlier post saying that the "Main Title Deconstruction" is the end title track to the film? Because you're wrong. The Oakenfold track is the end titles, followed by a playing of the "love theme" from the score. Retract your statement, and admit your error.

Mike

NP: PLANET OF THE APES

---

At the press screening I saw on Tuesday, when the end titles started to play, the music I heard was "Main Title Deconstruction".

And that was followed by the Oakenfold track.

(i.e. they're BOTH used)

No retraction.

But regardless of that, I stand by what _I_ saw and heard.)

I wouldn't go that far, but I do think it's a very intriguing and inventive score, and I think Elfman--and his orchestrators--deserve a lot of credit for going the experimental route like the original instead of something that would be generally accepted by everyone who heard it.

Granted, Elfman's score is far more blunt than Goldsmith's, but that doesn't make it less interesting. It functioned perfectly in the film.

And the film... despite its problems, I liked it a lot. It was slow in parts, and the acting from all human characters was sub-par (and Kristoffersen's and Warren's characters had no point in being in the film) but these shortcomings did not bring down my enjoyment of the film when compared to its good points (all actors behind the ape masks, Eflman's score, the photography, the design of the city, etc). I had no problems with the story... it wasn't original, but I didn't feel it needed to be.

This project was way too big for Burton. I remember the first time I heard that he was directing I thought, "What?". His films are way too claustrophobic (more or less). Granted he could've turned it in to "Edward Apehands" or "BeetleApes". Having all the apes wear tight leather ala Pfieffer in "Batman". Somehow it seems worse than had that been the case.

I regard the 1968 film as something of a milestone for SciFi and Burton's is horribly irreverent. Remember that scene in the first film where we see the apes for the first time? THERE'S NOTHING LIKE THAT IN THIS FILM. No "wow" moment. Okay so we knew already that there were apes and such but you would think that a talented director like Burton would TRY to wow us SOMEHOW! As a matter of fact this whole film feels like someone kept saying,"Wouldn't it be cool if..." The point of the story is irony and maybe poignancy...not novelty.

Gimmie a break.

"Hey wouldn't it be cool if they wrote with their feet??? Oh wait!!! Wouldn't it be cool if the apes would jump around super high EVERY DAMN TIME THEY'RE ON THE %#$@#@* SCREEN????"

Personally I think one of the creepy things about the original "Apes" pictures is that the apes were VERY human. Yeah they kinda walked funny but they did everything like us. The make-up is so good in this film we don't need to SEE them ACTING like apes too.

Ok ok.....so I didnt like Burton's version. What if there'd never been a Planet of the Apes franchise? Well, maybe this film would be.....interesting. But even so it does have basic problems.

WHat did the story do to warrant the goodbye that Marky Mark gives the Nova character at the end? (That was not a spoiler) Were they ever...EVER given a decent amount of screentime together? What was that "thing" that they shared that they verbalized to each other? What was the commonality they shared?

Maybe I missed that part.

Was there, in Boulle's book a pseudo-romance between a human and an ape?

Also, it's been a LONG time since I've seen a film that was SO *%(&@&*(%@#^ PREDICTABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I tried REALLY REALLY hard to be wrong when I would guess where the picture was going. The ending was funny compared to the 1968 version's ending. What a letdown.

But I have to look on the bright-side, only I knew this was going to suck. LOL

Elfman? Better than the picture.

Marky Mark? Miscast and out of his league.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hornerfan:
So, Goldwasser, are you Big Brother now? Are you the Moviemusic Film Score Police? Or are you simply General Asser? Why don't you stop being a moocher and come to grips with reality for a second. Just because you saw it, or heard it, WAY before everyone else did, doesn't make it true. The "Main Title Deconstruction" is just that. A deconstruction of the main titles. In NO WAY was it used as the end titles.

---

Dude, calm down. Take a deeeep breath.

Breath.

Relax.

It was used in the end titles in the print that I saw.

quote:

---

This has been verified with other people, too. Besides, why would they show the press a "different print" of the film as everyone else?

---

Because the film wasn't finished last week. And to show the press a screening would mean they had to strike a print over the weekend (perhaps before they were finished).

Or were you under a rock then?

All I said was "It's just the end titles, with a "fancy track name"." And you blew it waaaaay the hell out of proportion.

What I saw OBVIOUSLY differs from what you and everyone else saw. Fine. No dispute there; I explained TWICE why what I saw might have been different than what you saw. So what?? Who the hell cares?? It's only a movie, and not a very good one at that.

So unless you have a REAL problem with me (which you seem to think you do, but you really don't), just back off.

And yes, they HAVE shown the press "rough" cuts where necessary.

I'll just chaulk your statements and anger to jealousy. Nothing more.

Dan

First off, you might not have "said it," but from some of the comments you've made, you imply it. Your smug attitude about everything you post makes you look superior to us all, with your 1650 soundtrack CDs and all that other wonderful stuff you like to drop (names, and the like). Secondly, your reasons for why you saw might have been different are poor, and lack common sense. It's pretty bad of you to make comments like that when you have no one else to support your claims that the print was bad, or the music was different. Have you read a critic's review saying "the color timing was really off on the film I saw?" No. You really must have been on something that night.

The only thing I have a problem with is with egotistical morons like you.