They actually compare him to Max Steiner and Alfred Newman, in that article.... Very ballsy. I applaud them, though for my applause, I'm sure there is another certain to condemn them, off in the wings there, somewhere.....

I can't wait until they start comparing Trevor Rabin to Beethoven and Prokofiev.

Shaun

quote:

---

Originally posted by Shaun Rutherford:
I can't wait until they start comparing Trevor Rabin to Beethoven and Prokofiev.

---

No, that would be Randy Newman who is following in the tracks of Beethoven and Prokofiev...

I'm a huge fan of Zimmer, he's one of my favorite composers...

That said, it's ridiculous to compare Zimmer to Max Steiner or Alfred Newman... There IS no comparison, Zimmer simply isn't THAT good my friend.

Again I enjoy his music immensely, but he's no Steiner, Newman, Goldsmith, Williams, Morricone, or even Horner...

Actually, you don't have to elaborate on anything to anyone at all.

Of course--not being the pig-headed "zimmerfreak" that many must take me for, because I don't hop on the "good taste bandwagon"--I can assume what you mean by "good", and for the sake of arguing, I can assume that your estimations of said composers are so great that a composer of Hans Zimmer's....ability....could not compare in quality. IF you will do me the favor of assuming that perhaps I observe--and, specifically, hear--something different, possibly better, than most choose to.

I'm not saying this is something to aspire to, or look up to. I'm a weird ****. I grant that I have a perhaps-skewed perception of entertainment...I actually enjoyed Ishtar...

It's an opinion, sure... But in my opinion, and most on this board, Zimmer is not as GOOD as those composers I mentioned. Lancelot, you seem to get on people when they simply throw out their opinions, too... Whatever, pointless argument and I'm going to stop right now.

I almost regret writing in metaphor sometimes, because some jerk will come along and say, "yeah, bad neigbors." or "maybe I should move to another neighborhood"...

I jumped on Shaun over an error in which his miscredited his source--an error that should probably be a significant one. He later amended that error, and then assumed an air of innocence, which I took in all playfulness, doing perhaps my worst Scarlett O'Hara imitation...(Actually, in my mind it was Bugs Bunny doing Scarlett O'Hara, but there's no way you could have known that.) For my humor, which, yet again, reaches very few, I am insulted. Folks basically should know that I'm not out there to trash others--that is a waste of time. But I will take a stand on an issue, and if challenged, I will do my best to defend it. So, I plead self-defense.

However, music is not biology or algebra, you do not simply learn it and have the answer. So many arguments have been waged over opinions, tolerance, etc. While I don't always agree with Lancie, I can understand his frustration.

Is Zimmer as "good" as the classic greats mentioned...probably not. But does it matter? Do I disqualify my opinions as a whole be confessing to enjoy his music...I hope not!

Music is a matter of taste..it does not require mathematical derivatives to understand. Are some composers technically more proficient and classically trained...of course and that does count for something.

I apologize for not being clearer in my criticism, however, yes, your post (at the time I chided it) attributed the information to the Channel, not to the publication. In this instance, I think it was of greater importance that the source was a nationally-circulated publication, rather than a channel that crams too much audio-and-visual information into a short and small space. Though, to quote Scott, "It isn't exactly the New York Times." Now if you want to talk quality of nationally-circulated publications....perhaps the music writers at that source will take sides with you.