quote:

---

Originally posted by Crono/Kyp:
I agree, just not about the Jerry Goldsmith converting. I didn't know you were creating a colt.

--Brian

[Message edited by Crono/Kyp on 10-12-2001]

---

Neigh.

Mike

What I once said was that just as the Romantic style differs from the Classical or Baroque or Contemporary or other styles and schools in orchestral music, Film Music, too, is it's own style and school with its own forms and structures. The individual composers have a strong effect on the range of the music, but a lot of the effects follow basic patterns and objectives.

Howard's good example was the short cue versus a longer development that is very common to film scores. There are other examples as well and the total of these helps constitute the film music sound. Often listeners complain about things in some film music that they love in other film music--the cues were too damn short--or what have you, but listening to film music isn't just listening to Goldsmith or Herrmann or whoever, it's also listening to "a set of basic assumptions" as well.

Connecting with that core element is the task of the film composer and is part of "what connects us" as listeners. But pointing out the commanalities in film music doesn't answer the first part of the question--what are the commonalities in us that make us responsive to the same core element that the composers are articulating.

The people who come to this strike me as diverse. It may turn out that we all eat oat bran and that's what makes it possible for us to also appreciate film music (and it could actually be as simple a common factor as that). What the simple common factor is, and if it really is that simple, are speculation.

I believe the question has been answered, or at least an attempt to answer has been made. The majority share a strong reaction to music and image and pursue the music accordingly. Just as folks put snapshots in an album for future viewing and the joy remembering people & events brings, so we film music folk collect "earshots" in our "albums" for very similar reasons. The minority, as you appear to concur, like the quick burst of energy inherent to the film composer's "basic set of assumptions". This does not mean classical music is too much of a slow, simmering process, it just means there is a time to listen to a soundtrack and a time to listen to a symphony. And if the stand-alones find themselves listening more to soundtracks than symphonies, amen.

Then there are scores that can do both. If I allow them to,they will envoke images of the actual movie (Star Wars and Star Trek being perfect examples) and if I don't allow them to, they evoke completely new images.

Is this just me? Does anyone have the same experiences? Am I just an extra-terrestrial and don't know it?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Howard L:
Maybe the music is better on its own than it was as film music.

---

Well, the music fit the film quite well, if that is what you are getting at. But, what maybe most film music is just plain good stand alone music?

I dunno, I probably make no sense at all.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Howard L:
Think of married couples: you see one member you can't help but "see" the other, even if separated.

---

I dunno, when I see Clinton I see Monica....ok, that was bad.

Scott

quote:

---

Originally posted by Howard L:
...I just don't think you're being completely honest with yourself. Human nature dictates that if the marriage were perfect then you would envision the film.

---

Great, now I'm lying?

Ok, all joking aside. Let me try to clarify myself. It is not that the music doesn't or can't evoke the images of the movie, for in most cases it can. Yet, I have a rather vivid imagination and I can controll it quite well. In other words, I can supress the actual movie and let the music take me on a new journey. I have been practicing image therapy for a long time now, which in essence, is the controlling of your imagination in order to accomplish certain things, i.e. goals, studies, etc.

Dang, I am weird....

We, the people on this planet, are all weird. Some are weird because they listen to film music in the shower. Others are weird because they do other things in the shower. I myself am weird because I can soak in my bathtub for 4 or even 5 hours continuously while reading an interesting book

Just one thing, Scott - couple of posts ago you thought yourself being an extra-terrestrial because of your ability to take the film music as its own, letting it create images into your mind. For Heavens sakes, Scott - if you haven't seen my topic "Gothic Symphonies", then NO WONDER you think you're alone in the universe... but you're not alone !!

I'am just as weird as you - even a bit weirder, I think. I can watch a movie and be totally in it with my emotions and YET simultaneously being able to watch the movie from a filmmaker's point and also listening to the music. As for soundtrack albums, I ALWAYS listen to the music as its own - in my opinion good film music is the music that has magic and power enough WITHIN; for example, it's not "E.T." the MOVIE that makes my imagination to soar, IT IS THE WILLIAMS MUSIC that has enough power to do this. So, I really am one those weirdos who like film music on its own - I don't buy soundtracks to relive some cinematic moments again; I want the soundtracks because the music on them is simply terrific, and because it makes my imagination run even wilder.

And, yet, I do like to defend music's importance in movies - being originally meant FOR THE MOVIE but still getting a completely new life and meaning on its own.

So, Scott, stop fussing over it - you're NOT an alien lifeforce and you're NOT alone; what you should do is to ENJOY your marvelous ability and listen more to marvelous film music.

And, yes - I'm very impressed that you Scott are ABLE to listen music while taking a shower - I wouldn't hear anything because of that WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSHHHHSSSHHHHHHSSSS in my ears

Np: Many a' thing (Various folks)

I always want to go deeper, further...where no man (or woman) has gone before.

cool..

Ken, you read books while taking a bath too? Wow, cool. I dunno bout 4 to 5 hours, I'd be all wrinkled like a prume, but yeah get this...reading a book while taking a bath and film music in the background.

It's really not that I am fussing about this issue. Not at all, actually, it is just so unique to me that all of us are in this together and that we are such a minority out there.

She had problems with the experience. She'd never seen the film but the music still 1) evoked specific images in her rather than emotions, 2) felt like film music, felt "half there", seemed to develop according to an imposed, outside pattern rather than develop on its own accord and terms.

She's not a snob and I think she gave it an honest open chance to register--it's just not her thing. But it raises points in relation to the topic question.

First, she saw an image when listening to this music but in her case, that blocked her from feeling an emotion. People who like film music seem to also see an image but can transfer that image into an additional emotional response.

Second, the way a cue changes to catch things on screen created a pattern of starts and stops and abrupt changes in tone that broke up her chance to get into the cues emotionally as well. I tried to explain to her how to "surf" with the film music wave, how neat I felt it was that, for example, the harpsichord would come in at point A or the flute would enter and do this neat figure and then leave, but she couldn't enjoy the music for those reasons.

If most people don't get it and yet we do, what is it that works in us and not others. Howard seems to see emotion as the common factor and I agree. But not everyone pulls emotion from film music, at least on its own apart from a film, and yet, we film music people can do it, often do it more from film music than from any other kind of music that is meant to stand on its own.

My friend's seeing an image that blocked her emotions raises another question as well. Are we responding emotionally to the sound of the music or to the images that the music helps to create in our heads. Even if we're listening to music to a film we've never seen, do we still create substitute movies to the music and respond emotionally to those dream images instead of to the music itself? And, if so, does that really matter? Or do people interpret music differently from one another and so what connects us film music people is some configuration of our brain cells that's different from the people who can't get into sound. That seems so unlikely. But there are so many personalities and types of people and behavior. Psychologists talk about the introvert and extrovert but I don't recall that they ever explained what causes a person to be one or the other. Is it possible that we film music people do ultimately share a similarity in other personality traits as well, that there is a hidden checklist somewhere we'd all give the same answers to.

I think you touched on several aspects of this mystery. I recall the first time I listened to the score of "Saving Private Ryan". I actually got so emotional while listening to Hymn for the Fallen that I had tears in my eyes, although I hadn't even seen the movie yet. In this case however, I don't remember actually developing any images, it was the music that evoked these emotions.

My question would be if your friend would have had the same reaction, had you told her that the music she was listening to were excerpts from a classical piece. Perhaps she was a little prejudice to begin with? I don't know, but I think it would be a good project. On that note, ask any of my non-film music listening nephews what kind of music I play they would tell you soundtracks. Then ask them what soundtracks sound like, guess their answer: Classical music. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....

I've said it before and I say it again, that we the film music lovers DO have a richer imagination and an ability to concentrate on the music. Period.

And, Scott actually that 4-5 hours of soaking in the tub has happened only twice during the last two years, the first time with a Walt Disney biography, and the second time with a book about the Disney Imagineers...
However my minimum bath-session is about an hour. I like to be in water swimming and soaking myself as an octopus. I've always said if I wouldn't been born as a human being, I'd probably be a squid. Really.

yet I would defend film music also on the basis that it is classical music. Or should I say classical music especially composed for a movie? While it is certainly true that classical music has a very different structure as far as developments are concerned, it is still music composed to achieve a certain emotional effect.

Film composers are so underrated these days. In the early days we had classical composers who composed for the screen. These composers, Stein,Copeland, Herrman, Korngold, Waxman, were highly regarded. Today we have film composers who compose for the concert hall as well (Williams, Goldsmith,-Goldenthal probably doesn't count because he started in the classical arena first if I'm not mistaken), and yet are not as respected by the classical elite. Yet wasn't i Williams, in the notes to Close Encounters, who said that composing for film is so much more difficult than composing for the concert hall? For, as he put it, classical music is composed after the composer's own imgagination, timing and desires, whereas film composing has to be confinded within the bounderies set through the images and the director.

As far as Disney " The Art of Walt Disney", and "Disney Animation -the evolution of Life" are two great books that combine the life and art of Disney in incredible ways. Also the biography "Walt Disney-An American Original" by Bob Thomas, is very detailed and incredibly informative. Just thought you might wanna know.

Scott

Just that, Scott,
thanks for the suggestions.

However, (after having read various Disney biographies) I think that Katherine & Richard Greene's THE MAN BEHIND THE MAGIC is the very best book ever written about Walt Disney - it was the very book that got me to stay in the tub those (about) 5 hours.

...Although I would sometime like to see someone publish a book THE DARK SIDE OF DISNEY...

Now, back to topic.

In my opinion, anyone who's having some brains in the head will certainly understand that composing for movies is a VERY difficult task, much more harder than what classical composers have done or are doing. I do agree with you, Scott, that film music composers are still today underappreciated, and it is a terrible shame.

Last spring I accidentally stumbled upon a live TV concert that was a very awaited work of some "great" composer -
these artists were making different sounds with stones and throwing them around with a symphony orchestra playing along -
and it sounded like

- PLICK - PLOCK - BRRRRROOOOMMM - PLOCKPLICKPLOCK - CLASHBRRRRRRRRROOMMM - PLOCK - CLASHCRASHBRROMMCHHSCHSCREECHHHCLASH PLICK PLOCK PLUM - CRASH

and I didn't even laugh.
It was horrible.

Scott: yes, film music CAN be another form of classical music, but how do you rate the non-symphonic scores? Do we have to consider some of the urban groove work of Schifrin, Fielding and Quincy Jones as a "kind of" jazz? Some of it may well be up with the best of Charlie Parker and Miles Davis, but, even if it is, I think we might be using a superflous measuring stick there.

Some of you others have touched on the subject of how film music (hey, what IS that anyway?) conjures up images, sometimes to the point of blocking emotion. Was that you, Howard L? (I'd have a look back, but I don't know how to do it without losing what I've already written.) Indeed. Unfortunately, like it or not, much of the best film music, even orchestral, DOESN'T sound like concert hall music for reasons well-detailed. In those cases the music may simply conjure up images of previous bad films, and thus hinder any real objective musical appreciation.

Careful...lest you unwittingly prove my point, for supression follows the conjured-up image and is therefore a form of calculated resistance against the film, si?

"Some of you others have touched on the subject of how film music (hey, what IS that anyway?) conjures up images, sometimes to the point of blocking emotion..."

You must be contrasting images via free association vs. images recalled via film memory. Yes, I see you are ("In those cases the music may simply conjure up images of previous bad films, and thus hinder any real objective musical appreciation...). Ironically, this and the Hymn to the Fallen reference above neatly illustrate how listening to film music devoid of the film-viewing experience and listening to a symphony/classical piece, et. al. are similar animals with respect to the "visual" free-association factor. Thor Haga pretty much summed this up by coining/substituting the term "visual music" in place of film music to convey the stand-alone listening experience. He may have said "vision music" but you get my drift.

The fact remains, however, that once film enters into the picture (heh-heh) true free association is lost forever. I mean I heard Blue Danube a million times before 2001: ASO arrived on the scene. And I'm not sure I like being on automatic pilot, conjuring up images of outer space while listening to a hallowed classical piece that was not written for a science fiction film, GRRRRRRRR! Same thing for Rhapsody In Blue, but thankfully I envision George G, Oscar L or even Leonard B on the piano before any fleeting United Airlines commercial .

********************************************************************

Listening to Goldenthal's magnificent score to Michael Collins, I didn't get any visions whatsoever. Yet I concentrated on the music itself. The orchestration, arrangements, performance, etc.

Thus far film music can:

1. Evoke images from the movie.
2. Create images on its own merits.
3. Make me dissect it musically.

(hold your original #3 thought, Scott, while I jump in yet again with my own)

So far it appears both film & stand alone listeners can relate in one way or another to the 3 items above. While film music certainly enhances what may already be felt from the visual, it can also inject emotion with stunning immediacy away from the film, per se, and on its own. For example, think of riding in the passenger seat and staring out the window. Now think of what happens when you turn on the stereo and add film music. 'S an amazing thing. True, almost doesn't matter what kind of music but think of the difference when it's really good film music!

Lou, the story about your ladyfriend's reaction is a great topical post unto itself but I must respond in conjunction with the above point and first state that #3 holds true even if your eyes are closed. Second, I must ask if were you in the room while she listened to the Schifrin piece. If you were, then I suggest it was not the music that "blocked her from feeling an emotion", rather, the presence of someone else in the room. That someone else spurred her to resist emotion. I maintain that if she were alone she most certainly would have felt an emotion of some kind. I thus maintain that in many, if not most cases, the power of film music is best and most honestly felt in solitude. Avid film viewers will also relate to this, I'm sure of it.

If she were alone, then I believe it just wasn't that good a mover. Feed her Williams' Cadillac of the Skies. Even T'Pol would be moved .

Extraverted/Introverted
Intuitive/Sensing
Thinking/Feeling
Perceiving/Judging

Besides a couple of ISTJs, everyone was an NT, which is a Rational type. (ISTJs are really "related" to Rationals.) Almost everyone was introverted. I really find it interesting that everyone was thinking rather than feeling.

i am INFP...this is the second time I have taken a test to tell me that. (I took the longer one a couple years ago.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Viola:
Oh, by the way, the URL for that personality test is:
http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes1.htm

---

7. You often feel hot