December 7, 2001 - The "We Were Soldiers" score is being recorded this week in London at Abbey Road Studios. The legendary studio is where many of the Beatles greatest albums were made.

Recording began today, December 7, and will continue until December 11. Session musicians and members of the London Philharmonic are being conducted by Nick Glennie-Smith, who composed the music as well. Glennie-Smith had previously written and composed the score for "The Man In the Iron Mask", also by writer/producer/director Randall Wallace.

Want to see a really cool trailer? Go here:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/fox/minority_report/large.html

Now that mvoie looks REALLY COOL! You go Mr. Spielberg.

--Brian

NP: Christmas Music (Harry Potter Mix )

quote:

---

Originally posted by sean:
Mel Gibson trying his hardest to make a patriotic film about such a useless, stupid, and unpopular war. Even worse is his explanation to his daughter, at the beginning of the trailer, about what war is all about. He should have been banned from making films after he made The Man Without A Face.

---

The only good thing about The Man Without A Face was Horner's score.

He took an exceptional book and sanitized it. I think the story was a hard one to film if you have read it. As a matter of fact, I don't think it would have been published in today's climate.

As for Nick Glennie-Smith and "We Were Soldiers", I don't seem to recall being too impressed with his score for "Man In The Iron Mask" which was a dreadful film. Let's hope he can do something interesting here. My guess is that it will sound like Hans Zimmer. (I wonder why?)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bond1965:

He took an exceptional book and sanitized it. I think the story was a hard one to film if you have read it. As a matter of fact, I don't think it would have been published in today's climate.

James[/B]

---

Sorry...by "He" I meant Mel Gibson.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeron:
Whatever happened to just enjoying these things for what they are, rather than what they should or shouldn't be based on completely subjective comparisons to their book counterparts?

[Message edited by Jeron on 12-08-2001]

---

Thank You.

--That Harry Potter Nut

To me, We Were Soldiers just looks to cash in on that epic hero that Gibson has been known to play in the past. The dialogue sounds horrid, the cast looks phony, and the people behind the camera haven't impressed me in the past.

Wallace wrote a good script, sure, but remember his directional debut The Man in the Iron Mask was hardly well received; not a bad film IMO, just a fairly average one.

Glennie-Smith, while I do enjoy his work more than most, doesn't have much sense of drama IMO, and if you need proof, look at the way his career as a composer has fell over the past 8 years or what not. There's a reason the projects he's been attached to are so often so awful.

Of course people like Lancelot (who think it's a sin for one to dislike any sort of movie) aren't going to like people posting about how they feel about these things, but don't think we don't have our reasons.

It's just really lame to wacth all these garbage propaganda war films like The Patriot, Pearl Harbour, and now We Were Soldiers to even be considered to be put on film. You know, the Nazis used to make films exactly like these. Why would you wanna make a patriotic film about the Vietnam War? Haven't any of you people seen all the footage of American soldiers torturing women and POW's or doing battlefield executions or dragging VC bodies behind their tanks; even the fact that the Americans supported such a murderous government like that which ran South Vietnam. That's really disgusting that someone would even think of making a "heart-felt" movie about such a stupid war. Why should Americans be proud of that?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeron:
Whatever happened to just enjoying these things for what they are, rather than what they should or shouldn't be based on completely subjective comparisons to their book counterparts?

[Message edited by Jeron on 12-08-2001]

---

What was wrong is that he bastardized the book.

It would be like watching Lord of the Rings and having them change important characters and their actions to the point that it negates the real story that was in the book.

Now I know I'll be blasted for this...but I thought Braveheart was VERY overrated. It started out good...then Mel went "mad" as he ALWAYS does in his films and then it got silly Monty Pythonish with humor that didn't work with what had proceeded it.

Then suddenly Mel is in love with a princess? After he has gone mad over his wife's murder and started this battle?

The best part of that movie was Mel being disembowelled at the end.

Sorry...I haven't liked Mel since 1988.

If he makes one more movie where his wife/family/dog gets killed and he "goes mad" with revenge...I'll puke. Thank god he was wise enough to pass on "Gladiator".

James

Oh my...the morning has started off on the right foot. In one way or another everyone on this board is interesting...a hoot...whatever you call it. But as a whole we have to be the most critical bunch of film high-brows I have ever met. What a shock...an American made movie about our involvement in war...and we hiss! (From the preview no less!) Next shock...the invariable cry of disdain once the film opens...hiss...hiss...