And he's human. Hurtful comments do sting, no matter how much you try to shrug things off. Clearly he was upset by those who presume that he is a hack, or that he puts no research into the music itself.

Plus, his music is just badly written.

You could write it better, I'm sure, and we'd all hear some kind of unique sound from you.

Your argument holds no water.

quote:

---

Originally posted by gkgyver:
It's not that he doesn't research; he just doesn't seem to be able to give one of his scores (and therefor the movie) a unique sound.

---

Huh?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dinko:
Huh?

Broken Arrow vs. Crimson Tide vs. As Good as it Gets vs. Gladiator vs. DaVinci Code
Seem pretty unique sounding to me.

---

Canadian, gkgyver is prone to writing things that don't make sense whatsoever and running his/her keyboard like a drunk; it just doesn't like Hans Zimmer's music, but has no proper and/or meaningful way of articulating that hate other than blanket and dumb comments like "his music is just badly written" (yeah!?! prove it!), or it's most ridiculous comment of all (in this thread, at least):"he just doesn't seem to be able to give one of his scores (and therefor the movie) a unique sound." gkgyver, want some help finishing that 24 of Lucky?

Not sucessful, not popular but good.

The fact is that almost all of these debates about Zimmer, Horner or whoever all come down to one fact: does the music work for you?

If it does, no amount of criticism by anyone on the net is going to change that view.

quote:

---

You could write it better, I'm sure, and we'd all hear some kind of unique sound from you.

---

Are we relying on the lazy, old "write something better!" routine?

I will not just "go away" only because you don't want to hear the cruel truth about Zimmer's music.
Say what you want, but his instrumentation and overall orchestration is the same on each movie he does, so that barely holds up as "unique".

quote:

---

Originally posted by MWRuger:
Why don't you prove it's good?

Not sucessful, not popular but good.

The fact is that almost all of these debates about Zimmer, Horner or whoever all come down to one fact: does the music work for you?

If it does, no amount of criticism by anyone on the net is going to change that view.

If it doesn't, you may came to appreciate it but you will never like it.

---

Hey, I didn't write anything about proving it to be good, all I meant (and it's pretty clear) is that it's personal taste: therefore, gkgyver just has to write that he doesn't like Hans Zimmer because he doesn't like Hans Zimmer, instead of puking up remarks that make no sense. And Ruger, no one can deny Zimmer's success, and he, like EVERY other composer, slips once in a while; not every score is a home run. Individuals like gkgyver are strange, though... I don't know, I own scores by dozens of different composers and like scores by all of them; I don't have that hate-on for some composers and sichophant praise for others. I guess the kid just has to take it easy.

I'm not sure, but I'm positive I'm older than you, kiddo. I'm 21. 22 next month.

So you've never felt hate or at least strong resentments against any film composer? Now THAT'S strange.
But maybe you're just not taking film scores serious enough to have this kind of feelings.
I for one do take them as great art, and it seems to me that someone who generally accepts any score as at least a decent effort doesn't really go deeper than scratching on the surface.

You enjoy scores as light entertaining, and that's fine, but don't call me strange because I have a passion for my hobby. And passion inevitably comes with very strong emotions.

By the way, I don't think I've ever expressed a very resolute, generalising feeling for any composer, except for Horner and Zimmer. And frankly, I think they both deserve it.

Oh, and one more thing, concerning Zimmer's "unique" sound: out of 14 pieces from Pirates 2 and Da Vinci Code that are available as sheet music, 9 are written in the same 2 keys. The rest is in C.

It's funny you bring this up because after your last post I really thought about why I dislike Zimmer's music so much, whereas I greatly adore Howard Shore. I picked him because I think from the outside, his music doesn't seem to be that different from Hans Zimmer's.
And it basically boils down to three things:

- Shore knows how to orchestrate, he varies is orchestrations, Zimmer doesn't,
- his music is played by a real orchestra, not much tinkering,
- Shore simply knows how to write and infuse some class into a musical piece

I know someone like you will now come along and say "Well, it's your opinion, I think Zimmer does know how to write", and there's not a damn thing I can do about that.

All I can say is: well, that's a shame.

quote:

---

Originally posted by gkgyver:
Sorry, I just thought it was common knowledge that Zimmer's music isn't exactly amongst the most sophisticated.

---

Rubbish. There is no such "common knowledge". The Zimmer criticizers are just being very LOUD, giving the impression that they are more than they are.

Zimmer can certainly be sophisticated enough, whatever that means. And whether he is using a real orchestra or not (which he often does, btw), is completely irrelevant here.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thor:
But...let's focus on the interview in question to keep this on-target.

---

Alright then, let's ressurect a dead horse. I debated Zimmer with Lou here awhile back, and it's really just a recap of what I said: Zimmer does not utilize orchestra in the same way that more classically oriented composers do, so it's unfair to compare him to them. He's using it in a more prog rock-oriented idiom; in its own unique and interesting way.

gkgyver...lack of versatility? Are you serious? If Zimmer is ANYTHING, it is versatile. THIN RED LINE, CRIMSON TIDE, DRIVING MISS DAISY....yeah, pretty inter-changeable stuff.

quote:

---

He's using it in a more prog rock-oriented idiom; in its own unique and interesting way.

---

That's what narrows him down. It may be interesting the first time you hear it. And the second time. But at some point you just have to ask "well, is this all he can do?"
And maybe he could, but he doesn't show that.
I find it so ironic that the title of the interview is "Breaking the rules". If there's one thing he doesn't do, then it's breaking his own rules. His rules of orchestration for example, like some have pointed out.
I don't remember who said it, but somebody wrote that Zimmer uses the orchestra so often as a clubbing stick that it just gets tiring.
Listen to Danny Elfman's Batman, then Red Dragon and then Hulk. That's a level of versatility Zimmer has never reached. Ever.

And I AM serious about his lack of versability. You may find it extremely diverse and pleasuring to hear 100 horns constantly droning in that mid- range area and hearing the same theme in I don't know how many scores, but I don't.

I think the argument over Zimmer's music being badly written is not the point. We're spilling blood and beating dead horses (or "resurrecting them"? Not sure what that means, Thor!) over something that has no objectively provable end. Debates over Beethoven and Mozart's being #1 probably still exist in some stuffy online clubs for elitists.

It is common knowledge that Zimmer didn't have "formal music training" when he set out. Essentially he began as a kid with a keyboard. Go listen to A World Apart. He's learned much since then, along the way taking credit for many of scores that required actual writing (thank you, ghostwriters).

Success in the arts, especially film, doesn't come with movie production degrees piled on top of communication arts degrees from universities. Corporate business careers require certain degrees to get in the door. To beat down on Zimmer because he has no degree or can't write according to academic standards really is a cheap criticism, especially now that he's had so much success.

What is important, though, is the consumer of his work. That's us. His overall critical success comes from the accolades we place on him. Maybe he is a one trick pony. I like his trick, and like Alwin says, I always look forward to a new score by Zimmer, even if it means the first listen might be the last. There's something about his craft that is unique... and the reason I've listened to Crimson Tide as many as 200 times over the course of owning it.

What I don't like is the one trick pony trying to be something he's not. I am sure he calls it "expanding his horizons," but all of his efforts that would hopefully result in him being "versatile" seem to me to be disassemblies of the what it is he's already good at. Thin Red Line is very effective, but is no more than Crimson Tide slowed to 1/100th the speed (or whatever, the actual precise fraction is not the point). Other scores that might do well to label him versatile are, I'm afraid, not singularly his... although official credits suggest this.

Versatility in music is not about writing the same note for ten different instruments. In that regard, good orchestration isn't necessarily the sign of a versatile composer. Good orchestration is the sign of an educated copyist and composer who knows everything about orchestras, learned through experience and study.

Personally, I feel Zimmer is not versatile. He's a good theme-writer, which proves a education is not required. Several composers, including Jerry Goldsmith, have said you can't be taught how to write themes. Most composers can claim they've dreamed of themes at night in their sleep.

But because I think Zimmer's not versatile doesn't mean I am attacking. I like what Zimmer does when he's doing Zimmer. He can make a variety of sounds (variety of soundmaking does not equal versatility) and tug on a variety of emotions, yes, but true versatility is not there. But I don't look to him for that.

This is the extreme idealogy of a versatile composer, and only begs the thought: versatility isn't something required to be great.

So to all Hans Zimmer worshippers among you: he may not be so versatile, but he can still be great.

You call it 'clubbing stick'. I call it using the orchestra as "colour" in an overall non-traditional way. How, you may ask? Well, the orchestra alternates with steady rock beats and works in simultaneous chord changes (like pop or rock). This is a STRENGTH in Zimmer's music, IMO, and not a weakness. People have to get over that Zimmer doesn't DO classically symphonic music. That's not his thing. Never was. And he's very much aware of it. I hate...absolutely HATE....the prevalent prejudice that the synth is somehow inferior to the orchestra. It isn't. The synth is capable of creating timbres that the orchestra isn't. Zimmer excels at combining the textures of the two, and he's even a pioneer in it.

***And I AM serious about his lack of versability. You may find it extremely diverse and pleasuring to hear 100 horns constantly droning in that mid- range area and hearing the same theme in I don't know how many scores, but I don't.***

Well, that shows just how little you've actually heard of Zimmer's music and how close-minded you've been when you have.

***And he just doesn't know how to make them sound creative and what you generally call "good".***

Well, that's in the eye of the beholder. You're free to have your opinion of his music, of course. All I react to are misunderstandings, misconceptions and prejudices.

NP: THE BEST OF... (Electric Light Orchestra)

It means that we have discussed it to death, but if people want to ressurect it once again, there's little I can do...

***Thin Red Line is very effective, but is no more than Crimson Tide slowed to 1/100th the speed (or whatever, the actual precise fraction is not the point).***

Huh? Those work in two completely different spheres. CRIMSON TIDE is rock opera anthems and prog rock grooves. THIN RED LINE is etheral ambient electronica a la Shamen, Vangelis, experimental Jean Michel Jarre or Brian Eno.

***A versatile composer is one who can write equally well in different idioms.***

And I certainly think Zimmer qualifies. His musical resume speaks for itself. Remember, though, that versatility should never come at the cost of originality. Zimmer is able to operate in a number of different musical forms and deal with vastly differing subject matters, yet it's always easy to recognize his "sound". That's the mark of a true artist.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thor:
Zimmer excels at combining the textures of the two, and he's even a pioneer in it.

---

Kirk

When it is used to create them, yes. Synth is just completely inferior to the orchestra when it tries to BE the orchestra. That's what Zimmer does often, he lays down his synth mockup of his score. Nothing wrong there. Then he gets his music recorded by a massive orchestra. Great. But then: He mixes the synth back onto the orchestra, in essence doubling it. The result is that the whole thing sounds synthesized, and synthesized orchestra just doesn't sound like orchestra. Not completely.

Look at the battle cues in Gladiator and "The Gladiator Waltz" from the "More Music" album. IF you compare the two, you easily hear that in the final version, there is some more depth and, let's say "soul" to the music, than in the complete synth mockup. But if you hear it by itself, without the reference, it just sounds mostly synthesized. That's what bothers me most about some Zimmer scores. If he wants synth sound, that's cool. But if he wants orchestral sound, let an orchestra do it and don't contaminate it again with an imitation of orchestra. That just sounds bad.

quote:

---

Originally posted by James:
While I only like about 2% of all the music Zimmer has ever written, I don't take issue with any of your arguments except for this one. I have a hard time seeing how Zimmer is a pioneer in this field.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChrisAfonso:
When it is used to create them, yes. Synth is just completely inferior to the orchestra when it tries to BE the orchestra. That's what Zimmer does often, he lays down his synth mockup of his score.

---

I agree with you that the synth should never try to imitate acoustical instruments (the samples simply haven't come that far yet). It diminishes both the orchestral and electronic media. A good example would be Mark Mancina's MOLL FLANDERS. But I REALLY disagree with you that this is what Zimmer is doing. Yes, sometimes he is doubling acoustic brass with electronic brass samples, for example, but it's within an overall architecture. It's not simply a matter of having the synth "imitate" anything. I have to reiterate again that Zimmer does not use the orchestra in a traditional way. So he shouldn't be judged thereafter.

NP: "Calling All Stations" (Genesis)

quote:

---

Not in the simple task of joining synth and orchestra, perhaps, but doing it a CERTAIN WAY that has become hugely influential in the film music world over the years.

---

And what would that CERTAIN WAY be? I don't think you should mix up pioneer work with a composer's unique style.

I just told you. Please read the rest of the post above.

***And I also don't think anyone should fool him- or herself. Zimmer isn't successful in Hollywood because his music is so great or because he's pioneering***

Yes, he is. Among other things.

quote:

---

Originally posted by gkgyver:
I think it's somewhat fitting for Zimmer to take amazon reviews as a reference point.
Especially the ones saying "OMG! Best film music EVER!!!"

---

About versatility: Maybe it isn't versatility or whatever, it could be as Thor points out, just his style, but Zimmer has a better niche on more popular forms of music than most others do. Listen to John Williams try to incoporate electronic beats into orchestral action music in A.I. and it sounds absolutely dreadful to anyone familiar with electronica, or his use of an electric guitar during the Zam chase sequence in Attack Of The Clones and again, it's way out of place and ineffective. That just isn't what Williams is good at, he can't do it (or he has yet to do it successfully). When Zimmer incoporates those elements into his action music it sounds better and works better, most likely because he's writing more from that point of view to begin with; he isn't the more capable orchestral composer that John Williams is, but he's got a better pulse on his heavy metal (The Fan, Broken Arrow) and/or electronic beats than most others-Thor is right, he shouldn't be placed in that sphere of criticism, because Zimmer doesn't do what John Williams does with an orchestra or what Jerry Goldsmith could do so much better with his orchestras.

gkgyver, you're burrying yourself pretty fast, and faster than you ought to. So, we all get that you hate Zimmer's music, but you don't make anything else clear; you aren't discussing anything at hand; you're just posting trash, rubbish, and garbage statements that prove nothing. If you think so passionately (as you claim, but I think you're lying, so far) about film music than prove it and make a convincing case for your argument, otherwise don't participate/waste space in a thread you're so uncaring and dispassionate about (even though you claim the opposite; you can't have your cake and eat it, too, with your current stance).

From what I've read, I don't know that Hans Zimmer actually delivers a score that fast, or so fast that directors "don't care" what the music sounds like. (And yeah, Zimmer is successful because he can write good film music, not because of speed.) You think a director goes and makes a movie that he/she doesn't "care" about? No one does that; for their own sanity they wouldn't. Michael Bay, IMO, is THE WORST American filmmaker working today, but he most certainly thinks he's doing something special with his films and cares about them deeply... even though they're all vommit-inducing, jingoistic trash. Whether their movie is bad or not, it's pretty clear they care, or why bother continuing?

quote:

---

You could write it better, I'm sure, and we'd all hear some kind of unique sound from you.

Your argument holds no water.

---

(It's actually quite amazing that you even had to edit this post)

quote:

---

gkgyver is prone to writing things that don't make sense whatsoever and running his/her keyboard like a drunk; it just doesn't like Hans Zimmer's music, but has no proper and/or meaningful way of articulating that hate other than blanket and dumb comments like "his music is just badly written" (yeah!?! prove it!), or it's most ridiculous comment of all (in this thread, at least):"he just doesn't seem to be able to give one of his scores (and therefor the movie) a unique sound." gkgyver, want some help finishing that 24 of Lucky?

gkgyver, just write that you don't like Zimmer's music because you don't like Zimmer's music, and then go away. Don't flaunt points you can't even and are unwilling to prove, and stop reading interviews with a prolific composer you hate so much.

---

Please note that those are two separate posts in which between I didn't even say anything. Now I've got a question for you: why do *you* have this way of overreacting and attacking people personally?
You've taken this to another level, now deal with it.
At least I know now why I thought you were much younger than me.

Anyway, back to whatever the point of this thread is.
YOU make exactly the same comments I make, just to the opposite direction.
I could say the same thing about those. You know, that they're "trash, rubbish, garbage statements that prove nothing". But I don't want to, simply because such statements about other people's conclusions are totally inappropriate. That's what it's ultimately about, non? Conclusions (or ILLusions in some cases).
I listen to Pirates 1, Pirates 2, Gladiator, Batman Begins, Da Vinci Code, I hear the same patterns, the same synths, the same horn section blaring more than similar motifs, the absence of woodwinds, the same bass fundament, and I say that is anything but unique. It's monotone and boring.
You hear the same things and you think they're diverse, interesting, the work of a pioneer.
And both conclusions are fine. Errare humanum est.
But what it ultimately comes down to is the truth. Do you know the truth? I don't. But I definitely think I'm getting closer than you do.

I don't understand how someone can look at the more and more frustrating output of film scores and say the director care for and understand much about their music. I mean, obviously many people are indeed happy with the current state of the industry, but I am not.
Of course directors CARE for their films, it would be stupid to deny that, and maybe I didn't make this point clear, I give you that. But because they care for their *film* doesn't mean they automatically care for their *music*. It seems like quite a few don't get the connection between those anymore.
And it doesn't automatically mean they appreciate good film music. Just take George Lucas. He seems to appreciate Williams' effort, but he doesn't understand it.

And please, don't walk around blindly. Scoring schedules are getting alot tighter, and any composer who can work quickly is most welcome.

And please, don't make these comments about passion. I find them not only absurd, but pretty hurtful and offensive. And accusing me of lying is something I'm trying really hard to ignore.
Of course about anyone would rather be involved in a passionate discussion about something he loves, not about something he hates. And I wouldn't have any problem ignoring Zimmer's output completely if he didn't continue to make such ridiculous statements.
And a point has arrived long ago where the music I hate started to affect the music I love.

Interesting. I actually think Zimmer himself badly wants to be included in that "sphere of criticism." In an old famous FSM interview Zimmer pointed out that his music is similar to Jerry Goldsmith's score for Total Recall, citing the use of "electronics, percussion and orchestra." He shouldn't compare himself to Goldsmith and not expect outrage from fans.

quote:

---

In those days, all I wanted to do was go to Hollywood, compose for action movies and sound like John Williams. But in truth I didn't know how.

---

I agree with you about George Lucas: I'm not sure why, but it seems to me in the editing process Lucas lets Ben Burtt ground Williams's score to a halt and put it at the back of the mix. It's horrendous. Thank goodness Burtt no longer works at Lucasfilm (he didn't like the way his sounds were treated in Revenge Of The Sith), so if Lucas ever makes another movie we'll have someone give Williams a better, more deserved mix (hopefully, that is).