It got me to thinking about the possiblility that some of today's composers would actually sound like those from the past. Be it thru homage or blatant ripoff.

For instance I've always loved the love theme from DICK TRACY and then I found out that Elfman used Rhapsody in Blue as "inspiration". I never drew the connection but I love them both.

When listening to some of Mahler's work there is a moment when the piece is straight out of STAR TREK IV! (or vice-versa)

Or the main titles of STAR TREK VI being very "Bringer of War" by Holst.

Anyway, I was wondering if it was well-known that one present-day composer always or more often than not sounded like a classical composer. Does Horner borrow from Bizet or Berlioz for example? Does Barry sound like any classical music? Williams? Goldsmith?

I apologize if this has all been covered before but I've never seen it discussed anywhere.

Thanks in advance!!!

There's something in Horner's long 12-15 minute cues, in his orchestration and in his long lines and repeated motifs which somehow reminds me of Mahler. There's also a tragically romantic side with both Mahler and Horner, but also Tchaikovsky.

That said, Horner constantly rips off Prokofiev.

Go there: http://www.towerrecords.com/product.aspx?pfid=1080974&cc=USD

And listen to the clip from track 5 called: 5. Cantana For The 20th Anniversary Of The October Revolution, Op.74: V. Interlude

You'll notice action music lifted directly from this Prokofiev piece and inserted in Willow (and apparently some other Horner scores from the mid1980's). That's in addition to the theme from Schumann's Rhenish symphony also found in Willow.

Other than that, Horner just keeps on stealing parts from Prokofiev's Alexander Nevsky.

So Horner is a weird bag. Stylistically (and when he writes his own material) he reminds me of Tchaikovsky and Mahler. Content-wise, Horner should be paying the Prokofiev family dividends.

In terms of Williams, I think his style resembles most those of Alan Rawsthorne and again Prokofiev. A long time ago, I posted a clip from a piece by Rawsthorne. A number of people though it might be Williams, or McNeely pulling a Williams. But Rawsthorne's score was written half a century ago.

As for Star Trek 6 & Holst, that is not surprising. If you reread Nicholas Meyer's booklet notes from the Star Trek 6 soundtrack, you'll find Meyer initially wanted to adapt the Planets before hiring Eidelman. Although, the Star Trek 6 main titles remind more of Stravinsky than of Holst.

If one thing does remind me of Holst, it's Zimmer's battle music from Gladiator. More than that, it's really a variation on the Battle of Britain battle music by Brit classical master and occasional film scorer William Walton.

1950's horror/suspense scores resemble Messiean's Turangalila symphony.

I risk being stoned for what I'm about to say, but Media Ventures chord banging resembles Beethoven's music. Not quite. Beethoven's is far better. But the basics I think are there.

There's one other dude who would have been the perfect movie music composer, and to whom all film composers must pay hommage once a year: Puccini.

The dramatic themes, the soaring strings, the use of ethnic music, of funny musical winks (like the American anthem in Madam Butterfly)... all drama music with lush over the top strings and heart breaking dramatic brass bears some resemblance to Puccini. Perhaps the most obvious example would be Gone With the Wind.

Finally, in terms of orchestration, and in terms of Mikey Mousing as well as describing images using the music, all film music resembles Rimsky-Korsakov's operas, in which R-K used the orchestra to paint images. There's some stuff in Rimsky's Mlada which could have been the basis for a suspense/time motif in Goldsmith's Alien, Ross' T-Rex, or Horner's Zorro.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dinko:
You'll notice action music lifted directly from this Prokofiev piece and inserted in Willow (and apparently some other Horner scores from the mid1980's). That's in addition to the theme from Schumann's Rhenish symphony also found in Willow.

Other than that, Horner just keeps on stealing parts from Prokofiev's Alexander Nevsky.

---

In addition, there's bits in Krull that sound totally like Wagner's Fire Magic and the night music from Strauss' Alpine Symphony.

quote:

---

[b]Although, the Star Trek 6 main titles remind more of Stravinsky than of Holst.

---

The rhythm is Holst's, the theme is from Stravinsky's Firebird, just played backwards.

Goldsmith occasionally sounds like Anton Bruckner...Star Trek V is one of those scores, and also parts of Blue Max, Final Conflict, First Knight and The Edge....in the latter, he uses the same 4-note motif Bruckner used as the base for his Te Deum. Though there are only so many ways to combine 4 notes in tonal music, and most 4-note motifs sound rather similar (50% of them sounding like the Dies Irae), so I don't try to read too much into it. In any case, Goldsmith used the same motif in the middle section of his Voyager theme.

Rach

To compare the world of 'classical' music (Beethoven, Wagner, Puccini, R Strauss etc) with the world of film composing is wholly inappropriate.

Film music is a wholly different animal to music which is *intended* for stand-alone consumption, be it wholly (a symphony, rock song, jazz piece) or mostly (such as a ballet or opera).

You should really be comparing modern composers such as Macmillan, Ligeti, Henze, Kurtag, Torke, Penderecki, Turnage, Adams and Ades with earlier 'classical' composers. Film composers simply don't count (except Glass's 'documentary' film scores perhaps) - unless they specifically write a non-film music stand-alone work, and even then one has to question the true quality of such a work.

Whereas all music intended for stand-alone consumption is almost always original and sophisticated, film music is by its very nature simplistic derivative of what has gone before - be it classical, jazz or rock music.

So of course there are a billion and one examples of a film composer either lifting or emulating a non-film composer's work. You mention Star Trek, well it is a commonly known fact that Horner directly quotes from Prokofiev's 'Romeo and Juliet' during Star Trek III, and not only is Goldsmith's 'cloud' music from ST:TMP merely a variation on Herrmann's 'Vertigo' main theme, but Herrmann's work itself is hugely derivative of Wagner and Richard Strauss, to say nothing of Vaughan Williams.

To specifically liken Horner's 'sound' to Mahler's is like saying pretzels are similar to caviar (after all, both are edible). Considering that Mahler is one of the fathers of film music, of course there are sometime similarities between Horner and Mahler, but no more so with Williams and Mahler or Bernstein and Mahler, and especially Goldenthal who often blatantly emulates Mahler (listen to the love music during his Batman scores). But Horner sounds like dozens of other composers just as often, be it Khachaturian or Prokofiev or Schubert - often because he blatantly copies huge chunks of these composers' work.

Herrmann's 'Journey to the Center of the Earth' is a rip-off of elements of Wagner's Ring Cycle, John Williams' Superman score is a shameless steal of Strauss's 'Death and Transfiguration', and one of Korngold's greatest scores (1944's 'Between Two Worlds) is merely a recycling of his own material from his grand opera 'The Miracle of Helene'.

But I am not trying to criticise film music or film composers because originality is not very important when it comes to movie music. Indeed, as rachmaninov pointed out the great classical composers themselves freely quoted and adapted musical ideas from other composers. Speaking of Mahler's Symphony no. 1, there is an amazingly blatant quotation from Mendelsohnn's 'Scottish Symphony' - indeed, Mahler's music is littered with musical ideas culled from other composers, but Mahler almost always creates something new from the previously composed musical material which inspired him, whereas film composers hardly ever do this, but are merely content to recycle rather than reinvent or adapt.

Doubtless some will *mis*interpret my views here as 'snobbish' or somehow anti-'film music'........however, I hope that you will understand where I am coming from and that my attitudes towards film music (in its intended role of supporting the movie) are far from being disparaging.

The thing is, movie music is set apart from all other forms of music.......jazz, 'classical' and rock 'n roll all have one important factor in common........they are intended for stand-alone listening.

Film music fulfils a completely different function......ie it exists to *support* a greater artform - the movie itself.......opera is also very different from film music in that with virtually every major opera the music is by far the most important aspect. In much the same way, a rock video merely supports the music.

One of the problems I have with your opinions, meegle, is that you talk as if film music has somehow 'replaced' or superseded classical music and opera........in fact, contemporary 'classical' music and opera continues to flourish. There are many talented 'classical' composers today who are composing superb pieces of 'serious' music, be they symphonies, opera or whatever. And these modern 'classical' works are performed in the concert hall with far greater frequency than any film music from the past 70 years, excepting some of the work of Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Walton, Vaughan Williams and so on which has special significance. I say 'special' because such composers are far more famous for their stand-alone works than their film music. Even the film music of Korngold, a genius composer of operas and movie scores, rarely has his film work performed in the concert hall. And almost all of these great composers' film work has been specially adapted and made more sophisticated for the concert hall - Alexander Nevsky for example was massively improved by Prokofiev for the concert hall. Just witness the failed attempt at this year's proms to perform his 'Ivan the Terrible' score with minimal improvement - it just sounded like a typical film score, disjointed, derivative and simplistic.

Furthermore, the 'classical' music avant-garde continues to develop music and pioneer new soundworlds and compositional techniques........so too are the worlds of rock 'n roll and jazz. Indeed, never have the idioms of jazz, rock 'n roll and 'classical' been so closely related as they are today with the leading exponents of each idiom regularly crossing the perceived boundaries between rock, jazz and classical with ever-increasing success. Yes, the future of musical development does lie with electronics, but such concepts are still only in their infancy, but it is the fusion of all musical idioms which will help speed the process.

However, film music plays little or no part in this progression........indeed, film music only ever reacts to changing musical trends, it doesn't lead them......

Furthermore, film music (whether its Zimmer of Williams), for all its superficially 'contemporary' nature, is still firmly rooted in the Romantic tradition espoused by Tchaikovsky and Elgar a century ago.

As I have said many times before, film music is based firmly on the principles of the 'classical' composers of a hundred years ago, such as Elgar and Dvorak. But the 'classical' music of today (ie the music being composed by the likes of Ades, Adams and Turnage) is far in advance of what is being composed for film.

For film music to succeed in its aim of enhancing the emotional resonance of a movie for the audience it must communicate using a musical language that is easily appreciated by the widest cross-section of the cinema-going public - hence film music's old-fashioned and often simplistic, derivative and facile nature. The well-known and popular movie themes of the past seventy years, from GONE WITH THE WIND to JAMES BOND to STAR WARS are all written in a style which is easily interpreted and appreciated by the public. In many ways, this 'popularity' reinforces my view that film music is utterly conservative and derivative.

For any music to be truly regarded as legitimately 'classical' or 'serious', it must be original. Thus we have film music's greatest weakness.......its unoriginality. Take a listen to any John Williams or Jerry Goldsmith score and you will find it is a tapestry of borrowings and re-inventions of existing musical ideas. For example, Goldsmith's fantasy scores to THE SECRET OF NIMH and LEGEND are so clearly derived from the works of Debussy and Janacek as to render Goldsmith's scores as a mere homage (albeit a skilled one) to composers of a long past era........such music can *never* be respected as legitimately 'classical' because it is wholly unoriginal both stylistically and (more importantly) thematically. And then there are the direct quotations composers such as Horner weave into their scores - STAR TREK III includes huge chunks of Prokofiev and the main theme to ALIENS is pure Khachaturian.

But this is no criticism of Horner and Williams.......for these men are doing exactly what is required of them......and that is to produce excellent film scores.......a successful film score is more about appropriateness and communication than originality or what may be perceived as 'artistic integrity'. Sure, a film score can be 'original', but such considerations are secondary to the music's success in enhancing the emotional resonance of a movie. I would rather have a derivative but appropriate film score than an original but inappropriate film score - and so would 99% of the cinema-going public.

Again, movies haven't 'replaced' operas.......apart from the fact that operas are still being written (often with great success), the crucial difference between opera and film is that the opera is all about the music. Virtually every major opera has wall to wall music which is almost always prominent......the music is always there, save for a few brief periods of spoken dialogue in some operas, and the music is almost always the focus of attention. With movies, the vast majority of films have long periods without any music at all, and even when there is music the score is almost always secondary to the images and dialogue, which also helps to explain why so much film music is disjointed, poorly developed, simplistic, monotonous and repetitious - to me, listening to film music divorced from the movie is like listening to a violin concerto without the violin - hence some of my reasons for not listening to film music outside of the intended movie.

To illustrate my point, when people refer to 'Tristan and Isolde' they say Wagner's 'Tristan and Isolde' and when people talk of 'Turandot' they say Puccini's 'Turandot'.........but nobody describes ET as Williams' 'ET'.

Therefore, one doesn't have to see an opera to appreciate the music.......far more people listen to opera on the hifi than they do film music. This is because music written for opera is not only 'superior' in every way to film music, but the entire opera itself is based around the music. In other words, with opera it is the music which drives the action, whereas film music is driven by the overall movie. With opera, the music is almost always meaningful even when heard outside of the opera house. After all, when one visits Covent Garden to enjoy a performance of Janacek's 'Jenufa', how many of us understand the libretto (which is in Czech). A basic idea of the plot is all that is needed to appreciate an opera as a musical treasure - and a translation of the libretto and a more intricate understanding of the workings of the plot can be explored to further enhance one's appreciation in time. But at the end of the day, far more people love listening to opera without an understanding of the language or a copy of the libretto than listen to film music because the music written for opera is superior in every way and is almost always 'musically meaningful' in a similar way to a symphony or concerto. With film music the reverse is true. Film music is almost always reliant on the images and dialogue to give it substance and meaning.

Nobody will be looking back on the film scores of the 20th century expecting to come across a 'lost gem'. This is because film music has been so wholly exposed to contemporary audiences. Think about it, film music is exposed far more than classical or opera because so many people go to the movies.......but they don't go to the movies to hear the film score, they go for the overall picture......thus, as far as the movie composer is concerned, there is a massive 'captive audience'.....the composers of symphonies and operas, and even the jazz artistes and rock 'n roll performers can only weep with envy at the privileged position of the film composer.

And yet, despite this 'free' mass-exposure, only the tiniest fraction of society enjoys listening to film music outside of the intended movie on the hifi. That's because film music, as a purely listening experience, is usually woefully inferior to music intended for stand-alone consumption, be it classical, jazz, folk, or rock 'n roll. Oh sure, some main themes are well-known and popular (and will always be), such as John Barry's wonderful 'Midnight Cowboy' and Max Steiner's 'Gone with the Wind' and John Williams' 'Raiders of the Lost Ark', but take these scores as a whole and you will find that most of the music is purely designed to augment the images and dialogue seen in the movie. In other words, for 95% of the time a film score is subservient to the movie.......whereas with opera, 95% of the time the opera is subservient to the music. So, there is no way on earth that film music will be regularly performed in the concert hall in the same way as Mahler and Beethoven is today........not only is there a virtual absence of demand amongst the majority of society to hear film music performed in concert (or on the album for that matter), but the film music itself doesn't have the complexity or sophistication to endear it to anyone seeking more of a challenge. In other words, most people want to listen to Kylie Minogue because her music is popular, but a lot of people also want to hear Richard Strauss and Gustav Mahler because their music has depth and 'challenge' - film music has neither quality - it isn't popular but nor is it 'complex', therefore it appeals to only a minute fraction of society. Look at it this way, rock 'n roll is hugely popular today because it appeals to the widest section of society......with classical it's a bit different. It took a long time for Mahler to become famous and for his music to be properly appreciated (50 or 60 years after his death) because of its complexity and sophistication. But there's no 'hidden' treasure with film music.......nobody is going to look back on Goldsmith's score to US MARSHALS in 50 years time and then to discover its true value (as has happened with Mahler's symphonies). The 'value' of Goldsmith's score to US MARSHALS is plain for all to see, and fifty years of maturing will not make it any more valuable. Goldsmith's scoring of US MARSHALS (for instance) is necessarily simplistic and derivative, but Mahler's 4th symphony (for example) garnered initial criticism and incomprehension because of its originality and complexity. In other words, if Goldsmith's US MARSHALS (or any of his other scores) were to become great examples of 'classical' or 'popular' music then it would have happened by now - indeed, I believe the forthcoming decades will only see a diminution in the appreciation of much of Goldsmith's work.

Yes, there are great movie themes (such as Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, E.T) that will be remembered in centuries to come, but so will the opening bars of Beethoven's 5th, Strauss's 'Zarathrustra' and Puccini's 'Nessun Dorma'........but the difference is that when people listen to the whole of Beethoven's 5th symphony they will continue to marvel at the originality, structure and invention of the entire work, but with ET, people will continue to like the main theme and then be disappointed by the repetitiousness, disjointedness and lack of development of the rest of the score. People will never listen to Williams' score to ET like they do Beethoven's 5th.

Don't get me wrong, I love film music just as much as I love listening to Miles Davis, Janacek or Led Zeppelin..........but I also recognize that film music is a completely different animal to all forms of stand-alone music, be it classical, rock or jazz. Whilst I believe film music makes for a wretchedly unsatisfactory stand-alone listening experience, when married to the intended movie, film music can become the equal of the greatest symphony or most passionate love song......the reason for this is simple........

With film music, it's a two-way street........Not only does film music enhance the emotional resonance of the movie, but the movie itself gives the music meaning...........

In summary, Meegle. All I can suggest is you gradually familiarise yourself more with 'classical' music, especially the great romantic works of Wagner and the often victimised 20th century composers. I have, and it makes listening to film music as a stand-alone experience wholly redundant........

On reflection, one could make a shorter list of film scores which don't *apparently* contain blatant influences from existing compositions, rather than attempt a list of known 'borrowings' and 'stealings' because such a list is virtually endless.

Daniel Seamus Cunningham

PS Please refer to my earlier threads at this forum (where I posted as Don Webster, Splash and so on) where I recommend great stand-alone listening from all musical genres (except film music).

What about when music is written and recorded before the film is shot, with the footage then edited to that music, as for instance with Glass's Kundun or Nyman's scores for Peter Greenaway films? From the insert notes on The Essential Michael Nyman Band:

quote:

---

Consequently, almost all the music that Nyman has wrriten for Peter Greenaway is essentially concert music (their italics) that has additionally been used, immensely effectively, for film.

---

And forgive me for pointing out the obvious, but these opinions are not facts. Many composers, in fact, may disagree with you. Take this excerpt from an interview with Tan Dun:

quote:

---

Some people seem to think that film music is not as "pure" as classical music, and vice versa. What are your thoughts on that?

I am a composer doing both, and I don't know what other people's experiences are, but I think honestly that there is no difference. Artistically, both are extremely creative, and technically, there are normal distinctions - it's not a big deal. When you write a chamber music piece or when you write an opera - they're the same, but they're different, of course. The same goes for writing for film. All of the people involved are humans and artists, and there's a soul that you need to reach. No matter if you're doing a symphony or a film - they all have the same goal.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marty:
For film music to succeed in its aim of enhancing the emotional resonance of a movie for the audience it must communicate using a musical language that is easily appreciated by the widest cross-section of the cinema-going public...

---

I'll let Mr. Herrmann handle this one:

quote:

---

The present time we live in, cinema and television is the great vehicle for contemporary music, and by contemporary music I mean that you can have experimentation in both those mediums in the most avant-garde musical techniques and in audience will accept it providing it is compatible with the dramatic situation of the film.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marty:
All I can suggest is you gradually familiarise yourself more with 'classical' music, especially the great romantic works of Wagner and the often victimised 20th century composers. I have, and it makes listening to film music as a stand-alone experience wholly redundant........

---

In that respect I made specific reference to Glass. And the same is true of Nyman. But, as you rightly point out, such examples are very much the exception and form only an infinitesimal fraction of all 'film' music.

James said - "Many composers, in fact, may disagree with you. Take this excerpt from an interview with Tan Dun....."

With the greatest respect to Tan Dun and you, James, whilst you are entitled to your opinions on this matter, very, very few people outside of this message board would agree that film music fulfils as a purely listening experience to anywhere near the same extent as most quality 'classical', rock 'n roll or jazz that has been specifically written for listening purposes. From a purely listening point of view there is far more common ground shared by opera and chamber music than either shares with film music.

James said - "Therefore, whether or not film music can serve the same purpose as concert music (or any form of stand-alone music) depends entirely on what you believe music's function is in the first place."

Fair enough......but I'm not saying that my opinion that film music usually makes for a wretchedly unsatisfactory stand-alone listening experience is 'right' - but it is an opinion shared by the vast majority of public and music critics alike. That makes the guy or gal who listens to soundtrack albums very unusual.....'special', if you like.

James said - "I have always found film music just as emotionally, technically, and creatively satisfying as any other type of music......"

And I too.....when heard within the intended movie......

James said - "I'll let Mr. Herrmann handle this one: The present time we live in, cinema and television is the great vehicle for contemporary music......"

And there speaks a film composer.....let us not forget it is 'Mr Herrmann' who also said - ".....although music is the cement that binds a film together, it should not be noticed, though neither should it dictate the action." So it's easy to keeping churning out isolated quotations to fit with one's opinions.

James said - "Jerry Goldsmith's strange music certainly didn't hurt the success of Planet of the Apes.

Of course 'modernist' techniques have been used in film, but my point is that such techniques were not 'pioneered' by film composers. And the same is just as true of a 'modernist' score such as Goldsmith's 'Planet of the Apes' as a score with Romantic elements such as 'Forever Young'......in each case the film score lacks the structure and sophistication necessary for it to garner stand-alone status, either with lovers of popular music or the avant garde.

James said - "Even if such scores are only reacting to musical trends, they are not musical trends most audiences are aware of."

And that is precisely my point. The film composer will use 'modernist' techniques often to portray an 'alien' environment or help create 'tension' therefore having an unsettling effect on the audience, but that doesn't mean 'modernist' film music has the depth, sophistication and structure of a stand-alone 'modernist' composition, such as Ligeti's piano concerto.

James said - "As the very existence of this forum suggests, there are quite a few people who are very familiar with "classical" music in all its forms, and we do not find listening to film music as a stand-alone experience wholly redundant."

In my experience at these message boards, few if any of the members here have a balanced or even representative knowledge of non-film music, be it classical, rock or jazz. There is a world of music out there, and if you look hard enough you will find 'stand-alone' music which has all of the 'attractions' of film music but has the depth, sophistication and structure to endear it to the most *demanding* music lover. My earlier threads at this forum detail such non-film music from across all genres.

The thing is James, most of the non-film music talk here is concerned with the 'usual suspects' - Bruckner, Mahler, Vaughan Williams, Shostakovich, the well-known works of Richard Strauss. But such 'popular' classical works represent only the very tip of the iceberg. A complete knowledge of such works as the Bruckner symphonies is merely the starting point on an unbelievably exciting and fulfilling musical journey......a journey I continue to make, and one in which film music hardly ever features (outside of the movie itself of course).

Now if people are content listening mainly to film music then that's fine, it's their choice and I have no problem with that. However, too many film music fans here it seems *choose* to avoid or even denigrate non-film music without knowing what they're actually talking about - it's almost as if they are afraid to accept there are vast continents of stand-alone music out there that is far, far 'better' than film music. The perfect example of this is Dinko's dismissal of Wynton Marsalis and Haydn at an earlier thread at this forum even though he admitted he knew little of their work. Now I'm intimately familiar with Marsalis's superb achievements in the worlds of classical and especially jazz, and for a film score fan to dismiss such a great musical talent as this is simply ridiculous, especially when several of Marsalis's albums feature very cinematic jazz sounds incorporating intimate jazz ensemble and orchestra. Again I detail such albums as his magnificent 'Midnight Blues' at my 'recommended listening' threads.

Indeed, there are dozens and dozens of jazz/rock/classical crossover albums which are cinematic in sound and scope but have the benefit of structure, sophistication and development. Many of these I also detail at my 'recommended listening' threads.

And beyond all of that, I don't know anyone here is who is familiar (beyond the preludes and famous arias) with the late-Romantic operas of Wagner, Strauss, Braunfels, Schreker, Zemlinsky, Janacek and so on and on which not only contain much of the greatest music ever written (yet), but also have provided an amazing source of thematic material and musical devices for the film composer. Being intimately familiar with a hundred or so of the greatest operas ever written does tend to illuminate the wholly facile, derivative and thoroughly unoriginal nature of film music.

I don't think there's really much more to say, since none of your arguments are "wrong," only personally disagreeable, and now that I've disagreed I'm satisfied. But it was interesting to read.

Incidentally, I agree with you when you talk about film music fans seeming to choose to avoid or denigrate non-film music without being familiar with it, except that I must add it is most definitely not something you find only in film music fans. You will find a great many people who listen primarily to one genre of music who dismiss all others when they really don't know enough about other genres to dismiss them. It's sad, really. Having eclectic tastes in music (and all forms of art and entertainment) can be very rewarding, if rather expensive.