"Looking for the best composer for your film?

With over a thousand composers waiting to work as a team on your project, you're assured each and every music moment is the best it can be. Gone are the days where a great action composer is caught writing melodramatically during the love scenes, and that hip comedy composer can't reach deep enough for the chills and thrills.

With TeamScore™ the best composer for each moment in your film is always working for you.

And with MultiScore™ you can work with multiple approaches at the same time, so you have all the backup plans you need to cover all your executive needs.

Massive box-office success "The Dark Knight" is a great example of exactly what happens when you put more than one composer into a "think tank". James Newton Howard and Hans Zimmer worked together to create arguably the most powerful score of the year. We believe excellence is achieved through a managed and tempered collaboration."  - The Composers Collective

__________________ end of  quote

This blurb set me off, sorry for my hysterical ranting on the previous version.   But this is disturbing because the whole art of film music is in a composer developing his themes and ideas to express all the moods of the film.  And these guys are arguing against that, saying they've replaced that with something better!  Also, the Dark Knight was good not because of the forgettable score, but because of the film itself.  Compare that score to the first Batman by Danny Elfman - an individual composer with his own style who created a beautiful  piece of work. 

 Yes, you're right.  I should not worry over these things.  It is just that there seems to be a universal movement to erase individuality and replace it with corporate-controlled, homogenized drek everywhere..

 Yes, you may be right there.  I should actually have used the example of Bernard Herrmann first of all, as well as Erich Wolfgang Korngold, two composers who stand as the most individualistic artists in film music.  Herrmann of course did his own orchestrations as well as his own style of non-leitmotif development, which were radical innovations compared to any other composer at the time.  And Korngold viewed his film scores as "operas without words" using as careful and serious a treatment as concert pieces he wrote in developing many different nuances for the films he scored.  Adventures of Robin Hood just came out on Bluray, and it is good to be able to see the beautiful Technicolor so clearly while hearing that great music.  But the point is that the real art of film music is doing precisely the opposite of what this company is trumpeting as its great new development.

I second the motion about how good the Danny Elfman Batman score was. I am wary instead of all these ongoing for 20 years rumours about how much help Elfman has behind the scenes (as opposed to almost everyone else?..), I heard it first hand myself when an oscar nominated well known composer told me so in a private conversation in between masterclasses. Frankly, for all the crap(?) that's going around, and since Beetlejuice, I have been impressed - not overwhelmed - by Elfman's work, so much so that with the gradual passing of the "great" ones, he is certainly top five on my list. If for all these decades he has come up with such different and interesting scores (Beetlejuice, Batman, Good Will Hunting, Big Fish, etc.) with so much help, why don't these incredible helpers make something of themselves? What are they waiting for? Another 20 years?...

As far as Horner is concerned, I don't care much for his work (except "Aliens" which I find just exemplary, masterfully capturing Cameron's metallic aesthetic, as well as the terror), but even him, with all his 'copy-paste' modus operandi, I still find more interesting than Hans, James-Newton, Thomas (how many movies can you score with the same strings-patterns?? Captured the stasis, changelessness and repetitive life in Shawshank prison, didn't realize that was his one style), all current Davids (except Newman - listen to "Throw Mama from the Train" among others), etc. Why? Because Horner (unsuccessfully? You be the judge) served (attempted to serve if you prefer) a different soundtrack aesthetic than almost everyone else today. An aesthetic that stemmed from pioneers such as Herrmann, Rozsa, Rota, Goldsmith, Morriconne, Williams, Barry, Jarre, and many others who wished to have more original music percentage-wise in every score (of course they used their signature-tricks as well), than just exactly the same SYMPHOBIA orchestral-rush for every suspense scene for every movie for every kind of shot etc. And - have you noticed? - they all could write a damn good melody when required... on manuscript paper too of all places... And I mean MELODY, not 4-5 notes put together like Hans' or Howard's. These guys' "melodic" material compares to that of the 3rd raters of the 70s and 80s.

Don't get me wrong, I know that guys like Beltrami and Desplat have probably had excellent conservatoire training; it is the soundtrack aesthetic of the last say 14-15 years I personally detest (there always are exceptions of course, especially from the old guard). However, if that is what the new generation of directors want, who am I to decide what to do with their millions every year?... 

 "if I ever get to move from scoring independent movies to the mainstream then I'll be using a pro orchestrator." - bluejay

If you get to that point you will be writing music just like Zimmer.  You need to realize - you are lucky to be scoring independent movies.   Yes, you may make no money,  but what is  your goal in music?  To make money or to  create good music?  To me, writing music for a serious dramatic independent film is the best work a film composer could ever find.  Writing music for a Hollywood film is the worst, because it is the total destruction of everything that the art of music stands for.  If you want to make money,  then you will write like Zimmer or they won't hire you.  Because everything in commercial films is homogenized pablum.  There is no artistry _  the only art of film music any more is to be found in independent filmmaking. 

Except for  a few older composers who are really good and allowed to do what they do, especially in Europe like Preisner and a few others, but any new, non-established composer today is in big trouble if he is uncompromising, like all the great composers who are admired from the past.  And today, uncompromising means just doing something slightly good.  Not uncompromising like Herrmann, who was an absolute tyrant in control of every single note heard in the score and if anyone tampered with them he was gone from the project in a fit of screaming rage.  But you cannot have that kind of artistic integrity and work today in commercial films.   You can in independent filmmaking. 

 Not really sure I get your point here Errikos.

Firstly, it's nice to see that you, like me, know how to orchestrate but recognise the various reasons for using pro-orchestrators.

After that, you seem to contradict yourself, on one side defending Elfman whilst admitting that the orchestration may not be all his own work and then, on the other side, attacking  modern composers for using other people's orchestration.

I know that at least some of the orchestration on Batman had to be reworked (it's one of the assignments and examples in the Scott Smalley course) to improve the tone and voice leading in the strings.

The worst of all this is that I'm sure you and I actually have the same aesthetic towards film music and are just arguing semantics at this point. As I've said all along, I love the early Elfman scores however I feel that the sound he created at the time was heavily influenced by his collaborators.

As for another 'hack' who has demanded imitation ... well it depends on how you define hack. I'm sure many people consider Zimmer to be one and he is imitated by a lot of people these days ... including Elfman.

In response to your 'manifesto' I can only say that this is getting noticed. Nearly every major film I've been to see of late I've walked out to hear people in the audience complaining about the weak score.

Oh and thank you William! It's nice to see someone who values scoring independent movies. My only problem is that too many indie directors (in the UK at least) want to sound like Hollywood! At least when I'm not getting paid a lot I can argue my case more strongly.

I might recommend slightly less broad brushes, here, guys.  There are good directors/producers, even in Hollywood.  Rare, but not extinct.  Personally, I can and do orchestrate my own work, but there are gigs where I literally don't have time to do it all by myself, so I use one or more orchestrators.  But I provide them with such detailed notes it's basically copying/transcoding.  I can't imagine leaving general notes like, "woodwinds/brass" or something.  If an orchestrator takes any licenses with something I catch it immediately at the session.  To me the composing and orchestrating process are inseparably linked.

In any case, if you don't have the skills to compose appropriate music for both the action sequences and the love sequences in the film you're hired for, you're not a qualified film composer.  Period.

_MIke

" ...a trite stereotypical "urban" sound for the supposed (in)existential - but really hackneyed - issues and suicidally boring characters they explore..."  errikos

Oh, so that is all independent movies? Thanks for clarifying that for me.  And get back to me when you score your first mainstream film  - I assume it will be exploring the existential anguish of a large CGI robot.

[sigh!] Misunderstanding again... I was referring to the directors that I had the misfortune of meeting. Be that as it may, it would be very far from me to assume or bestow artistry, philosophy, and vision to a producer or a director simply because they do Independent Film... There are incredibly huge amount of arty-farty people in the Independent industry surrounding the gifted and the visionary, always pooh-poohing Hollywood for its "commercialism", while they themselves tell the same stories again and again, use every cliched, and contribute nothing at all; i.e the exact counterparts of the CGI robot scenario. At least if I ever did the music for that I'd be rich!

Let's face it, as bad and worse as Hollywood is getting to be, there aren't exactly too many Viscontis, Fellinis, Truffauts, or Hitchcocks working in Europe today for every composer... I know you'll say these are big names and would be categorized as European Cinema directors, not Independent, but (I could very well be mistaken) I don't see too much insightful cinema today. The political messages are In Your Face, there is unbearable catechism in the dialogues addressing an apparently uneducated audience, exclusively late20th-early21st century sensibilities even in period pieces(!!), etc. But, I have to agree that it is in Independent Cinema that a lot of creative chances are taken, and that is great for us. I was just wishing for directors with some considerable musical horizons. In that vein, I am happy for all of you who are working with such great visionaries who also understand good music, because I insist on what I said about the musical requirements I have come across (urban crap for crap plebeian characters, or the obligatory acoustic group "sad song", preferably with sultry teenage-early20s female vocalist).