SUPPORT FILMTRACKS! CLICK HERE FIRST:
Amazon.com
Amazon.co.uk
iTunes (U.S.)
Amazon.ca
Amazon.fr
eBay (U.S.)
Amazon.de
Amazon.es
Half.com
Glisten Effect
Editorial Reviews
Scoreboard Forum
Viewer Ratings
Composers
Awards
   NEWEST MAJOR REVIEWS:
     1. Venom
    2. House With a Clock/Walls
   3. The Nun
  4. Crazy Rich Asians
 5. The Meg
6. Christopher Robin
   CURRENT MOST POPULAR REVIEWS:
         1. Edward Scissorhands
        2. Jurassic World: Kingdom
       3. Batman
      4. The Predator
     5. Gladiator
    6. Mission: Impossible - Fallout
   7. Solo: A Star Wars Story
  8. Apollo 13
 9. Ant-Man and the Wasp
10. The Equalizer 2
Home Page
Menu Options ▼
Zzzzzzzzzzz

Ash
<Send E-Mail>
(h24-80-154-166.du.shawcable.net)


  Responses to this Comment:
MSM
-
Tuong-Vi G.
Zzzzzzzzzzz   Wednesday, January 30, 2002 (6:59 p.m.) 

Boring score. Predictiable composer. Nothing new to offer here. Movie's awful too. Skip it. and this disc. Least inspiring score of this year.

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


MSM
(pcei15.cpedu.rug.nl)

  In Response to:
Ash

  Responses to this Comment:
Ash
Zzz!?   Tuesday, February 5, 2002 (8:56 a.m.) 

> Boring score. Predictiable composer. Nothing new to offer here. Movie's
> awful too. Skip it. and this disc. Least inspiring score of this year.

Maybe the melodic content of this album will not please everybody, but I don't see why you think it is boring! There are plenty of energetic/loud/action passages. I wonder how you define an interesting score!?


Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Ash
<Send E-Mail>
(24.80.154.166)

  In Response to:
MSM

  Responses to this Comment:
MSM
Erika
Re: Zzz!?   Tuesday, February 5, 2002 (3:25 p.m.) 

> Maybe the melodic content of this album will not please everybody, but I
> don't see why you think it is boring! There are plenty of
> energetic/loud/action passages. I wonder how you define an interesting
> score!?
Ah yes...if all I desired was a melody this score would be average. But there is no magic in this score. It feels souless like most of Hans Zimmer's works of late (Thin Red Line excluded). For me a boring score is something that has no "soul" there is no way to define weather or not a score has soul. What you can do is measure it against other scores that attempt to do the same. In Williams's case your measuring this is score against some of his previous scores in the same genre. For example another score of Williams in the this genre would be "Hook" a far better score, that uses magic to much more effect. Is it just me or did the Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings score sound the same? The Rings score was slightly better than the Potter score, but to me both scores sound the same. If you want interesting scores of the same magnitude try:
1) Trevor Jones's Thirteen Days
2) Jon Brion's Magnolia
3) Chris Young's Murder in the First
4) Mychael Danna's Ride With the Devil
5) James Newton Howard's Snow Falling on Cedars

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


MSM
(onw117pc13.farmedu.rug.nl)

  In Response to:
Ash

  Responses to this Comment:
Ash
Sean Raduechel
Re: Zzz!?   Friday, February 8, 2002 (3:43 a.m.) 

I agree that Hook was a better score, but I think it is you when you wonder if HP and LotR sounded the same. They didn't. HP is a far more complex and certainly more original writing than LotR and I think that's quite obvious when you listen carefully. I think LotR lacked magic indeed, but HP is a more than average regarding to magic. I think a goog criterium for determining whether or not a score is magical, is increase the volume of your HIFI installation, close your eyes and see if you can imagine if you can fly. If not, it's no magical score. But whith HP I had that.

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Ash
<Send E-Mail>
(h24-80-154-166.du.shawcable.net)

  In Response to:
MSM
Re: Zzz!?   Friday, February 8, 2002 (7:00 a.m.) 

> I agree that Hook was a better score, but I think it is you when you
> wonder if HP and LotR sounded the same. They didn't. HP is a far more
> complex and certainly more original writing than LotR and I think that's
> quite obvious when you listen carefully. I think LotR lacked magic indeed,
> but HP is a more than average regarding to magic. I think a goog criterium
> for determining whether or not a score is magical, is increase the volume
> of your HIFI installation, close your eyes and see if you can imagine if
> you can fly. If not, it's no magical score. But whith HP I had that.

Now there's a thought!

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Sean Raduechel
<Send E-Mail>
(csradu469.uwsp.edu)

  In Response to:
MSM

  Responses to this Comment:
Julius Talyansky
hobbits vs. harry: the full synopsis   Sunday, April 7, 2002 (11:54 a.m.) 

> I agree that Hook was a better score, but I think it is you when you
> wonder if HP and LotR sounded the same. They didn't. HP is a far more
> complex and certainly more original writing than LotR and I think that's
> quite obvious when you listen carefully. I think LotR lacked magic indeed,
> but HP is a more than average regarding to magic. I think a goog criterium
> for determining whether or not a score is magical, is increase the volume
> of your HIFI installation, close your eyes and see if you can imagine if
> you can fly. If not, it's no magical score. But whith HP I had that.

I have decided to make your comment my victim in describing my real thought of Harry Potter verses Lord of the Rings. To start, I will go to the root of each films nature, the books, and thus provide insight into the error of your so called magic. Lord of the Rings was written by J.R.R. Tolkien with a clear purpose in mind, to spread the christian message to readers around the world by means of creative parallels and metaphors; much like what C.S. Lewis did with Chronicles of Narnia except with a much more sinister and darker feeling to try and best portray evils existence in this world. Harry Potter, on the other hand, was written with the intentions of providing a wide audience of readers with an addictively entertaining fantasy book series, thus drawing them to any related artifact that can be found with such fervor not seen since furbies first hit the market. Thus what we have hear is what could be called really two totally different kinds of magic. Lord of the Rings tends to portray a sort of black vs. white, dark yet moralistic and religious sort of magic. On the other hand Harry Potter tends to have sort of dreamy, idealistic magic. So clearly we cannot simply define magic in a basic term.

Now that the natures of these films have been clarified, it comes down to analysing how well the music works with and amplifies the action on screen. With Harry Potter, I must admit, I saw it at a late time and fell asleep. However, what I did hear does work for the idealistic fantasy nature of the story. Lord of the Rings, also, fits the film very well. The harsh gothic nature and almost religious choral arrangments of the score really do amplify the film's basic premise of the high and moral verses the hideous and evil.

What it finally comes down to is originality and complexity. It seems that my predecessor was quite strongly opinionated in this, having provided her view without much in the way of supporting evidence. If one were to seriously listen to Harry Potter, they would certainly realize that it is not the more original score. At several points in the score the comments by the one who wrote this sight's review are made quite clear. There are several points where themes from Hook, Indiana Jones, and even Star Wars: A New Hope are used. Although these are dwarfed by one great repeat: the use of Schindler's List in the what one may describe as Harry's Theme. This usage is best illustrated at the very beginning of track 2 and later on in track 3. Although I cannot write music now, the theme essentially goes as follows, high-low-high-low-higher-mid-low. On the other hand, the closest resembling score I can come to with Lord of the Rings is 13th Warrior, since they both heavily used male dominated choral arragments. Then there comes the issue of complexity, to which I can easily say, although it is not lacking in it, Harry Potter is no more complex than Lord of the Rings. Both use a large number of Leitmotifs, many of which can be hard to identify at times, and in reality, Harry Potter has essentially the same mystical, not too aggressive tone through out (with the exception of the quidditch game), whereas Lord of the Rings has several tracks that are very sad (gandalf falling and boromirs death), several that are aggressive (anywhere where the black riders are involved, betrayal of isengard, and kazad dum), several that are light hearted (regarding hobbits and the rivendale tracks), and still several that are ominous (journey through the dark and lothlorien).

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Julius Talyansky
<Send E-Mail>
(12-234-178-117.client.attbi.com)

  In Response to:
Sean Raduechel

  Responses to this Comment:
Erika
Janakae
Re: hobbits vs. harry: the full synopsis   Monday, June 23, 2003 (8:02 p.m.) 

I have a sudden urge to laugh for an extremely long and drawn-out time - are people so crass that they will see anything in anyway, even if that view is totally unsupported? The comparison between LoTR and HP is just WRONG...not slightly incorrect, not questionable, but WRONG. The comparison of Tolkien to C.S. Lewis is akin to comparing Dickens to Tom Clancy - the two just don't mix. Did not Tolkien SPECIFICALLY say that his works are to be taken with a grain of salt, and not applied to any themes from the real world? I want you to show me ONE example of Christianity in LoTR - aside from Morality and Goodness, because they can exist in even non-religious souls (shocking, no?). While C.S. Lewis DOES admit to underlying Christian themes in his writing, Tolkien wrote from an AGNOSTIC, or even ATHEISTIC prospective - while he himself was a devout Christian, his works have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Christianity, and therefore make your "argument" fundamentally flawed...

As for LoTR and HP, the argument is akin to comparing a master's work with the feeble dabblings of a layman - LoTR is much DEEPER than HP, and is made to be interpreted on many levels, unlike the one-shot "novel" that is HP. Although I am not against HP or Lewis, the comparison to LoTR is simply flawed, and should only be brought up, let alone argued, by those who understand the content and can SUPPORT their arguments with a valid thesis.

Ta ta,

Julius T.

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Erika
<Send E-Mail>
(philacad.andover.edu)

  In Response to:
Julius Talyansky
Re: hobbits vs. harry: the full synopsis   Wednesday, October 1, 2003 (4:15 a.m.) 

I am completely agreed with Julius. There is not a single place in the book or movie where anyone "prays" to a deity. The only people really "worshipped" are the elders, the kings, and those who have the rings. Unless somehow, by some twisted reason, you suddenly decide that Lord Sauron is this alter-God who likes to destroy people(if you believe that... go get help).

As for which work is better, HP or LOTR. I didn't even know there was any doubt. LOTR is entirely deeper and more touching. It deals with hobbits, who are tiny and whom no one ever expected anything from, and how four of them help save the MiddleEarth. For all you know, the end could be bad(it especially looks that way when Gandalf "died"). Now look at HP. It's about three teenage students and their adventures with magic. Whoopee. From the way the book is, you KNOW that the end is gonna be just fine. Plus they have magic, they can do ANYTHING. There's also no deep meaning except get good friendships because when you are royally screwed, it'll be there for you to lean on. However, in LOTR, you deal with perseverance, love, loyalty, friendship, temptation, etc. Actually, I have heard many people say that HP is merely a feeble attempt at imitating LOTR.

Seriously people, open your eyes.

Erika

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Janakae
<Send E-Mail>
(216.213.196.7)

  In Response to:
Julius Talyansky

  Responses to this Comment:
Elizabeth
Christianity in LOTR   Monday, February 16, 2004 (10:00 a.m.) 

In reply to:

Tolkien wrote from an
> AGNOSTIC, or even ATHEISTIC prospective - while he himself was a devout
> Christian, his works have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Christianity, and
> therefore make your "argument" fundamentally flawed...

YOUR argument is fundamentally flawed. Tolkien himself admitted in a 1953 letter to Robert Murray, and I quote: "The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision."

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Elizabeth
<Send E-Mail>
(client-216-43-116-237.consolidate
d.net)

  In Response to:
Janakae
Re: Christianity in LOTR   Thursday, March 11, 2004 (10:43 a.m.) 

I think that LOTR has absolutly nothing to do with Christian massages because it is a movie. So if Tokien didnt say that it was Chritian than I think that it has nothing to do with it and we cant find out because Tolkien is dead!


Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Erika
<Send E-Mail>
(philacad.andover.edu)

  In Response to:
Ash

  Responses to this Comment:
Lil' old me
Re: Zzz!?   Wednesday, October 1, 2003 (4:22 a.m.) 

What you can do is measure it against other
> scores that attempt to do the same. In Williams's case your measuring this
> is score against some of his previous scores in the same genre. For
> example another score of Williams in the this genre would be
> "Hook" a far better score, that uses magic to much more effect.
> Is it just me or did the Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings score
> sound the same? The Rings score was slightly better than the Potter score,
> but to me both scores sound the same.

NONONONONONONO. The LOTR score is soooooo much better. Enya has such a pretty voice and it kind of lets you float along and lets you feel as though you are in a different world, a different dimension, a Medieval based setting. The Harry Potter score could pass off as the score to any other movie. It isn't special like the LOTR score is.

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Lil' old me
(165.134.188.88)

  In Response to:
Erika
Re: Zzz!?   Thursday, October 2, 2003 (10:16 p.m.) 

> What you can do is measure it against other

> NONONONONONONO. The LOTR score is soooooo much better. Enya has such a
> pretty voice and it kind of lets you float along and lets you feel as
> though you are in a different world, a different dimension, a Medieval
> based setting. The Harry Potter score could pass off as the score to any
> other movie. It isn't special like the LOTR score is.

It depends on what kind of music you like. Sure, they're both classical scores, but they have very different feeling associated with them. Harry Potter is more magical (you can argue against that all you like, but I'm sticking to it) while LOTR is more dark and powerful. It takes much nore advantage of the choir. I have no clue how you could say that the two sound the same. It's like saying Metallica and Hootie and the Blowfish sound the same. I personally liked Harry Potter's score more, but I completely understand how you could feel the other way. Again, to say that the two sound the same is just retarded. That person must have never listened to a classical score before in their lives.


Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


-
(we-24-130-157-139.we.mediaone.net)

  In Response to:
Ash

  Responses to this Comment:
Sean Raduechel
Re: Zzzzzzzzzzz   Friday, February 15, 2002 (10:30 p.m.) 

> Boring score. Predictiable composer. Nothing new to offer here. Movie's
> awful too. Skip it. and this disc. Least inspiring score of this year.
And like you could do better? Give the guy a break! The HP music was enchanting, mystifying, and YOU didn't have any part in it. It wasn't your effort, so show some appreciation you ingrate!
By the way, I LOVE the HP music!!
Keep up the good work!

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Sean Raduechel
<Send E-Mail>
(csradu469.uwsp.edu)

  In Response to:
-
Ingrates vs. the State of Williams   Sunday, April 7, 2002 (10:30 a.m.) 

And like you could do better? Give the guy a break! The HP music was
> enchanting, mystifying, and YOU didn't have any part in it. It wasn't your
> effort, so show some appreciation you ingrate!
By the way, I
> LOVE the HP music!!
Keep up the good work!

How ammusing! What you, the prosecution, are suggesting is that we give the most lofty, well thought of, worshipped, and most likely highest paid composer in Hollywood a break. I had no idea that your client had reached such a low level that people are suggesting to us that we should give him a break. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the prosecution now is arguing that John Williams has sunk to such a low level of musicality that we, the people, need to "give him a break." Surely the music cannot be that good if he "needs a break."

Also, the prosecution claims that my client is an ingrate. Do they provide any real evidence for his fact? No. He is just simply an ingrate. But is a matter of simple opinion really grounds for being an ingrate, especially on an issue that, unlike racism and/or abortion, will not truly have that much of an effect on society's existence? The answer I tell you is no!

In conclusion, ladies and gentlemen, I must remind you of the true issue at hand. Is Harry Potter the greatest score of the twentieth century? Or is it merely another uneventful statistic in a composer's long history, completely overshadowed by his great masterpieces? It is your decision, and do choose wisely.

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Tuong-Vi G.
(toulouse-2-a7-62-147-37-147.dial.
proxad.net)

  In Response to:
Ash
Re: Zzzzzzzzzzz   Monday, May 13, 2002 (12:52 p.m.) 

> Boring score. Predictiable composer. Nothing new to offer here. Movie's
> awful too. Skip it. and this disc. Least inspiring score of this year.

WHAT ZZZZZZ???

ARE YOU NUTS?THIS SCORE IS THE BEST SCORE OF ALL TIMES!!!!!
YOU DON'T LIKE IT BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOT IMAGINATION,THIS IS WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display



Copyright © 1998-2018, Filmtracks Publications. All rights reserved.
The reviews and other textual content contained on the filmtracks.com site may not be published, broadcast,
rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of Christian Clemmensen at Filmtracks Publications. Scoreboard created 7/24/98 and last updated 4/25/15.