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. Halloween
    2. Venom
   3. House With a Clock/Walls
  4. The Nun
 5. Crazy Rich Asians
6. The Meg
   CURRENT MOST POPULAR REVIEWS:
         1. Solo: A Star Wars Story
        2. Batman
       3. Jurassic World: Kingdom
      4. The Predator
     5. Edward Scissorhands
    6. Mission: Impossible - Fallout
   7. Christopher Robin
  8. Apollo 13
 9. Ant-Man and the Wasp
10. The Equalizer 2
Home Page
Menu Options ▼

Edit | Delete
Re: Disagree with FT review of JW music for Socerer's Stone
Profile Image
• Posted by: Ivan orozco   <Send E-Mail>
• Date: Thursday, September 11, 2008, at 2:22 a.m.
• IP Address: c-76-108-155-231.hsd1.fl.comcast.net
• In Response to: Disagree with FT review of JW music for Socere... (michael McCurry)

> I stumbled on to Filmtracks review of John William's score for HP1 while
> idly surfing the web to see Fan reaction to the music of recent HP films.
> Of course everyone is entitled to their options, but gad, I've never read
> a review with which I DISAGREED more.

> Whoever wrote the FT review should have his 'reviewer-credentials'
> examined. This score (for HP1) will likely go down as one of JW's most
> memorable and appropriate theme music (next to SW). In contrast to
> Filmtrack review, I thought JW captured beautifully the unique 'magical'
> nature of JK's story.

> Sadly the recent HP movies (4 & 5) have been progressively worse in
> everything from directing to following book plot lines, scripting and
> including music scores. HP5 was pathetic in that regard. I know a lot of
> folks who agree.

> Please - bring back Chris Colubus, Steve Kloves and John Williams. Save us
> from inept reviews like that from Filmtracks.
your an idiot harry potter 4 and 5 arnt bad in fact didnt you visit the critic website the rotten tomatoes that critics rank gof a 88 % out of a 100 while ss only got 78 % and says who that a lot of the fans agree that 4 and 5 sucks thats not what i heard crtics love 4 and 5 doesnt the 88 % of gof ranking on rotton tomatoes mean anything to you and yes i understand everyone is entitled to there own oppinyen's theres no crime about it but by saying every potter fan hates hp 4 and 5 thats crazy have you cross the line or something is there proof no because you have none sorry to burst your bubble but hp 4 and 5 didnt suck check out rotten tomatoes next time to see for yourself its no joke




Comments in this Thread:     Expand >>
  • Disagree with FT review of JW music for Socerer's Stone  (3075 views)
       michael McCurry - Thursday, July 17, 2008, at 12:34 p.m.
    •      Re: Disagree with FT review of JW music for Socerer's Stone  (3087 views)    We're Here
         Ivan orozco - Thursday, September 11, 2008, at 2:22 a.m.


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.