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. Captain Marvel
    2. HTTYD: The Hidden World
   3. The Lego Movie 2
  4. Aquaman
 5. Spider-Man: Into Spider-Verse
6. Bumblebee
   CURRENT MOST POPULAR REVIEWS:
         1. Batman
        2. Star Wars: The Last Jedi
       3. Apollo 13
      4. Edward Scissorhands
     5. How to Train Your Dragon
    6. Jurassic World: Kingdom
   7. First Man
  8. Solo: A Star Wars Story
 9. Justice League
10. Ready Player One
Home Page
Menu Options ▼

Edit | Delete
Re: They're not comparable
• Posted by: roach604   <Send E-Mail>
• Date: Friday, November 23, 2001, at 6:34 p.m.
• IP Address: alh446khy10mc.bc.hsia.telus.net
• In Response to: Re: They're not comparable (Jostein Hakestad)

> I agree, there is no reason to compare Williams' brilliant "Harry
> Potter" score to LOTR.

> They're two different projects.

Beethoven and Bach are two different composers. Are you saying I shouldn't compare them? Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings are two of the most popular fantasy books in the world, made into movies and released within a month of each other. They ARE comparable, because they are both fantasy films. Granted, it might be more applicable to compare the LOTR soundtrack to that of say, Braveheart or Gladiator, since they have all have a a sort of historial epic scope, but as "competing" fantasy films, HP and LOTR can be compared musically.




Comments in this Thread:     Expand >>


Copyright © 1998-2019, 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The reviews and other textual content contained on the filmtracks.com site may not be published, broadcast,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.