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 ▼
Another bad Harry Potter review.

Doug
<Send E-Mail>
(CC4-24.207.141.78.charter-stl.com)


  Responses to this Comment:
Lynn M
Jason Bourne
Nighthawk LA
Jack
Another bad Harry Potter review.   Thursday, May 27, 2004 (8:26 a.m.) 

I think this guy has something against Harry Potter. No matter what the case he has something to argue against Harry Potter. In the first it was "it lacked magic", in the second "it didn't have any good soaring themes". So now Williams supplies an enormous amount of new music and Clem still isn't satisfied. I agree that we need a new reviewer. And I thought Clem wanted more original music, but when he gets it, he doesn't like it. Don't get me wrong, he gave it a ****, which is really good, but I still think it really really deserved an extra *.

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Lynn M
(h000bdb1264cc.ne.client2.attbi.co
m)

  In Response to:
Doug

  Responses to this Comment:
Mark
Isn't four stars considered good?   Thursday, May 27, 2004 (8:54 a.m.) 

> I think this guy has something against Harry Potter. No matter what the
> case he has something to argue against Harry Potter. In the first it was
> "it lacked magic", in the second "it didn't have any good
> soaring themes". So now Williams supplies an enormous amount of new
> music and Clem still isn't satisfied. I agree that we need a new reviewer.
> And I thought Clem wanted more original music, but when he gets it, he
> doesn't like it. Don't get me wrong, he gave it a ****, which is really
> good, but I still think it really really deserved an extra *.

Why is everyone who loves Harry Potter calling for the editor to be fired when he gave all three Potter scores **** (positive reviews!)?

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Mark
(165.134.195.24)

  In Response to:
Lynn M

  Responses to this Comment:
Ed
CS^TBL
Re: Isn't four stars considered good?   Thursday, May 27, 2004 (8:57 a.m.) 

> Why is everyone who loves Harry Potter calling for the editor to be fired
> when he gave all three Potter scores **** (positive reviews!)?

First of all, most of us think it should get 5 stars. Secondly, the review itself is very negative towards the music. Even if he would have given it 5 stars, the review itself is still, in many of our opinions, unfair.

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Ed
(80.43.158.172)

  In Response to:
Mark

  Responses to this Comment:
Mark
Re: Isn't four stars considered good?   Thursday, May 27, 2004 (10:36 a.m.) 

> First of all, most of us think it should get 5 stars. Secondly, the review
> itself is very negative towards the music. Even if he would have given it
> 5 stars, the review itself is still, in many of our opinions, unfair.

U dim-witted schlong. How the hell could a 5 star review be unfair?? Christian is a quality reviewer - look how many bloody scores he's done!! And you can get all 'hot-under-the-collar' about an article, that doesnt suit YOUR tastes??

Learn to be a bit more acceptable pal.

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Mark
(165.134.195.24)

  In Response to:
Ed

  Responses to this Comment:
JAmes
Re: Isn't four stars considered good?   Thursday, May 27, 2004 (12:20 p.m.) 

> U dim-witted schlong. How the hell could a 5 star review be unfair??
> Christian is a quality reviewer - look how many bloody scores he's done!!
> And you can get all 'hot-under-the-collar' about an article, that doesnt
> suit YOUR tastes??

> Learn to be a bit more acceptable pal.

Thanks for the intelligent comments, Ed.

I don't really care that much about what star rating he gives it. I was simply restating what a bunch of other people had already said. Also, I don't think I am getting all "hot under the collar" about the review, but I will tell you why I don't like it.

I read these reviews to get an idea for what kind of soundtrack it is. Sometimes he writes good reviews. Whether or not you agree with the "Pirates of the Carribean" review, It does give a good idea of what type of music to expect. Here, however, he complains about how it doesn't include enough of William's older Harry Potter themes (which he complained about in the first place). Than he goes on to talk about how half of the new themes don't meet his expectations, and he leaves it at that. He never describes "Hagrid the Professor" other than being "out of character." I, personally disagree with that, but it's just a matter of opinion.

Lastly, and this has already been said several times, is Christian's comment about "Window to the Past" as the primary identity for "Azkaban." "Double Trouble" appears in twice as many tracks as "Window to the Past." It was also the only new song to appear in any of the trailers, and it appeared in every one of them. I would like to hear why Christian thinks "Window" is the main theme (another important point he fails to support).

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


JAmes
<Send E-Mail>
(pd90059c0.dip.t-dialin.net)

  In Response to:
Mark

  Responses to this Comment:
Musica42
Re: Isn't four stars considered good?   Sunday, June 6, 2004 (11:15 a.m.) 

STOP calling them songs! SONGS HAVE WORDS. If you don't even have the correct vocabulary to discuss a film score, don't complain the reviewer (who is actually educated). Christian gave a good review.

> Thanks for the intelligent comments, Ed.

> I don't really care that much about what star rating he gives it. I was
> simply restating what a bunch of other people had already said. Also, I
> don't think I am getting all "hot under the collar" about the
> review, but I will tell you why I don't like it.

> I read these reviews to get an idea for what kind of soundtrack it is.
> Sometimes he writes good reviews. Whether or not you agree with the
> "Pirates of the Carribean" review, It does give a good idea of
> what type of music to expect. Here, however, he complains about how it
> doesn't include enough of William's older Harry Potter themes (which he
> complained about in the first place). Than he goes on to talk about how
> half of the new themes don't meet his expectations, and he leaves it at
> that. He never describes "Hagrid the Professor" other than being
> "out of character." I, personally disagree with that, but it's
> just a matter of opinion.

> Lastly, and this has already been said several times, is Christian's
> comment about "Window to the Past" as the primary identity for
> "Azkaban." "Double Trouble" appears in twice as many
> tracks as "Window to the Past." It was also the only new song to
> appear in any of the trailers, and it appeared in every one of them. I
> would like to hear why Christian thinks "Window" is the main
> theme (another important point he fails to support).


Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Musica42
<Send E-Mail>
(adsl-208-191-124-250.dsl.snantx.s
wbell.net)

  In Response to:
JAmes

  Responses to this Comment:
Amuro
Re: Isn't four stars considered good?   Wednesday, June 9, 2004 (1:59 a.m.) 

Seems the music snobs are beginning to rear their ugly heads. Songs, pieces, cues, wtf does it matter what you call something? I've been around colleges enough to know that silly vocabularly really only pisses off the kind of people that I enjoy pissing off. Anyway, Double Trouble is a song so oops, now you look like an idiot, James.

Anyway, my guff with the review is how back handed its praise it. It's like he's saying "I love it, I love it, I love it, but it's not that good." And his negative remarks are rather silly - I mean in general I think most music reviewers are musically numb, but come on, can this guy really be this easily displeased? Anytime Williams even remotely steps out of his box he's there to point out how weird and awkward that makes him feel. Personally I felt the jazz and baroque to be excellent additions to the score, yet I assume it's these two elements that warranted his comment that the score doesn't hold together well.

Anyway, Williams wrote Hook a long time ago and decided then and there that he wasn't James Horner and so wouldn't be writing Hook again. Hook is great. Potter is great. Which is better? Don't care. They're both two of the best musical worlds to walk into that I know of.

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Amuro
(12-222-16-223.client.insightbb.co
m)
Profile Picture
  In Response to:
Musica42
Re: Isn't four stars considered good?   Friday, June 11, 2004 (1:22 p.m.) 

> Seems the music snobs are beginning to rear their ugly heads. Songs,
> pieces, cues, wtf does it matter what you call something? I've been around
> colleges enough to know that silly vocabularly really only pisses off the
> kind of people that I enjoy pissing off. Anyway, Double Trouble is a song
> so oops, now you look like an idiot, James.

> Anyway, my guff with the review is how back handed its praise it. It's
> like he's saying "I love it, I love it, I love it, but it's not that
> good." And his negative remarks are rather silly - I mean in general
> I think most music reviewers are musically numb, but come on, can this guy
> really be this easily displeased? Anytime Williams even remotely steps out
> of his box he's there to point out how weird and awkward that makes him
> feel. Personally I felt the jazz and baroque to be excellent additions to
> the score, yet I assume it's these two elements that warranted his comment
> that the score doesn't hold together well.

> Anyway, Williams wrote Hook a long time ago and decided then and there
> that he wasn't James Horner and so wouldn't be writing Hook again. Hook is
> great. Potter is great. Which is better? Don't care. They're both two of
> the best musical worlds to walk into that I know of.

HEAR HEAR!


Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


CS^TBL
(62-221-215-55.dsl.fiberworld.nl)

  In Response to:
Mark
a 6 star system perhaps?   Thursday, May 27, 2004 (1:51 p.m.) 

* bad!
** noting spectaculair
*** good
**** very good
***** outstanding
****** historical classic

There are numerous 5-star scores that are really good, but not really that appropriate for the history-books of music. For that I'd say: introduce 6 stars for those real 'important' classics, and perhaps some 4-star scores could become 5-star scores then ..

- yeahyeah.. I know.. inflation -

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Jason Bourne
(65.54.98.112)

  In Response to:
Doug
Re: Another bad Harry Potter review.   Friday, May 28, 2004 (9:41 p.m.) 

> I think this guy has something against Harry Potter. No matter what the
> case he has something to argue against Harry Potter. In the first it was
> "it lacked magic", in the second "it didn't have any good
> soaring themes". So now Williams supplies an enormous amount of new
> music and Clem still isn't satisfied. I agree that we need a new reviewer.
> And I thought Clem wanted more original music, but when he gets it, he
> doesn't like it. Don't get me wrong, he gave it a ****, which is really
> good, but I still think it really really deserved an extra *.

I totally agree on everything you say.
-J. Bourne


Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Nighthawk LA
<Send E-Mail>
(207-105-246-22.omm.com)

  In Response to:
Doug

  Responses to this Comment:
Amuro
Zephros
Clem Should Take Hook & Fly To Neverland   Friday, May 28, 2004 (10:40 p.m.) 

> I think this guy has something against Harry Potter. No matter what the
> case he has something to argue against Harry Potter. In the first it was
> "it lacked magic", in the second "it didn't have any good
> soaring themes". So now Williams supplies an enormous amount of new
> music and Clem still isn't satisfied. I agree that we need a new reviewer.
> And I thought Clem wanted more original music, but when he gets it, he
> doesn't like it. Don't get me wrong, he gave it a ****, which is really
> good, but I still think it really really deserved an extra *.

I wish Clem would take his Hook score, fly to Neverland and never come back! I'm tired of the constant comparisons to the forgettable Hook score. Play the Hook score for a group of people and see if one person recognizes any of the songs. This man has not given a positive review for a soundtrack in ages. For crying out loud, look at the review he gave for Pirates of the Caribbean. That is the top selling soundtrack and people are buying the sheet music to it like crazy. Thousands of people can't be wrong! Clem complains all the time that composers rehash or lift from their own material. But then when a composer creates new and original music, he's not satisfied with that either. I think the purpose of a soundtrack is to set the feeling for the movie and to add to the entertainment of the film. If the CD is a great listen on it's own, then that is an added bonus. But how can people trust what he says or enjoy this website, if everything he says is negative, hypercritical and over analyzing?!



Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Amuro
(nr8-216-196-198-236.fuse.net)
Profile Picture
  In Response to:
Nighthawk LA
Re: Clem Should Take Hook & Fly To Neverland   Monday, May 31, 2004 (3:47 p.m.) 

> I wish Clem would take his Hook score, fly to Neverland and never come
> back! I'm tired of the constant comparisons to the forgettable Hook score.
> Play the Hook score for a group of people and see if one person recognizes
> any of the songs. This man has not given a positive review for a
> soundtrack in ages. For crying out loud, look at the review he gave for
> Pirates of the Caribbean. That is the top selling soundtrack and people
> are buying the sheet music to it like crazy. Thousands of people can't be
> wrong! Clem complains all the time that composers rehash or lift from
> their own material. But then when a composer creates new and original
> music, he's not satisfied with that either. I think the purpose of a
> soundtrack is to set the feeling for the movie and to add to the
> entertainment of the film. If the CD is a great listen on it's own, then
> that is an added bonus. But how can people trust what he says or enjoy
> this website, if everything he says is negative, hypercritical and over
> analyzing?!

Please, just don't even compare this masterpiece (Harry Potter) to any crap like Pirates of the Caribbean. Its not natural, that score is so horrible I can't even listen without getting extremely bored... and about Hook, that is an incredible score, while yes I think comparing HOOK and HARRY POTTER is stupid, I will say that both are extremely good scores, and deserve to be worshipped!

Amuro

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Zephros
(dialup-225.135.221.203.acc02-neer
-bal.comindico.com.au)

  In Response to:
Nighthawk LA
You First   Monday, May 31, 2004 (11:07 p.m.) 

> I wish Clem would take his Hook score, fly to Neverland and never come
> back! I'm tired of the constant comparisons to the forgettable Hook score.
> Play the Hook score for a group of people and see if one person recognizes
> any of the songs. This man has not given a positive review for a
> soundtrack in ages. For crying out loud, look at the review he gave for
> Pirates of the Caribbean. That is the top selling soundtrack and people
> are buying the sheet music to it like crazy. Thousands of people can't be
> wrong! Clem complains all the time that composers rehash or lift from
> their own material. But then when a composer creates new and original
> music, he's not satisfied with that either. I think the purpose of a
> soundtrack is to set the feeling for the movie and to add to the
> entertainment of the film. If the CD is a great listen on it's own, then
> that is an added bonus. But how can people trust what he says or enjoy
> this website, if everything he says is negative, hypercritical and over
> analyzing?!

Hey, idiot! Clem has fifty times more knowledge of film music than any of those people. The only reason Pirates sold so well is because it was an excellent movie and was extremely popular. Hook was a mediocre movie with an excellent score. Hence the forgettable part.

And for the record, the reason people recognise Pirates music more is because Media Ventures have used the same music for most of their films. I'm pretty sure hearing the same loud, synthesised crap in ten different films is likely to be pounded into your brain.

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Jack
<Send E-Mail>
(martha.csumain.csu.edu.au)
Profile Picture
  In Response to:
Doug

  Responses to this Comment:
Sa'ad Al-khatib
Simon
Re: Another bad Harry Potter review.   Sunday, October 19, 2008 (6:58 p.m.) 

I thought that the entire series of Harry Potter movies (released to date) were absolutely terrible. They deviate from the stories in the books and they change the characters. They are a cheap commercialisation of the books which were also terribly written. I am quite aware that i may become chastised for this but looking at the books from the perspective of an English major student, they seem to have nothing new or remotely impressive to offer the literature world besides a halfway entertaining story.



Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Sa'ad Al-khatib
<Send E-Mail>
(79.173.x.25.go.com.jo)

  In Response to:
Jack
Re: Another bad Harry Potter review.   Tuesday, December 13, 2011 (1:23 p.m.) 

> I thought that the entire series of Harry Potter movies (released to date)
> were absolutely terrible. They deviate from the stories in the books and
> they change the characters. They are a cheap commercialisation of the
> books which were also terribly written. I am quite aware that i may become
> chastised for this but looking at the books from the perspective of an
> English major student, they seem to have nothing new or remotely
> impressive to offer the literature world besides a halfway entertaining
> story.

finally someone who knows what he's talking about , THANK YOU


Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Simon
<Send E-Mail>
(77-254-45-130.adsl.inetia.pl)

  In Response to:
Jack
Re: Another bad Harry Potter review.   Saturday, March 28, 2015 (4:41 a.m.) 

WTF?? You're funny guy!


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.