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. Incredibles 2
    2. Solo: A Star Wars Story
   3. Deadpool 2
  4. Avengers: Infinity War
 5. A Quiet Place
6. Ready Player One
   CURRENT MOST POPULAR REVIEWS:
         1. Star Wars: The Last Jedi
        2. Gladiator
       3. Blade Runner 2049
      4. Batman
     5. Thor: Ragnarok
    6. The Avengers
   7. Spider-Man: Homecoming
  8. Avatar
 9. Dunkirk
10. Phantom Thread
Home Page
Menu Options ▼
Comments about the soundtrack for Radio (James Horner)
Radio

Amuro
(12-222-16-223.client.insightbb.co
m)
Profile Picture

  Responses to this Comment:
Mike Skerritt
Radio   Tuesday, November 11, 2003 (2:36 p.m.) 

If this score is so "ripped off" as the review seems to say, why is that so bad? I mean, it was obviously good the first time around (Horner wrote it) so whats so bad about reusing it? I'm not trying to sound jerky, and I honestly want an answer...

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Mike Skerritt
<Send E-Mail>
(h-68-167-55-210.mclnva23.covad.ne
t)

  In Response to:
Amuro

  Responses to this Comment:
Amuro
Re: Radio   Wednesday, November 12, 2003 (8:04 a.m.) 

Let's say you write for a magazine. At the core you're a good writer. You have a way with words. Maybe early on in your career you wrote an inventive and brilliant article on a large family of wolves (or whatever, it doesn't matter). Basically this article gave you a career at the magazine. Although you're still writing for the magazine, you can write whatever you want. But you choose to write about the same wolves. For every story. You can only stretch the story so many ways. At some point you'll end up describing the same things using the same words. Your articles will most likely become repetitive and boring. When you've tapped at a family of wolves, you'll move on to a family of coyotes. Or hyenas. Or leopards. It doesn't much matter. You'll probably have a lot of readers who criticize you for any number of reasons (selling out, being overrated, writing crap, etc.) From an objective standpoint, you wouldn't be a very good writer. At least not a very original one.

As a reader, why should I waste my time with a writer who's constantly spilling out the same exact story again and again? I'd rather go off and read someone who, even if he always writes with a similar style, always finds something fresh to write about, something I haven't read before.

As a former Horner-phile, his output frustrates the hell out of me. I don't think I'm asking too much for someone who was once so promising and creative to challenge himself. Maybe reinvent himself. He's 50 now. It doesn't look like that will ever happen.

Slainte,
M

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Amuro
(12-222-16-223.client.insightbb.co
m)
Profile Picture
  In Response to:
Mike Skerritt

  Responses to this Comment:
Mike Skerritt
Re: Radio   Wednesday, November 12, 2003 (6:04 p.m.) 

> Let's say you write for a magazine. At the core you're a good writer. You
> have a way with words. Maybe early on in your career you wrote an
> inventive and brilliant article on a large family of wolves (or whatever,
> it doesn't matter). Basically this article gave you a career at the
> magazine. Although you're still writing for the magazine, you can write
> whatever you want. But you choose to write about the same wolves. For
> every story. You can only stretch the story so many ways. At some point
> you'll end up describing the same things using the same words. Your
> articles will most likely become repetitive and boring. When you've tapped
> at a family of wolves, you'll move on to a family of coyotes. Or hyenas.
> Or leopards. It doesn't much matter. You'll probably have a lot of readers
> who criticize you for any number of reasons (selling out, being overrated,
> writing crap, etc.) From an objective standpoint, you wouldn't be a very
> good writer. At least not a very original one.

> As a reader, why should I waste my time with a writer who's constantly
> spilling out the same exact story again and again? I'd rather go off and
> read someone who, even if he always writes with a similar style, always
> finds something fresh to write about, something I haven't read before.

> As a former Horner-phile, his output frustrates the hell out of me. I
> don't think I'm asking too much for someone who was once so promising and
> creative to challenge himself. Maybe reinvent himself. He's 50 now. It
> doesn't look like that will ever happen.

> Slainte,
M

Ah, it all seems to make a hell of a lot more sense now, thanks. I am a huge fan of Horner, and to be quite honest, I find more repetetive nature in the scores of Williams (E.X. the spider theme from Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, and the Raptor theme from Jurassic Park). But I recently did buy "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan" and I can notice many of the Horner themes sticking out. Well, thank you

Amuro (who learns more and more, thanks to people like you )


Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Mike Skerritt
<Send E-Mail>
(h-68-167-55-210.mclnva23.covad.ne
t)

  In Response to:
Amuro

  Responses to this Comment:
Amuro
Re: Radio   Thursday, November 13, 2003 (6:41 a.m.) 

> Amuro (who learns more and more, thanks to people like you )

Thank you, my friend. That's very nice of you to say.

I happen to prefer Williams over Horner but I totally see what you mean. The thing I love so much about Williams is that he can still knock your socks off. I think A.I. is one of the very best scores of his career. I guess I'm still hoping Horner will knock my socks off again someday.

Take care,
M


Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Amuro
(12-222-16-223.client.insightbb.co
m)
Profile Picture
  In Response to:
Mike Skerritt

  Responses to this Comment:
Mike Skerritt
Re: Radio   Tuesday, November 18, 2003 (2:26 p.m.) 

> Thank you, my friend. That's very nice of you to say.

> I happen to prefer Williams over Horner but I totally see what you mean.
> The thing I love so much about Williams is that he can still knock your
> socks off. I think A.I. is one of the very best scores of his career. I
> guess I'm still hoping Horner will knock my socks off again someday.

> Take care,
M

Has The Missing "knocked your socks off" yet? It has mine

Amuro

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Mike Skerritt
<Send E-Mail>
(h-68-167-55-210.mclnva23.covad.ne
t)

  In Response to:
Amuro
Re: Radio   Monday, November 24, 2003 (1:49 p.m.) 

> Has The Missing "knocked your socks off" yet? It has mine
>

I haven't listened to it yet so I don't know. But I have to say, I'm looking forward to it more than any other Horner score in a long time. I hope it "knocks my socks off."

M


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.