Tim,
I understand your frustration.

I think some people have an automatic backlash if something is extremely well-liked or popular, therefore they gave it a one.
Also, some people will just give the score a one because it is John Williams. There are some people that don't like him because of the tired and idiotic "he's-a-thief" argument, or because of the backlash to his popularity. Either way, it's a shame because I personally think he's brilliant.

But what can you do, it's their loss, right?

-Lars

> As of this post, 1,446 people selected the one star option for John
> Williams' "Schindler's List". Chances are, if there was a zero
> star choice, there would be folks who would select it. What this means,
> since it is the lowest possible rating available, is that the score has
> absolutely no redeemable qualities. This means the score is horrible,
> atrocious, abominable...and many other adjectives that indicate that this
> score is somehow on par with someone making an album out of chainsaw
> noises.

> This would mean, to me, that those people either have no love in their
> hearts for film scores (or music in general, for that matter) or don't
> have the slightest comprehension as to what a one star rating signifies...

> The problem, I feel, is that when someone doesn't like something, they
> automatically label it poorly, without thinking first.

> Shame.

> Tim

> P.S. please forgive any grammatical or spelling errors, as I typed this
> very fast because I was fairly heated about this matter.