> I cannot believe the blasting this guy has given Goldenthal's fantastic
> Alien 3 score! WTF, this score is amazing, its scarely the hell out of me.
> Quite ironic as the film itself (devoid of music) its pityful.
> Let me address a few points if I may:
> "What is so excruciating about this score is the fact that it follows
> two widely respected and effective scores in Alien and Aliens"
> While I thoroughly enjoyed both scores, they are hardly works of musical
> genius. Alien, arguably the most highly regarded of the two, is little
> more than splicing together or quotations from the 20th century rep. While
> Goldsmith never makes direct quotes to my knowledge, it is quite clear
> where he has blatently copied the likes of Bartok (when Dallas is in the
> tunnel) and Holst (opening titles).
> I love to listen to this score, but I certainly dont put it on any
> pedestals.
> Horner's Alien's score was very good. It fit the movies well, I cant
> critise it to any great degree. But I would argue that the original
> reviewers critisisms coulde be equally applied to this score, regarding
> the preferance away from memorable thematic ideas (not that it is devoid
> of themes!).
> "His music for the film, though, is thematically devoid (probably
> intentionally so) and often lacks any rhythm. It serves as simple sound
> effects for action and suspense cues in the film."
> And this is a problem, why?
> Goldenthal draws from practically every 20th century device in the book to
> create music of high tension and uncertainly. Imo, his use of the
> orchestral is amazing - he wields it with far more grace than many other
> composers in the genre who opt only for 'stock' effects.
> Listen to the likes of Penderecki, Ligeti, Schoenberh, Webern,
> Shostakovich, Cage etc. You'll see that Goldenthal develops in this score
> is the pick of 20th century musical innovation. If you dont like that,
> cool. But PLEASE dont try to write off this score because it doesnt fit
> your 'diatonic' taste buds.
> "One of the major pitfalls of this score is the fact that it isn't
> scary."
> I would beg to differ. But as it is, you cant really make a claim like
> that based upon a single opinion.
> "Mysteriously, Goldenthal waits until the very last track --Ripley's
> death scene-- to bring the orchestra together, lose the wavering brass,
> and bless the film with a seriously powerful and entertaining cue"
> Mysteriously you say?
> Do you think that the directors vision of Fury would be enhanced better by
> an entertaining tune?
> I certainly dont, and clearly neither did Goldenthal (much to his credit).
> Might I be pertinant and suggest that you learn wtf you are talking about
> before passing such comments?
> " He takes a trombone, for instance, and has it blast away at the
> loudest possible volume while wavering between two or three notes, forcing
> it produce a shrill whine"
> Ay?
> What, you mean like a trill?
> Or maybe a flutter tongue articulation?
> These are standard articulations used by practically every film composer
> to take up the pen.
> I find it amusing that you choose to critise Goldenthal's orchestration,
> when it is by far the most important element of this entire score (and
> most successful I might add). During one cue he uses a special effect in
> the brass to represent the hacking and slashing of the creature on screen.
> This is just one example of Goldenthal's use of creative orchestration on
> this film.
> Seriously mate, maybe you should stick rom-coms and kiddy adventures if
> you want pleasant little tunes, composed and orchestrated in typical 19th
> century styles? But if you are insistent of watching dark horror flicks,
> then be prepared to hear music a little further to the edge, captialising
> on atonality and aleatory.
> Bob
I agree with you.  He really got this review wrong.
| 
