> What makes you assume that I am a Zimmer fanboy.
> Am I defending Zimmer's score?
> Very well, since I have criticized the reviewer, I shall now criticize
> Zimmer's scoring style to balance the picture.

> I think Zimmer is a case of someone who caught the tiger's tail: I found a
> successful formula of scoring, and can't let it go for fear of losing
> success.
> As a background, Zimmer did not have classical training, so already is
> orchestral style is somewhat 2-dimensional. His ideas are developed in an
> obvious manner. Enough said.

> But, Zimmer is as much a businessman as a composer. He has his own music
> company and enjoys a close relationship with Bruckheimer. All of his
> "students" inherit his sound, a cardinal crime for any young
> composer in my opinion. Therefore, Zimmer's scores are nothing more than
> business contracts that make money. I do not see much musical value.
> Therefore, time spent criticizing his scores is time wasted.

> My sole objection was the tone of the reviewer, who was taking an
> intellectual high ground. Let me ask you, do you know what dodecaphony is?
> Or total serialism? Limited transposition modes? Or do you know the
> composer Arnold Schoenberg? Pierre Boulez? Karlheinz Stockhousen? Gyorgi
> Litegi?

> As for your attack on me, two words: °³ »õ³¢

Apparently this browser is incompantable with Korean. Two words: Geh sekki