SUPPORT FILMTRACKS! WE EARN A
COMMISSION ON WHAT YOU BUY:
Amazon.com
Amazon.co.uk
eBay
Amazon.ca
Glisten Effect
Editorial Reviews
Scoreboard Forum
Viewer Ratings
Composers
Awards
   NEWEST MAJOR REVIEWS:
     1. 1917
    2. Little Women
   3. Star Wars: Rise of Skywalker
  4. Jumanji: The Next Level
 5. Knives Out
6. Frozen II


   CURRENT BEST-SELLING SCORES:
       1. Godzilla: King of the Monsters
      2. Romeo and Juliet
     3. The Monkey King
    4. John Williams in Vienna
   5. Space Battleship Yamato
  6. Willow
 7. Ready Player One
8. Ghostbusters
   CURRENT MOST POPULAR REVIEWS:
         1. How to Train Your Dragon
        2. Nightmare Before Christmas
       3. Gladiator
      4. Alice in Wonderland
     5. Harry Potter: Sorcerer's Stone
    6. Superman
   7. LOTR: Return of the King
  8. Titanic
 9. Raiders of the Lost Ark
10. Joker
Home Page
Menu Options ▼
Comments about the soundtrack for Dragonslayer (Alex North)

Edit | Delete
Re: Bad weeds grow tall.
• Posted by: Matthias N.   <Send E-Mail>
• Date: Monday, July 3, 2006, at 12:42 p.m.
• IP Address: matthias.hechtsheim.wohnheim.uni-mainz.de
• In Response to: Re: Bad weeds grow tall. (Mike)

Hello, Mike.

But please remember,
Dragonslayer is a Disney movie with a very simple and sometimes non-sense
plot. Compared to LOTR it's really dumb. But even the LOTR scores followed
the unwritten rule of having strong melodies and sweeping, epic pieces to
support a fantasy movie. And here North fails completely, in fact he
further reduces the size of the movie with his artificial compositions.

But isn't that just a question of taste / tradition? Why should all those mythological knight tales have strong melodies or epic pieces. I remember Dragonslayer as a rather dark movie, not very "Disneyish". And although it has become common to score such a film with a bright conglomeration of big orchestral, melodical show pieces, where is the qualitative lack in not doing so? If you judge the musical quality of Dragonslayer, which Mr. Clemmensen should but refuses to do if you read carefully, there can still be things, that you don't like, but you will have diffuculties in reasoning your dislikes. When it comes to the point where you cannot base your opinion on objective reasons, you have to leave it out of your review or, for entertaining reasons, mention your preoccupation.
That's nothing intellectual but just one of the basic rules of music or film reviews. It wouldn't bother me if Mr. Clemmensen emphazized the commentary character of his texts, but he is using the stylistic devices of objective reviews to justify a quite inobjective opinion. It has become an epidemy in the internet that everybody wants to know his opinions to be the last result of pure wisdom. In most cases they are just the opposite and all that together is pretty annoying.

Greetings,
Matthias




Comments in this Thread:     Expand >>
  • Bad weeds grow tall.  (3557 views)
       Matthias N. - Sunday, June 25, 2006, at 5:28 p.m.
    •    Re: Bad weeds grow tall.  (3711 views)
         Mike - Monday, July 3, 2006, at 9:47 a.m.
      •      Re: Bad weeds grow tall.  (3544 views)    We're Here
           Matthias N. - Monday, July 3, 2006, at 12:42 p.m.


Copyright © 1998-2020, 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.