> Just want to drop my 2 cents worth. Being a composer myself, albeit not as
> great as those composers who are earning more than anyone of you out there
> combined, I must say, each and every composer has its own period where
> ideas and new inspirations are lacking. My best guess in this case, Horner
> was probably experimenting on the tune which he might have
> "borrowed" or "taken" and probably decides to create a
> variation of it. Remember Rachmaninoff who did a variation on a theme by
> Paganini? Or even certain rappers that took music from Edvard Grieg (
> Morning from Peer Gynt Suite) or from Alexander Borodin (Polovtsian
> Dances). I think nobody or should I say far and few remarks were thrown to
> them about borrowing these tunes, public domain or not.

> The fact is music is just music, it's when humans start to realise that
> they want to claim ownership of these stuff that everyone starts to hammer
> each other about who's being better.. I wonder did anyone claimed
> ownership to "Greensleeves" ?

> Granted that there are people out there that don't like Horner's music.
> Granted, there are people out there that loved Horner's music. Everyone
> has their unique opinion and that's the most beautiful thing about us
> being human. There is no need to bash each other. Don't forget this movie
> potrays the horrors of war. Are we all going to be at war with each other
> because of difference of opinion? I certainly hope not.

> Finally, all the composers from William to Horner to Goldsmith to Zimmer
> to Menken to Silvestri, they have their own style and they are good at
> what they are at. So, let's just give it to them. Perhaps we should try
> writing our own music, if we don't like the music they write

Well said