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 Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith (John Williams)
Two things...

Jon
<Send E-Mail>
(cache-dtc-af05.proxy.aol.com)


  Responses to this Comment:
Markus
Jon
Two things...   Thursday, June 9, 2005 (4:48 p.m.) 

First, the review says that it's interesting that the Imperial March isn't present with "Enter Lord Vader". Well, that's because part of the track (and it's the part that's on the website) isn't focusing on Vader; it's focused on Yoda and Obi-Wan fighting clones.
Secondly, with all the complaints by the review and people about the incompleteness of the soundtrack, you'd think the site would at least give a rating of how the "complete" score sounds on film. Personally, I thought it was excellent, and not the disappointing departure that many people consider it.

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Markus
(0-1pool132-214.nas1.spokane1.wa.u
s.da.qwest.net)

  In Response to:
Jon

  Responses to this Comment:
JB
Heads up asses   Saturday, June 11, 2005 (3:39 p.m.) 

Well, see, that involves admitting that you were wrong on your longest, biggest, prettiest review ever ... and nobody really seems to want to admit that.

> First, the review says that it's interesting that the Imperial March isn't
> present with "Enter Lord Vader". Well, that's because part of
> the track (and it's the part that's on the website) isn't focusing on
> Vader; it's focused on Yoda and Obi-Wan fighting clones.
Secondly,
> with all the complaints by the review and people about the incompleteness
> of the soundtrack, you'd think the site would at least give a rating of
> how the "complete" score sounds on film. Personally, I thought
> it was excellent, and not the disappointing departure that many people
> consider it.


Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


JB
(83.102.12.23)

  In Response to:
Markus

  Responses to this Comment:
Markus
Re: Heads up asses   Sunday, June 12, 2005 (10:59 p.m.) 

Well, then again Christian wrote this BEFORE seeing the movie and went under the assumption based on the track title alone. And also he seems to be of the variety who doesn't go back to a review to make corrections unless it has to be expanded at some length.

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Markus
(0-2pool129-57.nas1.spokane1.wa.us
.da.qwest.net)

  In Response to:
JB

  Responses to this Comment:
Krikarian
You Yourself and Dick
John
Christian crybaby   Monday, June 13, 2005 (8:21 p.m.) 

So he reviews CDs but not film scores? Sounds like if I want a frank discussion on the merits of the actual score, I'm going to have to look somewhere else. Of course I'm not going to buy the CD, but I'll watch the movie for its score.

The holier-than-thou review certainly won't get updated. Christian seems too much like a whiny baby, defending his writing style when people are just trying to point out that maybe, just maybe, his review is misinformed. There are outright, utterly false statements, such as, the Luke and Leia theme isn't in the score. The theme IS in the score, at the end! It's not on the CD, but big deal. Ask for a better CD. But I don't think any film score is good if it's not in context with its movies. The Luke and Leia theme would be pointless if all we'd heard for the last 30 years of Star Wars was its music -- and no characters or movies to connect them together. Is there room for a correction here? No, Christian just puts his childish "fanboy" on someone. He defends the length of his review as a reason why it's good. Sorry, length does not equal greatness, and responding back to criticism with baby-like taunts and teases is rude and unprofessional.

Film scores aren't film scores unless you judge them in a film context. Otherwise they're albums with track titles and you're supposed to fill in the visual blanks. Some might call this just straight-up classical music.

Though I've come to rely on good reviews from Christian since about 1999, I think I'm going to start looking elsewhere, or contribute to sites in some other way because this style of pompousness and rudeness is a trend I've seen increase in time at this site. It has been awful to watch the slow decline of quality at this site.

I anticipate a snarky reply back from the legions of ... yes ... fanboys for Christian.

> Well, then again Christian wrote this BEFORE seeing the movie and went
> under the assumption based on the track title alone. And also he seems to
> be of the variety who doesn't go back to a review to make corrections
> unless it has to be expanded at some length.


Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Krikarian
<Send E-Mail>
(ts17-17.dialup.bol.ucla.edu)

  In Response to:
Markus

  Responses to this Comment:
Markus
who are the horse's asses...   Monday, June 13, 2005 (10:11 p.m.) 

perhaps you star wars whiners might remember that this site is for reviewing CD releases, not the scores in the film--did I say film???. the cd for this film sucks so badly, regardless of the music presented in the film, that i had to re-edited half of it to even bare listening to it. what's that damned throne room music doing here? it's not in the movie. why is the opening so badly edited? why are soundtracks treated with such disrepected by the distributors...and now the composers themselves?

now, brats, get over it and move on.

oh, yeah, and by the way... the movie stank, too.

now whine about that for a while.

keep up the good work you've been doing, Christian.

krik

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Markus
(dialup-4.191.36.142.Dial1.Seattle
1.Level3.net)

  In Response to:
Krikarian

  Responses to this Comment:
krikarian
From the smug Filmtracks Mission Statement   Tuesday, June 14, 2005 (2:47 a.m.) 

Directly from Filmtracks.com Mission Statement, http://www.filmtracks.com/about.shtml:

"Filmtracks' goal is to provide reviews of film music from a fan's perspective to other film music fans."

By the way, I posted that because nowhere in that statement does it say "CDs" or "albums" or "Music as presented on CD" or "CD releases." It says "film music," which I would interpret as being --- and this might be a stretch --- the music in films.

But I could be wrong. If you folks who can't spell, or use grammar correctly, or even -- and I know this is a stretch for your fingers -- use the shift key, want to keep repeating this CD nonsense, you can. Maybe if you say it enough times, it'll come true! :-)

As far as I'm concerned, when you all say things like that, I feel like I'm being treated with "such disrespected."

Cheers! :-)

> perhaps you star wars whiners might remember that this site is for
> reviewing CD releases, not the scores in the film--did I say film???. the
> cd for this film sucks so badly, regardless of the music presented in the
> film, that i had to re-edited half of it to even bare listening to it.
> what's that damned throne room music doing here? it's not in the movie.
> why is the opening so badly edited? why are soundtracks treated with such
> disrepected by the distributors...and now the composers themselves?

> now, brats, get over it and move on.

> oh, yeah, and by the way... the movie stank, too.

> now whine about that for a while.

> keep up the good work you've been doing, Christian.

> krik


Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


krikarian
<Send E-Mail>
(128.97.214.1)

  In Response to:
Markus
Re: From the smug Filmtracks Mission Statement   Wednesday, June 15, 2005 (3:35 p.m.) 

who's smug...?

but to the point, the review was of the cd of rots, not the music in the film; the attacks against Christian strayed far afield from that fact.

i also was simply stating the facts: this thread and the personal attacks have been mainly fueled by star wars fans who blindly follow the fold regardless of the quality of the product under discussion.

oh, yeah, i was handing some back to them to see who just might take the bait...you won.

krik

Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


You Yourself and Dick
(async151-3.nas.onetel.net.uk)

  In Response to:
Markus

  Responses to this Comment:
Markus
Know the rules before you protest against them   Tuesday, June 14, 2005 (9:03 a.m.) 

> I anticipate a snarky reply back from the legions of ... yes ... fanboys
> for Christian.

I like smartass comments, especially when used against fanboys. I'm not a Clemmensen worshipper either. That said, however, you're missing the point. These reviews are a capsule in time, and only about the album even at that. Even in the Revenge of the Sith review, there are disclaimers about the incompleteness of the CD. None of these soundtrack reviewers can physically view all the films. There isn't time for them to go back and change each review after watching the movie either. You have to know the rules before you can protest them.

Being an asshole is great, but you have to have some logic behind the smarts. You sound like the anti-Filmtracks fanboys even though you're probably better than that.

And: you've been visiting this site since 1999 without figuring out that it reviews CDs and not the scores in films? You lost your stock right there.



Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Markus
(dialup-4.191.39.124.Dial1.Seattle
1.Level3.net)

  In Response to:
You Yourself and Dick

  Responses to this Comment:
palanciyan
Clemmensen himself refers to review of "film" music, not "album"   Tuesday, June 14, 2005 (4:48 p.m.) 

CDs ... not film music? Hmm... what could make me think otherwise?

"... with the last scenes of the film previewing everything ..."
"'In this film more than any of the other five, there are references to earlier scenes ... '"
" ... re-record it specifically for this film."
"As the primary identity for the film ... "
"One of the film's major curiosities... "
" ... into the song at the end of that same film ... "
" ... so many flourishing and engaging new sub-themes for the film ... "
" ... weakest of the six scores ... "
" ... the most characteristic Star Wars score of the prequel trilogy ... "

And, perhaps most notably in the final paragraph:

"Now, his music for the sixth film is almost lost in the era ... "

Perhaps now would be a good time to point out that in every instance above the word "album" or "CD" could be used to subsitute for "score." Now, I know Christian can tell the difference between film scores and film score albums ... in fact he did, when he talked about the album! But then, of course, he went right back to talking about the score itself. So you can see how there might be some confusion when I hear that Christian is reviewing the CD and not the score, especially since he mentions the FILM many times.

If Christian is going to talk about music in the film, then that's what he needs to review. Clearly he is wanting to do that based on the terminology he used in his review.

I appreciate the idea, but reviews for Star Wars films can be judged independently, or they can be placed into the context of the other Star Wars films. And, since Christian obviously did that, it is probably fair to assume he is reviewing the music as it appears in the film.

After all, we are not reviewing the completion of a six-CD set, we are discussing the final chapter in 6 movies, and the brilliant themes that weave throughout them all composed by John Williams.

Cheers!

> I like smartass comments, especially when used against fanboys. I'm not a
> Clemmensen worshipper either. That said, however, you're missing the
> point. These reviews are a capsule in time, and only about the album even
> at that. Even in the Revenge of the Sith review, there are disclaimers
> about the incompleteness of the CD. None of these soundtrack reviewers can
> physically view all the films. There isn't time for them to go back and
> change each review after watching the movie either. You have to know the
> rules before you can protest them.

> Being an asshole is great, but you have to have some logic behind the
> smarts. You sound like the anti-Filmtracks fanboys even though you're
> probably better than that.

> And: you've been visiting this site since 1999 without figuring out that
> it reviews CDs and not the scores in films? You lost your stock right
> there.


Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


palanciyan
(135-bar7-x16.libre.retevision.es)

  In Response to:
Markus

  Responses to this Comment:
Markus
Re: Clemmensen himself refers to review of "film" music, not "album"   Tuesday, June 14, 2005 (7:00 p.m.) 

> "... with the last scenes of the film previewing everything ..."
> "'In this film more than any of the other five, there are
> references to earlier scenes ... '" ... re-record it
> specifically for this film." As the primary identity for
> the film ... " One of the film's major curiosities...
> "" ... into the song at the end of that same film ...
> " ... so many flourishing and engaging new sub-themes for
> the film ... " ... weakest of the six scores ... "
> " ... the most characteristic Star Wars score of the prequel
> trilogy ... "
>
> "Now, his music for the sixth film is almost lost in the era ... "

Are you kidding? Your examples don't support your argument because you're trying way too hard to twist the language away from its general meaning (it isn't working.)

Really, you remind me of:

http://www.filmtracks.com/scoreboard/main.cgi?read=145894



Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Markus
(dialup-4.178.60.52.Dial1.Seattle1
.Level3.net)

  In Response to:
palanciyan

  Responses to this Comment:
KathyL2
This is rich   Tuesday, June 14, 2005 (11:32 p.m.) 

Yeah, legitimate criticism of a poorly conceived review pretty much does signify that I consider all reviews wholly without merit, since they're all just satan! Please.

No, I'm not kidding, and I'm not "twisting" anything. This review is explicit in its representation of being a film score review, and not a film score album review. If it were an album review, I'd expect at least even the slightest semantic hinting at such a thing. But instead I'm left with repeated instances where the "film" music is criticized, and not the "album" music.

So you can keep it up the parallels to religious nuts, if it makes you feel like you're getting an edge on the argument. But my point still stands: in the discussion of this film score, Clemmensen makes flat-out false assertions and he refuses to correct them. The review is inaccurate.

> Are you kidding? Your examples don't support your argument because you're
> trying way too hard to twist the language away from its general meaning
> (it isn't working.)

> Really, you remind me of:

> http://www.filmtracks.com/scoreboard/main.cgi?read=145894


Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


KathyL2
(ppp-69-213-255-173.dsl.dytnoh.ame
ritech.net)

  In Response to:
Markus
Re: This is rich   Wednesday, June 15, 2005 (9:24 a.m.) 

> No, I'm not kidding, and I'm not "twisting" anything. This
> review is explicit in its representation of being a film score review, and
> not a film score album review. If it were an album review, I'd expect at
> least even the slightest semantic hinting at such a thing. But instead I'm
> left with repeated instances where the "film" music is
> criticized, and not the "album" music.

film music put on album is still film music. Christian has always reviewed the albums. it says right in this review particularly that it's an album review. You need to chill out!



Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


John
(adsl-67-114-249-202.dsl.lsan03.pa
cbell.net)

  In Response to:
Markus
Re: Christian crybaby   Wednesday, June 15, 2005 (7:02 a.m.) 

> Though I've come to rely on good reviews from Christian since about 1999,
> I think I'm going to start looking elsewhere, or contribute to sites in
> some other way because this style of pompousness and rudeness is a trend
> I've seen increase in time at this site.

You and 20 other people. Why is it that people who proclaim that they can't stand this site, and say they are about to leave, are always still here years later?

Markus, you are forcing Clemmensen's language out of his intended context. It's laughable how hard you are trying to do that, too.



Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display


Jon
<Send E-Mail>
(yakg26-pc-7.cl.msu.edu)

  In Response to:
Jon
Wow. I go away for a month and a half and look at all the controversy I created NM *NM*   Friday, July 15, 2005 (9:53 a.m.) 



Post Full Response         Edit Post         Threaded display



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.