Why are film scores generally not as good these days?

[NealKenneth]

Themes seem to be getting less melodic and more about creating an atmosphere. As a songwriter I can testify that melodies are much harder.

So there could be a lack of skill and/or effort as well. All music, not just movie music, has fallen far.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Themes seem to be getting less melodic and more about creating an atmosphere. As a songwriter I can testify that melodies are much harder.

So there could be a lack of skill and/or effort as well. All music, not just movie music, has fallen far.

Based on what?

 

[NealKenneth]

Where to even begin? The quality of modern music is awful compared to even 20 years ago.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Where to even begin? The quality of modern music is awful compared to even 20 years ago.

Based on what. You are just saying it is. Just like the odd premise for this thread. Its just worse, just like how people try to say the NFL or NBA is worse, or how film is worse, or how television is worse, etc. This is nostalgia at its finest.

By the way, I am not a big fan of modern pop music, but there is still plenty of other stuff to listen to.

 

[NealKenneth]

I know you take critical opinion as evidence, so I'm going to use the most highly-respected music ranking list (that being Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest.)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_Stone's_500_Greatest_Songs_of_All_Time

On that page you'll find charts where they break down the number of songs from each decade that make the list. The pattern is clear, especially if you consider that way more music is released now every year than during the 60s and 70s. Or, better yet, listen in to a Top 40 broadcast from today compared to one from 1969 or 1972. If popular music has collapsed to such a degree, it makes sense that other forms of music would also be suffering.

It's obvious to most people...if you want to argue that it isn't happening, you'll have to find someone more gullible than me!

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Not only did you use wiki and Rolling Stone (the height of music journalism ), but you their 500 greatest songs, which was published in 2004.

Rolling Stone has always slated towards classic rock (metal and otherwise), from the 60s and 70s. They aren't going to carve out a list dripping with anything else. Even my favorite, Dylan, it is mostly his electric period. Come on.

By the way, Rolling Stone, the magazine that had to re-review Zeppelin because they crapped on them in their heyday. So maybe not the best at judging music in the present tense.

 

[Grootster]

Where to even begin? The quality of modern music is awful compared to even 20 years ago.

I'm inclined to agree. It's easy to blame it on nostalgia, but I didn't grow up in the 70s and 80s and I find music from that time period far more listenable. I used to be more into modern music, but now that I've explored 80s rock I rarely listen to modern songs anymore. Not saying it's all bad because there are a handful of modern songs I return to, but a lot of stuff from the 2000s strikes me as whiny, generic or somewhat pretentious.

 

[NealKenneth]

Wikipedia isn't reliable now? I think we've had three elections since the last time I heard someone say that. rofl Also the link has a chart for their 2010 edition as well as the 2004 edition. And yeah, RS is just as crap as Empire is at listing films, but I've seen you use such things as evidence before...weird that it counted then but not now.

Yes, at some point, it comes down to personal opinion, but this thread is asking WHY not asking IF. You're arguing a whole different thing...just relax dude

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Wikipedia isn't reliable now? I think we've had three elections since the last time I heard someone say that. rofl Also the link has a chart for their 2010 edition as well as the 2004 edition. And yeah, RS is just as crap as Empire is at listing films, but I've seen you use such things as evidence before...weird that it counted then but not now.

Yes, at some point, it comes down to personal opinion, but this thread is asking WHY not asking IF. You're arguing a whole different thing...just relax dude

For criticism? Of course not. Its an information gathering tool.

So your argument is Rolling Stone and Empire are crap, but because others use Empire, its good? Okay...

I am arguing the thread's question is a false premise. The thread title assumption does not make it right. And I am perfectly in my right to do that. Perhaps you should calm down.

Oh, on another note, you keep on bringing up you are a songwriter and such, and yet haven't been able to break this kind of stuff down. Which is interesting.

 

[NealKenneth]

I'm inclined to agree. It's easy to blame it on nostalgia, but I didn't grow up in the 70s and 80s and I find music from that time period far more listenable. I used to be more into modern music, but now that I've explored 80s rock I rarely listen to modern songs anymore. Not saying it's all bad because there are a handful of modern songs I return to, but a lot of stuff from the 2000s strikes me as whiny, generic or somewhat pretentious.

Yes, it's easy to blame on nostaglia but it's not that at all.

You can count the number of artists consistently creating music on the quality of B-listers in the 60s and 70s on one hand (Tame Impala and Kendrick Lamar are both great if anyone wants suggestions.) I too was born in the 90s and most of my friends were as well. 80% of the music we listen to is from between the year 1963 and 1983. How can we be nostalgic for music that was made before we were even born? It's not like we don't know what nostaglia is...that's why we all get off on Britney Spears and The Backstreet Boys too.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I'm inclined to agree. It's easy to blame it on nostalgia, but I didn't grow up in the 70s and 80s and I find music from that time period far more listenable. I used to be more into modern music, but now that I've explored 80s rock I rarely listen to modern songs anymore. Not saying it's all bad because there are a handful of modern songs I return to, but a lot of stuff from the 2000s strikes me as whiny, generic or somewhat pretentious.

Oh, nothing whiny and pretentious about 70s and 80s music. You know, the era of progressive rock.

Again, another example of eras that have been refined and and reflected on. Where time has allowed the cream to rise to the top. But as usual, look back and see exactly how many Grammys did the Beatles, Zeppelin, Floyd, New Order, and Dylan win in the 60s, 70s and 80s? Boston, Journey and Zeppelin were fought over. How about King Crimson?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Yes, it's easy to blame on nostaglia but it's not that at all.

You can count the number of artists consistently creating music on the quality of B-listers in the 60s and 70s on one hand (Tame Impala and Kendrick Lamar are both great if anyone wants suggestions.) I too was born in the 90s and most of my friends were as well. 80% of the music we listen to is from between the year 1963 and 1983. How can we be nostalgic for music that was made before we were even born? It's not like we don't know what nostaglia is...that's why we all get off on Britney Spears and The Backstreet Boys too.

Well I don't know about anyone else, but my mom and dad controlled the radio as I grew up. So as a little one, I spent a lot of time listening to music well before my time. Sitting in the car, listening to oldies, one of my favorite memories as a child.

This is also why I grew up watching Gone with the Wind 100 times and a lot of westerns growing up. The favorites of my mother and father respectively.

 

[NealKenneth]

So your argument is Rolling Stone and Empire are crap, but because others use Empire, its good? Okay...

Not others, you. Your entire argument for why TDK is so great was based on publications like these so I figured it would be a good place to start for this one. Oops!

Oh, on another note, you keep on bringing up you are a songwriter and such, and yet haven't been able to break this kind of stuff down. Which is interesting.

I mentioned it once (wtf) but even so...haven't been able to break down what? What exactly have I failed to break down here? lol for as frustrating as you are, Darth, you really give me a good laugh sometimes.

 

[Greens]

Modern pop music isn't necessarily crap, it's just not up your alley. Every once in a while I like a track that's on the charts, but mostly the new styles just aren't my thing. I want my songs to have a catchy melody and a semblance of interesting instrumentation, but modern music is very focused on lyrics, the beat and general ambiance. Vocal performance also seems to be important. There are a lot of tracks that don't have any music but a single beat or a single piano, and it's all about how well the singer performs.

I've gone back and listened to the top pop tracks of the 60's, 70's and 80's and there was so much crap it's unbelievable. The good > bad ratio WAS more favorable, I will admit. A great mainstream hit like Come On Eileen wouldn't be made today.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Not others, you. Your entire argument for why TDK is so great was based on publications like these so I figured it would be a good place to start for this one. Oops!I mentioned it once (wtf) but even so...haven't been able to break down what? What exactly have I failed to break down here? lol for as frustrating as you are, Darth, you really give me a good laugh sometimes.

No, that was a different argument. I used Empire because you said that people didn't think TDK was all that good anymore. And then I showed that over the last few years, it is still consistently named one of if not the best superhero movie by both the public and publications. It has nothing to do with me agreeing, and everything to do with pointing out that you reading of the room was completely wrong.

I don't know, I am not a music major. But my brother is rather capable of explaining why songs work and what they are missing when he thinks they don't. You are the one throwing out your music cred. You'd think you'd go beyond the basics of well they not so melodic anymore.

 

[Consona]

There's this masterclass on movie scoring: http://mikeverta.com/product/online-masterclass-scoring-1/

And it's fantastic. It compares Star Wars and Batman Begins soundtracks. Two greatest examples of classic/old-school/golden era movie scoring and modern movie scoring... And it's actually devastating to watch. Mike (great guy, I took 17 of his classes already and they are pure gold) presents here how motives develop throughout the movies.

In Star Wars the main theme literally follows what's on the screen and what happens to the characters. The same theme is differently orchestrated, harmonized, modulated, with different rhytmic background and counterpoint melodies, it perfectly shows what Luke's experiencing in the given moment, sadness and loneliness on Tatooine, determination and focus when he does some heroic stuff, mystical moments when Obi Wan's voice speaks to him, it has militaristic qualities when he fights in the X-Wing against Tie Figthers, etc. Just one theme, one of many in that film. And the theme alone tells the story.

In Batman Begins. The Batman's theme is literally the same throughout the whole movie. Maybe some slight differences in tempo here and here, but it is exactly same whatever happens to Bruce. He's a thug on the streets, he climbs a mountain, he changes his life, finds a new purpose and becomes Batman, he creates his iconic suit and equipment, he fights bad guys, he saves the city, he's rebuilding the manor... music's all the same. It does not tell the story, there's no character arc in the score, it's just cool music.

Wiliiams' score is the film in the musical form. It's a story reproduced in a sound. It has dramatic structure. Not to mention the themes alone are stellar.

Zimmer's score is great rocking orchestra concert album put next to the picture. Everything's cool about it, it suits the individual moments really well, except, there's crucial difference in the structure compared to Williams' scoring, it does not tell one continuous story.


But today, there's no locked picture, which is really bad for composers who want to do this kind of dramatic scoring. And most importantly, how many can do that? Williams, Goldsmith, Shore, Horner, Herrmann, Korngold, Steiner, Courage, those guys studied symphonic, long-form development, and even decades before they started to score pictures! Now? I'm not so sure...

So, it's "tied to the story vs modular". You cannot take Luke's theme, the same melody, but from binary sunset and put that to the ending ceremony scene, because, even thought it's the same theme, it's so dramatically different, because it serves different dramatic moment. But you can take Batman theme from beginning, middle or end of the film and put it elsewhere no problem, because it does not develop.

 

[Osiris-Rex]

Based on what. You are just saying it is. Just like the odd premise for this thread. Its just worse, just like how people try to say the NFL or NBA is worse, or how film is worse, or how television is worse, etc. This is nostalgia at its finest.

By the way, I am not a big fan of modern pop music, but there is still plenty of other stuff to listen to.

People remember the good stuff and forget about the bad.
Some songs of 1997, 20 years ago.
Songs like Macarena, Barbie Girl, groups like Hanson, Spice Girls, Vanilla Ice

 

[Greens]

There's this masterclass on movie scoring: http://mikeverta.com/product/online-masterclass-scoring-1/

And it's fantastic. It compares Star Wars and Batman Begins soundtracks. Two greatest examples of classic/old-school/golden era movie scoring and modern movie scoring... And it's actually devastating to watch.

All of these points are valid and Star Wars is the ultimate example of using and developing leitmotifs throughout a modern blockbuster. The thing is, not every director wants this. Junkie XL recently put out a video answering the question of why modern movies don't seem to have memorable themes or melodies behind them... it's because modern directors veer away from it. There's been a style shift to a more ambient and/or percussive style of scoring. I would love it if the old Williams style came back, but it's not up to the composers to bring it back.

 

[dude stannis]

Junkie XL recently put out a video answering the question of why modern movies don't seem to have memorable themes or melodies behind them... it's because modern directors veer away from it.

 

[Consona]

All of these points are valid and Star Wars is the ultimate example of using and developing leitmotifs throughout a modern blockbuster. The thing is, not every director wants this. Junkie XL recently put out a video answering the question of why modern movies don't seem to have memorable themes or melodies behind them... it's because modern directors veer away from it. There's been a style shift to a more ambient and/or percussive style of scoring. I would love it if the old Williams style came back, but it's not up to the composers to bring it back.

Batman theme in BB consists of two notes, yet you can develop it so it reflects what's happening in the film. And when music reflects what's in the story and on the screen, it's much more effective than when it's modular piece of music.

So you don't need that elaborate or strong melody to develop it. Any musical idea, no matter how simplistic, is "developable". It's just it's much more hard to do, it demands much more skill and experience and knowledge and today's directors don't even know what they are missing, when they don't demand that. I think a lot of them don't even know they should demand it because modern soundtrack landscape just do not lead them to that. But I think if they saw their films with properly developed music they would feel the difference. I think no director would complain if composer made his music more adhere to the picture. Because it strengthen the experience. It connects viewers much more to the film.

And I even think J XL tried this in Mad Max when his minimalistic string theme changed throughout the film.
So you can have minimalistic themes and motives, yet you can adapt them to the picture.

 

[Greens]

Batman theme in BB consists of two notes, yet you can develop it so it reflects what's happening in the film. And when music reflects what's in the story and on the screen, it's much more effective than when it's modular piece of music.

So you don't need that elaborate or strong melody to develop it. Any musical idea, no matter how simplistic, is "developable". It's just it's much more hard to do, it demands much more skill and experience and knowledge and today's directors don't even know what they are missing, when they don't demand that. I think a lot of them don't even know they should demand it because modern soundtrack landscape just do not lead them to that. But I think if they saw their films with properly developed music they would feel the difference. I think no director would complain if composer made his music more adhere to the picture. Because it strengthen the experience. It connects viewers much more to the film.

And I even think J XL tried this in Mad Max when his minimalistic string theme changed throughout the film.
So you can have minimalistic themes and motives, yet you can adapt them to the picture.

I would imagine that Nolan of all people has a pretty good idea of what is possible with film scores, he just chose to go a certain route. There really is no objective "proper" way to use music in film. James Newton Howard and Hans Zimmer composed themes for different emotional and action beats, and they were placed accordingly. They actually went further than a lot of modern composers and gave Joker and Bane (this was just Zimmer) their own recognizable themes. Especially Joker's theme is an amazing example of subconsciously prepping the viewer for what's going to happen. Did they go as far as Williams did? No, but I would say that the music for the Dark Knight Trilogy stands head and shoulders above a lot of modern scores in terms of being recognized beyond their function in the movies.

 

[Consona]

Yea, TDKT scores and definitely pinnacle of modern approach to blockbuster scoring. Same goes for Man of Steel score or Inception, all Zimmer and Co.

 

[Consona]

I would imagine that Nolan of all people has a pretty good idea of what is possible with film scores

I don't know man, if you listen to music in his films, it's always very minimalistic. Following, Memento, Prestige, very background and ambient stuff.

 

[Greens]

I don't know man, if you listen to music in his films, it's always very minimalistic. Following, Memento, Prestige, very background and ambient stuff.

Of course, but I meant that he's not blind to other potential approaches. He doesn't pigeon hole himself because he doesn't know that a score CAN be symphonic and out there. He just a personal preference as to how music functions in his movies. Interstellar is a movie where he chose to go extremely bombastic (TOO bombastic for a lot of people) because he thought it suited the material and what he tried to convey. That wouldn't have fit in The Prestige.

 

[enquencle]

I'm surprised that temp music hasn't been brought up as part of the problem. It is, for me, the main culprit. Snyder's 300 is the perfect example.

Films are edited with temp music, and it's so hard to see it without that specific music that they often ask the composer to replicate the same piece of music that's already there, limiting his options and creativity. Of course music can be an essential part of the editing process, but it also creates these problems often.