Recently the Warrior-Bard (also known as my dear friend Tim) posted about his thesis composition, a work far from finished, but completed in draft form. First, good on him for getting it done because it's a pretty big accomplishment. In describing the genesis of his thesis he had the following to say:
"Film music can--and does--stand alone, apart from the events of a film (especially when it appears on the album in a concert form instead of chopped into three scenes throughout the film, as is the case with Toccata and Dreamscapes). But this is another discourse entirely, one I don't have time for at the moment. I can let Brad field that one..."
First of all, thanks to the almighty Warrior-Bard (and his anger, which has made him powerful)for giving me today's topic. We'll explore three common fallacies of film music.
1. Film music isn't supposed to draw attention to itself.
2. Film music that is "emotionally manipulative" is bad film music.
3. Film music isn't intended to exist outside of the film/music diegesis.
1. Film music isn't supposed to draw attention to itself.
"Experts" seem to think this is true. The "best" film music shouldn't draw any attention to itself ever. I think that this is slightly misplaced. I think what these "experts" want to say is "film music should be subtle enough that it doesn't force me to feel a specific emotion". While we'll tackle this shortly I want to address the first issue. The "best" film music is that which the composer and/or director has chosen the appropriate time to allow the music to play in the background or come to the foreground and help tell the story on another level. If the "best" film music isn't supposed to draw attention to itself, why is the music from Star Wars a perennial favorite? Because it's good music. That's why.
2. Film music that is "emotionally manipulative" is bad film music.
I had an interesting discussion with a young filmmaker when I was in Los Angeles last June (that's another posting) about "emotionally manipulative" music in film. His argument was that he felt that he disliked a lot of film music because of this. So we engaged in an interesting debate/discussion. This conversation took place shortly after he had seen both of the films that evening (both of which I scored) and was surprised that 1) I had written "actual music" and 2) it didn't shove his emotions around. I think I was eventually able to convince him that some people that think that "emotionally manipulative" music is being considered in the incorrect context. My point to him was that just because a cue is emotionally involved doesn't mean that it's trying the manipulate the emotional response of you, the listener/viewer. Perhaps the composer was trying to express the emotional response of the character or, heaven forbid, the overall situation. Or maybe he/she is actually portraying their own musical/emotional response to the scene they're scoring. Ultimately, though it is the character and not you, the audience, that is the important thing (in good film, anyway).
3. Film music isn't intended to exist outside of the film/music diegesis.
Perhaps this was the original intention of film music; that it should/could/would never live outside of film, that it was the ultimate gebrauchtsmusik. Can you extract an entire score for a concert performance? Perhaps. Should you? Not really. Not unless it's a colossal work such as Lord of the Rings or Star Wars where there is an abundance of music to choose from. (Anymore, though, I'd be more interested in hearing film music outside the construct of the film in which the composer has gone back and reworked the material into something that is more concert-like, just to prove his/her composition skills. Think about it, Korngold's Violin Concerto is based on themes from his film scores that were recast in more traditional symphonic form.).
For me this is perhaps the most important of the three because I don't have to see the movie first in order to appreciate how great the music can be all on its own. Actually I would say that between 10-15% of my film score recordings are from films that I've never seen. But I like the music. Does seeing the movie make the listening experience more valuable? Of course it does. But sometimes you have a real stinker of a movie with a really tremendous score (did I hear someone say Cutthroat Island?) and you like listening to it for whatever reason. Ultimately it means that it resonates with you and that is a deeply personal thing.
As is all art.
3 comments:
YYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!
I can't wait to be done with academia.
I, too, have many film scores to films I have never seen--and in some cases, never even want to see. Why? Because I like the music. Obviously. Why don't people understand that?
It must stand alone, if there are people who friggin listen to it by itself!!!
Off the top of my head, here are a few scores to films I haven't seen:
Deep Rising
Deep Blue Sea
Phone Booth
and a ton of copies you burned me back in the days of the Black Pearl.
Often times, I see a film just because I was intrigued by the music. With Plunkett & Macleane, I loved the music, listened to it for months, and finally caved and rented it. I ended up loving the movie, too.
I love the through-composed nature of film music, and the developmental sensibility (in the good ones, anyway). It enhances my day-to-day life. That is reason enough to listen to anything. No one should have to justify their choices any more than this. Isn't that the overall purpose of music?
Most academics have forgotten that.
What many academics (we need a new term, something that more accurately describes bull-headed collegiate professionals that think there is only one path) have also failed to realize is that the two are capable of cross pollinating in a way most won't admit. They think that only film composers plunder the concert hall and not vice versa. I've heard many a work written for the concert hall that one would call "cinematic" in nature. But then it would be said that they aren't borrowing from film, they're borrowing from 19th-century music language. It drives me mad just thinking about it. When done tastefully and artfully, a film work can utilise the techniques of the concert hall without falling into parody (in the Renaissance sense) and vice versa. I seem to remember writing a paper about the music for The Matrix in this respect for Dr. Bulen's class.
In my case much of what I initially learned regarding classical music was through exposure to film music, Star Wars in particular.
I remember reading the liner notes, especially of those scores that had been "long lost", and the discussion of certain composers that influenced particular film composers.
This is largely how I came to classical music, through the music of John Williams and Miklos Rozsa and Bernard Herrmann. It was through them that I discovered Stravinsky, Debussy, Ravel, etc.
Post a Comment