Does music fool the audience?

[Tony Keats]

I've long been a fan of soundtrack CD's and often buy them after enjoying a skillfully scored movie. Recently though I've begun to wonder if maybe I put too much stock in the music and let it cloud my judgement with movies. Expanding the theory a little- I think a particularly good score can cover up shortcomings in the film itself and an unusually memorable theme can give the production a massive headstart.

Jaws for example:- The score effectively IS the shark for most of the film and without John Williams' music, the ominous bits would be reduced to gentle scenes of people kicking around in the water.

Here's a (theoretical) sum for you.. Tim Burton minus Danny Elfman= a much less distinctive director (agree?).
Another great Williams score was present in The Phantom Menace, just imagine how unbearably pedestrian that would have been without the fantastic orchestral work.

Would anybody have a kind thing to say about Flash Gordon and Highlander if Queen weren't associated with those films?. I know it's the content of the features that counts, but listening to/remembering a movie's music can elevate a project no-end (in your affections and in reality too).

I don't think it's wholly unreasonable to suggest that George Lucas, Tim Burton and a few others actually owe their careers to their composers. Are there any others that I've missed? or maybe you disagree entirely...

[Bapapapa]

A movie score certainly conveys emotion, but to say certain directors owe their careers to the composers is a little off, IMO. If the director didn't think a particular piece was appropriate to the scene or indeed the entire movie, it wouldn't be there in the first place, surely?

[TheFatBoy]

Just look at any Tarantino film - the soundtracks are brilliant, and without them, the movies would not be as good. But then again, Tarantino is supposed to choose the music himself...

A coupla other films where music makes the movie (IMO!) are Grosse Point Blank and Out Of Sight - both of them have utterly brilliant soundtracks...

I wouldn't agree with your statement about the music making the director's career tho - I think that's going a bit too far. I think it's fair to say that a lot of films would be almost unwatchable without the score, and also that most people don't even notice the soundtrack!

[Gizmo]

I have to agree to an extent that music can and IS used to manipulate the audience - Spielberg is particularly adept at using music in this manner.

Used skilfully, however, a director can use music (both orchestral AND pop/rock) to augment the moment. It's another tool that the director should be able to call on when necessary - it shouldn't be used as a lazy way to explain a scene or what a character is feeling!

[TheFatBoy]

Originally posted by Gizmo
Used skilfully, however, a director can use music (both orchestral AND pop/rock) to augment the moment.

One moment that stands out for me is the massive shoot-out scene in Face/Off, all set to Somewhere Over The Rainbow... Sounds like it shouldn't work, and yet it's brilliant - one of my favourite scenes of any movie, in fact... :D

[Tony Keats]

Bapapapa- I can't BELIEVE you've stepped in to defend Lucas! he's an FGP and deserves all he gets surely?!!. Yes you're right though, it would be a little off to suggest they owe their careers to their composers, but I only said it's not "wholly unreasonable" to suggest that. If, for example, you took all of John Williams' music away from each of the Star Wars films and replaced it with nominal stuff, the resulting movies would have lost more than just the music. Lucas' directorial talent (or lack of) would then be brought into sharper focus.

The Star Wars franchise has been (arguably!) carried along by the main theme for absolutely ages (games/ads etc all being coupled with the original score). Lucas can make the next one as mediocre as he pleases, as long as he has the main titles at the start with the familiar theme he'll probably get away with it (again!). The music is one of the main things that defines the series.

FatBoy- Tarantino is a good example actually. His films are greatly aided by a suitable choice of tracks (as they don't have much score to speak of). James Bond is another franchise that NEEDS the accompanying theme to be accepted as gladly as it is (surely they're just middling actioners otherwise?).

[TheFatBoy]

Originally posted by Tony Keats
TheFatBoy- Tarantino is a great example actually. His films are greatly aided by a good choice of tracks (as they don't have a great deal of score to speak of). James Bond is another franchise that NEEDS the accompanying theme to be accepted as gladly as it is (surely they're just middling actioners otherwise?).

I think there is far more to James Bond films than just the music - I agree that a lot of them are just middling actioners, but I don't think the music has a lot to do with changing that... You have to take into account the cars, the girls, the gadgets, the cheesy one-liners... as well as the fact that James Bond is practically an institution!

[Tony Keats]

Yes, but it's only the bond theme that defines them as a whole. The Bond series has been through loads of different phases- they've attempted realism at times, been excessively silly on other occasions and of course had different actors in the lead role.

The music binds all of these (otherwise fairly disparate) films together. There are other elements that are common to the series obviously, but the music is probably the most prominent of all the common ingredients IMO. Again, any games/ads/merchandise connected with the franchise will almost always be accompanied by the famous theme.

[TheFatBoy]

I would disagree that the music binds all the Bond films together - the signature theme is obviously a big part of the films - but in a series as long running as Bond, the theme would be as famous as the character himself. The Pink Panther is another example, the theme is as famous as the character, and as such has been used in everything from the films, the cartoon's and the games. I imagine the people behind Bond, when the first films were made (Cubby Broccoli etc), after seeing how well the first couple did made a conscious decision to stick to that theme - and by the later films the music was so widely recognised it would have been suicide to change it - although they toyed with various updates (David Arnold remixes spring to mind).

Another theme that has become as recognisable as the character is Superman - but I'd argue the same case!

I hope I've made sense there, I have a feeling I was rambling a tad :rolleyes::D

[Tony Keats]

Originally posted by TheFatBoy
I would disagree that the music binds all the Bond films together - the signature theme is obviously a big part of the films - but in a series as long running as Bond, the theme would be as famous as the character himself. The Pink Panther is another example, the theme is as famous as the character, and as such has been used in everything from the films, the cartoon's and the games. I imagine the people behind Bond, when the first films were made (Cubby Broccoli etc), after seeing how well the first couple did made a conscious decision to stick to that theme

I see what you're getting at, but my point is:- would the series have been so enduring/successful if they had used a less appropriate (or less distinctive) piece of music to begin with?. The Pink Panther is another gem of a tune though (and extremely fitting), but I'm pretty sure that example strengthens my argument rather than yours!

Another theme that has become as recognisable as the character is Superman - but I'd argue the same case!

Well, I think Richard Donner appreciated how crucial a memorable theme was and his remarks on the DVD doco certanly back that up. I got the impression that he considered the music to be of 'make or break' importance and I'm sure he said he punched the air with joy when he heard the opening titles for the first time (or something along those lines anyway).

I imagine people would have still enjoyed Superman with or without that great theme, but would it have had the same impact with a sub-par score? I honestly don't believe it would.

I hope I've made sense there, I have a feeling I was rambling a tad :rolleyes::D

Oh don't worry, as you can see, I'm quite partial to a ramble myself!.

[Bapapapa]

Bapapapa- I can't BELIEVE you've stepped in to defend Lucas! he's an FGP and deserves all he gets surely?!!.

Eh?

http://www.bapapapa.btinternet.co.uk/ambulance.gif

[Tony Keats]

Bapapapa- I'd understand someone else being puzzled by that line, but as it's directed solely towards you (and the abbreviation originates from one of your posts on another thread) I don't see what the confusion is.

I'd just finished reading the Star Wars "don't go running" thread where you were vociferously attacking Lucas throughout (and I agreed with your sentiments for the most part) so to see you (in effect) defending him seemed noteworthy at the time. Your switch of role just happened to be the first thing that crossed my mind as I read your comment. Obviously the topic of discussion here is completely different, but I also think it's obvious that my initial post was purposely exagerrated anyway (and I certainly don't think an ambulance was necessary!).

Come on mate, surely your playful scorn has some more deserving targets? (Craig@Rewind might be posting something right this minute...).

..BTW.. FGP= Fat Greedy Prick (TM Baps'01)

[Bapapapa]

Wow, you agreed with most of my Lucarse comments? About the only one who did. :nuts:

Yeah I know what the acronym means- :D , but believe me I wouldn't give Luca$ the steam off my ****, let alone defend him. :p

Now get back in that ambulance... it's for your own good.

[Cap'n Al]

I'd say it cuts both ways. For instance, while John Williams' score for the Star Wars films does a brilliant job of helping the action, suspense and humour, his score for the first Harry Potter film was just an intrusive barrage of noise, with even the main theme less memorable than it should have been.