FSM Board: old fart collector doesn't get it (2024)

No. At least, in the film, it sounded routine at best. Don't have a clue what the fuss is about or how it could possibly have won awards.

The Foreign Press Association has no more clue about film music than does the Academy. In typical fashion, the Best Score award is bestowed upon either the film they wish to further honor, or thrown as a bone to the film that gets lots of nominations but no meaningful awards. I also liked the film, and thought the music was enjoyable, but there was scarcely any noticeable underscore, just loads of groovy source music. All respect to Mr. Shore, who has proven his mettle, but this one is no big deal.

I haven't seen the Aviator but I think the score works very well on its own. With exception of Howard's The Village, which also has a lyricism that doesn't demand a visual context for the enjoyment, Shore's Aviator is as strong a composition as I've heard out of Hollywood this year. Even one of my favorite scores, The Incredibles, by Giacchino, benefits from having seen the film.

I know its generally thought of as a bonus these days to get a film score that works in and out of the film, but I remember a time when every score worked like that. Now we're lucky to get a couple per year. And in some cases, it seems as though it's a negative to have a film score function on its own.

Shore's Aviator might not appeal to every film score fan because, and please don't take this the wrong way everyone, most film score fans have been weened on post-Romantic, programmatic styled film scores. Very Straussian/Mahlerian with a dash of Copland/Barber for Americana. Even a little French Impressionism from Debussy and Ravel to boot.

Shore's Aviator draws from the Baroque period when music was primarily written as absolute music (non-programmatic or narrative) with the exception of the odd oratorio. Of course it has a somewhat detached quality from the film because of how most of us have been conditioned by Hollywood scores for the past 40-50 years. It's the same as dissonance in music. Play Xenakis or Ligeti over a tender romantic moment and people will expect someone's head to explode into tentacles or an chestburster to come flying out.

I'm not advocating that everyone take heed and revere Shore's AViator. Bach is not everyone's cup of tea either. So be it. But I don't Shore's clever work in the Aviator should be dismissed as boring or plain.

Just my 2 cents.

Remember, it's about quality, not quanity. Not every film has to be (or should be) wall to wall with music.

Seems like PATTON gets its fair share of abuse here too, Howard, though it always mystifies me when I see it. The way Goldsmith used his music to illuminate the mysticism in Patton's view of war and the "eternal warrior" was nothing short of genius, in my view. It is not a great listen apart from the film, but I consider it one of the most effective and ingenious scores ever written.

I'd hardly say that Jerry Goldsmith wasn't given the same respect, praise and admiration. The man received 18 Academy Award nominations and was chosen to write the Fanfare for Oscar. In the industry he was loved and respected by all. Granted, Goldsmith deserved more than once Oscar, but then again so did Elmer Bernstein.

James

In other words, we are stupid?

And when I saw the film, the music was so low in the track (NOT the songs, those were nice and loud - I'm talking about the SCORE) it had no punch whatsoever.

Lester, Scorsese didn't do anything to Bernstein (or his music) on GANGS OF NY. I heard Bernstein himself say that the dumping of his score was the work of the Weinsteins. He didn't have a bad word to say about Scorsese.