criterionforum.org

Antoine Doinel wrote:Celebrating them after the fact with end of the year awards comes off as a hand-wringing apology on behalf of the film community.

Isn't that what the Academy Awards are all about?

Amazing. Sometimes there are no words to express how hilarious and well-done something is.

Yeah, I was trying to think of something witty and cute to put in but I thought better of it. It's just as good, if not better than the Donald Duck/Glenn Beck video floating around.

I actually am a Radiohead fan. I think they have made some excellent records. But I am sorry I have hated Johnny Greenwoods scores. I think they are incredibly distracting and don't let the strength of the material breathe. Paul Thomas Anderson, I think, never underlines his material for cheap dramatic effect, I think Greenwood's been doing this at almost every turn for me it's working against the rest of the film. I am still very frustrated with TWBB. I think he got a lot better with "We Need to Talk About Kevin", but still really obnoxious in some scenes, I didn't know who scored the film until the credits rolled, but while I was watching it I couldn't understand the oversight.

I don't want to speculate too much, but it seems maybe thanks to his reputation and showboating on TWBB he is given incredible freedom. I mean, his scores are definitely noticeable! Maybe that's part of why I think they suck. But also he is just NOT an experienced composer, and it shows, it shows, all though many experienced composers do suck (Howard Shore, John Williams) I would just rather he not practice on Lynne Ramsey and PTA films, haha. I understand that these choices are coming from the directors, but personally, I would like to see him playing a smaller role, or significantly minimize his approach.

I honestly didn't care until I realized there was a chance he may be used for "Inherent Vice" I would like to see how "The Master" pans out, but my feeling now is please oh please do not use him for "Inherent Vice" Pynchon, PTA, and Downey Jr. should be able to make it sing without Greenwood's cultural juxtapositions and cello glissando's, IMHO.

Lorne wrote:all though many experienced composers do suck (Howard Shore, John Williams)

Stopped reading after this.

But you were almost done!

Lorne wrote:I am sorry I have hated Johnny Greenwoods scores.

Apology accepted.

Perhaps you would prefer Randy Newman's (heavily spoiler-laden) score for We Need to Talk About Kevin?

James Mills wrote:

Lorne wrote:all though many experienced composers do suck (Howard Shore, John Williams)

Stopped reading after this.

I may have been a bit hasty in saying that Howard Shore sucks. I'm sorry about that. I remember not minding his work up to about twenty years ago. I should re-watch some of those earlier films it's been a few years. But, I do really think John Williams is dreck. I should have made a distinction, Howard Shore is just an example of someone, who, in my opinion has not gotten better with age. I think twilight would have been a better job for Greenwood. Then I wouldn't have to hear it at all.

I re-watched TWBB the other day and for me the music is so distracting. Can anyone else relate to this? I find it hard to sit through, But maybe it's just me.

Anyhow, can anyone think of anyone else doing good work these days who fit's the bill for a PTA joint? Even among the Greenwood enthusiasts. Just curious.

How do y'all feel about Carter Burwell, or David Wingo these days?

@ Jeff - Thank you for accepting my apology, haha, I am not trying to piss anyone off. I'm actually about to watch Toy Story 3 hahaha. I don't remember his scores for the other ones, only the parodies. But his work on Performance is amazing!!

I would second that John Williams is nothing special at all but what's all the hubbub over johnny Greenwood's scoring?

Because Radiohead fans can't seem to separate his scoring from the fact that they love the band he plays in

mfunk9786 wrote:Because Radiohead fans can't seem to separate his scoring from the fact that they love the band he plays in

But is there anything wrong that he's doing that's technical? I enjoyed the score for TWBB quite a bit.

I enjoyed the score too, don't get me wrong. But some of it wasn't original work, and it wasn't as if the film could've only been scored by Greenwood, which a few people on this thread tried to claim.

Dona Santa wrote:

mfunk9786 wrote:Because Radiohead fans can't seem to separate his scoring from the fact that they love the band he plays in

But is there anything wrong that he's doing that's technical? I enjoyed the score for TWBB quite a bit.

Mfunk: I don't really see this as a big problem. If his names get's his foot in the door whatever. I agree idolatry may compromise standards, but it's not that interesting to me. And if as you say you appreciated his work on TWBB then I don't really see the problem.

Dona Santa: There's nothing wrong with it that's technical. For me, I find in TWBB it doesn't suit the tone of the rest of the film. It certainly doesn't suit the era. And as I said I feel it detracts from the rest of the film. I feel it is working against almost every other element, and not in a clever brechtian way. Now obviously, it is integral to the film as is. It was probably carefully considered through every step of the editing, so I don't mean to claim that it falls solely on Greenwood. But I didn't like the film. And for me, the use of Greenwoods music is the primary reason why the film didn't work and I do not think it will stand the test of time as well as PTA's earlier work.

I listened to an audio commentary with PTA wherein he mentions that a lot of the details of 70's valley are his trick bag to draw from. The things he can incorporate into his films from his background that add authenticity. Which is why I think the music in boogie nights works so well. But it would not have worked if he had used New Order, The Cure, The Smiths, Replacements, whatever... it just wouldn't make sense. I'm sure people still would've loved it, but someone really looking at the artform would think "what the hell is going on?"

TWBB is PTA's furthest venture from the valley thus far. I think sparse American music would have worked best, or something that influenced it directly in that period, like Percy Granger.

Loud, blaring, 1960's European influenced concert music done by an amateur composer, IMO, makes no sense. Every step of the way. The quality of the work, well that's just my opinion. But still I don't understand why it's misplaced in the era, why there is so much of it, it's "look at me, look at me." While his earlier films are right on pitch, this one for me, is a bit of a mess.

I'm glad people enjoyed it and it spread more enthusiasm for PTAs work, because I think he's really good. I just hope to see the music in PTA's future work lining up better with the piece, whether it is Greenwood or not.

For better or worse I think TWBB is Anderson's most allegorical work and Greenwood's score reflects that. Boogie Nights is much more focused on recreating a certain era and the human drama therein takes the forefront. The grander allegorical statements about America and family and loss of innocence are all watered down as subtext. But TWBB casts out its criticism of Capitalism, Religion, and Oil far beyond the period of the film (and the character study is pushed back), which Greenwood's score makes clearer than period pieces would.

So I don't think it's working against the film, unless you demand your period pieces to be purely of their periods. And there are plenty of other anachronisms, most notably the "Brother from another mother" line. A good point of comparison might be Coppola's Marie Antoinette.

Thanks for the insight Lorne. I for one thought the score brought a hugely unsettling atmosphere that reflected Plainview's unpredictable mood/personality. I'm not familiar with what sound would have been appropriate for the era it was set in but I can't help but think if it was given a plain old America sound just like the times it was in, it would greatly take away from the emotional density that I think Greenwood brings. I guess what I'm saying is that I view the score to be more about following the character of Plainview than the actual movie itself. It's almost as if the music is its own character.

Ah, you both make a really good point! Thank you. I agree with the sentiment in Shrew's remark "unless you demand your period pieces to be purely of their periods." I certainly don't. Not at all.

I suppose I have to regress. I still feel the music draws too much attention to itself. And for me the it would have worked better with less of it or different music. But you are right to call me on this "era specific" argument of mine. For while I criticize it in this instance, there are other cases in which I celebrate it. Whoops

For me this is not one of those cases. And while I agree that the filmmaker can use any music they please to achieve their desired effect, I think this is a case where the compositions seem to be operating almost independently of the picture. Which got me wondering why they chose to mimic a different tradition in the first place. Hahaha, anyway.. who's gonna do the Inherent Vice soundtrack? Have y'all read that book? I'm giddy about this. Adding music to Pynchon, a paranoid, suedo-psychadelic, detective comedy. Badalamenti?

I can't imagine how boring this film would have been without the current score. It certainly built tension where there probably shouldn't have been any. Being loud and obtrusive was sort of the point IMO. And though cliche, the score was so prevalent to be considered a character itself in the film.

@aox: Regarding being boring without the score.. I'm not interested in this film, nor most others for their entertainment value. Whether or not it is "boring" is really only a question for those who are. If as you say the film wouldn't hold water without the loud, obtrusive score.. you'd kinda have to wonder what they were doing the rest of the time they were making it.

I wouldn't be interested in a film that was saved in the score, nor a showcase for an inexperienced composer to manipulate us with his Penderecki licks. Respectfully disagree.

Ooh, also for those interested "Film, a Sound Art" is an excellent exploration of this topic, that contains material from some of his very highly regarded earlier books on the subject. I have no idea whether Chion would've agreed with me or not. Doesn't matter. Should be a good for for anyone with an interest.

Lorne wrote:

mfunk9786 wrote:Because Radiohead fans can't seem to separate his scoring from the fact that they love the band he plays in

Dona Santa: There's nothing wrong with it that's technical. For me, I find in TWBB it doesn't suit the tone of the rest of the film. It certainly doesn't suit the era ...

TWBB is PTA's furthest venture from the valley thus far. I think sparse American music would have worked best, or something that influenced it directly in that period, like Percy Granger.

Why not make it a black and white silent? That would fit the era to a T.

mfunk9786 wrote:My father had an issue realizing who's child H.W. is the first time he saw There Will Be Blood, and I had some momentary confusion about whether or not Eli Sunday was actually the 'Paul Sunday' who visited Plainview to tip him off to their oil. It becomes clear pretty quickly that they're twins, but I have noticed that Anderson's recent trend of very economical editing (There Will Be Blood is a film that is quite long but one that is as tight as a drum - there's no more room to cut that film down despite its length) might be to his detriment in some cases.

This was the one major element that left me lukewarm about ...BLOOD. I know that Anderson made a serendipitous decision to cast Dano as both characters, but the ambiguity over which twin he represented hung over the rest of the film in a bad way (especially since the two characters are never shown together). Had Anderson used two actors to play the roles and had them interact in at least one earlier scene, the finale confrontation with Plainview would have been more dynamic.

Anyway, I'll have no problem with elliptical editing in THE MASTER as long as it's not undercutting the relevancy of the scenes included.

He had actually planned to do just that, but the original actor was too scared of DDL. Dano having both roles was an act of desperation more than anything else.

knives wrote:He had actually planned to do just that, but the original actor was too scared of DDL. Dano having both roles was an act of desperation more than anything else.

That's what I meant when I said it was a "serendipitous decision", as I believe Anderson had no regrets over the late casting of Dano as Eli (when he was originally contracted to play Paul only). Apparently, he had already shot Dano's single scene as Paul so the decision was made to just move forward with Dano in both roles. I'm sure no one was keen on delaying the shooting to script more material or reshoot earlier scenes, but I think it would have helped to hire another actor and reshoot the Paul/Plainview scene so the identity of the brothers would never be in doubt.

It never is in doubt though. There's never a point where the film questions if they're the same person leaving it safe to assume they are identical. Only because modern audiences are so weened on twists and dull attempts to be clever that any classical straight forward attempts at story telling are thwarted by an unwillingness to take story developments at face value.