# What place, if any, will film music have in the future of classical music?



## Gordontrek (Jun 22, 2012)

I started a similar thread in the film music forum some time ago; it was suggested that the discussion would be better in the main forum. Moderators may move this if need be. 
We have discussed in the past concerning to what degree classical music and film music intersect. It's difficult to say, because film music is bound to a given on-screen context. It seems that the majority of it isn't designed to be divorced from the silver screen, but can still make excellent concert music if arranged appropriately. Either way, film music is indeed a form of art that is capable of standing alone on its own merits. 
The question I'd love to see discussed is this: what place will it have in the orchestral repertoire of the future? I am NOT trying to ask the beaten-to-death question of whether film music is "the new classical"; rather, I am curious as to what YOU think will become of film music in the coming centuries. Will it fall by the wayside and be forgotten, maintain the status quo of a separate genre, or might it just become as standard as Brahms? I'm here for YOUR opinion! 
Personally, I believe that film music will indeed become accepted into the canon at some point, but only the very best and most popular scores. The scores of Korngold, Barry, Williams, Goldsmith, Rosza et al. will be remembered and played often. But it will only happen when cinema and television are replaced by another medium of entertainment, which could be centuries from now. Film music won't make a mass migration into the canon, but Rosza and Rimsky-Korsakov on the same program won't be uncommon. 
But even today I'd like to see film music championed as concert music more often. If a score was written by Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Copland or Bernstein, it's accepted as classical music without a second thought. Why not Williams!
Thoughts?


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

The problem is that nowadays, few film composers bother to rework their scores into suites suitable for concert performance, as some used to do for popular incidental music. Thus, a lot of film music is perhaps not as good as it might have been, and as such unlikely to last into the longer term.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

I grew up watching films with John Williams' music (Star Wars, Superman, Indiana Jones, ET) and wondered why it wasn't accepted, as I thought it was more immediately accessible than even Mozart. But after listening to Wagner, Stravinsky, Holst's the Planets, and Vaughan Williams, I started to find Williams' music very derivative from these composers. A classical composer has to write music to push the envelope, and be original. I always found John Barry's music (also influenced by Wagner's big brass sound) to be very slight on musical ideas, and from movie to movie, there isn't that much change. Even Bernard Hermann's music, while works well with the visuals, is not really stand alone music.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

Phil loves classical said:


> I grew up watching films with John Williams' music (Star Wars, Superman, Indiana Jones, ET) and wondered why it wasn't accepted, as I thought it was more immediately accessible than even Mozart. But after listening to Wagner, Stravinsky, Holst's the Planets, and Vaughan Williams, I started to find Williams' music very derivative from these composers. A classical composer has to write music to push the envelope, and be original. I always found John Barry's music (also influenced by Wagner's big brass sound) to be very slight on musical ideas, and from movie to movie, there isn't that much change. Even Bernard Hermann's music, while works well with the visuals, is not really stand alone music.


This will not in itself prevent some of the music from becoming very popular. The Warsaw Concerto comes to mind. Grieg's Peer Gynt suites are not exactly the most profound stuff either, but have become instantly recognizable. But yes, film composers have to churn out a lot of music very quickly, and thus they will focus more on tried and tested formulas (and whatever would be suitable to support the action on screen) rather than trying to push the envelope musically.


----------



## BabyGiraffe (Feb 24, 2017)

I can't see any future in it.
Because it's not original and lacking in artisticism.
The best music from John Williams is (often transposed and with slightly different tempo) from Howard Hanson, Shostakovich, Holst, Vaughan Williams, Brahms, Korngold, Copland, Tchaikovsky and so on.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Well, this doesn't negate film music occasionally finding its way onto concert programs, but one significant difference is the method of composition with respect to time. In general, a piece of CM fits the time it needs to unfold the way it does and say what it needs to say -- even something small like a single ballet dance or an overture. Whereas film music is composed to fit ultra-specific parameters. Say exactly 47 seconds, or a minute three. Thus, the whole is far more constrained, and often a film theme doesn't have (or have to have) a defined end.


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

BabyGiraffe said:


> I can't see any future in it.
> Because it's not original and lacking in artisticism.
> The best music from John Williams is (often transposed and with slightly different tempo) from Howard Hanson, Shostakovich, Holst, Vaughan Williams, Brahms, Korngold, Copland, Tchaikovsky and so on.


Agree, the computer does all the work nowadays.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

An article in the LA Times described John Williams' method of composing. He does his work at a piano, notating his music by pencil on the usual blank music paper with staves. It seems he often leaves final instrumentation to others, based on his instructions, but carefully reviews the results.

He seldom prepares "concert suites" because that is not a profitable use of his time and he has too much original work to do that pays much better. There is a suite available based on his music for "Close Encounters" that is very good, but I don't know if he prepared it.

His film music is getting more exposure year by year on the FM where I live, and I don't think it's going to go away any time soon.


----------



## BabyGiraffe (Feb 24, 2017)

KenOC said:


> His film music is getting more exposure year by year on the FM where I live, and I don't think it's going to go away any time soon.


It doesn't matter how popular is his music. Not every orchestral music is classical. 
To become part of the cannon, you need at least some originality (even if your music sucks - thats why some of the avantgarde composers are considered classical (but their followers and imitators aren't) - their music may be not listenable, but at least they tried to innovate).
Nowadays anyone can make "orchestral" or soundtrack music with the free software like Musescore, any of the DAWs and the countless orchestral sample libraries. The only thing that matters is the end result (it's easy to make electronic textures or atonal noise, but good luck writing original and beatiful music without knowing the craft and lacking _talent_ and _inspiration _- something that Williams lacks, you can hear that he borrows shamelessly even in his original compositions).


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

BabyGiraffe said:


> It doesn't matter how popular is his music. Not every orchestral music is classical.
> To become part of the cannon, you need at least some originality (even if your music sucks...


Actually, to become part of the canon, your music need only be enduringly popular among people who listen to classical music. That's the way it's always been, anyway.


----------



## Magnum Miserium (Aug 15, 2016)

I'd bet way harder on the survival of the songs of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones (Gershwin and Arlen are of course already in the canon) than on any film music.

And I really don't know why, of all the hills to die on, film music champions so often choose John Williams instead of Hermann, Korngold, Steiner, Rota. Or rather, I know all too well: it's because 99% of film music championing is really just rationalizing nostalgia for _Star Wars_.


----------



## Magnum Miserium (Aug 15, 2016)

I mean, like, I can see the "Gone with the Wind" theme sort of limping into posterity as a kitschy period piece, but I'm not sure I can see Williams even managing that - his famous tunes are all just so... DUMB.

I don't know, maybe with distance the stupidity of the blockbuster era - musically and otherwise - will seem endearing.


----------



## BabyGiraffe (Feb 24, 2017)

KenOC said:


> Actually, to become part of the canon, your music need only be enduringly popular among people who listen to classical music. That's the way it's always been, anyway.


Actually too many composers were literally starving, dying from misery, unpopular their whole life (or recived recognition when they were old or dead), being forgotten and later rediscovered...
You can always check any guide/encyclopedia...
Of course, there were some famous and rich people amongst the "great" composers.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

There are plenty of selections/suites from films that have every right to be included in classical concerts, but the current pattern of a few pops concerts with Star Wars, Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Superman (all Williams scores) will likely continue. There seems to be a bit of a small trend of an orchestra playing a score live to the movie, which is curious and may also continue in some form, but probably not expand in any serious way. But the music has the advantage of being tied to the films themselves, and will remain popular if only in that form for as long as the movies themselves survive. (This is in part why we tend to hear about the blockbuster films, and forget about wonderful scores like To Kill a Mockingbird, which is a very fine film as well, or Prince Valiant, a fine score to a rather silly film with Robert Wagner in a rather silly wig.) The only thing missing, I think, from its chances of greater presence in classical concerts is that I don't believe it has strong proponents in the classical industry itself (conductors and musicians). Derivative or not, the main theme to Star Wars is better known and more widely popular than any classical music written in the last 50 years. (And no, I don't have the statistics, and in this case do not believe that they are necessary.) Schindler's list (Williams again) has been played as a piece featuring a violinist. (And part of the entry of Williams may be due to his longtime role as conductor of the Boston Pops, in addition to the obvious popularity of his film works. As I have noted elsewhere, that seems not much to have helped his more "serious" compositions.)


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Film music has always been a mainstay of the popular segments of "Pops" concerts. -- going back at least to Arthur Fiedler (and/or his arrangers). When I was a kid, popular Boston Pops numbers included the Entrance of the Charioteers from Ben Hur, the main themes of Exodus and some currently popular TV shows (Man from UNCLE, The Munsters, etc.), Chim-chim Chiree from Mary Poppins, and whatever else his ear told him would sell. (Of course, he also played Beatles songs.)

Also, back then it was ludicrously impossible to get symphony orchestra musicians to "swing."


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

I think that it's best to leave film music for its intended purpose. To be honest, I don't understand the strong interest in using it for any other reason.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

For a few decades, there will be a nostalgia aspects for famous movie scores (e.g. Star Wars, Schindler's list, LOTR, Harry Potter), but I don't think it will last. I think movie scores from earlier days, even by famous classical music composers like Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Honegger, rarely get programmed for concerts.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

brianvds said:


> The problem is that nowadays, few film composers bother to rework their scores into suites suitable for concert performance, as some used to do for popular incidental music. Thus, a lot of film music is perhaps not as good as it might have been, and as such unlikely to last into the longer term.


Unfortunately, there's a lot of truth to that. Take Hans Zimmer for instance. In the past, he wrote music that could easily be made into suites for Nine Months, Driving Miss Daisy and Pearl Harbor. Now, for the most part, he'll still come up with a catchy theme, but not do much with it. (Incidentally, one of his more recent catchy themes was for the opening of Netflix series, The Crown.)


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

BabyGiraffe said:


> I can't see any future in it.
> Because it's not original and lacking in artisticism.


Absolutely not true!


----------



## Magnum Miserium (Aug 15, 2016)

DaveM said:


> Absolutely not true!


Pretty much true.


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

I don't mind film music, as long as it doesn't insult my intelligence by attempting to manipulate my emotions at key points in the film. I kind of "get it" all by myself. I don't need the extra help.


----------



## Gordontrek (Jun 22, 2012)

Some interesting replies here.


BabyGiraffe said:


> The best music from John Williams is (often transposed and with slightly different tempo) from Howard Hanson, Shostakovich, Holst, Vaughan Williams, Brahms, Korngold, Copland, Tchaikovsky and so on.





Magnum Miserium said:


> And I really don't know why, of all the hills to die on, film music champions so often choose John Williams instead of Hermann, Korngold, Steiner, Rota. Or rather, I know all too well: it's because 99% of film music championing is really just rationalizing nostalgia for _Star Wars_.


For the life of me I'll never understand this attitude. Maybe someone can better explain it to me. What is it about John Williams, and _Star Wars_ in particular, that gets so many purists' blood boiling? Yes, he is probably the most popular film composer, and _Star Wars_ is probably the most popular film score. But whenever I tell people "I love film music, and I want to see more of it in the concert hall," invariably at least one person is going to say "you just want to hear _Star Wars,_ don't you?" Well, I love Williams, and I love the _Star Wars_ scores, but there is SO much more film music out there worthy of attention that I love equally if not greater. If I were given the opportunity to program a concert for my local symphony and was told to include one film score, I would probably not pick _Star Wars_, and I probably wouldn't pick something by Williams for that matter.
About Williams and the "plagiarism" camp. I'm not sure if it's a fair criticism. Borrowing is very common among composers, and I fail to understand what makes Williams' borrowing unique. In fact, I rarely find anything in Williams' work that is directly, note-for-note lifted from other composers. The most blatant, I would say, is actually the _Star Wars_ fanfare (Korngold's Kings Row). Others, like the Indiana Jones love theme (similar to Tchaikovsky violin concerto) are similar harmonically but it would be difficult to argue that it's a direct copy and paste. But I'm sure you've heard that Beethoven's Ode to Joy is pretty much identical to Mozart's Misericordias Domini. Can someone explain why it's okay to ignore Beethoven's copying and not Williams's? 
Of course, you can insert any film composer in here for John Williams, but it seems most of these conversations inevitably drift to Williams because he's so popular.


----------



## Gordontrek (Jun 22, 2012)

brianvds said:


> But yes, film composers have to churn out a lot of music very quickly, and thus they will focus more on tried and tested formulas (and whatever would be suitable to support the action on screen) rather than trying to push the envelope musically.


Would it be fair to argue that the constraints film composers are under makes the best ones that much more impressive? It's true, they have to meet strict deadlines, the expectations of the directors and producers, and make their music fit into pre-determined time slots on the screen (a 90-second cue here, a 6-minute theme there). I feel like the composers who work under these conditions yet create solid, enjoyable music are indeed great musical minds who deserve more attention.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Magnum Miserium said:


> Pretty much true.


Then you should have no problem coming up with a good soundtrack for a movie. Waiting with baited breath.


----------



## Xaltotun (Sep 3, 2010)

I'm also one of those who really likes film music when watching a film... and nowhere else. I think film music has a great future... as film music, and nowhere else. It's a great gateway to introduce people to classical music, though!


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

So often when this subject is discussed, names such as John Williams and others that go back as far as the 1970s are used as a measure of what is the best film-related music. Better examples are more recent film composers of the last 20-25 years with some of the greatest melodic and creative artistic talent such as Hans Zimmer, Randy Edelman, Alan Silvestri, James Horner, Howard Shore, Thomas Newman, James Newton Howard and Michael Kamen (to name a few).


----------



## pcnog11 (Nov 14, 2016)

I answered to a similar post.

Here is the link:

http://www.talkclassical.com/47344-how-will-film-music.html


----------



## Gordontrek (Jun 22, 2012)

pcnog11 said:


> I answered to a similar post.
> 
> Here is the link:
> 
> http://www.talkclassical.com/47344-how-will-film-music.html


Yes, that is the thread I started that I mentioned in my OP.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

Gordontrek said:


> Would it be fair to argue that the constraints film composers are under makes the best ones that much more impressive? It's true, they have to meet strict deadlines, the expectations of the directors and producers, and make their music fit into pre-determined time slots on the screen (a 90-second cue here, a 6-minute theme there). I feel like the composers who work under these conditions yet create solid, enjoyable music are indeed great musical minds who deserve more attention.


True. Such constraints don't automatically make for hack work; many of history's great artists and composers worked on commission, and under similar constraints of time, style, length and instrumentation. One need but to look at those cantatas that Bach churned out, one per week, on and on. What a sell-out hack the man was.


----------



## BabyGiraffe (Feb 24, 2017)

Gordontrek said:


> Of course, you can insert any film composer in here for John Williams, but it seems most of these conversations inevitably drift to Williams because he's so popular.


It's not copying of someone's style (if you understand harmony, form, orchestration and have sense of dramatism, you can pretty much imitate the style of any composer without directly using their own notes). It's plagiarism. Many "pop" songwriters do the same thing - they take some old hit song and rearrange the pitches of the melody in a slightly different formation. Then you transpose up of down and change the tempo.
Williams is not the only one who steals - the Matrix score was called "original" and innovative by the critics (compared to the rest of the Hollywood cliches), but it's basically based on excerpts of John Adam + some orchestral effects from Lutoslawski, Penderecki, Varese and company.


----------



## Magnum Miserium (Aug 15, 2016)

DaveM said:


> Then you should have no problem coming up with a good soundtrack for a movie. Waiting with baited breath.


If your standard of excellence is "Better than Magnum Miserium could compose," then buddy, you've got a LOOOOOOOW standard.


----------



## Magnum Miserium (Aug 15, 2016)

Gordontrek said:


> For the life of me I'll never understand this attitude. Maybe someone can better explain it to me. What is it about John Williams, and _Star Wars_ in particular, that gets so many purists' blood boiling? Yes, he is probably the most popular film composer, and _Star Wars_ is probably the most popular film score.


I think you've answered your own question.

Though of course I know that Williams is now kind of passé among people who follow current film music - but I don't think current dean Hans Zimmer (Zimmer is still cool, right?) is ever going to have quite that kind of popularity.



Gordontrek said:


> About Williams and the "plagiarism" camp. I'm not sure if it's a fair criticism.


I'm sure it's an unfair criticism, and worse, an unintelligent one. The issue isn't that Williams steals - that's a problem for lawyers, not critics - but the quality of what he does with what he steals.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Personally I still like John Williams' music for the movies, mainly from the 70's and 80's. He is a brilliant orchestrator and his music carries the themes and motifs convincingly to me. I don't think he belongs in the classical canon, simply because his works are very unoriginal, and too repetitive, but he is still creative. I find his music can still stand alone apart from the visuals to a much higher degree than many other film composers nowadays. Hans Zimmer's music is really just background effects, from listening to the Batman series and Inception (like the sound of tuba blasts, though). A serious work of classical needs more development of themes, not just recurring rearrangements of the same few themes in a movie score. The movie score I feel to closest to a real piece of classical music in terms of variety, development, etc. Is the original LOrd of the Rings soundtrack with Leonard Rosenman. Stravinsky, Bax, and maybe Varese sound to be clear influences. The musical language is much more modern than the naive Romanticism of Williams and most others in Hollywood.


----------



## RRod (Sep 17, 2012)

There are movies where enough shutting-up happens in the dialogue that the music can do some interesting things, and thus an arrangement for the concert hall can be viable. I'm not sure the venue for this is a *non*-pops concert, but what's wrong with a little summer fun?


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Just for interest sake, the following is an example of how Hans Zimmer related soundtracks have changed over the last several years. The first example is a fully fleshed out piece which along with other parts of the soundtrack can form a beautiful suite.

The second is more typical of what he is doing these days which is a relatively brief thematic snippet similar to what he has done in movies more recently. Mind you, that's not to diminish his skills. The opening music to The Crown can only be fully appreciated when you see it with the graphics which cleverly depict growing golden tentacles and also watch the series itself.

Fwiw: I'm not entirely sure whether this change has something to do with Hans Zimmer himself, whether producers are simply not willing to pay the high price tag for more themes and development or something else.

Hans Zimmer, Pearl Harbor opening title music (2000)






Hans Zimmer, The Crown opening title music (2016)


----------



## BabyGiraffe (Feb 24, 2017)

DaveM said:


> Fwiw: I'm not entirely sure whether this change has something to do with Hans Zimmer himself, whether producers are simply not willing to pay the high price tag for more themes and development or something else.
> ]


It's well known fact that he has an army of assistants and orchestrators that do most of the compositional work - the guy is great businesman and electronic producer, but horrible composer and musician (well, I can imagine him doing the 3 note ostinati from Batman, anything melodical - the assistants).
Even well known classical composers like Liszt (who is way better than Hans) and some other opera composers from the past used orchestrators and co-writers behind the scenes...


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

BabyGiraffe said:


> It's well known fact that he has an army of assistants and orchestrators that do most of the compositional work - the guy is great businesman and electronic producer, but horrible composer and musician (well, I can imagine him doing the 3 note ostinati from Batman, anything melodical - the assistants).
> Even well known classical composers like Liszt (who is way better than Hans) and some other opera composers from the past used orchestrators and co-writers behind the scenes...


I don't agree that he's a horrible composer and musician. Besides, you can have your own view on how good a composer he is, but you have no way of knowing how good a musician he is.

Yes, he has an army of assistants these days, but that wasn't true with his earlier movies where he composed much or all of the music.


----------



## Gordontrek (Jun 22, 2012)

DaveM said:


> Just for interest sake, the following is an example of how Hans Zimmer related soundtracks have changed over the last several years. The first example is a fully fleshed out piece which along with other parts of the soundtrack can form a beautiful suite.
> 
> The second is more typical of what he is doing these days which is a relatively brief thematic snippet similar to what he has done in movies more recently. Mind you, that's not to diminish his skills. The opening music to The Crown can only be fully appreciated when you see it with the graphics which cleverly depict growing golden tentacles and also watch the series itself.
> 
> Fwiw: I'm not entirely sure whether this change has something to do with Hans Zimmer himself, whether producers are simply not willing to pay the high price tag for more themes and development or something else.


This brings me to an important point that I probably should have made earlier. In my original post I said that I believe only the very best film scores have a chance of finding a place in the orchestral repertoire in the centuries to come. The first video you linked is an example of something that might do it (probably not that exact piece, but others like it that work adequately in standalone). The second represents a _lot_ of modern film music; it's made up primarily of simple progressions and rhythmic motifs, designed to be a shiny auditory backdrop to an opening credit reel. It sounds like every other attempt at an "epic" score I've ever heard.
Again, in the original post, I said that film won't make a mass migration into the orchestral repertoire. This is because so much of it is bland and basic. The film scores that I think WILL see classical concert halls are the most rich and inventive ones. Zimmer's _The Crown_ will probably never be played outside of its soundtrack, and neither will the hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of scores that sound just like it. But if you took the grand, swashbuckling classics, like Milkos Rosza's _Ben-Hur_ (what a magnificent score) or _Plymouth Adventure_, Jerry Goldsmith's _Star Trek: The Motion Picture_ or _The Blue Max_ you could make fabulous concert suites out of them. 








THIS is the kind of film music that I believe has the best shot at becoming standard. It's not simply background music or cookie-cutter time fillers; it's music "with a purpose" that's capable of standing on its own. Most modern film music, especially Zimmer's, doesn't hold a candle to it.


----------



## JAS (Mar 6, 2013)

I like Miklos Rosza as much as anybody, but I don't think Plymouth Adventure will ever become a concert staple, except perhaps at Thanksgiving. Scores, or rather suites from scores, such as Ben Hur, El Cid, and King of Kings are more likely to fit the bill, although there are certainly less well know works, such as Five Graves to Cairo, that exist in the form of wonderful suites and would be, from the viewpoint of a listening audience, a fine short work on a longer program of more standard classical fare. Unfortunately, I don't think that is very likely to happen, in part because there is a strong reluctance on the part of the classical music industry to grant any respect to more modern music that continues to encourage more traditional forms. It is sneered at precisely because it has melody, and sweep, and recognizable form, all of which makes it work so well in accompanying a film. (And I don't mean to include only Rosza, although composers like Rosza, Korngold, and Herrmann have one foot in the classical world and may be seen as more acceptable.)


----------



## Richard8655 (Feb 19, 2016)

Prokofiev's Alexander Nevsky immediately comes to mind as a work that's stands equally well by itself as a concert performance and work of art while working so well in Eisenstein's film.

But to tell the truth, I think Stanley Kubrick's masterful use of existing classical music in his films surpasses most specifically composed film music. Screening Barry Lyndon or 2001, I can't imagine any contractually composed music could exceed the classical music he selected for these and his other iconic films in the context of what he wanted to express.


----------



## Gordontrek (Jun 22, 2012)

JAS said:


> I like Miklos Rosza as much as anybody, but I don't think Plymouth Adventure will ever become a concert staple, except perhaps at Thanksgiving. Scores, or rather suites from scores, such as Ben Hur, El Cid, and King of Kings are more likely to fit the bill, although there are certainly less well know works, such as Five Graves to Cairo, that exist in the form of wonderful suites and would be, from the viewpoint of a listening audience, a fine short work on a longer program of more standard classical fare. Unfortunately, I don't think that is very likely to happen, in part because there is a strong reluctance on the part of the classical music industry to grant any respect to more modern music that continues to encourage more traditional forms. It is sneered at precisely because it has melody, and sweep, and recognizable form, all of which makes it work so well in accompanying a film. (And I don't mean to include only Rosza, although composers like Rosza, Korngold, and Herrmann have one foot in the classical world and may be seen as more acceptable.)


This is an excellent point. I have wondered if the reason purists thumb their noses at film music is because it isn't particularly innovative where the music itself is concerned. The trouble is, this leads to a host of other questions, such as whether or not traditional tonal harmony is outdated in the classical world....but that's another thread for another day! 
Either way I feel like film music still has a chance, just probably not in our lifetimes. Cinema looks like it is going to be around for a long time, and not until long after it's replaced by something else will it become thought of as an "ancient" art on the order of opera. Perhaps the "golden age" of film music, which I think is roughly from the start of film until the beginning of the 21st century, will be seen as close enough to common practice classical music to avoid being considered un-innovative by future generations.


----------



## Chronochromie (May 17, 2014)

Most of the best film scores musically (that is, those scores which can stand on its own to listen to without the film) that I've heard are by Classical composers who also wrote concert music, and their film music isn't even among their best work.


----------



## Magnum Miserium (Aug 15, 2016)

Chronochromie said:


> Most of the best film scores musically (that is, those scores which can stand on its own to listen to without the film) that I've heard are by Classical composers who also wrote concert music, and their film music isn't even among their best work.


Yup. Almost like it's a second rate genre. (Of course, so was ballet between Rameau and Tchaikovsky, and I guess we should never rule out the possibility of film music getting its Tchaikovsky - though how a film is supposed to work with music assuming as prominent a role as in Tchaikovsky's ballets is hard to imagine - but anyway it aint happened yet.)

Sweet irony: maybe the single greatest piece of film music - that wonderful oasis that gives conservatives hope in a fallen age of Noisy Music - is... a 12 tone piece by Schoenberg. (Of course it's for a movie that doesn't actually exist, so maybe it doesn't count.)


----------

