# This Is Why John Williams Is Great



## kamalayka

Even if you take the music by itself, it is still listenable.

And the orchestration is awesome.


----------



## Kopachris

Each theme group is rather repetitive, with little change of orchestration, dynamics, or texture. The whole thing is filled with cinematic cliches, and the theme groups are too separate from each other, with nothing serving to unify the whole piece. John Williams is great at crafting themes and fitting them to film, but (judging by this, at least) he lacks the formal skill to unify the music into a piece of art on its own.

I prefer Hans Zimmer, on the other hand, because he appears to be very good with form and developing and transitioning themes. Take this excerpt, for example: 




The whole thing comes across as generally unified by mood, though there are distinct themes, differences of texture and dynamics, and certain themes and motives are woven throughout. In my opinion, much more "listenable" than the credits music which simply recapitulates each of the movie's main themes without any sort of proper development.


----------



## Cnote11

I don't like Hans Zimmer.


----------



## PetrB

It's like a string of little short bits of theme all strung together.

A lot of the instrumentation sounds remarkably 'thin' rather than full - really odd for one with a full orchestra at his disposal, and with such a supposed reputation as a great orchestrator. 

It is also a string of cliches, generic: I suppose to compose new ones, though they sound trite, is a sort of knack or talent, but this, or Hans Zimmer, is a far cry from the fully classical trained and more imaginative Bernard Hermann, for example, who is a really 'great' film composer.

He just ain't that grand other than being a 'good film composer.'


----------



## Sid James

I've been listening to John Williams' music lately and have been enjoying it immensely. Like quite a few composers I like, he draws from the rich resources of classical music, esp. the first half of the twentieth century. He's a master of counterpoint and of taking themes (leitmotif like things) through a whole score. To my ears, his biggest influences would be Holst, Stravinsky, maybe Hindemith and Berg too. Of the pre-1900 guys, I think Wagner's influence is discernible in his music, as well as J.S. Bach (my strong guess is that Williams reveres Bach, in terms of him being the master of contrapuntal music). But there are trademarks to Williams' style such as this rich string sonority. & don't forget that when he emerged in the 1960's and '70's, some predicted that 'tonally' leaning film music was near to being dead. You had a number of composers doing atonal film scores around that time (eg. Jerry Goldsmith's original Planet of the Apes score, a classic) & guys like Nino Rota and Bernard Herrmann where reaching the end of their long careers. But Williams proved such predictions wrong, more tonal focussed and neo-romantic film music is alive and well. & that's good, like the whole of classical, film music is very diverse. Williams has had one of the great partnerships in film music with director Stephen Spielberg, scoring most of his films, and he has also written purely concert hall works, eg. a cello concerto and other pieces for Yo Yo Ma. Its appropriate that this thread popped up cos he had his 80th birthday this year and I don't think anybody mentioned it. The 80th birthday album on Sony was actually one of my best buys of this year.


----------



## PetrB

Sid James said:


> I've been listening to John Williams' music lately and have been enjoying it immensely. Like quite a few composers I like, he draws from the rich resources of classical music, esp. the first half of the twentieth century. He's a master of counterpoint and of taking themes (leitmotif like things) through a whole score. To my ears, his biggest influences would be Holst, Stravinsky, maybe Hindemith and Berg too. Of the pre-1900 guys, I think Wagner's influence is discernible in his music, as well as J.S. Bach (my strong guess is that Williams reveres Bach, in terms of him being the master of contrapuntal music). But there are trademarks to Williams' style such as this rich string sonority. & don't forget that when he emerged in the 1960's and '70's, some predicted that 'tonally' leaning film music was near to being dead. You had a number of composers doing atonal film scores around that time (eg. Jerry Goldsmith's original Planet of the Apes score, a classic) & guys like Nino Rota and Bernard Herrmann where reaching the end of their long careers. But Williams proved such predictions wrong, more tonal focused and neo-romantic film music is alive and well. & that's good, like the whole of classical, film music is very diverse. Williams has had one of the great partnerships in film music with director Stephen Spielberg, scoring most of his films, and he has also written purely concert hall works, eg. a cello concerto and other pieces for Yo Yo Ma. Its appropriate that this thread popped up cos he had his 80th birthday this year and I don't think anybody mentioned it. The 80th birthday album on Sony was actually one of my best buys of this year.


Bringing themes in, back, forth, throughout a score is not "counterpoint" (please

That 'Late Romantic sound is a 'tradition' established by the European immigrant classical composers who first made their mark on the film score as we know it: Erich Wolgang Korngold, most especially, along with Miklos Rosza, Dmitir Toimpkin, Bernard Hermann, Franz Waxman, et alia. It is from there, as well as well-knowing his music literature, that Williams derives his 'romantic' style. I have nothing 'agin' the film score per se, but so many -- Williams' included -- are "highly derivative of" while being 'original.'

I checked out his 'cello concerto some time ago, and it is highly polished, facile, if you will, with an expected luxuriance of orchestration: it also sounds as facile and superficial as the film scores, but with nothing further to associate with or attach to the 'cello concerto, it seems, 'meh,' like a film score in need of a film


----------



## arpeggio

PetrB said:


> A lot of the instrumentation sounds remarkably 'thin' rather than full - really odd for one with a full orchestra at his disposal, and with such a supposed reputation as a great orchestrator.


This is a very unfair observation. Because of time constraints most of the time film composers employ an orchestrator to orchestrate their film scores. Normally the film composer prepares a condensed C score and the orchestrator actually prepares the individual parts. I recall reading that, because there was so much music, Korngold employed several orchestrators for the soundtrack to _Robin Hood_.

I recall that Williams started out by preparing some orchestrations himself. I read that he was Tiomkin's orchestrator for the _Guns of Navarone_.


----------



## KenOC

I admit to being pretty fond of some of Williams's film scores. Not the original soundtracks so much, but arranged as suites (as some of them have been). I have some of his "straight music" too but haven't yet liked any of it as much.

Always amused by the sneers Williams receives for being popular and successful.


----------



## Sid James

PetrB said:


> Bringing themes in, back, forth, throughout a score is not "counterpoint" (please
> ...


I'm thinking of counterpoint in the usual sense. The 'shark cage fugue' from Williams' score to Jaws is a good example of his kind of modern/melodic counterpoint. Its quite thrilling, even without the accompanying visuals of the shark bumping the cage etc. & to expand, in terms of repeating themes, Williams does that in many of his films signifying characters (eg. in Star Wars, the Darth Vader theme and the Princess Leia theme are so well known they're ubiquitous). In this way, you are right to point out Williams' indebtedness to guys like Korngold and Rozsa. But I think Williams has a unique sound and way with things, he is not just rehash of them or any other composer. He does music that's appropriate to the film at hand, he does not just do cookie cutter. Eg. I was listening to his score for Amistad this week, and its quite different to other things I've heard by him. Then again, things like his score for Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is kind of rehashing material from the previous Indiana Jones films buts its a franchise so what do you expect? All of them did rehash, or most of them, even the greats. Mozart, Handel, Beethoven, etc. So what?


----------



## millionrainbows

He's too entertaining.


----------



## PetrB

millionrainbows said:


> He's too entertaining.


I have yet to be entertained by John Williams, film or 'classical.'

He is a Great film composer, no doubt there. I would think that would be enough, and no envy, unless someone wants his job. I don't - knowing I have no sense of 'what will make people feel x,y, or z,' which is a native Must for any truly effective film composer, without which they can pretty much look to not working for films.

I do wonder why some want to 'validate' their entertainments from this particular genre by intimating or flat out calling for their recognition as 'classical music' when they so plainly are not. (I do not find that in this post, under the appropriate category, but do see the almost nonchalant passing remark in classical from more than one person that 'John Williams' is classical. As film scores they are excellent. What is the need to consider them as other than film scores?

The 'classical' works will have to take their lumps as judged by classical criteria: classical criteria are not what one uses in 'measuring' the success of a film score -- because the two are such different genres with very different aims of purpose.

Trying to compare the genres does neither genre any justice, really: that just highlights their differences.


----------



## PetrB

arpeggio said:


> This is a very unfair observation. Because of time constraints most of the time film composers employ an orchestrator to orchestrate their film scores. Normally the film composer prepares a condensed C score and the orchestrator actually prepares the individual parts. I recall reading that, because there was so much music, Korngold employed several orchestrators for the soundtrack to _Robin Hood_.
> 
> I recall that Williams started out by preparing some orchestrations himself. I read that he was Tiomkin's orchestrator for the _Guns of Navarone_.


Fair enough then. Lately, and I thought it was from Star Wars on, he has repute as being one of the few to do his own orchestrations, ergo that 'trademark' orchestral sound. Herrmann was another who did his own scoring - if something was shopped out, you can be sure it was a far more complete particell than just a piano score.

So it is possible those earlier Star Wars, or the first he wrote, were shopped out orchestrations: that link is very much missing his trademark full arranging for strings, to be sure.


----------



## PetrB

Sid James said:


> I'm thinking of counterpoint in the usual sense. The 'shark cage fugue' from Williams' score to Jaws is a good example of his kind of modern/melodic counterpoint. Its quite thrilling, even without the accompanying visuals of the shark bumping the cage etc. & to expand, in terms of repeating themes, Williams does that in many of his films signifying characters (eg. in Star Wars, the Darth Vader theme and the Princess Leia theme are so well known they're ubiquitous). In this way, you are right to point out Williams' indebtedness to guys like Korngold and Rozsa. But I think Williams has a unique sound and way with things, he is not just rehash of them or any other composer. He does music that's appropriate to the film at hand, he does not just do cookie cutter. Eg. I was listening to his score for Amistad this week, and its quite different to other things I've heard by him. Then again, things like his score for Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is kind of rehashing material from the previous Indiana Jones films buts its a franchise so what do you expect? All of them did rehash, or most of them, even the greats. Mozart, Handel, Beethoven, etc. So what?


I'll take your word for it, then. I have found, in whatever I have heard of it, nothing but highly polished mediocrity which does not hold my attention. When I do become conscious of it in the films I've seen, it either works or it doesn't - I find so much film music more inappropriate than appropriate that I often have to tune it out to better enjoy the film. Watching the film _The Piano_, I recall, I had to blot out the entire, which seemed about the greatest 'non-fit' for the entire duration of the movie I would not have thought it possible: maybe Mr. Nyman set some sort of dubios record there [Naw, he completely cashed in, for a lifetime, with that score. - must be 'successful' then.]


----------



## KenOC

PetrB said:


> I do wonder why some want to 'validate' their entertainments from this particular genre by intimating or flat out calling for their recognition as 'classical music' when they so plainly are not. (I do not find that in this post, under the appropriate category, but do see the almost nonchalant passing remark in classical from more than one person that 'John Williams' is classical. As film scores they are excellent. What is the need to consider them as other than film scores?


Well, it seems to me that film scores are a pretty obvious extension of the music that fills out operas, or incidental music as composed from (at least) Beethoven forward. We have no problem calling that "classical music." And I'm not sure why you assume that anybody needs to "validate" their tastes by calling film scores classical music or anything else for that matter. It's music, sure enough, and that's sufficient.


----------



## Guest

I rarely bother with original soundtrack albums (_Gladiator_, Zimmer/Gerrard and Shores 3 for _LOTR_). Generally, I find them quite unsatisfying because they are inevitably episodic, repetitive (despite variations) and underdeveloped pieces. Having said that, some of the episodes are, in themselves, very entertaining and fulfil their purpose of stirring the blood or tugging the tearducts.

I wonder whether John Williams' scores are feted because of the popular directors he has worked with, rather than on their own merits? More generally, I wonder whether film composers' reputations have more to do with the popularity of the films/directors? Herrmann's work with Hitchcock, Morricone with Leone...Carpenter with Carpenter ?


----------



## Kopachris

KenOC said:


> Well, it seems to me that film scores are a pretty obvious extension of the music that fills out operas, or incidental music as composed from (at least) Beethoven forward. We have no problem calling that "classical music." And I'm not sure why you assume that anybody needs to "validate" their tastes by calling film scores classical music or anything else for that matter.


That's true enough, but film music and classical incidental music are generally composed completely differently. While classical incidental music (including operatic incidental music) is composed as a single piece of music, no matter what the format of its program, film music is usually composed as a series of "cues," generally a few notes to a few phrases long. Many cues are largely unconnected to each other, though certain themes and motifs may be present throughout the film. Though they share similar origins, the two types of music are completely different.



> It's music, sure enough, and that's sufficient.


Agreed.


----------



## Ramako

I don't consider film music classical music. I am aware that one of the reasons I really love Howard Shore's LOTR soundtracks is because I love the films (though the music is good too). Structurally, however, the music on its own is pretty awful, however I know the films inside out so I unconsciously fill in the narrative detail.

On the other hand, one of the reasons that The Hobbit I felt was not so good was because Howard Shore was singularly uninspired in the score, just re-hashing his old LOTR tunes. I have seen people online glowing over some of the most basic methods of thematic transformation: he just seems to have had a problem with coming up with any decent new ideas. Even the main theme (which I thought was good) wasn't by him. I hope he picks up his game in the next films.

The point of the above is that really it cuts both ways: you can't separate the film from the music, unless you have never heard the one or seen the other.

John Williams I consider a better film composer than most others I am aware of (at least alive ones): Hans Zimmer often seems to sound the same (makes me think of Pirates of the Caribbean) and Howard Shore seems to just compose the same-sounding music all the time: it just works really well for LOTR. John Williams in Jaws sounds reasonably different to Star Wars, or Harry Potter, while at the same time having a distinctive style it is not quite so intrusive, although sometimes it is pretty similar (Indiana Jones).

I also thought that he did his own orchestrations, but unlike PetrB who seems to dislike all film music written after 1970, I think it is quite good. Film music has little intellectual value, but it is entertaining. Not all classical music is Bach fugues and Beethoven late quartets. But Film music is not classical, it is film. What is the problem?


----------



## millionrainbows

Kopachris said:


> That's true enough, but film music and classical incidental music are generally composed completely differently. While classical incidental music (including operatic incidental music) is composed as a single piece of music, no matter what the format of its program, film music is usually composed as a series of "cues," generally a few notes to a few phrases long. Many cues are largely unconnected to each other, though certain themes and motifs may be present throughout the film. Though they share similar origins, the two types of music are completely different.


All this argument does is describe the qualities necessary of cinema music; unlike opera, cinema requires the ability to cut to different scenes quickly. 
Opera is staged, so the action is necessarily more drawn out. Other than that, there are precious few crucial differences.

Sure, both film and opera have their differences due to the mediums, but I laugh when I see PetrB, Ramako, and Kopachris frantically scrambling to defend the fort of traditional classicism (as exemplified by opera) against being seen as almost identical to opera, i.e. dramatic action and story supported by music.

I think the argument would be much more convincing if it emphasized the similarities between cinema and opera. I'll prefer opera, as I like to munch popcorn as I am entertained.



Ramako said:


> I don't consider film music classical music. I am aware that one of the reasons I really love Howard Shore's LOTR soundtracks is because I love the films. Structurally, the music on its own is pretty awful, however I know the films inside out so I unconsciously fill in the narrative detail.


It would be easy to make the same kinds of criticism about opera music. What's the difference? I don't see much.


----------



## Kopachris

millionrainbows said:


> All this argument does is describe the qualities necessary of cinema music; unlike opera, cinema requires the ability to cut to different scenes quickly.
> Opera is staged, so the action is necessarily more drawn out. Other than that, there are precious few crucial differences.
> 
> Sure, both film and opera have their differences due to the mediums, but I laugh when I see PetrB, Ramako, and Kopachris frantically scrambling to defend the fort of traditional classicism (as exemplified by opera) against being seen as almost identical to opera, i.e. dramatic action and story supported by music.
> 
> I think the argument would be much more convincing if it emphasized the similarities between cinema and opera. I'll prefer opera, as I like to munch popcorn as I am entertained.


Oi. Does anyone else feel like arguing that modern popular film music isn't classical is like fighting a strawman?

And I do not scramble anything but eggs.

Similarities between opera and film music? I can't think of any.
Differences? Opera is music supported by drama. Film is drama supported by music. That's what makes opera classical and film music not.


----------



## Ramako

millionrainbows said:


> It would be easy to make the same kinds of criticism about opera music. What's the difference? I don't see much.


Heh, I'm not much of an opera listener, so you tell me. Never studied it. I do know that Mozart at least concerned himself about the whole structure of the opera. And in another thread I was comparing LOTR with Wagner's Ring, arguing for the former in artistic terms, although admittedly I was thinking more about general conception and the book rather than the films (many of the finer details are lost in the transition to the screen).


----------



## Arsakes

From what I've heard from him His style in movie-music is the mixture of Romantic, Neo-Classic and Jazz.


----------



## Mahlerian

Arsakes said:


> From what I've heard from him His style in movie-music is the mixture of Romantic, Neo-Classic and Jazz.


Primarily Neo-romantic, actually, not Neoclassical in any way.

As I recall, the Star Wars score has bits inspired by/borrowed from:
Holst
R. Strauss
Wagner
Webern (don't believe me? it's true)
Berg
Stravinsky

And Benny Goodman for that bar scene.


----------



## BurningDesire

arpeggio said:


> This is a very unfair observation. Because of time constraints most of the time film composers employ an orchestrator to orchestrate their film scores. Normally the film composer prepares a condensed C score and the orchestrator actually prepares the individual parts. I recall reading that, because there was so much music, Korngold employed several orchestrators for the soundtrack to _Robin Hood_.
> 
> I recall that Williams started out by preparing some orchestrations himself. I read that he was Tiomkin's orchestrator for the _Guns of Navarone_.


One of the reasons I don't respect most film composers, and one of the reasons I have very little interest writing for Hollywood's crappy films. A composer who doesn't orchestrate their own piece... its like a painter not choosing their own colors or brushstrokes.


----------



## KenOC

BurningDesire said:


> One of the reasons I don't respect most film composers, and one of the reasons I have very little interest writing for Hollywood's crappy films. A composer who doesn't orchestrate their own piece... its like a painter not choosing their own colors or brushstrokes.


Gershwin, Moussorgsy (retrospectively though)... Shostakovich accused Prokofiev of having his students orchestrate his music...

In fact I can see this easily. Composer writes out a simplified score, with instrumentation indicated. Assistant goes through the gruntwork of converting this to a "finished" instrumental scoring. Composer reviews, makes changes as required.


----------



## Art Rock

Raff was instrumental in the orchestration of many Liszt compositions.


----------



## arpeggio

BurningDesire said:


> One of the reasons I don't respect most film composers, and one of the reasons I have very little interest writing for Hollywood's crappy films. A composer who doesn't orchestrate their own piece... its like a painter not choosing their own colors or brushstrokes.


Really Burning. Are you telling me that if some corrupt, materialist, greedy movie producer offered you $100,000 to compose a "crappy" film score you would not do it, pocket the check and cry all of the way to the bank?

I agree most film music sucks. I can not remember who said it, it was either Copeland or Bernstein, "Composing film music is 10% inspiration and 90% algebra." I spite of the constraints, there are a few composers who do a real good job of it.

You are correct, in the original form, most film cues are episodic. But many composers have done a great job of converting their film music into concert works. Williams and Goldsmith have succeeded in doing this on some of their works. Two of the best examples is Vaughn Williams with his _Seventh Symphony_ (based on the soundtrack for _Scott of Anartica_) and Prokofief with the cantata that was based on _Alexander Nevsky_.


----------



## BurningDesire

KenOC said:


> Gershwin, Moussorgsy (retrospectively though)... Shostakovich accused Prokofiev of having his students orchestrate his music...
> 
> In fact I can see this easily. Composer writes out a simplified score, with instrumentation indicated. Assistant goes through the gruntwork of converting this to a "finished" instrumental scoring. Composer reviews, makes changes as required.


Not really Mussorgsky's fault that Rimsky-Korsakov was a presumptuous pretentious douche who felt compelled to alter his dead friend's work because he thought he knew better than the man who wrote the music, and Pictures was just meant to be piano music when he wrote it. The example you give there at the end I have no problem with, and in that case it really isn't orchestration that the assistant is doing, they're really just acting as a copyist.


----------



## BurningDesire

arpeggio said:


> Really Burning. Are you telling me that if some corrupt, materialist, greedy movie producer offered you $100,000 to compose a "crappy" film score you would not do it, pocket the check and cry all of the way to the bank?
> 
> I agree most film music sucks. I can not remember who said it, it was either Copeland or Bernstein, "Composing film music is 10% inspiration and 90% algebra." I spite of the constraints, there are a few composers who do a real good job of it.
> 
> You are correct, in the original form, most film cues are episodic. But many composers have done a great job of converting their film music into concert works. Williams and Goldsmith have succeeded in doing this on some of their works. Two of the best examples is Vaughn Williams with his _Seventh Symphony_ (based on the soundtrack for _Scott of Anartica_) and Prokofief with the cantata that was based on _Alexander Nevsky_.


I don't know, nobody has offered me 100,000$ to write anything. Maybe I would. We all need money to survive, and even if the movie is worthless, I can always do my best to write music that is good anyway. I have seen crappy movies and shows and games with really good music, better than the work deserved.


----------



## millionrainbows

The mention of operatic incidental music, I suppose, created the association, but there are numerous examples of "incidental" music by classical composers: Beethoven's Egmont music, Schubert's Rosamunde music, Mendelssohn's Midsummer Night's Dream music, Bizet's L'Arlésienne music, and Grieg's music for Henrik Ibsen's Peer Gynt.


----------



## kamalayka

Here is John Williams working on the music for Star Wars V:


----------



## Arsakes

OK pure romantic piece by J.Williams:
Theme from 'Schindler's List'






more complex to say:
Star Wars (Episode V) - Battle in the snow






My problem is Neo-Romantic has no clear meaning for me. It's simply Later-Romantic with some adaptation after the styles of the first half of 20th century.


----------



## millionrainbows

The Schindler's list music is just beautiful. Was that Itzhak Perlman?

The Stars Wars I can live without; I don't like the whole "glorification of war" that characterizes the whole enterprise. But war is more interesting than peace, isn't it?

I've heard connections to classical (The Planets in Star Wars, Scheherazade in Dune) which connect it to the great tradition; but to expect cinema music to be on equal par with classical music is unfair, because we are now funded and empowered by a consumer industry. The "mass audience" wants a good cinematic experience, not art.

Really, a lot of this "elitism" never takes into account that the game has changed; yet, when art or music steps outside the boundaries of mass audience, it is castigated as being "ivory tower." The game has changed forever; give the people what they want.


----------



## DeepR

My favorite John Williams piece is probably the theme from E.T.


----------



## pianozach

*John Williams*' first Academy Award nomination: 1967. *Valley of the Dolls*.


----------



## Ethereality

kamalayka said:


> Even if you take the music by itself, it is still listenable.


I have read this and thought deeply about this comment. Thank you. By the way, what is your favorite soundtrack by the classical composer John Williams?


----------

