John Williams and why he isnt a great composer.

[Geekosaurus]

But... But... But Star Wars, dude. Star Wars.

That was pretty much my opinion.

 

[nspaas]

A film score should be able to stand on its own without a film behind it and to be able to enhance a film with it.

Sorry but I must disagree. The relationship between a film and it's score is such that one supports the emotion of the other. Either one on it's own should feel incomplete.

That is not to say that said score can't be enjoyed on its own; but using Star Wars as an example, ask yourself when was the last time you heard the opening title and didn't immediately conjur images of the film?

Greetings btw.

 

[Something Amyss]

However, the "You go write a song" argument is terrible.

I know, but I figured I'd say it before anyone else.

Haha. Touché, brotha.

 

[imagremlin]

You're missing the point big time. John Williams writes film music. He's the best in the business. His music performs a starring role on each movie, almost like a character.

 

[Oldmanwillow]

*snip*

As far as composers go, John Williams is one of the best that we have nowadays. He's classically trained, classically oriented, and his music sounds amazing even outside of the film it was in.

The problem is that you're comparing two very different composers from two very different time periods with two very different goals and two very different audiences. John Williams is writing for a film in which the director and producers have decided which scenes are to be scored and which characters are to be given themes. Williams' music is very commercial and has always been designed to complement a space opera. Brahms, on the other hand, is a post-classical composer writing concert music for (mostly) aristocratic (or at least fairly wealthy) audience.

If you compare John Williams to someone like Claude Debussy, your conclusion would likely be much different.

As a side-note, you've clearly not listened to John Williams' concert music. Compare that to Brahms and you will probably arrive at a different conclusion than "Williams isn't a great composer."

What concert piece are you talking about his best piece is "the cowboys" and i have listen/played a lot of it. (if you'll pay me i will play just about anything) It isnt that great while it works as a thematic material it does very little else. I dont get any variation and it's usually stagnatic (with in the theme sections anyway) I know there is a difference between the two composer but all of that was an illustrative guide on why John Williams isnt a brilliant composer hes just OK. Claude Debussy is a wonderful composer hes is one of the greatest composers for keyboard who ever lived.

For the millionth time i dont hate the mans music i just dont find it great. I have no problem with music simplicity it just needs to go somewhere and music doesnt have to be complex to do so.

I also know we has writing a score for a film but plenty of other composers have written stuff for film and have made much better music (LOTR music score for an example)

and Claude Debussy > John Williams

EDIT: sorry you are right he does has some concert works i didnt know about i will check them out.

Double edit: is tuba concerto is actually quite good. I am impressed.

 

[le picklez]

Here's a song that a large number of people know by heart:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91kdwxFsthI&feature=related

What's that, you may ask? It's the russian national anthem (or used to be, at least.)
Why would russia choose such an obviously inferior piece of music to be their anthem? Why not have a complicated piece of music with melodies, harmonies, and such?

Because it doesn't click with us much.

here's a couple iconic songs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JG5OsfOuEy0&feature=iv&annotation_id=annotation_758004

Here's the new world symphony by Dvorak:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OAXCy3YS54 | movement 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ENf4VEhI40&feature=related |2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cp0-FVuLtOk&feature=related |3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yctfXIqugXc&feature=related |4

Now, the relation between this fine piece of music, (and the most common part, part 4), and the rickroll and star wars is what?

A strong identifiable melody. Yep. That's why we like it so much.(Well, maybe not like it, but remember it at least.) We don't need augmentation or diminution. We don't need anything really complex for it to stick to our mind. And your point of how Williams didnt change the theme is somehow a weakness, thats actually a strength. Many of my music friends draw pleasure from the fact they know who is onscreen by the music. They love that. Just because its not hard to find doesn't make it inferior to Brahms.

 

[lacktheknack]

I'm not a music major, but I have more than a little music training, and I can say that John Williams is a good composer because his music is greater then the sum of its parts. It's boring if you drill to the nitty gritty bits, but taken as a whole, it's pleasing and memorable. Thus, it is good music.

Then again, Akira Yamaoka is my all time favorite composer, so maybe I'm not allowed to say anything.

 

[le picklez]

John Williams scared people out of the ocean with two simple notes.

This thread is wrong. There is no argument, it is just wrong.

You win.

 

[2fish]

I was going to argue that you were just seeing it from an angle that most people never look from since they don't know how. However it seems I don't have to Thanks to Baby Tea.

Spoiler

While we do have a pretty memorable melody what the harmony and rhythm behind it is very unimaginative and quite boring. let me ask you what does it do besides beat out a basic rhythm and the basic chord. This isnt so bad a lot of good composer suffer from this but what makes it worse is the fact he does very little to change up the theme besides put it in a different key. Wheres the variation? wheres the augmentation or diminution (to make the melody longer or shorter) why cant he find a good way to meld the fast and the slow section together?

Wait wait, are you saying that something has to be more complex for it to be really great?
John Williams is a great composer, and he is great because of his simplicity.

He certainly isn't he greatest composer, but he is very excellent.
Your 'education' has opened your eyes to things that 90% of everyone else wouldn't notice or even care about. That doesn't mean it's bad, it just means you can see area for improvement where other people just are quite happy with it.

I work as a radio producer, making commercials and promos for a radio station. I listen to other radio station imaging and commercials, and I'll complain about audio quality, poor scripts, bad reads, poor transitions, piss-poor promos and imaging, bad choice of imaging voice, etc. Do you know who else hears that? Other producers, and that's it. My wife has no idea what I'm complaining about, because she has no idea.

It doesn't make those other commercials terrible, just terrible to me because I know better. Everyone just shrugs. How can they complain about something they don't know much about?

Likewise, you might be paying attention to the bass-line or percussion of Indiana Jones, and everyone else is just humming the melody.

So what is your response? Make a pointless thread on the internet trying to get everyone to agree with your opinion of a well-received composer because you took some classes and think you know better then a guy who has been doing this for decades?

Or just let people enjoy what they enjoy! Heaven forbid we allow people to have differing opinions on something as subjective as music.

Geez.

I do the same thing with politics, That is my major and I will see a stupid move but no one around me will notice it, no one understands my furry when I complain about a stupid move or statment.

I think he is good because I like my music to be simple enough to go alon with but not so simple I get bored. Classical music tends to make me bored as it feels like a misuse of music to me. But then I have a have a bad history with classical music...

In a perfect world we might be able to find a happy middle ground. Enjoy your time in music school, when you compose the music that you are after please post a link here. I want to see what it is your mind is looking for.

 

[Oldmanwillow]

Here's a song that a large number of people know by heart:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91kdwxFsthI&feature=related

What's that, you may ask? It's the russian national anthem (or used to be, at least.)
Why would russia choose such an obviously inferior piece of music to be their anthem? Why not have a complicated piece of music with melodies, harmonies, and such?

Because it doesn't click with us much.

here's a couple iconic songs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JG5OsfOuEy0&feature=iv&annotation_id=annotation_758004

Here's the new world symphony by Dvorak:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OAXCy3YS54 | movement 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ENf4VEhI40&feature=related |2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cp0-FVuLtOk&feature=related |3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yctfXIqugXc&feature=related |4

Now, the relation between this fine piece of music, (and the most common part, part 4), and the rickroll and star wars is what?

A strong identifiable melody. Yep. That's why we like it so much.(Well, maybe not like it, but remember it at least.) We don't need augmentation or diminution. We don't need anything really complex for it to stick to our mind. And your point of how Williams didnt change the theme is somehow a weakness, thats actually a strength. Many of my music friends draw pleasure from the fact they know who is onscreen by the music. They love that. Just because its not hard to find doesn't make it inferior to Brahms.

I was trying to show that it is possible to take a great theme and turn it into something so much more with just a little variation. Great composition relies more than just a great melody. Would of the point gone along a lot better if i would of used a theme from a different composer? I am sorry that point went over your head.

 

[Cazza]

But... But... But Star Wars, dude. Star Wars.

heavily influenced from The Planets. If you listen to all them you can hear the influence they had on the music in Star wars. How can you take credit from taking something changing it a bit and calling it yours?

 

[teknoarcanist]

...you're asking why a composer for FILM would write a piece with a strong central melody, which can be repeatedly recalled, with minor variations in tone and pitch? And you're a music student? This is a trick question, right? You're asking why something that is meant to accompany a visual representation of a narrative doesn't stand as well on its own as a piece of music specifically made to stand on its own?? You're asking why 'Star Wars Intro Text Title Theme' doesn't have the nuance of a symphony?

Besides being incredibly stupid on the face of it, this ignores a whole host of . . . . . . you know what, actually, no. This is just pretty stupid on the face of it. A film score has to accomplish, in a relatively short amount of time, a distinct character and feel that complement the story and visuals.

For example:

You have thirteen seconds to communicate that the hero has arrived. GO!

You have fifteen seconds to communicate that the hero has triumphantly returned. GO!

You have thirty seconds to communicate that the hero has died. GO!

(You have TWO SECONDS to communicate "SHARK". GO.)

If those melodies aren't short, simple, and recognizably similar to one another, you have failed as a composer of film. You might have written a great piece of long-form music, but you didn't score that film as memorably and iconically as Mr. Williams might have, and you downplayed the strengths and necessities of a particular medium/genre because you were too obtuse to think critically about it.

Delving into a symphony is like dipping into the ocean. Composing a film score is like fine-tuning a high-pressure hose. Asking why the water pressure in the ocean is so low is just...not...a good thing...to be asking...

<__>

(Especially if you're an aspiring oceanographer.)

I guess what I'm really getting at here is that this screencap from Aladdin is nowhere NEAR as good a painting as Edward Munch's 'The Scream'.
http://tiny.cc/ipyoz

 

[The Root Beer Guy]

I agree to a certain extent. I was just thinking the other day about how all of his movie scores basically sound the same. On the other hand, his music is undeniably iconic and overall very good.

 

[Timmaaaah]

That is true with Indiana Jones, but Empire was a masterpiece. Also think about back then we he timed everything so perfectly to match the music to the film. This was before computer editing too... just a pen and a score, and a roll of film. He does write good melodies but he does change them. He composes melodies as themes for characters or situations and reprises them repeatedly, but they're never once the same (in the Star Wars movies anyway). He's still my favourite composer. Technically Brahms is better, but in the end it's just how much people like it that matters. If you're a music major and you can only write stuff that musicians will like then it doesn't really make you a great composer. Maybe he isn't the best composer of the generation, but he's still awesome. Back in the 70s and 80s he didn't get other people to write the rest. Compare recent films to the old ones... Jurassic Park has sooo much silence and you can only really notice a couple of melodies repeated, and the Harry Potter movies have a mediocre soundtrack at best, but none of that can be compared to early Star Wars.

 

[Timmaaaah]

Btw, whoever compared John Williams to Beiber and JT... I'm suprised you're even able to turn a computer on with that brain of yours.

 

[Timmaaaah]

But... But... But Star Wars, dude. Star Wars.

heavily influenced from The Planets. If you listen to all them you can hear the influence they had on the music in Star wars. How can you take credit from taking something changing it a bit and calling it yours?

The planets did influence his scores, but it's far from just taking something and changing it a little. That's like saying that The Dark Knight was taking the original Batman movies and changed them a little bit. Or that Under the Bridge was just pachelbel but changed a bit.

 

[LaBambaMan]

I guess as a musician I should chime in, and also because I fucking love John Williams.

First and foremost, as Baby Tea said, he's great because he can take some simplistic and make it sound awesome. The Keep It Simple Stupid method of music isn't a bad thing. I honestly believe it takes more talent to make something simple sound amazing than it does to write something pointlessly complex.

An example I always turn to is Marc Termonti of Creed/Alter Bridge fame, although I think I got his last name spelled wrong. Anyway; Marc is a talented guitar player, sure. He can rip it up and play some bitchin' solos, but as a song writer he's terrible. Every single song he's ever written sounds exactly the same. It doesn't matter how fast he can play or how great he is at soloing if all his songs sound the same. Now look at something like the Ramones. Blitzkrieg Bop is probably as simple a song as you can get, and even someone with no formal training in guitar can learn to play it in less than a hour, but it sticks with you. It's simple tune that damn near everyone's familiar with. Hell; my 54 year old mother who loves country music can even point out that tune, because it's memorable. It doesn't need to be complex with 30 different chords throughout, and that's the beauty of it. That song has less than 10 different chords in it, and yet it's still more memorable than anything Mr. Tremonti has ever written.

When music becomes pointlessly over complicated because people believe that complexity makes something good then you run into problems. Complex =/= well made. Jazz is a great thing that can take the most simple of beats and then run with it and create great music. Is complexity bad? No. There's a difference between complexity and over complexity. Does everything have to be as simple as Blitzkrieg Bop? No. What I'm simply saying is that you can't discredit someone's talent as a composer based on the complexity of their work, but rather on the memorability of their work. Mr. Williams' songs may not be the most complex or ground breaking works, but pretty much anywhere you go in the world people will be able to recognize the themes from Star Wars, Jaws and Indiana Jones.

 

[Spitfire]

He isn't skilled, and he doesn't have the skill enough to write something that isn't a part of a movie score.

How exactly does that make him less of a musician in any way?