Elmer Bernstein's The Magnificent Seven has exact borrowings from both The Rite and Symphony In C.

@Angelo Clematide said:

well you two, from your responds I must assume that you are both hollywood movie soundtrack tinker

Insist upon yourself. Be original. You've gotta be original, because if you're like someone else, what do they need you for

no, i am not. i compose contemporary music. the way you respond just shows that ignorance often goes along with arrogance. nobody is ever fully original. the great masters did copy from others like crazy. i already said: it is in the way you do it.

Originality is the one thing which unoriginal minds cannot feel the use of.

I know that when you work to the specification of a client,  like forumite William does, that he does whatever the expectations are of the movie director and obeying to the common cliché, and not breaking out into new music - but I do not understand that you as contemporary composer can not take the freedom to compose whatever you like, meaning inventing new music nobody ever heard before

So it must be concluded from Clematide that all film music is unoriginal and all concert music is original.  The only problem with this amusing concept is you don't hear all the copycats of Berg, Webern or Stravinsky in the concert halls because they instantly disappear after one performance, but anything unoriginal written for film continues to be heard as long as the film is playing.

To come onto a forum filled with film composers and say film music is basically bad is insulting and doubly so because people in the early days of cinema used to look down on film music as being second rate.  After Herrmann, Korngold, Steiner, Goldsmith, De la Rue, Preisner,  etc. etc. etc. that became not only more difficult to do but actually a sign of either ignorance, envy or simple stupidity. 

That is an excellent point by aural about Shakespeare and absolutely true.  In fact his greatest play, Hamlet, was actually based on a fully written play by someone else that is now lost.   In folklore such as the medieval marchen, the quallity of a story was never defined by how original it was, but by how well it was told.  it is only in the modern age that originality became the end-all and sole purpose of art.  Today, to be original means MORE than to be good.  So if someone like Angelo Clematide creates a work of art by excreting on a musical keyboard in front of an audience he will be acclaimed as a brilliantly original creator.  BTW Angelo - you can use that idea, no problem.

Hey Angelo, welcome back from your slumber and all that jazz but please... I prevail upon you.  Don't       Piss       William       Off. 

Do you how long it took us (forum members) to put him back in good spirits after his last, er... "episode."  He gets down right nasty when he's pissed!

I understand you're just as passionate as the rest of us but, Angelo, if you continue to poke William with a stick then I would like to ask, is there anybody out there who would like to make a wager as to how long the moderator will allow this thread continue?  You know anytime Angelo's name comes up the moderator is sweating bullets with his/her finger on the "Shut This Thread The Hell Down" button. 

My wager is 10.  10 responses starting now.

Hey VSL, if I'm correct can I get a free copy of the Vienna Choir? 

jasensmith sez: ----> Hey Angelo, welcome back from your slumber and all that jazz but please... I prevail upon you. Don't Piss William Off.

I have absolutely no intention to "piss off" William, and Robert told me that he is a superior talented film composer, and I enjoiyed his underscoring of Prisoner of Azkaban very much, after a long time I felt that my investment for a cinema ticket was a good spending,

of course I was a little surprised by his response above with the capital letter with the great typography which was directed at an another forumite ---> but he is completly on the right track about my persona, except for Stravinsky for which I have no special relation nor any kind of admiration. I only missed a little the dynamics, 3D effect, visual ambience and digital colorist effect in his otherwise great post, so I changed this factors a little to enhance a more to the audience appealing typography and add it to my official CV:

 © William, 2010 May 1st

I see the troglodytic lurker Clematide has re-surfaced from the Lovecraftian netherworld he sunk to after his ludicrous "How-to-do-all-dynamic-ranges-in twelve-steps" thread was mercifully dispatched into the cybernetic non-existence it richly deserved.

BTW oh Magnificent Clematide, the Knower Of All Things Eurropean who let me know how little he knew compared to his vast reserve of enless knowledge - DO YOU KNOW WHO LOVECRAFT IS? Quick! Look it up on the internet and give me many references. For your information, I already have TWO COMPLETE ARKHAM HOUSE EDITIONS of everything he wrote, so don't bother.

For your information you pathetic blowhard Clematide, Stravinsky was FULL OF *** concerning film music, which HE ORIGINALLY WANTED TO DO BUT WAS REJECTED FROM A HOLLYWOOD STUDIO GIG AND AFTERWORD SAID FILM MUSIC IS WALLPAPER. Gee, what a shock! Talk about sour grapes! And yet you beleive everything he said. How very predictable.

So don't tire me with your pathetic little references to what this pyschotic (albiet talented) composer said. He like many other great artists was a source of disinformation and absurdly opinionated CRAP concerning other artists - which he didn't happen to be - and other arts - that he did not do - like the GREAT ART OF FILM MUSIC - YOU PATHETIC FOOL! - WHICH YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF IN YOUR INCOMPETENCE AND THEREFORE INSULT - JUST LIKE YOUR GOD STRAVINSKY, you wretched syccophantic slavering troglodyte gibbering incoherently at the nethermost pits of Hell.

@Angelo Clematide said:

... but I do not understand that you as contemporary composer can not take the freedom to compose whatever you like, meaning inventing new music nobody ever heard before

the fact that i do not diss filmmusic does not imply that i don´t intend to write unheard material or that i don´t take the freedom to write what i like... i actually really do that... the difference is just that i am not as pretentious as you.

btw: you could also accuse stravinsky of not being original... just take the rite of spring... do you know how many folkmelodies there are in that piece? these melodies are not even altered... they are quoted literally... so... by your definition, stravinsky must be a lame composer, because he did not come up with one single original melody in the probably most groundbreaking piece of the early 20th century.

The new look of my post, with emphatic typography, is quite alluring so I must thank Angelo for clarifying the tender feelings expressed in it which were revealed to me under the illumination of a draft of fine vintage from the deep-delved earth.  Actually I have to revise something concerning the gelatinous and amorphous entity known as "Clematide"  - his dynamic range thread, which sank into the tarn outside the melancholy house of Usher at the same time Madeleine clawed her way out of the coffin and leaped fatally upon Roderick,  was potentially useful.  I didn't want to use it personally, but it could be of value since one has to evolve something of the kind eventually. 

however, these personal insults have got to stop - Prisoner of Azkaban?  I did NOT score that film!   I scored the Prisoner of Kazhakstan, a much more adult-themed film about the later adventures of Harry in a men's prison.

@aural said:

btw: you could also accuse stravinsky of not being original... just take the rite of spring... do you know how many folkmelodies there are in that piece? these melodies are not even altered... they are quoted literally... so... by your definition, stravinsky must be a lame composer, because he did not come up with one single original melody in the probably most groundbreaking piece of the early 20th century.

I believe that in one piece (Petroushka?) he even used a melody that was still under copyright and and ended up having to pay a royalty.

I always want to hear exactly what people who complain about originality do THEMSELVES.  Let's just hear YOUR originality.   They sit on the sidelines and ridicule film composers for having no originality.  So what do they do?  

I have heard this kind of stuff many times.  For example, people who were not composers started saying this about John Williams  as soon as he was successful.  They said he stole everything and would give examples, like a section from Stars Wars sounds like Rite of Spring, etc.  But if you write tonal music it is inevitable that you will sound like something else at some time. Also, inspiration will lead to similarities that are not necessarily plagiarism.   But in the end, despite all that, his own style is unmistakeable. One knows it is John Williams within about four or five bars.  People copy John Williams now.  So if he is so unoriginal, how could you copy him?  THERE WOULD BE NOTHING TO COPY.  

The reason is that "originality" is contained within the overall piece of music that is the composer's style, not in simply contradicting everything previously done which would be idiotic (and has been done many, many times).  J. S. Bach was considered old-fashioned - IN HIS OWN TIME.  He was not new and "ORIGINAL."  Of course the new and original people of that time are LONG GONE.  Whereas Bach is played all over the world, every day,  centuries after his death.

yes, indeed.

what people also forget ist the fact that filmcomposition involves a tremendous craft as a musician. since i know both sides, i can say that it is far easier to write something abstract (you can´t do that much wrong when you´re abstract... if people don´t like it or if it´s crap, you simply can say: "it is art!"... it´s actually pretty easy to behave as if you are contemporary... postmodernism allows for anything to happen...) than something "concrete".

you really have to know both sides... as a filmcomposer, you have to be accustomed to all sorts of styles and write in those styles within a splitsecond... the fact is, that the really great filmcomposers also do write contemporary music (actually incredibly well, but hardly anyone will ever have the chance to hear such pieces) and you can hear it in their filmscoring that they are experienced in post WW2-music (does mr.C actually really think that for filmcomposers the musical history ends with mahler and stravinsky???)... it is just a huge difference... (actually all filmcomposers i know personally do also write contemporary concert music at a very advanced level... yet all straight edge, arrogantly behaving contemporary music composers i know are not able to score for film... and if they try, they come up with something like a lachenmann-string-quartet (which by itself sounds very good, tbh) in a kissing-scene, because they could not ever forgive themselves if they wrote something tonal... so... there must be something wrong here, right???) but people like mr. C. just know the abstract world... believe me... being "original" in that realm is really simple... just do something that a composer would never do... and whoom... there you go... academics will love you for being unconventional when you write a concerto for a derailing train.... in contemporary music "arbitrariness" is often confused with "originality" (as in filmcomposition or any style for that matter)

again: i am neither dissing filmmusic, nor contemporary concert music... i am just saying that it is not a black or white issue... there is good and bad in both sides...

You are right about the craft, which is extremely difficult at times.  it even thwarts the finest composers.  An example is the great Max Steiner who is without question one of the best composers in the history of film, but who could overwrite a scene terribly.  Or another example of the craft but the reverse - being exceptionally well done - Lord of the Rings.  At first I was leery of Shore but now think he did an amazing job.   The range of music that must be done simply to get a score down for that project, let alone to do it well, is almost unimaginable.  In fact, it is on a Wagnerian scale.  I have often thought that Wagner was trying to create film scores before there was film.   Perhaps the greatest example of craft as well as pure composing for film is Herrmann.  I say that because never once, in all the films and tv shows that had his music (of which I have heard every one), never did I hear a scene that was overwritten, or weak, or not right for the film.  He had the most unerring sense of what was needed for a film score of any composer.  But also, his music was extremely good from a pure compositional standpoint.  Like the score to Vertigo - it is better than most concert music written at the time, and music that will last.  He developed a style that was Romantic, and yet minimalist, thereby isolating himself from the Post-romantic Rachmaninoff-Liszt-Tchaikovsky-amalgamation so common at the time (1940s - the time of the first score he did which was Citizen Kane).  He was both Modernist as well as Romantic.

I always want to hear exactly what people who complain about originality do THEMSELVES. Let's just hear YOUR originality (1). They sit on the sidelines and ridicule film composers for having no originality. So what do they do?

I have heard this kind of stuff many times. For example, people who were not composers started saying this about John Williams as soon as he was successful. (2) They said he stole everything and would give examples, like a section from Stars Wars sounds like Rite of Spring, etc. But if you write tonal music it is inevitable that you will sound like something else at some time. Also, inspiration will lead to similarities that are not necessarily plagiarism. But in the end, despite all that, his own style is unmistakeable. One knows it is John Williams within about four or five bars. People copy John Williams now. So if he is so unoriginal, how could you copy him? (3) THERE WOULD BE NOTHING TO COPY. (4)

The reason is that "originality" is contained within the overall piece of music that is the composer's style, not in simply contradicting everything previously done which would be idiotic (and has been done many, many times). J. S. Bach was considered old-fashioned - IN HIS OWN TIME. He was not new and "ORIGINAL." Of course the new and original people of that time are LONG GONE. Whereas Bach is played all over the world, every day, centuries after his death.

1. Definitely no! I don't wanna hear my music in a few week in a dumb Hollywood flick.

2. Nobody can say anything about anyboby before anybody is known. Simple logic.

3. I have no clue who is copying John Willaims. I thought you are John Williams until you told me you are not.

4. Exactly! That would be the solution. Karl Lagerfeld said that with next spring collection being yourself will be en vogue.

- You Williams and aural have the unique original talent to read things in my comments I never said (see under "assumtion is the mother of fuckuption" on the internet), and then bring examples of composer who are indeed not very original. Forget that Hollywood nonsense, most movies have music under each scene, and the movie can not be watched without this constant underscoring, the whole nonsense would be even obvious to the dumbest recipient, and the music itself without the picture is usually anyway unenjoyable.

Btw... just saw a cinema release without any music, that was highly enjoyable, but the picture was good.

"Originality is the one thing which unoriginal minds cannot feel the use of.”

- John Stuart Mill

@Angelo Clematide said:

I thought you are John Williams until you told me you are not.

You have just negated any further reason for me to discuss anything with you and shown that you are profoundly ignorant on a Forum filled with experts whom you just insulted deliberately with your arrogant dismissal of film music.  You have just demonstrated you know absolutely nothing about film music. Your post is worthless and a complete waste of the reader's time.

 .... however there is at least one music genre in film where soundtrack tinker are composers, that is the horror genre, this music is indeed not borrowed from any composer of the past

and a word about composer who compose in traditional harmony (diatonic and whatever chromatic extensions), there it is enough to invent a good melody and make the good harminization to it or vice versa, and they are originals.

You have just negated any further reason for me to discuss anything with you and shown that you are profoundly ignorant on a Forum filled with experts whom you just insulted deliberately with your arrogant dismissal of film music.  You have just demonstrated you know absolutely nothing about film music. Your post is worthless and a complete waste of the reader's time.

William, I know all excuses of people and music students since I worked at the conservatory until 1981. And of course discussing anything musical with a fan is pretty analogous to tell a Christian that his believe is superficial nonsense, respectively a waste of time.

If you can't hear in a movie soundtrack of what we are discussing here, then you better look for a job at wal-mart or someting in this direction

William, don't you know that Angelo is unquestionably the smartest person who ever lived? Anything you will say, Angelo knows better! You are wise to give up on this thread before making more a fool of yourself. I might add, I have made a fool of myself posting my Tchaikovsky piano concerto mockup here, I believe his words are: "Sorry Guy, but it sounds awful, had to turn it off after half a minute."

We should be thankful to have a person like Angelo among us to enlighten us. I believe, Angelo you took a break of a few years from the forum. Maybe another break is due? I cannot bare to make a fool of myself anymore when you are around. We should learn from this wise man, his talent for interacting with others, his incredible sense of tact, his great musical talent that he keeps hiding well by never posting any music of his. How humble can one get? But I would guess it is to avoid the rest of us amateurs getting too discouraged.

We are not worthy Angelo!

Guy

@Angelo Clematide said:

 .... however there is at least one music genre in film where soundtrack tinker are composers, that is the horror genre, this music is indeed not borrowed from any composer of the past

that shows that you have neither a clue about filmmusic, nor about contemporary composition. the horror genre actually does copy contemporary composers (also from dead composers, btw.) like crazy. without the likes of ligeti, lachenmann, zimmermann, boulez, xenakis, stockhausen (i don´t want to start with namedropping here, but i guess you get my point), the horror genre would sound completely different.

sorry, man, but you have not the slightest clue what you are talking about. no matter how strongly you insist on it: the color of snow is not green!!!

i strongly advise you to go to uni and take some courses in contemporary composition and analysis...

 aural, you are right to point out how horror cues are probably the least original. Not to mention this anti-film, anti-film-music bias in theses posts.  This person has the arrogance to insult everyone here with his anti-film music tirades. 

Film music can be a great art, which unifies image and sound into a single art form - as Herrmann expressed it so eloquently.  This Clematide puts down the entire medium and all the people here who are trying to practice it.

clematide,  - POST SOME MUSIC.  let's hear your originality, your genius, your mastery which enables you to insult every film composer here with your bullshit posts.  you think you are so superior?  Let's hear it with your refined concert masterpieces.  Put some of them on right here, so I for one can be illuminated.

the color of snow is not green!!!

The color of snow is as green as I like to be green.

you think you are so superior?

no ---> nor did I say that I am not doing often the same as any film underscorer, that is using clichés, here and there a well known fragmentary melody etc.