Though cinema is certainly multi-faceted, rather than seeing it as a series of compartmentalized elements, I tend to regard English-language cinema, since the advent of talking pictures, as a single entity with various shadings. Though I might criticize much of Goldsmith’s 90s output, I regard the main body of his work as containing some of the best examples of film scoring, and though I admire Horner as one the best film composers in cinema history, I willingly accept that not all of his film-score work is of the highest quality. It’s the same with any other facet of cinema, from whichever period of cinema history, there are good moments and there are bad.

As far as important and influential film composers go, here’s my personal list in order of importance based on the whole history of English-language talking pictures. The criteria for inclusion is strictly based on my own limited knowledge of cinema, and is not intended to attempt to reflect either popular taste or general filmscore-enthusiast opinion.

The five star film composers…..

1) Max Steiner *****

Take a look at this man’s filmography and one could easily be forgiven for thinking it constituted the career output of ten individual movie composers, such is the incredible number of detailed and large-scale film scores. On top of that is the amazing consistency of Steiner’s success, both the scores he wrote and the high quality of many of the movies he worked on. Of course, of even more importance than any single Steiner score, is the impact this man’s career output had on the development and enhancement of the art of movie-scoring. Steiner was the most important pioneer of modern film scoring practice back in the 30s, and even in his 70s he composed one of the most popular pieces of music ever written, his magical theme to A SUMMER PLACE.

2) John Williams *****

One of the very few movie composers who have become household names, Williams has also demonstrated an amazing ability to musically interpret the movies on which he works. But it is the inspired brilliance of his themes employed in such movies as JAWS, STAR WARS, ET, RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK and so on, that have endeared him to the public at large. Williams is a true all-rounder; though he is famous for his mainly symphonic film scores, his life’s work covers all musical territory and his willingness to employ new musical ideas to his film scores shows no sign of waning. Nobody has done more to popularize film music and bring it to the attention of the general public.

3) Alfred Newman *****

The deserved nominee for more Academy Awards than any other contributor to cinema (he won nine times), Newman is quite simply an institution. Heading Fox’s music department for 30 years and the incredible number and diversity of movies on which he worked are indicative of Newman’s industry status. He wasn’t just a composer, he was a musical genius. He could turn his hand to any musical style, and created many of the most memorable film scores in cinema history, not least his mesmerizing SONG OF BERNADETTE.

4) Jerry Goldsmith *****

Goldsmith went where other film composers feared to tread. No other movie composer has influenced movie-scoring development over the past thirty years as profoundly as Goldsmith. To this day, virtually all of the modern and successful film composers, including Horner and Zimmer, refer to Goldsmith’s pioneering approach to filmscoring in many of their own scores. From the early 60s, Goldsmith displayed an extraordinary versatility and dynamism that literally shattered film-scoring convention - Goldsmith nailed an amazing array of genres with uncanny accuracy by approaching his movie assignments with an uncompromising and unflinching attitude. Considering all of Goldsmith’s achievements as a film composer, it seems a little unjust that he hasn’t garnered greater public recognition.

5) Hans Zimmer *****

Perhaps the greatest current pioneer of movie music progression, Zimmer, like Newman, has also become an institution. Media Ventures is an organization that has led film-score progression for the past ten years, its ethos being a devotion to fulfilling the musical needs of the movie, whilst appealing to the widest possible audience. Immensely talented composers such as Trevor Rabin, Mark Mancina, John Powell and many others, are, or have, been part of Clan Zimmer. Over the past decade Zimmer has successfully married the traditional approach of such composers as John Williams with the often purely ‘electronic’ cutting-edge composers such as Vangelis to create the perfect medium. Thus, Zimmer (and Media Ventures) output contains the best of both worlds. This has led to a steady stream of hugely successful scores that often combine both traditional and popular stylistics seamlessly. The Zimmer hallmark is diversity, appropriateness and an unflinching desire to serve the movie.

6) Bernard Herrmann *****

Despite being primarily known for his orchestral scores, Herrmann is very much the favourite composer of the fashionable – and rightly so. His larger-than-life scores to Hitchcock, most notably VERTIGO, brought the dramatic film score to prominence, and his work for Welles and his attachment to many classic movies of the 40s and 50s has ensured the immortality of Herrmann’s output. Herrmann is the one famous for saying that ‘although music is the cement that binds a film together, it should not be noticed, though neither should it merely duplicate the action.’

7) James Horner *****

James Horner has done little to break film-scoring convention, but no-one since Steiner has provided such a consistently high standard of film-scoring to such a diverse range of movies. Rather than a creator of music, Horner is a genius at manipulating musical forces, be they his own or another composer’s. Horner’s approach to scoring is so in tune with his movies, and his versatility so complete, that he easily adapts to changing musical trends whilst retaining the quintessence of the composer of dramatic film score.

8) Dimitri Tiomkin *****

One of the most celebrated Hollywood composers, Tiomkin forged a fine career in the 30s and 40s scoring innumerable classic movies. But it was in the 50s that Tiomkin rose to prominence, winning three Oscars in the process. His amazingly evocative musical narrative scores to such movies as HIGH NOON are quite unique in their ability to enhance mood. Outside of the movie-musical, no other scores come so close to being the perfect marriage of image and music as HIGH NOON and other Tiomkin scores of its ilk.

The four star film composers…..

9) Alex North ****

Innovative, perceptive and insightful are words that are often used to describe the composer of a successful film score, but rarely are these words more fitting than in the case of Alex North. His A STREETCAR NAMED DESIRE is recognized as the first genuine jazz score, and it still packs a punch today. Each North score is an intricately developed musical event, and this composer successfully transplanted his compositional abilities to the concert hall.

10) Danny Elfman ****

Elfman has been a mainstay of 90s cinema and is renowned for his work with Tim Burton. But there is infinitely more to this composer than fantasy music. Elfman has proven, when given the opportunity, to be a remarkably skilled composer of all musical forms. This is one composer with a very bright future.

11) Mikloz Rozsa ****

Rozsa is perhaps the film composer who has also found most success away from the film score in the concert hall, but his work in movies is also of the highest quality. Beginning in England, Rozsa followed Korda to Hollywood in 1940 and remained to create great film scores into the 80s. Rozsa was particularly adept at scoring film noir, and was always intent on scoring the movie’s psychological undercurrent rather than merely reinforcing the obvious. Though he later concentrated on scoring full-blooded epics, with unparalleled success, in later years he returned to his more intimate style that so perfectly captured the mood of those 40s classics.

12) Ennio Morricone ****

Morricone’s film scoring has elevated some otherwise mundane ‘spaghetti’ westerns to unforgettable movie experiences. Though his music often verges on the pretentious, Morricone’s involvement with a movie is always welcome. Sometimes Morricone strains to be different, and often succeeds in bringing his movies to life like no other composer. Thus, Morricone has gained respect from within the music world as well as the world of film, and his prolific output and willingness to work in Europe and Hollywood continues to keep this composer very much in vogue.

13) Elmer Bernstein ****

Bernstein’s musical output is renowned for its boldness, but there is plenty of tenderness there too, as demonstrated by his intimate and moving work on TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD. But it is as the composer of such famous themes as THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN and THE GREAT ESCAPE that Bernstein is best remembered. A versatile composer equally at home with jazz and symphonic stylings, Bernstein’s presence in cinema since the early 70s has been surprisingly low-key.

14) John Barry ****

Barry began as a composer and arranger of jazz and popular music, and this grounding in popular stylistics put him in good stead for the series of Bond movies that were to make his name. Since scoring FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, Barry has proved himself a fine composer of all styles of music, and has provided many notable film scores in a diverse range of genres. Since his brilliant DANCES WITH WOLVES however, one has not seen enough of this inspirational composer.

15) Maurice Jarre ****

Jarre’s work includes some of the best loved film scores – DR ZHIVAGO and LAWRENCE OF ARABIA will live forever in popular culture. Jarre’s is a particularly distinctive style, and usually one can quickly recognize a score as being Jarre, and this may have worked against the composer on occasion, but such is the inspirational brilliance of some of his work, any stylistic limitations can be forgiven. Apart from his famous scores, he has done much great work – his theme to IS PARIS BURNING? is simply magical, and his work on RYAN’S DAUGHTER is incredibly romantic, and the incorporation of Beethoven is joy to behold.

16) Erich Wolfgang Korngold ****

A relatively small body of work, but such quality. Who can forget his stirring theme to THE SEA HAWK, or his magnificent work on any other Errol Flynn swashbuckler? But it was his poignant work on THE PRIVATE LIVES OF ELIZABETH AND ESSEX (again with Flynn) that the true depth of Korngold’s talent becomes obvious.

17) Franz Waxman ****

A catalogue of classic scores, including BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN, SUNSET BOULEVARD and A PLACE IN THE SUN, distinguish the career of yet another composer who fled Nazi Germany.

The three star film composers…..

18) Roy Webb ***

19) Henry Mancini ***

DAYS OF WINE AND ROSES, BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY’S, THE PINK PANTHER – need I go on? But it wasn’t all jazz – check out LIFEFORCE.

20) Lalo Schifrin ***

BULLITT, DIRTY HARRY and now MISSION IMPOSSIBLE, Schifrin has done some classic stuff. Great to hear him reprise his early 70s funky sound in 1997’s RUSH HOUR.

21) Benjamin Frankel ***

22) James Newton Howard ***

23) William Alwyn ***

24) Elliot Goldenthal ***

25) Leonard Rosenman ***

26) Basil Poledouris ***

27) Carter Burwell ***

28) Marc Shaiman ***

29) Howard Shore ***

30) Alan Silvestri ***

31) Vangelis ***

32) Victor Young ***

33) Mark Isham ***

34) David Raksin ***

35) Malcolm Arnold ***

36) Herbert Stothart ***

37) Frank Skinner ***

38) Bronislau Kaper ***

39) Patrick Doyle ***

40) Leigh Harline ***

41) Clifton Parker ***

42) Adolph Deutsch ***

43) Mischa Spoliansky ***

There are many, many other film composers who have contributed high quality work to cinema, but the above represents the cream of the film scoring fraternity, in my opinion.

At least someone clearly states that he's posting his own opinions which are far from canon.

Even though I obviously differ on various points, your opinion is well explained and clear.

I'll now leave room for the furore over Horner and Zimmer clocking in ahead of Morricone, North and Bernstein (and in my humble opinion Silvestri, too)

Big post. I look forward to a lot of this broken down into different posts so we can talk about things without having to write doctoral theses.

I will admit right away I didn't read your entire post, however, after reading the little plug on EW Korngold, I cannot help but see some inconsistency in his ranking, as it relates to Hans Zimmer.

Deduced from your description of Korngold, Zimmer needs to AT MOST be on par with Korngold, not above him. You claim Korngold's small body of work. This is true, he only actively scored films for 15 years. However, if we look at Hans Zimmer, he's only been scoring films for 12 years, and his output is only slightly ahead of Korngold's (this is arguable, but separate out all of the films that Zimmer scored alone, and we see my perspective).

Now, what have these two composers done in their comparative 15 year careers? You praise Zimmer for being a pioneer. If Zimmer is a pioneer, which I strongly agree he is, Korngold was even more of a pioneer. A Hollywood without Korngold would have meant a 1977 without Star Wars. One can write books and books on this subject alone, but this one fact should be enough to make my point.

So, please, think about where your Korngold fits into your star system regarding the importance of pioneering, and get back to me. I hope, after reading your enthusiasm for the history of the British Empire over the centuries, that only 70 years hasn't faded the importance of an Austrian émigré's pioneering efforts in the world of motion picture music composition.

Still, you're right to say that Steiner is a pioneer and that Williams has popularized film music beyond those themes that became popular songs. I love Williams but have never put him in my top rank because his music holds up less for me than that of others. Though, I would never attack Williams the way I do some other composers.

I like Newman, perhaps a tad less than you and John C Winfrey, but in general you can't ignore either his output or what he did as the head of 20th's music department.

I do not see what you and others see in Horner and 'Clan Zimmer' but that could simply be my own blindness. Still, both are responsible for combining electronics and symphony orchestra in film scoring and if you think this is an advancement, then maybe it is.

Herrmann uncovers a certain emotional subtext to images in addition to creating his particular sound. You're right to mention Goldsmith but note his best work is behind him (as much as people may disagree). You praise Rozsa, Tiomkin, and Morricone as I do. Bernstein IS both boldness and tenderness. And I love Jarre much more than a lot of people do despite his "limitations" (it's also nice to see someone who thinks Ryan's Daughter is a good score).

I have to agree with most of the guys on your list after the majors and with the idea of spliting film between English-language and other language films. There are great things in foreign film, but a lot of foreign film conventions (except for those, like Neo-Realism, which were imposed by the lack of money for film production) are borrowed from and were innovated first in Hollywood.

NP: Tom and Viv (Debbie Wiseman)

I respect what you say in relation to Korngold and Zimmer, and firstly reiterate that my initial posting at this thread is made based only on my own limited knowledge of cinema. I guess one of the reasons why I started this thread was in the hope that people with greater knowledge of certain composers, such as yourself, might throw more light on the subject.

However, Korngold is one composer that I am very familiar with. I have seen most of the movies he has scored, and as I have stated above, rate him very highly, and I do recognize his influence on John Williams’ scoring of STAR WARS. That said, I now regard Zimmer’s output as being of even greater importance than Korngold’s in the context of cinema history…..however, this is not because Zimmer is current and Korngold is no longer working. Yes, Korngold has been, and continues to be, influential in the world of film-scoring, but Zimmer has also changed the face of film-scoring forever, and this is where it all becomes subjective, especially when one considers that Zimmer’s pioneering efforts do not meet with universal approval; you know, change is change for the worse, and all that.

Though Korngold helped to define the modern film-score, Zimmer has been even more important in further evolving the art of film-scoring, in my opinion.

I mentioned Korngold’s relatively small catalogue of film scores, not because the criteria for a composer’s importance is based on the quantity of film scores written, but because it is simply an important point of interest when it comes to this individual composer’s history. As it happens, Korngold composed scores for only a little over a dozen movies, and not all of them were very good (the movies, not the scores), and these were spread over only a 12 year period, 1935-1947, excepting 1956’s MAGIC FIRE in which he took on musical direction chores.

With Zimmer, it is quite a different story, for he has been composing for film on a regular basis for 15 years so far, and in that time has been the sole composer (or the majority composer) composer on at least three times the projects that Korngold worked on in his entire career. Add to this Zimmer’s enormous creative input on various other movies in which he was not the ‘majority’ composer, and you already have a body of work comprising some of the best examples of modern scoring. This is to say nothing of his creative input at Media Ventures – it’s his brainchild (along with Jay Rifkin, the idea of Media Ventures was conceived in England during the early 70s). Media Ventures, as a whole, is the most powerful musical voice working in cinema today, and the quality and diversity of the film scores emanating from this pool of gifted creative talent is the most exciting film scoring phenomenon since Max Steiner, in my opinion.

Like so many other Hollywood composers and other cinema talents of the early days of sound, Korngold fled persecution in his native Europe. Thanks to his reputation preceding him, when in Hollywood, Korngold was in the enviable position of being able to choose his projects carefully, hence the rather thinly scattered nature of his film work. And this is another area in which Korngold doesn’t quite make it to my five star composer list. Because he was able to choose his projects, Korngold opted for a relatively narrow range of genres. His bent was toward historical romances and swashbucklers, as well as movies with a more tender nature, such as KINGS ROW and THE PRIVATE LIVES OF ELIZABETH AND ESSEX. Therefore, though the quality of Korngold’s film scores was almost always superb, the nature of the movies he scored meant that his stylistic range was rather narrow.

Most, if not all of Korngold’s contemporaries scored the full range of genres, either by choice or because that’s what they were contracted to do. In my Alex North capsule above, I state that North is recognized as the composer of the first genuine jazz dramatic score. Personally, I don’t see it quite like that. Apart from North’s score being largely traditional in nature anyway, there were many, many dramatic scores preceding A STREETCAR NAMED DESIRE that incorporated jazz and popular elements.

The point I am trying to make is, that whilst Korngold produced magnificent symphonic scores almost solely within the historical romance/swashbuckler genres, many other movie composers were also scoring film noir, contemporary drama, urban thriller, gangster movies and so on. Yet again, Steiner comes to mind (it seems that Steiner either provides the benchmark for, or at least an accomplished example of any historical element of film-scoring). Steiner is justly renowned (and sometimes derided) for his string heavy, sweet and lush scoring of melodramas and womens’ pictures. But, as we all know, such melodramatic film scores as these comprised just one important element of Steiner’s all-encompassing life’s-work.

Not only did Steiner excel in scoring the wildly romantic classics of the late 30s and early 40s (such as THE LETTER), he also scored a number of swashbucklers with comparable skill and vigour to Korngold (such as THE ADVENTURES OF DON JUAN and THE FLAME AND THE ARROW). However, one then has to consider Steiner’s exceptional work in any number of other genres. His brooding and moody scoring of both KEY LARGO and especially THE BIG SLEEP are exceptional examples of noirish scoring. His work on WHITE HEAT is another example of Steiner’s colossal range, his score to WHITE HEAT being characterized by some amazingly taut and spare writing that perfectly reflected the cynical nature of the movie. Steiner also incorporated jazz and popular stylistics to many of his scores (such as 1941’s THE BRIDE CAME C.O.D.), especially in later years, and also was musical director on innumerable musicals and two of the most fondly remembered composer biopics, NIGHT AND DAY and RHAPSODY IN BLUE. Steiner also excelled scoring westerns, especially in the 50s, indeed, some consider THE SEARCHERS to be the finest western ever made. And then came Steiner’s crowning glory, A SUMMER PLACE – a theme that is so of its time – one hears this piece of music and one is nostalgically transported back to the early 60s.

Korngold is not forgotten, and neither is the British Empire. Evidence of the important and constructive global influence of the British Empire is all around us, and evidence of Korngold’s pioneering impact on the world of film-scoring is also plain to see….it’s just that when it comes to Korngold or the British Empire, some people may choose not to recognize their historical importance.

Considering that you appear to gain more satisfaction from listening to film music rather than music intended for stand-alone consumption (correct me if I am wrong), it is interesting, and quite reassuring to hear you agreeing with much of what I have said at my initial posting at this thread, what with me being mainly interested in the effectiveness of film music within the movie itself rather than on the album.

I suppose it goes to show that we are looking for many of the same qualities in a film composer, though an ability to compose thematically cohesive and orchestrationally complex music is perhaps more important to many genuine film-score enthusiasts than a film composer’s abilities as an interpreter of a movie’s musical requirements, which is probably why I’m in a small minority here at the message board.

I’ve really warmed to Alfred Newman during the past ten years or so. Apart from his beautifully Mahlerian score to SONG OF BERNADETTE, his moving scoring of THE PRESIDENT’S LADY, and the frequent use of his Street Scene theme (heard at its best in WHERE THE SIDEWALK ENDS, but also given a complete airing at the start of HOW TO MARRY A MILLIONAIRE), I have been particularly impressed by the number and diversity of superb Newman scores throughout the first forty years of talking pictures, an amazing body of work, and I’m yet to hear all of it.

Knowing your interest in film-score albums, I can understand you having little regard for Horner and Zimmer. Horner especially, often sacrifices his artistic integrity by recycling other composers’ music – he sells his musical soul to the devil, but to me, his ability to musically enhance a movie is second to none these days. But away from the movie, for all of the reasons discussed, Horner’s music is of far less interest, particularly because he recycles his own material (as well as other composers’) from one score to the next. But, a movie is a single entity, and if I hear the same bit of Khachaturian’s Invention in PATRIOT GAMES as I heard in ALIENS it matters little to me, just so long as the use of the music is appropriate in the context of the movie at hand, and with Horner, it usually is, in my opinion.

I see your point. Perhaps I should not attempt to rate a specific composer on both his influence on the evolution of the film score and on his importance within and without the film industry – perhaps the two, influence and importance, are immiscible.

However, the intention of the ranking of these composers is based on the fact that every film composer, no matter what his background, is to all intents and purposes striving towards the same goal….to provide the movie with the most appropriate musical accompaniment. Whether we are talking about Zimmer or Korngold, this is what film composing is primarily about. The success of the music as a purely listening experience (and any other objectives) is very much secondary to this overriding aim.

Therefore, it is my belief that all film composers can be discussed and judged referring to the same benchmarks. The influence of an individual film composer on his peers, or the importance of his film scores in their relevance to popular culture, are merely two interrelated aspects of the overall value of an individual film composer.

Let me put it this way. Although James Horner is an extraordinarily successful film composer, few could argue that he has influenced the progression of film scoring to any great degree. Instead he has refined the art of film scoring based on existing convention and fashionable practice – he has successfully applied CMS to his scores without actually being the originator of current trends. Whilst, on the other hand, although Korngold produced only a dozen or so scores (albeit of the highest quality), his influence on many other film composers, and on the development of the film score as a whole, has been profound – many would argue, even more so than Steiner himself.

So, yes, if I have understood what you have said Peter, my ‘ranking’ of composers at the initial posting at this thread can be invalidated for many sound personal reasons.

However, I don’t quite understand what you mean when you describe my list as ‘grouped by’. Each composer is listed in order of merit based on my own personal perspective of their achievements – ie this uneasy mixture of their influence on the evolution of the film score and the importance of their work, etc – I tend to feel there is enough of a correlation between these two facets to attempt to rationalize an overall ranking. By five star, four star, and three star composers, I have merely emphasized where one group ends and the next begins; for instance, although Hans Zimmer and Bernard Herrmann are both five star composers, because I rank Zimmer as number 5 on the list and Herrmann as number 6 on the list, I believe that Zimmer has the edge over Herrmann, when all things are considered.

Now, to take up your specific examples. It is actually my belief that Williams did change the face of film music back in the mid to late 70s, most notably with his scores to JAWS and especially to STAR WARS. Although the orchestral score had never gone completely out of fashion, Williams breathed new life into the symphonic movie score, and triggered a surge of interest in film music from the general public and also inspired filmmakers to seek out more symphonic scores and for other film composers to increase their use of the orchestra. Jerry Goldsmith, for one, is a prime example of a fellow film composer who relished the opportunity to compose more scores that were symphonic in essence.

I accept that Korngold’s style had a profound influence on Williams’ composing of STAR WARS….but Williams still had to do it. Korngold may have supplied some of the inspiration, but it took an equally gifted film composer to make the score to STAR WARS a reality. Equally, would there have been the famous ‘Cloud’ music during STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE without Herrmann’s VERTIGO? Indeed, Korngold himself was influenced by those who came before him, particularly Mahler and the other late-Romantic concert hall composers.

The list is also not intended to be a ‘Korngold v Zimmer’ or ‘Goldsmith v Horner’…..the intention of the list is to promote those positive aspects and ideals that characterize the work of each of these great film composers. It just so happens that when one takes the entire history of talking pictures into account, in my opinion, Zimmer is more important than Korngold (though Korngold is still very important), hence Zimmer’s five star status and Korngold’s four star status.

Let me put it another way. The fact that Korngold came before Zimmer has very little bearing on the above rankings – the rankings are based on the whole history of film scoring – though Korngold’s pioneering of the art of film scoring, in itself has a bearing. But when all things are considered, in my opinion, Zimmer is that bit more important than Korngold. After all, do we rate Haydn as more important than Beethoven just because Haydn precedes Beethoven?

As far as Zimmer is concerned, I actually do believe he has ‘raised the bar of film composition’. The very fact that he has championed the seamless and appropriate incorporation of electronics into the film score whilst also maintaining and further enhancing the traditional orchestral elements of the film score is of the greatest significance in the context of the evolution of film scoring. However, if we are talking about film music as a purely listening experience, then I would have to agree that Zimmer’s output has been rather less than extraordinary…..but I am not talking about how the music works on the album or in the concert hall, I am talking about the music’s value within the movie, and as such, I believe Zimmer’s work over the past decade to include some of the finest examples of film scoring from the entire 70 year history of the modern film score.

In summary Peter, I hope now that you can see my perspective that there is one consistently overriding rule when it comes to the order of merit illustrated at my initial posting at this thread….every film composer, no matter what his background, seeks a common goal; namely, to provide the movie with the most appropriate musical accompaniment. That is the primary basis for my ranking of the great film composers, though there are many other facets of composing for film that also have a bearing on the order of merit.

And I hope also that I have explained that the listing is in order of merit, 1 (Steiner) through to 38 (Kaper), and that the star system is merely a further illustration of a composer’s importance.

And finally, please allow me to reiterate – There are many, many other film composers who have contributed high quality work to cinema, but the above represents the cream of the film scoring fraternity, in my opinion.

I appreciate all of your words, and want to ask you something of your reiterations, specifically that "every film composer, no matter what his background, seeks a common goal; namely, to provide the movie with the most appropriate musical accompaniment."

I agree with the innocent sentiment this statement supposes, however, this is a sheltered view of today's post- and even pre-production practices.

It is not uncommon for a temp-track to come into existence even before a composer is hired. Considering this, the composer is no longer a provider of what s/he thinks is appropriate. What is "appropriate" for the film has been chosen by the directors and editors of the world long before composer is given pencil and paper (or keyboard and samples, in Zimmer et al's case). It's unfortunate, but it's reality.

For some of the big names working today, they are working because they were genius enough to introduce, or re-introduce, a kind of music for film (before the temp-track obliterated everyone's opportunity to "introduce"). Wallowing in the successes of the films these composers have collaborated in, a momentum builds, and directors and editors begin supplying temps of these composers' scores into new pictures.

I am sure you are well aware of the effect the temp-track has had on the 90s, thus I will not continue. My point with this post is to continue to usher in various elements, God knows there are many more, that affect a list of the best Hollywood composers.

I agree with you when you say that film-score practice has changed over the course of the past seventy years, but, rather than seeing today’s pre and post production practices as undermining the success of the film score, I see it (usually) as a further (and necessary) sophistication of the art of applying music to film. You see, the application of music to film is as much a collaborative process as any other element of the movie, and if the film score is to conform to the filmmakers’ wishes, as it should, then the film composer must be amenable to the filmmakers’ conception of the movie. I believe it to often be the case that the best film composers require the minimum creative input and guidance from the filmmakers, for professional film composers such as these are already often instinctively in tune with the agenda of the movie and the purpose of the filmmakers’ motivations.

Perhaps inadvertently, Peter, you have articulated a point that I have been attempting to illustrate effectively for some time – that being, the film score isn’t just about the film composer’s inspiration, but it is also (often more importantly) about what the filmmakers desire. For this reason, I do not share your loathing of the temp track – I just see it as a further sophisticated tool in the filmmakers’ armoury.

You said, “What is "appropriate" for the film has been chosen by the directors and editors of the world long before composer is given pencil and paper (or keyboard and samples, in Zimmer et al's case). It's unfortunate, but it's reality.” – well, I don’t see anything wrong with the filmmakers predetermining the nature of the score to their movie; and that is the point, it is their movie, and the input of the composer is just one of many elements that constitute the finished product. I don’t see this practice of filmmaker predetermination as unfortunate, not in the least.

The filmmakers have every right to indicate or, if necessary, demand from their hired film composer the type of score that they see as being most appropriate to their movie. After all, if the composer decides to create a film score based on his own personal sensibilities, and such as score goes against the overall agenda of the movie (which it often will), then the effectiveness of the entire movie may be sabotaged by the score, as it would if the script wasn’t up to standard or the lead role was badly miscast. It only takes one element of the movie to be incongruous with the whole, and the entire production can be undermined – an inappropriate film score is quite capable of destroying the effectiveness of any given movie.

I can understand your apparent dissatisfaction with the state of film-scoring practice today, Peter. But, my perspective is different from yours, and as much as you are disenchanted, I am heartened with what I perceive to be the burgeoning sophistication and intelligence of today’s moviemaking and film scores.

Al has found the common goal among today's working film composers without so many words: The paycheck matters most, and then, and only then, if there is a chance to work some genius into a score, a composer will go for it.

Daniel, I look at your extended list and can only notice there are no composers who started writing after 1990. And you say the nineties was one of the best in film scoring? Perhaps the 90s was the best because of what happened in the 70s and 80s, but you will never admit to this.

I for one am not blaming today’s film composers for producing inappropriate scores because of the temp track….indeed, I believe today’s film scores are consistently more appropriate than at any time since the late 40s, partly because of the increased practice of temp tracking.

You seem to characterize the film composer as some sort of paragon of creativity who knows better than the ‘philistine’ filmmakers what any given movie needs musically, and that the film composer is courageously fighting to preserve the artistic integrity of the film score. I believe this to be utter nonsense, Al.

As you rightly point out, at the end of the day it is the pay-cheque that has the most influence on what the film composer produces for his movie, and it is the guys who are waving the pay-cheque that have the right to extract from the film composer movie music that is appropriate to the agenda of their movie.

Film composers are extremely well-paid professionals who are hired to apply music to a filmmaker’s movie. If film composers want to feel free to create original music that reflects their own sensibilities then they should compose their own personal works for concert-hall consumption. At the cinema, they are the slaves of the movies…..and of the whim of the filmmakers. I believe the filmmakers are in the best position to judge what music their movies require. And considering the enormous sums of money that the sought-after film composer garners, I believe this is only fair.

Having said that, I believe there are plenty of opportunities for the film composer to impart his musical genius to his film scores – the outstanding quality of Hans Zimmer’s 90s scores is testament to that.

Tactics…..what tactics?

You then say, I quote, “Now I am the disenchanted one….”, as if up to now I have been expressing disenchantment with modern cinema. The exact opposite is true, I adore current cinema and film composers for their championing of those values that made 30s and 40s cinema so entertaining, rewarding, sophisticated and intelligent. And, Peter, are you trying to say you are not disenchanted with today’s cinema and film scoring practice? Allow me to analyse your comments.

You said –

I never said I loathed it (temp-tracking), I simply said it has FACTUALLY obliterated opportunities for new composers to put their unique mark on a film score. – and you are trying to tell me that this comment is not dripping with disenchantment?

You then said –

Al has found the common goal among today's working film composers without so many words: The paycheck matters most, and then, and only then, if there is a chance to work some genius into a score, a composer will go for it. – and you are trying to tell me that this comment is not oozing with disenchantment?

You note that few, if not all of the important composers I include in my list of important and influential film composers began composing prior to 1990s, thus registering your surprise that I should regard the 90s as producing the best film music since the early 50s. Well, there is nothing surprising about that. It would be amazing for a film composer to have started working in the industry in say 1994, and within six years be regarded as one of the most influential and important film composers in the history of cinema.

And anyway, when have I said that 70s and 80s scores and cinema were uniformly poor? – I never have – I just believe that the 90s has seen a return to those values that made cinema so intelligent, sophisticated and entertaining back in the 30s and 40s – hence, the 90s have seen a far greater consistency of fine movies and film scores than during the 70s and 80s. But this is only my opinion. I openly accept that not everyone shares that opinion. And I would be quite willing to change my opinion of Zimmer and Korngold’s place in cinema history if somebody else gave me good reason – but nothing you have said at this thread, Peter, has given me good reason – if it had, I would have said so.

And to reiterate, though I regard cinema of the 90s and of the present as similarly successful, enlightened, intelligent and sophisticated to cinema of the 30s and 40s, I am the first to admit that not every movie and score is successful. However, whereas you, Peter, seem to think there has been a general deterioration in creativity in movies and film scores, I only see a few individual elements of today’s cinema that are not in keeping with the extraordinarily high standard of movie-making that we enjoy today.

Rather than seeing general areas of cinema under-achieving (as you seem to Peter), I tend to only see failure in the occasional individual movie rather than with any of cinema’s individual creative talents, that is with one notable exception – Jerry Goldsmith. Of all of the dozens of successful film composers and filmmakers operating today, only Jerry Goldsmith consistently fails to provide a standard of film-scoring that is in keeping with the extraordinarily high standard of film scoring that we enjoy today.

But, Peter, as I have said on many occasions at this thread, these are only my personal opinions.

I have a friend who loves movies more than I do. He thinks music IN movies is great, he likes that it's there and it really enhances his experience of moviegoing. BUT, he loves Rock and Jazz and some classical but would never listen to film music on its own and doesn't understand why I do or can.

Really, listening to film music is a kind of abberation. It's meant for the film not for the concert hall or the Cd player. It's only on this board that we have people who talk about the quality of film music as something to listen to. Here, a score was good or bad usually refers to what it was like to listen to it apart from the film and not how well it worked within the film.

So you could say, well, Horner might not be so great to listen to on his own, or that he cribs, but his stuff works really well in the movies he scores and that's what's important and that's where his genius shines.

But the truth for me is, not only does Horner bore me when I hear his scores on CD, but I rarely think his music he works well in the movies I watch either. It's either too maudlin, too inert, or too overblown. Lou Diamond Phillips holds a gun to his head in Courage Under Fire and the score just pounds on the soundtrack, calling attention to itself, injecting tension instead of supporting it, and thus destroying the whole moment when it's supposed to help create it.
His music in Deep Impact was so plain that it might as well not have been there.

And, listening to Zimmer throw every style in the book up against the wall to see what would stick in MI:2 didn't impress me with his abilities either.

One could not ask for a more objective, succinct and reasonable explanation of one’s scepticism of Horner and Zimmer’s approach to movie-scoring – the same goes for your comments at the “hi I’m new too. read this, please?” thread.

Though my perspective of cinema and the role of film music is different to yours, I fully respect your opinions.

You say that Williams, Horner, and Zimmer have done a lot to popularize film music, make it better known to people. But I don't necessarily want film music to be widely appreciated. Like you, I want it to work in the films I see. Then beyond that just for myself, I want it to work on my turntable. Making it popular might just ruin what I already like about it.

In a recent post (Films in November I believe) you say you are still puzzled that people would listen to film music apart from the films they were intented for.

I really do prefer film music to other classical music, Rock & Jazz. I would play Vertigo for plesure before Beethoven's 5th or 9th in a heartbeat. Is the quirk mine or is it possible that music written for a film is still music that can work as music, do the same things that stand alone music can do, especially once you've acquired the taste, gotten used to and to like all the things about film music that make it different from stand alone music?

To be fair to both James and Hans, there are moments where their music does work in movies and over my headset as well. But there are just as many instances with them where they get a ? out of me.

MI:2 was a prime example--chorus during a motorcycle chase, the girl's theme during a fight scene, all the reverb flutes and harmonica, that might have been new at one time but just seems to be cliche now. If he was trying something new, it came off confused. And, by your criteria, it failed because it didn't really help the film any. Odd because a similar approach did help Black Rain and Broken Arrow.

Of course, you could say that Herrmann and Rozsa and Delerue all repeated the same sound and sounded cliche too, especially toward the end of their careers, but up to the end they produced scores that worked in the films (more or less--one of Herrmann's best scores to listen to is Obsession but it just overpowered that poor film. Still, on Taxi Driver, he found the whole feel of that film perfect.) I can't say the same for J & H and they still have years to go!

But, I should stop trying to convince you or keep putting my opinion out there because it will just become an impasse.

We're both here on the board promoting our views and we can get along despite differences (and we're probably the only people who are reading this post or even care).

I’ve no problem with you continuing to state your opinions, and I understand, and even agree with much of what you say. I’ve nothing much to add here, except to comment on your remarks, ‘But I don't necessarily want film music to be widely appreciated.’, and, ‘Making it popular might just ruin what I already like about it.’

An interesting thought, and, as many seem to be saying, perhaps it is composers like Zimmer and Horner who are doing just that. I suppose, more than anything, one could argue that Zimmer and Horner are ‘painting by numbers’, and I wouldn’t argue with that.

Scoring Gladiator with a Rozsa-esque sound may be too anachronistic for the people who made the film a big hit.

In any period, people strive to be cool. And cool today is roller coaster cinema.

The thought of a Pearl Harbor film directed by Michael Bay and with a modern score just makes me cringe.

But watch the board when it comes out: people will see the planes flying and ships blowing up and they'll say how cool it is.

The film itself will probably look like an MTV video or be a 2 hour trailer--it'll have no story, no characters, it'll be wooden, stilted, etc.

But so what? Not liking that approach--that's my bag, those are my standards going into a film. They are no longer the standards of this kind of cinema or this kind of cinemagoer.

The things I want from movies just get in the way of these movies. An 8 year old kid wrote Spielberg: "In the next Jurassic Park, I want the dinosaurs in the first scene, I don't want to wait."

Jurassic Park 4 will be nothing but dinosaurs eating people for 3 hours and people will probably say that's the one they like best.

I don't know who first called himself an old fogey here on the board but a number of people have been calling themselves lately, me included. We are feeling, if not a generation gap, a cultural gap between us and other members on the board.

I've seen films from the entire history of cinema--silent films from before 1900, foreign, black & white, etc. There are a lot of things there I've loved. And, I've adjusted myself to things not to love--anachronisms and things politically incorrect. I don't laugh or cringe at a previous age's attempts to put their cultural wish list over on the public, even if it seems a brutal or ridiculous lie by today's standards.

But that's me--others may not feel it's cool to go where I do. Indeed, for some, I come off rude and fringe for having this position.

All right, to the point: By insisting on a symphonic approach and music that stands as a pleasure to listen to in and away from the film, I'm pulling on the reins, hoping the breakaway horse will remain on the path of what I consider good culture. That may not be what the horse wants to do or where other riders may like the horse to go.

I'm opposed to the Horner/Zimmer approach to film scoring just as I'm opposed to other trends in current cinema all for reasons that I've flogged to death in other posts. I'm just insisting that movies be made for me and what I want and I should know better--Hollywood isn't interested in gearing everything to suit one old fogey's tastes.

In any case, I have no reason to complain--I still have enough cinema to watch for the rest of my life. I may not be able to go out to the theater and have the experience I want there very often any more, but thanks to VHS and TCM, I never lack for something to watch.

Not too long ago I recorded In This Our Life: Bette Davis, John Huston, Max Steiner. I've never seen it before and I haven't watched it yet--it could be great, it could suck, or just be mediocre. Still, I know I'm not going to hear a derivative Carmina Burana during chase scenes, see 35 rapid cut angles of a car exploding, or see plot and characters sacrificed for stylish effects or cool-looking sets.

I'm not going to give up and stop knocking what I consider crap, but if you want to hear from me, I'll be sittin' in my rocking chair, retired to the TCM farm, living with my memories in the past, letting the fast-paced world progress without me....

NP: Tess (Philippe Sarde)