|
Film Score Blogs by Bill Wrobel I actually started this blog back on Saturday, January 12, 2008 at 7:22 pm. I finished my latest film score rundown (Cape Fear) last evening, giving it finishing touches this afternoon by inserting the bootleg cd timings on the cues. Early this morning I went to Home Depot and purchased for the Homeowners Association 12 sod, shrubs and flowers for a few of the homes I volunteered to work on (the Association will pay the $68 for the supplies). I took a short nap a little while ago and decided to try to finish up this blog. I may at the end of this blog tonight work on comparing the analysis of a film score by somebody who’s a very good writer with the actual score. You see, he made an analysis without ever having the opportunity to study the written score! I’m rather curious to see how well he did. Actually I’ll do it right here and now under the March 23 heading. The article I am focusing on is the Time After Time: An Analysis by Frank De Wald in a Rozsa fan periodical, Pro Musica Sana (Fall 1980, # 32, issue).De Wald correctly puts the Eb major (Eb/G/Bb) chord as the starting tonality for the “Prelude” since, after all, the director insisted on Max Steiner’s classic Warner Bros. theme music to open the picture, based on the three flats of the Eb maj key signature. His Example 1 of the Prelude (two staves) has that key signature for Bar 1, although in the actual written cue, Rozsa did not use that key signature formally (he flatted the appropriate notes). De Wald assumes the Maestoso tempo-marking. It’s a very good bet but in actuality, Rozsa has Con moto (perhaps Frank was logically thinking in terms of the maestoso of Steiner’s logo music introducing the music). Steiner was very big (frequency of use) on the maestoso tempo marking in his scores! De Wald has a good ear because he offered the precisely right tones for the basic theme opening the cue. It’s just that the notation structure is off, condensed or “speeded up,” so to speak. In the treble clef in Bar 1 of Ex. 1 (4/4 time), he has Line 1 Bb half note tied to 8th note up to Line 2 Cb 8th down to Line 1 Gb dotted 8th to F 16th up to (Bar 2) Ab whole note to (Bar 3 in 5/4 time), he has Bb half note tied to 8th note to Cb 8th up to Eb dotted 8th down to Cb 16th to “3” triplet value descending 8ths Bb-Ab-F to (Bar 4 in 4/4 time) Ab whole note. Once again, the tones given are indeed correct. My own personal tonal recognition (ear-training) is quite poor, so I would not be as brave as he to offer my guesstimate. What’s askew is the notation and bar/meter spacing. In the actual written cue (let’s focus on the violins playing the melody line), we find Lines 2 & 3 Bb whole note trill tied to 8th note in Bar 2 (not half note tied to quarter note in the same Bar 1). After an 8th rest, the violins then play up to Cb rinforzando-marked quarter note fortissimo (not an 8th note) down to Gb dotted quarter note rinforzando (not a dotted 8th) to F rinforzando 8th not 16th) up to (Bar 3) Ab whole note tied to whole note next bar (not just a whole note in De Wald’s example in Bar 2) to (Bar 5) Bb whole note (not a half note in De Wald’s Bar 3 in 5/4 time) tied to (Bar 6, now in 6/4 time) 8th note. After an 8th rest, the violins play ff < Cb rinforzando dotted quarter note (not 8th) up to Eb rinforzando dotted quarter note (not dotted 8th) to Cb 8th (not 16th) to “3” triplet value descending quarter Bb-Ab-F (not triplet 8ths). Etc. Anyway, I commend the accuracy of the notes, but the inaccuracy of the meter and notation structure shows the danger of any analysis based on subjective perception (and not on objective perception based on looking at the actual score). Next is De Wald’s Ex. 2 (the “Jack” cue in the actual score). De Wald once again inserts the Eb maj key signature (Rozsa does not) but in effect Rozsa establishes it by inserting the accidentals to the appropriate notes. Once again, De Wald does a marvelous job in giving the exact tones in C (same 4/4 common time in Rozsa’s version) time. Also once again, De Wald did not correctly establish the correct notation structure, but a close or workable approximation. In his Ex. 2 (one staff in the bass clef), we find small octave G dotted quarter note to Ab-G 16ths down to D dotted quarter note to Eb-D 16ths to (Bar 2) Great octave Ab half note tied to 8th note to F 8th down to Eb up to G 16ths up to D 8th down to (Bar 3) a repeat of Bar 2 to (Bar 4) Ab quarter note to Bb half note to Ab quarter note, and so forth. Well, in the actual written cue, we find the bassoons playing small octave G double-dotted quarter note (not dotted quarter note) to Eb-G 32nd notes (not 16ths) to D double-dotted quarter note (not dotted quarter) to Eb-D 32nd notes (not 16ths) down to (Bar 2) Great octave Ab half note tied to 8th to G 8th (same as De Wald’s) to Eb up to G up to small octave D 16ths followed by a 16th rest (not Eb-G 16ths to D 8th), and so forth. De Wald’s analysis of this cue being “rife with tritones” is fine, but I don’t see an abundance of obvious tritones in this particular cue (but other cues there are). That D note down to Ab quarter note is a tritone, for example. Incidentally, if you want to see and hear a score loaded to the max with tritones, go no further than Herrmann’s score for Cape Fear! Cady in that movie and Jack in Time After Time have a lot in common! Let’s skip to Ex. 19 (“The Redwoods”), a very popular and moving cue in the movie. De Wald had the tempo marking of Largamente e dolce. That’s a logical choice, but in the actual score, Rozsa inserts Andante, and has the oboe playing espr. Once again, his ears are faithfully accurate, offering the right notes on the staff. While the note construction is not exact, it is overall pretty good. In the grace bar of Ex. 19, DE Wald has the oboe in the grace bar playing Line 1 D 8th (same as Rozsa) to (Bar 1) Line 2 C dotted quarter note to B 8th tied to “3” triplet value 8th to B-A# triplet value 8ths to “3” triplet value descending 8ths C-B-G to (Bar 2) Eb dotted half note (followed by an 8th rest) to D 8th up to (Bar 3) Line 2 E dotted quarter note to D 8th tied to “3” triplet value 8th, and so forth. In the actual written cue for Bar 1, Rozsa has Line 2 C dotted quarter note to B 8th tied to 8th note (not triplet value 8th) to B-A# 16ths (nor triplet value 8ths) to “3” triplet value (as De Wald’s version) descending 8ths C-B-G to (Bar 3) Line 1 Eb half note tied to dotted quarter note (not dotted half note followed by an 8th rest) to D 8th, and so forth. Very permissibly close (but not precise as you would have if you had access to the actual written cue). Ex. 17 (“Pursuit”) is probably one of the most inaccurate representations in terms of notation structure when compared to the actual cue. We find in Ex. 17 (4/4 time), small octave C quarter note to Db dotted quarter note to C 8th to Eb quarter note tied to (Bar 2) 8th down to C 8th to E dotted quarter note to C 8th to Db-C 8ths to (Bar 3) Eb quarter note down to C 8th to E dotted quarter note to C 8th to (Bar 4) F# half note tied to 8th, and so forth. In the written cue, we find C quarter note to Db 8th followed by two 8ths (not Db dotted quarter note) to C up to Eb 8ths followed by an 8th rest (not Eb quarter note from that C 8th tied to 8th next bar). In Bar 2 in the written cue, after an 8th rest, we find C up to Fb 8th (not E natural dotted quarter note—enharmonic Fb), and so forth. Too many inaccuracies here in terms of structure. But the pitch discrimination is still very good. At any rate, I have little desire to pursue more comparison examples. While he was not accurate in his cue illustrations in many instances (though close approximations in many), I nevertheless found that his analysis offered an excellent, certainly enthusiastic, overview of the music. If only he had an opportunity to have the actual score available for his analysis, then it probably would be an oft-quoted analysis due to the excellence in the writing and his insights. [Feb 17 note: I’ll be talking about Jane Eyre (music by Bernard Herrmann) starting about page 6 of this blog below, and also later on I will give a quickie rundown of Herrmann’s Hatful of Rain. Also towards the end of this blog, I will be writing my reviews of the current issue of the Journal of Film Music (Vol. 2, No. 1, Fall 2007)] Saturday, January 12, 2008 at 7:22 pm: Now: I returned home from work to find in the mail a large package from Screen Archives Entertainment. Six days ago I ordered ten issues of Film Score Monthly, each for only 95 cents. The shipping fee ($11.90) was greater than the combined cost of the publications ($9.50). I particularly wanted the two issues that contained a circa 1967 interview with Max Steiner (Vol 10 # 1 Jan/Feb 2005; Vol 10 # 2 March/April 2005). Myrl A. Schreibman. He also wrote an article for the Summer 2004 issue of the UFVA Journal titled, “Max Steiner and the Art of Mickey Mousing” (I’d like to read that article). Max stated, “Gone With The Wind, like all my scores, is written like an opera, you see. Just the same. If you listen to Wagner’s Ring you will find the same theme throughout. It goes from one end to the other.” This was included in Part One of the interview, but for me the best was Part Two in the next issue, the most informative with the most interesting observations. For instance, he stated that he hadn’t worked in two years because of two eye operations that went bad (he was also color blind). Then he said, “I don’t care. I don’t want to work anymore. I have done 200…” Max was in the retirement mode finally in his late Seventies. Max soon stated, “I said Richard Wagner would have been one of the greatest picture composers that ever lived because he was underscoring dialog just like I do…But I don’t particularly care for his music. It’s too Nazi...Well, Wagner was undoubtedly a great composer. There is no question about that. I just don’t particularly care for his music. Some of his music. I lean towards Tchaikovsky and Rimsky-Korsakov. I like French music better. I don’t like Wagner much.” Interesting. Myrl asked Max is he normally wrote music out of emotion or more as an intellectual project. Max replied, “Myrl, I can’t answer that. I don’t know. I sit down, I write whatever I can figure out, whatever comes to my mind. Usually at night, in bed. Sometimes I write some of my music in my sleep, in my dreams, and then I get up in the morning and write it down.” Max felt that Dimitri Tiomkin was “all right, I guess….I don’t understand what they do now, what they are writing: a love scene with bongo drums. I don’t understand it.” Too bad Myrl didn’t ask Max what his opinion of Bernard Herrmann was. I have a feeling that Max would feel that composers like Goldsmith and especially Goldenthal were often into “just noise and tricks.” An essence of Max’s philosophy of scoring is on page 26 when he states that any time a composer writes music for his own satisfaction without regard for what goes on the screen—trying to squeeze in a tune that doesn’t really fit the picture (maybe to make a hit tune or something), well, this is wrong. The Volume 9 # 6 July 2004 issue includes the “Re: Re-Recordings” article by John Morgan that was actually culled from the FSM message board. Specifically, the “Memo to FSM” states on page 27 that, “And when a discussion thread re-emerged on the FSM message board last month [I assume late Spring 2004], Morgan chimed in with these thoughts…” Morgan offers the same sentiment as Max when John states, “Since its function is primarily to enhance a film, the most important aspect is how the music works within the framework of the film.” Such music may be great in the film but standing alone it may seem lacking, repetitive, meandering, and so forth. John states, “When we re-record a score for an album, my primary concern is not at all how the music works with the film, but how it works away from the film—as music.” I am not quite sure what he meant by that statement because he certainly recorded, say, Mysterious Island, exactly as given in the full score. It was not altered as a suite, for instance. The only change was restoring the bars of cues edited out in the movie. I suspect what he meant is clued in his later statement, “But good music certainly can stand up to different interpretations.” This can include tempo changes. An example in Mysterious Island is the much slower pace of the “Exploration” cue featuring the soli strings and harps. I personally felt that this slower tempo did not work for this particular cue but it certainly was a “different interpretation.” John continued with his insights on different performances done on different levels, how a new recording may bring out inner details of a score not previously heard clearly before, and so forth. He then discussed how the recording process is very important. He certainly was not pleased with the early church recordings for Marco Polo, especially Charge of the Light Brigade and how the reverb obliterated much of the orchestration details. He discussed close miking, improper mixing, and other recording details. Interesting read. John felt that “Steiner is closer to Gustav Mahler, where the inner line is important, as compared to Korngold—who was closer to Richard Strauss—with the blend of color that sort of washes over you.” Interesting. I would’ve liked to have asked that of Max in that imaginary time machine interview I mentioned earlier. Now: Although FSM stated that his discussion originated on the FSM message board that reemerged as this magazine article, readers may not be aware that a lot of what John wrote in 2004 or so allegedly for the FSM message board [I could not locate the thread that far back] was actually discussed several years earlier on the Filmus-L list discussion board. In fact, many of the lines are virtually verbatim. Perhaps John lifted portions of earlier discussions on Filmus-L and pasted them (with edits) on the FSM discussion forum. Case in point: His Filmus-L post dated Sunday, June 18, 2000 in the thread titled “Re:Recording Film Score Rerecordings.” Much of this is later pretty much word-for-word in the FSM article, including the whole four-point insert on Murray Spivak (see page 29 of the FSM issue). [More on John Morgan and his new Tribute projects below on the 2-12-08 entry] Now: I joined Filmus-L June 24, 1998 (“Hello and Introduction”) but left in early December of that same year due to the political deletions of one or two of my posts (I was commenting negatively on the old SPFM) by the Moderator. I protested and left for good. I never posted on the Film Score Monthly discussion board for certain reasons. Some people I never communicate with or even recognize due to their inexcusable behavior towards me personally or in general. I have put some individuals (privately and in public interaction) completely and permanently in persona non grata status. It’s unfortunate and extremely rare but sometimes in life there are certain individuals you simply cannot trust and let into your life in any way, shape or form, otherwise you’re asking for unnecessary trouble or aggravation. You cannot have a sincere discussion with someone who is insincere, plays games, sets traps, and who is untrustworthy. As general advice, if someone puts a trip on you, it’s best to simply neutralize your contribution to the problem (“It takes two to tango”). Non-retaliation calls the bluff. Instead of fighting them, learn to simply withdraw attention from them. You can give your initial objection but avoid carrying it too far, getting deeper into the quicksand. You dissociate, refusing to dignify it with your attention. As a result, the emotional charge will soon die out due to lack of energy. Incidentally, allegorically speaking, this is seen by Cerberus, the three-headed dog, being lulled by the music of Orpheus, and the hydra being charmed to sleep by Medea. If you try to solve a problem on the level of the problem, focusing on slights and trying to use will-power persistence to “debate” it, you are in the same quicksand as the other person. Best to initially state your objection (rightful anger, grievance, whatever) and then loose him and let him go. Your responsibility is to master your own conduct and motivations. Wayne Dwyer once stated on a PBS show I watched longed ago that “there are no justified resentments.” As Edgar Cayce reiterated, “one without a temper is not very much good, and one that cannot control it is very much worse.” He also stated (in session 1739-6): “Be sure the ideal is proper. Follow that irrespective of outside influence. Know self is right, and then go straight ahead. So live each and every day that you may look any man in the face and tell him to go to hell!” [if need be].You have no responsibility to live up to the beliefs that others have of you, but to move toward your own becoming (value fulfillment). You have no responsibility to be or do what somebody else wants you to be or do. Do not accept another person’s idea of what you should be or do. Let them materialize their own ideals and beliefs and leave you materialize your own. Also, if their beliefs are limited, that does not mean you should also limit yours! Sometimes at work situations, say, you may have personality conflicts with someone but usually in time it resolves itself (circumstances, changed attitudes, whatever). Affirmation of self and one’s quality of life sometimes means you have the right to say “No” to some people. Of course for a long time I have a policy regarding regular snail mail: If there is no return address, I ignore it and simply toss it in the trash. If it is addressed but don’t want to be bothered by that sender, I toss it in the trash. I remember at Christmas being sent what looked exactly like a standard good-will Xmas card (but with no return address) and my wife looked at it briefly. It turned out to be from a disingenuous person sending nonsense in the guise of a personal Xmas card, so I tossed it in the trash without reading it. People can have blind spots to their own disingenuousness (or rationalization) when they do such insincere, dishonest mailings. I recently also got rid of my “fimscorerundown” e-mail address. Normally people have contacted me thru that address. It was in my Profile in Talking Herrmann, given on my site in the blogs, and so forth. But every couple years I need to change it because of excessive spam (and other unwanted e-mails!)--so I did so a few weeks ago or so (after Xmas sometime). This time I won’t replace it. I’ll e-mail people from a private account on a need-to-know basis. Other people can contact me via snail mail for a change (if they have it!). Otherwise strangers will probably be out of luck if they wanted to ask for favors or whatever. I need a vacation from that, and besides, I’m getting busier and busier on personal projects. As given, sometimes people contact me via e-mail and make requests for my help. Usually I oblige because I want to assist in their research or provide some little bit of information I may happen to have. Recently I helped a cd producer with information regarding specific music identification they needed for their booklet, and fortunately I had the right information to be able to help them in a timely manner. That’s fine. Sometimes it gets excessive and I have to say “No” (although sometimes they may ignore it and insist on more help and even argue!). Those people need to do their own research or whatever and not expect it to be done completely for them. I remember humorously one student from South Korea who insisted I provide just about everything I know about a score I researched painstakingly so that he can do his college paper in time! At the time, I hadn’t yet done a “run down” analysis of that particular score yet. Nevertheless he picked that score and was desperate for detailed information (obviously unable to get it in South Korea!). Back to Cayce, perhaps an ideal he referred to above can be read (case # 1999-1) where he stated: “Let the world be better for your having lived in it, in every way, in every manner! Let those you meet day by day feel and know, by their association, they are better by meeting and knowing and being with you!” Max Steiner certainly expressed this ideal in his music career, and he certainly seemed by most accounts that he was overall a very positive influence in his personal life (great sense of fun & humor, accommodating to friends in need, and so forth). I personally feel highly appreciative that Bernard Herrmann made an impact on this world! The same I’m sure applies to your own favorite composers. [Saturday, January 19 at 8:22 pm] We’re watching The Prestige magic movie starring Hugh Jackman and Michael Caine that we rented at Blockbuster. We had already seen the other magic movie, The Illusionist, that had come out about the same time. In my opinion, the latter is better, especially the music score. The Prestige has a meancing, mean-spirited part of the plot in terms of a character or two, actual deaths (birds and people), and so forth. It’s well made but the subject matter, actors, and mystique (and again, music) are far more satisfying in The Illusionist. Whereas The Prestige is more about “getting your hands dirty.” The two main characters are not very appealing, although Hugh Jackman’s character appeared he might’ve been at first. Michael Caine comes closest to the one with the most integrity and common sense. Of course I am at this very moment 1:28 into the 2:10 duration of the movie. Let’s see how it proceeds… [10:23 pm] Arghh! That science fiction-type ending regarding the Tesla machine makes me see double! It’s too much and too fantastic to swallow. The movie is no approachable clone to The Illusionist. Oh, well. It was worth seeing this $3.99 rental this first time around but overall I would not recommend it as a dvd to purchase for one’s own collection. We also rented The Bourne Ultimatum and Disney’s Ratatouille. Let’s see how they fare… [January 21 at 6:30 pm Martin Luther King holiday] I am on vacation this week so I can spend some free time watching dvds (and write this blog!). I just put in the Emmerich Godzilla dvd in my player out of nostalgia and comparison to the Cloverfield movie just seen this morning. My wife wants to see Ironman when it comes on. We both want to see the newest Star Trek at the end of the year, directed by the man who produced Cloverfield. Emmerich’s 10,000 B.C. doesn’t seem to interest us that much! Fortunately I am on vacation because it’s going to rain off & on pretty much thru Saturday (and maybe even Sunday). Tomorrow I plan to watch CNBC’s financial coverage on cable television because today in the world market (Dow Jones was closed today due to the holiday) the stocks plunged steeply. Germany had a free fall of 7.16% (Spain close behind) while the U.K. dived 5.5 % (about $150 billion in the panic sell off). The Asian markets were also hit hard, especially China. I am afraid tomorrow in the Dow we will see the official dramatic start or sure recognition of a recession. As far as my TSP is concerned, I am not worrying that much because I have it 100% on the G Fund. Still I will pay off the $200 or so remaining in my credit card debt and then do some belt-tightening for most of the year. I had already ordered $39 for the 11-dvd set of the first season of The Man From U.N.C.L.E. (shipped today) but that was a good deal from the original $59 price (plus no tax & no shipping charges). [Tuesday, January 22 at 4:11 pm] Watching Hardball on MSNBC in the background. I just finished re-watching my Jane Eyre dvd, and taking more timing notes. I am particularly interested in finding the many instances of “mickey mousing” by Herrmann. As given in my Wagner’s Ring & Herrmann post in early January on the Talking Herrmann forum, what impressed me most about Jane Eyre was how Herrmann often musically imitated (mickey-moused) the specifics of various scens tied to “hitting the mark” (synchronizing changes of music to the changing actions/scenes on the screen). Usually people associate Max Steiner as the “mickey mouse” composer par excellence, whereas Herrmann is normally associated with the far different approach of mood setting or overall approach. Yet, especially in earlier works such as Jane Eyre, Herrmann did indeed mickey mouse his music in many cases (though admittedly not anywhere as much as Steiner). There are far more instances of “hitting the mark” with music obviously than mickey-mousing, and he took pains on the written autograph score to annotate specific scenes and dialog lines on specific bars. Herrmann rarely annotated as such on his score in his “super” decades (Fifties and Sixties) but occasionally he did. For instance, in the “Fire” cue of Mysterious Island, he wrote “He Falls” and then “She falls” when the hero and heroine fall in the dark outside the honeycomb into the grotto. Anyway, I may indeed do a full rundown of Jane Eyre but I can note many instances of clear “mickey mousing” and also “hitting the mark. “ Remember you can “hit the mark” and “mickey mouse” at the same instant but certainly not always since the composer may hit the mark with mood music instead of mimicking synchronization music. Both instances occurred, for instance, in the “Fire” cue at the end when “He falls” and then “She falls.” The first four bars of the next cue, “Jane’s Departure,” were cut out by Herrmann himself. It featured horn I playing the soon-to-be familiar five-note motif in _ time of Line 1 E to F to G quarter notes crescendo hairpin to (Bar 2) A [written Line 2 E] quarter note to A half note decrescendo. Muted strings play the harmony accompaniment. Herrmann hits the mark on Bar 43 (6:10 location or Chapter 2 at 4:44) when little Jane turns around at the front gate of Gateshead Hall (owned by the Agnes Morehead character) and rebukes her and her Pugsly-like son. He hits the mark at the start of Chapter 3 when the carriage drives out to Lowood. The mickey-mousing instance is slight but there in original Bar 77 [actual Bar 56] on page 15 (6:58) when Jane’s coach companion blows his horn. At that point is when Herrmann writes in an isolated muted trumpet note of Line 1 B [written Line 2 C#] rinforzando dotted half note. He hits the mark on original Bar 90 [actual Bar 69] at the start of the Lento section (7:16 location) when the Lowood Institution sign is seen close-up, Brocklehurst as Chairman. The “Jane Alone” cue starts at 10:24 (or Chapter 3 at 3:48). At least twelve bars of this cue were deleted in the picture. In fact many cues had deleted or dialed out bars, and the score needs to be properly restored. The “Dreaming” cue starts at 12:22 (or Chapter 4 at 1:56). Herrmann definitely hits the mark at Bar 21 (13:12) when Jane and Elizabeth Taylor run off together! The “Vanity” cue starts at 15:22 (or Chapter 4 at 4:56) when the two girls are forced to tread in a circle outside in the cold rain wearing “Vain” and “Rebellious” signs. In Bar 13 (16:11) is when Herrmann mickey-mouses the steam from the kettle with the Lines 1 & 2 & 3 D whole note trills. In the “Elegy” cue at the end (18:20) is when Herrmann hits the mark as Jane’s hand suddenly leaves the lifeless hand of her girlfriend (who died of pneumonia). Muted trombones play fortissimo Great octave Bb/small octave Gb/Bb rinforzando 16ths to A/F/A rinforzando dotted 8ths tied to quarter notes and tied to whole notes held fermata in the end bar. Celli and contrabasses also play this pattern. “Jane’s Sorrow: (when she talks to the doctor) starts at 18:25 (or Chapter 4 at 6:24). This is a mood cue with the final two bars deleted. The “Time Passage” cue starts at 20:06. Bars 3-4 (repeating Bars 1-2) were deleted. “The Letter” starts at 23:23. The trumpets play figures from 24:01 thru 24:06 somewhat mimicking the horn calls of the coachman. “Thornfield Hall” starts at 25:18 on Bar 2 (Bar 1 was deleted in the movie). As the coach starts off (25:27 in Bar 4) Herrmann mickey mouses with the use of the whip! He did the same effect in the “Abduction” cue of Journey to the Center of the Earth. When the coach reaches the spooky Thornfield Hall (25:53 in Bar 22) the music appropriately changes (hitting the mark). Herrmann annotates dialog variously in this cue, including at the 27:48 point at the end of page 43 when she enters the new room (entering of the music shift as well). At the end of the cue (28:14) Herrmann hits the mark when the dark tower scene is on screen. The “Adele” cue starts at 29:59 (only two bars). Flute, harp, 2 violins, 1 viola, and I cello. “Rochester” starts at 30:44 on the dvd. In Bar 13 (31:22) we come to the start of the Allegro Vivace section in Cut time when Herrmann hits the mark as Rochester approaches on his charging horse. The exact sighting as the horse reels in front of Jane on the middle of the foggy road is the 31:34 point. “The Piano” (next cue) starts at 35:53. A lot of the original cue was deleted, suggesting editing cuts. It’s already a very short movie at an hour and 36 minutes, but they still cut a lot of scenes in the movie! Herrmann annotates dialog lines in various locations such as “Good night.” “Promenade” starts at 38:04. He clearly “hits the marks” in various spots such as the 38:38 point. “Rochester’s Past” starts at 43:06. Herrmann annotates the dialog line of “at once” at the start of Bar 3. He hits the mark at various spots. For instance, at the end of the cue (44:51) we hear the ominous tower music (and he annotates “The Tower” at that bar, in fact). “The Fire” cue starts almost immediately afterward. The old first Bars 1-4 were deleted. The piano in new Bar 1 plays in 2/4 time Contra-octave and Great octave B 8ths to Great octave Gb 8th to Contra-octave and Great octave B 8ths to Great octave G 8th (repeated next bar). The Tam Tam sounds ppp a half note. Herrmann hits the mark at various points (including annotations) such as at the 46:18 point (“The Tower” annotation) when Jane witnesses Rochester’s candle light ascending the interior of the tower. At the 47:32 point the music becomes frantic again when Rochester exclaims, “We forgot the child!” It relaxes at the 47:40 point (Bar 88) when the child is seen peacefully sleeping. The “Duo” cue starts at 48:35 (or Chapter 8 at 3:37). Herrmann self-borrowed this music from the earlier Outward Bound radio episode from 9/15/38, Bars 7-13, used again more closely in the later “Mr. Mason” cue. In Bar 30 (50:04) Herrmann annotates “Roch. Rides on the snow” (scene: Jane looks out the window and see Orson rising off in a hurry). The nature of the music of course changes here as open horns plays a sort of “ride” repeat figure. Bar 33 has Herrmann annotating “closeup of Jane” and here Herrmann re-introduces the strings in emphasis. The end seven bars of this cue were deleted. “The Door” cue starts at 50:59. Herrmann hits the mark in Bar 4 (51:11) when Jane starts to go up the Tower winding steps. When the Mrs. Screams at the 51:46 point (Bar 15), Herrmann hits the mark with the fff horns and muted trumpets. Herrmann annotates Grace Poole’s dialog in the next bar. “Springtime” starts at 52:12. More annotations are made on various bars. “Mr. Mason” starts at 57:43 (or Chapter 9 starting at 5:09). More mark-hitting, such as Bar 29 (59:01) when the knock on the door interrupts Rochester’s talk with Jane (“What the devil is that?!” Herrmann annotates the knock. Later he annotates “Cut to Jane” and then “Cut to Roch” and then “The Tower” once again (1:00:38). “The Room” cue starts at 1:01:44 when Rochester says “…courageous Blanche.” Several bars were deleted. “The Rattle” starts at 1:03:28 (Chapter 10 at 1:21). “The Garden” starts at 1:05:26 but some of the instruments are not used initially in the actual recording (such as the stopped horns—unless they are extremely low in this mono recording!). Herrmann annotates “The Terrace” in Bar 13 (1:06:18) when Rochester and Jane talk in this molto tranquillo section of the cue. Etc. The “Farewell” cue starts at 1:09:39 (Bar 9). The first eight bars are deleted in the pic. Herrmann annotates “Cl up of Jane” at the 1:11:08 point (soli two clarinets here). Most of the end cue (9 bars) were deleted. “Song” starts at6 1:13:09 (Bar 4) with the first three bars (and grace bar) deleted. Herrmann annotates “The guests leave the house.” “The Storm” starts at 1:15:10 (start of Chapter 12). Various Herrmann annotations, including dialog lines in this heavily dramatic cue. Some bars were deleted. “The Wedding” starts at 1:18:00. Some bars were deleted here as well. Herrmann annotates at various bars, including Bar 38 (1:18:33), “Grace Poole,” but most of these three bars in this section were cut (edited out). “The Wife” starts at 1:20:17. Trombones are highlighted. “Jane’s Farewell” starts at 1:21:29 (Chapter 13 at 3:10). Lots of annotations by Herrmann in this cue such as Bar 31’s “Stay with me, Jane.” A large chunk of the cue was edited out (most of pages 144-145). Herrmann annotates “The Moors” in Section L (page 148) at the 1:25:23 point (“Going nowhere I had nowhere to go”). Jane then decides to go back to Gateshead Hall. The end 5 bars are deleted after Jane says “Bessie” (that Herrmann also annotates as such). “The Letter Burns” cue starts at 1:30:22, only eight bars (but the end three and a half bars were edited out). “Jane’s Return” starts at 1:30:57. Herrmann writes “Clouds, Jane” in Bar 22 (1:31:44). Etc. “ Jane Eyre’s Finale” starts at 1:33:37. The last ten minutes of the movie are so rushed in terms of developing the plot line and various scenes that it’s almost dizzying! This shortening and speeding up is a definite flaw of the movie. [Wednesday, January 23 at 2:53 pm] The Dow had a wild ride today starting at about 250 down to 302 up at the close. Mad Money Cramer is discussing it now on his CNBC show (just after 3 pm). It just started raining about ten minutes ago. A cutoff low is stalled in the general area so we can expect rain thru Sunday and maybe even Monday. Paul Merkley’s “Stanley Hates This But I Like It!” : North vs. Kubrick on the Music for 2001: A Space Odyssey.” This article makes me mildly interested although I have read articles about this collaboration. One I have in my possession that I xeroxed is David Patterson’s “Music, Structure and Metaphor in Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey” featured in the Fall 2004 (Vol 22 # 3) issue of American Music. At the very least I would like to compare Merkley’s article with Patterson’s and see their differing approaches, divergences of shared points, and so forth. Personally I would be far more interested in simply studying North’s score than in reading about the merits or not of the in effect temp tracked movie. Patterson on pages 455-456 gives two score examples between Also Sprach Zarathustra and Strauss’ Blue Danube Waltz, stating that the latter “in its basic musical makeup…proves to be nothing more or less than a genteel version of the material found in Zarathustra.” I don’t know if he’s reading too much into this or not, but it bears closer examination. Unfortunately he did not give it a thorough analysis, just a few paragraphs about the octave similarities, major/minor similarities, and drone notes. At any rate, Patterson does not discuss North’s written score, so I suspect Merkley’s article will. I’ll verify this and possibly review the article if I get to read it at a university before I submit this new blog for site updating (if the physical journal issue is actually available yet). The next article is Lawrence Kramer’s “Whose Classical Music? Reflections on Film Adaptation.” Well, this initially is the least interesting offering to me. I’d be far more interested in an article called, say, “Classical Music Influences on Golden Age & Silver Age Film Composers.” Wagner would be highlighted of course, perhaps Debussy, Holst, and many others. I’m still doing this with Wagner, just finishing off Tannhauser. Next is Anthony Bushard’s “He Could’ve Been a Contender” : Thematic Integration in Leonard Bernstein’s Score for On the Waterfront (1954).” This article is available for free download so you can read it yourself. I may review it here shortly. Finally is the Editor’s article, “The Manchurian Candidate (1962): An Interview with David Amram.” I may give it a fast read although initially I am not very drawn to this subject. Merkley’s and Bushard’s articles holds the most reading attraction. As for the book reviews, Tom Scheller reviews both David Cooper’s Bernard Herrmann’s Vertigo: A Film Score Handbook and Bernard Herrmann’s The Ghost & Mrs. Muir: A Film Score Handbook (I think Cooper’s Ghost & Mrs. Muir book was better presented) and Jack Sullivan’s Hitchcock’s Music. The latter seven-page review is available for free download over the Internet. David Cooper also reviews a book, James Wierzbicki’s Louis & Bebe Barron’s Forbidden Planet: A Film Score Guide (I have a feeling Cooper will not give it a thumb’s down as Schneller did for Sullivan’s book! :) What is my Top Ten list. Actually I never officially made a priority list, but here goes with a more ambitious Top Twenty list: I never resonated with Friedhofer’s music overall, nor Raksin, Fielding, Rosenthal, Stevens, Delerue, Addison, Copland, and so forth. In the case of other composers there are individual or isolated scores I liked a lot, such as Them! By Kaper, Fantastic Voyage by Rosenman, some of North (like that dragon movie), Salter, some of Gold, some of Young, Roemheld, and so forth. Goldenthal has great talent and he could’ve been on my Top Ten list but it appeared he strayed off in odd ways (same for Horner where he started off strong and then petered out). [6:23 pm] Raining heavy with squall lines around 5:30. The rain started about 2:30 pm. It should end in about an hour but Fritz and Dallas on the local channels state that it will be raining off and on right thru Sunday and maybe into Monday morning (heaviest Saturday late thru Sunday). My wife cancelled riding out to Hermosa Beach with a friend for an art show opening because of the rain. Her friend may show up in an hour and watch Ratatouille with us. Right now I am slowly reading Bushard’s article of Bernstein’s score for On the Waterfront. Apparently he only had access at the LOC of Bernstein’s sketches and also the Symphonic Suite. He failed to state where the full score might be (if still existing). I think it would’ve been better if the F.S. excerpts were provided, although I suppose the Symphonic Suite is the next best thing. In my own personal research, the orchestrated (full) score is the #1 priority and requirement, then it would be nice to have (but not necessary) to have the Conductor pages (complete with timings, cued dialog snippets, etc), and also the sketches. With that complete trio you have the best of all possible research worlds, although all you really need that is best are the orchestrated pages. One disadvantage I have right now as I read this article is that I do not have the dvd (and hence, the music) as a reference source. I know that there is a special edition dvd that I almost purchased at DVD Planet several months ago but my money on hand then was limited and that title was not a priority (and it’s not a favorite film of mine—nor the score!). Bernstein definitely composed a rather jazzy/bluesy dramatic score with intelligence and design, but I never really cared for Bernstein’s music in most cases. I think Merkley did a fine job in describing this but interest in it may be quite limited in comparison to the fan & researcher base for scores by Herrmann, John Williams, Goldsmith, and others. Bushard ends the paper with a paraphrase that Bernstein “could’ve been a contender” if he stayed with film music. No, with all due respect, I don’t think he would’ve been a heavy weight contender going the distance with many rounds with the likes of Herrmann, Steiner, and others. Perhaps his film music bulb glowed very brightly but also very shortly. Herrmann and others endured. Bushard’s approach is a “musicodramatic analysis” fitting the score with actions and emotions in the film, presenting key motifs and themes (“Pain,” “Dignity,” Love,” and others), briefly explaining their structure (tritone intervals, etc) in relationship to the events on the screen. He writes on page 51 how Bernstein’s “music whose melodic and harmonic dissonance, rhythmic syncopation, and urgent ostinao all combine to create aural instability while incorporating consistently thematic material.” Even the Love theme is “bittersweet” (designed that way in the music itself) because the plot underneath the love scenes suggests that there’s a side to Terry’s involvement that Edie does not know about (her brother’s death). I remember how in Catholic grade school back in the early or mid-Sixties sometime the priest who taught us had the whole class watch On the Waterfront at the theatre. He then discussed how Terry’s scene of being beaten up at the end was a fitting allegory for the Christ figure in his tortured Passion and even Crucifixion before he became redeemed or saved. Anyway, I wondered how Herrmann would’ve scored the film—probably more in the same overall line as probably that most forgettable of his scores/films, A Hatful of Rain, except that his probable score would be remembered far more because On the Waterfront is a much better film! Maybe Bernstein should’ve done The Godfather now that I think of it, although The French Connection may have fitted his style a little bit closer. I think I liked best in the article his distinction between the rooftop scenes/music and the street level world & accompanying music. I guess Terry is a pigeon caged up but feels freer up there above his street work and gang involvement. The contrast between the two worlds is allegorical and revealing musically. [Thursday, January 24 at 3:23 pm] My wife & I went to Olive Garden for the $6.99 soup & salad lunch. Then we went to the Nature Center breathing in the fresh, brisk air (clouds but no rain) and enjoying the birds, trees, and other sights. Starting to rain now, however. Yesterday there were squalls late afternoon and early evening. [6:22 pm] Watching the GOP (Republican) Candidates Debate on MSNBC right now in the background. No fireworks yet! Rather tame. Also I am reading Tom Schneller’s review of Jack Sullivan’s book, Hitchcock’s Music (a book title, by the way, I consider very misleading). Once Tom initially offers a few scraps of commendation in the book (kudos for the John Williams interview, a few tidbits of interesting archival details), he then basically knifes the book in a series of bloody excellent strokes! If I reviewed this book, I probably would’ve added, in effect: Well, instead of the Wrong Man writing this book (although that may indeed be the case!), at least it is the Wrong Title. It’s almost like the Elaine character of Seinfeld when she often pushed Jerry or somebody and exclaimed, “Get out!” or “Get off it!” in disbelieving what was just said to her. Similarly, readers reading Sullivan’s book would equally be disbelieving in its auteuristic claim that Hitchcock was closely instrumental in shaping the music in his films! “Give me a break” (Elaine and readers would exclaim). In fact, I am reminded of the Psycho story how Hitchcock didn’t want music for the shower scene but Herrmann did it anyway. When Herrmann reminded Hitch of this, Hitch responded, “Improper suggestion.” Similarly, if Hitchcock was alive now and read this book, and if somebody asked him what he thought of the author trying to convince readers of Hitch’s pervasive influence on the music, he would’ve said too, “improper suggestion.” Instead of reviewing this book (although I liked Tom’s review very much) for six or seven pages, I say, “Why waste valuable time and energy on this book? Just put up a warning notice: BEWARE! DO NOT BUY THIS BOOK!” Read it if you want but certainly don’t buy it—although I did, unfortunately, as an impulse purchase. What a waste of $38. I could’ve used the money to buy a Wagner written score I don’t own yet or some other useful music purchase. I mean, there are many laughably lame comments and inferences in this book. On page 211 when discussing Wrong Man, Sullivan writes, “Hitchcock got what he needed from Herrmann.” I’m sure he squeezed it out of Herrmann exactly as he (Hitch) designed it in his head. To be fair, Sullivan nevertheless prefaces many statements with “Herrmann” did this, or “Herrmann” (not Hitchcock) did that. But many statements suggest that Hitch was responsible for the tonal picture supplied by the composers, and Tom rather sarcastically gives several examples of this on page 88 of the journal. The book lacks credibility and common sense. It’s like Elaine (our allegorical reader of the book) saying, “You can’t be serious?!” Sullivan ends the book with: “Hitchcock put it more succinctly. Through music, he said, we ‘express the unspoken.’” Well, perhaps this book would’ve been best “unwritten” (or never written) given its faulty root assumption, many errors of details (after all, the devil’s in the details), sloppy musical terminology, and so forth. By the way, Tom Schneller, the reviewer of the two of the items in the JOFM, has his own website where he discusses Vertigo: http://writings.tomschneller.net/ VertigoN.htm I wonder if any of this six-page paper online was incorporated in his book(s) review of Cooper’s Vertigo and Ghost & Mrs. Muir? Hopefully I’ll get to read it before I have this blog updated. I may delay the update, now that I think of it, until I get my Cape Fear rundown completed. There’s no rush! In Schneller’s “Death and Love” paper online, his approach obviously could not be a book-sized analysis of the whole Vertigo score (since the paper is only six pages long). Instead, his approach is musicodramatic one : “…I will focus on the way the link between love and death established on the level of the narrative is reflected in the musical design.” This is an approach I do not normally take in my rundowns (but I do now & then) because it would “dramatically” increase the length of my analyses, taking forever to do! It’s quite a job just doing a thorough cue-by-cue descriptive analysis whereby other readers and researchers can take that basic material (delineated notes/chords/intervals/etc.) and then make their own narrative observations and assumptions. My rundowns tend to be a “just the facts, ma’am” (Jack Webb’s “Joe Friday” famous line) presentation that then can be used (if a researcher does not have access to the written score) for the next level of analysis (musico-dramatic correspondences). Of course I do this spontaneously here & there. For instance, I point out how Herrmann “sets the stage” for his Cape Fear score with the very first bar of the “Prelude” when he utilizes the “devil’s interval” or tritone as the horns declaratively pronounce their three-bar sforzando statement. Tom then discusses the five principal motifs in the score, three tied to Scottie, two tied to Madeleine/Carlotta. The former generates from the “primal cell” of the opening triplet figures in the Prelude. The “Vertigo” polychord derives from this, Eb min/D maj (Eb/Gb/Bb/D/F#/A). A transformation of the primal cell structure is the “Obsession” polychord of Ab maj (or G# maj enharmonically and A minor. The Vertigo polychord starting on Eb is connected to the Obsession polychord by a tritone interval (Eb to A, and D to Ab/G#). Anyway, you can read it for yourself for free online. I do not necessarily agree with his “primal” analysis, but that’s okay. Everybody has their own unique interpretative POV. For instance, he conveniently ascribes an enharmonic equivalence to the primal cell he refers to (F# instead of Gb, for instance) and neglects to explain simply how that A note (of the D maj chord part of the polychord) comes into the picture by Herrmann in the contrary triplet figures played by the flutes, etc. Herrmann did not include the A in that “primal” construction. Best to see how exactly wrote the notes and meant it, otherwise the danger of a commentator is to “read too much into it,” straying from the precise manner Herrmann actually wrote the notes. So, while I am not really convinced by his arguments as a whole, it is an interesting read nonetheless. Jason & the Argonauts is on TCM right now. However, I’ll probably continue on my listening (and reading the full score) to Wagner’s The Flying Dutchman. [4:13 pm] I finished the opera, and there’s pretty darn memorable music there indeed! My favorite little section is No. 7, Chorus of Norwegian Sailors. In my reference cd conducted by Karl Bohm and starring Gwyneth Jones, it starts at the :31 point of track # 8, cd II going into track # 9. In the Dover written score, it starts on page 286. But my favorite section is most definitely the vibrant second theme that starts on page 298 (1:07, track # 9) thru page 303 (2:05). It starts immediately after the chorus sings “Her! Komm’und trink’ mit uns!” (Come and drink with us!). I love the simple repetitive brassy rhythmic line, the dominant beat of the drums, and the lovely melody line played by the woodwinds and strings. Very nice! Now: There’s nothing especially Herrmannesque in this score or “influences” reminiscent of Herrmann’s style—unlike the many examples in the Ring operas. Probably the closest to a film composer’s style that I noticed was a section that reminded me of Dimitri Tiomkin. This was in the Overture, pages 44-45, 8:56 thru 9:06 on my cd (track # 1, cd I). The harp plays ascending legato arpeggiated “3” triplet figures, the flute and oboe play the melody line, and so forth. Maybe other people won’t hear Tiomkin in this tiny ten-second section, but I do! A somewhat Herrmannesque pattern is given just before No. Aria. So we have the near end of No. 1 Introduction at the Molto piu lento section, page 76 of the Dover score and the first two bars of the next page. On my cd, this is track # 4 from 3:56 thru 4:17. It’s essentially a call and response repeat pattern with the horns calling and the trombones & low strings responding. I also like the violins playing low register ascending to descending 8th note figures in Cut time simulating a rolling sea effect. This is on pages 104 thru 106, Moderato, non troppo lento section (“From shore to shore forever banished…”). It is the start of track #7 on my cd I. Also I liked on page 112 (still track # 7 but starting 3:58) the effect Wagner used with the first violins piu animato playing “6” sextuplet 8th note legato figure followed by a measured trem figure of normal value four 8th notes. Violins II and violas are bowed trem. I liked the combination used repeatedly for several bars. Of course, back to the Overture on page 41 (8:26 point) we have the measured trem 8ths (16ths) figures exclusively for six bars. This Wagnerian effect was used in the Main Title of Silver Chalice by Waxman starting in Bar 8. I also liked the rolling “6” sextuplet figures on pages 64-65, especially the series switched off to different instruments at the 1:54 point of track # 3 on page 65. First the flute plays (after an initial sextuplet value 8th rest) Line 2 E-F-G#-A-Line 3 D to descending C-A-F-D-C-Line 1 A 8ths. Then the clarinet takes over the pattern in the next bar, then violins I in the following bar, and then the violas. Of course we hear a lot of film composers doing exactly the same thing (including Herrmann quite frequently for orchestral variety). Going over some random pages I happened to annotate, I just came across page 123 at the point (8:54 track # 7) where the trombones and tuba are soli (“Wird sie mein” sung also here). Well, the Pos play small octave C/Eb/G whole notes while the tuba plays Great octave A. This is the root position A half-diminished 7th (A/C/Eb/G). Herrmann of course loved the half-dim 7ths (his favorite or most-oft used sevenths in his works). Perhaps in some way he was influenced by Wagner here as well. Let’s see…On page 245 (6:02 point of track # 4, cd II), just four bars into the Duet section, sostenuto, we find the trombones on Great octave A/small octave C/E whole notes and the Fag on F#. So here we have the F# half-dim 7th (F#/A/C/E). We’re watching some of The Man from UNCLE first season episodes. I really liked Jerry Goldsmith’s original score for the Solo pilot (in color). He composed a fair number of Herrmannesque signatures with the Fags and I believe a contra-Fag, plus nice use of the brass and of course Goldsmithian percussive effects. Very nice score. I may purchase the Film Score Monthly cds of the series. I would recommend buying for only $39 (no shipping fees and no sales tax) this Time-Life 11 dvd set of the series (black & white first season). Turner Classic Movies about a month ago had the color movie versions compiled from the series. It was fun watching them, especially the Janet Leigh movie where she plays a very bad girl! [Sunday, January 27 at 5:37 pm] Now: The Mastersingers of Nuremberg opera gets better after I left it around page 100. Of course the most famous motif is towards the end in cd 4, the Mastersingers Procession. I believe the Table of Motifs calls it the Meilterlingertema. It starts on page 490 of the Kalmus score, track # 3, cd 4 around the 3 minute area. The opera closes with the motif. Back in cd 1 starting at the 6:03 point of track # 12 (“recht! Wen ihr Meis-ter den Preis…”), I found a series of musical sequences that loosely reminds me of Herrmann’s style in composing Three Worlds of Gulliver. We hear this again at the :42 point of track # 13 on page 108 (“so lasst das Volk auch Rich-“), and then the 2:32 point on page 114 (“liesst es selbst euch auch sa-gen,”). On page 153 at the :39 point of track # 2 of cd 2 (“stort? Blieb’ ich von Al---len ungehort?”), this four-bar passage reminds me of a basic Hollywood classic style. Herrmann comes to mind in his romantic scores, but it can apply to many film composers (including Steiner). Now: Tannhauser (written 1845) also holds little Herrmannesque sections (again, unlike the Ring series) but it is nevertheless a memorable opera, especially the immortalized Overture. I really liked the immediately following section, Scene I, The Venusburg (track # 2) starting on page 49 of the Dover score. Wagner liked using the gestopft (stopped +) horns like Herrmann later did. The opening of Scene III in Act II is an example. This is on page 368 of the Dover score. On the excellent Daniel Barenboim audio set (Teldec Classics), it is located on cd 3, start of track # 7. I liked the “Herrmann” reference in the opera—actually it’s “Hermann.” You hear the voices singing with exclamation, “Hermann Heil!” starting on page 208 (Scene 4 of Act II). It’s heard again with gusto on page 213 (cd 2, track # 6 at 2:45), and ending phrase on page 215. Wagner obviously had a psychic flash! In this score, Wagner certainly loved composing a whole bunch of the “turn” ornament. You hear it in fact right at that spot I just mentioned immediately above when Elizabeth sings “los-se” where the first violins play the turn on Line 1 Ab dotted half note. At the bottom of page 207 (track # 7, cd 3, about 1:30) we hear a typical “run” of 16ths, a device used frequently by Golden Age composers, especially Max Steiner it seems! Here Wagner has the strings playing a chromatic run of “7” septuplet 16ths G-A-B-C-D-E-F# to (next bar) G quarter note. “I usually thought TWISTED NERVE was just about the most "forgotten" Herrmann film/score out there but periodically there tends to be lively discussions of it in this and other forums. Of course, as we all know, Herrmann’s score was given prominence by director Quentin Tarantino. He included in Kill Bill Vol. 1 the distinctive Main Title music and whistling from Twisted Nerve (Darryl Hannah one-eyed character disguised as a whistling nurse in the hospital scene!). Tarantino also seemed to have made references to the Truffaut/Herrmann collaboration of The Bride Wore Black since the heroine is a revengeful bride, vowing to kill those responsible for the death of her fiancée at the morning of her wedding. In fact, some reviewers have jokingly called the movie, “The Bride Wore A Black Belt.” “In the "Intro" (first cue),the instrumentation is as follows: 4 flutes, 4 clarinets, 4 bass clarinets, 4 horns, 2 vibraphones, small and large susp cymbals, 2 celestes, and 4 harps. I gave a complete list of cues in that Twisted Nerve topic: http://herrmann.uib.no/talking/view.cgi?forum=thGeneral&topic=2618 As for Hatful of Rain, here’s the list of cues: “The Car” Reel 2/2 in C time. :33 duration. Instrumentation: 3 sords horns, 3 Pos in cup mutes, 8 violins, 4 violas, 4 celli, 2 CB. Sords violins I play pp Lines 2 & 3 D whole notes tied to half notes next bar (followed by a half rest) while violins II play these tied notes on Lines 1 & 2 D. After a half rest, muted violas play small octave G# half note tied to half note next bar (followed by a half rest) while VC/CB play this on Great octave E tied notes. In Bar 2, muted horns play pp < > small octave Bb/Line 1 D/G# whole notes [written Line 1 F/A/Line 2 D#], while Pos in cup mutes play Great octave Bb/small octave D/G# whole notes. “The Street” Reel 2/3, Lento in C time, :52 duration. Clarinets, bass clarinet, horns and trombones. “The Gun” Reel 3/1. Molto Pesante in C time, 1:09 duration. “The Closet” [A] Reel 5/1. Lento in _ time, 3:13 duration. Version B is 31 seconds. “The Search” Reel 5/2-6/1. Molto largamente e pesante in C time. 4:38 duration. “The Sidewalk” Reel 6/2. Molto largamente e pesante in C time. 1:24 (or 1:44). “The Hold-Up” Reel 7/1. Prestissimo in 12/8 time. 35 seconds. 14 bars. In Bar 1, sotto voce violins play small octave rinforzando A legato to Bb down to G# 8ths (crossbeam connected) and this figure played 4X. Six violas play the same. Six VC and 4 CB play pp Great octave A to G# up to Bb 8ths in that repeat pattern. In Bar 12, violins I are trill sff on small octave A whole note (to Bb) to G#-A grace notes or after-beats to (Bar 13) Bb rinforzando 8th (followed by an 8th rest, quarter rest, another quarter rest(held fermata) to Line 1 D quarter note pianissimo tied to (end Bar 14) whole note held fermata and decrescendo hairpin. Violins II are trill on small octave G# whole note (to A) to G#-A grace notes to (Bar 13) Line 1 Db 8th followed by rests to small octave G# quarter note tied to whole note next bar. Violas are trill on small octave A whole note (see violins I). VC are trill on Great octave A/G# whole notes to G#-A grace notes to (Bar 13) Bb 8th (followed by rests) to Great octave E/Bb quarter notes tied to whole notes next bar. In Bar 13, CB pluck pizzicato Great octave E 8th (followed by rests) to Bb quarter note tied to half note next bar. In Bar 13, five clarinets now sound fff on Line 1 E/Bb/Line 2 D/G#/Line 2 D whole notes held fermata. “The Cafeteria” Lento in C time. 1:44 (or 1:41). ********************************* I will probably take a little vacation from Talking Herrmann for at least a week. I need to focus on my new rundown (Cape Fear) and, besides, I was getting a bit tired of recent activity there last week (best to ignore annoying posters). Elective activity should be fun, else why do it?! [Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 8:36 am. Day off.] Here is an interesting online article by Curt Hardaway about the Tribute Records team: http://gammillustrations.bizland.com/mk6-temp/music1024-1.htm [9:21 am] Watching MSNCB in the background. They’re discussing today’s Chesapeake elections. So far Obama is running full speed (he won all the caucuses on Saturday) and is expected to win everything today, whereas Hillary had to hire a new campaign manager and is again resorting to trying to throw dirt on Obama in a move of desperation. My wife & I don’t like Hillary, and don’t trust her. We’re into giving Obama a chance. I agree with what Michael Moore said on Larry King last week. Moore said he used to be for Hillary years ago but after her repeated support and vote for the war on Iraq, he cannot in conscience support her now. As for Huckabee and his fundamentalist Christian approach (wanting to change the Constitution to reflect his narrow or conservative religious views), I think he’s pretty arrogant. As for McCain and his pro-Bush and pro-Iraq War stance, I feel pretty sorry for him considering the state of the country that is overwhelmingly looking for meaningful change (that’s why the Democrats took control of both Houses in the last election). My concern is the so-called “Super Delegates” and how they may be used to go contrary to voter sentiment if the Clinton-Obama race is a dead heat even. If the majority of people ultimately vote for Obama but the Super Delegates vote for Clinton, there will be a big stink about that (similar to how Bush “won” over Gore, even though Gore won the popular vote). However, if Obama makes an overall voter sweep over the next three weeks, he’ll have enough delegates. At lunch my wife and I will go to a special Tuesday $4.99 Chinese buffet. Also today I will continue my newest detailed rundown on Cape Fear. [4:24 pm] Obama is winning Virginia with the 4% poll numbers in only so far (64% for Obama, 35% for Clinton). I have a slight case of buyer’s remorse: On Sunday, I took a chance and bought for $8.99 at Borders on impulse the Naxos cd of Michael Hersch’s world premiere works (Symphonies # 1, # 2, Fracta, and Arrache). Atonal earache! On the back label, it states that he has been described as a “new hope of American Musical culture.” If I need culture, I’d rather have yogurt than his jarring music. Oh, well. Now & then I take such spontaneous chances. A few weeks ago, I bought “Puccini Without Words” (conducted by Kostelanetz) and Verdi Without Words” (conducted by Kunzel). By far I prefer Verdi’s music over Puccini. The former has a real gift for melody and memorable tunes, whereas Puccini is rather amorphous & generalized. He’s okay but I’ll buy more Verdi (including written scores). As given above in my paste of my Talking Herrmann post, the Death of Ase (Aase) basic three-note structure is the same as Herrmann’s three-note structure or musical thought form for “The Basket” cue of 7th Voyage of Sinbad. Grieg’s piece also has the strings con sordini in C time. If you want to play it on the keyboard, just finger B/D/F# (B minor) quarter notes up to the D/F#/B quarter note inversion up to F#/A#/C# (F# maj) half note. Specifically, violins I play Line 1 F# legato up to B quarter notes to Line 2 C# half note (repeated next bar). Violins II play p Line 1 F# to same F# half notes, while violas play small octave B to A# half notes. VC play small octave D up to F# quarter notes down to C# half note, while CB play Great octave B up to small octave D quarter notes up to F# half note. Repeat in Bar 2. While Herrmann’s structure does not offer triads, the basic interval between lowest to highest notes is the same P5 interval. The top celli (etc) play D up to A (perfect 5th interval) quarter notes to Bb half note with the bottom celli playing D to Eb half notes. So the half note section has the interval of Eb up to Bb (another P5 interval). Of course, Grieg has B/D/F# (B to F# is a P5 interval) and then F#/A#/C# (F# up to C# is a P5 interval). [9:51 pm] I expanded my observations and just posted the section below on Talking Herrmann: “At any rate, I found enough common ground between the two pieces. “I also got sections of the full score of Richard Strauss' ALPINE SYMPHONY. Very nice score! While I did not find (so far) any Herrmann similarity, I did find a few Korngold and Alfred Newman similarities. I have the excellent Naxos cd (8.557811). If you have it, go to track # 6 (Am Wasserfall or At The Waterfall) and go to the :06 point of that track (pages 44-45 of the written score I have, F.E.C.L 7529). It sounds so characteristic of Korngold's style from a swashbuckler score. I'll try to find the closest approximation when I get time. “If you go to track # 14 ("Vision") towards the very end starting at 3:40 (page 99 of the score), that brief section sounds remarkably like something Newman would've composed, very similar to the miracle scene (I believe) in SONG of BERNADETTE.I worked on Newman's score a long time ago (just the condensed score was available), so I'll try to dig it out and find the exact cue and bars. Anyway, I highly recommend the Alpine Symphony. Rather high-altitude refreshing music! “Back to Grieg, there's some Herrmannesque qualities in that PEER GYNT Suite # 1 also in that 4th section, "In the Hall of the Mountain King"--interesting, colorful orchestrations, effective use of the stopped horns, etc.” [February 14 at 9:09 pm] We just got back from Valentine’s dinner… At any rate, the root assumption is that there is a “striking difference” between the two overall periods, miraculously changing somewhere around 1950. Would the early period include his long-term work on Wuthering Heights? If so, then mid-1951 would be a pivot point, not 1950 (On Dangerous Ground), when the opera was finished. Yet Herrmann heavily employed his cell format in various radio works and other works much earlier. His feature film work was basically a logical extension of his radio work where he carried over many of the same old tried-&-true techniques. His Hitch-Hiker score from 1941 sounded so “contemporary” (compared to his late Fifties to mid-Sixties works) that he rerecorded for use on The Twilight Zone, Perry Mason, and other CBS television shows. There are plenty of two-bar and four-bar “cell” structures, including cue V that was heard often on CBS television. Fags/VC/CB play Great octave F# to G quarter notes (followed by a half rest and full rest next bar) and repeated in Bars 3-4.. After a half rest in Bar 1, the chimes strike middle C# half note, and horns are stopped on middle C# [written G#] half note. Repeat next three bars. The E.H. plays in Bar 2 small octave F# to G quarter notes (repeated in Bar 4. Then in Bars 5-8, strings play staccato 8th notes E/F#. Etc. So it appears that Tom Schneller also bought into these (misleading) root assumptions in his review of Cooper’s books. Perhaps Tom should’ve researched Herrmann’s early works himself quite extensively and made factual comparisons before making such statements about “striking differences.” Let’s deal more with facts than with unexamined, hasty assumptions, speculations and theories. Musicologists and scholars (and reviewers!) often need to dig deeper! I am reading now David Cooper’s review of Wierzbicki’s book on Forbidden Planet. Well, sorry to say, but Cooper’s article is the aggravating item in this issue! The problem is plain and simple: verbiage (too many words, very long sentences, unnecessary taxing terminology). Also Cooper has a tendency to go off on a tangent. “I finished nearly all of Wierzbicki's highly readable work; that is, you will not be burdened by excessive musicological jargon. It is an entertaining and informative read. In certain terms, it is an experimental analysis, just as the Barron score is an experimental, unusual score for Hollywood back in that Golden Age years. It's what can be termed a good SPECULATIVE analysis; that is, there is NO written score to analyze, so Wierzbicki had to base his observations and conclusions "entirely on aural experience." So it was an exercise that was out-of-the-norm in terms of film score analyses/books that normally rely on a physical (written) score. He would in Chapter 4 make written transcriptions or versions of the audio. With great pitch discrimination, I would assume he could do an excellent job of putting-to-paper elusive sounds that can be rather hard to pin down (especially electronically generated sounds). So Wierzbicki did a fine job in his attempt to decipher and musically intellectualize and describe what essentially is a listening experience. “Chapter 1 is "Origins and Connections," and quite informative. Even more interesting is Chapter 2's "Compositional Techniques" that more squarely discusses the phenomenon of electronic music. Chapter 3 is a very nice read, "Historical and Critical Contexts." Chapter 4 is the technical or analytical musical meat of the book, and the chapter I was most interested in. Chapter 5 ("The Film Score") deal more generally in terms of how the "music" functioned in the visual layout of the film, etc. Chapter 4 included many written transcriptions/versions of the electronic sounds, providing an admirable cue-by-analysis. Like the Id monster, the score is invisible-in fact, it doesn't exist substantially as a written document but only as an aural event/experience. Wierzbicki admirably attempts to make it less invisible in understanding, to make it more substantial in his precise (or precisely subjective) analysis. He was in a sense in the Krell laboratories, experimenting to decipher or translate this aural score into another level of understanding. This was a hard task given that there was no "physical instrumentality" (no written score) available to him. My main criticism is that there is no new in-depth interview with Bebe Barron discussing the issues presented in the book that would've been an important historical document. Bill Wrobel 8-29-05” [Sunday, February 17, 2008] The biggest paper is Paul Merkley’s item, “Stanley Hates This But I Like It! : North vs. Kubrick on the Music for 2001: A Space Odyssey.” I remember I looked at this score at UCLA many years ago, and I believe I xeroxed some cue title pages. However, I was far more interested in North’s score to Cleopatra and hence focused almost exclusively on that. After all, at the time, there was no recording of North’s 2001 that was available, and so I had no audio reference source to help and interest me further. Just now as I write, I attempted to find my copy of the score that Goldsmith conducted, but damn, I cannot find it. It’s possible I lost it. That’s unfortunate because I wanted to hear the music while I read the score samples provided in the paper. Oh, well. I may go to the extra expense to buy that Intrada Special Collection cd. I vaguely recall, however, that when I first heard the Goldsmith re-recording, I was not particularly impressed by the music. Herrmann would’ve done a much more interesting score! I liked the side comment of Merkley on page 31 when Schurmann told home that he went to see the movie in 1968 with Herrmann: “I went with Benny Herrmann. I thought it was terrific. Benny did too.” Too bad Kubrick did not trust his instincts about Herrmann doing the project no matter the costs. North is not one of my Top Twenty favorite composers but I did like some of his works, or at least some of the cues in his scores. His Dragonslayer score is nice overall, I thought. However, the subject matter may lend itself to a problem; namely, it was given familiar exposure already by several sources, and it may not generate as much initial interest to many readers of this long paper. Also, the subject matter is integrally involved in a North score that in effect does not conveniently exist (cannot easily be heard in the normal context). The viewer of the film/reader of this paper cannot pop in a dvd of the movie and listen to the North score. It would be nice if an alternate track existed on the dvd where you can listen to the North score. So the reader has to go to the trouble of getting either the Goldsmith re-recording or, perhaps better yet, the Intrada original cassette tape version (formatted to cd) and then time-consumedly try to line up the music to synchronize with the dvd. The same musico-dramatic impact is not there as in the case of a score specifically designed for the final edit of the movie. With the Torn Curtain dvd, at least there is a separate section that aligns (or tries to) the unused Herrmann score with the scenes the cues were meant for. But at least you can purchase the cds of North’s score and say, “North Loves This But I Hate It!” or “North Loves This And I Love It!” or “North Loves This But I Only Like It!” As for myself, I recall long ago I did not particularly care for the score initially, but I need to fairly reacquaint myself with the music (once again, I wish it was conveniently on a dvd). As for the paper itself, I paraphrase my overall review of it as, “Merkley Loves This But I Like It.” Initially I was not very eager to read it and I had to discipline myself to sit down and give it a good, long, hard read. I’m glad I did, and I liked the good detective reconstructive work on uncovering the historical dynamics behind the music of 2001. Later on today I may pop in my old dvd of the movie and give it another watch (and another listen!). Incidentally, North’s 2001 original sketches (I believe all in pencil) are in Box 12 of the North Collection at UCLA. Overall the music sheets used were yellow Pacific 311-R, each page 3 X 4 staves. The cue, “Space Talk,” is Reel 4/2 at 74 bars. “Trip to Moon” (Reel 5/1) has the vibe, celeste, chimes I believe, harp, piano, cymbals, violins, violas in harmonics I believe. “Moon Rocket Bus” (Reel 7/1, “Stanley Hates This But I Like It! H.B.) is I believe 8 pages in length, 119 bars. Also in Box 12 is “Wonderful Country, dated May 19-20, 1959, 10:30 am. 2 flutes, 2 oboes, 3 clarinets, 1 Fag, 4 horns, 3 trumpets, 3 Pos, 1 tuba, 1 piano, 4 drums, guitar, 6 violas, 6 VC, 2 CB (no violins). Also included is “Symphony To a New Continent (Africa).” I believed I looked at these scores (and others) on August 17 one year long ago. I also looked at the Hans Salter collection, Box 1. This included the white Conductor sheets for Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman” by H.J. Salter, Charles Previn, and Frank Skinner (3 staves normally).There were also original pencil sketches for Maneaters.” The Main Title is in _ time, key signature of two sharps. Reel 1/B is “Jungle.” R1/C-2/B is “Malaria” in four staves. Reel 2/A is “Wounded Tiger. Reel 2/C is “First Victim” Moderato in _ time, key signature of 1 flat. Reel 2/E is “Leaving Hospital,” Slow (Grave) in 4/4 time. Etc. Anyway, the next paper in the latest JOFM is “Whose Classical Music? Reflections on Film Adaptation” by Lawrence Kramer. This paper and the prior one both involve the usage of classical/contemporary concert (Ligeti for 2001) pieces in feature films, so I guess we could logically call this issue the Journal of Classical/Film Music. I was least interested in this paper initially in terms of what was offered en total in the issue, but I read it anyway, and I liked the casual, make-yourself-at-home, highly readable, informal style of writing by the author. No pedantics (unlike Cooper’s item!). Kramer’s focus is wondering why Chopin’s Prelude in E minor was used in the 2004 film, Notebook. He then takes on the associative task of relating the views of art historian Erwin Panofsky (specifically his essay, “Reflections on Historical Time”) to the seemingly unrelated use of Chopin in a film based during 1939-1946 in the “swing” music period (although the “present” period is a timeframe since the characters of the movie are there in their old age). Unfortunately I neither saw the movie nor did I read Panofsky’s paper, so at the offset I was at a disadvantage and could not easily ”relate.” Kramer proceeds to describe various pivotal scenes, and this helps, but it is a poor substitute for actually seeing and hearing the film itself. Just like music, you’ve got to “experience” it (hear it) and not just read about it (or even read the written music) because that is more in the level of an abstraction. Kramer continues and provides an associative study between the music being played by the young girl on the tinny-sounding piano and the advances of her would-be young suitor. The advances were disrupted by outside forces but the intent was nevertheless there to bring the desire to fruition (beautiful music) although it was temporarily prevented (symbolized by the playing on a bad piano). If I may add a point, in a greater or inner Framework of action, there are no such impediments of desire. The impediments are in the practical realization or material/physical fulfillment. Anyway, Kramer tries to bring the reader into a different level of appreciation of the film, better appreciating the use of Chopin’s music (not remaining on the level where it’s just music that happens to be there and seems to fit okay). There are certain associations that can be brought to conscious awareness, even though the elements at first may not seem to “fit.” If I may add here, it’s not unlike what happens in dreams at bed. You may not remember them but the subconscious processed the events and feelings of the day prior and created a series of symbolic dreams. If you do remember the dreams, the symbolism may or may not be lost to you consciously. In conclusion, all of the main Articles in this issue are fine and educative on some level (s). It all is going to depend on your personal interest in the topics. The Amran interview and Merkley’s long paper are more fact and outer oriented, while Kramer’s essay is multidimensional, associative, and intuitive (but very readable). Bushard’s paper is the more analytical of the bunch in terms of the music itself. Once again, I am not a big fan of Leonard Bernstein’s music, or of the movie itself. But if you love the movie and the music, you’ll like Bushard’s paper. Of the four Reviews, Schneller’s review of Hitchcock’s Music is good (probably because I agree with it!) while his review of Cooper’s books is not so fine (probably because I don’t agree with it that much!). Hung’s review of Goldmark’s book on cartoon music (I never read it) is informative enough but I cannot relate to it directly since I’ve never laid my hands on the book. Cooper’s review of Wierzbick’s book on Forbidden Planet to me is an inexcusable display of pedantic excesses, and I would hope he will curb these tendencies in future books and write in a bit more “readable” and relatable style. I was not very impressed (well, except negatively!). Feedback is feedback, and of course I realize this is only one person’s feedback (and I don’t want to be unkind), and he may actually enjoy writing in this fashion (!) and be part of his nature—well, that’s fine. People should do what makes them happy. But one’s personal value fulfillment may not be anyone else’s value fulfillment. My opinion is that he has a lot to offer in his intelligent analysis but the way it is presented can present a problem at times. I suggest book and review writers make their output less painful & difficult to read, and a little bit more enjoyable to read. [Thursday, Feb 21 at 9 pm] Earlier I posted a few brief times on Talking Herrmann. Here is one with interesting links re: 2001 I enjoyed Tim's comment on North's version of the sunrise/M.T.: End of Talking Herrmann paste job. ********************************** You can download all of the papers, including Royal S. Brown’s “How Not to Think Film Music.” If you liked David Cooper’s review in the JOFM of Wierzbicki’s Forbidden Paper book, you’ll love Brown’s terminological complexities! Perhaps the paper should’ve been titled, “How Not To Go Off The Deep End in Thinking About Film Music.” When he briefly discusses the Overture to North by Northwest, he laments that the A maj (A/C#/E) closure is “simply wrong” (although Herrmann did indeed compose it on end page 18 of the Overture), and that it was no longer film music but converted into “ersatz concert music.” He then figured that this “god-awful cadence” was the creation of the music editor, although he could not confirm it because the original written full score was unavailable to him “because the curator of the Bernard Herrmann archives sits over his collection like a dog in a manger.” Hmmm. Brown in understandably non-specific here. Is he referring to the previous curator, Chris, or the current one, David? At any rate, Brown made a “god awful” assumption that a music editor for the film wrote the ending (normally used in concert performances). I discuss all of this in detail in my rundown of the score/movie. An excerpt is as follows: “As stated earlier, Herrmann simply cut & paste his Overture from “The Wild Ride” cue. The first three pages (Bars 1-48) are kept intact. He then skips the fourth page of this cue that featured the ascending 8th note figures (that you’ll hear more prominently in “Two Dollars”). Remember, however, that he keeps this page for the actual “The Wild Ride” cue. Then he resumes on the fifth page on Bar 65 (:33). He includes the 6th page that starts on Bar 81 (:43). He also keeps the 7th page that starts on Bar 97 (:53 Overture; 1:40 “Wild Ride”). He then skips pages 8 thru 10 (Bars 113-160). He resumes on the 11th page that starts on Bar 161 (1:03 Overture; 2:00 “Wild Ride”). He continues with the rest of the cue up to Bar 273. He does not use the alternate (longer) ending for the Overture (page18 of this cue, alternate Bars 269-275), the alternate ending played so often in CD re-recordings and concert performances. The final edit of the movie also does not use the longer alternate ending…… The cue ends on the A maj (A/C#/E) 8th note tonality in end Bar 275. Pos play this on small octave E/A/middle C# 8ths (followed by a quarter rest). Trumpets play Line 2 C#/E/A 8ths. The piccolo plays Line 2 A rinforzando 8th, and so forth.” Brown’s statement that the curator wouldn’t allow him to research the score sounds rather like a lame excuse (and a personal grudge) to me. Even if the autograph score is no longer allowed to be perused, a copy of it is available for study (xerox reproduction or the microfilm). As it turns out, if Brown feels that what Herrmann composed is “god-awful” for the cadence, then I suppose the reader is supposed to accept that belief? I can imagine if Herrmann was alive and read that statement, he would have a fit! At any rate, if you’re going to write an official paper in a scholarly film journal, one would expect at least that the writer do his homework and research the score properly instead of making unsupported observations. Best not to say anything in this case unless you’re reasonably sure (and not make lame excuses that the curator made the score unavailable since I know for a fact that the Herrmann Papers are available for study to researchers). Brown soon discusses Psycho and makes more assumptions that I disagree with, including his belief that Herrmann simply was not up to doing a thoroughly proper job in completing the score! To paraphrase, Brown states that Herrmann’s failure was his inability to “get his compositional soul back in touch” with the modernism evident in his Early Works—or specifically, Sinfonietta—that based part of his Psycho score. I suppose Brown knows better than Herrmann himself what was necessary to do! Brown also asserts that it was basically only the Sinfonietta (with the possible exception pf the Prelude for Piano) that “features compositional audacities to be found nowhere else in his work.” Oh, really? Can he back that up with fact? Actually, there are indeed more examples of such “compositional audacities” found in his Early Works that I personally researched. Once again, Brown makes statements without doing the proper homework (verifiable, supporting research of the primary materials). So I am not very impressed by his commentary. Far earlier I was not impressed with his “Herrmann, Hitchcock, and the Music of the Irrational” assumptions, and I am not impressed by this paper as well. At the very least, I’d be more impressed if he got his facts right, and made far few unsupported assumptions. Also, who is he trying to impress with his tedious dense terminology? Examples are “signifier of musical terminativity,” “psychosemiotic perspective,” “hyperexplication,” and so on. A topic in The Film Score Message Board voiced criticisms about this, how “impenetrable” the wording can be: At any rate, you may want to give it a read for yourself. At least it is a free read (so far). I wonder if Brown (and the other contributors of this inaugural issue) was actually paid for their works published there? Well, I think 40 pages are enough for a blog! See you again in about three or four months! I was thinking of putting up a second rundown along with Cape Fear for this new update in late March or early April, but I’ll think about it. I’m a bit tired. It’d have to be a short television score. I was thinking of Goldsmith's Twilight Zone score for “The Invaders.” We’ll see. The dvd of “The Mist” came out today. I’m watched it. It’s okay but the ending was uncalled for, a tasteless move. It also doesn’t seem logical to me, considering the admirable actions and motives of the lead character throughout the movie. I don’t care about that previous promise to his son that he won’t let the bad monsters get to him. I’m sure it would turn off most people and give this movie a thumb’s down. The director should’ve stuck with the end of the novella where the car and occupants just drive off into the mist. Glad I didn’t buy the dvd, but just rented it for $5. The other dvd I rented is I Am Legend starring Will Smith. I’ll try to watch it tonight….Well, I’m 28 minutes into the movie. So far it’s keeping my attention, but it’s a somewhat bleak, lonely movie. I’m not a big fan of this kind of subject matter. …I’m 53 minutes into the movie. His dog got bit by the vicious dog. I knew that was going to happen! Predictable….Ok. I finished the movie. Better than “The Mist” but not by much. The music did not catch my attention in either movie! I miss the good ole Golden Years! ************************* |
