James Horner - Appreciation Thread

[Eric Paddon]

I'm sorry I haven't added to this thread yet but obviously my sense of perspective about Horner's sad passing isn't the same as it is I know for others at this point. Even so, I'd be remiss in not mentioning that for me, no matter how good I find Goldsmith's score for the first Trek film, Horner's Trek score for II and again III was the true sound of the film series at its best. Goldsmith's biggest failure had been to connect his score to the TV theme whereas Horner took care of that right off the bat with the TV fanfare in the opening and then making what followed his own that served II quite well on all levels. III might have been considered a rehash of a lot of II in many respects but for me it represented continuity that was needed.

It was because of that sense of Horner providing continuity and the definitive sound for the movie franchise that I really felt his absence from IV and I have gone on record a lot about my dislike of IV as a movie and how it literally was the one thing that made me stop being a diehard Trekkie fan in terms of not caring about anything other than the original series any longer. Having said that, I think if Horner had been retained for IV or at the very least his theme music to provide needed continuity, I might not have disliked IV as much as I did. I'm not knocking Rosenmann who did a fine score in its own right but this being the 80s when in the age of the movie franchise you expected that musical continuity in the SW Trilogy, the Superman films etc. even if the primary composer had been replaced, it was much too jarring to hear a totally brand new score and sound. And we know of course the reason was chiefly because Leonard Nimoy had been hell-bent determined to use Rosenmann at some point (If I recall, Nimoy felt trapped into using Horner again on III simply because II had been so successful).

Other than Apollo 13 and Titanic, there are no other Horner scores in my collection due to lack of familiarity with his other films (no Andy, let's not get into that subject again). But the Trek films established him as a name I will always associate with the sound of movie music that has all but disappeared now.

[John Johnson]

[John Johnson]

http://www.artfilms.co.uk/Detail.aspx?ItemID=2942

[Paul MacLean]

I might not have disliked IV as much as I did. I'm not knocking Rosenmann who did a fine score in its own right but this being the 80s when in the age of the movie franchise you expected that musical continuity in the SW Trilogy, the Superman films etc. even if the primary composer had been replaced, it was much too jarring to hear a totally brand new score and sound.

I honestly never cared for Rosenman's score either. I found it much too jaunty and goofy (and contrived -- like the jazzy synthpop for the arrival in San Francisco). Rosenman was good at "weird stuff" (like his choral music in Beneath the Planet of the Apes) but I don't think he had a handle on "popcorn" adventure movies (as Robocop 2 would later confirm).

As I've said before, Nimoy should have saved Rosenman for The Good Mother and given Star Trek IV to Elmer Bernstein (imagine Bernstein scoring a Star Trek movie!).

Other than Apollo 13 and Titanic, there are no other Horner scores in my collection due to lack of familiarity with his other films (no Andy, let's not get into that subject again)..

I would highly recommend Krull. I think you might enjoy Brainstorm, The Land Before Time and Braveheart as well.

[AndyDursin]

Well I guess I have to come to Rosenman's defense yet again!

I'm not a huge Roseman devotee (by any means) but I've always been a big fan of Rosenman's score for IV. The picture's tone was much removed from the seriousness of II and III, it was a tonal shift and an atmospheric one and I think really demanded a new sound as it were. Horner's gorgeous, but dense going and very "serious" music, wouldn't have fit.

It's still the best film of the series IMO for its overall entertainment value and when I hear Rosenman's music, it's festive, light and captures the tone of that picture completely. It's meant to be jaunty, almost like a celebration -- essentially telling the audience what kind of film it is. No more spending an entire movie on sound stages like the claustrophobic SEARCH FOR SPOCK -- this film is going off the reservation -- and I think that's one element that has always worked in its favor.

Either way, the music fits it like a glove. Nimoy wanted the film to be fun, the script was always intended to be upbeat and even specifically open with the Courage theme, and I think Rosenman nailed what the picture was looking for. His music for the whales is lovely...his use of the Star Trek theme at the very end sent chills up my spine and was hugely emotional when the crew sees the "new" Enterprise (I remember some people getting misty eyed sitting near me -- myself included)...to a degree where I think, of EVERY film that used the Courage theme, that was the best usage of it out of any composer.

I really, honestly believe Rosenman's work on that picture was perfect. So it never bothered me that Horner wasn't brought back.

One thing that's also overlooked in this debate (which we've had before, often!) is that Horner's SEARCH FOR SPOCK score is pretty pedestrian considering what he wrote for WRATH OF KHAN. I don't think it's on the same level as his KHAN score to any degree, honestly -- not nearly as inspired or memorable -- so it's also possible Horner was done as well with this series and had already "said" everything he needed to, musically, as well.

[Eric Paddon]

How about this as a compromise Andy. Suppose we had the entire film be what Rosenmann did up to the end credits but when the Enterprise takes off we go back into Horner's end title from II and III? That way "continuity" as I define the concept is served completely.

[Paul MacLean]

The problem is "important" composers on sequels usually don't want to use the music written by the previous composer (which is why the later Harry Potter scores are so disappointing). Goldsmith of course even went back to his ST: TMP theme for Star Trek V (which was great, since it was such an outstanding theme, but on the other hand, admittedly a little odd in context).

Interestingly Rosenman did bow to Nimoy's wishes to use the TV series theme as the main title. However Nimoy liked Rosenman's end title so much, he asked him to adapt it for the opening credits.



But I still think Elmer Bernstein (with his extensive experience in action and comedy) would have been the perfect choice for the film (and improved it). Oh well.

[AndyDursin]

Elmer would have been interesting. His career was hit and miss at times for me, though his sci-fi scores were generally excellent with the exception of, say, SPACEHUNTER, which I was bored to tears by.

I don't know, however, if Elmer's score wouldn't have been even "goofier" than Rosenman's "modern" tracks (which didn't really bother me) given the faintly embarrassing GHOSTBUSTERS "contemporary" music he wrote that was (mostly) wisely thrown out. I just can just see Kirk and Spock walking down the street to some of that stuff.

For me, Rosenman's music was a definite part of IV's success and improved the film. I also liked that he tried doing the Courage arrangement (which is on Lukas' expanded CD), but his end credits/opening credits music was perfect. It's just one of those things -- I like more Horner and Elmer scores than Rosenman's work, no doubt, but that score was the right choice for that film IMO. Given the film's massive popularity and the acclaim Rosenman's score received, I think Nimoy's decision to hire him was affirmed.

[Eric Paddon]

The problem is "important" composers on sequels usually don't want to use the music written by the previous composer (which is why the later Harry Potter scores are so disappointing). Goldsmith of course even went back to his ST: TMP theme for Star Trek V (which was great, since it was such an outstanding theme, but on the other hand, admittedly a little odd in context).|

But there is certainly precedence though for it. Franz Waxman did "Demetrius And The Gladiators" but most of Newman's thematic material from "The Robe" remains.

Certainly if II and III had been done by say, Williams, there's no way you wouldn't have used his material in IV. So Horner admittedly was at a disadvantage there because he wasn't that kind of giant figure in the business.

[John Johnson]

A rather touching story, James Horner at a UCLA masterclass.



http://www.newmusicbox.org/articles/rem ... es-horner/

[AndyDursin]

But there is certainly precedence though for it. Franz Waxman did "Demetrius And The Gladiators" but most of Newman's thematic material from "The Robe" remains.

Certainly if II and III had been done by say, Williams, there's no way you wouldn't have used his material in IV. So Horner admittedly was at a disadvantage there because he wasn't that kind of giant figure in the business.

Horner was well on the "A list" by that point in time in the mid '80s. Moving on to another composer was all about the type of FILM IT WAS, not how much (or how little) cache Horner had at the time. It was not a heavy going melodrama about Kirk's son and Spock's death/resurrection and the destruction of the Enterprise, all elements that Horner's dense, dramatic music touched upon.

Furthermore -- after Horner's basically by-the-numbers score for III, why do you think he'd have wanted to score IV after phoning in THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK? Horner's interest level may have already been waning. Maybe if Horner put in a Williams-esque effort for STAR TREK III and wrote a lot of fresh, new material (which he didn't), Nimoy would have been more interested in him. The fact he didn't probably lead Nimoy to believe he was just going to write the same KIND of music again, and it would not have fit the specific requirements of IV's story and tone. And of course he wanted Rosenman for III in the first place, but couldn't hire him due to his lack of clout at the time (if you want to talk about being a "giant figure in the business," consider that Horner had more cache as a composer than Nimoy had as a director when III was being made!).

It's the same reason Horner scored II fresh and didn't retain Goldsmith's theme -- because the movie was a different animal than its predecessor, and required its own sound. They made the smart idea to have a fresh start. It's the same thing with IV, and even more so really, given the change in tone and atmosphere.

[Eric Paddon]

I think the difference between going from I to II though is that II came off more like a whole reboot of the movie franchise after I basically misfired and no one wanted to call attention to anything associated with it. Frankly, if TMP had been more of a success in the sense that they were going to retain the costumes/look etc. of TMP in II then there might have been more pressure to retain the general theme of Goldsmith around a new score etc. The problem is that II-III-IV is still a singular storyline in which when we went from III to IV there was still an undercurrent of "what happens next" in the same way we were building off that thinking with the SW franchise in those days as well. For better or worse, that made all three movies seem like an integrated storyline where yes, you could change the tone from one to the next if you wanted to (and I'm still unconvinced that was a good idea) but I think overall some sense of continuity maintenance had to be maintained. (Of course they also tossed it out the window in other areas too which is also why I didn't like the film among other reasons but that's another story!). You could have Rosenmann do whatever he wanted to do in the body of the film if that served it well, but at least give recognition to the fact that the successful thematic sound of the Trek movies, where they became a legit enduring franchise once again was also helped by what Horner had done just as Williams had done it with the SW and Superman films. In the end, that's really what I'm more put-off by than the fact that Rosenmann did the main score which is why if suddenly at the end we eased back into Horner's end title (which would have worked) I don't think it would have hurt.

[Jedbu]

Considering that after the budget (of which there was nothing finalized) of TMP went nutso and Paramount pretty much had II under somewhat tighter reins with Harve Bennett and considerably less money, I wonder if Horner might have been signed for just II with an option for III if II did well enough. I also noticed that Horner composed four scores in 1982 with TEN in 1983-is it possible that if he was offered III and by the time it came to do it he might have felt a bit fatigued after an extremely busy year and got the OK from Bennett and Nimoy to base much of his score on II? Or that with III not quite so action filled Horner felt less was more, ala Goldsmith?

My only quibble with Rosenmann's score for IV is that the orchestra never sounded as full as the ones that Goldsmith and Horner used for their scores or that the orchestration just did not have as epic a feel as it needed. I know that Nimoy and Rosenmann had been friends since the days they worked in TV together and Nimoy might have felt that his friend needed a major studio job on a film that was guaranteed to do well and get him more exposure (he had more intimate theatrical features like CROSS CREEK and HEART OF THE STAG and his last major work had been the Bakshi LORD OF THE RINGS in 1978). After IV it appears that Rosenmann's last major theatrical film was ROBOCOP 2 with either independent or TV work until he retired. I still think his work on EAST OF EDEN is his finest.

[Paul MacLean]

Considering that after the budget (of which there was nothing finalized) of TMP went nutso and Paramount pretty much had II under somewhat tighter reins with Harve Bennett and considerably less money, I wonder if Horner might have been signed for just II with an option for III if II did well enough.

I recall reading Goldsmith was sought-out for Star Trek II, but deemed too expensive for that film's lessened budget (plus he was already lined-up for Poltergeist, in advance of production). Nicholas Meyer toyed with the idea of asking Miklos Rozsa, and Andy tells me the young William Stromberg was even under consideration at one point.

I'd be willing to bet it was Goldsmith that recommended Horner, given that Horner was at that time something of a protege of Goldsmith, who was trying to help the younger composer find quality work. (Goldsmith was also asked to re-score Something Wicked This Way Comes, but was unavailable; I suspect Horner got that job on Goldsmith's recommendation as well).

Harve Bennett and Horner agreed to work together again if Star Trek II spawned a sequel, but Horner told CinemaScore magazine after Star Trek III he wanted to get away from "epic" movies, hence is non-involvement in IV.

[AndyDursin]

Horner told CinemaScore magazine after Star Trek III he wanted to get away from "epic" movies, hence is non-involvement in IV.

That makes sense. Plus Nimoy didn't want Horner. He didn't even want him on III, he wanted Rosenman, but was vetoed by Bennett. Once III was a hit, Nimoy had the clout to do what he wanted.

This is all outlined in the liner notes of Lukas' CDs.

The problem is that II-III-IV is still a singular storyline in which when we went from III to IV there was still an undercurrent of "what happens next" in the same way we were building off that thinking with the SW franchise in those days as well. For better or worse, that made all three movies seem like an integrated storyline

Yet, other than the opening and closing of the film, IV is a completely self-contained film. Only those sections of the film really addressed the loose ends of III -- it's why IV was able to have such success with mainstream, non-Trek viewers and enjoyed the commercial success that it did. If it was completely wrapped up with the prior movies, most people would have been lost trying to figure out where the story was at, and only hardcore Trekkies would have gone to see it.

So yes, it's a continuation, but most of the III loose ends are addressed right off with leaving Saavik on Vulcan and such, but then the movie moves on from there. You didn't need to see II or III to appreciate it, because IV is its own animal (whereas THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK is so tied into II that it doesn't exist on its own terms).

. You could have Rosenmann do whatever he wanted to do in the body of the film if that served it well, but at least give recognition to the fact that the successful thematic sound of the Trek movies, where they became a legit enduring franchise once again was also helped by what Horner had done just as Williams had done it with the SW and Superman films. In the end, that's really what I'm more put-off by than the fact that Rosenmann did the main score which is why if suddenly at the end we eased back into Horner's end title (which would have worked) I don't think it would have hurt.

I just can't see how that would have been a good idea. Going back to Horner's music after Rosenman's music would have been jarring, and while I think Horner's music was phenomenal in II, frankly I don't believe they owed him anything by having to adhere to his theme. (And again, in my mind, it's not as adaptable as the one Goldsmith wrote. It is a sweeping, beautiful but also very heavy theme. It is not as "light" as the march Goldsmith wrote for TMP)

That's how Star Trek has always functioned. Every composer has basically had their own shot at it, for better (Horner, Rosenman, Goldsmith) or worse (Eidelman, Giacchino).