Composition

Morricone: What Do We Think?

31 replies 6,042 views

Started by

Feldman

Member

Member

Opening post by Feldman

Posts
171

I have always turned my attention toward a composer of our time, certainly very well known (I am talking about Ennio Morricone), whose production seems to include not only film music but also interesting chamber and orchestral productions for the concert hall.

What do you think of this composer and his poetic vision?

In particular, I highlight a personal consideration regarding this gentleman's chamber works, which are quite different in structure and language from his cinematic ones. Here is a simple example of his music, not exempt from the lessons of the post-WWII avant-garde composers:

Member

Reply 2 by aaa

Posts
78

He is a composer who has multiple souls; if I'm not mistaken, he also participated in San Remo (only once). Regarding him, I mainly know the repertoire related to film music; his main characteristic is making even the simplest melodies, which have incredible singability, interesting in terms of harmonization. Perhaps even too "simple," in the sense that sometimes he could dare more but spares the "wrong" note so as not to offend the sensibilities of a lay audience.

In short, one of those who are talented but at least clever

... Now I am listening to your proposal

Member

Reply 3 by Dante

Posts
275

I spoke about it a few months ago with my composition teacher; he told me that Morricone is only good at writing film music... I never formed a real opinion of my own on the subject. This could be the occasion, thanks for the prompt Feldman.

Moderator

Reply 4 by thallo

Posts
1,170
City
Crema

could you trash your composition teacher? No, but seriously, I don't understand these things... I might be provocative, but I BEG YOU to go to your teacher and say "you know, I wrote on a forum that in your opinion Morricone is only good at writing film music, and they responded to me like this: pppprrrrrrr!". With "pprrrr" I mean the longest raspberry you can make; even say it's not your opinion but mine

Member

Reply 5 by zadra

Posts
84
City
Torino

Given that I don't understand 20th-century music and usually find it so indigestible that I can only resist for two minutes at most, I actually liked the track. Aside from the trumpet, which I truly detest as a solo instrument. XD

Member

Reply 6 by Carlos

Posts
759

Personally, I appreciate Morricone's soundtracks for their effectiveness and immediacy. However, Morricone seems to me a composer who is not very skilled at developing the (otherwise beautiful) themes he writes (I am referring to soundtracks). As an author of non-film music, I know him little, but I find Ut to be at least an uninteresting piece.

Member

Reply 7 by aaa

Posts
78

Dante's master will be the ridiculous Thallo, but it's not that this piece does honor to Morricone... better he does what he is good at, even Chopin after a fugue had the courage to stop

Moderator

Reply 8 by thallo

Posts
1,170
City
Crema

my raspberry was more about the attitude, for the contempt towards film music. The expression "he's only good at making music for films" is not flattering towards film music, first of all

Member

Reply 9 by Dante

Posts
275

To be honest Thallo, in reality the "contempt" was more towards Morricone's music outside of the film music context... which is quite different. Which ultimately confirms what has been said by other types like AAA or (perhaps) even Carlos.

Administrator

Reply 10 by Thesimon

Posts
4,504
City
Ariccia, RM

At this point, a question comes to mind. Who would realize that themes like those from Superman, Star Wars, E.T., etc., etc., are film scores if they hadn't heard them paired with the film images? Would you truly be able to say: "this is film music?"

Member

Reply 11 by Natan

Posts
239

From my point of view, film is like theater; that music makes sense if there are images. It is the images that decide how the music should be.

For example, if in a festive scene of a film at a certain point the cat were to die, it is normal within the context of the images for there to be a sudden change in the music's atmosphere... but what if there were no images? I certainly don't know if that music would make the same sense.

Member

Reply 13 by AleGozzo

Posts
355
City
milano

it is difficult not to love Morricone's film music; I have listened to little of his other production but I don't dislike it at all, it is a language that I appreciate and satisfies me, including the piece in question (except for the calmer parts which I find weak - and there are quite a few... - and the trumpet which I also find horrible).

However, I have little sense of form and horizontal comprehension of pieces, and even my teacher, who by the way loves him, told me that his "serious" production has major problems with form and structure, and they fail to be as fine and "important" as his cinematic production.

Member

Reply 14 by GoffredoLIguri

Posts
104

I didn't know he was also a conductor, has anyone ever had the chance to see him at the opera?

Member

Reply 15 by Feldman

Posts
171
GoffredoLiguri wrote:

I didn't know he was also a conductor, has anyone ever had the chance to see him at the opera?

From what I know, he does not define himself as such but limits himself to conducting his own works (in my opinion, this is a principle that every good composer should consider and perhaps adopt, because what is important in these cases is not the beauty of the gesture but the relationship that is established between the creator of the work and the orchestral instrument, because the composer is the one who knows their work best and knows what they want...)

Moderator

Reply 16 by Frank

Posts
3,838
City
-
AleGozzo wrote:

he told me that his "serious" production has major problems of form and structure, and they fail to be as excellent and "important" as his film production.

I would like to be a little "naughty", try asking him what the weaknesses of Messiaen's "serious" music are, just out of curiosity ...

Member

Reply 17 by AleGozzo

Posts
355
City
milano
Frank wrote:

I'd like to be a little bit "naughty," try asking him what the weaknesses of Messiaen's "serious" music are, just out of curiosity ...

truly every now and then he even speaks ill of him .... but only when he is particularly angry

now I don't remember the precise terms and I wouldn't want to misrepresent it, anyway something like a writing that is too much in panels with a lot of montage work (it gave me the image of church stained glass) .... anyway always within the scope of "walking on eggshells"""}

Member

Reply 18 by Carlos

Posts
759
TheSimon wrote:

At this point, a question comes to mind. Who would realize that themes like those from Superman, Star Wars, E.T., etc., etc., are film music if they hadn't heard them coupled with the images of the films? Would you truly be able to say: "this is film music"?

An uninteresting prompt: extremely interesting! It opens up a wide-ranging discussion that could also be made in reverse. That is: is "film music" necessarily less valid than absolute music? And, conversely, if someone writes "so-so" music, is it justified if they say they write "film music"? I simply believe that music accompanying images or theater is simply different music, for example, in its structure. Naturally, in this specific case, Morricone is, among the great film score composers, one of those who found a "signature" in identifying motifs that are sometimes of an almost aphoristic brevity which become, themselves, the soundtrack to an entire film, with almost no hint of development. To this day, the most developed Morricone theme I know is the magnificent theme from "Cinema Paradiso":

But perhaps the most universally known (or one of the most) is that of "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly":

This theme is totally devoid of development and reappears repeatedly throughout the entire film. But it is and remains one of the most beautiful themes in cinema history, in my opinion.

An analogous discussion to the one proposed by Simone was made, a century and a half ago, regarding Symphonic Poems (the issue is not very different, I'll get to that soon, I promise), namely: does the fact of writing a piece whose plot is a literary text justify someone who writes a structurally weak piece? The answer is crystal clear to everyone, right? And it is, obviously, no. The fact that at the origin of a musical piece there is a literary text does not mean that the piece should not be self-sufficient and stand on its own. You listen to Strauss's Don Juan and, even if you don't know a single line of Lenau's poem, you enjoy twenty minutes of splendid music (which you will appreciate even more once you know the poem). It is not exactly the same thing, I know. But it occurred to me and I wanted to say it. Perhaps the most fitting comparison would be with ballet music, but even there we have clear examples of music that we know and which are regularly performed without the dance part (that is, without the direct purpose for which they were written), and I am referring, as you can imagine, at least to Tchaikovsky and, even more so, to Stravinsky.

One of the most beautiful soundtracks of recent years is, in my opinion, that of Jurassic Park (John Williams):

I am listening to it again right now as I write, and I must tell you that I continue to consider it one of the most beautiful pieces of music written in recent years (1993). To Simone's question "would you truly be able to say that it is film music?" I should probably answer no, but the same applies to some of the soundtracks of Hitchcock's films, written by that genius Bernard Herrmann, such as Psycho (1960), from which this wonderful suite was taken. The original (and the suite) are for string orchestra and even the "shower scene" is orchestrated without any effect. Listen to what a marvel:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQRfTvayqk0

However, it must be said that in some moments one feels the sense of "emptiness" left by certain sounds, deprived of the images for which they were written...

In any case, I would never dream of saying that a "film music" composer is a minor composer; therefore, as far as I am concerned, saying of Morricone that "he is a composer more suited to film music" is not an offense, just as it would not be to say of Giuseppe Verdi that "he was a composer more suited to opera than to instrumental music." We have examples of great composers who wrote beautiful film music while continuing to remain known, at least on this side of the ocean, for their instrumental compositions. One of these is Erich Korngold, who for Hollywood wrote tons of film music that we have all watched without knowing that the soundtrack was by one of the most important authors of the 20th century. Here is the suite from "The Adventures of Robin Hood," did you know the music was his?

Member

Reply 19 by zadra

Posts
84
City
Torino

At this point I have to ask it: still on the subject of composers working for cinema, what do you think of Hans Zimmer and Howard Shore?

Member

Reply 20 by rstrauss

Posts
432
City
Udine
TheSimon wrote:

At this point, a question comes to mind. Who would realize that themes like those of Superman, Star Wars, E.T., etc., etc., are film scores if they hadn't heard them coupled with the images from the films? Would you truly be able to say: "this is film music?"

Yes, it can be felt, but not because of the music itself, rather because of the difference that lies in the fact that usually the originally written piece is not put entirely into the film, but only the useful fragments.

I was at the Morricone concert in Udine in September and after seeing the films, I understood.

Log in to participate