Music applied to Cinema: Maestro Morricone's approach

Intriguing question, posting this theme song from the famous cartoon Popeye

not to mock the topic but to point out how effectively, before electronics, music for images was symphonic (even for a cartoon).

This can tell us many things, but the change brought by the digital era is certainly blatant. So when you talk about symphonic, what do you mean?

Open content (youtube)

By "symphonic" I mean what many define as "art" or "contemporary" but for orchestra; for "chamber" the same thing but for a chamber.

In my opinion, perhaps cultured, contemporary but certainly not, and anyway Morricone is one of the best and most appreciated also because if he can choose between cultured and popular, the popular note always wins.

Clearly his great melodic vein (precisely, contemporary music... melodic vein? That's already an answer) leaves no escape and makes one forgive some "fake" naivety.

From my point of view in film music, the scene commands and the music supports, therefore musical language can never be a discriminating factor.

If an event is taking place in a club and a piano bar arrangement is required… how would “contemporary” [classical contemporary] fit in? Which, by the way, is nothing more than one of the genres of art music.

Therefore, starting with “artistic” or “contemporary” already introduces a formal flaw, as some say when expressing themselves in these terms, but it is enough to speak of art music. And indeed, you report that in the video they speak of cultured musicians.

Since you mention contemporary music, according to some, certain soundscapes can be wedded to certain types of film scenes, but let's return to the discussion of images, which command the music; therefore, not everything can be put everywhere and every artist must find the balance between their own language and directorial requirements.

Another point is the one mentioned by Ludovica: one cannot pretend that electronic music does not exist, so when should acoustic instruments be used?

For instance, if you write music for The Legend of 1900… a beautiful acoustic piano is enough. Question: how would you have inserted “contemporary” music in general into that film? Into those scenes? Into that setting?

I point you to this topic opened by good Thallo

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/3240-la-grande-bellezza/

From a cultured point of view, the images manage to justify even the now historicized minimalism.

Because of this:

> “Once Upon a Time in the West built on the “strategic” arrangement of the sixth interval”

If you think about it, all tonal music is based on the strategic arrangement of tonic and dominant. Everyone can tell their own compositions however they want; the fact remains that Morricone, one of those I appreciate, is one of those who, if he can, prioritizes the ear of the general public. His strength is that despite this aspect, he proposes credible and modern compositions.

More technically, he knows harmony very well (one of a composer's resources) and manages to make catchy melodies interesting. The melody reaches the general public and the cultured ones get the harmony.

I know, but it is deliberately simplistic, but tighten... tighten...

Beautiful question!

A Feldman, I would say... Yes. Music can!

And how! In cinema, it has 'its own' role in communicating. A role that accompanies the images and the dialogues.

...the harmony... I would say that even the general public 'gets hit by it'. Even if they don't know they are being hit by it, what do you say Frank!?

From my point of view, Morricone is a bit overrated; for example, Rota composes catchy music without falling into the banal; Morricone took advantage of melodism to cater to the audience. However, I must admit that Morricone's music is functional to the films it accompanies and is based on excellent thematic ideas, almost totally devoid of development. Which is not a flaw in itself, but I believe that the "great" film music composers are others.

LucaCavaliere wrote:

what are you saying Frank!?

Having seen Tiger's last intervention, I say that Morricone has two souls. On one hand, he is a very refined composer (which emerges in his film music; his scores have been covered by other artists several times), on the other hand (light music compositions and arrangements) he is not always up to the task. However, this is just my impression.

Surely the images stimulate him quite a bit and I think they play their part... in fact, often, once the images are removed, film music (this in general) "loses" many references.

Feldman wrote:

. Morricone clarified the matter by saying that he always attempted to find "underground" solutions, almost hidden, to experiment with different criteria in the development of themes and melodies; he thus provided the example of Once Upon a Time in the West, built on the "strategic" arrangement of the sixth interval, and Eat One Evening at Dinner as Ricercare in 6 parts.

It occurred to me that the entire soundtrack for "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" is based on a motif that is supposed to imitate the coyote's cry, a motif that he elaborates timbrally, using ostinatos (notes SI DO LA MI) and aleatoric elements.

Interesting because at a certain point he takes up the initial motif and joins it with the piano ostinato; he is certainly someone who studied.

I don't know Frank...

i mean: regarding Morricone's 'two souls', I don't know what to say because, in my substantial great ignorance of modernity, I only know the "melodic" soul (the one that winks at the "general public" as they used to say). Even Daniele - in a chat in the past - told me that I only know one side of Morricone.

By asking you "What do you say?" I was referring to the discussion about the cultured and the general public, about perceiving (and remaining seduced by) melody rather than also by harmony... which, in my opinion, both act more or less on everyone. All discussions about the 'perception' of music intrigue me. And so I asked you for a confirmation - or a denial - of that opinion of mine thrown out there. And I went a bit off topic.

In any case, the discussion about Morricone and film music remains - rightly so - the main one.

Morricone is a musician of cyclopean stature. His ability to invent hundreds of ideas that pierce your brain and stick there forever is perhaps matched only by John Williams. In Morricone's case, and particularly when working for Leone, I don't think it is right to say that "in film music the scene commands and the music supports": it is not a simple matter of support, because if you remove Morricone, the scene vanishes (and Leone knew this well). Perhaps Tornatore overdoes it a bit, in the sense that he uses the same music too much, with a vaguely "saturating" effect, as if exaggerating with the cake we like so much (a tendency already present in Once Upon a Time in America, moreover), but this does not diminish Morricone's greatness.

The problem is when one tries to listen to the same music outside of the film: impossible, because they are totally devoid of development. There is a lack of a framework to hold the form together.

RedScharlach wrote:

Il problema è quando si prova ad ascoltare le stesse musiche al di fuori del film: impossibile, perché sono totalmente prive di sviluppo. Manca un'impalcatura che regga la forma.

Which essentially means that the music relies on the support of the images. Without them, it doesn't work

Tiger wrote:

Which basically means that the music is supported by the images. Without them, it doesn't work

In this specific case, I would say rather the opposite: it is the images that support the music.

particular cases that I like very much are those in which the "soundtrack" is itself a protagonist of the film. As in Three Colors: Blue

but the same happens in The Double Life of Veronika

what do you think in general about Preisner?

Open content (youtube)

Open content (youtube)

Feldman wrote:

What do you think? Can music for Cinema (in this and other cases) live off the same complexity inherent to chamber and symphonic music?

Perhaps not the same, but certainly a complexity of its own.

I mean, there have always been many types of music, and today there are even more: instrumental music, sacred music, operatic music, etc. (and it's not just us Westerners making music...)

Each of these typologies must deal with a set of constraints that are more or less large depending on the case. Some are precise and explicit (for example, tonal music has its rules, serial music has others), while others are more elusive and variable and therefore identify broader typologies—for example, the constraints that determine what should be so-called absolute music (in the sense of Hanslick) compared to music with a dramatic setting. This discussion would lead us very far, but I believe that, unfortunately, in order to answer the question fully, it would have to be addressed.

Furthermore, one must define complexity—what is meant by this term—and then whether or not it is appropriate to attribute positive or negative connotations to it.

In general terms, however, it is important to understand that it is precisely the constraints that influence, if not determine, the level of complexity.

Chamber music has its constraints; music for cinema has others.

Bianca wrote:

Perhaps not the same one, but certainly one of its own.

perhaps that is exactly what Feldman meant

I do not know Preisner's work, but I thank Luca for remembering the great Kieslowski!

@ micamalher

i appreciate your praise... and that you write "the great Kieslowski". I agree!

Regarding Preisner, I don't consider myself a great connoisseur of his work, but everything I have listened to has deeply moved me.

I would like to add that in the music he wrote for Kieslowski's major films, there is already so much: quite unlike a mere "soundtrack"!

Preisner's music "revives" the drama on its own, specifically musical, autonomous level. And it imposes itself almost as an alternative to the viewing of the film (I'm exaggerating, I know. But it's to give you the idea).

A bit like what happened with the Leonore III Overture that Beethoven wrote for Fidelio. Instead of preparing the drama, it "burned" it within its absolute musicality. An absolute musicality that is not even affected by trumpet blasts in the distance.

Beethoven noticed this and replaced it with something more... ad hoc.

I agree with everyone. I have always thought that Morricone somehow had a sort of inferiority complex towards his colleagues who wrote chamber and symphonic music, while he, known for pop arrangements and soundtracks, felt almost excluded from the cultured environment.

For this reason, I believe that some of Morricone's absolute works are too tied to certain stereotypes of the avant-garde, such as the use and abuse of dissonance to exclude any reference to tonality or modality.

What do you think instead of this younger composer, who always tries to find a synthesis between electronics and symphonic music in every one of his works?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUmIELyNGrU

I am obviously talking about Hans Zimmer, a German author who has become almost a point of reference for the very newest generations of composers.

Open content (youtube)

Feldman wrote:

I agree with everyone. I have always thought that Morricone somehow had a sort of inferiority complex towards his colleagues who wrote chamber and symphonic music, while he, known for pop arrangements and soundtracks, felt almost excluded from the high-culture environment.

For this reason, I believe that some of Morricone's absolute works are too tied to certain avant-garde stereotypes, such as the use and abuse of dissonance to exclude any reference to tonality or modality.

What do you think instead of this younger composer, who always tries to find a synthesis between electronics and symphonic music in every work?

I am obviously talking about Hans Zimmer, a German author who has become almost a point of reference for the very newest generations of composers.

The soundtrack certainly gave greater effectiveness to the images, thus fully fulfilling its function.