New Composer and Theme for Series Five?
- Thread starter Admiral_Young
- Start date
Gold's good, but he is very derivative (anyone who can't hear echos of certain famous film scores in his work really needs to wash their ears out). When his music is used well its brilliant, but the new series does have an awful habit of ramping up the soundtrack too much for my tastes (and I know I'm not alone here). When used properly though his stuff is ace. I can't imagine Moffat is going to change absolutely everything about the show, but maybe he feels the ime is right for a new composoer...heck for all we know gold might not want to do it anymore.
Or he could go back to having a couple of composers using different styles to suit different stories?
Wish I coud be bothered to check who scored Jekyll, the upcoming Moffat/Gatiss Sherlock Holmes, or even did the Press Gang theme tune....
Yes... Different composers. Keep Gold, but add Bear McCreary (sp?), Michael Giaccino and whoever scored Futurama to the mix please.
Of the classic series composers, I always thought Dudley Simpson was excellent. His work is suitably atmospheric without ever managing to distract you from the story.
I don't know. I really think the show is pushing its luck making so many changes at once. Replacing the shows musical 'voice' might really be too much. Maybe bring in another composer next season.
Big Gold fan (probably due to growing up listening to John Williams).
Big Gold fan (probably due to growing up listening to John Williams).
Last edited:
But, Cutter John, Doctor Who is a series that is defined by change. The actors change. The writers change. The look and feel of the series change. Justin Richards went as far as to say of Doctor Who that "neither the Doctor nor the TARDIS are strictly speaking necessary."
And even if Gold were to stay around for the next season, there's no guarantee that Wenger and Moffat would want the type of music from Gold that RTD wanted. Look at the difference between the first and later seasons of Star Trek: The Next Generation. Same composers, completely different sonic texture, because Bob Justman wanted a lush orchestral sound in the first season and Rick Berman wanted something muted, like sonic wallpaper, in later seasons.
Food for thought.
And even if Gold were to stay around for the next season, there's no guarantee that Wenger and Moffat would want the type of music from Gold that RTD wanted. Look at the difference between the first and later seasons of Star Trek: The Next Generation. Same composers, completely different sonic texture, because Bob Justman wanted a lush orchestral sound in the first season and Rick Berman wanted something muted, like sonic wallpaper, in later seasons.
Food for thought.
1. Doctor Who has been historically defined by change, but this does not mean that radical change will be successful today.
2. Even if major change is helpful, that doesn't mean that several major changes all at once won't be too much for the audience.
After all, nuWho has been fairly stable since David Tennant assumed the role; there is the possibility that too much major change might hurt the series today and lead to its cancellation.
I'm not saying it's likely -- I'm just saying, bear in mind that what worked 20 years ago is not guaranteed to work today.
Oh trust me, I'm the first one to rush in with that point when people start complaining too much about a new Doctor. But Sci said it. Too much change all at once and you risk alienating some of your audience. The need some continuity to ease into a new era. Make it feel like a continuation rather than a brand new show.
But what, exactly, is changing? We have a Doctor, we have a companion, we have a TARDIS. The audience is already used to the idea that the Doctor can change, and they know that companions come and go. The only thing that is really different from the past five years is the writers and producers behind the scenes, and is that something that the core audience, not fandom, will really note?
But on screen, there aren't that many changes. New Doctor, new companion, new TARDIS. And each of those changes are going to be explained for the audience. We have a regeneration. We have the TARDIS heavily damaged. Why would the audience find these things alienating?
But as I said above, Sci, nuWho isn't synonymous with the Davies/Tennant era anymore.
It wasn't guaranteed to work twenty years ago, either.
At this point, I don't see that the change from Tennat to Smith will be as radical or as traumatic as the change from Troughton to Pertwee. Pertwee's Doctor Who might as well have been a different series entirely. Smith's Who doesn't appear to be as radical a departure from the past.
At least, not yet.
Not quite. McCarthy did half the music for the first season. In season two, when Berman wanted the music toned down, McCarthy scaled back his scores to sonic noise. Chattaway's first scores in the third season were a little more bombastic, and when Jones was fired in the fourth season, Chattaway's scores were dialed back.
I'd still like to hear Jesper Kyd have a go...
Yes but even NuWho has been defined by change.
Season 1- Eccleston becomes Tennant
Season 2- Rose is the companion, then she leaves
Season 3- Martha is the companion then she leaves
Season 4- Donna etc etc etc...
I think even the average 8 year old likely understands that the show is about change. Could we have too many changes at once...possibly, but I think the Moffat/Smith era would have to be exceedingly bad to see the show cancelled.
Similar threads
