What do you think the music should be like in Star Trek XI?
- Thread starter Charlie Kelly
- Start date
Re: What do you think the music should be like in Star Trek
I swear, if they play the brass "starship in orbit fanfare" (which was reused repeatedly through the original series but has never been hinted at since) I'm going to wet my pants!
Yep... there are tons of recognizable "classic Trek motifs" which haven't been used in 40 years... some of which are every bit as "signature Trekkish" as the two A. Courage bits we're all familiar with (the "starfleet fanfare" and the TOS theme).
I swear, if they play the brass "starship in orbit fanfare" (which was reused repeatedly through the original series but has never been hinted at since) I'm going to wet my pants!
Re: What do you think the music should be like in Star Trek
I'm also hoping for TOS cues. (Note: the Courage fanfare didn't appear at all in TMP, although once the ship was underway, a reharmonized bit of the main melody was interpolated into Goldsmith's score.) I like Giacchino's work on Lost but have no idea how he would approach a Trek movie main title; Lost, of course, has no main title music. But three great main title themes, all different from each other and from Courage's TOS title melody, have been written by others (Goldsmith in 1979, Horner in 1982, and Eidelman in 1991) so we should not discount the possibility that a fourth new and different, yet equally appropriate, opening theme can be devised. (Yes, I know that the Courage fanfare was used as the lead-in to Horner's main theme. This evoked a great audience reaction on opening night, especially because TMP had eschewed its use, but that's been done and there's no need to do so again, as Eidelman showed.)
I'm also hoping for TOS cues. (Note: the Courage fanfare didn't appear at all in TMP, although once the ship was underway, a reharmonized bit of the main melody was interpolated into Goldsmith's score.) I like Giacchino's work on Lost but have no idea how he would approach a Trek movie main title; Lost, of course, has no main title music. But three great main title themes, all different from each other and from Courage's TOS title melody, have been written by others (Goldsmith in 1979, Horner in 1982, and Eidelman in 1991) so we should not discount the possibility that a fourth new and different, yet equally appropriate, opening theme can be devised. (Yes, I know that the Courage fanfare was used as the lead-in to Horner's main theme. This evoked a great audience reaction on opening night, especially because TMP had eschewed its use, but that's been done and there's no need to do so again, as Eidelman showed.)
I don't want to be a downer, but from the tenor of the discussion here, it sounds like a lot of you are really expecting (or at least hoping for) a heavy reference back to TOS and/or TMP. I hate to say it, but I don't think they're going to oblige you.
This is supposed to be the movie that invigorates the franchise and even though they're going back to Kirk and Spock I don't think they're going to be going as much into "TOS" mode as people expect - not only in music, but in all aspects of the design.
I think this will be a one-off movie to try to revitalize interest in Trek in general, in anticipation of a new TV series. They aren't going to be pandering to the die-hard fans, using obscure or nostalgic references from TOS. They're going to try to put together a profitable, accessible Hollywood-style film that non-hardcore Trek fans will like. This means that the score will, in all likelihood, be pretty standard stuff.
This is just a guess on my part. Certainly all I really care about is that the movie is good, and that it finds enough interest to get some new Trek productions going on TV or possibly direct to DVD. But I wouldn't expect as much of the "referencing" as most people. It's just not what this movie is about.
This is supposed to be the movie that invigorates the franchise and even though they're going back to Kirk and Spock I don't think they're going to be going as much into "TOS" mode as people expect - not only in music, but in all aspects of the design.
I think this will be a one-off movie to try to revitalize interest in Trek in general, in anticipation of a new TV series. They aren't going to be pandering to the die-hard fans, using obscure or nostalgic references from TOS. They're going to try to put together a profitable, accessible Hollywood-style film that non-hardcore Trek fans will like. This means that the score will, in all likelihood, be pretty standard stuff.
This is just a guess on my part. Certainly all I really care about is that the movie is good, and that it finds enough interest to get some new Trek productions going on TV or possibly direct to DVD. But I wouldn't expect as much of the "referencing" as most people. It's just not what this movie is about.
Leslie Moonves HATES sci-fi and Star Trek so a new TV series under his watch, not gonna happen, even if the new film breaks every Box Office record out there, sweeps the Oscars, it just isn't going to kick off a new TV series.
- W -
* As long as Leslie Moonves is around that is *
- W -
* As long as Leslie Moonves is around that is *
Too bad a guy with "moon" in his name takes such an unfavorable view of science fiction.
Anyways, I'm thinking more long-term. Star Trek is always going to be around, I just don't want to wait 25 years for a new series.
Re: What do you think the music should be like in Star Trek
You make use of terms like "Pandering" to refer to the stuff from the original, and "revitalize" to refer to stuff that is, as you say, "pretty standard stuff."
So, you're saying that it will be impossible to revitalize the franchise unless they toss out everything from before and go with "hand-held-shakeycam" shots starring the latest hollywood drug-addled stars... you know, the "pretty standard stuff."
There is NO reason to conclude that a film that uses existing design elements, existing character histories, or existing musical cues for that matter, is not going to be a good film, and NO reason to conclude that tossing that out and creating "all new" stuff WILL create a new film.
It's all background. What makes a good film is storytelling. What's made the last few Trek ventures unsuccessful was two things... first, that they weren't really particularly good movies when taken on their own, and second, that the audience had a predisposition before even going, that this is "just another Trek movie."
There will STILL be some of that second element... but since it's not another TNG movie, and not another Berman/Braga movie, and so forth, there will probably be a little less of that.
Still, what's going to make or break this movie is NOT "coming up with music, props, sets, costumes, and ship designs that are different." You could make a movie with the original 1960s uniforms, sets, props, and models, and if the STORYTELLING was good, it would be a success. Having improved ... or "polished"... versions of those would help, but not as much as some people think it will.
Pretty images help a little, but its good storytelling that makes for a good movie.
And using some referential stuff... like some old Sol Kaplan musical cues, for instance... won't HURT the movie, and could serve as a "bonus" for those who know the original show. And some of that music is GREAT STUFF, just FYI... I'm not talking about using every little bit but instead of using musical cues that a large amount of the audience already knows, or at least recognizes as "Star Trek," and which SOUNDS GOOD.
Doing that isn't going to make a "good movie" or a "bad movie" but it could help a tiny bit, and can't HURT at all...
And you've got every right to make your own guesses, obviously. But you're letting your own biases show.
You make use of terms like "Pandering" to refer to the stuff from the original, and "revitalize" to refer to stuff that is, as you say, "pretty standard stuff."
So, you're saying that it will be impossible to revitalize the franchise unless they toss out everything from before and go with "hand-held-shakeycam" shots starring the latest hollywood drug-addled stars... you know, the "pretty standard stuff."
There is NO reason to conclude that a film that uses existing design elements, existing character histories, or existing musical cues for that matter, is not going to be a good film, and NO reason to conclude that tossing that out and creating "all new" stuff WILL create a new film.
It's all background. What makes a good film is storytelling. What's made the last few Trek ventures unsuccessful was two things... first, that they weren't really particularly good movies when taken on their own, and second, that the audience had a predisposition before even going, that this is "just another Trek movie."
There will STILL be some of that second element... but since it's not another TNG movie, and not another Berman/Braga movie, and so forth, there will probably be a little less of that.
Still, what's going to make or break this movie is NOT "coming up with music, props, sets, costumes, and ship designs that are different." You could make a movie with the original 1960s uniforms, sets, props, and models, and if the STORYTELLING was good, it would be a success. Having improved ... or "polished"... versions of those would help, but not as much as some people think it will.
Pretty images help a little, but its good storytelling that makes for a good movie.
And using some referential stuff... like some old Sol Kaplan musical cues, for instance... won't HURT the movie, and could serve as a "bonus" for those who know the original show. And some of that music is GREAT STUFF, just FYI... I'm not talking about using every little bit but instead of using musical cues that a large amount of the audience already knows, or at least recognizes as "Star Trek," and which SOUNDS GOOD.
Doing that isn't going to make a "good movie" or a "bad movie" but it could help a tiny bit, and can't HURT at all...
Re: What do you think the music should be like in Star Trek
I'm hoping for a largely original score, with a few nods to the Courage theme from the TV show. And PLEASE, no repeats of the TMP theme - it's lovely, but it's been used in so many Trek productions that it's become cliche.
Trek XI is a great opportunity to create an original, all-new Trek score rather than just rehashing TOS cues.
I'm hoping for a largely original score, with a few nods to the Courage theme from the TV show. And PLEASE, no repeats of the TMP theme - it's lovely, but it's been used in so many Trek productions that it's become cliche.
Trek XI is a great opportunity to create an original, all-new Trek score rather than just rehashing TOS cues.
Re: What do you think the music should be like in Star Trek
Pandering was too harsh a word. I should have said "indulging" which is absolutely accurate. As for "revitalize" - this isn't really my word, this is one of the buzzwords. I'm not saying what they're doing is right or going to work, just what I would expect. Basically, it comes down to this: they aren't going to consider appealing to hardcore TOSers as a ticket to the top of the box office, so they're not going to make that a priority. That's all I'm saying.
Respectfully, that's nothing at all what I was saying. I am designating my expectations for the film, which are that they are going to make this more reminiscent of a traditioanl big-budget action/sci-fi movie rather than a retread of previous Trek films OR an insider-pleasing homage to TOS. I didn't say this would work, just that this is what they'll do. I think the only possible way to revitalize the franchise is to make a good product. Whether this movie will qualify, I have no idea. I hope so.
Uh, my point exactly.
I agree, although replace the word "few" with "two" since First Contact was successful in almost every regard.
Exactly, the story is what matters most; solid acting, good editing, etc. are also important, not the musical cues or costumes. This is what I'm saying, and I'm also saying that "TBTB" probably are going to come to the conclusion that anything in design TOO close to TOS is probably not going to appeal to a mass audience. This isn't 1967, it's 2007, and for better or worse audiences are different. They want 20-somethings, 30-somethings, and most of them (foolish as they are) don't have a huge appreciation for TOS, even if many do recognize who Kirk and Spock are.
I don't disagree, I have several TOS soundtracks. I still don't think they're going to do it, at least not very much.
I think that this movie is somewhat of a schizophrenic venture in that it is both trying to break from the past and embrace it at the same time.
First of all, we're never going to have another "The Original Series". The movie is being made because Paramount hopes in the short term it will make money, and in the long term it will be credible enough to make the poential for future projects look more promising.
Therefore, they are using the very familiar Kirk and Spock characters as a way to try to entice casual semi-fans who are not going to rush to see, for example, a Voyager movie or a Star Trek movie in an unfamiliar setting with no known characters.
In my opinion, the TOS aesthetic is no longer marketable except as retro kitsch to an audience of those who are not already Star Trek fans. Personally, I love TOS and the other shows as well, but I don't see them feeling particularly indepted to the shrinking, aging fanbase of the original series.
Pandering was too harsh a word. I should have said "indulging" which is absolutely accurate. As for "revitalize" - this isn't really my word, this is one of the buzzwords. I'm not saying what they're doing is right or going to work, just what I would expect. Basically, it comes down to this: they aren't going to consider appealing to hardcore TOSers as a ticket to the top of the box office, so they're not going to make that a priority. That's all I'm saying.
Respectfully, that's nothing at all what I was saying. I am designating my expectations for the film, which are that they are going to make this more reminiscent of a traditioanl big-budget action/sci-fi movie rather than a retread of previous Trek films OR an insider-pleasing homage to TOS. I didn't say this would work, just that this is what they'll do. I think the only possible way to revitalize the franchise is to make a good product. Whether this movie will qualify, I have no idea. I hope so.
Uh, my point exactly.
I agree, although replace the word "few" with "two" since First Contact was successful in almost every regard.
Exactly, the story is what matters most; solid acting, good editing, etc. are also important, not the musical cues or costumes. This is what I'm saying, and I'm also saying that "TBTB" probably are going to come to the conclusion that anything in design TOO close to TOS is probably not going to appeal to a mass audience. This isn't 1967, it's 2007, and for better or worse audiences are different. They want 20-somethings, 30-somethings, and most of them (foolish as they are) don't have a huge appreciation for TOS, even if many do recognize who Kirk and Spock are.
I don't disagree, I have several TOS soundtracks. I still don't think they're going to do it, at least not very much.
I think that this movie is somewhat of a schizophrenic venture in that it is both trying to break from the past and embrace it at the same time.
First of all, we're never going to have another "The Original Series". The movie is being made because Paramount hopes in the short term it will make money, and in the long term it will be credible enough to make the poential for future projects look more promising.
Therefore, they are using the very familiar Kirk and Spock characters as a way to try to entice casual semi-fans who are not going to rush to see, for example, a Voyager movie or a Star Trek movie in an unfamiliar setting with no known characters.
In my opinion, the TOS aesthetic is no longer marketable except as retro kitsch to an audience of those who are not already Star Trek fans. Personally, I love TOS and the other shows as well, but I don't see them feeling particularly indepted to the shrinking, aging fanbase of the original series.
Re: What do you think the music should be like in Star Trek
Again, equating "the TOS aesthetic" to "retro kitsch," and equating what many of us think of as simply "continuity" to some form of pandering to a "shrinking, aging fanbase" is what I, and many others, object to.
I don't object to it because I find it some sort of insult, and not because I see it as "raping my childhood" or whatever. Nope.
I object to it because it is not a supported or supportable argument. You're leaning towards ignoring "the old" because to use it would be to pander to that aging, shrinking minority.
Yet, I see "the old" as not being "kitschy" at all. I see it as being HIGH QUALITY WORK. And as such, I want, very much, to see future work show respect for that work.
Being "older" doesn't mean that something is "obsolete." For cryin' out loud, how many of the great books, how many of the great films, how many of the great plays... are as old, older, or MUCH older, than Star Trek? Nobody ever equates "Gone with the Wind" or "Casablanca" to "kitsch." At least nobody with an ounce of taste. The things about those films that made them classics are TIMELESS.
I've found that it's most often those who are younger who tend to think that things "back then" were dramatically different than they are "these days." Those of us who remember "back then" see that no, the world didn't actually exist in black-and-white "back then," that all families weren't "Ozzy and Harriet," that people actually knew what sex was... and that silly trends from "back then" aren't really all that much different than silly trends are today. Human nature, human intellect, and most aspects of day-to-day life, really haven't changed very much since the late 1960, early 1970s, etc, .
The stuff we're talking about is in NO WAY "kitschy." We're talking about stuff that, even if hobbled by low budgets and limited technology (of course, our technology today is still very limited by what I expect REAL 23rd-century technology to be like!), represents VISION which surpasses most of what comes around even today.
Paramount has recognized that, at least in part. Abrams "gets it," as do his writers, at least according to what they've been saying (and that is supported by everything that they've actually DONE so far, at least that we've been able to see!)
I don't think that the people whose opinions matter would consider the stuff we're talking about to be "kitsch" at all.
I agreed with pretty much your entire post until you got to this point.
Again, equating "the TOS aesthetic" to "retro kitsch," and equating what many of us think of as simply "continuity" to some form of pandering to a "shrinking, aging fanbase" is what I, and many others, object to.
I don't object to it because I find it some sort of insult, and not because I see it as "raping my childhood" or whatever. Nope.
I object to it because it is not a supported or supportable argument. You're leaning towards ignoring "the old" because to use it would be to pander to that aging, shrinking minority.
Yet, I see "the old" as not being "kitschy" at all. I see it as being HIGH QUALITY WORK. And as such, I want, very much, to see future work show respect for that work.
Being "older" doesn't mean that something is "obsolete." For cryin' out loud, how many of the great books, how many of the great films, how many of the great plays... are as old, older, or MUCH older, than Star Trek? Nobody ever equates "Gone with the Wind" or "Casablanca" to "kitsch." At least nobody with an ounce of taste. The things about those films that made them classics are TIMELESS.
I've found that it's most often those who are younger who tend to think that things "back then" were dramatically different than they are "these days." Those of us who remember "back then" see that no, the world didn't actually exist in black-and-white "back then," that all families weren't "Ozzy and Harriet," that people actually knew what sex was... and that silly trends from "back then" aren't really all that much different than silly trends are today. Human nature, human intellect, and most aspects of day-to-day life, really haven't changed very much since the late 1960, early 1970s, etc, .
The stuff we're talking about is in NO WAY "kitschy." We're talking about stuff that, even if hobbled by low budgets and limited technology (of course, our technology today is still very limited by what I expect REAL 23rd-century technology to be like!), represents VISION which surpasses most of what comes around even today.
Paramount has recognized that, at least in part. Abrams "gets it," as do his writers, at least according to what they've been saying (and that is supported by everything that they've actually DONE so far, at least that we've been able to see!)
I don't think that the people whose opinions matter would consider the stuff we're talking about to be "kitsch" at all.
Re: What do you think the music should be like in Star Trek
I didn't say I thought it was kitschy. I said that I thought it wouldn't be marketable as a serious movie (if it were to embrace that aesthetic) Because many people whould see it as kitschy. And even most die-hard fans of the original series have to recognize, if they are to admit any objectivity at all, that plenty of aspects of the show are "kitschy" according to most definitions.
I'm not talking about my personal preferences, I'm talking about marketability. As I said, I love TOS and I want to see a movie that is entertaining on its own while still respecting the original. I just don't think that the filmmakers are going to put a very high priority on things like music cues, using the authentic original color scheme, etc.
I hope I haven't offended anyone by my comments. Let me assure you: I love Trek, I love TOS (I've seen every episode multiple times) and I respect the desire to have things such as nostalgic musical cues in the movie. I am only saying that based on the limited knowledge I have of how movie marketing and things of that nature work, my prediction is that there will be a low emphasis on this sort of thing in the movie and a high emphasis on resorting to whatever it takes to draw in NEW fans. I guess we'll find out what happens next year. I have my fingers crossed and big hopes just like everyone else here
I didn't say I thought it was kitschy. I said that I thought it wouldn't be marketable as a serious movie (if it were to embrace that aesthetic) Because many people whould see it as kitschy. And even most die-hard fans of the original series have to recognize, if they are to admit any objectivity at all, that plenty of aspects of the show are "kitschy" according to most definitions.
I'm not talking about my personal preferences, I'm talking about marketability. As I said, I love TOS and I want to see a movie that is entertaining on its own while still respecting the original. I just don't think that the filmmakers are going to put a very high priority on things like music cues, using the authentic original color scheme, etc.
I hope I haven't offended anyone by my comments. Let me assure you: I love Trek, I love TOS (I've seen every episode multiple times) and I respect the desire to have things such as nostalgic musical cues in the movie. I am only saying that based on the limited knowledge I have of how movie marketing and things of that nature work, my prediction is that there will be a low emphasis on this sort of thing in the movie and a high emphasis on resorting to whatever it takes to draw in NEW fans. I guess we'll find out what happens next year. I have my fingers crossed and big hopes just like everyone else here
Re: What do you think the music should be like in Star Trek
I just hope it's not like that anal nemesis.
it should be bold,bombastic,loud,dominant.
just like in the star wars films.
it should have a pivotal role.
not in the prequels star wars films in which it was rubbish and bland.
james horner would be good or even duran duran could score it.
remember "view to a kill"?
I just hope it's not like that anal nemesis.
it should be bold,bombastic,loud,dominant.
just like in the star wars films.
it should have a pivotal role.
not in the prequels star wars films in which it was rubbish and bland.
james horner would be good or even duran duran could score it.
remember "view to a kill"?
Re: What do you think the music should be like in Star Trek
I want to hear a grand fanfare with crescendos that could rival/exceed the crescendos conducted by John Williams in such flicks as Star Wars, Superman and Indiana Jones.
I want to hear some majestic swelling, dammit!
I want to hear a grand fanfare with crescendos that could rival/exceed the crescendos conducted by John Williams in such flicks as Star Wars, Superman and Indiana Jones.
I want to hear some majestic swelling, dammit!
Re: What do you think the music should be like in Star Trek
Yes and no. The "Past", that this film is trying to break with isn't the one of The Original Series and its movies but Star Trek's more recent past... the one where Technobable was the order of the day and cowboy diplomacy is dead.
Sharr
Yes and no. The "Past", that this film is trying to break with isn't the one of The Original Series and its movies but Star Trek's more recent past... the one where Technobable was the order of the day and cowboy diplomacy is dead.
Sharr
Re: What do you think the music should be like in Star Trek
Hans Zimmer (Pirates III - At World's End), or Howard Shore (Lord of the Rings). As a musican with some composition experience, these guys blow me away. But that's just me. I love big, orchestral, operatic, pull-out-all-the-stops music.
Hans Zimmer (Pirates III - At World's End), or Howard Shore (Lord of the Rings). As a musican with some composition experience, these guys blow me away. But that's just me. I love big, orchestral, operatic, pull-out-all-the-stops music.
Re: What do you think the music should be like in Star Trek
Me to.
Me to.
If I could have my pick, I'd have either John Williams or Bear McCreary compose the music on their own terms.
For a long time, I was both a Trek and a Williams fan and always hoped the two would meet up at some stage, providing Trek with a score as incredible as Star Wars. I don't think it's ever going to happen but then that's beyond the point
In terms of other composers, McCreary's contributions to nuBSG have me really psyched about what he might produce in the future. I'd really find it interesting to see what he'd come up with it.
Come to think of it, ideally, I'd like two versions of the movie - one with a Williams score, one with a McCreary score AND two FULL CD releases to go with it
For a long time, I was both a Trek and a Williams fan and always hoped the two would meet up at some stage, providing Trek with a score as incredible as Star Wars. I don't think it's ever going to happen but then that's beyond the point
In terms of other composers, McCreary's contributions to nuBSG have me really psyched about what he might produce in the future. I'd really find it interesting to see what he'd come up with it.
Come to think of it, ideally, I'd like two versions of the movie - one with a Williams score, one with a McCreary score AND two FULL CD releases to go with it
I do hope the music is overly dramatic/leaning toward the goofy side, kind of like the music that plays every time they show the Enterprise surrounded by the Romulan Battlecruisers in "The Enterprise Incident" and they have GOT to use the fight music from "The Arena."
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
