Howard Shore removed? Deja vu Saruman? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Child of the 7th Age · 10-14-2005, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Reports are coming in that Howard Shore has been replaced by James Newton Howard to score the King Kong film. From Soundtrack.net: Sources in the film music industry have indicated to SoundtrackNet that Howard Shore's score to Peter Jackson's King Kong has been dropped. Hired to replace him is composer
James Newton Howard. Due out on December 14, the film requires over two
hours of music, which must now be written over the next few weeks.

There is no indication currently as to why Shore's score has been replaced,
and all indications are that most - if not all - of the score has already
been recorded in New Zealand. The replacement score will be recorded in Los
Angeles. More details to come as we get them.

TORN/KIKN: Is currently trying to independently confirm or deny this rumor.
However James Newston Howard's unofficial site also lists this news.

This is all conjecture but I can't help wondering.

This came in from theonering.net in an e-mail notification. Is this wild rumor or real? It seems strange to redo the soundtrack at this late date in the game, especially given the quality of Shore's work in LotR. Can anyone confirm or deny?

More importantly in terms of this site......I couldn't help thinking of what happened to Christopher Lee's character in the Two Towers. I always had the feeling that Jackson and Lee had some sort of personal falling out, and this influenced how Jackson handled the scenes of Saruman's demise in the movie, getting rid of scenes that should have been left in. (I truly feel there's no defense for removing this material from the theatrical version.) There is also the fact that Lee was also omitted from the ending credits of RotK and didn't have a sketch included as the others did.

If this Shore thing is true, is this another instance of personal feelings coming in between Jackson and another artist with less than desirable results? It's interesting that in both cases the people involved -- Lee and Shore -- were experienced artists who were perhaps less professionally dependent on Jackson than some of the others associated with the movies. Or am I barking up a wrong tree?

Aiwendil · 10-14-2005, 05:21 PM

It's not that uncommon for scores to be rejected, even those of high-profile composers. Goldsmith, Horner, Herrmann, and Waxman are just a few of the more famous names that have been on scores turned down by the director or producers; and Shore has had at least one score rejected already. Often, it's done for legitimate artistic reasons. For example, anyone who listens to Alex North's famous rejected score to 2001 will immediately see that it is not in line with Kubrick's vision. If this rumour is true, it may simply be that Jackson was not happy with the way Shore approached the movie; Jackson may even have been right.

There are of course other cases - when a score is rejected for personal, political, or commercial reasons. This kind of thing is generally very unfortunate for all involved, since it can be seriously detrimental to the movie, can deprive film score fans of a great work, and can damage a composer's career. Famous examples are Herrmann's score for Hitchcock's Torn Curtain and, more recently, Gabriel Yared's score for Troy. Both were great scores (though in the latter case, this is judging only from the few cues that have made their way to the public), and I don't doubt that both movies suffered greatly from their lack.

So if this is true, I think it's wise to reserve judgement on it until more details come out, or the rejected score is made available.

Essex · 10-15-2005, 12:06 PM

'Confirmation' from kingisknog.net..................

Quote:

Peter Jackson made the following statement: "I have greatly enjoyed my collaborations with Howard Shore, whose musical themes made immeasurable contributions to 'The Lord of the Rings' trilogy. During the last few weeks, Howard and I came to realize that we had differing creative aspirations for the score of 'King Kong.' Rather than waste time arguing with a friend and trying to unify our points of view, we decided amicably to let another composer score the film. I'm looking forward to working with James Newton Howard, a composer whose work I've long admired, and I thank Howard Shore, whose talent is surpassed only by his graciousness."

mmmmmmm so no Shore for the Hobbit then?

Lush · 10-15-2005, 04:23 PM

I'm weirded our by the Shore thing, but if it didn't work out, it didn't work out.

I'm not exactly sure what to make of the Christopher Lee thing. I can't imagine Peter Jackson jeopardizing a movie because of a personal falling-out with an actor. It seems too bizarre to me. Business is business. I could think of a million work-related reasons why Lee was omitted, but personal? As in, "I don't like you anymore, Lee, you don't get to do this"???

Any specific theories on this floating out there, Child? I'd love to get a hold of them.

Lathriel · 10-16-2005, 03:03 PM

I agree with you Lush There are just too many things at risk if you let something personal come in your way. But I do find that it is a little late to replace Howard Shore. Maybe the new James newton Howard will keep some of the things Howard Shore wrote because i can't see how you can write something in two weeks and get it recorded as well.

Aiwendil · 10-16-2005, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Maybe the new James newton Howard will keep some of the things Howard Shore wrote because i can't see how you can write something in two weeks and get it recorded as well.

Well, it happened on Troy. Gabriel Yared's finely crafted score, many months in the making, was replaced with one by James Horner a few weeks prior to the movie's release. Of course, James Newton Howard doesn't have quite the same reputation for assembly-line insta-scores as Horner does.

10-15-2005, 04:23 PM	#4
Lush Fair and Cold Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: the big onion Posts: 1,770	I'm weirded our by the Shore thing, but if it didn't work out, it didn't work out. I'm not exactly sure what to make of the Christopher Lee thing. I can't imagine Peter Jackson jeopardizing a movie because of a personal falling-out with an actor. It seems too bizarre to me. Business is business. I could think of a million work-related reasons why Lee was omitted, but personal? As in, "I don't like you anymore, Lee, you don't get to do this"??? Any specific theories on this floating out there, Child? I'd love to get a hold of them. __________________ ~The beginning is the word and the end is silence. And in between are all the stories. This is one of mine~

10-16-2005, 03:03 PM	#5
Lathriel Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Wandering through Middle-Earth (Sadly in Alberta and not ME) Posts: 612	I agree with you Lush There are just too many things at risk if you let something personal come in your way. But I do find that it is a little late to replace Howard Shore. Maybe the new James newton Howard will keep some of the things Howard Shore wrote because i can't see how you can write something in two weeks and get it recorded as well. __________________ Back again

10-14-2005, 05:21 PM	#2
Aiwendil Late Istar Join Date: Mar 2001 Posts: 2,224	It's not that uncommon for scores to be rejected, even those of high-profile composers. Goldsmith, Horner, Herrmann, and Waxman are just a few of the more famous names that have been on scores turned down by the director or producers; and Shore has had at least one score rejected already. Often, it's done for legitimate artistic reasons. For example, anyone who listens to Alex North's famous rejected score to 2001 will immediately see that it is not in line with Kubrick's vision. If this rumour is true, it may simply be that Jackson was not happy with the way Shore approached the movie; Jackson may even have been right. There are of course other cases - when a score is rejected for personal, political, or commercial reasons. This kind of thing is generally very unfortunate for all involved, since it can be seriously detrimental to the movie, can deprive film score fans of a great work, and can damage a composer's career. Famous examples are Herrmann's score for Hitchcock's Torn Curtain and, more recently, Gabriel Yared's score for Troy. Both were great scores (though in the latter case, this is judging only from the few cues that have made their way to the public), and I don't doubt that both movies suffered greatly from their lack. So if this is true, I think it's wise to reserve judgement on it until more details come out, or the rejected score is made available.