1 Clip – 3 versions of the score

Photo by Sam Javanrouh

Here’s an interesting little experiment.  I like to call it that, because it’s how I feel about it.  When someone offers an idea, my philosophy is to say ‘ok, let’s try it’ before nixing it outright – unless I have direct experience with something similar which did not work in the expected way.  Of course, when you are working on a film as the composer, you are working collaboratively with the director/producer.  You are going to be taking a LOT of suggestions!  And that’s not a bad thing – I always have a gut feeling about the people I work with – I know it will work or not, I know it will be an enjoyable challenge or an unmitigated drag.  If it works, I love getting ‘notes’ – in most cases, the work I subsequently produce is better, and I often learn something.

This particular clip was interesting, because it was intended as a ‘teaser’.  But it functions in many ways like an opening/credit sequence – a young woman is shown lovingly preparing food for a dish to be served at a banquet.  The visuals are beautiful and sensual, and it has a very peaceful quality.  The film however, deals with themes of family, pride, and death/loss, and how we don’t always see each other for who/what we really are, and sometimes can’t communicate what we really need.  It’s a dramatic feature, and these themes are very powerful in the film.  The challenge was, as I was only scoring this short teaser – should the music reflect the visuals, or speak to the underlying themes/story, or was there a way to do both?

Enough words.  Let’s take a listen to Version 1:

Note that I did not send this to the director – at first.  I decided it played too upbeat – it worked to the visuals of the piece, but if it were an opening, it would give a completely false impression of what the film was going to be about.  “Practical Magic” springs to mind (a musical guilty pleasure), as a reference I thought of when I reviewed the music against picture.  More on what the director said about this version shortly, as they did not hear it until after Version 2.  It’s decidedly major, with a rhythmic figure in the strings that gives it a ‘running’ movement, and has a slightly mysterious, searching melody based on the Lydian scale.

Here is Version 2:

I took the basic structure and figures from V1 and made the harmonic progression minor.  It wasn’t a straight inversion; some of the original progression just didn’t function the same way.  I managed to get some interesting movement in some parts, and I liked the development of interplay between sections – I wanted it to sound like a conversation – a back and forth kind of thing that would mirror the conversations/arguments that would happen in the film.  Each section wants to ‘be heard’.  After watching the fantastic 2003 film ‘Zatoichi’, I took the idea of matching actions on-screen with stylized rhythmic motifs – so when she is peeling a vegetable or chopping garlic, the woodblock and shaker figures come up.  I thought this might inject a bit of humour back into the scene, as the film is really about hope, and has it’s funny moments too.  The theme of death and loss is addressed as the music climaxes in intensity, becoming very mournful.  It then returns to a quiet simplicity, the french horn line representing quiet hope and acceptance of some truths.

The director’s feeling was that the string figure made it seem too urgent, and that the overall music, while beautiful, seemed in conflict with the calm energy of the scene (a gentle jazz tune was used to temp the scene).  Overall, the music seemed too dramatic and dense – when sparse and intimate was what she wanted.  I thought, hmmm – maybe my first instinct was off – maybe she will like the first version better, as it addresses her concerns – I fired that off, commenting that I felt it spoke to the character of the cook – youthful, optimistic, confident.  To my slight surprise, she felt as I did about version 1, and went a step further – she felt it was very “mainstream”, and reminded her of the Tom Hanks vehicle, ‘Big’.  At that moment, the term “mainstream” sounded like a dirty word to me.

We talked, and decided that the basic material comprising version 2 was good and I would work from that, to produce something slightly more spare, less urgent and suspenseful, with more of a focus on the solo instruments.  There was a lot of material and ideas in V2 that I really liked – the rhythmic string motif being one.  I moved towards a compromise; here is Version 3:

In this version, the music holds off a bit until the visuals set a bit of the pace.  The tempo of the piece was reduced from 120 to 110 bpm – to bring a bit of calm.  Instead of the urgent string motif, I have only the harp (playing half time from V2) and a solo flute and cello.  When the rhythmic motif does come in, it’s for a few bars only, and at a reduced dynamic – the strings alternate to long, legato bowing instead of the staccato they played throughout in the previous versions.  I reduced the intensity of the build, and in general re-arranged some of the sections to play in lower, darker registers, to lessen height of the climax.  I was very happy with this version, and felt it improved not only how it worked to picture, but it became much more interesting as a piece – it had more variation in rhythm, texture, and dynamic.

I got final approval from the director on this version, with a few small changes – the harp would come in 2 bars early as an introduction to the melody, and the first solo would be taken by the violin instead of the flute – the flute reminded her too much of those warbly soundtracks for the National Film Board of Canada’s 1970’s nature documentaries.  It was quite humorous – definitely a product of our age – she said, “I don’t know about the flute… it kind of reminds me of…” and I said “Wait, don’t say it, I already know”.

All in all, I enjoyed this process of carving away at the block.  If I were on my own, I would likely have stopped at version 2 and begun the process of finessing the piece.  I can’t deny, however, that the final product is qualitatively better than version 2, and I’m very pleased by that.  I enjoy the collaborative process – it’s not for everyone; you really have to let your ego go while maintaining your position as an expert in your field.  It’s very important that you find a way to effectively communicate with your director/producer/client, and that you keep focused on win-win solutions to all problems.  If you can do this, it’s a very rewarding experience where you get to do good work, learn something, fulfill (some) of your own artistic desires, and make your client happy (which has positive side effects for you as well!).

To hear the final piece and see the recording session of the orchestra at CBC studios, click here:

http://adrianelliscomposer.com/AdriansBlog/?p=116