Intrada Soundtrack Forum

I picked up the score CD for "Sanctum" with the two new Intrada releases 'cuz I've been a fan of David Hirschfelder's since "Elizabeth". Not like we've heard a massive amount of music from him since then, but this new score makes me wish he'd done "Avatar" instead of James Horner. There's a male Native American-sounding (ish) vocal that I do not understand (probably makes sense in the fillum) but it certainly doesn't put me off at all. Much vibrant, exciting orchestral music here (well, in the first few tracks, anyway - we'll see how it develops over the rest of the disc) with a dusting of electronic percussion (I think?) here and there to power things along. Most agreeable - best blind buy I've taken a flyer on in a while.

I've heard nothing but horrible things about the movie, but have yet to hear from anyone who's actually SEEN it (apart from one girl who obsessed over Richard Roxburgh and Ioan Gruffudd taking their shirts off a lot, but I'm not sure she ever got beyond that scene). Seems to be accepted dogma that anything with James Cameron's name on it as producer is automatically gonna suck so that's what everyone's saying. So, has anyone taken the plunge, to coin a phrase? Is this another pretty damn' good score that was written for a wretched movie? I wasn't curious before I popped in the CD, but I am now.

_________________
Karl Morton IV

"Enjoy every sandwich."
-- Warren Zevon

Seen the film, which is pretty badly written but the 3D's better than many recent 3D films. The score wasn't that remarkable. I tried a couple of cues later via Spotify but it doesnt do anything for me. Then again, most modern scores don't...

Saw it two days ago at at the Italian preview, with my 22-years old son, and yes, it is that bad.

Terrible writing (both the story delelopment AND the dialogue), acting ranging from lifeless to very bad, good images but quite incompetent use of 3-D ("window violations" aplenty, out-of-focus planes, incorrect perspective, small avoidable mistakes, so in the enfd both our heads hurt).

Possibly because I was distracted by this all, I did not notice much the music, except for a small low-notes motif that was repeated in excess - but in all honesty, this could be a choice of the director or the music editor rather than the composer; and, at the very beginning, when I still thought the film could be good, I heard some ethnic-sounding chanting that also made me think that this music ould have been better suited to Aavatar than Horner's score - which I found competent but not particularly new or exciting.

I suggest to pass the movie - but I might try to listen to the CD to check what I missed.

_________________
Do I contradict myself?
Very well then, I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes)

Terrible writing (both the story delelopment AND the dialogue), acting ranging from lifeless to very bad, good images but quite incompetent use of 3-D ("window violations" aplenty, out-of-focus planes, incorrect perspective, small avoidable mistakes, so in the enfd both our heads hurt).


I won't comment on your remarks about terrible writing since most action movies don't boast of amazing writing depth to begin with. There was an entertainment quality of the film that worked and yes, the score had some very nice moments. It was enjoyable and made me squirm a few times.... but.......

Incompetent use of 3-D? I've been a professional cinematographer and camera operator (and life-long film music nut) for over 15 years (having worked on 2 3-D films in the last couple of years alone) and I've never heard the term "window violations". Please explain what you mean by that. I want to follow up on a couple of your points: Your comment about out of focus planes doesn't jive since most 2-D movies, television and even in-flight safety videos make use of shallow focus for dramatic effect. That is accomplished by the use of high speed prime lenses and zooms that intentionally create depth by throwing foreground and background out of focus. If the focus puller missed a focus-pull on fast action that's normal and happens to be a common style in most action films nowadays. Besides, pulling focus on action is not as easy as you think and I've even missed a few myself. Incorrect perspectives? Are you referring to the actors' eye lines in relation to "the line" used to determine screen direction perhaps? When you make a broad critique about the technical side of camera work I hope you can use specific examples to make your case. I don't mean to jump on you but c'mon... just because the film wasn't shot like Avatar, you have to take into consideration that 85% of Sanctum was shot "live action" (unlike the largely CGI and motion capture-based film Avatar).

The Cameron / Pace 3-D Camera systems of Burbank, California (the same HD cameras designed and created to shoot Avatar) were also employed to shoot Sanctum. Many of the same digital imaging technicians, camera operators and camera assistants were involved in both films. These guys work incredibly hard and very long hours to create a film and forge new ground (which Sanctum was in the 3-D world) so if the end product suffers from some technical shortcomings that's to be expected. But show me a film that's perfect and I'll stop defending the less than 100% end-result work of my colleagues.

RJ

_________________
Do I contradict myself?
Very well then, I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes)

_________________
Karl Morton IV

"Enjoy every sandwich."
-- Warren Zevon