Altered Soundtracks?

Discussion in 'Site Polls' started by rhett, Oct 9, 2004.

?

How do you feel about changing a film's soundtrack?

Poll closed Nov 8, 2004.
  1. It makes old movies fresh, I have no problem with it.

    1 vote(s)
    1.1%
  2. If it helps get the film released on DVD, it's okay.

    7 vote(s)
    7.9%
  3. If the score isn't memorable, I don't mind.

    11 vote(s)
    12.4%
  4. I dislike it, but I will still buy the DVD.

    21 vote(s)
    23.6%
  5. Films should never be altered for any reason.

    49 vote(s)
    55.1%
  1. rhett

    rhett Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2000
    Messages:
    9,395
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Canada
    With silent films, the scores would usually change with each exhibition of the film, since most were played live. But ever since sound became a prevalent aspect of filmmaking (from 1930's The Jazz Singer onwards) a single soundtrack would be tied in with a film throughout every exhibition. Indeed, musical scores had been standardized and forever associated with the films they accompanied. A trend that seems to have really picked up with DVD and home video however, is substituting alternate soundtracks in order to save a company money. "Stairway to Heaven" had to be removed from Wayne's World when it hit VHS, because Paramount was not willing to pay for the music rights.

    Often, music rights on home video are much more expensive than on broadcast mediums like theatrical or television exhibition. The viewer cannot theoretically own the television or projected film image, so it is much cheaper. As soon as one can own it on a home format, like VHS and DVD, clearance rights can get very expensive. Wayne's World was an early demonstration of this, but recently this trend has really taken a stronghold on DVD. TV shows like Dawson's Creek and The Apprentice substituted their trademark theme songs in favor of cheaper music. On DVD, and particularly in the horror genre, films like Night of the Living Dead have been given revamped scores. Recently however, the influx of changed soundtracks seems to have reached a peak, with both Warner's Return of the Living Dead, Part II and Columbia's Happy Birthday To Me both receiving altered scores.

    What is your take on changing a film's soundtrack, be it for money or for trying to appeal to a different audience? Good, bad, ugly, let's hear it!
     
  2. dwatts

    dwatts New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    16,580
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Crashed
    Most of the changes to soundtracks that I have read about are substitution of pop/rock hits for something else. Since that music wasn't composed for the film, or on the occasions I am aware of, were not written with the film in mind, then I confess to not caring very much about the changes.

    The one time I did care was when a wholesale soundtrack was made. Best case "Battle of Britain". Still, the DVD had both soundtracks. Either way, it wouldn't stop me buying a DVD.
     
  3. I'm not 100% happy when soundtrack changes are made but if it's the only way for a film to get on DVD I accept it...
     
  4. Mortis

    Mortis GARBAGE DAY!

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2001
    Messages:
    7,401
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, PA
    I think it's a bunch of bullshit, but whatever it takes I guess.
     
  5. RyanPC

    RyanPC Guest

    I really hate the fact that this is becoming a kind of "trend" but since I love both ROTLD 2 and Happy Birthday to Me, I'll still buy the DVDs.
     
  6. Damage

    Damage Mirror Mirror

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,579
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Take off to the Great White North, eh?
    Although I voted Films should never be altered for any reason, I will still buy the DVD if it's a title I really want.
     
  7. bigdaddyhorse

    bigdaddyhorse Detroit Hi-on

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    12,508
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Under a rock
    That about sums it up for me as well. Definitly don't like it, but if it's the only way to get a favorite, it's the only way.
    I will add that in some cases, I'd rather have a good looking dvd-r with the right sound than a legit altered disc without many extras. Of course aspects like widescreen and source play into that choice.
     
  8. thrashard76

    thrashard76 Guest

    Movies shouldn't be altered (soundtrack wise) for any reason.
     
  9. zombee

    zombee Guest

    I was looking at my Wayne's World dvd the other day and saw that the case said some of the music had changed from the theatrical version. I was wondering what music had been changed...
    Also, in response to the poll I voted "dislike it but will still buy th dvd." I don't think soundtracks should be altered.
     
  10. Erick H.

    Erick H. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    Messages:
    9,400
    Likes Received:
    134
    Trophy Points:
    63
    As a rule I dislike changes.When it's a minor bit,like a different song on CAT PEOPLE for instance,I can handle it.Sometimes though,a whole score is changed for a film,the tv prints of THE WITCHFINDER GENERAL replaces the original score with a crappy Casio keyboard sounding thing that was just terrible.I was pleased the MGM's release of DR. PHIBES RISES AGAIN restored the brief shot of Vincent Price waltzing to "Dancing in the Dark" and his singing of "Over the Rainbow" which is missing from some prints.
     
  11. onebyone

    onebyone Guest

    If it is the only way that a movie or a TV show will ever make it to DVD, then I will begrudgingly support it IF it is announced before I buy the DVD. I don't like to be surprised when I get home.

    And I am still pissed that they changed the Dawson's Creek theme song. That is taking things a bit too far. Since they had the rights for the first two sets, clearly it was possible for them to get the rights. They just choose to be even cheaper with the music.
     
  12. Dave

    Dave Pimp

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 1999
    Messages:
    7,187
    Likes Received:
    360
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Is it them being cheaper, or the company owning the rights wanting a lot more money? You don't know for certain.

    If it's an issue of getting the DVD released, then change whatever you have to. But it's hard for us fans to know, because the above comment makes a good point. All too often the company will just change the music rather than pay X amount to get the rights for the DVD release.
     
  13. evileye

    evileye Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 1999
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Detroit, MI
    Has anyone actually confirmed the HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ME situation? I have heard all kinds of BS flying around but have yet to enounter a review (which I imagine would be coming soon).
     

  14. keep in mind if they have to pay more then the consumer has to pay more for the set in order for them to keep the same profit margin...

    ..and if the profit margin decreases tell me why they should bother to release more sets knowing that they lose the money they expected to make in the first place.
     
  15. Myron Breck

    Myron Breck BOO!!! Gotcha!

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,699
    Likes Received:
    272
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Atlanta
    I'm just stoked that SIXTEEN CANDLES was finally released with all of the original tunes!!! After watching it on HBO every day as a kid, the home video versions with missing/altered songs were really annoying. I even burned a homemade CD soundtrack about 5 years ago (RIP Napster)...what a geek I am.
     
  16. I think a prime example of this, is the 1984-1989 TV cop show, "Miami Vice". TONS of people would love to see "Vice" on DVD, but what's held it back, is the fact there was SO SO much pop & rock music used on the show, during it's five-season run on NBC back in the 80's. Out of 114 one-hour episodes, "Vice" used in excess of 350+ songs on the show.

    Well the thing is, it isn't like one simple movie like "Wayne's World". The music on "Miami Vice" was an integral part of the show, and at times was necessary to create a mood. But changing it, or leaving it out, it ruins the experience, and changes the overall original product.

    This leaves Universal (who owns the show) in a hard spot. I believe they are trying to clear the rights, but I think they've already shelled out $2.5-million just for the music in SEASON ONE! Just for one season, it's already cost them $2.5-million, just for the music. That doesn't count DVD production cost, and all that shit. Just music clearences, and there's another four seasons to go, to clear.

    And it all has to do with the absolute greed of musicians. The Metallica's of the world. The problem here is, originally back in the day in TV & Film, real songs that were to be used on a TV show episode or movie, were paid once, for one broadcast. It was basically pay-per-show. So everytime the TV show or movie was shown, they had to go back and pay them everytime.

    That's the biggest problem with DVD's now, is they need to pay the musician one flat fee to have the rights to the song forever, because these DVD's will be produced, and be in circulation forever. Not just one showing.

    But to me, why is this hard? It only cost $14-15 bucks to buy thier album, which you have the music of ... forever! So why is it so hard for TV shows & movies?
     
  17. Prior to the advent of home video, no one anticipated extended release of feature films outside of theatrical exhibition and television broadcast. As a result, many deals only specified those rights regarding the songs or music
    score. When the new formats became popular, producers and distributors
    were stuck re-negotiating these rights with the composers or song owners.
    In some cases, the costs exceeded what they could afford and still make
    a profit so they figured it was cheaper to just lay in new music. Not ideal
    but it was the only way to release the movies or shows at all.

    There's always the option of becoming a film collecting and purchasing an original print of the title with the release soundtrack. There are many film
    collecting sites and The Big Reel newspaper which lists available prints for sale. For example, you can purchase an old print of "The Conqueror Worm" with the original music. Film collecting is a rather expensive hobby however.
    Expecially when it comes to Technicolor movies. A Tech print of "The Horror of Dracula" would run over $600. On the other hand, the quality is so superior to any video format (the colors glow from the screen in three dimensional relief), that it could be considered a long term investment since the price of these prints keeps going up.
     
  18. dwatts

    dwatts New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    16,580
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Crashed
    --And it all has to do with the absolute greed of musicians. The Metallica's of the world. The problem here is, originally back in the day in TV & Film, real songs that were to be used on a TV show episode or movie, were paid once, for one broadcast.--

    Boy, I sure don't agree with this statement- It's not greed to want to be paid for work you do. Universal will, presumably, be making money from the show, and you yourself say this music is integral to the experience. So why should Universal be able to make money from repeat viewings, but not the musicians? It just makes no sense to me.

    If Universal doesn't like it they have three options. Pay up. Change the music. Or don't release the DVD. The greed, if it is anywhere, is with Universal, who would want an artists music in perpetuity because they used it to make a cop show. If they want to use an artists music - pay for it. It's not the musicians fault.
     
  19. Xanfan

    Xanfan Guest

    As much as I want to get 1984 on DVD, the main reason I haven't gotten it was due to the fact that every note of the soundtrack by Eurythmics was removed. Changing soundtracks isn't cool because its not what was originally made. In some cases it may not be what was originally intended, but oh well! :fire:
     
  20. Myron Breck

    Myron Breck BOO!!! Gotcha!

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,699
    Likes Received:
    272
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Atlanta
    Did anyone ever catch the 80s version of Fritz Lang's METROPOLIS? It replaced the original organ music with pop hits by Pat Benatar, Journey, etc; a few instances of colorization were also added.
     

Share This Page