[Musical Fanatic!!]

that the beginning of As Long As you're Mine is a slowed down version of the beginning of No One Mourns The Wicked??

[Luc]

Yeah....

[TheNextTenMinutes]

Is this a serious question?

[krisavalon]

That's a common characteristic of Broadway musicals. Basically the whole soundtrack is united by certain recurring melodies. In fact, if you listen to Jesus Christ Superstar, it's actually the same five songs over and over again, and yet it's brilliant.

[sadie1208]

I've noticed that in les miz.

[Rumblepurr]

The technique is called a musical theme. Certain melodies usually center on certain characters or events within the story. Thus, if you hear a certain melody, something about a certain character is about to occur.

An example of a character theme can be noticed in the James Bond movies. The music heard in the opening credits usually apply to actions by "Mr. Bond." Other notable theme music: "Peter & the Wolf" by Prokofiev, “The Carnival of the Animals” by Saint-Saens, and “Carmen” by Georges Bizet.

Rumblepurr
The Writer Cat
R-W Forum Moderator

[Luc]

They do it in RENT, too. With "Musetta's Waltz" and "Christmas Bells" especially.

[MademoiselleMusicals]

And Beauty and the Beast......

[Valjean_Jean24601]

Don't forget "Evita"

Sm**chies!

~Jacob.

[Live to perform008]

It helps tie the music in together. And give it sort of a theme.

[Baker]

Phantom does it.
Joseph does it.
Pretty much all Webber does it.
In The Music Man, "Seventy Six Trombones" and "Goodnight My Someone" are the same song sung to different beats.

[frodolover456]

Well, I didn't notice, probably because I never cared. But Andrew Loyd Webber does it in a lot of his shows. I never notice that kind of stuff until someone points it out to me.

[rockyrocks666]

the only reason webber does it is because hes not clever enough to think up new melodies and riffs... he doesnt do it in a clever way

[Pounce]

[musicalsrokmysox]

[Baker]

[MademoiselleMusicals]

^ I've noticed that and thought I was going loopy...

[Clarabelle]

[Jesus]

Or perhaps they are being observent enough to notice that Webber's use of "Musical Themes" is lacking in any even remotely compelling variation through out the entirety of most of his pieces. Or that his "Musical Themes" are not only taken from elsewhere in each piece, but that he also borrows from his other, and other composers pieces in such an obvious and blatant fashion that it is insulting for an audience member to be told that this is "new music."

I personally have no qualms with using musical themes as theatrical and dramatic devices for the furthing of an audiences comprehension of a piece's characters or situations. However when the bulk of a composers piece is comprised of a limited spectrum of musical themes, which seemingly have no dramatic or theatrical purpose other than as filler then I take issue. Webber is at fault for this, and if you who accuse people who notice this as being ignorant, and not knowing what they're talking about...well perhaps your words would be of better use elsewhere.

Also, I never realized that "Musical Themes" could also include the blatant use of well-known melodies from previous works of an author, something which Andrew Lloyd Webber is very much guilty of. However, as droneing and generic this makes his music, I suppose he is well within his rights to use his own intellectual property.

The same cannot be said, however for the property of others. Of course all writers are "inspired" by the greats of whatever medium they work in, and yes some "borrowing" does occur. But in most cases it is used to lead the writer to find something unique and provoking of their own. And in most cases, the writer will add enough variation to make the "borrowed bits" less than stolen...that is to say, the inspiration is still recognizable, but it isn't blatant palgerism. Webber I think, rather than using inspriation to further his own creation, uses it as his own creation. He steals from here there and everywhere in so unabashed a way that again, I feel, in addition to decidedly unmoved, downright insulted by his work.

Jesus

[Clarabelle]

Somehow I don't think that the comment I was referring to was quite as intellectual as you are implying...

Also, if you look at composers such as Mozart and Haydn etc they blatantly re-use bits of music and melody and plagiarise from each other; my best essay for my degree proposed as such and proved the point. Yes, ALW does use certain phrases in more than one musical, but at the end of the day if you look at some of his writing (actually analyse the scoring etc) some of it is musically quite complex and not as simplistic as many people make it out to be. Don't get me wrong, I'm not his biggest fan, some of his stuff I like, some I don't- but from a musical point of view, while some of his work is very simplistic some of it is complex and as such I don't think it's fair to whitewash over all his work as being 'easy' and 'copying' from himself when there is a broader range evident there.

[Jesus]

From my perspective there is no "broader range," in Webber's music. I feel his music, from both an aesthic and musical point of view is bland, uninspired and decidedly unoriginal.

In my experience, neither Mozart's nor Hayden's "plagerism" is in anyway blantant. Each of these composers artfully reinvents their re-used bits, so as to keep their music vital and interesting. Webber does not.

As for his "complexities." I again think you are very much in the wrong. Nothing about Andrew Lloyd Webber's writing is complex. It is nothing but simple. Especially from a theoretical perspective. What is sometimes complex about Webber's music, is the orchastrations. Something for which Webber is not responsible. Often times, his music is taken by a musical director and complexities are created. Nothing inherent to his writing contributes to this.

Oh and no where did I ever state Mr. Webber's work is "easy." For I don't believe it is. Boring, yes. Generic, definitly. But easy...no.

Jesus