What's new

Is Hans Zimmer overrated as a composer?

Status
Not open for further replies.

PeterN

⋆☾
Went through an hour long compilation of Zimmers compositions and, yes, while there are some interesting and creative compositions (e.g. “now we are free”), plenty (I find) is simple chord progressions with excellent sound design.

Not trying to poke on Zimmer here, and with all respect, but what is the opinion in the community?

I know Verta has criticism on the unrealistic compositions, from an orchestral perspective, but thats not the issue here really, could it be that Zimmer just does quite simple chord progressions sound amazingly good in the commercial field?

Is this question allowed to ask, or am I going too close to something holy here?
 
It depends on your musical background, taste, and what you value in terms of aesthetics, complexity, innovation, etc. For me, with lifelong exposure to classical music, I would call his music "easily digestible" like pop music...nice to listen to but lacking in the kind of depth that would let me listen repeatedly to discover new things. As to being overrated, those you've heard of will always be overrated relative to the greatness of their actual music...think of how many composers have written catalogues of great orchestral and chamber music that you've never heard of. Being famous doesn't legitimize your work as being vastly superior to the work of obscure composers. It speaks more to marketing, opportunity, luck, and offering music that suits the current tastes/trends. Long term, I don't think Zimmer will be remembered like Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven.

Just my take,
Dave
 
Couldn't disagree more (yes, this is close to holy!!). ;)

Too many great scores to name, but to me, the best illustration of his genius is 'Time'. This is a stupefyingly simple tune. It's so simple, I can teach my kids to play it. It's so simple, even I could have written it; any one of us could have. The point is, none of us did - such simple notes, such simple contrasts, lying there waiting to be discovered, and none of us, working away at writing melodies, came close. That, for me, is pure genius. To take something, so simple, and create something so moving, that I could listen to over and over again, and it still give me shivers, is just pure genius. If that's overrated, I just wish I could have a fraction of it, and I'd be happily over rated.

I went to watch the Zimmer tribute orchestra this year - I doubt there was a single person in that audience who would answer 'yes' to your question.

Watch, listen and recant your blasphemy, thou sinner ;) Praise be to the Zimmer.

 
He's not overrated. Hans is not a traditional composer in the John Williams sense of the word.He can do that stuff, but his bread and butter is more in making soundscapes. It's almost like he's a sound designer with notes.
And the little Zimmer wannabes all try and draw from the same thing, the "epic' sound, with the low string ostinatos, etc. But he's more than that. Maybe he's not Herrmann or Williams, but nobody could have written a more appropriate score for POTC, or Inception, or many others. I'm not saying he's my favorite composer (though he's up there) but he's definitely not overrated.
 
Last edited:
He is a genius when it comes to making music for the scene. Just knows what and what not to do ...always innovating and coming up with new ideas! He is one of the main reasons I got into composing for TV/Film, among others! While not so complex like John Williams, the music just works and I will always respect him as a music producer/composer/etc! I respect anyone who can create an emotion from a piece of music, complex or not!!!
 
The genius of Zimmer is his ability to add an absolutely quintessential part to the storytelling of a movie.

You can't listen to his work without watching the movie (you can but you will only get 10%).

His work with Nolan is simply stunning. Interstellar is a masterclass in how a composer and director can synergistically create something bigger than its parts.
 
One can always ask. But in my humble opinion, no, he is not.
 
It depends on your musical background, taste, and what you value in terms of aesthetics, complexity, innovation, etc. For me, with lifelong exposure to classical music, I would call his music "easily digestible" like pop music...nice to listen to but lacking in the kind of depth that would let me listen repeatedly to discover new things.

Taste and aesthetics are one thing, but I can't agree that musical background should have any bearing on what you can appreciate.

My roots are "classical" too, and I think the enthusiasm for Hans is entirely deserved. :thumbsup:
 
Is this question allowed to ask, or am I going too close to something holy here?
I'm sure this question is allowed, but I'm not sure that topic is worth spending time on. :) If you eg. like his To Every Captive Soul a lot, like the mood and simplicity of Time, some of his collaborations with Lisa Gerrard (Now We are Free) - why worry if there are other pieces you don't like or if they are overrated? :)
 
What's "overrated"?
People like what they like. Who has the authority to tell someone or a mass that they are "overrating" something if it's just their own preference?

One can discuss about musicality and orchestral sophistication, but to say people are "overrating" (and "underrating" for that matter) something or someone is to consider ones own taste superior to the taste of others.
So, I'd never use the word "under" or "overrated" - unless something can be empirically demonstrated to be lacking, despite popular appreciation.
For example: Let's say science would find that staying warm actually doesn't help much healing the cold... then we could objectively say "people are overrating staying warm and not going out when you have the cold".
But regarding the arts (be it music, movies, paintings, books etc) this just won't work that smoothly.
 
What's "overrated"?
People like what they like. Who has the authority to tell someone or a mass that they are "overrating" something if it's just their own preference?

One can discuss about musicality and orchestral sophistication, but to say people are "overrating" (and "underrating" for that matter) something or someone is to consider ones own taste superior to the taste of others.
So, I'd never use the word "under" or "overrated" - unless something can be empirically demonstrated to be lacking, despite popular appreciation.
For example: Let's say science would find that staying warm actually doesn't help much healing the cold... then we could objectively say "people are overrating this".
But regarding the arts (be it music, films, paintings, books etc) this just won't work that smoothly.

Yea, you make a point. I didnt like that word either, but couldnt come up with a better wording. Also meant to add some spice - and raise attraction - like a catchy modern news headline.
 
Yea, you make a point. I didnt like that word either, but couldnt come up with a better wording. Also meant to add some spice.
Well, you could've just asked - what do you think about Hans Zimmer's music?
Even though I'm not sure there's much worth to discussing this. I can pretty much tell you what the responses will be.
A lot of people will say - he is great. Some people don't find him so interesting and a few will say his music is bland and not musically interesting.
But you'll have a lot of bias because Hans is around on the forum. I'm sure there are a lot of people who hold back here and would give him shit in other forums, or in private conversations.
 
Well, you could've just asked - what do you think about Hans Zimmer's music?
Even though I'm not sure there's much worth to discussing this. I can pretty much tell you what the responses will be.
A lot of people will say - he is great. Some people don't find him so interesting and a few will say his music is bland and not musically interesting.
But you'll have a lot of bias because Hans is around on the forum. I'm sure there are a lot of people who hold back here and would give him shit in other forums, or in private.

Yea, well, sort of genuinely curious about anwers. No intention to deny peoples opinions who can explain why they would disagree (to the catchy headline). I think we got some good feedback already.
 
I think even Hans would agree that he's a bit overrated, in regards to the extreme oversaturation that comes with the entire film industry eating out of your hand at any given moment.
However, therein lies the very reason he's far from overrated as a craftsman.
Hans is reliable, has an immense talent for churning out catchy compositions that linger in popular culture, not to mention giving up-and-coming composers a chance to elbow their way into the industry by working under/alongside him at Remote Control Productions.

TL;DR Hans is prolific to the point of oversaturation, but he's not overrated as an artist.
 
HZ is good enough to have had a HUGE influence on many top film composers today. That's saying quite a lot, and I'd say that in any forum. He's good enough to be in super high demand in some of the biggest pictures of the past few decades. Pretty damn good, I'd say.

Hans isn't my favorite composer (I'm almost completely old school-oriented: Rozsa, Goldsmith, Herrmann), however I adore his scores to Man of Steel, Interstellar, and a few others.
 
I was initially going to just put a popcorn emoji and leave it like that.
But decided to comment.
There are three things about Hans's work which I love.
1. They always work for the scene... always..
2. His theme are more memorable than most other film composers I listen to (note I said most not all).
3. His music is almost always 'accessible' especially to a wider audience who quite frankly aren't musicians.

rsp
 
I guess I have to be the one to ask this: what's wrong with simple chord progressions? Some of the best music written wasn't built on anything much more complicated than that. I don't use them unless I'm getting paid, however that in itself also says something positive...Sancta Simplicitas!
 
Taste and aesthetics are one thing, but I can't agree that musical background should have any bearing on what you can appreciate.

My roots are "classical" too, and I think the enthusiasm for Hans is entirely deserved. :thumbsup:

Not suggesting one can't like a genre or style because of a predominantly classical background. Rather, I'm saying that the preponderance of your lifelong musical influences will naturally steer you towards music you are familiar with and have a deep appreciation for. Also, the more you know about the technical aspects of something, the more you look at things through a more critical lens. A mechanic sees under the hood and not just the sculpted lines of that shiny red sports car that may influence many people simply by it's aesthetics. So, if someone's familiar with well-developed symphonies, or contrapuntally rich baroque music, etc. etc. they may find Zimmer doesn't speak to them with the same intensity. Doesn't mean they still can't enjoy his music and even admire aspects of it.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom