This is a follow-up to my earlier "composer/song writer confusion"-thread. 21 Users ended up voting for the option of which we've since established that it's simply not allowed by the rules, so the poll options needed changing. So I'll try again, starting again with two screenshots:

From the opening credits:


From the closing credits:


The current profile (EAN 025193-327222) gives both John Cacavas and Mike Post equal "composer" credits, which is wrong. The contribution rules clearly say that the "composer" credit is to be "used for the composer of the film's Original Score." It's clear that that's John Cacavas, and NOT Mike Post. As such, we cannot credit Mike Post as "composer". Currently, the profile makes it seem that John Cacavas and Mike Post scored the movie together, and that is clearly not true. I want to fix that.

Apart from John Cacavas' credit, the end credits give an additional credit to Mike Post, for writing the 'Mystery Movie Theme'. I find that valuable data, and I'd like to retain that credit in DVD Profiler. Since he didn't provide the score, we can't credit him with "composer". That leaves us with two options: either remove Mike Post's credit altogether, or credit him as "song writer".

So, I propose to change his credit to "song writer". A number of users prefer to argue about what exactly constitutes a "song", saying that because it has no lyrics, it isn't a "song" so the "song writer" credit cannot be used. I don't feel that way, but even if you do it's important to realise that in the current set-up, using the "song writer" credit is the only way to retain Mike Post's credit.

Also try to remember that this issue affects many profiles. Lots and lots of TV shows have credits like "music by XXX, theme by YYY". IMHO, these can all be perfectly handled using the "composer" and "song writer" credits - I'd much rather do that, than having to remove all those "theme" credits. Again: to me that's valuable data. They're perfectly legitimate credits, that can be handled in DVD Profiler in a perfectly acceptable way, even showing a clear distinction from the actual composer to boot. Please let's not decide to remove all those credits?

Again: please note that the rules do not prohibit us to use the "song writer" credit in this way - it's just some users' notion of what constitutes a "song" that makes it difficult for them to apply the "song writer" credit to an instrumental theme. Some users have proposed to ask Ken to add a third "theme" credit to the music section. Of course, I'd be absolutely fine with that, but I really don't think it's necessary. Again, I feel that any "theme" written by someone else than the composer of the movie's score can be handled perfectly by using the existing "song writer" credit. All some of you apparently need is a clarification from Ken that it's okay to consider a "theme" as a "song" for DVD Profiler purposes. Nothing more, nothing less. And then we're done.

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
The Composer field cannot be both the "person who wrote the movie score" and the person who wrote the "movie theme" or other instrumental piece, but not the entire score. Using the field in this way makes the data useless, since you have no idea which "job" the person listed actually performed. For purposes of DVDP, there is no reason that we cannot define "Song Writer" to include "movie themes" and/or "instrumentals".

While a feature request for a "theme" credit is nice, I really don't want to wait and see what may or may not happen in a future version of DVD Profiler. At the moment, this profile has the theme writer jointly listed as a "composer" together with the person that actually scored the movie. That is incorrect, not even allowed by the rules, and I want to fix that NOW. Currently, that can only be achieved by either removing the credit, or changing it to "song writer". What do you prefer?

Once more my proposal in a nutshell:

Any original piece of music written for a movie or TV show, but NOT written by the actual composer of the score, should be treated with a "song writer" credit.

Not only does this allow us to retain Mike Post's credit, I also don't believe there will ever have to be any questions on the subject again. This would fit perfectly within the current system and the contribution rules. All we need is a nod from Ken and/or Gerri, and we're done with the whole matter.

Quoting Voltaire53:

Quote:
Change the Rules so that Composer is legitimate - or accept that the 'original score' can be made up of the score of the background music and the theme tune so 2 people contributed to it (albeit at different times) so both are composers of the original score.

Similar to a feature request for an additional "theme" credit, this is also an option that could solve the problem at some point in the future. Not a solution I'd like, but that doesn't really matter. If Ken indeed chooses to change the rules, or add an additional credit, then that's what I'll work with. The point remains that with the system and the contribution rules that we have to work with today, the current profile is wrong. The question remains: at this point, do we prefer to simply remove all "theme" credits, or shall we retain those credits by using "song writer"?

Quoting Martin_Zuidervliet:

Quote:
I would remove it in the online profile and keep him as a song writer in my local profile. If not everybody agrees, it should not exist, that way everybody is "happy".

Yes, I expect that's what it's gonna come to. If my current contribution changing his credit to "song writer" is declined, I'll try to remove him. But I do think it's a shame - I just cannot imagine why so many users would prefer to lose a perfectly legitimate credit, while it can be perfectly handled within the current system. Once more, I see that as an indication that some of the more "vocal" users are more interested in fighting over petty details, semantics and technicalities instead of striving for a high-quality, USEFUL database. Here we a movie that shows us two different credits, one for a composer, one for a "theme" writer. The software offers us two different job descriptions to use for entering these people into DVD Profiler. How hard can it be to figure out what goes where?

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
If you are interested in the most accurate method, then adding a check-off for "Theme Music" to "Composer" and "Songwriter" is the best fix.  There is no need to get into whether or not it even has lyrics - some do, most don't.

At this point, I don't even care what is the best "fix". I already said that if Invelos were to decide to change the rules, or add an additional "theme" credit, that I'd do things accordingly. This is just about what we're supposed to do NOW. As long as we have no further clarification from Invelos, we can either choose to remove the credit, or we can choose to retain it. I only tried to make a case for the latter, as I value that particular bit of data. Again, I'll work with any "fix" if and when it arrives. But as for now: the current profile violates the rules, and I'd like to set that straight, regardless of any future developments.

Can someone explain simply, without biting my head off or directing me to a 6-page thread, why a theme tune is NOT considered to be part of a score for a film or TV programme. Sure the score is the non-song music which comprises a film soundtrack - which is made up of a combination of the theme and the background music, which may (or may not) be written by the same person.

Quoting Voltaire53:

Quote:
Can someone explain simply, without biting my head off or directing me to a 6-page thread, why a theme tune is NOT considered to be part of a score for a film or TV programme. Sure the score is the non-song music which comprises a film soundtrack - which is made up of a combination of the theme and the background music, which may (or may not) be written by the same person.

No one is saying that it is not part of the score.

The current definition of Composer for DVDP purposes, says that it is the person who "wrote the Original Score", not the person who wrote "part of the Original Score".  If someone is listed in the credits as "Music By" or "Score By", then it is inappropriate to give the same level of credit to someone else who only wrote the music for one "theme" song which is included in that score.

I voted for "song writer", BTW.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
ROFLMAO, Tim. Are you related to Al gore. I don't the vote came out i want a recount.

Give me a break.

Skip

Please just answer my questions instead of useless posts like this? For instance: do you, or do you not agree that Danny Elfman's theme is a very large part of the music of 'Sledge Hammer!'? Do you, or do you not agree that since he's NEVER provided a score for any of the episodes of 'Sledge Hammer!', that we cannot credit him as "composer"? Do you, or do you not agree that using your logic, we have NO option to credit Danny Elfman at all for his contribution to 'Sledge Hammer!', regardless of his weekly credit for composing the theme? And if so, wouldn't you agree that that's a shame?

As for your "witty" remark: did you notice that the vote came out in my favour, albeit slightly? So...  I really don't see your point. I DO however, see the point of this second poll, as quite a number of people voted for the option to keep Mike Post credited as "composer". I didn't even consider it, but along the way someone pointed out that the rules don't even allow that. That's why I started a new thread: to point out that either we reach a compromise to use the "song writer" credit, or we're just going to lose all "theme" credits that are not written by the movie/tv episode's score composer.