Martin:

What don't you understand? You have a very long track record oif doing whatever you damn well please and then rationalizing it to death. I am not the only person that has told you we don't do ADDITIONAL anything, not Additional Sound Editors, Addiitional Music, Additional Anything, the poll backs it up as well.
You got caught and you don't like it...too bad. If you consider the data important keep it local and hope that someday it will be contribuutable, which I would guess that in some way it will be, but right now it is NOT.

Skip

Quoting Martin_Zuidervliet:

Quote:
Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Quoting Martin_Zuidervliet:

Quote:
If you can provide an explanation that the credited writers wrote additional music especially for a movie, they should be included as composers in our database.

That's what the "additional music by" credit means: providing further explanation isn't necessary - it is what it is. If you see such a credit in conjunction with a "music" or "composer" credit, then that in itself tells us that someone DID contribute some additional music to the movie, but was NOT the main composer of the score. And Skip is right: we can't use "composer" because we wouldn't have a way to distinguish between the two. If you did, it would look like the film's score was composed by both of them, and that really isn't a accurate reflection of that large "composer" credit in the opening credits for just one of them... It's not that the contributor of "additional music" didn't COMPOSE anything - he did, obviously - but he just cannot be mixed in with the actual composer(s) of the movie's score.

I've been thinking about your reply, and I can't quite follow you there. First you were advocating to enter "Mystery Movie Theme by" as Song Writer on which you disagreed with Skip, and now you suddenly disapprove of "Additional Music by" to be entered as Composer on which you agree with Skip. Sorry, but that doesn't make any sense to me.

It's all perfectly clear to me, and I still stand firmly behind both points of view. The matter at hand is that we don't enter ANY "additional" crew credits, whether it's music or anything else. The other issue you refer to is that I feel "theme" writers qualify as "song writers" for DVD Profiler purposes. That's something else entirely - something in which I feel I am 100% backed up by the rules, I might add, but let's not go into that here.

There is one key similarity, though: in that debate, I also felt we could NOT give them a "composer" credit, for the same reason we can't use "composer" for the additional music in this thread: because we wouldn't be able to distinguish between the two, and it would look like both composed the score together. In both cases, that would not be an accurate representation of that single "composer" credit in the opening credits.

So in both cases, I've always argued that we can not use "composer". Now if you had elected to use "song writer" in this discussion, I'd understand why you'd draw a parallel, but since you used "composer", I don't get it. Again, both those responsible for "themes" and for "additional music" DID make a contribution to the movie - I'm not arguing that. But there are many people who do that, yet never get a credit in DVD Profiler. A generic "additional music" credit doesn't tell us how large a contribution this person made, but we do know it was not significant enough to credit him alongside the actual composer. Therefore, using the "composer" credit is simply not possible. That not only goes for "additional music", but for "themes" as well (where we do have a pretty good indication of the "size" of the contribution). Both are not credited as the composer of the score, while someone else is. The only difference is that for specific "themes", I use "song writer" (again, because I'm convinced that the rules tell me to), while I don't credit generic "additional music" at all. That's another debate, but the point is that "composer" isn't allowed for either of them.

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
There is one key similarity, though: in that debate, I also felt we could NOT give them a "composer" credit, for the same reason we can't use "composer" for the additional music in this thread: because we wouldn't be able to distinguish between the two, and it would look like both composed the score together. In both cases, that would not be an accurate representation of that single "composer" credit in the opening credits.

What if the theme was purely instrumental? Surely a "song writer" credit would be wrong when no song has been written.

Winter:

That is what I have always sqid about most themes. Mission: Impossible is NOT a song.  But Tim disagrees.<shrugs>

I think we need a Theme by Credit which we don't have right now. But that's another story for another thread, which will come along again someday, I have no doubt.

Skip

Since Martin, brought up the Mystery Movie Theme. Correct me if i am wrong, the mancini credit is there but i have yet to heard that theme on any of the associated discs. I have heard...ummm Columbo and so forth but I haven't heard the Mystery Movie Theme in years.

Skip

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
Winter:

That is what I have always sqid about most themes. Mission: Impossible is NOT a song.  But Tim disagrees.<shrugs>

I think we need a Theme by Credit which we don't have right now. But that's another story for another thread, which will come along again someday, I have no doubt.

Skip

I agree with the need for a "Theme by" credit.  Often the theme is the most recognizable music in a program, either film or TV.  So if Ken adds "Theme by" to the music credit section, why not "Additional Music," too?

I know, Skip.  And I also agree, if reluctantly.<sigh>

we could always try harder for the wishes to come thrugh..