Maybe it is too much to cover the whole history of film music in one film. The golden age of cinema is overlooked and the silver age is touched on in this film. They started talking about Jerry Goldsmith then quickly cut over to John Williams. John Williams is a great composer, I think his best work is Superman (1979) that whole score is great. But we know Williams because he scored Lucas and Spielberg. All the other composers didn't have that exposure. What about Basil Poledouris Conan? Or James Horner's earlier work like Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan? And going back to Goldsmith. The guy has the greatest library as a whole such creativity, experimentation. The film does show composers fiddling with instruments to get a certain sound. Guess who started that? Goldsmith. Who experimented with moog and electronics? Goldsmith. Guess who wrote the creepiest song ever for the anti christ? Goldsmith! I guess I would say to anyone that is a slightest of a fan of this music, just start listening there is so much great stuff out there. And a lot of it is on Youtube, which I hope stays up there so people can learn and enjoy these people's work.

Score is the sort of documentary that anyone with more than a passing interest in film can enjoy - financed partially by 1,870 backers it explores in real depth the process, the creation, the orchestration, engineering and history of the past 30 years in film.Score starts ambitiously, looking at movie scoring in the 30s, 40s, and 50s, before turning to the great composers of the 70s Jerry Goldsmith and John Williams. It then turns to look at more recent favourites. There are plenty of interviews and plenty of scores.However, the film is restricted by studio choices to only being able to use certain scores, and some of the really great film scores that one would love to know more about just aren't there. In particular, with the tragic death of James Horner, having only a two minute piece (a very good piece though) in the end credits is a real shame. I sat through the whole film waiting for the section on James Horner that simply isn't there.Again, it is a well-made and interesting insight to the world of film scoring and deserves viewing, but for this viewer by not being able to get all the studios to release their soundtracks at a minimal cost the film ends up focusing on only some of the great scores.

"Score" is not a bad overview of film music history and craft, albeit somewhat simplistic ... and some folks here, perhaps inadvertently, say things that are obvious or pretty stupid. Is there a single reference here to Erich Wolfgang Korngold? I think not. Instead Steiner and Newman get too much credit that symphonic sound in films forged in the 1930s. But what mostly irritated me was the film's way of equating of today's film composers with the masters of yesteryear. Most of them aren't worthy to shine their shoes.

Fair disclosure: I'm a Kickstarter backer and I know one of the filmmakers. Having said that, I love movies and I've always been into the music that makes them tick, and this gets into the nitty gritty of how movie scores came to be and how they have evolved over the years. The interviews with many big-name composers are fascinating in that we learn about how they do what they do, how they work with directors and orchestras, and in many cases, how they went from what they used to do to scoring movies. It's a quick and breezy and uber-interesting 90 minutes that includes people and scores you'd expect and some you probably wouldn't, but are happy to see. There are one or two places where the music is a bit louder than the spoken word, and there are a couple instances where it would be really great to see the scores, while they're being orchestrated, in context of the movies they become part of. But I quibble. Everything here is right up my alley and I thoroughly enjoyed it.