The Bursting of the Dam - A Look into Soundtracks of Indie Films

A soundtrack is beyond fundamental. A great soundtrack has the ability to change the structure and meaning of a song itself - a rare and incredibly powerful thing to be able to do. Used well in the depths of film it can even transform the original artefact, sometimes for the greater good and sometimes not so. Therefore, the soundtrack is a dangerous tool, not simply because of the above but because it has the ability to apply images and words created on screen to a song that originally had nothing to do with its new environment and, subsequently, no relevance. It changes, amongst other things, timescales, tone and effect. In many senses a soundtrack is a manipulation tool and one that should be utilised with great thought and consideration to be used to great effect.

For instance, listen to Lust For Life by Iggy Pop and it’s difficult not to see Ewan McGregor as Renton in Trainspotting sprinting down the road bring chased by police with the famous “Choose Life” speech ringing over the top. But rather than result in defamation, it became a defining centrepoint for ‘90s culture, even leading to a re-release of the song. The film changed the shape of the song and the song changed the shape of the film, and together they created a unified sonic aesthetic that is now as synonymous with great British cinema as Hugh Grant is with drab British cinema; a wonderful example of the beauty and power of a great and relevant soundtrack put into action. However, post-‘90s and into the 2000’s we’ve seen a new breed of soundtrack emerge; one that started as an idiosyncratic and refreshing take on alternative music within film but has subsequently turned into something prescribed and predictable. In many cases now the soundtracks used have lost their purpose and serve only to make a film marketable and credible to the hip instead of serving the film itself. I’m going to look into this a little further.

Wes Anderson: culprit or instigator in the soundtrack boom of the noughties? Well, both, but he’s only a culprit because of how people have subsequently misinterpreted his work. Anderson’s films are notoriously splattered with a “who’s who” of rock music, creating varied and enticing soundtracks. But listen carefully and you won’t hear a song out of place. These are incredibly well thought through decisions and ones with financial repercussions that alter the film process. Do you know how much it costs to get the rights to a Rolling Stones song in a film? Anderson is an auteur, and it just doesn’t ring true to splash huge money on something just to make the film more hip - it has to serve a purpose in the film, be it to enhance the mise en scène, to allow the narrative to flow alongside it, or to give a sense of authentication to the period or place. If you are unsure of Anderson’s obsessive nature in having everything ’just-so’ in his films then look no further than the Royal Tenenbaums’ DVD Extras; it will soon become apparent that this man has a place for everything.

However, this notion has been grossly misconstrued and now so many films are littered with alternative soundtracks that, on paper, are fantastic and would equate to a mixtape you might make a friend and one you‘d be mighty proud of, but they have no place in the film. No relevance, no purpose, nothing to serve. So, it’s changed the meaning and job of a soundtrack; it’s now about creating a hip image for the film, a glorified and extensive name drop, a ploy for intended CD sales.

Since the early 2000’s and the rise of the alternative ‘quirky’ indie movie, we have seen alternative and ‘quirky’ indie soundtracks to accompany them. But when did this become as formulaic and generic as a car crash in an action movie? Well, while Juno can’t be solely blamed for this, it was at this point in 2007 that we reached breaking point; Juno simply burst the damn open and subsequently flooded the market with shit. What was previously tolerable and somewhat sweet in a film soon became sickly, turgid and frustrating. Producers and film companies saw the dollar signs after the meteoric rise and subsequent Oscar wins for Juno. Now we have reached a point of what feels like no return, such little thought is going into soundtracks that the ability to carefully and considerately structure a series of alternative songs in a film is becoming almost an impossible task because so many songs are being tarnished and tainted through misuse. It’s the equivalent of someone’s iPod that has every possible artist you could ever imagine but only a handful of songs by each one on it. They’ve downloaded a few tracks because they feel they should be familiar with the artist but have never spent time with an album or maybe even the songs themselves; it’s essentially a ticking off boxes list to appear hip.

Take (500) Days of Summer. For instance, the scene in the elevator where Joseph Gordon-Levitt listens to The Smiths on his iPod before a gooey-eyed Zooey Deschanel gushes “I love The Smiths”. Or again when Gordon-Levitt is drunk at a karaoke bar and sings Pixies‘ Here Comes Your Man. Every utterance and feeling in these kind of scenes is contrived and false beyond comprehension, nothing serves a purpose and all the film seems to do is create a platform for the writer or director to show how cool they are. I think maybe within two minutes of the start of the film, Belle and Sebastian are namedropped for no other reason whatsoever other than to mention Belle and Sebastian. Maybe all this linked to something in the end but I doubt it; I turned it off after thirty minutes due to physical sickness.

See also 2009’s Adventureland. The opening screams and guitars of Bastards of Young by The Replacements scream out before you even see anything on the screen; before you’ve even heard or seen anything it’s “here we go again” in your head. So ludicrous and pointless are the musical references in the film, it even goes as far to work into the storyline that a fairground worker (played by Ryan Reynolds) has jammed with Lou Reed! Now, I studied screenwriting for two years at university, and the number one golden rule we were persistently told was “make sure your script drips with authenticity”. Now, Lou Reed ‘jamming’ with a fairground worker is about as conceivable and plausible as Van Morrison being found playing hopscotch with some kids down his local park. It’s utterly preposterous and serves my point that these references and use of credible artists’ music are simply not being considered. I lasted roughly twenty minutes into this film before switching off, again due to physical sickness.

Funny People even goes as far to work a Wilco show into the script - no particular reason, relevance or even particular significance it seems, other than to simply mention it. Now, I’m not completely opposed to musical references in films, far from it, but it’s this constant misuse and treating of something that‘s ‘alternative’ as a borderline marketing tool. The whole thing reeks of nothingness; manufactured and purpose-built nothingness. Simply put, if there is something in your film that doesn’t serve it in some way, why is it there? Even when you listen to a Tarantino soundtrack, it sounds like a man who has sat and thumbed through his record collection for inspiration before picking honestly and carefully - a reflection of his tastes to accompany the vision for his film. With some of the aforementioned films it feels more like they’ve told an intern to read Pitchfork for a couple of weeks and get back to them with an iTunes playlist.

HMV now seems to sell more band t-shirts than it does music and with this marketing frenzy of selling something as ‘alternative’ and ‘individual’ to the masses, it’s a saddening and somewhat sickening time when even our art forms are not safe from such profiteering. Marketing budgets now take into account CD sales of the soundtrack before the film is even released. It seemed a time not that long ago that a soundtrack CD being available to buy was more of an afterthought, a realisation that the music for the film was great and maybe people would like to own it, or hell, maybe even released by public demand!. Now it’s as predetermined and as calculated as any other menial task in pre-production like the poster campaign.

Earlier I spoke of how the soundtrack has the ability to change the shape of songs, but now it’s getting to the stage where it’s rendering them lifeless and meaningless, and leaving them unable to perform such tasks because all the subtlety and intent is gone. See again Funny People which actually has Adam Sandler covering Neil Young on the soundtrack. It’s brash, abrasive and foul - its intentions aimed at financial gain and attaining a reputation built on namedropping instead of honesty and integrity. It’s a sad realisation that the subtle and delicate effect of songs such as Sometimes by My Bloody Valentine in Lost In Translation will literally become lost, because of over-saturation and inconsiderate use of an art form. As I stated earlier, the soundtrack is a dangerous tool and if people don’t learn to use it wisely again it could soon become extinct.