Martin Scorsese says Marvel movies are 'not cinema'

[Oliver_W]

Martin Scorsese, one of cinema’s most venerated current directors, has decried superhero movies – the dominant force in today’s industry. The director of films such as Taxi Driver, Raging Bull and Goodfellas told Empire magazine that his attempts to get up to speed with contemporary superhero films had failed. (https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/oct/04/martin-scorsese-says-marvel-movies-are-not-cinema)

“I tried, you know?” the director said when asked if he had seen Marvel’s movies. “But that’s not cinema.”

He continued: “Honestly, the closest I can think of them, as well made as they are, with actors doing the best they can under the circumstances, is theme parks. It isn’t the cinema of human beings trying to convey emotional, psychological experiences to another human being.”

Earlier this year, Avengers: Endgame became the highest grossing film in history after topping $2.8bn at the global box office (fifth highest after adjusting for inflation). Eight other titles from the same studio feature in the Top 30 (when factored without inflation).

Marvel head Kevin Feige last year defended his films against the kind of criticism levelled by Scorsese, saying that the series’s lack of major awards was no indication of a lack of quality or ambition.

“Maybe it’s easy to dismiss VFX or flying people or spaceships or billion dollar grosses,” Feige said. “I think it is easy to say that you have already been awarded in a certain way. [Alfred] Hitchcock never won best director, so it’s very nice, but it doesn’t mean everything. I would much rather be in a room full of engaged fans.”

Scorsese’s latest film, The Irishman, won rave reviews from its premiere at the New York film festival last weekend, with critics praising the use of “de-ageing” technology.

Hmm. I'd say he's not entirely wrong - while I think the MCU as a whole will go "down in the books" as the first successfully executed cinematic universe, I don't think any of the movies are earth-shattering in their own right, out of the MCU context. Like sure, Infinity War + Endgame successfully tied up about a million threads and brought the current incarnation of the MCU to a close, but I can't imagine watching it without having seen the previous films!

I'd say a better comparison than themeparks might be comparing cinema as a whole to food; MCU and (most) other superhero movies are McDonalds - enjoyed by most people, tasty enough, but ultimately disposable and lacking substance.

And I'm saying all this as someone who really enjoys most superhero movies!

[Niamh.]

What is his definition of "cinema" though. In my mind "cinema" is exactly these kinds of movies, ones that you don't want to watch at home because the action needs to be on a big screen etc They're entertainment pure and simple. Superhero movies are never going to really be that deep or earth shattering but so what, you need a balance aswell

[James]

I'm not the biggest fan of the MCU films, but there's a few I like quite a lot. I find with a lot of blockbusters in the 2010s, including many from the MCU, they don't have a story that works from beginning to end like the best films.

They are a lot like theme park rides but I would say that they are still cinema - big spectacle has always a reason people like films - films don't need to say anything about humanity.

One of the earliest ever films was of a steam train arriving at a station, and apparently people lost their minds at that.

[Oliver_W]

What is his definition of "cinema" though. In my mind "cinema" is exactly these kinds of movies, ones that you don't want to watch at home because the action needs to be on a big screen etc They're entertainment pure and simple. Superhero movies are never going to really be that deep or earth shattering but so what, you need a balance aswell
I agree with all of this tbh. I'd say Scorsese maybe should have used a different word, but I'm not even sure what that word could be! Movies? Well obviously they are literal movies, because they're moving pictures. hmmmm

[Alf]

Well he's got a point.

A great film should give you a feeling in your heart or your stomach. It should give you an emotional feeling of wow. It should speak to you. It should make you come away from the viewing asking questions of it and be in your mind for the rest of the day and days to come.

[Niamh.]

I agree with all of this tbh. I'd say Scorsese maybe should have used a different word, but I'm not even sure what that word could be! Movies? Well obviously they are literal movies, because they're moving pictures. hmmmm

Yeah, I mean, from reading the interview, he could just have said, I don't really like Marvel movies :laugh:

[Oliver_W]

He could easily have come off as "old man yells at cloud", but he's Martin ****ing Scorsese. He looked at Leonardo DiCaprio and thought "I'm gonna turn him into a legitimate actor" ... and he succeeded!

Cinema itself is pretty stagnant at the moment tbh. Like, all horror is these days is "quiet scene, then we're made jump". I enjoyed both IT movies but the recent one had about four instances of "benign person or object suddenly gets huge and runs at character" :joker:

All we get from the mainstream these days is franchise movies, remakes, and cheap horror

tbh I'd be happy for Hollywood to burn to the ground, leaving only Big Name Directors like Scorsese, Speilberg, etc, and leave the rest to indie directors.

Okay, I'm under 30 but I'm the old man yelling at clouds :joker:

[Tom4784]

Gatekeeping prick.

Cinema is cinema, his pretentious three+ hour oscar bait is cinema, Marvel films are cinema, even **** like Adam Sandler's filmography is cinema.

If this was a few years ago when Marvel was in a creative rut with the films and every one (Bar the Captain America sequels) felt like it was made from the same blueprint then he might have had a point but I think Black Panther in particular has inspired Marvel to do more, it's only Captain Marvel that's been underwhelming recently.

[Alf]

Scorsese's work will be sought after in a century's time. This super hero fad more than likely won't be.

[Tom4784]

Scorsese's work will be sought after in a century's time. This super hero fad more than likely won't be.

Can you really call something a fad when it's been going since the late 1990's? The craze started with X-Men and Sam Raimi's Spiderman films after all and then you had Nolan's Batman films that really elevated everything and now you've got the likes of Black Panther and inevitably Joker (which, ironically, Scorsese was attached to for a very long time) that are and will make waves at the oscars.

I don't think super hero films will ever die down now, the comics never have and the films are an evolution of that. Disney and Marvel have created a machine that can keep going and going now.

Scorsese's comments aren't much different to the old guard's disdain for Netflix and the like, Scorsese nor his counterparts can get with the times.

[Cherie]

I agree with him in that some of these movies are not standalone classics so you have to watch 5 or 6 movies to get the full drift

[Alf]

I don't think future film makers will be studying and taking inspiration from these Marvel films as much as they will be studying Scorsese. They're just really a quick fix, where what Scorsese does is greatness in the art of moving pictures.

Most people can draw a picture, but not everybody is Da Vinci or Rembrandt.

Scorsese has earned the right to criticise in this subject, I'd think he has a good idea what he's talking about.

[Tom4784]

I don't think future film makers will be studying and taking inspiration from these Marvel films as much as they will be studying Scorsese. They're just really a quick fix, where what Scorsese does is greatness in the art of moving pictures.

Most people can draw a picture, but not everybody is Da Vinci or Rembrandt.

Scorsese has earned the right to criticise in this subject, I'd think he has a good idea what he's talking about.

Everyone has the right to criticise but his standing doesn't mean his opinion is beyond reproach.

I also think that Marvel films could end up being studied because, after all, they are technical feats and Thanos alone will probably be a benchmark for people learning about CGI in cinema. The social relevance of Black Panther could also lead to it being a film that's highly valued down the line, especially from a historic point of view.

His criticisms of Marvel films are not much different then the criticisms he got when he was a young director in the 'brat pack'. Every generation is bemoaned by the one that came before it.

[Alf]

And to be fair to Scorsese, it's very rare you see him criticising films, in fact I can't recall him doing so before, he's usually very positive and enthusiastic when he's talking about cinema, and he's a huge fan of it. So something's got up his nose.

[Alf]

I should probably stop defending him anyway. You never know what's gonna come out in the future with these Hollywood types.

[arista]

Clockwork Orange
a Great Cinema film.

[Alf]

Clockwork Orange
a Great Cinema film.it most certainly is. Kubrick is a God

[The Slim Reaper]

Clockwork Orange
a Great Cinema film.

Yeah, but it's no muppets christmas carol.

[Tom4784]

Stanley Kubrick was an auteur but he will forever be an absolute prick for what he did to Shelley Duvall.

I find it difficult to appreciate his work when he essentially drove someone in his care to madness.

[James]

I kind of feel his generation were more creative film-makers than the people making films now.

The current films are made by Gen-X'rs and older Millennials that grew up in the 80s with all the great popular culture that came out of that decade, and for whom Star Wars in 1977 was year zero for films - they kind of want to copy all of that, and the earlier films of the seventies that they admire.

Obviously the way the Internet hypes up the big superhero films and recognisable IP, at the expense of everything else, contributes also.

[James]

Stanley Kubrick was an auteur but he will forever be an absolute prick for what he did to Shelley Duvall.

I find it difficult to appreciate his work when he essentially drove someone in his care to madness.

Where's the evidence for that?

[Niamh.]

Stanley Kubrick was an auteur but he will forever be an absolute prick for what he did to Shelley Duvall.

I find it difficult to appreciate his work when he essentially drove someone in his care to madness.

what was that about?

[Tom4784]

Where's the evidence for that?

A lot of the cast have acknowledged Stanley Kubrick's behaviour during the filming of The Shining and there's plenty of pieces that go into the history of that film.

what was that about?

Basically during the (very long) shoot for The Shining, Stanley Kubrick bullied Shelley Duvall relentlessly and isolated her from the cast and crew to make sure no one could comfort her or help her. He belittled her talents repeatedly, forced her to do over a hundred takes for shots for no good reason and was generally a sociopathic piece of **** towards her. A lot of her acting in that film isn't believed to be acting but her literally having breakdowns under the stress Kubrick heaped on her. She legitimately had to keep bottles of water close by at all times because her tears left her dehydrated because she was forced to cry for twelve hours a day. I'm pretty sure there's other stuff that I'm forgetting but he was generally evil towards her which is strange because he chose to cast her against Jack Nicholson's advice who wanted Jessica Lange to be cast instead. I believe it was because Kubrick probably knew he couldn't have done to Lange what he did to Duvall.

She never really acted much after that film was done and the experience has been attributed to driving her off the edge as she suffers from mental issues now.

I can't really appreciate his talent in the light of what he did to Shelley Duvall.

[Niamh.]

A lot of the cast have acknowledged Stanley Kubrick's behaviour during the filming of The Shining and there's plenty of pieces that go into the history of that film.



Basically during the (very long) shoot for The Shining, Stanley Kubrick bullied Shelley Duvall relentlessly and isolated her from the cast and crew to make sure no one could comfort her or help her. He belittled her talents repeatedly, forced her to do over a hundred takes for shots for no good reason and was generally a sociopathic piece of **** towards her. A lot of her acting in that film isn't believed to be acting but her literally having breakdowns under the stress Kubrick heaped on her. She legitimately had to keep bottles of water close by at all times because her tears left her dehydrated because she was forced to cry for twelve hours a day. I'm pretty sure there's other stuff that I'm forgetting but he was generally evil towards her which is strange because he chose to cast her against Jack Nicholson's advice who wanted Jessica Lange to be cast instead. I believe it was because Kubrick probably knew he couldn't have done to Lange what he did to Duvall.

She never really acted much after that film was done and the experience has been attributed to driving her off the edge as she suffers from mental issues now.

I can't really appreciate his talent in the light of what he did to Shelley Duvall.

I never heard that before, how awful if true. I must do a bit of reading up on it

[Tom4784]

I never heard that before, how awful if true. I must do a bit of reading up on it

It is fascinating although difficult to read at some points, from what I read he pretty much manipulated the crew into having no sympathy for her and blaming her for the film's problems during the shoot. Quite typical behaviour for an abuser.

[user104658]

I fundamentally disagree, but it would take me more time than I have right now to elaborate. I might later :joker:. I guess all I'll say in the shortest terms is, he's mistaking "completely different" with "inferior".

[Vicky.]

What is his definition of "cinema" though. In my mind "cinema" is exactly these kinds of movies, ones that you don't want to watch at home because the action needs to be on a big screen etc They're entertainment pure and simple. Superhero movies are never going to really be that deep or earth shattering but so what, you need a balance aswell

This.

I cannot stand half the superhero type movies, and have not seen many marvel stuff (unless gavin has it on and am half watching) but of course they are cinema..hell, possibly moreso than some Scorsese films!

I agree he could have just told the truth and said..I don't like Marvel movis, instead of this nonsense :laugh:

[Oliver_W]

The social relevance of Black Panther could also lead to it being a film that's highly valued down the line, especially from a historic point of view.


Not to be "that guy", but what social relevance? There have been black superhero movies for decades tbh

[Alf]

I fundamentally disagree, but it would take me more time than I have right now to elaborate. I might later :joker:. I guess all I'll say in the shortest terms is, he's mistaking "completely different" with "inferior".Nobody ain't got time for one of your novels.

[Oliver_W]

Nobody ain't got time for one of your novels.

I'd be interested to hear!

[Alf]

I'd be interested to hear!I'd make a packed lunch and a flask a tea for the event if I was you.

[Tony Montana]

Not to be "that guy", but what social relevance? There have been black superhero movies for decades tbh

It was the first comic book film to have a predominantly black cast.

Apart from the Blade films, what other black superhero films have there been?

[Vicky.]

It was the first comic book film to have a predominantly black cast.

Apart from the Blade films, what other black superhero films have there been?

Only one I can think of is hancock..if hes meant to be a superhero :laugh:

[Oliver_W]

It was the first comic book film to have a predominantly black cast.

Apart from the Blade films, what other black superhero films have there been?

I can't remember its name but there was the one where the teacher got hit by a meteor which gave him powers, and Blankman. They both had a mostly black cast (if I remember right, I've only seen each once).

Spawn? Who's that guy that looks like Venom?

[Tom4784]

Not to be "that guy", but what social relevance? There have been black superhero movies for decades tbh

And most of them are blaxpoitation films or films that take inspiration from that era. What makes Black Panther so innovative was the fact that it didn't rely on the blaxploitation angle and it was a film that embraced culture and spoke of issues in a way that's never been handled in a mainstream superhero film before. It's difficult to explain but, in the US in particular, it's a very important film because it bucked a lot of trends that people used to devalue black actors and films with minority casts. Go back even a few years ago and most studios would have never gone for a big budget Blockbuster without a white actor on the poster because they wouldn't believe it to be profitable.

Black Panther showed that you could tell a successful authentic story featuring black characters and culture that didn't rely on stereotypes or belittlement. Black Panther's critical, financial success along with the adoration of the audience, when you consider all the factors, was unheard of. If the MCU ever does come to an end, Black Panther will likely be one of the films that will remain relevant and beloved.

[Oliver_W]

And most of them are blaxpoitation films or films that take inspiration from that era. What makes Black Panther so innovative was the fact that it didn't rely on the blaxploitation angle and it was a film that embraced culture and spoke of issues in a way that's never been handled in a mainstream superhero film before. It's difficult to explain but, in the US in particular, it's a very important film because it bucked a lot of trends that people used to devalue black actors and films with minority casts.
Okay, I'd never thought of it like that before :)

[Ammi]

A lot of the cast have acknowledged Stanley Kubrick's behaviour during the filming of The Shining and there's plenty of pieces that go into the history of that film.



Basically during the (very long) shoot for The Shining, Stanley Kubrick bullied Shelley Duvall relentlessly and isolated her from the cast and crew to make sure no one could comfort her or help her. He belittled her talents repeatedly, forced her to do over a hundred takes for shots for no good reason and was generally a sociopathic piece of **** towards her. A lot of her acting in that film isn't believed to be acting but her literally having breakdowns under the stress Kubrick heaped on her. She legitimately had to keep bottles of water close by at all times because her tears left her dehydrated because she was forced to cry for twelve hours a day. I'm pretty sure there's other stuff that I'm forgetting but he was generally evil towards her which is strange because he chose to cast her against Jack Nicholson's advice who wanted Jessica Lange to be cast instead. I believe it was because Kubrick probably knew he couldn't have done to Lange what he did to Duvall.

She never really acted much after that film was done and the experience has been attributed to driving her off the edge as she suffers from mental issues now.

I can't really appreciate his talent in the light of what he did to Shelley Duvall.


...one of the scenes filmed was a ‘record breaking scene..’...for any known dialogue scene.../...it had over 120 takes with her swinging a bat at Jack Nicholson...it was reported that she was sobbing hysterically between the takes...with Kubrick telling others not to speak to her...and then he finally got the ‘reality’ of his shot...when he emotionally drained her and isolated her from any comfort...

[Niamh.]

Only one I can think of is hancock..if hes meant to be a superhero :laugh:

He's more of an Anti Hero I would have thought :think:

[Alf]

Black Panther has a rating of 7.3 on IMDB

That doesn't sound like it was overly impressive with the public.

Not seen it myself, so I couldn't tell you anything about it.

[Ammi]

...having just watched Avengers: Endgame...I would completely disagree with him, there is a huge depth to it, so many threads running through it and a huge stretch of emotions throughout...it stretches you from one side of the emotional plain to the other...it’s surely a movie that for me would require a few watches to completely absorb...that wouldn’t be a definition of any kind of ‘shallow’ movie...

[Shaun]

I think I get (and agree with) what he's saying: they're largely crowdpleasers and meant to wow people in the same sense that fireworks displays and theme parks are. I'm sure there are thousands of people who take the same sort of emotional impact from these films as others do with the likes of The Departed/The Godfather/No Country for Old Men etc... but they're usually teenagers :laugh:

This whole thing will be spun out of proportion though and made to sound as if he's this horribly bitter bloke with a contempt for the state of the film industry when he's, presumably, quite unbothered and happy with his success :laugh:

[Ammi]

Only one I can think of is hancock..if hes meant to be a superhero :laugh:

...I would say that Hancock is an anti hero...

[Ammi]

He's more of an Anti Hero I would have thought :think:

...and snap...:laugh:...yeah what Niamh said...

[Shaun]

Black Panther has a rating of 7.3 on IMDB

That doesn't sound like it was overly impressive with the public.

Not seen it myself, so I couldn't tell you anything about it.

IMDb is a hard thing to gauge because nowadays most films (especially popular ones) have a particular reactionary movement from snobs/web bros.

Every time there's a movie that comes out now with some level of tokenism ("all black cast! first gay superhero! women produced/directed 85% of the movie!") there's usually a counter-movement from the anti-PC brigade that'll give it a 1/10 without even having seen the movie. The female remake of the Ghostbusters was the most notable recent example: it was a perfectly "fine" movie, nothing amazing but nothing terrible either, but meninists took it upon themselves to decry it as the worst thing since the Holocaust.

Edit: even the films that most people agree are amazing/classics, you'll find a bunch of trolls giving it 1/10s to make sure its total score ends up falling below a movie they're trying to champion

[Ammi]

I think I get (and agree with) what he's saying: they're largely crowdpleasers and meant to wow people in the same sense that fireworks displays and theme parks are. I'm sure there are thousands of people who take the same sort of emotional impact from these films as others do with the likes of The Departed/The Godfather/No Country for Old Men etc... but they're usually teenagers :laugh:

This whole thing will be spun out of proportion though and made to sound as if he's this horribly bitter bloke with a contempt for the state of the film industry when he's, presumably, quite unbothered and happy with his success :laugh:



...I don’t think he seems bitter or contemptuous in any way but I don’t agree with what he’s saying because the Marvel movies of today...as in recent years...are still an unknown in terms of their general value to the film industry...he’s generalising Marvel in a way that he wouldn’t want his own movies to be generalised...and he would have had to have watched every one as well, I wonder if he has because there is no analysis of the movies in any way...just sweeping statements...

[Alf]

IMDb is a hard thing to gauge because nowadays most films (especially popular ones) have a particular reactionary movement from snobs/web bros.

Every time there's a movie that comes out now with some level of tokenism ("all black cast! first gay superhero! women produced/directed 85% of the movie!") there's usually a counter-movement from the anti-PC brigade that'll give it a 1/10 without even having seen the movie. The female remake of the Ghostbusters was the most notable recent example: it was a perfectly "fine" movie, nothing amazing but nothing terrible either, but meninists took it upon themselves to decry it as the worst thing since the Holocaust.

Edit: even the films that most people agree are amazing/classics, you'll find a bunch of trolls giving it 1/10s to make sure its total score ends up falling below a movie they're trying to championMaybe, although I'd expect they have a system that can identify trolling.

I still think it's the best rating system online for films. I've found it more helpful than Rotten Tomatoes in finding a film I like. Although the likely hood is that more guys use it more than girls, so guy type films will likely score higher.

[Vicky.]

Hmm yeah, been ages since I watched Hancock, but from bits I remember, you are likely right :laugh:

[Niamh.]

Maybe, although I'd expect they have a system that can identify trolling.

I still think it's the best rating system online for films. I've found it more helpful than Rotten Tomatoes in finding a film I like. Although the likely hood is that more guys use it more than girls, so guy type films will likely score higher.

Why would you think more guys than girls use it?

[Vicky.]

Why would you think more guys than girls use it?

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/men-are-sabotaging-the-online-reviews-of-tv-shows-aimed-at-women/

Hes probably right

Seventy percent of IMDb TV show raters are men, according to my analysis, and that results in shows with predominantly female audiences getting screwed

Just a blog really, but makes sense.

Also makes sense that men deliberately sabotage films/shows that are 'aimed' at women. Though its surely pointless to be so spiteful..

[Tom4784]

Black Panther has a rating of 7.3 on IMDB

That doesn't sound like it was overly impressive with the public.

Not seen it myself, so I couldn't tell you anything about it.

IMDB is a terrible barometer to measure a film's worth since it's infested with trolls and the like. I remember reading yesterday about one film in particular on that website in which the top reviews were overtly racist and had statements like 'This film would be better if it had less *insert racial slur here*'.

[Niamh.]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/men-are-sabotaging-the-online-reviews-of-tv-shows-aimed-at-women/

Hes probably right

Seventy percent of IMDb TV show raters are men, according to my analysis, and that results in shows with predominantly female audiences getting screwed

Just a blog really, but makes sense.

Also makes sense that men deliberately sabotage films/shows that are 'aimed' at women. Though its surely pointless to be so spiteful..

I wonder why that is, I thought everyone loved a good movie male and female hhmm

That's ****ty though if that's going on, heaven forbid women start to get decent roles at last. Don't know what the big threat to men is

[Tom4784]

Rotten Tomatoes is better since they've taken a lot of steps to prevent trolls from tanking scores.

[Jordan.]

I get his theme park comparison. It's like they're fun to experience for the first time but once you've seen everything they have to offer there's little need or desire to ever return to them.

[Oliver_W]

I wonder why that is, I thought everyone loved a good movie male and female hhmm

That's ****ty though if that's going on, heaven forbid women start to get decent roles at last. Don't know what the big threat to men is

I wonder if it's more about the tokenism of it rather than the presence of women. Like, everyone loves both Terminator movies and the Alien films, and the lead female aspect was never made to be a big deal.

[Wizard.]

And who's this guy in the cinema world? Not one I've heard of that's for sure!

[Niamh.]

I wonder if it's more about the tokenism of it rather than the presence of women. Like, everyone loves both Terminator movies and the Alien films, and the lead female aspect was never made to be a big deal.

Arnie was as much, if not more of the draw in the terminators, let's be real, Alien yeah sure but those were one offs, there are always some exceptions, it's that alot of films have women leads or better roles nowadays and it seems to be causing more backlash because of that I think. It's like men are feeling threatened now that women will, I don't know, take their jobs or something?, I don't really know what the fear is of tbh

[Alf]

And who's this guy in the cinema world? Not one I've heard of that's for sure!You must have seen Hugo or Shutter Island or Wolf of Wall Street? He made them.

Not to mention

Taxi Driver
Raging Bull
Goodfellas
The Departed

And also

Mean Streets
Casino
After Hours
The Aviator
The last temptation of Christ
Gangs of New York
The King of Comedy

And others

[Oliver_W]

Arnie was as much, if not more of the draw in the terminators, let's be real, Alien yeah sure but those were one offs, there are always some exceptions, it's that alot of films have women leads or better roles nowadays and it seems to be causing more backlash because of that I think. It's like men are feeling threatened now that women will, I don't know, take their jobs or something?, I don't really know what the fear is of tbh
Resident Evil, HungerGames, and Underworld are all female led series too - all get their own criticisms, but none for having female leads.

Nah,no-one is "threatened", the backlash comes from either beloved franchises being needlessly changed, people backlashing against what they perceive as "virtue signalling', or just plain trolling.

[user104658]

Arnie was as much, if not more of the draw in the terminators, let's be real, Alien yeah sure but those were one offs, there are always some exceptions, it's that alot of films have women leads or better roles nowadays and it seems to be causing more backlash because of that I think. It's like men are feeling threatened now that women will, I don't know, take their jobs or something?, I don't really know what the fear is of tbh

T2 certainly, his career hadn't really taken off before T1. In fact, I think his soaring popularity as an action star is almost certainly the reason that the Arnie-model Terminator was reprogrammed as a "good guy" in the scripting stage for T2, though it did also end up working very well narratively.

The "fear" right now tbh is just utterly toxic groups of blokes who are feeling threatened in their "masculinity" in all areas of life, because its so fragile in the first place.

[user104658]

Nobody ain't got time for one of your novels.Nobody ain't? Aw thanks Alf!

[Tom4784]

There's been a lot of female led films but a lot of them tend to be focused on the male gaze or oversexualisation of it's lead. Ripley in the Alien films was written without a gender in mind so while that has it's own merits, it also counts against it being an example of a well written female character. Sarah Connor was a lead character but the Terminator films as a whole were vehicles for Arnie.

Alice in the RE films was definitely a character designed to appeal to males rather than females. I can't remember much about the Underworld films apart from Kate Beckinsale running around in a skintight catsuit. Katniss Everdeen's a decent exception.

A lot of the backlash does come from a place of misogyny, I've not watched the newest Ghostbusters film but from what I heard, it wasn't that bad but I remember a lot of the anger towards it began when the cast was announced. I don't think it would have mattered if the film was a masterpiece, the people out to hate it would have hated it regardless of it's quality. Look at The Last Jedi as well, a lot of the hate towards that film was attributed towards the focus on female characters to such a point that a fan edit became popular in which the female characters roles were minimized and it was the male characters that were the focus.

I think a lot of anger over female roles tend to come from the same place, nerd culture.

You see it all the time in gaming, for example. If you ever watch a showcase for video games and a female developer appears, you can guarantee a flood of gross comments about her. If you have a female character that wears sensible clothes, you'll get a bunch of losers screeching that the character not having tits bigger than next week is PC gone mad.

If a girl engages in anything nerdy, you can guarantee it'll put the male nerds backs up.

[user104658]

I guess I'd also add that an issue with SC as a female lead is that she spent 90% of T1 as a "damsel in distress" and totally reliant on protection from Kyle... And in fact, even in T2 there are "callbacks" to the fact that her now-strong character is thanks to his "training" and influence. "On your feet, soldier" etc.

That said, I do think we're starting to see more genuine female-protagonist shows, movies and games recently and not just tokenistic ones.

[Niamh.]

Just to pick up your comment on Katniss Dezzy, she was written by a woman, that could be the difference

[Brother Leon]

I mean. The last two Avengers movies had Cinema screens sounding like football stadiums almost. If that’s not conveying emotions and experiences to viewers then I don’t know what is.

[LaLaLand]

I don’t think he worded it the best but I understand and agree with what he means.

[Oliver_W]

I guess I'd also add that an issue with SC as a female lead is that she spent 90% of T1 as a "damsel in distress" and totally reliant on protection from Kyle... And in fact, even in T2 there are "callbacks" to the fact that her now-strong character is thanks to his "training" and influence. "On your feet, soldier" etc.
Eh, she was a waitress who'd never had a fight in her life, it was realistic reaction :hehe:

[Oliver_W]

Ripley in the Alien films was written without a gender in mind so while that has it's own merits, it also counts against it being an example of a well written female character.
To be fair I thought the issue was about "fan" reaction rather than how or why a character was written?

A lot of the backlash does come from a place of misogyny, I've not watched the newest Ghostbusters film but from what I heard, it wasn't that bad but I remember a lot of the anger towards it began when the cast was announced. I don't think it would have mattered if the film was a masterpiece, the people out to hate it would have hated it regardless of it's quality. Look at The Last Jedi as well, a lot of the hate towards that film was attributed towards the focus on female characters to such a point that a fan edit became popular in which the female characters roles were minimized and it was the male characters that were the focus.

I reeaaaally Last Jedi, but people who rag on it for the "female focus" just give me collective embarrassment. It's gotten to the point where I feel like I'm being lumped in with them when I voice displeasure about it.

[GiRTh]

I agree with what he's trying to say. There is a lack of soul in most arts these day, particularly music and cinema. The best stories have always been difficult to tell in an hour and half movie but these days many movies are more a marketing exercise than genuine well told good stories. Many TV series over the years are imo better made and better told than the average blockbuster movie.

[Marsh.]

Yeah, I kind of understand what he means. But he's worded it awfully by suggesting comic book films/sci-fi etc cannot be well made cinema or "movie art". They can. Picking at examples he doesn't think are good doesn't discredit the genre.

[Tom4784]

Yeah, I kind of understand what he means. But he's worded it awfully by suggesting comic book films/sci-fi etc cannot be well made cinema or "movie art". They can. Picking at examples he doesn't think are good doesn't discredit the genre.

Yeah, he just made himself look like a gatekeeping arse. A superhero film can be every bit a piece of art as any prestige picture or oscar bait. Were it not for the jam packed year it was released, Logan would have likely seen a **** ton of Oscar success, The Dark Knight WAS an Oscar contender and the way it's looking, Joker will be too.

Comic books are such a wide medium that to discredit it as a film genre is just dumb.

[Ammi]

...Samuel L Jackson, as well as others, are becoming involved in the ‘debate’ now ...so he’s definitely got people talking, which is a good thing...the audiences are always who decide what cinema is by what they pay to go and see...there are many movies which are very critically acclaimed but an audience may feel that acclaim has been over sold and may feel disappointment...’yeah it was good but I expected sooooo much more ...etc...’....


...there is so much content in a Marvel movie with the back stories and the plot and the spectacular effects as well...so many things that have to come together perfectly to please a Marvel audience member and do a Marvel character, justice...as a director of such standing, Scorsese knows that...so to dismiss that huge heart and soul that goes into a Marvel movie as ..no that’s not cinema...is a little silly of him...

[Ammi]

...I guess that the special effect../..visual movies like Marvel etc are the ones that draw the cinema audiences more because so much is lost on a small screen...Scorsese would have seen a huge change..(..and decline..?...)...in cinema goers through his years of film making ...

[user104658]

OK. Settle in Alf. I would like to talk to you all about one of (to me) the most important concepts in entertainment; escapism.

I love cinema. I love all sorts of cinema. I love deeply psychological movies and can absolutely appreciate a masterpiece of the genre when I see one but it is a complete fallacy to suggest that any one genre or "type" of movie is superior to any other. Honestly? I think that when Scorsese says that films are or should be about - ONLY about - "human beings trying to convey emotional, psychological experiences to another human being" he is being self-aggrandising and short sighted. Sorry, Martin, if you're reading this, but Dezzy is correct... you are being a gatekeeping prick.

Because whilst some of the best movies, and many of my favourite movies, are complex narratives with deeply psychological themes - the idea that I (or I think most people) are looking for that every time they sit down at a screen is frankly insane. And being totally honest I think would be verging on damaging for most people.

Some days, so many days now, there's such a torrent of absolute BS going on in the real world that I can't imagine anything less appealing than a dark and gritty peek at the underbelly of the human psyche. No. Just... no, thank you.

Sometimes, for me at least and I'm sure I'm not alone, cinema is exactly what the guy says at the cinema when he's telling you to turn off your phone. "Switch off from the outside world". Just let it take you somewhere else for a precious few hours, where some familiar unambiguously good people fight some unambiguously bad people in scenes that could never exist in the real world, and the fate of the world and/or universe hangs in the balance.

And there is absolutely an art in that - because it can fail easily if it isn't done right. Maintaining immersion, keeping you locked away in that world where the unbelievable temporarily looks feasible, is absolutely not a formula that goes right every time. I've been to *plenty* of high-concept action/fantasy/sci-fi movies that jump the shark too early and snap you back to being a bored human looking at CGI explosions on a screen.

It's something I could go on about endlessly really, Alf. I'm huge on immersion, continuity, in-universe rules. It's a completely different type of film making and trying to say that "Scorsese style movies are better" isn't just comparing apples and oranges, it's comparing apples and... tennis. Or dogs. The whole reason for watching is completely different, and no one has to limit themself to one or the other.

It's also obviously completely subjective; for example, I can't stand musicals (in movie form; tbf I enjoy them on stage) but I can completely appreciate that they are some people's brand of escapism and that shouldn't be minimised either.


tl;dr I love movies. I love deeply psychological movies, but a lot of the time, I'm not in the headspace to watch them. Some days I just want to see a supersolder hitting a nazi in the face with a shield - and I'm eternally grateful that people are filming that.

[user104658]

Also just saw this in Twitter comments which I tend to avoid like the plague, but I agree;

If he can't comprehend art forms other than those he creates, then I wouldn't call him "Brilliant"

[Niamh.]

Great post TS, absolutely agree. To add, Superhero movies are a great way to bond with your kids aswell imo. The hours and hours myself and my son spent discussing the Marvel movies on car journeys :laugh: and counting down the days till the next film came out, that's pretty priceless to me too

[user104658]

Great post TS, absolutely agree. To add, Superhero movies are a great way to bond with your kids aswell imo. The hours and hours myself and my son spent discussing the Marvel movies on car journeys :laugh: and counting down the days till the next film came out, that's pretty priceless to me too

My youngest (despite being a terror herself at times :think: ) finds any even mild violence / threat in live action films distressing unfortunately. She doesn't care about cartoons beating each other up but I don't think she fully understands that "real people" aren't actually getting hurt! Eldest has also resisted Superhero stuff mostly thus far, however I did convince her to come to Spider-man Far From Home with a bribe of Skittles and she loved it so there's hope yet :joker:. The "it's American High School Kids" (basically her preferred genre of... everything...) element was enough to win her over.

[Niamh.]

My youngest (despite being a terror herself at times :think: ) finds any even mild violence / threat in live action films distressing unfortunately. She doesn't care about cartoons beating each other up but I don't think she fully understands that "real people" aren't actually getting hurt! Eldest has also resisted Superhero stuff mostly thus far, however I did convince her to come to Spider-man Far From Home with a bribe of Skittles and she loved it so there's hope yet :joker:. The "it's American High School Kids" (basically her preferred genre of... everything...) element was enough to win her over.

Awww pity, the "Who would win in a fight" conversations are the best :laugh: Fingers crossed you get her hooked

[Beso]

Shoving ping pong balls all over your body before leeping about in front of a green screen,is not acting..scorcese is correct...these films have no depth.

[user104658]

Awww pity, the "Who would win in a fight" conversations are the best :laugh: Fingers crossed you get her hooked

I could try "Who would win a fight - Edward Cullen or Hermione?" :think:

... ... ..... ... ... and now I sort of want to know... I mean I want to say Hermione because I recon by the final film she's probably packing some firepower, BUT that stupid sparkly vampire is ridiculously fast so what if he got to her before she could react :worry:

[Niamh.]

I could try "Who would win a fight - Edward Cullen or Hermione?" :think:

... ... ..... ... ... and now I sort of want to know... I mean I want to say Hermione because I recon by the final film she's probably packing some firepower, BUT that stupid sparkly vampire is ridiculously fast so what if he got to her before she could react :worry:

Oh that's a good one, she has the spells but he's got the speed I'm going with Hermione, she'd figure it out :think:

[user104658]

Oh that's a good one, she has the spells but he's got the speed I'm going with Hermione, she'd figure it out :think:

Indeed, she would be prepared before the fight. Ron or Harry would die.

[Alf]

Marvel addicts
Marvel Junkies

Until the next fix

[Niamh.]

Indeed, she would be prepared before the fight. Ron or Harry would die.

Harry can go Mrs Weasley has been through enough

[user104658]

Harry can go Mrs Weasley has been through enough

https://media.giphy.com/media/jql4MhqhiFljPg5DFQ/giphy.gif

[user104658]

Marvel addicts
Marvel Junkies

Until the next fix

:shrug: Better than alcohol and nicotine isn't it? We're all addicts.

[Marsh.]

Also just saw this in Twitter comments which I tend to avoid like the plague, but I agree;

If he can't comprehend art forms other than those he creates, then I wouldn't call him "Brilliant"

Spot on.

Finding himself the only creator of "true cinema" is arrogant bollocks.

[Alf]

Spot on.

Finding himself the only creator of "true cinema" is arrogant bollocks.Nearly as much bollox as what you're talking there.

Scorsese is a massive cinema fan. And he most certainly talks more about others work than he does his own.

Listen to him talk about Fellini or Kurasawa or Kubrick or Ford or Hitchcock or Powell and Pressburger or Bergmann or Kazan.

[Nicky91]

Scorsese is up there for me with Steven Spielberg, James Cameron and Ridley Scott :hee:

and to some extent also Quentin Tarantino

[Alf]

Scorsese is up there for me with Steven Spielberg, James Cameron and Ridley Scott :hee:

and to some extent also Quentin TarantinoCameron and Scott are great, but a league below Scorsese and Spielberg.

[Tom4784]

Nearly as much bollox as what you're talking there.

Scorsese is a massive cinema fan. And he most certainly talks more about others work than he does his own.

Listen to him talk about Fellini or Kurasawa or Kubrick or Ford or Hitchcock or Powell and Pressburger or Bergmann or Kazan.

The problem is that he rarely respects modern cinema unless it's in his wheel house which is what TS and Marsh are saying. He only has love for people that are doing similar things that he does or films that were made before the 1980's.

His attitude is just very dismissive of a lot of modern works unless they fit into certain genres or styles he approves of. He's good at what he does but he is extremely elitist.

[Nicky91]

Cameron and Scott are great, but a league below Scorsese and Spielberg.

Ridley did some marvelous things though with Alien, setting up that franchise

Cameron put himself on the map with pure class like Titanic, and more recent with Avatar, which he has plenty more sequels of in the next upcoming years, also has built a Avatar forest here in our province flevoland which he himself had opened :)

[Vanessa]

Well, that's his opinion and I respect that. But I disagree. There are plenty of excellent comic book movies. Like Batman for example. That's pure cinema.

[Alf]

Ridley did some marvelous things though with Alien, setting up that franchise

Cameron put himself on the map with pure class like Titanic, and more recent with Avatar, which he has plenty more sequels of in the next upcoming years, also has built a Avatar forest here in our province flevoland which he himself had opened :)Cameron put himself on the map with The Terminator, 13 years before Titanic. He then did Aliens, the sequel to Ridley's Alien, and then Terminator 2. So he was already on the map by the time he did Titanic.

[Scarlett.]

I wonder if it hurts having an ego that big?

[Alf]

I wonder if it hurts having an ego that big?Having an ego doesn't hurt at all. So wonder no longer.

[Alf]

Just for clarity.

I've never seen any Avengers movie, I haven't seen Iron man or Logan or most of the others like Hulk, Spiderman or Black Panther. So I could be a big fan, you never know.

The only ones I have seen is the Christopher Nolan Batman trilogy.

I am thinking about purchasing The Avengers box set sometime. Maybe I'll ask Father Christmas to bring it for me this year.

[Vanessa]

Just for clarity.

I've never seen any Avengers movie, I haven't seen Iron man or Logan or most of the others like Hulk, Spiderman or Black Panther. So I could be a big fan, you never know.

The only ones I have seen is the Christopher Nolan Batman trilogy.

I am thinking about purchasing The Avengers box set sometime. Maybe I'll ask Father Christmas to bring it for me this year.
I've always liked the Batman movies. My favourite is the one with Jack Nicholson as the joker.

[Marsh.]

Nearly as much bollox as what you're talking there.


I've never seen any Avengers movie

Not interested in your hero worship of Scorsese and discussing his opinion on movies you've never even seen. :thumbs:

We get it, just like Scorsese, it makes you feel better about yourself to think you have superior intellectual tastes.

Take your bollocks to someone else.

[Alf]

Not interested in your hero worship of Scorsese and discussing his opinion on movies you've never even seen. :thumbs:

We get it, just like Scorsese, it makes you feel better about yourself to think you have superior intellectual tastes.

Take your bollocks to someone else.You told me yesterday that Avengers is rubbish. Scorsese says more or less the same and you're kicking off.

[Marsh.]

You told me yesterday that Avengers is rubbish. Scorsese says more or less the same and you're kicking off.

I haven't kicked off about anything. :shrug:

I thought Endgame was overstuffed and overrated. That's an entirely different point.

You seem to think people are taking issue with Scorsese saying he doesn't enjoy Marvel movies? They're not.

They're taking issue with his penchant for saying anything he doesn't like is not "worthy". There's a difference between saying "I'm not a fan of that genre" and "I'm not a fan of that genre... therefore that genre isn't "true cinema".

[Marsh.]

Shoving ping pong balls all over your body before leeping about in front of a green screen,is not acting..scorcese is correct...these films have no depth.

Well, we could just as easily say the same about people sitting around talking in front of a camera... if you ignore the movies themselves and focus on the minutiae of how they are made.

[user104658]

Cameron and Scott are great, but a league below Scorsese and Spielberg.

What does Scorsese think of Spielberg, though? Because there are actually numerous examples of Spielberg movies that are just as CGI-heavy and plot-light as any Superhero movie (and moreso than a few). Spielberg is huge on spectacle, visuals and action... and I can't think of many (any??) of his films that I'd refer to as "trying to convey emotional, psychological experiences" as their prime objective. For Scorsese, then... is Spielberg "not real cinema"? That would be a pretty bold statement :umm2:.

[Tony Montana]

Different strokes for different folks. Superhero films have been around for a very long time. To say they're 'not cinema' is ridiculous. There's been several comic book films that have been critically acclaimed.

Marty's probably just jealous that most comic book films can make more money than his entire films combined.

[Tony Montana]

What does Scorsese think of Spielberg, though? Because there are actually numerous examples of Spielberg movies that are just as CGI-heavy and plot-light as any Superhero movie (and moreso than a few). Spielberg is huge on spectacle, visuals and action... and I can't think of many (any??) of his films that I'd refer to as "trying to convey emotional, psychological experiences" as their prime objective. For Scorsese, then... is Spielberg "not real cinema"? That would be a pretty bold statement :umm2:.

Whatever he thinks of them he'll keep it to himself since they're friends.

[user104658]

Whatever he thinks of them he'll keep it to himself since they're friends.

Someone should ask him about Ready Player One... a very recent, massively CGI heavy Spielberg action film that salutes dozens of other fun, light-hearted, action and effects heavy movies :joker:.

To be fair though I doubt it has anything to do with the money the films make, Scorsese has a 9-figure personal net worth, it's purely misplaced intellectual snobbery.

[Oliver_W]

To be fair most of Spielberg's films at least try to have some "heart" in them.

[Alf]

What does Scorsese think of Spielberg, though? Because there are actually numerous examples of Spielberg movies that are just as CGI-heavy and plot-light as any Superhero movie (and moreso than a few). Spielberg is huge on spectacle, visuals and action... and I can't think of many (any??) of his films that I'd refer to as "trying to convey emotional, psychological experiences" as their prime objective. For Scorsese, then... is Spielberg "not real cinema"? That would be a pretty bold statement :umm2:.I'm sure Scorsese has respect for Spielberg. Although not many other directors do. I know Terry Gillam is always critical of Spielberg.

Spielberg is versatile, he doesn't have his own style like Scorsese. Spielberg will just adapt to whatever script he has. The likes of Kubrick. Scorsese, Hitchcock, Tarantino and I'd say Nolan definitely have their own certain style, recognisable as their work.

But Spielberg definitely does deserve the respect he doesn't always get, he has an impressive catalogue of work himself and was the major player in the blockbuster era.

[Oliver_W]

I'm sure Scorsese has respect for Spielberg. Although not many other directors do. I know Terry Gillam is always critical of Spielberg.

Spielberg is versatile, he doesn't have his own style like Scorsese. Spielberg will just adapt to whatever script he has. The likes of Kubrick. Scorsese, Hitchcock, Tarantino and I'd say Nolan definitely have their own certain style, recognisable as their work.

But Spielberg definitely does deserve the respect he doesn't always get, he has an impressive catalogue of work himself and was the major player in the blockbuster era.

Spielberg has a certain "flair", if not style. The Brachiosaurus reveal in Jurassic Park, and the rise of the Tripods in War of the Worlds are both pure Spielberg.

[Alf]

Vq_pOZxdr_4

[Tom4784]

I've never been a huge fan of Spielberg, I like the films but never so much his direction. I acknowledge his talent but I've always thought he was highly overrated.

[Vanessa]

I prefer Tarantino.

[Oliver_W]

I guess there's a difference between a good director and a good filmmaker.

Take George Lucas - the movie industry has sooo much to thank him for. He's behind the inventions of practically every type of special effects used today, in order to make the Star Wars movies the way he wanted them. Pixar is also an offshoot of ILM, but admittedly he sold it long before Toy Story.

Star Wars and Indianna Jones have likely influenced about half of current filmmakers in one way or another.

He's also tangentially to thank for PhotoShop!

(there's another thing I can't recall offhand)

All this is true. but when it comes to directing a simple dialogue scene ... sheesh!

[Mystic Mock]

What is his definition of "cinema" though. In my mind "cinema" is exactly these kinds of movies, ones that you don't want to watch at home because the action needs to be on a big screen etc They're entertainment pure and simple. Superhero movies are never going to really be that deep or earth shattering but so what, you need a balance aswell

This really.

There's a room for all types of Movies imo, apart from the deceptive ones that lie about what they are.

[Mystic Mock]

Nearly as much bollox as what you're talking there.

Scorsese is a massive cinema fan. And he most certainly talks more about others work than he does his own.

Listen to him talk about Fellini or Kurasawa or Kubrick or Ford or Hitchcock or Powell and Pressburger or Bergmann or Kazan.

The problem with Scorcsese's comment is that he has made himself come across as a very narrow-minded Movie goer who can only appreciate Psychological Movies, which don't get me wrong things like the first Saw Movie (which nobody gives enough credit for being Psychological) Psycho, and 1984 with John Hurt are all great Psychological or emotional Movies, but not every Movie should be like them imo.

Also I'm not the biggest fan of stories that focus too much on Romances (unless they're comedic) but I'd still call them Cinema, and I'm sure that some of them are good Movies at what they are, I wouldn't just dismiss the genre as "bad" like Scorsese has done with Superhero stuff.

[Ammi]

...’build it and they will come..’...and if they come, then it’s cinema because it becomes part of the beating heart of cinema audiences...it would be interesting to take away all of the Marvel audiences from the box office figures over the years...and see what cinema would be without them...it’s good for cinema though, that he has many people talking about it...

[Ammi]

...I wonder what he thinks of Harry Potter../..Star Wars movies...

[James]

I think the distinction is that it is the Marvel Cinematic Universe he is against, not comic-book or superhero genre. The problem is with the word 'Universe' because that means people will go to see the film just on the basis it is part of the franchise. The film then becomes even less dependent on earning its success through its quality.

I caught up on them because they are part of the zeitgeist now, and I didn't want to miss out. I do think it will become more difficult for the whole world they've built to make any sense, with so many superheros roaming around who can't appear in every film or TV series.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/men-are-sabotaging-the-online-reviews-of-tv-shows-aimed-at-women/

Hes probably right

Seventy percent of IMDb TV show raters are men, according to my analysis, and that results in shows with predominantly female audiences getting screwed

Just a blog really, but makes sense.

Also makes sense that men deliberately sabotage films/shows that are 'aimed' at women. Though its surely pointless to be so spiteful..

Yeah I've noticed that with geek-related stuff, you look at the (online) reaction to Robert Pattinson being cast as Batman... at lot of it was we don't want him because he was in Twilight, ie. for girls.

[user104658]

Yeah I've noticed that with geek-related stuff, you look at the (online) reaction to Robert Pattinson being cast as Batman... at lot of it was we don't want him because he was in Twilight, ie. for girls.

Im not going to pretend that things like this aren't prevalent, they definitely are, but to fair I think the main issue people have with him from Twilight is more that Twilight is awful rather than it being girly. Plus Pattinson is awful IN Twilight and that's the only thing a lot of people know him from (other than maybe his brief appearance in Harry Potter)... So they're judging him based on that role, which was also awful. Because the material was poor and he had nothing to work with. But plenty of people won't necessarily realise that.

We watched the Twilight films fairly recently with our daughter... Honestly if anything they're worse than I remembered. And the first one is the WORST one, the central performances are abysmal and... Well... weird... So the worry isn't unfounded.

[James]

Im not going to pretend that things like this aren't prevalent, they definitely are, but to fair I think the main issue people have with him from Twilight is more that Twilight is awful rather than it being girly. Plus Pattinson is awful IN Twilight and that's the only thing a lot of people know him from (other than maybe his brief appearance in Harry Potter)... So they're judging him based on that role, which was also awful. Because the material was poor and he had nothing to work with. But plenty of people won't necessarily realise that.

We watched the Twilight films fairly recently with our daughter... Honestly if anything they're worse than I remembered. And the first one is the WORST one, the central performances are abysmal and... Well... weird... So the worry isn't unfounded.

I've only seen the first one, but I thought it was alright. It reminded me a bit of Twin Peaks, actually, which is my favourite TV show.

[user104658]

I've only seen the first one, but I thought it was alright. It reminded me a bit of Twin Peaks, actually, which is my favourite TV show.I felt like both of them spent the entire film looking like they were trying not to be sick :joker:.

Although actually, the worst of Twilight saga has to go to the... very... Uncomfortable? relationship between Jacob and the little girl in the final film. They tried valiantly to make it not weird, they even had poor Taylor Lautner insisting endlessly that it's not weird. But it's weird :umm2:.

[Mystic Mock]

I felt like both of them spent the entire film looking like they were trying not to be sick :joker:.

Although actually, the worst of Twilight saga has to go to the... very... Uncomfortable? relationship between Jacob and the little girl in the final film. They tried valiantly to make it not weird, they even had poor Taylor Lautner insisting endlessly that it's not weird. But it's weird :umm2:.

Was the Paedophile being treated as a protagonist?:umm2:

That gives off Angel vibes with Buffy.

[user104658]

Was the Paedophile being treated as a protagonist?:umm2:



That gives off Angel vibes with Buffy.Edward / Bella is a direct Angel / Buffy rip off and that's weird enough on it's own, but no, I'm talking about Jacob's (the were wolf) BLATANTLY romantic (though they try to frame it otherwise) connection to Bella's daughter... Who is an actual child in the film. I'd say physically aged around 8? And the actual character isn't even 8, she's a baby.

It's a tough sell.

[Mystic Mock]

Edward / Bella is a direct Angel / Buffy rip off and that's weird enough on it's own, but no, I'm talking about Jacob's (the were wolf) BLATANTLY romantic (though they try to frame it otherwise) connection to Bella's daughter... Who is an actual child in the film. I'd say physically aged around 8? And the actual character isn't even 8, she's a baby.

It's a tough sell.

:umm2:

I'm glad to have never seen a single Film from that franchise.:joker:

[James]

Francis Ford Coppola now.


Coppola backs Scorsese in row over Marvel films
AFP
October 20, 2019

Lyon (AFP) - Francis Ford Coppola jumped into a controversy over the Marvel superhero movies Saturday, not just backing fellow director Martin Scorsese's critique of the films but denouncing them as "despicable".

Earlier this month Scorsese, director of classics such as "Taxi Driver" and "Goodfellas", described the Marvel universe films as more theme parks than cinema, even if they were well made.

His remarks made waves across social media for days, as fans of his work and the Marvel hits such as the Avengers films, argued the merits.

But Coppola, speaking to journalists in the French city of Lyon, where he has just been awarded the Prix Lumiere for his contribution to cinema, backed his fellow Italian-American Scorsese.

"When Martin Scorsese says that the Marvel pictures are not cinema, he's right because we expect to learn something from cinema, we expect to gain something, some enlightenment, some knowledge, some inspiration.

"I don't know that anyone gets anything out of seeing the same movie over and over again," the 80-year-old filmmaker said.

"Martin was kind when he said it's not cinema. He didn't say it's despicable, which I just say it is."

Coppola also said he was working on his biggest project yet: "Megalopolis", a film about a utopia, a project he has nurtured for two decades.

"I wanted to make a film about a human expression of what really is heaven on earth.

"I would say it's the most ambitious film (I've worked on) -- more than 'Apocalypse Now'. That's the problem," he added.

"Apocalypse Now", his 1979 war epic starring Martin Sheen and Marlon Brando, is notorious for the vast amount of time and money it ate up during production.

"I think it would cost more than 'Apocalypse Now'," said Coppola. "It would be the biggest budget I ever had to work with."

Coppola, the director of the "Godfather" films, joins an illustrious list of film-makers and actors to have received the Prix Lumiere, including Scorsese, Pedro Almodovar and Milos Forman.


https://news.yahoo.com/coppola-backs-scorsese-row-over-marvel-films-173112180.html

[Mystic Mock]

First and foremost Movies are supposed to be entertaining, I think that Coppola fails to understand that not every story has to be an emotional Drama where you gain something out of it as he puts it.

It's people like him why we get an episode like He Said, She Said from Brooklyn Nine-Nine as they don't understand what story they're making and they make a bastardised story.

[Marsh.]

"I don't know that anyone gets anything out of seeing the same movie over and over again," the 80-year-old filmmaker said.

He'd have been better of saying "I don't know" and stopping there since that's all it amounts to.

[user104658]

"When Martin Scorsese says that the Marvel pictures are not cinema, he's right because we expect to learn something from cinema, we expect to gain something, some enlightenment, some knowledge, some inspiration."

Honestly don't understand how anyone can so confidently make sweeping "we" statements like this. He means that's what HE expects to gain from cinema - and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that - but it's not what everyone is looking for, at least not all of the time. Sometimes, absolutely. Sometimes cinema is about being given something to think about. But sometimes it's about SHUTTING OUT the world for a couple of hours, not thinking about it more. Sometimes being forced to ponder the world and the human condition is utter torture. And that's no less a legitimate use of cinema. I honest to god envy these people who apparently never need that.

[Tom4784]

Francis is just being an old man screaming at the sky.

I've never been a huge fan of his. The first two Godfathers and Apocalypse Now deserves respect but everything else he has done has been hit and miss at best. He has built a career based on former glory and failed attempts to match up to what he put out before. One of the most overrated auteurs in the history of film.

[Oliver_W]

Apocalypse Now is another film which is tangentially related to Lucas <3


tbh I can see what he means about "watching the same movie over and over", some of them feel a bit "samey", but each also has different characters which make it so you don't mind:)

[Tom4784]

Apocalypse Now is another film which is tangentially related to Lucas <3


tbh I can see what he means about "watching the same movie over and over", some of them feel a bit "samey", but each also has different characters which make it so you don't mind:)

I think the same-y criticism would have been fair a few years back when the MCU films were basically all made with the same blueprint but I feel like they've broken that blueprint now tbh.

[Niamh.]

"When Martin Scorsese says that the Marvel pictures are not cinema, he's right because we expect to learn something from cinema, we expect to gain something, some enlightenment, some knowledge, some inspiration."

Honestly don't understand how anyone can so confidently make sweeping "we" statements like this. He means that's what HE expects to gain from cinema - and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that - but it's not what everyone is looking for, at least not all of the time. Sometimes, absolutely. Sometimes cinema is about being given something to think about. But sometimes it's about SHUTTING OUT the world for a couple of hours, not thinking about it more. Sometimes being forced to ponder the world and the human condition is utter torture. And that's no less a legitimate use of cinema. I honest to god envy these people who apparently never need that.

Absolutely. Alot of times, it's just about action, entertainment and getting away from the real world more than anything, especially in these times,where the world in general is just a bit depressing

[Marsh.]

Apocalypse Now is another film which is tangentially related to Lucas <3


tbh I can see what he means about "watching the same movie over and over", some of them feel a bit "samey", but each also has different characters which make it so you don't mind:)

Tbh most genres churn out movies that are samey and repetitive. Including the so-called character studies. That criticism isn't restricted to a genre he doesn't like.

But I imagine it's a genre he hasn't watched much of anyway.

[Tom4784]

Absolutely. Alot of times, it's just about action, entertainment and getting away from the real world more than anything, especially in these times,where the world in general is just a bit depressing

It's also really hypocritical when he's done films like Dracula and Jack which were both cynical cash grabs that certainly didn't have any deeper meaning beyond the source material in Dracula's case or Hallmark logic in Jack's.

[James]

Apocalypse Now is another film which is tangentially related to Lucas <3


tbh I can see what he means about "watching the same movie over and over", some of them feel a bit "samey", but each also has different characters which make it so you don't mind:)

I remember Francis Ford Coppola saying previously how he didn't hold Star Wars in high regard, and thought Lucas was capable of more.

https://ew.com/article/2015/12/08/francis-ford-coppola-star-wars-george-lucas/

[Oliver_W]

I remember Francis Ford Coppola saying previously how he didn't hold Star Wars in high regard, and thought Lucas was capable of more.

https://ew.com/article/2015/12/08/francis-ford-coppola-star-wars-george-lucas/

As much respect as I have for Lucas, I'm not sure what "more" he's capable of! The Prequels show what he's like as an "actor director", and he virtually invented special effects for both trilogies!

[Twosugars]

Absolutely. Alot of times, it's just about action, entertainment and getting away from the real world more than anything, especially in these times,where the world in general is just a bit depressing

Agree.
Take pornographic films for example :)

[Mystic Mock]

Agree.
Take pornographic films for example :)

:joker:

[James]

As much respect as I have for Lucas, I'm not sure what "more" he's capable of! The Prequels show what he's like as an "actor director", and he virtually invented special effects for both trilogies!

American Graffiti is a really good comedy and THX 1138 is a kind of art-house dystopian science fiction film, though I've not seen that.

[James]

Ken Loach. He has always disliked Hollywood.


Ken Loach: Marvel superhero films 'boring' and 'nothing to do with art of cinema'

The British director says the comic-based movies are made for a profit "like hamburgers", as he speaks about his new film.

Lucy Cotter - Arts and entertainment correspondent @lucycottersky

Monday 21 October 2019 22:28, UK

Director Ken Loach has said he finds the Marvel superhero films ‘boring’ and ‘nothing to do with the art of cinema’.


Ken Loach has told Sky News he finds the Marvel superhero movies "boring" and "nothing to do with the art of cinema".

The British director has joined the debate following comments by fellow filmmakers such as Martin Scorsese, who said they are "not cinema", and Francis Ford Coppola who branded them "despicable".

Loach told Sky News: "They're made as commodities like hamburgers, and it's not about communicating and it's not about sharing our imagination.

"It's about making a commodity which will make a profit for a big corporation - they're a cynical exercise.

"They're market exercise and it has nothing to do with the art of cinema. William Blake said 'when money is discussed - art is impossible'."



Loach's new film Sorry We Missed You is the antithesis of the superhero universe and explores the world of zero-hour contracts, epitomising his view of what cinema should be.


"I think reflecting the world we know can make beautiful cinema because it can celebrate who we are," he said.


"It can laugh with us, it can cry with us, it can learn about our deepest feelings and what it is to be human - you find that in the everyday".


It is three years since he released I, Daniel Blake - his 2016 film which won plaudits for its depiction of austerity Britain, looking at the victims of the welfare system.

Sorry We Missed You is about a family in which both parents are in insecure work with no holiday or sick pay and struggling to bring up their family.

Loach said his new film is based "entirely on fact" with the writer Paul Laverty doing research with van drivers and care workers to bring the characters to life.

What interested them was "the world outside where we put on a smiley face and the world inside our personal relationships where you're exhausted, you drop the smiles and that's when the tensions, the stress, the anger plays out".


Loach told Sky News that zero-hour contracts and the gig economy is "the reality of the free market, which the government does everything it can to support, where harsh competition means big companies compete on price, they cut their labour costs with no holiday pay, no sick pay with workers they have no responsibility to - they can just sack them overnight".

He went on to lay the blame with the government.

"It equals absolute exploitation but the government supports it, keeps it in place, keeps the taxes on big business low, people in poverty wages and a benefit system designed to trap people in a bureaucratic tangle so they're so terrified of having to go to a food bank that they will take any job however crude the exploitation".

Sorry We Missed You is released 1 November 2019.


https://news.sky.com/story/ken-loach-marvel-superhero-films-boring-and-nothing-to-do-with-art-of-cinema-11841486

[Tom4784]

https://i.imgur.com/91sn32Q.jpg

[Marsh.]

Wow, movies are made for profit. That's some amazing insight there.

I suppose he makes them for free? :idc:

[Ammi]

https://i.imgur.com/91sn32Q.jpg

..I’m pretty sure that Ken..(..and Martin..)..rated The Simpsons Movie as an all time great and personal favourite...

[user104658]

Do they think that backing each other up adds gravitas? It just sounds even more petty the more people jump on the bandwagon :shrug:.

[arista]

Ken Loach Says Marvel Films Are
"Made as Commodities Like Hamburgers"

1186586082646859777



Also on James Big Link

[Oliver_W]

Yeah, that's what they are. The McDonald's of movies. They're just fun but disposable entertainment.

tbh I'm sick of Hollywood in general, or at least the Big Studio System. The "big name" directors who pretty much make what they want are cool, as are the indies, but I'm glad it seems the MCU is winding down a bit.

[Marsh.]

I'm so glad we have intellectuals like Ken Loach to tell us Hollywood movies are made to generate profit.

What would we do without him?

[Tony Montana]

Disney CEO Fires Back at Scorsese & Coppola Over Marvel Movie Comments

Disney CEO Bob Iger has come to the defense of Marvel movies, calling out Martin Scorsese and Francis Ford Coppola's comments regarding the Disney-owned franchise.

“I’m puzzled by it. If they want to bitch about movies, it’s certainly their right,” Iger said in a conversation with Wall Street Journal Editor-in-Chief Matt Murray. “It seems so disrespectful to all the people that work on those [Marvel] films who are working just as hard as the people who work on their films.

He continued: "Are you telling me Ryan Coogler making ‘Black Panther’ is somehow doing something that is less than what Marty Scorsese or Francis Ford Coppola has ever done on any one of their movies?”

Scorsese kicked things off in early October, saying that MCU films are "not cinema" and calling them "theme parks." He later doubled down on his comments, saying "They’re not cinema, they’re something else. And we shouldn’t be invaded by them." Coppola defended Scorsese, calling the films "despicable."

Iger is not the first to come to the defense of the MCU. Marvel stars Samuel L. Jackson, Robert Downey Jr. and Karen Gillan all responded , along with Guardians of the Galaxy director James Gunn. Damon Lindelof and Kevin Smith also called out the two directors for their comments.

https://www.cbr.com/disney-ceo-fires-back-scorsese-coppola-over-marvel-movie-comments/

[Tony Montana]

How sad of an individual do you have to be, to get offended over movie popularity? Scorsese and Coppola come across as little kids who aren't getting the attention they feel they deserve.

[Oliver_W]

He continued: "Are you telling me Ryan Coogler making ‘Black Panther’ is somehow doing something that is less than what Marty Scorsese or Francis Ford Coppola has ever done on any one of their movies?”

To be fair Scorsese and Coppola are basically auteurs, their movies are their own and the result of a creative spark. Black Panther is just one in a line of mass produced studio created products. All Coogler had to do was paint by the numbers.
(Obviously directing any movie is a big task, I'm not saying he had an easy time, but to compare any MCU movie to any auteur movie is just daft)

edit: it's like comparing the six Star Wars movies to the ones that came after

[Alf]

Marty's new movie "Killer's of the flower moon" arrives in UK cinemas this week.

3 and half hours long film.

I'm going next Friday.

Scorsese is one of the living great film makers in history. So you have to go see his films on the big screen.

[bots]

i view it like music. It's like someone saying only classical music is pure and good

[Vanessa]

Not a massive fan myself. I do like some of them, just not all of them.

[Alf]

Not a massive fan myself. I do like some of them, just not all of them.Do you like Scorsese movies, Nessa?

He is of Italian family origin.

[Vanessa]

Do you like Scorsese movies, Nessa?

He is of Italian family origin.

Yes, of course. One of my favourite directors.

[Mystic Mock]

i view it like music. It's like someone saying only classical music is pure and good

Because that sentiment should be going to Screamo Music.:hehe:

[Mystic Mock]

Ken Loach. He has always disliked Hollywood.



https://news.sky.com/story/ken-loach-marvel-superhero-films-boring-and-nothing-to-do-with-art-of-cinema-11841486

Ken Loach sounds like a bundle of joy.

And nothing screams "imaginative" in entertainment than making essentially Biopic Movies.

[Alf]

Going to see "Killer's of the flower moon" tomorrow.

[Mystic Mock]

Going to see "Killer's of the flower moon" tomorrow.

Good luck with it Alf.

Hopefully you will enjoy it.

[Alf]

Scorsese now says he has hope for a different cinema to emerge after the success of Oppenheimer and Barbie this year.

With his film "Killer's of flower moon" and Ridley Scott's "Napoleon" also coming out soon, 2023 could be a renaissance year for cinema.

Let's hope it influences a new breed of film directors to follow in the footsteps of living greats like Christoper Nolan, Martin Scorsese and Ridley Scott.

[Alf]

Wow!

[Nicky91]

Scorsese basically admitting he's a fan of that piece of awfulness what Barbie is


:umm2:

[Alf]

That wow! Deserved a post all to itself.

A masterpiece.

Without a doubt one of Scorsese's best ever.

I can't think of a better film than that this century.

Scorsese was already in the realm of movie making greats. I think this one takes him into the realm of movie making God's.

By far Di Caprio's greatest ever performance. Not even a question about that.

[Alf]

Vanessa.You need to go and see this.

I know it's fresh in my mind and I take that into account. But I don't believe I'm exaggerating when I say it's definitely in Scorsese's top 5 and maybe even challenges his top 3?

Obviously his top 3 at present is Goodfellas, Raging Bull and Taxi Driver.

Then you have the likes of The Departed, The Wolf of Wall Street and Casino just behind.

This one is definitely amongst those greats.

[Alf]

I didn't know who Lily Gladstone was until today. But now I won't forget her. She puts in a truly fantastic performance.

If she doesn't win the best actress Oscar then I'll denounce Trump.

Even the Trump hating De Niro was great.