Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
On the one hand, he's not wrong about ^that. He's absolutely correct. But it's equally true of most major studio releases.
On the other hand, if it makes you feel any better, I had to Google "Ken Loach" to figure out who he was. I have never seen a single one of his movies.
Yeah, he's more well known in England than he is in the states. Regardless, just goes to show you how sad it looks to see everyone coming out of the wood work to hop the Marvel hate train.
Yeah, he's more well known in England than he is in the states. Regardless, just goes to show you how sad it looks to see everyone coming out of the wood work to hop the Marvel hate train.
I honestly don't know anyone who's heard of him, let alone his work.
I'm not going to go as far as Scorsese and Coppola and call them despicable or not movies, I find super hero movies entertaining, when you are in the mood for them, but I will add this take.
I recently started trying to learn how to write screenplays, how to develop stories, build scenes, etc. and I've taken a few classes. The general opinion, on those that do this, is that the 'super-hero' type movies are as paint by number as you can get....they are low hanging fruit but they are profitable so I see why Scorsese and Coppola would feel threatened by them.
The formula is simple...You take a villain, give him/her a backstory on why they turned bad, give him/her and emotion and then over exaggerate that emotion often to the point where it defines them.
Then you have a super hero, give him/her a back story on why they turned 'super', give them a major turning point where being 'super' meant they had to sacrifice a normal life.
Then make the bad guy/girl enter the realm of the super hero (directly or indirectly), pit them against each other and find a creative way for the super hero to defeat the villain and save the day.
Rinse and repeat...compare that formula to something like the Godfather, or Gangs of New York, or Pulp Fiction, and the 'invented' layers in those films you'll start to understand why that elk of directors/ film makers look down on Marvel films.
The general opinion, on those that do this, is that the 'super-hero' type movies are as paint by number as you can get....
I don't disagree in the slightest. That said ...
Formula is not always a bad thing. There is a very strict formula to what defines a hamburger or a burrito or a pizza. If you deviate from it too much, it may be good, but it is no longer a hamburger or a burrito or a pizza. The important question is: Is it good?
The same principal applies to stories. Human beings have been telling stories with a hero, a villain, and a beginning, middle, and end, since Thag Simmons was taken out by the stegosaurus. Within that formula is all kinds of freedom and variation.
So I don't inherently object to super hero stories. I have loved a lot of them. But there is definitely an element of "sameness" and safety and repetition overtaking the genre. Directors should aim higher.
I'm not going to go as far as Scorsese and Coppola and call them despicable or not movies, I find super hero movies entertaining, when you are in the mood for them, but I will add this take.
I recently started trying to learn how to write screenplays, how to develop stories, build scenes, etc. and I've taken a few classes. The general opinion, on those that do this, is that the 'super-hero' type movies are as paint by number as you can get....they are low hanging fruit but they are profitable so I see why Scorsese and Coppola would feel threatened by them.
The formula is simple...You take a villain, give him/her a backstory on why they turned bad, give him/her and emotion and then over exaggerate that emotion often to the point where it defines them.
Then you have a super hero, give him/her a back story on why they turned 'super', give them a major turning point where being 'super' meant they had to sacrifice a normal life.
Then make the bad guy/girl enter the realm of the super hero (directly or indirectly), pit them against each other and find a creative way for the super hero to defeat the villain and save the day.
Rinse and repeat...compare that formula to something like the Godfather, or Gangs of New York, or Pulp Fiction, and the 'invented' layers in those films you'll start to understand why that elk of directors/ film makers look down on Marvel films.
Rinse and repeat...compare that formula to something like the Godfather, or Gangs of New York, or Pulp Fiction, and the 'invented' layers in those films you'll start to understand why that elk of directors/ film makers look down on Marvel films.
The Godfather is essentially the depiction of tradition, a detailed insight into a culture most of us will never (nor want to) know. Nevertheless, it's a saga of heirs and conflicts.
Pulp Fiction is a hodgepodge of grindhouse pastiches that appeared at the right time. He's made some fun films, but QT wouldn't know subtlety if you force-fed him with a firehose.
Of course in this narcissistic day and age, nobody can accept minor criticism and move on. Now Iger is sneaking politics into the debate... to defend the franchise that scrubbed any reference to Tibet (Doctor Strange) that would anger the Chinese market. Scorsese directed the controversial Tibetan biography Kundun (1997, distributed by Disney funny enough), instead of bending over for China.
That seems to be Iger's MO, such as when he threatened to withdraw productions from filming in Georgia (and its significant black American population), in protest of an anti-abortion bill.
They're cape movies! cg lasers shooting out of a pampered celebrity's eyes to destroy giant cg purple people. Get over yourself.
I'm not going to go as far as Scorsese and Coppola and call them despicable or not movies, I find super hero movies entertaining, when you are in the mood for them, but I will add this take.
Point of clarification: Coppola said he'd call them "despicable," not Scorsese.
Quote:
"Martin was kind when he said it’s not cinema. He didn’t say it’s despicable, which I just say it is.”
I just hate when attribution gets mixed up. It's also how conspiracy theories get started: something that is kinda true gets mixed up with something else and then the crazy is off and running.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
