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.
It's more like you're finally agreeing with Scorsese that these are amusement park films.
Nope, just stating that his idea of cinema only counts if it's a 4 hour dialogue-filled film like The Irishman, is absurd. There's a reason why other genres exist. So everyone can find something they love. Marvel movies are supposed to be fun, yet they have also shown that the actors can have great dialogue. They're not a bunch of wooden actors surrounded by more explosions than a Michael Bay movie. If other genres didn't exist, he would've never had the comeback he had with mob movies, seeing as everything else he was making was mediocre at best.
Oh look, more references to TBLT again! What, no love for The Rescuers, or The Great Mouse Detective?
Haven’t seen TBLT. Like “The Great Mouse Detective” quite a lot, though. Do not at all like “The Rescuers,” but very much like “The Rescuers Down Under.”
But then again, “The Lion King” and “Bolt” are among my perhaps somewhat eccentric list of top favorite 20 movies. YMMV.
That's because he doesn't. He had a few non-mob movies that were good; especially Wolf of Wall Street. Everything else failed. Hence why he stuck with mob movies, featuring De Niro, Pacino, Pesci, and *insert your favorite Italian actor here* for his movies.
The list of Scorsese films I like can be counted on one hand: “Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore,” “The King of Comedy,” “The Age of Innocence,” and “Goodfellas.” Did not care for “Taxi Driver,” “Raging Bull,” “The Wolf of Wall Street,” or “The Color of Money.” Couldn’t sit through “Mean Streets,” either. He’s not usually a director I seek out. YMMV.
Nope, just stating that his idea of cinema only counts if it's a 4 hour dialogue-filled film like The Irishman, is absurd.
Where did he say a film only counts as cinema "if it's a 4-hour dialogue-filled film like the Irishman"? I don't even think that's implied in his statement.
For all we know, he may consider E.T., which is a family-friendly movie with little if any substance, a cinematic masterpiece. We have no idea how he might react to a movie like Avatar, the Dark Knight, or the Matrix, or Kill Bill, or La La Land, or Sicario. Saying that the MCU is not "cinema" is not saying that any movie that isn't similar to what he makes also isn't cinema.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DK736
There's a reason why other genres exist.
Why do you think he's indicting superhero movies as a whole rather than the MCU specifically? Let's examine the man's actual words.
Quote:
What has to be protected is the singular experience of experiencing a picture, ideally with an audience. But there’s room for so many others now, and so many other ways. There’s going to be crossovers, completely. The value of a film that’s like a theme park film, for example, the Marvel-type pictures, where the theaters become amusement parks, that’s a different experience. I was saying earlier, it’s not cinema, it’s something else. Whether you go for that or not.
So that qualifies him as the all knowing Hollywood King, who can decide what's cinema and what's not? Look, I'll give him credit where credit is due, as I own a handful of his movies. But his OPINION, is just that. An opinion.
And an informed opinion, shaped by almost 50 years of making some of the most acclaimed movies of all time. If we're talking movies, I think Scorsese's opinion counts a lot more than yours or mine.
Movies based on comics can only appeal with a PG-13 vs R-rating.
R-rated movies are better. True to life.
Depends on what one is in the mood for. I often don't watch movies because they are "true to life". I get enough of that without movies. I generally watch a movie for entertainment (whether it's R or PG). Marvel entertains me.
A lot of R movies are simply gratuitous.
Where did he say a film only counts as cinema "if it's a 4-hour dialogue-filled film like the Irishman"? I don't even think that's implied in his statement.
I said that about The Irishman. I was using The Irishman as an example to piggyback off his additional response. It's how he said it that kind of comes off as those are the only films theaters should be playing, seeing as he's urging them to "step up and allow more of them."
"And we shouldn’t be invaded by it. So, that’s a big issue. We need the theater owners to step up for that to allow theaters to show more films that are narrative films. A narrative film can be one long take for three hours, you know. It doesn’t have to be a conventional beginning or end."
And an informed opinion, shaped by almost 50 years of making some of the most acclaimed movies of all time. If we're talking movies, I think Scorsese's opinion counts a lot more than yours or mine.
The fans are the ones who ultimately decide if a director's film is worth watching or not. Our opinions hold a lot of value.
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.
