Martin Scorsese - Marvel movies are 'not cinema'

[T’Challa’s Heir]

I dont think ignoring the scale is ignoring the goal posts. I dont care how many movies it takes to tell a story.

I care if its good. Scorcese was talking about quality. If you disagree, cool, but counting the number of movies it took to get to the finish line as an accomplishment is dumb.

I'm not e en interested in every single Marvel movie and I doubt t most people are either. I'll catch that shyt on Netdlix but I wasnt rushing to theaters to see Spider-Man, Thor, or Ant-Man.

theres more than 1 way to tell a story. There’s more than 1 way to innovate. Marvel isn’t high art, but it’s unfair to say that they aren’t innovative. Avatar wasn’t high art, but it pushed technological limits.

martin doesn’t get define what cinema is. If it plays in a fukking theater it’s cinema. That’s literally the definition of it. He doesn’t get to change the definition of it because his next 3 hour movie about mobsters May get an extremely limited theatrical release.

And in terms of most people not being into marvel Movies. That’s demonstrably wrong at this point. 5 of marvels last 6 movies made over a billion dollars. 2 of their last 5 made over 2 billion.

 

[Black Trash!]

theres more than 1 way to tell a story. There’s more than 1 way to innovate. Marvel isn’t high art, but it’s unfair to say that they aren’t innovative. Avatar wasn’t high art, but it pushed technological limits.

martin doesn’t get define what cinema is. If it plays in a fukking theater it’s cinema. That’s literally the definition of it. He doesn’t get to change the definition of it because his next 3 hour movie about mobsters May get an extremely limited theatrical release.

And in terms of most people not being into marvel Movies. That’s demonstrably wrong at this point. 5 of marvels last 6 movies made over a billion dollars. 2 of their last 5 made over 2 billion.

Scorcese is talking about high art
I'm talking about high art
Done
Finito

 

[T’Challa’s Heir]

Scorcese is talking about high art
I'm talking about high art
Done
Finito

If he had said the marvel/super hero films weren’t high art no one would have disagreed. But he didn’t. He said they weren’t cinema and took a cheap shot calling them theme park rides.

 

[Black Trash!]

If he had said the marvel/super hero films weren’t high art no one would have disagreed. But he didn’t. He said they weren’t cinema and took a cheap shot calling them theme park rides.

In this case cinema means high art
That's how I took it

 

[Thief's Theme]

oh and the more i think about it.

martin's movie are nuffin more than superhero mafia villain movies. That have more in common with a comic over anything.
what is the difference between the godfather and joker.

both are fukk'n villains and the origin of two villain mafia bosses. one that arises from the possible intended heir being killed[wacked].
Sounds like a comic book movie to me.
As all the good comic movies are and in essence been exposes in villainy and the origin of the villain just like all of Marty's movies.

I find no difference between godfather epic and joker.
as a matter of fact. The editing process of both films both mirror one another. When it comes to how things were changed to get away from being too comic book'y as well.
yet still have the same crime romance expose.
that his genre of film making comics derived, bolstered or held over from a back and forth if both industries.

As a matter of fact...
if anything has an actual visual screen layout. It is in essence.
a comic at its core anyway.
not to mention most movies have a 2d panel based layout of the entire film and dialogue/camera/story telling etc.

which is what a comic book is at its very core.


So at the end of the day.
a movie is really nuffin but a visual layout medium.
or a comic brought to life in a medium away from print.

as real talk,..
Marty took this same critique for his films.
so I do not understand where this is coming from.
Plus how he could be so pompous.
not to understand the American history with comics and his usual film sweet spot of content as well.

plus how his actual idea of a critical film is a female romance rag comic.
just flipped and bounced into a book nd then film medium as well. As the draw for those books all developed from the readership of women and men. Yet most importantly women in the build.
to the draw for the type of movie Marty makes as well.
Plus was definitely kept alive and in drawing legacy all grim comics.
as reqdership for those eventual books.
all came from comic readership and back and forth and So on.
as a matter of fact.

I would believe the comic community, is largely the ones.
Who actually championed his film at its critical core, from grass roots to accreditation as well.


so I just don't get this critique in small soundbite.
nor grad scheme at all.

it is that privilege talking. Marty.

put up or stfu.




art barr

those comic movies are all fantasy, Goodfellas is based off of real people, not some make believe person with abilities that are completely ridiculous

real people

And what you're speaking on is not what Scorsese said, he's talking about the craft

like good editing, good cinematography, real suspense, realism...

not green screen, CGI, horrible cinematography, lighting, complete lack of suspense.. .not cinema

 

[Norrin Radd]

Martin Scorsese is doubling down on his comments about Marvel Studios' films. Scorsese sat on a panel discussing the future of cinema for the closing night screening of his latest feature, The Irishman, at the British Film Institute’s London Film Festival. He repeated a previous statement comparing Marvel movies to theme parks and went on to say that theaters shouldn’t be invaded by such films. "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,” he said. “As I was saying earlier, it's not cinema, it’s something else. Whether you go for that or not, it is something else and we shouldn’t be invaded by it. And so that’s a big issue, and we need the theater owners to step up for that to allow theaters to show films that are narrative films.”

Several actors and filmmakers connected to Marvel Studios responded to Scorsese's comments, including Samuel L. Jackson, who plays Marvel's Nick Fury. "That's kind of like saying Bugs Bunny ain't funny," Jackson said. "Films are films. You know, everybody doesn't like his stuff either. I mean, we happen to, but everybody doesn't. There are a lot of Italian-Americans that don't think he should be making films about them like that. Everybody's got an opinion, so it's okay. It's not going to stop anyone from making movies."

 

[T’Challa’s Heir]

this is the dumb shyt we’ve all been saying. Does he not know how capitalism works? Why does he want to force theaters to show movies that don’t make that much money? Why does he want to force studios to fund projects that don’t make much money?

He doesn’t get to ignore the economic side of film making. His argument is literally, studios and theaters should make less money and ignore demand so we can have more empty theaters showing narrative films. Who wins there? The theater that loses money because people aren’t showing up? The theater loses money because the ones showing up probably aren’t buying concessions. The studio loses money because they gave a limited audience film $150 million dollars and spent another $150 million on advertisements, so now this film needs to make $600 million worldwide to even break even.

 

[Black Trash!]

Samuel Jackson is c00nin here
He makes movies with a man that says nikker

 

[MarcP]

I was looking to see if Scorsese fukked with Nolan and found a interview of his from a few years back that kind spoke tot he same thing.

Do you feel that society today is affecting cinema, or that cinema is having an influence on society?

That’s a difficult question, as I am no longer able to really enjoy a film by going to a theatre, and so I am experiencing cinema in a different way, but my impression – this may not be the absolute accuracy – is that society has influenced cinema, at least where I come from in America. I feel that the kinds of stories that are being made for the most part indicate that the split in cinema is very clear now: you have the audience participation in the action/adventure films, and then there are the more modern, budgeted and simpler productions which to a certain extent – even though many have been Academy Award winners – are still marginalizing a lot of the artists. Yet, you can see these films everywhere now, and even on a computer, so they’re reaching more people. The bigger theatres are meant for some wild, visual all experience super productions. Whether that’s good or bad? I come from the old days, and I make films that are big too, in a sense, so it’s not my place to speak that way. But it’s a complicated matter. The danger is that the young people who are experiencing cinema this way, believe that is what cinema is. We know that cinema is something else also – besides, along with. But now, it’s just a place where you go to see beautifully and extraordinary made films, but what are they saying? So in a sense those films create the audience, and we have missed now a generation. This is why it’s important to preserve the older films, even if it is a film that’s only five years old. So preserve them and show them anywhere you can, on a computer – anything – to make them aware that cinema is also something beyond just the visual experience of a super production. “Cabiria” was a super production, made in 1914, right? People just wanted to see it. The film I made when I was eleven, was a super production! (Laughs.) But at that time, they were co-existent, now I don’t feel that’s the case. The big productions of Chris Nolan for example, they combine both: an incredible mind and beautifully made films on a big scale, so it is possible, there is room. I am just worried about the young generation and their impression of what cinema is.

Martin Scorsese: “There’s always the budget, but I am more concerned about the creative freedom”

 

[Saysumthinfunnymike]

"The big productions of Chris Nolan for example, they combine both: an incredible mind and beautifully made films on a big scale, so it is possible, there is room"

I knew he'd fukk with Nolan, two legends in the game

 

[HipHopStan]

I gotta admire Marty for not changing up his words. "I said it. "

 

[Big Mel]

He's not lying at all.

 

[AnonymityX1000]

Samuel Jackson is voronin highly there
He makes movies with a man that says nikker

Martin Scorsese says nikker in his movies to.

 

[AnonymityX1000]

this is the dumb shyt we’ve all been saying. Does he not know how capitalism works? Why does he want to force theaters to show movies that don’t make that much money? Why does he want to force studios to fund projects that don’t make much money?

He doesn’t get to ignore the economic side of film making. His argument is literally, studios and theaters should make less money and ignore demand so we can have more empty theaters showing narrative films. Who wins there? The theater that loses money because people aren’t showing up? The theater loses money because the ones showing up probably aren’t buying concessions. The studio loses money because they gave a limited audience film $150 million dollars and spent another $150 million on advertisements, so now this film needs to make $600 million worldwide to even break even.

Yeah, "Stop changing ,stop growing so guys like me can still get a bag."
Just dismissive comments that have no basis in logic just emotion. ,"They are something else." Really that's just some subjective made up shyt to make yourself feel better.

 

[Bigbigguy]

I get where he's coming from, he wants his types of films to be shown in theaters more but that will not happen till the prices get cheaper. It seems like marvel are the scapegoat for this right now because they're the most popular movies but you need to make event movies to get people out these days.