|
Post by Citizen Snips Has Left on Oct 5, 2019 18:21:32 GMT -5
There's something hilarious to me about this dude being pissed at Scorcese for the label he slapped on something being incorrect...and then calling his 76 year old nemesis a "boomer".
|
|
|
Post by Larryhausen on Oct 5, 2019 18:38:25 GMT -5
I don't really understand why people would care or why they'd be surprised. In no way would I have thought Scorsese would like superhero movies anyway, but ya know whatever. I still like them and him. My best friend isn't a fan of Monty Python; doesn't mean I'm gonna beat him with a pillowcase fulla doorknobs. What about pointed sticks?
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Oct 5, 2019 18:48:04 GMT -5
There's something hilarious to me about this dude being pissed at Scorcese for the label he slapped on something being incorrect...and then calling his 76 year old nemesis a "boomer". it's a joke for one and for two that is kinda the point. also I doubt Nash is really particularly angry about it.
|
|
|
Post by arrogantmodel on Oct 5, 2019 19:14:54 GMT -5
It has to be disheartening when these directors cite Scorsese as a huge inspiration and heap praise on him, only for him to be like, "Yeah, your movies suck."
I know that's not what he said, but he could have just said, "They can do amazing things these days with the superhero genre. It's not my cup of tea, but I wish these new and young directors the best."
See how easy that is?
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Oct 5, 2019 23:34:42 GMT -5
|
|
SAJ Forth
Wade Wilson
Jamaican WCF Crazy!
Half Man-Half Amazing
Posts: 27,214
|
Post by SAJ Forth on Oct 5, 2019 23:58:45 GMT -5
If he tried with the upcoming Phase4stic, I think he'd tell you cinema is dead.
|
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on Oct 5, 2019 23:59:36 GMT -5
I just think it sucks to see so many iconic filmmakers bash what Marvel is doing. Movies, films, cinema, whatever you call them, are intended to engage the imagination. Marvel is engaging imaginations, making people cheer and laugh and cry in packed theaters with friends and strangers. That's so pure. Just seems so shitty to dump on it for being prevalent.
|
|
|
Post by arrogantmodel on Oct 6, 2019 0:09:12 GMT -5
I'm 36, and if these Marvel movies came out when I was nine and ten when comics were hot, my god...my head would have exploded. Hell, I've admitted that while the movie itself was flawed, I couldn't hate on the fact that I was watching Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman battle Doomsday on the big screen.
And as I've already said, Goodfellas is my favorite movie. Has been since I was about fifteen. I also love Wolf of Wall Street and The Departed.
They're just different genres. One isn't "cinema" while the other is. Movies are made for many different reasons and to get many different reactions.
And Sam Jackson, head of the Marvel Universe as Nick Fury, summed it up perfectly.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Oct 6, 2019 0:24:40 GMT -5
I'm 36, and if these Marvel movies came out when I was nine and ten when comics were hot, my god...my head would have exploded. Hell, I've admitted that while the movie itself was flawed, I couldn't hate on the fact that I was watching Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman battle Doomsday on the big screen. And as I've already said, Goodfellas is my favorite movie. Has been since I was about fifteen. I also love Wolf of Wall Street and The Departed. They're just different genres. One isn't "cinema" while the other is. Movies are made for many different reasons and to get many different reactions. And Sam Jackson, head of the Marvel Universe as Nick Fury, summed it up perfectly. yeah as I said earlier the only point of criticism I have is the "it's not cinema" remark. Films are films, and even art made for money is still art. Am I demanding he has to like it? No, of course not... nor did I really expect him to. but to call them "not cinema" is just incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Oct 6, 2019 0:38:22 GMT -5
I'm 36, and if these Marvel movies came out when I was nine and ten when comics were hot, my god...my head would have exploded. Hell, I've admitted that while the movie itself was flawed, I couldn't hate on the fact that I was watching Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman battle Doomsday on the big screen. And as I've already said, Goodfellas is my favorite movie. Has been since I was about fifteen. I also love Wolf of Wall Street and The Departed. They're just different genres. One isn't "cinema" while the other is. Movies are made for many different reasons and to get many different reactions. And Sam Jackson, head of the Marvel Universe as Nick Fury, summed it up perfectly. yeah as I said earlier the only point of criticism I have is the "it's not cinema" remark. Films are films, and even art made for money is still art. Am I demanding he has to like it? No, of course not... nor did I really expect him to. but to call them "not cinema" is just incorrect. That's the only real issue I have. Whether he likes the MCU movies or not is really just his opinion and I don't really care if he doesn't. It's the gatekeeping, invalidating, not true -art!- snobbery I criticize.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Oct 6, 2019 1:49:07 GMT -5
I just think it sucks to see so many iconic filmmakers bash what Marvel is doing. Movies, films, cinema, whatever you call them, are intended to engage the imagination. Marvel is engaging imaginations, making people cheer and laugh and cry in packed theaters with friends and strangers. That's so pure. Just seems so shitty to dump on it for being prevalent. So much this. My generation grew up with Han Solo, Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia, Darth Vader, Indiana Jones, Doc Brown and Marty McFly, E.T., Mr. Miyagi, and countless more. My son's generation have a wealth of characters that have reached the same iconic status, and they all get to interact with each other in a way my childhood heroes never could. Trying to devalue that because it's not to your taste is unnecessary.
|
|
|
Post by "Cane Dewey" Johnson on Oct 6, 2019 1:59:04 GMT -5
I wish more people would treat the MCU like high art, maybe then there would be substantive critiques of these movies? The social media response to Scorsese's remarks so desperately wants superhero comic book movies to be respected, but only if they are uncritically appraised for their entertainment value, which a) seems like a boring perspective to have about any piece of "cinema" or "art," and b) that also, bizarrely, makes Disney out to be an underdog. There’s serious critiques (some substantive, some...not) of Marvel and comic book movies all over the internet. I’ve run into a number of vloggers and others complaining about Captain Marvel allegedly being pro-military, or the Avengers being too rooted in “great man theory.” And even if I don’t agree with those specific points, which I don’t (Carol being a pilot is just plain exciting, fairly benign as far as subtext- and an Avengers movie lacking any cool fights or not emphasizing how extraordinarily the heroes are would be way too slow IMO), the MCU I feel does have enough weight in their stories to warrant discussion similar to “highbrow” cinema. Black Panther looking at the ills of colonialism, Winter Soldier and government surveillance, etc. It’s easier than ever to find superhero film analysis these days. I don't know if I would equate the availability of internet criticism of superhero comic book movies with any ubiquity of internet criticism of superhero comic book movies per se. For example, I've read a couple of really insightful reviews of movies like Black Panther and Captain Marvel that argue that the small-c conservative narratives and themes of those movies run contrary to how those films were advertised and championed as instances of progressive representation and achievement. But I don't think there's a ferment of opinion about those two billion-dollar movies that coalesces around the former perspective; public opinion, at least in the digital world, is very much weighted towards the latter. Is that because general audiences can't think about the narrative, thematic, and aesthetic contradictions of these movies? Or that they won't? Or both? If it's the first scenario, maybe because people, in their defense of the MCU "as cinema," are doing very little to actually talk about "the cinema" of the MCU? Again, the bulk of online ink that has spilled falls more on the "these movies make people feel emotions, they're fun, and entertaining, and stop trying to take that away from people." Fair enough. But so far has anyone who disagrees with Scorsese said, "I really enjoy the mise-en-scene of Far From Home because..." or "the cue Led Zeppelin in Thor: Ragnarok is an excellent example of non-diegetic music for the reason that..."? My takeaway from Scorsese's comments is the implicit worry that there is a greater need for audiences to be film literature that has not, cannot, and will not be met any time soon. I think it would be awesome if people became literate about other cinematic media: television, video games, social media, etc., which is something that even Scorsese himself could adopt, in addition to the Netflix distribution of his upcoming movie. If it's the second scenario, again, fair enough. There isn't any "art" that exists that also isn't somehow contradictory, in itself, and that's before addressing the context in which it is discussed and the perspective(s) from which it is perceived. Still, more and more the conversation about criticism isn't about the complexity of engaging media or "reading a text," but about the (non-) value we attach to criticism, however grounded, flippant, exhaustive, tedious, thoughtful, or knee-jerk that criticism is. The "Let People Enjoy Things" meme that pops up every time these conversations are had no longer means "don't being a jerk to people who do like stuff, especially if it comes from a place of ignorance, but instead becomes a shorthand tool to reduce dissent to a zero-sum game: "either you love movie/video game/TV show X or you hate it." This perspective ignore the fact that one can enjoy something, but they can also still be critical of it, if not one can enjoy being critical of something. "Let People Enjoy Things" (LPET) is as equally valid of an argumentative position as "Let People Not Enjoy Things" (LPNET). But look at how quickly people look to consign Scorsese's body of work to the dustbin of history because he said a kind of dumb thing about very popular movies in a very off-the-cuff fashion, especially after being a specific question. (has most of the ado about his comments actually referred to the specific Empire interview in question? or did people simply stop reading after the headlines of the dozens of summary articles that have been drafted over the past 2 days?**) **On this point, Scorsese's remarks appear in the third-last paragraph of the entire piece. I've quoted and spoilered the last 5 paragraphs of the article so people know how the MCU came up in the interview. {Spoiler}{SPOILER: CLICK TO SHOW} I wonder if the reason why there's so much talk spent on LPET and not LPNET is because people identify themselves with the things they like, and anything that contradicts or questions that thing ends up being a personal attack. I don't know how healthy or unhealthy such a perspective is. What if we lived in a world with more people who liked pizza and fewer people who were pizza fans? How could or how would we talk about pizza then? Despite its snarky tone, an article published on The Baffler earlier this year systematically breaks down how and why people who are about LPET are so skeptical about LPNET. thebaffler.com/kate-takes/dont-let-people-enjoy-things-wagner
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Oct 6, 2019 2:13:09 GMT -5
There’s serious critiques (some substantive, some...not) of Marvel and comic book movies all over the internet. I’ve run into a number of vloggers and others complaining about Captain Marvel allegedly being pro-military, or the Avengers being too rooted in “great man theory.” And even if I don’t agree with those specific points, which I don’t (Carol being a pilot is just plain exciting, fairly benign as far as subtext- and an Avengers movie lacking any cool fights or not emphasizing how extraordinarily the heroes are would be way too slow IMO), the MCU I feel does have enough weight in their stories to warrant discussion similar to “highbrow” cinema. Black Panther looking at the ills of colonialism, Winter Soldier and government surveillance, etc. It’s easier than ever to find superhero film analysis these days. I don't know if I would equate the availability of internet criticism of superhero comic book movies with any ubiquity of internet criticism of superhero comic book movies per se. For example, I've read a couple of really insightful reviews of movies like Black Panther and Captain Marvel that argue that the small-c conservative narratives and themes of those movies run contrary to how those films were advertised and championed as instances of progressive representation and achievement. But I don't think there's a ferment of opinion about those two billion-dollar movies that coalesces around the former perspective; public opinion, at least in the digital world, is very much weighted towards the latter. Is that because general audiences can't think about the narrative, thematic, and aesthetic contradictions of these movies? Or that they won't? Or both? If it's the first scenario, maybe because people, in their defense of the MCU "as cinema," are doing very little to actually talk about "the cinema" of the MCU? Again, the bulk of online ink that has spilled falls more on the "these movies make people feel emotions, they're fun, and entertaining, and stop trying to take that away from people." Fair enough. But so far has anyone who disagrees with Scorsese said, "I really enjoy the mise-en-scene of Far From Home because..." or "the cue Led Zeppelin in Thor: Ragnarok is an excellent example of non-diegetic music for the reason that..."? My takeaway from Scorsese's comments is the implicit worry that there is a greater need for audiences to be film literature that has not, cannot, and will not be met any time soon. I think it would be awesome if people became literate about other cinematic media: television, video games, social media, etc., which is something that even Scorsese himself could adopt, in addition to the Netflix distribution of his upcoming movie. If it's the second scenario, again, fair enough. There isn't any "art" that exists that also isn't somehow contradictory, in itself, and that's before addressing the context in which it is discussed and the perspective(s) from which it is perceived. Still, more and more the conversation about criticism isn't about the complexity of engaging media or "reading a text," but about the (non-) value we attach to criticism, however grounded, flippant, exhaustive, tedious, thoughtful, or knee-jerk that criticism is. The "Let People Enjoy Things" meme that pops up every time these conversations are had no longer means "don't being a jerk to people who do like stuff, especially if it comes from a place of ignorance, but instead becomes a shorthand tool to reduce dissent to a zero-sum game: "either you love movie/video game/TV show X or you hate it." This perspective ignore the fact that one can enjoy something, but they can also still be critical of it, if not one can enjoy being critical of something. "Let People Enjoy Things" (LPET) is as equally valid of an argumentative position as "Let People Not Enjoy Things" (LPNET). But look at how quickly people look to consign Scorsese's body of work to the dustbin of history because he said a kind of dumb thing about very popular movies in a very off-the-cuff fashion, especially after being a specific question. (has most of the ado about his comments actually referred to the specific Empire interview in question? or did people simply stop reading after the headlines of the dozens of summary articles that have been drafted over the past 2 days?**) **On this point, Scorsese's remarks appear in the third-last paragraph of the entire piece. I've quoted and spoilered the last 5 paragraphs of the article so people know how the MCU came up in the interview. {Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{Spoiler}{SPOILER: CLICK TO SHOW} I wonder if the reason why there's so much talk spent on LPET and not LPNET is because people identify themselves with the things they like, and anything that contradicts or questions that thing ends up being a personal attack. I don't know how healthy or unhealthy such a perspective is. What if we lived in a world with more people who liked pizza and fewer people who were pizza fans? How could or how would we talk about pizza then? Despite its snarky tone, an article published on The Baffler earlier this year systematically breaks down how and why people who are about LPET are so skeptical about LPNET. thebaffler.com/kate-takes/dont-let-people-enjoy-things-wagnerNot feeling that Baffler article at all. The vast majority of people who utilize that meme aren’t fanboys or fangirls being insecure about some critics liking their movie. The author is equating those who use it automatically with the toxic fans going around harassing crew members and trolling because they don’t want their favorite things critiqued. I don’t think saying “let people enjoy things” to someone who would perceive stories designed to inspire and thrill people as too capitalistic and “Wagnerian” is too far out of line. The latter is just flat out being a snob unnecessarily, and not conducive in trying to combat toxic fandom. Now if that’s how the author truly feels about these films, that’s their right, but it shouldn’t come as a surprise that people are going to argue the merits of popular entertainment that’s clearly resonated with them and countless other people when one states they don’t get much out of a series or genre. It’s like how I’ve tried to get into Game Of Thrones, but it simply never appealed to me. I don’t find anything overly problematic about the show, but if I did and I expressed as such, I would expect plenty of rebuttals and comments from GoT fans talking about what they get from the series. If it boiled down to “you’re just a hater” or “you’re stupid” because I criticized it at all, then no, that’s not cool, but I don’t expect that sort of response automatically either.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Oct 6, 2019 11:22:53 GMT -5
Scorsese should write and direct a superhero movie, thus showing how the genre should properly be portrayed as a cinematic art form.
|
|
|
Post by thechase on Oct 6, 2019 11:54:06 GMT -5
I've never known anyone in any picture I've ever been to that has laughed/cried/cheered. It's just a movie.
|
|
The Unconquered Sun
King Koopa
He has no pants! What a heathen!
Lord of Storms and Kittens!
Posts: 11,548
|
Post by The Unconquered Sun on Oct 6, 2019 12:51:06 GMT -5
Scorsese should write and direct a superhero movie, thus showing how the genre should properly be portrayed as a cinematic art form. oh!ohohoh! Superman Red And Blue!!!
|
|
|
Post by King Boo on Oct 6, 2019 12:56:33 GMT -5
Samuel L. Jackson made a point that resonated with me personally. As an Italian-American, I don't particularly care for mob movies to be representative of my culture. I'm not ignorant to that world existing, but I do resent it being many people's first thought about "my people" and feel that movies such as Goodfellas perpetuate that mindset. I don't watch mafia related entertainment, nor do I ever plan to.
I also have never and would never say that any of Scorsese's films aren't cinema.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Oct 6, 2019 13:49:31 GMT -5
I've never known anyone in any picture I've ever been to that has laughed/cried/cheered. It's just a movie. In general? Or just Marvel/comic book movies?
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Oct 6, 2019 13:56:12 GMT -5
Laughing and crying at a movie in an almost universal cinematic audience reaction around the world. It would be weird for example to see a comedy at a cinema and have no one laughing at all. Cheering, not so much. Seems more like a mostly American thing.
|
|
|
Post by "Cane Dewey" Johnson on Oct 6, 2019 14:33:58 GMT -5
It's easy to dismiss the merits of thing you have no knowledge of, and the fact you do so reflects more badly on you than on the object of your scorn. But isn't this comment also applicable to people on the internet who haven't (yet?) read the full Empire interview in which Scorsese makes these comments about not seeing the Marvel movies? Which is nothing if not ironic. It's unclear from the actual published Empire piece how, when, why, and in what order of the conversation with the interviewer Scorsese' comments about the MCU even occurred. However, Scorsese praises a movie like Midsommar before he talks about the MCU--"he editing, the camera moves — glorious! And the image of her in the flowers? My God!" If we, as readers, want to know about the kind of "cinema" that excites him, if it isn't the MCU, the Empire article gives us one example, at the bare minimum. At the very least, the MCU provides us with an excellent moment that accurately encapsulates this controversy.
|
|