Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Martin Scorsese says Marvel movies are 'not cinema'


Recommended Posts

I don't appreciate this idea that adults who enjoy comic books and the like are not "grown up."  My husband reads comic books, or graphic novels as they're known, and is also an avid gamer.  He's every bit of a grown up as anyone else. He owns his own vehicle.  He owns his own home.  He's held a steady job since high school. He was working as sous chef and now as a kitchen supervisor.  He's in line to become a regional kitchen manager in the Portland Metro Area.  He's also an avid reader and has read everything from Alexandre Dumas' four novels about the Three Musketeers to Desi Arnaz' autobiography (which I recommended to him) to Nikki Sixx's Heroin Diaries.

I enjoy watching animated films and shows.  I've had the same pair of Chucks since the seventh grade and they are very comfortable.  I wear flip flops in the summer, though I do not buy the $2 Old Navy ones as they hurt my feet.  I also don't buy the ones that make the flip flop noise as you walk, because those are annoying. I don't think liking these things makes me any less of an adult than anyone else.  I have some graphic tees, but none with Looney Tunes. I also don't wear slogan shirts unless you count my hilarious Golden Girls shirt with the "I'm Ready! Take me hurricane '91" statement. I also don't have any tats or body piercings either. 

I think an adult is someone who is self-sufficient and can make their own decisions about what they do and do not like. If their love of comic books isn't hurting themselves or anyone else, why does it matter?

If someone doesn't like superheroes, Marvel, and anything else of that ilk, don't watch them. Who cares?

I'm honestly just tired of this trend of everyone trying to police what everyone else enjoys and does.  As long as they're not promoting free-basing cocaine or animal abuse, or anything else horrific and dangerous, why does it matter to you what people enjoy doing in their free time? 

Scorsese just needs to stick to making the same old gangster movie featuring Joe Pesci, Robert DeNiro, and Leonardo DiCaprio, and let everyone else do what they want. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, speedracer5 said:

I don't appreciate this idea that adults who enjoy comic books and the like are not "grown up."  My husband reads comic books, or graphic novels as they're known, and is also an avid gamer.  He's every bit of a grown up as anyone else. He owns his own vehicle.  He owns his own home.  He's held a steady job since high school. He was working as sous chef and now as a kitchen supervisor.  He's in line to become a regional kitchen manager in the Portland Metro Area.  He's also an avid reader and has read everything from Alexandre Dumas' four novels about the Three Musketeers to Desi Arnaz' autobiography (which I recommended to him) to Nikki Sixx's Heroin Diaries.

I enjoy watching animated films and shows.  I've had the same pair of Chucks since the seventh grade and they are very comfortable.  I wear flip flops in the summer, though I do not buy the $2 Old Navy ones as they hurt my feet.  I also don't buy the ones that make the flip flop noise as you walk, because those are annoying. I don't think liking these things makes me any less of an adult than anyone else.  I have some graphic tees, but none with Looney Tunes. I also don't wear slogan shirts unless you count my hilarious Golden Girls shirt with the "I'm Ready! Take me hurricane '91" statement. I also don't have any tats or body piercings either. 

I think an adult is someone who is self-sufficient and can make their own decisions about what they do and do not like. If their love of comic books isn't hurting themselves or anyone else, why does it matter?

If someone doesn't like superheroes, Marvel, and anything else of that ilk, don't watch them. Who cares?

I'm honestly just tired of this trend of everyone trying to police what everyone else enjoys and does.  As long as they're not promoting free-basing cocaine or animal abuse, or anything else horrific and dangerous, why does it matter to you what people enjoy doing in their free time? 

Scorsese just needs to stick to making the same old gangster movie featuring Joe Pesci, Robert DeNiro, and Leonardo DiCaprio, and let everyone else do what they want. 

Thank you. You've stated my position on this quite well. I think Maher and others who agree with his sentiment come across as out of touch and foolish in the same way that their predecessors did when they complained about the useless long-hairs and hippies listening to "noise music" and watching film and TV that they regarded as vulgar and infantile. All Maher and his ilk are doing is showing themselves as the same kind of shallow, judgmental fogies that he claims to rebel against.

I've posted many times about how I dislike this trend for some people to judge other people as inferior based on the films/TV/music/books that they enjoy. It's not enough to say that they don't share the same tastes, or that something just isn't for them, but they have to declare that anyone who would dare to like something they don't must be lacking in mental capacity, maturity, or proper artistic merit. It's a particularly loathsome habit of some people.

As for Scorsese, since he is my favorite living filmmaker, I do feel I have to defend him a little by pointing out that he's made 25 features, and only 6 were crime dramas, although Raging Bull is mob-adjacent. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

Thank you. You've stated my position on this quite well. I think Maher and others who agree with his sentiment come across as out of touch and foolish in the same way that their predecessors did when they complained about the useless long-hairs and hippies listening to "noise music" and watching film and TV that they regarded as vulgar and infantile. All Maher and his ilk are doing is showing themselves as the same kind of shallow, judgmental fogies that he claims to rebel against.

I've posted many times about how I dislike this trend for some people to judge other people as inferior based on the films/TV/music/books that they enjoy. It's not enough to say that they don't share the same tastes, or that something just isn't for them, but they have to declare that anyone who would dare to like something they don't must be lacking in mental capacity, maturity, or proper artistic merit. It's a particularly loathsome habit of some people.

As for Scorsese, since he is my favorite living filmmaker, I do feel I have to defend him a little by pointing out that he's made 25 features, and only 6 were crime dramas, although Raging Bull is mob-adjacent. 

Okay. I take back what I said about Scorsese's gangster films, I suppose I was contradicting my point with that statement. Scorsese isn't one of my favorites, only because he doesn't tend to make the type of films that appeal to me and of the ones I have seen, they seem to be the same old same old.  I do not like what he did to Cape Fear either. 

I do appreciate Scorsese's passion about film and his level of knowledge about cinema as a whole. I always liked his feature in the TCM Now Playing Guide. 

Re: adults are children for liking [insert whatever here]. Thank you.  Lately the thing to do online (well in Reddit anyway) is for people to call people "stans" for defending a particular comment/behavior/etc. of a particular individual.  A "stan" is apparently someone who is obsessive about a particular entity and will go to whatever length to defend and "protect" them/it.  I was called a "stan" for defending the pairing of two fictional characters in '90210.' Which is completely asinine, imo. I guess my point here is that in society there are all these extremes in being a fan or opponent of something.  At one end of the spectrum, you have someone who dislikes something so much to the point of belittling all fans of it and at the other end of the spectrum, you have people being called "stans" for seemingly supporting/liking something too much. 

Feel free to call me a "stan" for defending the freedom to like and do what you want (as long as it doesn't hurt yourself or anyone else).  This is why I also don't believe in the idea of "guilty pleasures." Why should I feel guilty about liking what I like? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, speedracer5 said:

Re: adults are children for liking [insert whatever here]. Thank you.  Lately the thing to do online (well in Reddit anyway) is for people to call people "stans" for defending a particular comment/behavior/etc. of a particular individual.  A "stan" is apparently someone who is obsessive about a particular entity and will go to whatever length to defend and "protect" them/it.  I was called a "stan" for defending the pairing of two fictional characters in '90210.' Which is completely asinine, imo. I guess my point here is that in society there are all these extremes in being a fan or opponent of something.  At one end of the spectrum, you have someone who dislikes something so much to the point of belittling all fans of it and at the other end of the spectrum, you have people being called "stans" for seemingly supporting/liking something too much. 

Feel free to call me a "stan" for defending the freedom to like and do what you want (as long as it doesn't hurt yourself or anyone else).  This is why I also don't believe in the idea of "guilty pleasures." Why should I feel guilty about liking what I like? 

I've noticed the "stan" term being bandied about more frequently, too. I think it comes from the Eminem song "Stan" about an obsessed, fan/stalker. People use it to mean "super-fan", and it can be derogatory or not, depending on the usage. It's like "fanboy/fangirl" with less nerd/geek overtones. 

And i'm completely with you on the notion that "maturity" should be based on managing the essentials in one's life rather than the entertainment they enjoy. I live in a house that I own outright, on land that I own, and drive a 2017 vehicle that's paid for. My bills are never in arrears, and maintain my property's appearance, as well as personal grooming habits. Now if I choose to wear clothes that are comfortable for me, in styles that I like, and with hair styled in the fashion I prefer, I don't give a **** what someone else thinks about my appearance. I don't have any of the fashion peccadilloes mentioned in posts above, but I do have facial hair, which many frown upon. And who is the arbiter of what's acceptable to wear? Why aren't we sticking to the old "rules" where women always wore dresses, and lacy gloves, and wore silly hats, and men always wore a suit with a necktie, even to go to the grocery store? 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LawrenceA said:

I've noticed the "stan" term being bandied about more frequently, too. I think it comes from the Eminem song "Stan" about an obsessed, fan/stalker. People use it to mean "super-fan", and it can be derogatory or not, depending on the usage. It's like "fanboy/fangirl" with less nerd/geek overtones. 

And i'm completely with you on the notion that "maturity" should be based on managing the essentials in one's life rather than the entertainment they enjoy. I live in a house that I own outright, on land that I own, and drive a 2017 vehicle that's paid for. My bills are never in arrears, and maintain my property's appearance, as well as personal grooming habits. Now if I choose to wear clothes that are comfortable for me, in styles that I like, and with hair styled in the fashion I prefer, I don't give a **** what someone else thinks about my appearance. I don't have any of the fashion peccadilloes mentioned in posts above, but I do have facial hair, which many frown upon. And who is the arbiter of what's acceptable to wear? Why aren't we sticking to the old "rules" where women always wore dresses, and lacy gloves, and wore silly hats, and men always wore a suit with a necktie, even to go to the grocery store? 

I agree with you re: the origin of "Stan." I think Eminem's song is the inspiration behind it. When I was called a "Kelly-stan" (for supporting the pairing of fictional characters Kelly & Dylan on "90210"), I had to look up what a "stan" was.  Then I was annoyed, because it was lame. How can I stalk a fictional character?

Thank you. I also agree with you re: maturity. My husband and I have our own home (not owned outright, but we can make our mortgage payment each month), we have a yard service (because we both loathe yard work. The yard service may very well be my favorite thing), we own two vehicles--2006 and 2012 (though I want to trade in my 2006 car. It's got 225k miles on it), we're up to date in our bills. I bathe every day. I wear clean clothes. Clothes with holes and stains, if they aren't thrown away, are not worn to work or out in public. I honestly do not own many "fancy" clothes. My job doesn't require office wear. I wear jeans, shorts, or capris (depending on the weather) and whatever shirt I want as long as it has sleeves. I live in my TOMS on all non-rainy days.  Rainy days, or when I have to wear socks are when I switch to slip on tennis shoes or my Docs.  I do not wear pajamas or sweatpants to the store. Though I have once because I was sick and needed medicine and I was the only one home, taking care of myself. I wasn't changing my clothes for a quick trip through self-checkout. I regularly cut my hair (well not myself, that would be a disaster).  My husband has a goatee (I'm not a fan, but it's his face). 

Frankly, as much as I love the women's fashions in the 1940s and 1950s, it would drive me insane to have to put on so many layers to be considered presentable in order to go out. Don't even get me started on the hair upkeep. I wash my hair every day. I get it cut in styles that literally require only blow drying and brushing. My normal hair is in vogue right now. "Beach waves" are a thing that people are styling their hair to emulate. My hair naturally has that look by itself. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, speedracer5 said:

I don't appreciate this idea that adults who enjoy comic books and the like are not "grown up."  My husband reads comic books, or graphic novels as they're known, and is also an avid gamer.  He's every bit of a grown up as anyone else. He owns his own vehicle.  He owns his own home.  He's held a steady job since high school. He was working as sous chef and now as a kitchen supervisor.  He's in line to become a regional kitchen manager in the Portland Metro Area.  He's also an avid reader and has read everything from Alexandre Dumas' four novels about the Three Musketeers to Desi Arnaz' autobiography (which I recommended to him) to Nikki Sixx's Heroin Diaries.

I enjoy watching animated films and shows.  I've had the same pair of Chucks since the seventh grade and they are very comfortable.  I wear flip flops in the summer, though I do not buy the $2 Old Navy ones as they hurt my feet.  I also don't buy the ones that make the flip flop noise as you walk, because those are annoying. I don't think liking these things makes me any less of an adult than anyone else.  I have some graphic tees, but none with Looney Tunes. I also don't wear slogan shirts unless you count my hilarious Golden Girls shirt with the "I'm Ready! Take me hurricane '91" statement. I also don't have any tats or body piercings either. 

I think an adult is someone who is self-sufficient and can make their own decisions about what they do and do not like. If their love of comic books isn't hurting themselves or anyone else, why does it matter?

If someone doesn't like superheroes, Marvel, and anything else of that ilk, don't watch them. Who cares?

I'm honestly just tired of this trend of everyone trying to police what everyone else enjoys and does.  As long as they're not promoting free-basing cocaine or animal abuse, or anything else horrific and dangerous, why does it matter to you what people enjoy doing in their free time? 

Scorsese just needs to stick to making the same old gangster movie featuring Joe Pesci, Robert DeNiro, and Leonardo DiCaprio, and let everyone else do what they want. 

Scorsese was asked what he thought of those movies and he gave the honest answer that he thought they're dumb and childish and the equivalent of a "rollercoaster ride." He was asked for his opinion and gave it. He can't criticize something you like ever now? Nowhere did he say people can't enjoy Marvel films or that Marvel films should be mass burned and their fans shamed. All he said they were not serious films and were degrading the art of movie making, an opinion shared by many film makers in his same craft.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gershwin fan said:

Scorsese was asked what he thought of those movies and he gave the honest answer that he thought they're dumb and childish and the equivalent of a "rollercoaster ride." He was asked for his opinion and gave it. He can't criticize something you like ever now? Nowhere did he say people can't enjoy Marvel films or that Marvel films should be mass burned and their fans shamed. All he said they were not serious films and were degrading the art of movie making, an opinion shared by many film makers in his same craft.

Scorsese didn't, but some posters said as much. Speedy was responding to them, as well as the OP, or at least that's how I took it.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

Scorsese didn't, but some posters said as much. Speedy was responding to them, as well as the OP, or at least that's how I took it.

My OP post was just a link to the article on what Scorsese said. Also no, I was not trying to imply Marvel or "superhero movies" should be banned or anything. I really like Watchmen for example. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gershwin fan said:

My OP post was just a link to the article on what Scorsese said. Also no, I was not trying to imply Marvel or "superhero movies" should be banned or anything. I really like Watchmen for example. 

Your OP was only part of what Speedy was responding to (the Scorsese bit). She was also responding to the Bill Maher comments, which were brought up again, as well as someone's comments about how people dress/groom themselves.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, LawrenceA said:

Your OP was only part of what Speedy was responding to (the Scorsese bit). She was also responding to the Bill Maher comments, which were brought up again, as well as someone's comments about how people dress/groom themselves.

Ok, ok I'm sorry speedy was insulted about my post raving about grown adults that dress & often act like children. There are always examples of grown adults that behave responsibly but still enjoy comics & super heroes....not at all whom I was referring to....

There is a large segment of 35-45 year olds who have found it acceptable to not become responsible adults and have little ambition to evolve. Mostly, their appearance is due to just being lazy: "it's easier to stay the same than put any effort in my appearance-who cares?"

Unfortunately, PEOPLE CARE what you look like. Your appearance tells others about your level of education, your station in life & your personality. The "comic book guy look" of long shorts/long t-shirt creates a visual proportion of a giant toddler. I'm sorry, but there's nothing flattering about a 50 year old in a Goofy or Pooh t-shirt.

4d758b18511dd61c7bba3938cc07312c.jpg

I had pink hair & wore mini skirts for decades & it looked adorable. A mature woman would look silly in crazy colored hair, heavy make up & sexy minis, so I respect others enough to dress appropriately. 

(I only mentioned Chuck Taylors because most find out after 40 they don't offer enough support)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not really a "comic book" thing as much as a devo thing-people who just don't want to grow up. As I said, I enjoyed my youth absurdities as much as anybody, but it someone else's turn. 

the-slobs-guide-to-fitness.jpg

The only picture I could find...this "athletic" toddler has hair.

3.jpg

And this giant toddler is the cool stoner version. He's hangin' with friends Darla & Tragedy Ann.

Sorry. Hey people made fun of me & the way I dressed in my 20's & 30's, now it's my turn for that!

b3885f46707ac2baf0d9a46ef0fbe5a5.jpg

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TikiSoo said:

It's not really a "comic book" thing as much as a devo thing-people who just don't want to grow up. As I said, I enjoyed my youth absurdities as much as anybody, but it someone else's turn. 

the-slobs-guide-to-fitness.jpg

The only picture I could find...this "athletic" toddler has hair.

3.jpg

And this giant toddler is the cool stoner version. He's hangin' with friends Darla & Tragedy Ann.

Sorry. Hey people made fun of me & the way I dressed in my 20's & 30's, now it's my turn for that!

b3885f46707ac2baf0d9a46ef0fbe5a5.jpg

You're cracking me up today!  :lol:

Okay I wouldn't be caught dead in garb like this, but that is just me.  This stuff just shrieks obscene things to me.  I had to search on "Chuck Taylors", just to see what the hell that is.  Yeah, not a good look IMO. 

Between the 80s and 90s I watched the clothing in stores go from primary colors (red/gren/blue) to earth-tone colors (lots of browns and yellows).  That was one year in the early 90s I remember that I didn't buy anything from a couple particular stores, as I watched their merchandise change virtually overnight.

These days I tend to wear darker colors, things that blend together well.  It is a look that has sort of evolved for me from working events and wearing darker colors so as to not stick out or be distracting.  I "do" look in the mirror before I leave the house.  That is why I sometimes cringe when I see these sorts of things, not so much for what I am seeing, but for what they are not seeing.  I don't mind people though that look like they are contractors or dressed to be fixing up their house, that is more the norm around here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One think I just saw a person say in response to a question I asked raises a fair point. (It doesn't relate to superhero films). It has to do with the way films are perceived in general anymore. They said that people like to look down in film circles on "fun" things, meaning comedies, romances, musicals, mainstream things and prefer to go for "artistic", "somber", "dark", "edgy", often independent and Foreign. I feel that both have their place and that one should not be discounted while the other is esteemed. I think one should value films of both schools of viewing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, CinemaInternational said:

One think I just saw a person say in response to a question I asked raises a fair point. (It doesn't relate to superhero films). It has to do with the way films are perceived in general anymore. They said that people like to look down in film circles on "fun" things, meaning comedies, romances, musicals, mainstream things and prefer to go for "artistic", "somber", "dark", "edgy", often independent and Foreign. I feel that both have their place and that one should not be discounted while the other is esteemed. I think one should value films of both schools of viewing.

There are foreign comedies and musicals and romances. Not everything foreign is Godard or Bergman.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Gershwin fan said:

There are foreign comedies and musicals and romances. Not everything foreign is Godard or Bergman.

 

True. After all, I love the Jacques Demy musicals. And the comedies of Truffaut..... It's just though that there's almost always an insistence on discounting material that isn't striving to make a statement. It seems, not here, but in certain cinema circles, like if a film is supposed to just bring excitement or joy, its only an ordinary film and should not be held to as high a standard.....

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, CinemaInternational said:

True. After all, I love the Jacques Demy musicals. And the comedies of Truffaut..... It's just though that there's almost always an insistence on discounting material that isn't striving to make a statement. It seems, not here, but in certain cinema circles, like if a film is supposed to just bring excitement or joy, its only an ordinary film and should not be held to as high a standard.....

I know what you meant. Just as comedies, romances and genre films (action/horror/sci-fi/etc.) are often said not to be "Oscar material". 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Coppola backs Scorsese in row over Marvel films

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Gershwin fan said:

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

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.

Think Daffy Coppola (they're despicable!) is just responding to the same zeitgeist that a lot of non-readers--y'know, the ones that think the SAME studio created "Avengers: Endgame", "Deadpool 2", "Venom" and "Joker"?--are suffering just through their fatigue with four studios creating what one qualified studio should be doing.

Just recently, I'd been going through vintage Siskel & Ebert review clips from '79-'82, and got to relive their entire moral crusade against the golden years of 80's teen-slasher movies--The ones we thought were "evil", and "sexist", and "puritanical", and "fatalistic", and "a depressing view of the teen experience", and not so much in protest of onscreen violence or low budgets, as just that the loudest critic voices were danged sick of having to sit through so many.  (We weren't quite up to that point with found-footage-exorcism movies in the early 10's, but close.)  And then, the big camel's straw that we thought was going to make them all go away for good, when parents groups tried to ban the killer-Santa movie, and after that backed down, we knew we had the evil genre on the run, and we'd chase it out of town for good, so that it would never, ever come back if it knew what was good for it.

Do we have a tipping-point equivalent like that for the superhero movies?  Welllll...I happen to notice this didn't start after "Dark Phoenix", or even the wretched '14 Fantastic Four movie.  This seems to have all started when somebody asked Martin Scorsese what he thought about "all the Taxi Driver stuff" in Joker.  If any movie has to go down in history as the One That Killed Them, it couldn't happen to a more deserving film, and certainly not a more deserving studio...At least the Marvels were safe, and were due for retirement anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Gershwin fan said:

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".

C'mon, it's just a movie, lighten up. If we teach our kids well, they'll realize it's just vapid entertainment and be OK. Comic books didn't make us all costumed killers, did it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TikiSoo said:

C'mon, it's just a movie, lighten up. If we teach our kids well, they'll realize it's just vapid entertainment and be OK. Comic books didn't make us all costumed killers, did it?

I've seen some of the most ridiculous looking guys (with pot bellies no less) wearing super hero outfits skiing, tights capes, and all. They must pretend they are flying as they come down the mountains. I'll take some pics this season, and post them for all to see. 

Some of these characters are married too with little kids.... 

  • Haha 3
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I sort of agree with the "Theme parks" comparison, but "cinema"?  Seems Scorsese attaches a higher meaning to the word than probably ever intended:

 

Definition of cinema

 

1a: MOTION PICTURE usually used attributively
b: a motion-picture theater
2a: MOVIESespecially : the film industry
b: the art or technique of making motion pictures
 
Sepiatone
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...