Bit of a side note but why wouldn't the likes of Netflix just have directors curate films too instead of just relying on algorithms? A selection of films recommended by a director they like would surely be of some interest to people? I don't get why they'd leave it to other streaming platforms to do curating.
Film Martin Scorsese - Marvel movies are 'not cinema'
- Thread starter Sweet Square
- Start date
Netflix is playing to the masses. Even if they did some amount of curating there’s always going to be mass appeal padding to keep the subscribers there. Criterion, on the other hand, is for the discerning viewer. Both can coexist.
This Scorsese needs to start coming up with his own arguments:
I don't think the problem is that there is not enough good filmmakers or good films but that there is just so much cheap, careless junk being churned out as consumer content, with skant regard for artistic value, that it can bury the innovative and more carefully considered films.
One point though is that the golden age Scorsese points to in the article are those dominated by privileged male filmmaker, mostly from the West. And I know Scorsese is a champion of all great cinema, whoever is making it and from wherever it comes, so it appears he's flubbed the argument here somewhat.
The bottom line is we've lost much (most notably a decline in overall quality of filmmaking) but we've also gained much (availability and diversity for example). Marvel is shit.
Also the article is pretty good on Fellini and makes me want to go back and revisit some of those film, but he does drone on a bit, especially when he starts talking about Bob Dylan again.
I think he oversells his argument a little, but much of what he has to say I agree with. 'Content', 'consumer', 'product' are terms that often accompany a careless, devaluing attitude towards art. They are only words and can mean a multiple of things, but only words can also be indicative of particular attitudes. And I think that the labels applied to film and cinema these days do demonstrate a brutal, predatory Capitalist attitude towards art.dumbo said:
I don't think the problem is that there is not enough good filmmakers or good films but that there is just so much cheap, careless junk being churned out as consumer content, with skant regard for artistic value, that it can bury the innovative and more carefully considered films.
One point though is that the golden age Scorsese points to in the article are those dominated by privileged male filmmaker, mostly from the West. And I know Scorsese is a champion of all great cinema, whoever is making it and from wherever it comes, so it appears he's flubbed the argument here somewhat.
The bottom line is we've lost much (most notably a decline in overall quality of filmmaking) but we've also gained much (availability and diversity for example). Marvel is shit.
Also the article is pretty good on Fellini and makes me want to go back and revisit some of those film, but he does drone on a bit, especially when he starts talking about Bob Dylan again.
That looks so shit. Unsurprisingly.
Well, movies certainly were IMO.
I think we have a tendency to remember the good films, and forget the bad. No one cares about the 70 odd films John Wayne starred in prior to Stagecoach. Taxi Driver came out in 1976, the same year A Star is Born, King Kong and The Enforcer were hugely success, despite being pretty mediocre by the standards of any decade.
That is a good point. It's the same with music. I think Todd In The Shadows(youtuber) has a video where he looks at the worst hit songs from a random year in the 70s and they're hilariously bad.
I've mentioned this in other threads, but I'm also suspicious when I see movie snob top lists and 90% of the movies are pre 1980. I could accept 60% maybe even 70%.
The idea of watching a film in a stadium sounds awful. Is that really a possibility?
I anticipated the cinema experience would get smaller, if anything. There's a place opened in Bath with small screens and sofas. Their bigger screens seat about 30 people. The smaller ones about 12. Excellent food and drink menu which is brought right to you before the film starts. It's quite a luxury experience, but pre-covid it was quite difficult to get a booking for as it became incredibly popular. That type of cinema experience is certainly preferable for me rather than going to a Cineworld or whatever.
I anticipated the cinema experience would get smaller, if anything. There's a place opened in Bath with small screens and sofas. Their bigger screens seat about 30 people. The smaller ones about 12. Excellent food and drink menu which is brought right to you before the film starts. It's quite a luxury experience, but pre-covid it was quite difficult to get a booking for as it became incredibly popular. That type of cinema experience is certainly preferable for me rather than going to a Cineworld or whatever.
But there are extremely mediocre movies being produced today too. That will always be the case for any decade.
My point of view is that the best movies from the 70s/80/90s are better than the best movies from the last decade. I'd say the decline slowly started in the late 2000s, then a big drop in the 2010s.
This, I agree, also, movie scores were so much more memorable in the 80s, 90s etc. They are so generic in last decade or so. Not bad per se, but not memorable.
Fully agreed. I regularly find myself listening to the soundtracks of Chinatown, Heat, Shawshank Redemptiom etc.
One of the replies hits the nail on the head; PG Joker marketed towards women.
This looks so bad.
These really are shamelessly marketed on popular tropes. The world is more cynical today? Better make a move that's dark and grisly because our audience will understand that. Strong/independent females are being highlighted more often in media? Better make sure we include one of those. Mental health is a popular topic? Let's address that too in case people don't happen to be bombarded every minute of the day like they are already.
I feel there's some good qualities to them - certainly in Joker - but the lack of authenticity is a bit obvious. Not a lot of big directors are in a position where they can lead debate anymore. Most of the big production companies would rather have a product designed with marketing in mind.
That's my rant of the day over
Last edited:
That's what I mean. You'll remember the mediocre films of this century, but the crap of the 70s won't even be a distant memory.
Curiously, when you look at Rotten Tomatoes list of the 100 highest rated films of all time, the 3 decades you mention would indicate a real dearth in quality. (Of course, these sort of things should always be taken with a pinch of salt).
The bolded part is an understatement to say the leastThat's what I mean. You'll remember the mediocre films of this century, but the crap of the 70s won't even be a distant memory.
Curiously, when you look at Rotten Tomatoes list of the 100 highest rated films of all time, the 3 decades you mention would indicate a real dearth in quality. (Of course, these sort of things should always be taken with a pinch of salt).
It's impossible to find a balanced list. Movie snob lists are heavily biased towards old films and like with everything: once you reach a certain "level", there will always be a "right opinion" that people don't dare to go up against. Meanwhile, lists like the IMDB Top 250 suffer from recency bias.
Oh yes I agree. I didn't post it to demonstrate the noughties were in some way superior to the 80s or 90s, rather that each decade has has had their own fair share of shite as well as gold. The best films of the 50s/60s/70s are still vivid in peoples minds, but the shite is long forgotten. Nobody but movie buffs will remember The Fall of the Roman Empire, but plenty remember the atrocity that is Wild Wild West. Nostalgia is as prominent as recency bias when these comparisons are made. The Golden Age of Hollywood benefited from being there first, so it's always going to lead the way in these sort of things.The bolded part is an understatement to say the least
It's impossible to find a balanced list. Movie snob lists are heavily biased towards old films and like with everything: once you reach a certain "level", there will always be a "right opinion" that people don't dare to go up against. Meanwhile, lists like the IMDB Top 250 suffer from recency bias.
I think you're onto something.
I got curious and checked the Rotten Tomatoes top 100 and it's pretty hilarious stuff. 17 of the top 20 movies of all time were made in the last 5 years and the best movie ever is Black Panther
Yeah thats a stupendously ridiculous list. Mission: Impossible Fallout being 3rd is a particular highlight.I think you're onto something.
I got curious and checked the Rotten Tomatoes top 100 and it's pretty hilarious stuff. 17 of the top 20 movies of all time were made in the last year and the best movie ever is Black Panther
Rotten Tomatoes sucks, even as aggregator sites go. Metacritic is better, while still very flawed.
Though I suppose you could argue that those sites generally are part of the contentification (which I know isn't a proper word) of film.
Though I suppose you could argue that those sites generally are part of the contentification (which I know isn't a proper word) of film.
Last edited:
Lists and rankings are fun. I'm quite guilty of enjoying them myself. But movie rankings will always be too subjective anyways. That's why I prefer to see the personal lists from various content creators. It's a great way to get movie recommendations beyond looking at these soulless lists voted on by the public.
The 70s also gets lauded because it coincided with the New Age of Hollywood, which was when a lot relatively young filmmakers - who mostly came from the AFI Conservatory - broke into the industry and got their work financed by big production companies. The companies didn't know what would sell and there was a lot more openness, and arguably creative, as they sought to appeal to a younger (ie 18-30) demographic than previous eras.
It was a bit ridiculous really in terms of the people who broke through. To name names - Cimino, Scorsese, Ford Coppola, Lucas, Spielberg, Malick, Allen, Altman, Lynch, Schrader, Friedkin, Peckenpah, Kubrick, De Palma, Cronenbourg, Schlesinger, Romero, etc.
Cimino's Heaven's Gate is regularly lauded as the film wot killed it because it absolutely bombed at the box-office and afterwards production companies become more conservative. Some of those filmmakers went on to make work in the 1980s but most made their name in the 70s.
I'm sure there was lots of dross too but it's remembered mainly, I think, because we remember these guys (and they were all guys weren't they).
I get the idea Marty privately rants about the overload of remakes/reboots/sequels/adaptations and originality being dead or at the worst very hard to get funding for..... quietly (not)oblivious to the fact he's done a sequel, remake, and god knows how many adaptations. Love the guy, but his rambling a bit odd.
If you ignore the ultra mainstream, theres still absolutely plenty of stuff to enjoy, almost every year. Even the megabucks stuff isn't all as bad as WW84 either.
If you ignore the ultra mainstream, theres still absolutely plenty of stuff to enjoy, almost every year. Even the megabucks stuff isn't all as bad as WW84 either.
.
Personally think he's sour because we've got to a point where people would rather watch Endgame in IMAX than the Irishman on Netflix
Precisely. Were in a world where, there's literally something for everyone in terms of film.
Personally think he's sour because we've got to a point where people would rather watch Endgame in IMAX than the Irishman on Netflix
thats obviously lies. The 80s made the best movies everThat's what I mean. You'll remember the mediocre films of this century, but the crap of the 70s won't even be a distant memory.
Curiously, when you look at Rotten Tomatoes list of the 100 highest rated films of all time, the 3 decades you mention would indicate a real dearth in quality. (Of course, these sort of things should always be taken with a pinch of salt).
It's worth saying Scorsese help established The World Cinema Project - https://www.criterion.com/boxsets/1021-martin-scorsese-s-world-cinema-project
It really isn't the case that the guy is just bitter that more people see marvel films over his. He clearly loves cinema and wants to make it as diverse and accessible as possible(The problem is he's just one dude).
It really isn't the case that the guy is just bitter that more people see marvel films over his. He clearly loves cinema and wants to make it as diverse and accessible as possible(The problem is he's just one dude).
It's not a bad quote but it does make me wonder if the effect of hearing something like it is more profound if the main place you shop for profound quotes is pop-culture movies.
Being a pretentious tit myself, it basically just sounds like what Freud alluded to in Mourning and Melancholia. Therefore it sorta loses its impact but whatever.
Last edited:
Nonsense you don't have to love someone to grieve
What is grief if not love caught and mangled in a trap, leaking blood and screams and viscera.
Deepest theme park I ever did see.
Scorsese must be shaking right now!
Those tweets...those people are so feckin cringy.
Reminded me of this much-mocked tweet:
I suppose it makes sense that the more limited your frame of reference is the better things like this will seem. And if you spend a lot of time in a given fan-bubble then OTT praise about things within that bubble won't jar as much as you're surrounded by hype for it anyway. I'm sure there are people who think Marvel films are legitimately great and culturally significant films so why wouldn't they think that's an all time great line too?
It's very easy to mock these things (and I do mean very easy) but at the same time I don't like throwing stones at people who feel passionately about something. Particularly kids and teenagers, who naturally tend to become passionately attached to films/music/books at that age. Whatever you like there'll be someone who will sneer at you for it so whatever.
Incidentally, being less well-read than you it didn't remind me of Freud but it did remind me of mid-00's Death Cab For Cutie lyrics. Which I'm not sure I'd class as a compliment.
I've studied Tarantino
He seems quite earnest judging by his replies but this one's great.
Last edited:
Who the hell knows how many films they've seen to the nearest thousand?
Prat.
Prat.
Tracking them on Letterbox'd would be my guess.