Yeah, that’s an absolute train-wreck of an analogy.
Can’t really think of a footballer equivalent to Marvel movies. Quaresma?
Film Martin Scorsese - Marvel movies are 'not cinema'
- Thread starter Sweet Square
- Start date
Can’t really think of a footballer equivalent to Marvel movies. Quaresma?
Adama Traore, surely?
And there are critics that have praised some Marvel films as great films, there are some marvel films more critically rated than the irishman. Same goes for other comicbookmovies in general.
Which ever way people want to put it, this thread will always be old men yelling at crowds.
Scorsese has been criticised in his past, the "gangster" genre has been criticised in the past, pretty much every criticism thrown at Marvel could be thrown at Scorsese at some point or another. Even the CGI fest etc could be thrown at the irishman.
This thread reminds me of a similar conversation about music nowadays. If all you listen to is kiss, capital etc then all you'll hear is pop etc. But we have more diversity and access to music than ever before. Any kind of music you want you can find. The same with movies, there are great studios outside of marvel e.g. a24, great movies outside of blockbuster. Fun interesting movies being released, sometimes in cinemas, a lot of the times via streaming, more access than ever to international movies, indie movies etc. Whatever type of film you want to watch you can.
So enjoy it, the future is now old men!
Well in terms of music its basically like saying 6ix9ine is better than Dre because he is younger by saying Marvel is better than Scorcese because it's more popular now.
I'm not sure what critics are saying Marvel films are better than the likes of Scorcese's classics unless it's marvel fans using multiple accounts to boost IMDB scores or whatever.
Maybe there are legitimate critics saying it I can't really say . I would find it hard to believe though
Well it's not saying that, if you see the argument that I'm making... Yes Takeshi exists in the current music landscape, just like Vanilla ice existed in the era of the chronic. And just as Dre existed back then, the likes of kendrick, cole etc exist now. The main thing is you have more of everything that you want. If you are a fan of old school style rappers with deep lyrical content they are a dime a dozen now on spotify etc and some are the biggest artists e.g. Kendrick. The same with movies.
With regards to Marvel movies, critics have praised gotg, infinity war, civil war, iron man, with black panther being the standout of them all in terms of critical response. Outside of Marvel you have the dark knight, batman begins, joker.
But the point is this, yes there are loads of superhero movies nowadays, just like there used to be loads of action movies, some of which were classics. But there are also loads of good indie films, and for example I think there are some really great creepy horror films being released in the past 4-5 years.
On another point, something that I do think contributes to a shift towards more blockbusters at the cinema and the rest to streaming sites is that most people have a mini cinema at home and for me at least ive watched some great films like moonlight for example with my girlfriend at home on a big screen and I could say it was probably better that way.
Critics rate Marvel films on a scale, you'll find it hard to see any of those films on any of their "best of the year" lists. They never get the same praise and passion of something like The Irishman or even Silence. The only exception is maybe Black Panther.
Comments like this may be good for knitting forum banter, but on a professional setting, it's completely uncalled for.
Good point. Websites have to be careful about managing expectations as in the case of Marvel you'll often get a shit ton of traffic for panning a film. They can't avoid reviewing them either because the traffic is part of their business model.
Reviews on the internet are becoming increasingly like this and I think it's a big reason why some of the better gaming websites, for example, have started to avoid using scores (e.g. Eurogamer).
Look, no one is saying every Marvel movie is a masterpiece, but just the fact that Black Panther got a nomination shows you that this sentiment that they are not cinema etc is silly.
Regarding the reviews, maybe you are right, maybe you are wrong. One reviewer I like is Mark Kermode and there are marvel films that he enjoys just because they are enjoyable, and some (black panther, infinity war) where he genuinely thinks they are good films. As is probably the case with most reviewers.
Another contradiction is just because the tone isnt serious etc that the movie is not introspective, a character study etc. You saw some reviewers praising Eternals in that way because the tone was slightly different, when in reality it just wasn't a great film. Yet people dismiss characters like tony stark and captain america when the reason why a film like infinity war/endgame works is because we have seen these characters change develop individually and collectively, some changing their principles, others keeping them, culminating to a point where you fully understand every characters motivation. Yeah it didnt happen in 1 film, but it still happened.
living on past glory and rather shit these days? yeah, probably true.
nah, mostly those from the same "camp" bump this thread all the time yet they watch even worse movies than those based on Marvel comics. it's easy to see who's the annoyed side here.
it's formulaic, boring and overstretched dose of same old with spent and past it actors. couldn't care less about what "critics" think.
I don't know. easy to like, easy to enjoy... that part is correct. less hated than Marvel movies appear to be in this thread though. certainly not interesting enough to become unhealthy obsession as these movies have become for some.
It got me thinking though. atm I have about 2700 movies rated and I've wached pretty much every major movie from Fellini, Kurosawa, Bergman and Tarkovsky, as well as every major movie from every famous American and European/Asian director. only movies I skip almost by default are those modern pure romantic comedies. there are thousands of them but they don't bother me because there's plenty of other movies to watch.
there's about 25 Marvel movies total in existence yet some in here are going apeshit because of that and act like they have nothing to watch. I don't think there's a single movie I'd rate more than 6 or 7, except for Black Panther, Winter Soldier & Civil War + the Infinity War. but why waste so much energy into this and similar threads when it's so easy to skip them and watch something else? it simply makes no sense. I bet those who are bothered by them in any way are probably the same people that don't watch old or foreign movies, yet keep acting like they deserve better than modern Hollywood.
The short answer to your question is that people are discussing the shitness of Marvel movies because this is a thread about the shitness of Marvel movies.
If there was a thread about why romantic comedies are shite that would be full of people discussing that particular topic.
The longer answer is about how much money is being spent on making shit Marvel movies and why it’s a shame that the people who invest in cinema see them as such a safe bet, thereby reducing the funding available for other, more interesting films. For anyone who has a genuine interest in cinema (which you seem to have?) then that’s a terrible shame. And likely to create strong opinions
Completely disagree. Granted, he doesn't do a film every year, so there is an average of a 2 to 3 year gap between his films. To say he's living off past glory is just absurd, however. I loved Silence, The Wolf of Wall Street, Shutter Island, and The Departed (this is 2006, but is about 6 films ago, when you take into account how often he makes films). I actually watched Gangs of New York for the first time last night and loved that, too. Haven't seen The Irishman yet as I just haven't got around to it. He films are always consistently good/great/masterpiece-quality.
I'd kill to be 'shit', if that's what qualifies as shit.
Pretty sure most directors would, too.I've always found that a weak argument. How much money do you need to make the Irishman? I mean if de niro was throwing moons at people i could understand some restrictive cgi budget that avengers 10 was pushing out of the way but its a dozen or so actors sitting around a dozen or so pretty straightforward sets for 3 hours. And it got made. And its a better movie watched at home on the sofa than in the cinema. And it probably would have been a better movie with a lesser budget that forced him to hire more fitting actors.
Is that funding point really true? Marvel movies in particular cost a lot to make, but also make outrageous profits.
Perhaps it's the copycats, that are as expensive but not as successful, that syphon off money that could have been used elsewhere? Or maybe Marvel movies set a certain standard that makes film companies think that they have to go that big or not even try? But Marvel isn't taking money away - and anyway only at Disney.
I just always assumed that the reason cinemas are fecking dominated by umpteen sequels of assorted CGI shitefests was purely financially driven. And that has to be at the expense of more interesting projects. It’s not just Marvel tbf. They’re all (more or less) as bad as each other. My biggest beef is that almost every big budget movie is part of a franchise. Either the latest in a long tedious series, or being released in hope of being the first of the next money train. They’re not even bothering to write them as standalone stories. It’s as though they’ve completely forgotten about the format they’re working in.
Last edited:
But it's actually sad that grown people are watching it and saying it's good.
Spiderman: Please Just Make It Stop
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Would you be interested in Marvel style Hitler film?
Is the OP bait? They could honestly be stills from the same film.
They are part of the same advertising campaign masquerading as movies. So who cares?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
No.
It could be all from the same film although doesn’t take away from the main point imo.
Hey some of us are balding before 40!
Last edited:
Well too bad we're making it anyway!
No.
Wtf I love Tom Holland now
You missed the Coppola interview, he also criticized Dune and No Time to Die.
Title spoilers for the rest of the octology...
Spiderman: Homecoming
Spiderman: Far From Home
Spiderman: No Way Home
Spiderman: There's no place like Home
Spiderman: Take Me Home, Country Road
Spiderman: Home is where the Heart Is
Spiderman: Home Sweet Home
Spiderman: Homey Womey Lomey
Spider-Man: Home Alone - crossover with Macaulay Culkin who will be playing a deranged disfigured villain (no make up needed) as he tries to break into Peter Parker’s home.
I had great fun reading the amazon reviews of no time to die recently
Yeah, but nobody is daft enough to suggest romantic comedies are shite.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I remember laughing out loud in the cinema when the 3 heads are staring at her.
I’m really not into Nolan work(Although tbf his Batman films are perfect Obama era time stamps)but even with that it still surprises me just how shite Returns looks at certain points.