Also, if Marvel movies doesnt have big success like it is, people wont make any comment of it. Marvel doesnt even have 5 films every months at cinema. Success breeds jealousy even more when it involved billion dollars on it i guess.
Film Martin Scorsese - Marvel movies are 'not cinema'
- Thread starter Sweet Square
- Start date
It's not the same type of film at all, apart from it being a blockbuster.
I think people are getting hung up on the genre too much, when what all these criticisms are directed at are more the general enterprise behind these films: how marketed and formulaic they are, how they all look the same, how they fit in to a massive planning... it just doesn't feel like "usual" cinema.
I mean when you see something like this:
It's just so strange.
The bolded part, its still the same for Mission Impossible. They are just the same plot since MI 1.
The first Marvel was in 2008, the latest was in August this year. There is 23 films in 12 years which is about 2 films per year. Its not that many but the exposure they got since first Avenger came out was quite unprecedented for this kind of movies that has been here since 70's(i think). They are just doing it better than others.
You maybe dont like it or even despised it but doesnt make it less cinema than any others movies.
And this rhetoric "art cinema", yeah sure, every times to times, you got movies thats so good that not every average person with average brain can understand whats going on but i supposed going to cinema was about getting entertained and even some blockbusters movies can do that.
I can't bring myself to watch another one and I haven't watched many of them.
I actually like some of the Avengers movies, and find them entertaining. I still believe there is something unique (not in a good way) about the Marvel "cinematic universe", like the films themselves don't really matter and just serve a general purpose. There's actually very few that would be enjoyable as standalone movies I feel, and very few that have a proper identity - especially visually, they really all do look the same.
Still, Simon Pegg is hypocrite.
Post this in the pro gaps thread please.
You think Scorcese is jealous of Marvel films ?
Liked James Mangold's point the most. People acting like there is deep, meaningful characters in this stuff. Look at Iron-Man/Tony Stark and Spider-Man/Peter Parker. I bet countless people will tell you that's an "amazing" relationship when in reality I'm guessing they've probably shared 10 minutes of screen-time throughout half a dozen movies. The same people will laugh at depressed Thor because he's fat.
Ugh, feck that picture. It never ends.It's not the same type of film at all, apart from it being a blockbuster.
I think people are getting hung up on the genre too much, when what all these criticisms are directed at are more the general enterprise behind these films: how marketed and formulaic they are, how they all look the same, how they fit in to a massive planning... it just doesn't feel like "usual" cinema.
I mean when you see something like this:
It's just so strange.
Guess everything up until MCU was meaningful.
Fact is, it's lonely at the top. Nobody likes you or what you're doing. And people are jealous of your success.
Feel like Jason Statham is the Robbie Savage of movie reviews though. I'll listen to Scorsese, I'll listen to Coppola, but am I feck listening to Jason Statham when it comes to film.
Fact is, it's lonely at the top. Nobody likes you or what you're doing. And people are jealous of your success.
Feel like Jason Statham is the Robbie Savage of movie reviews though. I'll listen to Scorsese, I'll listen to Coppola, but am I feck listening to Jason Statham when it comes to film.
He's right
Are any of them really intended to be standalone though?
At least standalone the way the vast majority of movies are intended to be. From the very beginning in either Iron man or the Hulk there was a bit about the Avengers at the end. So they planned these to be a series of movies from the get go. And if thats the intention then it only makes sense that they all look similar visually. They're basically like a really big budget TV series thats shown in the cinema. So Scorcese's initial criticism is probably fair enough, they're not cinema in the traditional sense but maybe the medium is just changing.
One good thing about not watching Marvel films is I'm not donating money to Trump as Marvel are one of his largest financial contributors.
I doubt Scorsese is donating money to Trump . So better films and no Trump
I doubt Scorsese is donating money to Trump . So better films and no Trump
Does Disney support trump?
Former chairman Ike Perlmutter donated personal funds but he has had nothing to do with Marvel Studios since 2015.
completely agree. with so many better/worse examples to choose from, it's weird that Marvel movies are the ones that get all the criticism. that's because vast majority actually enjoy them and most importantly - vast majority of people actually like characters from those movies and will remember their names for years after watching them, which isn't the case with your typical blockbuster.
also, fecking J. Statham and S. Pegg talking about good taste and childish things is surreal.
He is still the chairman
What does Statham having a part in a 25+ year old music video have to do with his or any other opinion on the matter?
Of Marvel Entertainment not Studios though.
Just seeing this. It's entertainment. I am not going to the cinema to make an Oscar recommendation. I go to the cinema to watch all kinds. I don't think one needs to shit on the other.
I went to the cinema to watch Avengers for the same reason I went to watch Wolf Of Wall Street or The Departed.
I went to the cinema to watch Avengers for the same reason I went to watch Wolf Of Wall Street or The Departed.
Last edited:
You think he doesnt get money from Marvel films ?
I guarantee you Pegg was angling for the Antman role (see photo below), especially since it was not so much a beefy action role as a comedic role. His good pal Edgar Wright was scheduled to direct as well. Wright gets dropped as director and now Pegg thinks Marvel movies are brainless. I mean its probably just coincidence...
"They are relying on green screen... It's all CGI created. So to me that is not authentic. I'm inspired by all old real star -- guys that can really do their thing."
I think it's amusing when people forget where they came from.
And then the last part is hilariously appropriate considering his dance moves.
I mean it's a music video, not an action movie, which he did 5 years before his first actual film credit on IMDB. I don't really see what it has to do with what he says about his preference in movies half a lifetime later. I think that's one of many ad hominem arguments in this thread.
He's done other green screen scenes himself, certainly the final scene in Crank wasn't live action. A lot of the comments from directors and actors seem to be sour grapes that they aren't part of the money spinning enterprise that is superhero movies, so I'm happy to poke holes in their arguments.
Also, I've been looking for an opportunity to share his mighty jungle thrusts with everyone and thought this was as good an opportunity as any.
I think people are conflating the superhero genre and Marvel specifically - esp. with regards to what Scorsese and Coppola have said which is directed straight at Marvel, I believe. The superhero genre, there's nothing wrong per se with it and it can actually give some very good films (although the genre has probably been a bit overloaded over the past decade or so). If people can't see there's a difference with Marvel and its "cinematic universe", the marketing, the planning, etc., I would say you're being a bit disingenuous. There's something inherently disturbing with it, and again this is coming from someone who actually enjoys some of them.
Also I doubt it's "sour grapes" from most of them, I really don't think Scorsese or Coppola would give a shit about being involved or not in these (and I would imagine Statham's bank account is fine without having starred in any of these).
Since Statham stars in about every other dumb but popular action movie I'd be surprise if he wasn't earning quite a lot of money himself, Jodie Foster has a ton of awards and a net worth of $100m according to some shitty sources on google. Scorsese, Ridley Scott and Coppola are at the end of very successful careers, I wouldn't be surprised if Marvel was eager to have one of them direct a movie to give it some deeper cinematic credibility. I don't see why they of all people would be "sour grapes" about Marvel, I think labeling them as such is just dodging their argument.
That belies an ignorance of the Marvel brand and universe and what it's about (not specifically directed at you, mate). The comics model, along with its well structured and maintained universe, has been transitioned to a film model. Certainly CGI has helped that because it enables filmmakers to capture the fantasy element. I don;t get what people's problem with it is, beyond market saturation, which is a fair argument but if it sells then people are going to sell it.
But I'm not denying that! I'm completely aware of this, but I think it's also fairly understandable why some people who make their living in the industry would be troubled by it, and don't appreciate a business model from another medium being implemented in what they probably love so much. And I think the comment "it's not cinema" is pretty understandable in that context.
They've all had great careers to be sure, but how relevant are they now? It's possible that might contribute their disdain. Scorsese and Statham are the only ones who still maintain a high profile based on recent projects and, to be fair, the last thing I saw Statham do was The Meg.
Comic books are basically story boards. It's probably the most intuitive evolution of any medium ever. Also, how is the Marvel universe any different from the Star Wars universe, The Godfather Trilogy, Star Trek, etc? It's a model for continuity in a brand's stories.
Also, I wasn't directing that statement at you.
I don't know 100% if he does or not mate, do you know that he does?
If i had to guess i would say no he doesn't. The company that makes the movies is nothing to do with Marvel Entertainment anymore and as far as i know hasn't been for years.
No the sharks were trained
Believe me I'm trying
Novel adaptation, real person biography, real life events, etc. Theres many sources for plot story filmmaking and saying comic adaptation destroy cinema just not hold up to anything.
Again, it's not about that.
Your initial point was marvel supports trump. This isn't a good point.
no actually its because they suck