Scorsese explains why he thinks Marvel movies aren't cinema

[WebLurker]

Marvel studio should be worried. They have X-Men now. its a complete different ballgame to their past marvel IPs. nobody cares about Disney success anymore, Disney is fastly gaining a eputation as a cash machine for soulless products.

Guess we'll find out in a few years, right?

Can you imagine what James Mangold or Mathew Vaughn would think about light heated comedy xmen movies that follows the mcu formula?

Not really.

I think it's silly to think Marvel has anything to worry about. But it's also silly to think Scorsese was trying to give them something to worry about because he said he didn't care for them.

Sure; I don't think that Scorsese was trying to do that, either. The point is that I don't think his commentary is going to change anything for the studio in terms of their popularity.

However I will say that Jurassic Park and Star Wars still having films isn't neccessarily the best example to want Marvel to follow into because those franchises are never going to have the esteem they once did.

I don't know about that; I sincerely think that the whole "fans hate Disney Star Wars" thing isn't true. With Jurassic Park, I don't think that franchise exactly exceeded the original ever (although JW1 was pretty big in 2015), but it's still going. More the point I was making is that those brands have been around for awhile in one form or another and they're still going on and finding fans generations later. I think the MCU is going to be one of those things that our grandkids will be watching, if that makes any sense.

[Pinsir]

Simonson was the first to turn Thor into a joke by making a frog. I couldn't take that seriously as a kid.

Well, you aren't suppose to take it seriously, I mean, why would you when the main character is transformed into a frog? You can have different tones in a work, particular in a several year long format like comic books. The silliness of Throg does not reflect the overall tone of the series, which was filled with numerous iconic moments, like Beta-Ray Bill's introduction and the descent into hell. The serious parts of the work were still treated with respect, becoming a frog didn't turn the character into a joke.

[Midvillian1322]

With Snyder you had people calling for the Reeves estate to sue him for defamation, a petition sent to the White House to have him removed from BvS, the rejoicing over his daughter's death and the fact that people can't seem to talk about a DC movie they enjoy without the need to take a shot at Snyder. And that's just the ugliness Snyder had to deal with. Gal Gadot and Amy Addams have had to deal with misogynistic and body shaming comments, the actresses who play Dinah and Cass on the upcoming Birds of Prey movie have already had to deal with revolting comments regarding race for the former and the latter's body. And there's the racism Anna Diop faced over being cast as Starfire. Hell, remember how Star Wars fans got in trouble for trying to make a pirated movie edit of the movie that removed the female characters? DC fans tried to do that with an edit of Man of Steel which cut out most of Lois' scenes.

Hardly anyone talks about this because DC/WB is viewed as an acceptable target no matter what they do.

I've never heard of Half the stuff your talking about. The petition ABOUT synder I remember. Never heard anyone on here suggesting that the Reeves estate who doesnt own Superman should sue Them for defamation. As far as race bending or body shaming that happens across the board DC isnt special. Bree Larson got way more hate thrown her way then any those actesses. And the last one is the funniest of all. If never personaly seen or heard anyone say Amy Adam's was the problem. I'm sure this stuff is a thing you have seen but I've never seen it repeated in these boards. Which is what were talking about. If were talking about the General audience there isnt any wide spread hate of the MCU. We are just talking about these boards when it comes to "overselling the hate" and honestly it's only a couple users who as of late have managed to bring everything back around full circle to The MCU Sucks and that's a fact.


But as far as the wider audience I do agree that Snyder Films are seen as an acceptable target. Therefore you will have less people defending it. But real life and this forum is the only place I engage in any of these debates. I dont post about this stuff on social media or go to any other forums so my exposure is limited.

[Agent Z]

I've never heard of Half the stuff your talking about. The petition ABOUT synder I remember. Never heard anyone on here suggesting that the Reeves estate who doesnt own Superman should sue Them for defamation. As far as race bending or body shaming that happens across the board DC isnt special. Bree Larson got way more hate thrown her way then any those actesses. And the last one is the funniest of all. If never personaly seen or heard anyone say Amy Adam's was the problem. I'm sure this stuff is a thing you have seen but I've never seen it repeated in these boards. Which is what were talking about. If were talking about the General audience there isnt any wide spread hate of the MCU. We are just talking about these boards when it comes to "overselling the hate" and honestly it's only a couple users who as of late have managed to bring everything back around full circle to The MCU Sucks and that's a fact.


But as far as the wider audience I do agree that Snyder Films are seen as an acceptable target. Therefore you will have less people defending it. But real life and this forum is the only place I engage in any of these debates. I dont post about this stuff on social media or go to any other forums so my exposure is limited.

Gadot's the only superhero actress I've seen where people constantly go on and on about her body not being muscular enough to be Wonder Woman (and that includes on these boards). None of the MCU actresses had to deal with that even the ones who were less muscular than their comic characters like Elodie Yung. Yeah backlash to racebending happens but it is especially toxic with DC and while I don't want to say who got it worse Anna Diop and Jurnee Smollett being called hookers is not something to shrug off. Even if you don't see all this stuff on these boards you can see it in a lot of other places like io9, twitter and tumblr.

[Beaddle]

Guess we'll find out in a few years, right?


.

we already know to expect , it is not as if Disney won't use the marvel formula , you yourself have already said it that because marvel is very successful nothing will change, what we have now is a ticking clock waiting to say, I told you so.

Not really.

I think you should, but its obvious neither will appreciate another soulless product marvel movie in a franchise they once help build. its only natural they feel that way.

Sure; I don't think that Scorsese was trying to do that, either. The point is that I don't think his commentary is going to change anything for the studio in terms of their popularity

And I think this is marvel's problem, they won't change because they think they will keep making money but what they don't realize is their artistic venture is suffering severely.

I don't know about that; I sincerely think that the whole "fans hate Disney Star Wars" thing isn't true. With Jurassic Park, I don't think that franchise exactly exceeded the original ever (although JW1 was pretty big in 2015), but it's still going. More the point I was making is that those brands have been around for awhile in one form or another and they're still going on and finding fans generations later. I think the MCU is going to be one of those things that our grandkids will be watching, if that makes any sense.

there is more truth to fans hate Disney star wars or fans hate Disney marvel. I just think general fans are now raging against this big cooperate machine. What I have noticed here is that many people who are very critical of MCU movies seem to always talk or know more about the comics than the people who are far less critical.

I think the MCU is going to be one of those things that our grandkids will be watching, if that makes any sense.

one of the other problems with marvel movies is because their movies are so immature, Disney make overed and cookie cutter, kids are likely to grow out of it. it is also very hard to even call any mcu movie a classic or a comic book classic because there are just so many of them that have been so massively produced and similarly manufactured together. you can't call avengers a classic but not Dr strange? but you can call spiderman 2 a classic but not amazing spiderman 2 because their is a huge artistic difference there.

spiderman 2 is not part of the mcu so it helps it status as a legit directed written movie in the genre. Blade of cult status is a bigger classic in the superhero genre than all the entire mcu movies combined, just for the stand alone uniqueness to itself and it having no connection to Disney MCU movies and I am sure not many kids or teens have ever seen blade.



I have seen some ask why didn't scorsese go after star wars? well there was no need too. Once upon a time comic movies were like star wars, this was before the cinematic universes and a company like Disney ruining both marvel and star wars

Once again Chadwick is still ignorant.

[jetengine]

Bringing up the Gadot/Muscular thing is pretty meh tbh. Tyst argument has been raging for years in the fandom. I'm someone who'd prefer her to be a bit more hench but Hollywood has institutionally made women afraid of beefing up for roles like guys.

Now its when you hound her on social media thats when its an issue

[Blind Wedjat]

Scorsese was asked and then people got upset and it became a big story so he clarified and tried to explain his viewpoint while also making sure to acknowledge everyone involved in the MCU was talented. Feige tried to defend his films as being profound by using the justification that they had Captain America and Iron Man fight in one film and that they killed half the heroes in Infinity War as proof of it. He actually said that. I shouldn't have to explain why that's ridiculous and completely irrelevant to anything Scorsese said.

Yes Gunn did get emotional and Igor also did get emotional and I think it's kind of silly to ignore the obvious implications of him running to Black Panther to make his point because of what happens to everyone who has criticized Black Panther. Scorsese on the other hand was not emotional in any of his responses and didn't say something absurd like "my films are profound because in the Departed I killed protagonist in the climax" or some nonsense (which is funny because that's still bolder than anything Feige did).

So I would posit you're downplaying it and misrepresenting what Scorsese did. The rest of your post is effectively saying "Scorsese should stop talking about it when he's asked". Also sorry it's kind of in the bubble to think nobody is talking about the Irishman when talking about Scorsese. It's probably the hottest film at the moment and nearly everyone in film circles has been talking about it indepent of this silly MCU spiff which only gets brought up once in a while. This site isn't a good indicator since it it skews so heavily towards comic films an ignores most of the general non franchise output.

And you're entire argument seems to suggest that people shouldn't be allowed to defend their work or product if someone of supposed 'high importance' criticises it (and you have another user here saying said people are "delusional" for doing so). It's almost like you people don't even know how to paint Scorsese in this situation. One moment he's a victim of internet and fanboy outrage. The next he is the unbothered maestro who's speaking truths. Which one is it?

Regardless of how you want to attempt to spin it, the people at Marvel are the victims here (if there's such a thing in this situation). They were the ones that were (and always have been) criticised repeatedly by someone with a platform. And every single one of them has a right to defend their work, even if they didn't pull the best defense. Because frankly, a lot of Scorsese's points are bullshit too. Saying theatres should refuse to play big budget films is nonsense. How else do you want them to survive? How else do you think they're surviving in this post-streaming, post-piracy environment? And saying something isn't cinema or a form of art and then having to define what that art is supposed to be makes you a gatekeeping elitist.

Scorsese's initial comment was that Marvel movies aren't cinema because they don't communicate emotional and psychological experiences. That's a definitive, objective statement for something that is highly subjective. What is an emotional experience for someone might not be for another person. It's why different genres exist and why people have different tastes. Someone may have a genuine emotional or psychological experiences to heavy metal and I can just think it's loud noise. Now if I were to say that about heavy metal without even bothering to listen to it, I should be rightfully called out. That's what is happening here, and that's why it became a big deal in the first place. Because Scorsese attempted to pass off a subjective opinion as an objective fact, and then started lamenting about how theatres should not support certain movies, kept repeating this sentiment and then wrote an entire op-ed. If anything, he wrote that piece because he knew he fucked up (because almost all of that rhetoric was gone from it).

And yes, Scorsese didn't need to repeat himself. The first time he made this comment he also said the actors of the films did a good job ("given the circumstances"), so he didn't add anything new. It was the same remark over and over again, and we all got it. Saying he needed to clarify himself is bunk when he didn't do that at all. What's funny is that he can shut down questions. When asked about why almost why almost none of his films feature strong female characters he said it was irrelevant. Please tell me how a Marvel movie is relevant to The Irishman? He can refuse to answer questions about his own films, but he can go on and on about other people's films he has barely seen.

[Blind Wedjat]

Bringing up the Gadot/Muscular thing is pretty meh tbh. Tyst argument has been raging for years in the fandom. I'm someone who'd prefer her to be a bit more hench but Hollywood has institutionally made women afraid of beefing up for roles like guys.

Now its when you hound her on social media thats when its an issue

Acting like Gadot is the only victim of body-shaming in Hollywood in recent years is just hilarious. Imagine trying to call out sexism yet ignoring everyone else who suffers from it to prove some kind of point.

[Agent Z]

Acting like Gadot is the only victim of body-shaming in Hollywood in recent years is just hilarious. Imagine trying to call out sexism yet ignoring everyone else who suffers from it to prove some kind of point.

When the hell did I say Gadot was the only victim of body shaming? I even pointed out another DC actress going through the same thing.

[Username taken]

And you're entire argument seems to suggest that people shouldn't be allowed to defend their work or product if someone of supposed 'high importance' criticises it (and you have another user here saying said people are "delusional" for doing so). It's almost like you people don't even know how to paint Scorsese in this situation. One moment he's a victim of internet and fanboy outrage. The next he is the unbothered maestro who's speaking truths. Which one is it?

Regardless of how you want to attempt to spin it, the people at Marvel are the victims here (if there's such a thing in this situation). They were the ones that were (and always have been) criticised repeatedly by someone with a platform. And every single one of them has a right to defend their work, even if they didn't pull the best defense. Because frankly, a lot of Scorsese's points are bullshit too. Saying theatres should refuse to play big budget films is nonsense. How else do you want them to survive? How else do you think they're surviving in this post-streaming, post-piracy environment? And saying something isn't cinema or a form of art and then having to define what that art is supposed to be makes you a gatekeeping elitist.

Scorsese's initial comment was that Marvel movies aren't cinema because they don't communicate emotional and psychological experiences. That's a definitive, objective statement for something that is highly subjective. What is an emotional experience for someone might not be for another person. It's why different genres exist and why people have different tastes. Someone may have a genuine emotional or psychological experiences to heavy metal and I can just think it's loud noise. Now if I were to say that about heavy metal without even bothering to listen to it, I should be rightfully called out. That's what is happening here, and that's why it became a big deal in the first place. Because Scorsese attempted to pass off a subjective opinion as an objective fact, and then started lamenting about how theatres should not support certain movies, kept repeating this sentiment and then wrote an entire op-ed. If anything, he wrote that piece because he knew he fucked up (because almost all of that rhetoric was gone from it).

And yes, Scorsese didn't need to repeat himself. The first time he made this comment he also said the actors of the films did a good job ("given the circumstances"), so he didn't add anything new. It was the same remark over and over again, and we all got it. Saying he needed to clarify himself is bunk when he didn't do that at all. What's funny is that he can shut down questions. When asked about why almost why almost none of his films feature strong female characters he said it was irrelevant. Please tell me how a Marvel movie is relevant to The Irishman? He can refuse to answer questions about his own films, but he can go on and on about other people's films he has barely seen.

Well said.

Scorsese can say what he said but Marvel is allowed to defend themselves from his comments. Feige's comments were kind of funny but Scorsese's original comment was filled up with bullcrap because he probably hasn't even seen any Marvel movie.

I actually kind of understand where Scorsese was coming from but taking one person's subjective statement and passing it around as an objective statement of fact is not just bullshit, it's idiotic..

All this being said, what Scorsese is saying is nothing new. Some folks raged against the Star Wars movies and the emergence of the "summer blockbuster", it generally happens when something huge takes over the multiplexes. But there's nothing "sacrosanct" about what he said and he has been rightfully called out for it.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Regardless of how you want to attempt to spin it, the people at Marvel are the victims here (if there's such a thing in this situation).

If this pernicious logic were enforced universally, then no one would be allowed to express any criticism or opinion or point of view in public ever again. That's now how this has ever worked any time before. If someone criticizes you in public, you take it, roll-with-the-punches and if you give enough of a s--t and are not content with making cash and so on, you go out and make a better work of art, you set out to prove them wrong. People have a right, especially in a Democratic society, to express points of view about anything. Painting people who respond to criticism as "victims" is real corporate drone mentality there. Dystopian stuff.

Look at George Lucas. That guy is a famous good sport, he helped with the VFX of Spaceballs, thought Hardware Wars was hilarious and neither he nor Lucasfilm ever made a move against those awful RLM videos about the prequels even if the stuff in that was kind of libelous. Brian DePalma has publicly mocked Star Wars and yet Lucas doesn't go out and do a hissy fit about how DePalma's movies are Hitchcock ripoffs and have been consistent low performers at box-office and so on.

And every single one of them has a right to defend their work, even if they didn't pull the best defense.

No they don't. Benedict Cumberbatch handled things deftly. And if they are compelled to defend that work it's probably because of what happened to James Gunn during his firing/rehiring and a need to protect their salaries and so on.

Saying theatres should refuse to play big budget films is nonsense.

He's not saying that. He's saying they should allow to play all kinds of films. He's also alluding to something the Walt Disney company does, which is muscle out the competition, or any competition as this article pointed out:
https://www.vulture.com/2019/10/disn...its-vault.html

Disney is using a lot of hard and soft power to make sure that multiplexes only screen the kinds of movies they prefer/favor/make-money-for-them. It's actively monopolistic. Which is to say that it's trying to be, aspiring to be, a monopoly while outwardly appearing as an organic or earned monopoly i.e. we earned being the only game in town.

And saying something isn't cinema or a form of art and then having to define what that art is supposed to be makes you a gatekeeping elitist.

Or it's simply daring them to do better. Scorsese is offering an opinion and saying where he comes from. And instead people just want to paint that in the blackest of terms.

[Farealmer]

Or it's simply daring them to do better.

Why do they need to "do better" to appease Scorsese? Is MCU obligated to appease every high profile film maker with their movies or else not be worthy of existence? You mention a democratic society but the USA is also a capitalistic one. Which means people should not be shamed for financial success just because some people don't like what they sell. That also leads to problems the same as destroying free speech of public criticism especially since making it financially is considered part of "The American Dream".

And instead people just want to paint that in the blackest of terms.

On this very thread a supporter of Scorsese said this.

I think he has a vendetta towards marvel. I have seen directors slam marvel in the past but Scorsese cannot just seem to shut up. It's been a month and he has talked about how he dislikes marvel like 4 times, even going as far as to do an OP-ED this week. If he has his way, he will ban marvel movies.

It's not just the MCU fans taking his statements the "wrong" way. Unless you agree that the bolded is indeed his goal.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Why do they need to "do better" to appease Scorsese?

The purpose of criticism is always "do better". When a critic or someone expressing a critical opinion says something, the intent isn't that the figure being criticized will always do bad stuff forever, the hope is that maybe they will do better.

Benedict Cumberbatch, probably because he's British and comes from a society where this stuff is understood
(https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...-a9169041.html) and he agreed with Scorsese's argument and believes that they should do better.

Is MCU obligated to appease every high profile film maker with their movies or else not be worthy of existence?

Obviously a lot of people are obligated to respond that the stuff they put out "is cinema twoo" and so on.

You mention a democratic society but the USA is also a capitalistic one. Which means people should not be shamed for financial success just because some people don't like what they sell.

In practice, that's not how things have ever worked. Aesthetic arguments and ideas have nothing to do with the marketplace. The idea of "nobody should be shames for financial success just because some people don't like what they sell" has never been followed universally. If I say that Michael Bay is as good as MCU based on commercial success will MCU fans agree? The fact that Venom 2018 by Sony made a lot of money but is widely seen as a bad movie and by MCU fans especially, is another one. Joker 2019 is the biggest superhero movie ever in profit margin but a lot of people, fans of MCU and outside, don't consider it an especially good movie. Star Wars prequels being commercial successes and juggernauts, as well as The Last Jedi hasn't shut down criticism of it. Nor has Game of Thrones Season 8.

If you make fun of the DC movies, or Sony's Venom movie despite being financial successes...then you are in no position to argue against Martin Scorsese or anyone else dismissing something you like or care about. The truth is commercial success has never shut down criticism for anything.

That also leads to problems the same as destroying free speech of public criticism especially since making it financially is considered part of "The American Dream".

The American Dream is "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" which all people who are "created equal" are entitled to. The word money isn't mentioned there at all. In this case, Scorsese is arguing for the liberty of smaller films or films from other genres to appeal to the mainstream moviegoing audience rather than franchise films dominating and putting smaller films into pasture and niche places, even if the movies were intended for the big screen.

It would be one thing for a movie to be allowed screenings and then failing to get an audience for all kinds of reasons. That happens to all kinds of movies, good and bad and film-makers in that situation might feel miffed but at least they lost fair and square. It's quite another when a movie with a high profile cast and subject as Irishman, doesn't get funding from any big studio simply because they won't fund non-franchise movies (when essentially Irishman is a sure-fire Oscar movie) forcing him to go hat-in-hand to Netflix and be stuck with a short release schedule in specialty theaters before going streaming only. In this case the marketplace didn't vote out Scorsese, the system enclosed him from the get-go. And that happens to Martin Scorsese a film-maker active for sixty years who's most recent films such as The Departed, Shutter Island, Wolf of Wall Street were huge hits across the world. What would happen to smaller film-makers who don't even get that far?

On this very thread a supporter of Scorsese said this.

Not Scorsese himself in other words. Scorsese would never call for any movie ever to be banned. He has championed film-makers who are oppressed and persecuted like the Iranian film-maker Jafar Panahi among others.

I am not saying the MCU should be banned either. IN fact I like the MCU and I will admit to having seen most of 'em especially in Phase 3...but you can like something and still admit it needs to be taken down. I loved Harry Potter books growing up but I also appreciated Alan Moore's hilarious satire in his League of Extraordinary Gentlement. I like Superman I also like MAD Magazine's Superduperman spoof by Harvey Kurtzman.

[luprki]

I’m really surprised about the overreaction and hatred thrown toward Scorsese. He didn’t say anything bad about the MCU. He just explained why he doesn’t like the MCU after being asked about it. Some MCU fans have to accept, there are people who like the MCU and there are people who don’t like the MCU. That just the way it is, get over it.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I’m really surprised about the overreaction and hatred thrown toward Scorsese. He didn’t say anything bad about the MCU. He just explained why he doesn’t like the MCU after being asked about it. Some MCU fans have to accept, there are people who like the MCU and there are people who don’t like the MCU. That just the way it is, get over it.

MCU fans are no different from Zack Snyder fans, DCEU fans, Venom fans or Joker fans in this respect. MCU fans rag on those movies despite being commercial successes, but the minute someone says something against their team they use the money defense, which they don't afford or allow to the other team.

It's childish.