Page 5 of 42 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 620
  1. #61
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    3,510

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thwhtGuardian View Post
    They're still just a piece of the pie, true, it's a larger slice than before but that's due to the increasingly competitive entertainment field in which film is only one player among many. There's increasingly more demands on the audience's entertainment dollar from streaming services(and there are almost more of those every day!) the quality of TV has gone up, and video games continue to grow as well, and with that competition it means studios are under a greater pressure to perform than before which means appealing to the largest number of people they can and playing it a bit safer.

    But even with block busters taking up more of the screen there is still more than enough room for other films; it's like I said there are only so many auteur writers and directors so it's not like we'd have more of those types of films if there were less block busters.

    And yes, I think that even 15 years ago Scorsese may have been turned down by a major studio...it's not that uncommon a thing to happen even for a guy like him. There are literally dozens of films he's wanted to make only to be turned down over the years of his career so rather than being a sign of doom that he has to go to a different platform to get his project financed it should rather be seen as a great sign because that other platform exists and can fund a film that wouldn't have other wise been made.

    And auteur films really always have been a minority, that's a flat fact. Other than a very brief period from the late 60's to early 70's profit driven studio films have always been the norm and they have always chased what ever trend was hot in order to turn out the most profit possible.
    Yeah I respectively disagree on that. Scorsese was able to get films like Taxi Driver and Mean Streets made when he had very little clout as a filmmaker and they were much further outside the main stream than a mafia flick with Al Pacino, Rob Deniro, and Joe Pesci would be. Those films wouldn’t get made today under similar circumstances.

    Nobody is arguing the film industry isn’t trying to make a profit. It’s that a long time ago you would take a risk on a film like a Rocky or Godfather or even things like Karate Kid where a creator thought he had a vision for an appealing film that would captivate audiences. Now there is a definite rush to how much you can milk IP’s.

    I saw someone mention universal horror monsters as an example. But at the time most of those were risks. The first Dracula and Frankenstein were really pushing and tearing audiences and nobody knew they would take the way they did. Yeah obviously they made sequels after sure, but there was still the element of “this is new and we are testing creativity vs audience appeal”. I mean fuck would even a film like Casablanca or Sunset Boulevard which are legit mainstream classics be made today? I can’t see it under this system. So I think it goes beyond some 60’s and 70’s golden age.

  2. #62
    Mighty Member thwhtGuardian's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,596

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KNIGHT OF THE LAKE View Post
    Yeah I respectively disagree on that. Scorsese was able to get films like Taxi Driver and Mean Streets made when he had very little clout as a filmmaker and they were much further outside the main stream than a mafia flick with Al Pacino, Rob Deniro, and Joe Pesci would be. Those films wouldn’t get made today under similar circumstances.

    Nobody is arguing the film industry isn’t trying to make a profit. It’s that a long time ago you would take a risk on a film like a Rocky or Godfather or even things like Karate Kid where a creator thought he had a vision for an appealing film that would captivate audiences. Now there is a definite rush to how much you can milk IP’s.

    I saw someone mention universal horror monsters as an example. But at the time most of those were risks. The first Dracula and Frankenstein were really pushing and tearing audiences and nobody knew they would take the way they did. Yeah obviously they made sequels after sure, but there was still the element of “this is new and we are testing creativity vs audience appeal”. I mean fuck would even a film like Casablanca or Sunset Boulevard which are legit mainstream classics be made today? I can’t see it under this system. So I think it goes beyond some 60’s and 70’s golden age.
    That's your rose colored specs coloring your perception of the industry at those times though, sure there were films like Casablanca and Sunset Boulevard made but do you know how many other films came out at the time those ones did? And how many of them we don't remember today? They were still in the minority, you can't judge a period based solely on it's greatest hits and assume that was the norm.

  3. #63
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    956

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KNIGHT OF THE LAKE View Post
    Coppola still can’t get one of his passion projects going.
    I just have to address this comment. Francis Ford Coppola not being able to get a passion project going has nothing to do with Marvel/Comic Book Movies/Blockbusters and has everything to do with his own financially reckless behavior.
    For every Godfather movie he makes (where he clashed with the studio and was nearly fired) he makes a huge flop like One From The Heart. The production troubles from Apocalypse Now are legendary, resulting in a fascination documentary about everything that went wrong filming. He personally went bankrupt in the 80s by putting his own money into his passion projects. Coppola has decades of flops and huge money losers on his resume. His troubles with getting financing for his projects have been going on for years before the MCU was ever a thing.

  4. #64
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    3,510

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thwhtGuardian View Post
    That's your rose colored specs coloring your perception of the industry at those times though, sure there were films like Casablanca and Sunset Boulevard made but do you know how many other films came out at the time those ones did? And how many of them we don't remember today? They were still in the minority, you can't judge a period based solely on it's greatest hits and assume that was the norm.
    We are disagreeing on two different things. I’m not disputing other films were made or that there wasn’t an incentive to make money, I’m saying in this era there is such saturation on IP driven blockbusters that the market is prohibitive to films like those even being made in the first place.

    Again we can go back, Scorsese was able to get films made when he wasn’t a legend that were far more niche than what he struggled to do now, when he had actors who were less established and it was a real risk. But today he needed to go to Netflix and is fighting with theaters to get his film released

  5. #65
    Wrath of a God Xero Kaiser's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    589

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beaddle View Post
    Let's just say, Scorsese and his buddies can do more harm than rotten tomatoes.
    I somehow doubt that people are going to suddenly stop showing up to MCU movies or that studios and theaters are going to suddenly stop wanting billions of dollars just because a few directors (no matter how many classics they've put out) are feeling salty.

  6. #66
    Mighty Member thwhtGuardian's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,596

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KNIGHT OF THE LAKE View Post
    We are disagreeing on two different things. I’m not disputing other films were made or that there wasn’t an incentive to make money, I’m saying in this era there is such saturation on IP driven blockbusters that the market is prohibitive to films like those even being made in the first place.

    Again we can go back, Scorsese was able to get films made when he wasn’t a legend that were far more niche than what he struggled to do now, when he had actors who were less established and it was a real risk. But today he needed to go to Netflix and is fighting with theaters to get his film released
    It's not prohibitive though, at least not markedly more so than the past. Again, do you know how many pitches he's made that got turned down in the past, even after his successes? How many of his films have failed to connect? The calculus involved in which movies are financed and which aren't hasn't changed dramatically.

  7. #67
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    3,510

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thwhtGuardian View Post
    It's not prohibitive though, at least not markedly more so than the past. Again, do you know how many pitches he's made that got turned down in the past, even after his successes? How many of his films have failed to connect? The calculus involved in which movies are financed and which aren't hasn't changed dramatically.
    You can look at his filmography to see how many failed to connect. It’s not a lot

  8. #68
    Fantastic Member Jon-El's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    447

    Default

    I think Scorsese & Coppola are incorrectly expressing their displeasure. I get they don’t enjoy the super hero movies. They made their names in an era when studios weren’t really aiming for a monster audience. The idea of making a movie appealing to virtually everyone just wasn’t a prevailing thought. It had been like that in the 50’s & 60’s but after a series of expensive flops, studios saw the value in letting a director craft a film with a specific vision rather than targeting the widest audience. That’s where you get something like “Easy Rider”. It wouldn’t appeal to grandma & grandpa but it spoke to a certain age group and made money. It wasn’t really until “Jaws” that studios starting the trend of the summer popcorn films that would appeal to everyone.

    To say Marvel films aren’t art however is absurd. The original “King Kong” from 1933 is art. “Star Wars” is art. “Shaft” is art. I think his problem is that yearly lists of top grossing films are dominated by super heroes or some type of animation. It’s not occasionally but just about every year. It’s surprising that a different type of film doesn’t crack the top 10 occasionally. Maybe they do and I just am not aware. I live in a smaller town so our selection isn’t the best. I love all these films but sometimes I even go “geez another comic book movie?” I get these guys don’t enjoy the movies but to trash them is just silly.

    Look at the actors. I’m sure they enjoy working on the Marvel movies but I’d think some get tired of acting against a blue screen all the time.
    Last edited by Jon-El; 11-06-2019 at 10:00 AM.

  9. #69
    Fantastic Member luprki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    441

    Default

    “They are sequels in name but they are remakes in spirit”
    Martin Scorsese
    In other words: they are the same movie with the same plot and the same tired formula.

  10. #70
    BANNED Midvillian1322's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    7,905

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luprki View Post
    “They are sequels in name but they are remakes in spirit”
    Martin Scorsese
    In other words: they are the same movie with the same plot and the same tired formula.
    Except he said himself he hasnt seen the movies. So iono why were talking about it. He was asked about Marvel movies but is upset with big franchises in general. But people want to make things line up with they're views

  11. #71
    Extraordinary Member Kirby101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    9,484

    Default

    And I suppose comic books can't be literature either?
    There came a time when the Old Gods died! The Brave died with the Cunning! The Noble perished locked in battle with unleashed Evil! It was the last day for them! An ancient era was passing in fiery holocaust!

  12. #72
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,796

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Midvillian1322 View Post
    Except he said himself he hasnt seen the movies. So iono why were talking about it. He was asked about Marvel movies but is upset with big franchises in general. But people want to make things line up with they're views
    Seems to be a prevailing trend among the MCU bashers. They haven't really watched the movies but atleast Scorsese is being honest about not having watched them. Unlike some other ppl….

  13. #73
    Astonishing Member Joker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    3,643

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirby101 View Post
    And I suppose comic books can't be literature either?
    Name the last comic book you read that you genuinely would tout as literature and state why.

    I can't do it...

  14. #74
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,796

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KNIGHT OF THE LAKE View Post
    Casino was a just as good follow up, at worst slightly inferior. Gang’s of New York and Aviator we’re we’re totally different things. Wolf of Wall Street was unique and one of the best comedy style films in recent memory. The Departed, whole not my favorite film, was one of the best at what it did and was ballsier than 99% of films that come out.

    Cape Fear came out right after Goodfellas.

    Can’t really agree with that statement. I’m also leaving out a lot.
    I saw 4 of those movies listed except Aviator and Wallstreet and they weren't unexpected nor did they feel new . That didn't take away from their appeal to me or lessen them. So I'm not sure where he's going with this. Departed had some truths in it but still at the end of the day it was derivative and a remake of another film. So yeah he's kinda putting his foot in his mouth with these criticisms.

  15. #75
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,796

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beaddle View Post
    if you want a scorsese Netflix fight, tell scorsese to take a dig at Spielberg but Spielberg is also one of his buddies, who thinks comic movies will fade into trash cans. these directors may have differences but superhero films are like a common enemy now.
    The thing is there's nothing they can do about tho. There criticisms and dislike of these movies aren't going to stop ppl from seeing them or studios from producing them.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •