I feel for the guy. His last two films not starring DiCaprio have both flopped. He couldn't get his new film financed anywhere and it ended up at Netflix, and he's just upset. It's an unfortunate situation for him, but it has nothing to do with Marvel.
Eastwood films still do very well at box office, sometimes superbly so. QT films have been very successful. It's not like there is no room left for anyone else.
You want studios to stop making movies for teenagers and big fandoms, the way they want them? Sorry but that's not going to happen.
The way I see it, if Marvel movies are “lesser cinema” and, in less kind words, meant for dumb mainstream audiences, then even if those films were gone, if the entire section of the industry dedicated for making money off of comic book fandoms and people looking for cheap thrills was suddenly gone, those people still wouldn’t be your target audience. People wouldn’t suddenly drop Avengers for the Irishman.
And yeah, I actually think it’s extremely unfair that mainstream media has eaten up the majority of space in cinemas and for some people, there are less and less options to go out and see a more diverse selection of films in theaters. I very much am in support of the theater experience (even if I think of streaming services as ultimately more beneficial than damaging). Ultimately however, it’s not some evil studio who decides what needs to be made. It’s the people who show what they want.
I don't entirely agree. Studios train audiences to desire their product. It isn't a vacuum. I think it was James Gray who said when you feed people cheeseburgers every other week, they're going to expect cheeseburgers. If one week you try to show them sushi, being so accustomed to cheeseburgers, it'll be too weird and strange a flavor to their palette. It's the same with movies.
Scorsese isn't wrong. What I think he isn't mentioning is that, of course, cinema has always been this way. It was initially divided back in the early 20th century as "Cinema of Attractions" and "Narrative Cinema," with the former being many movies from Georges Méliès, a Train Coming into the Station, Travelogue films, slapstick comedy and so on. As movies progressed, these two "sides" became integrated, but obviously some movies lean more one way than the other. The subjects and styles have changed, but not the basic dichotomy between these two aspects of movies.
I am utterly unsurprised Scorsese dislikes Marvel, which oppose every element of cinematic expression he prizes. I am also utterly unsurprised filmmakers are openly irritated it's way harder to get movies made in a climate where studios continue pumping out franchises with increasingly little authorship or cinematic expression.
Even though I think Captain America saying assemble was awesome, I kinda agree with Scorsese. Disvel seems like a fucking giant compared to other options. A massive, big chinned, purple giant.
I don't entirely agree. Studios train audiences to desire their product. It isn't a vacuum. I think it was James Gray who said when you feed people cheeseburgers every other week, they're going to expect cheeseburgers. If one week you try to show them sushi, being so accustomed to cheeseburgers, it'll be too weird and strange a flavor to their palette. It's the same with movies.
Scorsese isn't wrong. What I think he isn't mentioning is that, of course, cinema has always been this way. It was initially divided back in the early 20th century as "Cinema of Attractions" and "Narrative Cinema," with the former being many movies from Georges Méliès, a Train Coming into the Station, Travelogue films, slapstick comedy and so on. As movies progressed, these two "sides" became integrated, but obviously some movies lean more one way than the other. The subjects and styles have changed, but not the basic dichotomy between these two aspects of movies.
I am utterly unsurprised Scorsese dislikes Marvel, which oppose every element of cinematic expression he prizes. I am also utterly unsurprised filmmakers are openly irritated it's way harder to get movies made in a climate where studios continue pumping out franchises with increasingly little authorship or cinematic expression.
-Vader
I completely agree with this. As for Tarantino, remember the whole TFA/Hateful Eight shenanigan I mean lol
I do think it's a pity people tend to disapprove of Scorsese's point just because, some people even mentioned something along the lines of 'yeah well it's successful and we won' or something idk but anyway, that's not the point.
I don't entirely agree. Studios train audiences to desire their product. It isn't a vacuum. I think it was James Gray who said when you feed people cheeseburgers every other week, they're going to expect cheeseburgers. If one week you try to show them sushi, being so accustomed to cheeseburgers, it'll be too weird and strange a flavor to their palette. It's the same with movies.
Scorsese isn't wrong. What I think he isn't mentioning is that, of course, cinema has always been this way. It was initially divided back in the early 20th century as "Cinema of Attractions" and "Narrative Cinema," with the former being many movies from Georges Méliès, a Train Coming into the Station, Travelogue films, slapstick comedy and so on. As movies progressed, these two "sides" became integrated, but obviously some movies lean more one way than the other. The subjects and styles have changed, but not the basic dichotomy between these two aspects of movies.
I am utterly unsurprised Scorsese dislikes Marvel, which oppose every element of cinematic expression he prizes. I am also utterly unsurprised filmmakers are openly irritated it's way harder to get movies made in a climate where studios continue pumping out franchises with increasingly little authorship or cinematic expression.
-Vader
There might be something to it but it's mostly not conscious on the studio's part. If studios realized they could make Marvel money with The Irishman, they'd be releasing Irishmen every weekend. Studios don't have an agenda on what movies they want audiences to see, their only agenda is to make the most money possible. And there's really nothing wrong with that by the way. It's show BUSINESS after all.
Now you could argue that Star Wars, Marvel, Pixar, Disney and DC are favored because of the extra merchandising revenue they can provide. But even when they diversify these big studio movies, they prefer to show action and horror and not drama or comedy because that's what people currently want. I'm sure this will change but not because the studio will start the trend but rather the audience will get organically tired of the same movies and will want something different. And that's when dramas, family films and comedies will become more popular while horrors and traditional superhero movies will become tiresome. But it will be dictated by audiences and not mandated by studios because that's not possible. The studios will simply react to what the audiences are getting tired off and what the successful films of the time will be.
The MCU fans may not like it but Martin Scorsese gets to have his opinion and it's not even controversial to say that the MCU is a giant, obnoxious commercial for itself and itself only. It's kept alive not by any artistic need to tell a story but because it makes the big bucks for the giant billion dollar company that is Disney.
