|
Post by paulslaugh on Mar 28, 2023 9:55:45 GMT
But Scorsese didn't say Marvel movies aren't unworthy, he says there is a place for them in the motion picture landscape, he feels there should be more diversity in the industry and the theater going experience. You just said that he didn't view it as a cinematic product that's an insult since the thousands of hours were spent by hundreds of cast and crew specifically for that purpose. Scorsese is not open to what Marvel accomplished with a multivalent, long running narrative in the first three phases. It was remarkable. That said, Marvel has lost its movie mojo and making a mockery of their achievement.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Mar 28, 2023 12:29:16 GMT
Oh it's a real degree, I'm just fully aware of how much more trouble it would've been to try and do anything to Scorsese compared to Jackson.
He should've known what kind of reaction he'd get from saying something like that. He can't be that out of touch and clueless if he was really a Master Filmmaker.
Those Trolls would be toothless if he hadn't vindicated them.
Again, take that up with the people running the Theaters. Small Indie things always get less of a release, it's the nature of the business.
It doesn't mean Scorsese is untouchable, which certain people think he is.
So he's friends with Spielberg, so he wouldn't dare do anything to antagonize him. Meaning he lacks integrity.
The way you present yourself as well as your lack of awareness, understanding, and inability to produce logically sound argument has me to believe that your claim of having a degree and practice in the field is bunk. That's a fallacy - being an acclaimed filmmaker doesn't mean you will be able to accurately predict how your comments will be interpreted by others. People didn't like what Scorsese said about Marvel movies, so he clarified in an editorial. He didn't vindicate anybody, he stated his opinion, which at the end of the day, is not a fact. And, given there were already people, as you have pointed out, that were trolling Marvel Studios releases for years before Scorsese made his statement on them it would follow that they would still be doing the act if he hadn't said a word. Not how it works these days, especially when the theater isn't independently owned. And that isn't true, I've seen independent films being played for close to two months, but that was many years ago. I am not just talking about independent films though, blockbuster cinema today generally is dominated by spectacle-driven pictures, works that have some money put into them with some star power tend to go to streaming services, when about a decade ago or so they would be released theatrically and probably could have found an even bigger audience - the remake of All Quiet on the Western Front got quite a bit of attention from the Academy Awards, imagine if it the theatrical window had not been limited and it was treated and promoted as standard blockbuster fare? And I didn't say he was. Another fallacy - Scorsese being friends with Spielberg doesn't mean he won't have it in him to criticize (speaking of, how is criticism the same as being antagonistic?) his work. Scorsese has collaborated with plenty of people over his career that have taken part of productions he didn't think highly of. Terence Winter, who wrote The Wolf of Wall Street and created Vinyl and Boardwalk Empire, had been a writer and a producer on The Sopranos, which featured cast members from Goodfellas and Casino, Scorsese didn't care for The Sopranos series. Some of the actors from the Marvel Cinematic Universe have also worked with Scorsese on film and television projects, didn't stop him from saying what he said. You've stopped talking about why it was easier to leave Scorsese rather than go after Jackson. How long did it take anyone to go after Harvey Weinstein btw? Lots of big entertainment figures who should be hounded get away with their actions for too long.
Actually, he should have thought about that. But he didn't. He should have known what he'd be saying would make a certain segment feel vindicated and act like they now had a real pillar of film-making to back them.
That's never how it worked, small Indie films never get the big releases that major studio films do. It's been big spectacle ever since Jaws, so blame Spielberg. The new All Quiet film was also a foreign movie, not a Western made one, which is a major turn-off for Western Audiences.
Then his "real cinema" statement should be treated like the bunk it is.
He wouldn't criticize another "Titan of Cinema" because he knows it would be suicide at this point, meaning he lacks integrity. Terence Winter is in no way in Spielbergs class. And given his distaste for Superhero movies he probably isn't even aware those actors were in them.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Mar 28, 2023 19:13:29 GMT
My mistake, I forgot to include "not" after "it's" in my last sentence. It's as simple as you make it. Sorry, but no not with the cineplex I have.
|
|
|
Post by Lux on Mar 28, 2023 19:22:53 GMT
It's as simple as you make it. Sorry, but no not with the cineplex I have. Hollywood are making films of all types but it's your distributor Cineplex that you need to complain to.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Mar 28, 2023 20:18:58 GMT
The way you present yourself as well as your lack of awareness, understanding, and inability to produce logically sound argument has me to believe that your claim of having a degree and practice in the field is bunk. That's a fallacy - being an acclaimed filmmaker doesn't mean you will be able to accurately predict how your comments will be interpreted by others. People didn't like what Scorsese said about Marvel movies, so he clarified in an editorial. He didn't vindicate anybody, he stated his opinion, which at the end of the day, is not a fact. And, given there were already people, as you have pointed out, that were trolling Marvel Studios releases for years before Scorsese made his statement on them it would follow that they would still be doing the act if he hadn't said a word. Not how it works these days, especially when the theater isn't independently owned. And that isn't true, I've seen independent films being played for close to two months, but that was many years ago. I am not just talking about independent films though, blockbuster cinema today generally is dominated by spectacle-driven pictures, works that have some money put into them with some star power tend to go to streaming services, when about a decade ago or so they would be released theatrically and probably could have found an even bigger audience - the remake of All Quiet on the Western Front got quite a bit of attention from the Academy Awards, imagine if it the theatrical window had not been limited and it was treated and promoted as standard blockbuster fare? And I didn't say he was. Another fallacy - Scorsese being friends with Spielberg doesn't mean he won't have it in him to criticize (speaking of, how is criticism the same as being antagonistic?) his work. Scorsese has collaborated with plenty of people over his career that have taken part of productions he didn't think highly of. Terence Winter, who wrote The Wolf of Wall Street and created Vinyl and Boardwalk Empire, had been a writer and a producer on The Sopranos, which featured cast members from Goodfellas and Casino, Scorsese didn't care for The Sopranos series. Some of the actors from the Marvel Cinematic Universe have also worked with Scorsese on film and television projects, didn't stop him from saying what he said. You've stopped talking about why it was easier to leave Scorsese rather than go after Jackson. How long did it take anyone to go after Harvey Weinstein btw? Lots of big entertainment figures who should be hounded get away with their actions for too long.
Actually, he should have thought about that. But he didn't. He should have known what he'd be saying would make a certain segment feel vindicated and act like they now had a real pillar of film-making to back them.
That's never how it worked, small Indie films never get the big releases that major studio films do. It's been big spectacle ever since Jaws, so blame Spielberg. The new All Quiet film was also a foreign movie, not a Western made one, which is a major turn-off for Western Audiences.
Then his "real cinema" statement should be treated like the bunk it is.
He wouldn't criticize another "Titan of Cinema" because he knows it would be suicide at this point, meaning he lacks integrity. Terence Winter is in no way in Spielbergs class. And given his distaste for Superhero movies he probably isn't even aware those actors were in them.
I never really talked about it to begin with, I used Jackson as an example of famous people who have gone to court and only as that, you have been trying to invalidate that example since it was first used, and nothing you have presented since then and prior (which was about media like Scorsese's films have a negative influence on people) has been either logically sound or very substantial for that matter. Every talking point you have made has been rooted in emotion than logic, you appear very upset by Scorsese not thinking that highly of media you like and seem desperate to make yourself appear in the right no matter what counterargument is made against you. You cannot accept that a John Hinckley, Jr. was already very mentally unstable long before he even saw Scorsese's Taxi Driver, because it destroys your narrative that film is solely the blame for his actions and that it is an incompetently done effort by Scorsese which should invalidate his opinions on media. You cannot accept that Hinckley, Jr. was classified as insane by medical officials and justice officials recognized his problems did not begin after first watching the film, so your rationalization is that they were too chicken to go after a person with some wealth and fame in their name. I have asked you repeatedly to explain why your opinion is more valid than those of either party and you haven't even made a singular attempt to explain why, I asked if you have any experience in either field to justify your feelings and while you have said to hold a degree in psychology and have practiced it professionally you have not expanded upon anything and are making the same illogical claims - which has me thinking you are not being sincere. In all honesty, if it only takes a person to say that they don't think Marvel Studios produces great work to produce such an attitude from you, I think you are in need of a reality check - because this attitude is so very juvenile. What's done is done, Scorsese gave his opinion, saw some people were upset, and he elaborated in an editorial, and called it a day. People can agree or disagree with him as they wish, and as you have pointed out people were trolling these movies long before Scorsese made his opinion known and if another filmmaker said something similar, they would use that to substantiate their argument. The theater close by me would say otherwise, I have seen independent works play for long durations in the past. As for foreign films being a turn-off to western audiences...Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Hero, Parasite, and Pan's Labyrinth say otherwise. RRR also did pretty good in what theatres it played in the states despite limited release. I never made the claim that Scorsese could not be called into question in any of the posts I have made in this topic, and if you think his idea of what "real cinema" is bunk then that it is your right to think so. In 1975 Steven Spielberg wasn't seen as a "Titan of Cinema", he wouldn't be seen as such till late in the 1980's and especially after he delivered two colossal successes in 1993 with Jurassic Park and Schindler's List. Your argument that someone would be afraid to criticize a person of high status in a similar field (the entertainment industry) is not substantiated. If we focus on filmmakers who have criticized the work of, the associated work of, and the ethic of one Steven Spielberg, Elizabeth Banks criticized Spielberg for a lack of female leads in the pictures he has directed, Edgar Wright (Who co-wrote Spielberg's The Adventures of Tintin) once dumped on the first three Transformers movies that Spielberg produced (Tintin and Transformers: Dark of the Moon both were released in the year 2011), and you had Terry Gilliam express this in an interview (which also included a quote by Stanley Kubrick) - And I am not sure where you have gotten the idea that Scorsese detests superhero movies, he said most of the ones he has seen have been well-made, are entertaining, and the people behind them are very talented, the subject matter is not his cup of tea.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Mar 28, 2023 20:20:23 GMT
Sorry, but no not with the cineplex I have. Hollywood are making films of all types but it's your distributor Cineplex that you need to complain to. I have already explained the situation - they are not an independent company, they are part of a chain, they don't individually decide what to play, the higher ups at the company decide based on agreement with the studios.
|
|
|
Post by Lux on Mar 28, 2023 20:43:27 GMT
Hollywood are making films of all types but it's your distributor Cineplex that you need to complain to. I have already explained the situation - they are not an independent company, they are part of a chain, they don't individually decide what to play, the higher ups at the company decide based on agreement with the studios. The variety is there.
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Mar 29, 2023 1:32:41 GMT
You've stopped talking about why it was easier to leave Scorsese rather than go after Jackson. How long did it take anyone to go after Harvey Weinstein btw? Lots of big entertainment figures who should be hounded get away with their actions for too long.
Actually, he should have thought about that. But he didn't. He should have known what he'd be saying would make a certain segment feel vindicated and act like they now had a real pillar of film-making to back them.
That's never how it worked, small Indie films never get the big releases that major studio films do. It's been big spectacle ever since Jaws, so blame Spielberg. The new All Quiet film was also a foreign movie, not a Western made one, which is a major turn-off for Western Audiences.
Then his "real cinema" statement should be treated like the bunk it is.
He wouldn't criticize another "Titan of Cinema" because he knows it would be suicide at this point, meaning he lacks integrity. Terence Winter is in no way in Spielbergs class. And given his distaste for Superhero movies he probably isn't even aware those actors were in them.
I never really talked about it to begin with, I used Jackson as an example of famous people who have gone to court and only as that, you have been trying to invalidate that example since it was first used, and nothing you have presented since then and prior (which was about media like Scorsese's films have a negative influence on people) has been either logically sound or very substantial for that matter. Every talking point you have made has been rooted in emotion than logic, you appear very upset by Scorsese not thinking that highly of media you like and seem desperate to make yourself appear in the right no matter what counterargument is made against you. You cannot accept that a John Hinckley, Jr. was already very mentally unstable long before he even saw Scorsese's Taxi Driver, because it destroys your narrative that film is solely the blame for his actions and that it is an incompetently done effort by Scorsese which should invalidate his opinions on media. You cannot accept that Hinckley, Jr. was classified as insane by medical officials and justice officials recognized his problems did not begin after first watching the film, so your rationalization is that they were too chicken to go after a person with some wealth and fame in their name. I have asked you repeatedly to explain why your opinion is more valid than those of either party and you haven't even made a singular attempt to explain why, I asked if you have any experience in either field to justify your feelings and while you have said to hold a degree in psychology and have practiced it professionally you have not expanded upon anything and are making the same illogical claims - which has me thinking you are not being sincere. In all honesty, if it only takes a person to say that they don't think Marvel Studios produces great work to produce such an attitude from you, I think you are in need of a reality check - because this attitude is so very juvenile. What's done is done, Scorsese gave his opinion, saw some people were upset, and he elaborated in an editorial, and called it a day. People can agree or disagree with him as they wish, and as you have pointed out people were trolling these movies long before Scorsese made his opinion known and if another filmmaker said something similar, they would use that to substantiate their argument. The theater close by me would say otherwise, I have seen independent works play for long durations in the past. As for foreign films being a turn-off to western audiences...Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Hero, Parasite, and Pan's Labyrinth say otherwise. RRR also did pretty good in what theatres it played in the states despite limited release. I never made the claim that Scorsese could not be called into question in any of the posts I have made in this topic, and if you think his idea of what "real cinema" is bunk then that it is your right to think so. In 1975 Steven Spielberg wasn't seen as a "Titan of Cinema", he wouldn't be seen as such till late in the 1980's and especially after he delivered two colossal successes in 1993 with Jurassic Park and Schindler's List. Your argument that someone would be afraid to criticize a person of high status in a similar field (the entertainment industry) is not substantiated. If we focus on filmmakers who have criticized the work of, the associated work of, and the ethic of one Steven Spielberg, Elizabeth Banks criticized Spielberg for a lack of female leads in the pictures he has directed, Edgar Wright (Who co-wrote Spielberg's The Adventures of Tintin) once dumped on the first three Transformers movies that Spielberg produced (Tintin and Transformers: Dark of the Moon both were released in the year 2011), and you had Terry Gilliam express this in an interview (which also included a quote by Stanley Kubrick) - And I am not sure where you have gotten the idea that Scorsese detests superhero movies, he said most of the ones he has seen have been well-made, are entertaining, and the people behind them are very talented, the subject matter is not his cup of tea. And I'm bringing up how Scorsese was more protected and even though people should have gone after him they didn't. And then I brought up how others like Harvey Weinstein took too long to be persecuted as well which means "Well no one has gone after Scorsese" isn't a valid argument.
What matters is that Taxi Driver is what pushed him over the edge. Thanks to Scorsese's incompetence with the Bickle character. You can say that "professionals" said he was nuts anyways, but it doesn't change what the final catalyst was.
It's how Scorsese's passive-aggresive temper tantrum inspired all those silenced haters to crawl back out from under their rocks that annoys me.
Yes and before the trolls were seen as the impotent fools they were. Not anymore, now they feel vindicated and that Scorsese is on their side.
In the past, times change and movie theater business attitudes change.
"Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Hero, Parasite, and Pan's Labyrinth"
None of those would do well today.
Yes but by the time Scorsese made his comments, Spielberg was a Titan of Cinema. Elizabeth Banks was forced to recant her statements, Spielberg didn't direct those movies directly, And Terry Gilliam has more courage than Scorsese does.
He said they weren't cinema, thereby insulting everyone involved in them in every way.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Mar 29, 2023 3:24:04 GMT
I never really talked about it to begin with, I used Jackson as an example of famous people who have gone to court and only as that, you have been trying to invalidate that example since it was first used, and nothing you have presented since then and prior (which was about media like Scorsese's films have a negative influence on people) has been either logically sound or very substantial for that matter. Every talking point you have made has been rooted in emotion than logic, you appear very upset by Scorsese not thinking that highly of media you like and seem desperate to make yourself appear in the right no matter what counterargument is made against you. You cannot accept that a John Hinckley, Jr. was already very mentally unstable long before he even saw Scorsese's Taxi Driver, because it destroys your narrative that film is solely the blame for his actions and that it is an incompetently done effort by Scorsese which should invalidate his opinions on media. You cannot accept that Hinckley, Jr. was classified as insane by medical officials and justice officials recognized his problems did not begin after first watching the film, so your rationalization is that they were too chicken to go after a person with some wealth and fame in their name. I have asked you repeatedly to explain why your opinion is more valid than those of either party and you haven't even made a singular attempt to explain why, I asked if you have any experience in either field to justify your feelings and while you have said to hold a degree in psychology and have practiced it professionally you have not expanded upon anything and are making the same illogical claims - which has me thinking you are not being sincere. In all honesty, if it only takes a person to say that they don't think Marvel Studios produces great work to produce such an attitude from you, I think you are in need of a reality check - because this attitude is so very juvenile. What's done is done, Scorsese gave his opinion, saw some people were upset, and he elaborated in an editorial, and called it a day. People can agree or disagree with him as they wish, and as you have pointed out people were trolling these movies long before Scorsese made his opinion known and if another filmmaker said something similar, they would use that to substantiate their argument. The theater close by me would say otherwise, I have seen independent works play for long durations in the past. As for foreign films being a turn-off to western audiences...Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Hero, Parasite, and Pan's Labyrinth say otherwise. RRR also did pretty good in what theatres it played in the states despite limited release. I never made the claim that Scorsese could not be called into question in any of the posts I have made in this topic, and if you think his idea of what "real cinema" is bunk then that it is your right to think so. In 1975 Steven Spielberg wasn't seen as a "Titan of Cinema", he wouldn't be seen as such till late in the 1980's and especially after he delivered two colossal successes in 1993 with Jurassic Park and Schindler's List. Your argument that someone would be afraid to criticize a person of high status in a similar field (the entertainment industry) is not substantiated. If we focus on filmmakers who have criticized the work of, the associated work of, and the ethic of one Steven Spielberg, Elizabeth Banks criticized Spielberg for a lack of female leads in the pictures he has directed, Edgar Wright (Who co-wrote Spielberg's The Adventures of Tintin) once dumped on the first three Transformers movies that Spielberg produced (Tintin and Transformers: Dark of the Moon both were released in the year 2011), and you had Terry Gilliam express this in an interview (which also included a quote by Stanley Kubrick) - And I am not sure where you have gotten the idea that Scorsese detests superhero movies, he said most of the ones he has seen have been well-made, are entertaining, and the people behind them are very talented, the subject matter is not his cup of tea. And I'm bringing up how Scorsese was more protected and even though people should have gone after him they didn't. And then I brought up how others like Harvey Weinstein took too long to be persecuted as well which means "Well no one has gone after Scorsese" isn't a valid argument.
What matters is that Taxi Driver is what pushed him over the edge. Thanks to Scorsese's incompetence with the Bickle character. You can say that "professionals" said he was nuts anyways, but it doesn't change what the final catalyst was.
It's how Scorsese's passive-aggresive temper tantrum inspired all those silenced haters to crawl back out from under their rocks that annoys me.
Yes and before the trolls were seen as the impotent fools they were. Not anymore, now they feel vindicated and that Scorsese is on their side.
In the past, times change and movie theater business attitudes change.
"Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Hero, Parasite, and Pan's Labyrinth"
None of those would do well today.
Yes but by the time Scorsese made his comments, Spielberg was a Titan of Cinema. Elizabeth Banks was forced to recant her statements, Spielberg didn't direct those movies directly, And Terry Gilliam has more courage than Scorsese does.
He said they weren't cinema, thereby insulting everyone involved in them in every way.
And you are doing a very bad job at it. Your arguments are based more on emotion than of logic and validity, you project insecurity and cynicism that makes it hard for you to accept reality and move on from trivial things. Because of this, I don't think you hold a degree in psychology, and I don't think you have practiced it professionally either because I am sure anyone of the education and the profession would and should be able to recognize such behavior and see it as wrong and bad for mental health. I don't think you really care about people like John Hinckley, Jr. and their mental health, I don't think you care about psychology or criminal justice, I think you only care about being seen as in the right - you want someone like a Martin Scorsese, who expressed a very harmless opinion on media you like, to be seen as bad and the same with their work. Since this conversation has largely been between you and me, I must inform you that no matter how much you attempt to do so, you're not going to change my view on Scorsese as a filmmaker and his work at the end of the day. I look at the work as is, I look at the artist and what they bring to their canvas. What Scorsese said wasn't anything close to a temper tantrum, you on the other hand are displaying such attitude. The internet trolls who live on trashing on Marvel Studios' productions are still seen as internet trolls today, so this claim is rather eyebrow raising. They only see Scorsese as being on their side because he said he doesn't consider Marvel movies, and the whole of superhero movies, as being what he thinks of as real cinema, most of them do not use anything stronger than that to support their talking points and they clearly do not want to acknowledge that Scorsese still thinks they are, of what he has seen, well-made and entertaining. I understand, I just find it unfortunate. Either or, it does not dismiss my use of them as examples to argue against your claim that foreign films do not do well with western audiences. Scorsese was asked specifically about Marvel movies; he wasn't asked about Spielberg and his work. And? Elizabeth Banks still made her statement. No, Spielberg didn't direct them, but he was pretty involved in the production process of them (To the point where he wanted his name in front of the marketing), the first installment especially as he was the one who suggested it be largely about a teenager and his car and he personally selected Michael Bay to direct the project. Feeling they aren't cinema (which is highly subjective) doesn't mean he detests them, as stated he thinks, of what ones he has seen, are perfectly fine entertainments that are well-made and with lots of talent involved, but ultimately, they are not his thing. The closest you may ever get to a Scorsese directed Marvel picture is probably The Departed as one scene has Jack Nicholson's character pick up and present a Wolverine comic book to someone. I don't think you have the right to describe how anyone involved in a Marvel Studios production has to feel in regard to Scorsese's statement, they can interpret it however they like, myself? I am a long-time comic book reader and like a solid superhero movie, and I also like Scorsese's work, I didn't feel mad or upset when he said they are not real cinema in his eyes, because cinema is subjective and he has the right to his opinion - I don't need to agree with it, but that's life.
|
|
|
Post by Lux on Mar 29, 2023 7:37:49 GMT
And I'm bringing up how Scorsese was more protected and even though people should have gone after him they didn't. And then I brought up how others like Harvey Weinstein took too long to be persecuted as well which means "Well no one has gone after Scorsese" isn't a valid argument.
What matters is that Taxi Driver is what pushed him over the edge. Thanks to Scorsese's incompetence with the Bickle character. You can say that "professionals" said he was nuts anyways, but it doesn't change what the final catalyst was.
It's how Scorsese's passive-aggresive temper tantrum inspired all those silenced haters to crawl back out from under their rocks that annoys me.
Yes and before the trolls were seen as the impotent fools they were. Not anymore, now they feel vindicated and that Scorsese is on their side.
In the past, times change and movie theater business attitudes change.
"Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Hero, Parasite, and Pan's Labyrinth"
None of those would do well today.
Yes but by the time Scorsese made his comments, Spielberg was a Titan of Cinema. Elizabeth Banks was forced to recant her statements, Spielberg didn't direct those movies directly, And Terry Gilliam has more courage than Scorsese does.
He said they weren't cinema, thereby insulting everyone involved in them in every way.
And you are doing a very bad job at it. Your arguments are based more on emotion than of logic and validity, you project insecurity and cynicism that makes it hard for you to accept reality and move on from trivial things. Because of this, I don't think you hold a degree in psychology, and I don't think you have practiced it professionally either because I am sure anyone of the education and the profession would and should be able to recognize such behavior and see it as wrong and bad for mental health. I don't think you really care about people like John Hinckley, Jr. and their mental health, I don't think you care about psychology or criminal justice, I think you only care about being seen as in the right - you want someone like a Martin Scorsese, who expressed a very harmless opinion on media you like, to be seen as bad and the same with their work. Since this conversation has largely been between you and me, I must inform you that no matter how much you attempt to do so, you're not going to change my view on Scorsese as a filmmaker and his work at the end of the day. I look at the work as is, I look at the artist and what they bring to their canvas. What Scorsese said wasn't anything close to a temper tantrum, you on the other hand are displaying such attitude. The internet trolls who live on trashing on Marvel Studios' productions are still seen as internet trolls today, so this claim is rather eyebrow raising. They only see Scorsese as being on their side because he said he doesn't consider Marvel movies, and the whole of superhero movies, as being what he thinks of as real cinema, most of them do not use anything stronger than that to support their talking points and they clearly do not want to acknowledge that Scorsese still thinks they are, of what he has seen, well-made and entertaining. I understand, I just find it unfortunate. Either or, it does not dismiss my use of them as examples to argue against your claim that foreign films do not do well with western audiences. Scorsese was asked specifically about Marvel movies; he wasn't asked about Spielberg and his work. And? Elizabeth Banks still made her statement. No, Spielberg didn't direct them, but he was pretty involved in the production process of them (To the point where he wanted his name in front of the marketing), the first installment especially as he was the one who suggested it be largely about a teenager and his car and he personally selected Michael Bay to direct the project. Feeling they aren't cinema (which is highly subjective) doesn't mean he detests them, as stated he thinks, of what ones he has seen, are perfectly fine entertainments that are well-made and with lots of talent involved, but ultimately, they are not his thing. The closest you may ever get to a Scorsese directed Marvel picture is probably The Departed as one scene has Jack Nicholson's character pick up and present a Wolverine comic book to someone. I don't think you have the right to describe how anyone involved in a Marvel Studios production has to feel in regard to Scorsese's statement, they can interpret it however they like, myself? I am a long-time comic book reader and like a solid superhero movie, and I also like Scorsese's work, I didn't feel mad or upset when he said they are not real cinema in his eyes, because cinema is subjective and he has the right to his opinion - I don't need to agree with it, but that's life. Saying that something isn't what a product is made for is an insult to those that put hard work into the product, that is his opinion and no one is arguing that but this discussion has proved that you and Martin Scorsese don't have an understanding of what you're both fighting for. You're saying there's a lack of variety in films when there's a variety of films being made instead. Scorsese also is a hypocrite because most if not all of his films are New York based with a select group of actors he never strays from thus he has also made a career out of no variety in his work. There's so many holes in Scorsese's arguments.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Mar 29, 2023 8:59:07 GMT
And you are doing a very bad job at it. Your arguments are based more on emotion than of logic and validity, you project insecurity and cynicism that makes it hard for you to accept reality and move on from trivial things. Because of this, I don't think you hold a degree in psychology, and I don't think you have practiced it professionally either because I am sure anyone of the education and the profession would and should be able to recognize such behavior and see it as wrong and bad for mental health. I don't think you really care about people like John Hinckley, Jr. and their mental health, I don't think you care about psychology or criminal justice, I think you only care about being seen as in the right - you want someone like a Martin Scorsese, who expressed a very harmless opinion on media you like, to be seen as bad and the same with their work. Since this conversation has largely been between you and me, I must inform you that no matter how much you attempt to do so, you're not going to change my view on Scorsese as a filmmaker and his work at the end of the day. I look at the work as is, I look at the artist and what they bring to their canvas. What Scorsese said wasn't anything close to a temper tantrum, you on the other hand are displaying such attitude. The internet trolls who live on trashing on Marvel Studios' productions are still seen as internet trolls today, so this claim is rather eyebrow raising. They only see Scorsese as being on their side because he said he doesn't consider Marvel movies, and the whole of superhero movies, as being what he thinks of as real cinema, most of them do not use anything stronger than that to support their talking points and they clearly do not want to acknowledge that Scorsese still thinks they are, of what he has seen, well-made and entertaining. I understand, I just find it unfortunate. Either or, it does not dismiss my use of them as examples to argue against your claim that foreign films do not do well with western audiences. Scorsese was asked specifically about Marvel movies; he wasn't asked about Spielberg and his work. And? Elizabeth Banks still made her statement. No, Spielberg didn't direct them, but he was pretty involved in the production process of them (To the point where he wanted his name in front of the marketing), the first installment especially as he was the one who suggested it be largely about a teenager and his car and he personally selected Michael Bay to direct the project. Feeling they aren't cinema (which is highly subjective) doesn't mean he detests them, as stated he thinks, of what ones he has seen, are perfectly fine entertainments that are well-made and with lots of talent involved, but ultimately, they are not his thing. The closest you may ever get to a Scorsese directed Marvel picture is probably The Departed as one scene has Jack Nicholson's character pick up and present a Wolverine comic book to someone. I don't think you have the right to describe how anyone involved in a Marvel Studios production has to feel in regard to Scorsese's statement, they can interpret it however they like, myself? I am a long-time comic book reader and like a solid superhero movie, and I also like Scorsese's work, I didn't feel mad or upset when he said they are not real cinema in his eyes, because cinema is subjective and he has the right to his opinion - I don't need to agree with it, but that's life. Saying that something isn't what a product is made for is an insult to those that put hard work into the product, that is his opinion and no one is arguing that but this discussion has proved that you and Martin Scorsese don't have an understanding of what you're both fighting for. You're saying there's a lack of variety in films when there's a variety of films being made instead. Scorsese also is a hypocrite because most if not all of his films are New York based with a select group of actors he never strays from thus he has also made a career out of no variety in his work. There's so many holes in Scorsese's arguments. Once again, Scorsese did not say the work is bad and that the people involved in such productions have no talent and are incompetent, the style of movie isn't his cup of tea and he doesn't believe it lines up with his idea of what cinema is, which is, in his own words, "of human beings trying to convey emotional, psychological experiences to another human being." (Of what films accomplish this, you would have to see the works he lists in his editorial) Do I agree that superhero movies lack that? With some yes, others I would argue do offer that, but it isn't a regular occurrence as most set out to be pure entertainment. I am not saying there is a lack of variety in films being made, I was reiterating and supporting Scorsese's argument that there isn't enough variety of film available in most movie theaters. "Most if not all"? Have you seen Silence, Shutter Island, The Last Temptation of Christ, Cape Fear, Hugo, The Aviator, or Kundun?
|
|
|
Post by Lux on Mar 29, 2023 9:17:14 GMT
Saying that something isn't what a product is made for is an insult to those that put hard work into the product, that is his opinion and no one is arguing that but this discussion has proved that you and Martin Scorsese don't have an understanding of what you're both fighting for. You're saying there's a lack of variety in films when there's a variety of films being made instead. Scorsese also is a hypocrite because most if not all of his films are New York based with a select group of actors he never strays from thus he has also made a career out of no variety in his work. There's so many holes in Scorsese's arguments. Once again, Scorsese did not say the work is bad and that the people involved in such productions have no talent and are incompetent, the style of movie isn't his cup of tea and he doesn't believe it lines up with his idea of what cinema is, which is, in his own words, "of human beings trying to convey emotional, psychological experiences to another human being." (Of what films accomplish this, you would have to see the works he lists in his editorial) Do I agree that superhero movies lack that? With some yes, others I would argue do offer that, but it isn't a regular occurrence as most set out to be pure entertainment. I am not saying there is a lack of variety in films being made, I was reiterating and supporting Scorsese's argument that there isn't enough variety of film available in most movie theaters. "Most if not all"? Have you seen Silence, Shutter Island, The Last Temptation of Christ, Cape Fear, Hugo, The Aviator, or Kundun? There isn't a lack though? Thanks for the listing of films mostly starring Leonardo DiCaprio as mentioned above he has a select group of actors he never strays from. Does he even know what conveying psychological experiences mean? Therapy sessions?
|
|
|
Post by formersamhmd on Mar 29, 2023 12:54:14 GMT
And I'm bringing up how Scorsese was more protected and even though people should have gone after him they didn't. And then I brought up how others like Harvey Weinstein took too long to be persecuted as well which means "Well no one has gone after Scorsese" isn't a valid argument.
What matters is that Taxi Driver is what pushed him over the edge. Thanks to Scorsese's incompetence with the Bickle character. You can say that "professionals" said he was nuts anyways, but it doesn't change what the final catalyst was.
It's how Scorsese's passive-aggresive temper tantrum inspired all those silenced haters to crawl back out from under their rocks that annoys me.
Yes and before the trolls were seen as the impotent fools they were. Not anymore, now they feel vindicated and that Scorsese is on their side.
In the past, times change and movie theater business attitudes change.
"Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Hero, Parasite, and Pan's Labyrinth"
None of those would do well today.
Yes but by the time Scorsese made his comments, Spielberg was a Titan of Cinema. Elizabeth Banks was forced to recant her statements, Spielberg didn't direct those movies directly, And Terry Gilliam has more courage than Scorsese does.
He said they weren't cinema, thereby insulting everyone involved in them in every way.
And you are doing a very bad job at it. Your arguments are based more on emotion than of logic and validity, you project insecurity and cynicism that makes it hard for you to accept reality and move on from trivial things. Because of this, I don't think you hold a degree in psychology, and I don't think you have practiced it professionally either because I am sure anyone of the education and the profession would and should be able to recognize such behavior and see it as wrong and bad for mental health. I don't think you really care about people like John Hinckley, Jr. and their mental health, I don't think you care about psychology or criminal justice, I think you only care about being seen as in the right - you want someone like a Martin Scorsese, who expressed a very harmless opinion on media you like, to be seen as bad and the same with their work. Since this conversation has largely been between you and me, I must inform you that no matter how much you attempt to do so, you're not going to change my view on Scorsese as a filmmaker and his work at the end of the day. I look at the work as is, I look at the artist and what they bring to their canvas. What Scorsese said wasn't anything close to a temper tantrum, you on the other hand are displaying such attitude. The internet trolls who live on trashing on Marvel Studios' productions are still seen as internet trolls today, so this claim is rather eyebrow raising. They only see Scorsese as being on their side because he said he doesn't consider Marvel movies, and the whole of superhero movies, as being what he thinks of as real cinema, most of them do not use anything stronger than that to support their talking points and they clearly do not want to acknowledge that Scorsese still thinks they are, of what he has seen, well-made and entertaining. I understand, I just find it unfortunate. Either or, it does not dismiss my use of them as examples to argue against your claim that foreign films do not do well with western audiences. Scorsese was asked specifically about Marvel movies; he wasn't asked about Spielberg and his work. And? Elizabeth Banks still made her statement. No, Spielberg didn't direct them, but he was pretty involved in the production process of them (To the point where he wanted his name in front of the marketing), the first installment especially as he was the one who suggested it be largely about a teenager and his car and he personally selected Michael Bay to direct the project. Feeling they aren't cinema (which is highly subjective) doesn't mean he detests them, as stated he thinks, of what ones he has seen, are perfectly fine entertainments that are well-made and with lots of talent involved, but ultimately, they are not his thing. The closest you may ever get to a Scorsese directed Marvel picture is probably The Departed as one scene has Jack Nicholson's character pick up and present a Wolverine comic book to someone. I don't think you have the right to describe how anyone involved in a Marvel Studios production has to feel in regard to Scorsese's statement, they can interpret it however they like, myself? I am a long-time comic book reader and like a solid superhero movie, and I also like Scorsese's work, I didn't feel mad or upset when he said they are not real cinema in his eyes, because cinema is subjective and he has the right to his opinion - I don't need to agree with it, but that's life. I'm simply pointing out Scorsese's incompetence, what it led to and how it shows he's not the infallible Titan of cinema certain people see him as.
He said that out of his disdain for how they're keeping "real cinema" from being made. Passive aggressive.
And thanks to Scorsese opening the floodgates, those trolls are now seen as having legitimacy. Before they could be written off as trolls, now no more thanks to him.
Pity.
They don't, especially not in this day and age. That's why the new All Quiet on the Western Front wouldn't get a big release here.
It shows that he doesn't have the guts to go after someone he sees as a peer. Banks was forced to recant, showing how you can't say things like that about a "Titan of Cinema" unless you have protection yourself. He still didn't direct them.
What he said has been used to try and demean the entirety of the MCU, so thanks a lot Mr Outdated Old Man.
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Mar 29, 2023 20:20:08 GMT
And you are doing a very bad job at it. Your arguments are based more on emotion than of logic and validity, you project insecurity and cynicism that makes it hard for you to accept reality and move on from trivial things. Because of this, I don't think you hold a degree in psychology, and I don't think you have practiced it professionally either because I am sure anyone of the education and the profession would and should be able to recognize such behavior and see it as wrong and bad for mental health. I don't think you really care about people like John Hinckley, Jr. and their mental health, I don't think you care about psychology or criminal justice, I think you only care about being seen as in the right - you want someone like a Martin Scorsese, who expressed a very harmless opinion on media you like, to be seen as bad and the same with their work. Since this conversation has largely been between you and me, I must inform you that no matter how much you attempt to do so, you're not going to change my view on Scorsese as a filmmaker and his work at the end of the day. I look at the work as is, I look at the artist and what they bring to their canvas. What Scorsese said wasn't anything close to a temper tantrum, you on the other hand are displaying such attitude. The internet trolls who live on trashing on Marvel Studios' productions are still seen as internet trolls today, so this claim is rather eyebrow raising. They only see Scorsese as being on their side because he said he doesn't consider Marvel movies, and the whole of superhero movies, as being what he thinks of as real cinema, most of them do not use anything stronger than that to support their talking points and they clearly do not want to acknowledge that Scorsese still thinks they are, of what he has seen, well-made and entertaining. I understand, I just find it unfortunate. Either or, it does not dismiss my use of them as examples to argue against your claim that foreign films do not do well with western audiences. Scorsese was asked specifically about Marvel movies; he wasn't asked about Spielberg and his work. And? Elizabeth Banks still made her statement. No, Spielberg didn't direct them, but he was pretty involved in the production process of them (To the point where he wanted his name in front of the marketing), the first installment especially as he was the one who suggested it be largely about a teenager and his car and he personally selected Michael Bay to direct the project. Feeling they aren't cinema (which is highly subjective) doesn't mean he detests them, as stated he thinks, of what ones he has seen, are perfectly fine entertainments that are well-made and with lots of talent involved, but ultimately, they are not his thing. The closest you may ever get to a Scorsese directed Marvel picture is probably The Departed as one scene has Jack Nicholson's character pick up and present a Wolverine comic book to someone. I don't think you have the right to describe how anyone involved in a Marvel Studios production has to feel in regard to Scorsese's statement, they can interpret it however they like, myself? I am a long-time comic book reader and like a solid superhero movie, and I also like Scorsese's work, I didn't feel mad or upset when he said they are not real cinema in his eyes, because cinema is subjective and he has the right to his opinion - I don't need to agree with it, but that's life. I'm simply pointing out Scorsese's incompetence, what it led to and how it shows he's not the infallible Titan of cinema certain people see him as.
He said that out of his disdain for how they're keeping "real cinema" from being made. Passive aggressive.
And thanks to Scorsese opening the floodgates, those trolls are now seen as having legitimacy. Before they could be written off as trolls, now no more thanks to him.
Pity.
They don't, especially not in this day and age. That's why the new All Quiet on the Western Front wouldn't get a big release here.
It shows that he doesn't have the guts to go after someone he sees as a peer. Banks was forced to recant, showing how you can't say things like that about a "Titan of Cinema" unless you have protection yourself. He still didn't direct them.
What he said has been used to try and demean the entirety of the MCU, so thanks a lot Mr Outdated Old Man.
Sorry, but I am not going to fall for your endless traps any further, formersamhmd. The way I see it, a user like Power Ranger doesn't need to request a DC-Fan to return to this website, because you have turned into exactly like him, only you're very pro Marvel Studios.
|
|