Martin Scorsese Compares Marvel Superhero Films to "Theme Park Rides"

I wonder other directors consider Kenneth Branagh to be...or what he considers himself to be?

 

I watch movies to be entertained. If I want facts a good documentary will suffice.

 

i'll watch a superhero flick now and then for mindless entertainment.

but i prefer heavier fare. it's just the way i'm wired.

 

I always liked Ebert’s approach. Even if I didn’t always agree with him, I like that he took every film he did seriously. He once said he could give a better score to an action film than a drama as the action was better at what it tried to be.

 

As far as my overall thoughts:
First off, I have immense respect for Martin Scorsese as a director and for work in film preservation and the like. I also have no problem with him not being a fan of superhero/comic book films. That’s his right and his opinion.

That being said, I do think it was kind of crappy to sort of trivialize the work of others as they work just as hard as he does to make their movies the best it can be. And as others mentioned, some of his films aren’t exactly high art either, so that’s kind of pot calling the kettle black. I also think with him and a couple others, that these films seem to get much more backing and interest is kind of aggravating as well compared to his smaller scaled dramas and the like.

My thoughts on movies and the like. Genre is an abstract concept and fairly absurd when you get down to it, as any different style can be bent and stretched the way the storyteller desires. And while film, like any medium, can be used to tackle any kind of theme or concept, and can work on an intellectual level, it first and foremost needs to work on an emotional level. If a film uses brilliant technique and the like, great, but in the end, does the film speak to you? If it does, then the film is a success. If it doesn’t, then it failed.

Ultimately, both the more artistic films and the more mainstream fare have their place and I think it’s good to have a bit of both in your palette.

 

This. Emotional engagement too, but I definitely don’t have an escapist mentality.

The constant juggernaut of superhero films does little for me, and I consider myself to be fairly catholic in my cinematic tastes. I love world, arthouse, and classic cinema, but I’m always willing to give interesting modern films a go also. The superhero thing has become an industry within an industry. If it were the odd couple, like when I was a kid with the Superman films, then I could handle it, but it’s all the time now. I listen to colleagues at work and it’s all they go on about, all day, every day. A little diversity wouldn’t go amiss.

Christopher Nolan is a director who has done interesting work within the Hollywood mainstream. His Dark Knight Trilogy was emotionally engaging, but he has also made a number of other great films in other genres. That’s the kind of diversity I’d like to see more of, but Hollywood doesn’t like to take risks. When they have a cash cow, they continue to carve it up until all that is left is to steam the remains from the carcass. We can’t be far from that stage now with the superhero thing.

Scorsese isn’t perfect, and he’s made plenty of missteps, but he always aims to make interesting, diverse pictures that engage the audience emotionally. So, on balance, I have to side with Team Marty on this one.

 

You know it’s becomes abundantly clear that his statements have caused many of us to evaluate and reconsider what films are to us. Us as the general public, or as creators.

Looking back at simple animations in arcades, cranked by hand, to silent pictures flashing emotion. Then those experiences began to speak to us.

We’re all drawn to them in one way or another, and often we wonder why. What is it that draws us in? That sits us down for however long. That makes us ask our friends, “did you see that?”

It’s magic.

 

I can't comment because I didn't see the film. I've mostly avoided comic book films, but with them being essentially free during the MoviePass Madness I went to see a number of them. None left me moved. For a moment I thought "Wonder Woman" was heading in an interesting direction, but she quickly went on a remorseless killing spree that took all the nuance out of the character that the first part of film had ironically worked hard to establish. Comparing something like "Wonder Woman" to something like "Amour" is exactly (to me) like comparing a comic book to a great novel. More power to ya if you enjoy comic books, even as an occasional diversion. I just don't.

 

Oddly, what I enjoy about MCU is that the films seem to know they're comic book movies -- theme park rides. I'm surprised the creators would take Scorsese's comments as hurtful.

I hated the two Christopher Nolan Batman movies I watched because they clearly thought they were art, when they just Mexican wrestler pics with extremely large budgets.

 

I agree with Scorsese's view on superhero films ;however, I'm not sure that is a bad thing. Some people just want to see a fun movie, and that's what these films provide.

 

Just like script driven films, some good, some bad. I would say that‘s similar to super hero films MCU whatever, some good, some bad. Sad that he didn’t enjoy Endgame or Ragnarok. I don’t think the director‘s been relevant since the nineties myself.

 

I was in tears for Endgame (and I mean floods of 'em)... all five times I saw it... seriously!!! Who would have thought a movie about people in weird outfits with funny names fighting a big purple alien would be so profoundly moving... but it was... the wife even turned to me and asked "are you alright?" at one of the showings, and she's the emotional one in the marriage!!!

Was that film a mere "theme park" ride? I don't consider it so, but that's just, like, my opinion... man. There's quite a few comic-book movies that have strong characters, substantial storylines, and real heart to them, made by world-class filmmakers (in front and behind the camera), that can compete on an artistic level with any arthouse or 'prestige' release. I would posit Zack Snyder's Watchmen as one of the best films of the last decade, comic-book or otherwise... was that a theme park ride???

I think, in all fairness, Marty is expressing an opinion widely-held among many cineastes that comic-book movies have become so overwhelmingly dominant in the current industry, so all-pervasive and prevalent that the studios are almost loathe to really get behind a project that doesn't have a protagonist in a cape, cowl, or weird costume with an equally weird nom de guerre.

He's not wrong about that, and I too am sick to the back teeth of comic-book movies - I still dig the MCU but I think Endgame is my exit point with that world - and theoretically there's more than enough room in cinema for both a Big Mac and a filet mignon, but it's fascinating the immediate reaction from some over what was merely a personal opinion from probably the best American director of the last half-century... a lot of geeks and basement-dwellers are having foaming palpitations right now.

When Bill Shatner infamously said "get a life" to some fanboys all those years ago (was it genuine or a skit? I can't remember), who would have thought The Shat would be so prescient?

#TeamMarty .

 

Marvel Phase Five thread ?

 

It's a pretty baffling comment coming from Scorcese, who has championed genre films like Winchester 73 and Tomb of Ligea throughout his career, not to mention the fact that he got started working for Roger Corman, one of the kings of exploitation. Super hero movies can be used to tell all different kinds of stories and I think the Marvel films have gone out of their way to prove that. Just because Marty uses 'real life' gangsters instead of men in tights to tell his stories of interpersonal conflict and the lust for power doesn't necessarily make his films more prestigious or relatable. Gangsters are just his super heroes.

 

In the first Iron Man film, after being rescued from being abducted, Billionaire Tony Stark's first wish is not to have a fine 8-course meal, but a cheeseburger. In Endgame, after she's attended her father's funeral, Stark's daughter Morgan is promised all the cheeseburgers she want. You nailed it Sir, Marvel movies are like cheeseburgers and yes, I can enjoy a fine meal but I'll admit really loving cheeseburgers (especially at The Shake Shack).

I confess being amongst the few who thinks The King of Comedy is one of Marty's bests. Fine he prefers his Ma's cooking to cheeseburgers, that's his right.

 

I'd like to see his spin on Daredevil - if he can keep the ninjas out if it.

 

it wouldn't matter one bit (also, see any grammy ever given for music)

 

“I don’t see them. I tried, you know? But that’s not cinema,” Scorsese told Empire magazine. “Honestly, the closest I can think of them, as well made as they are, with actors doing the best they can under the circumstances, is theme parks. It isn’t the cinema of human beings trying to convey emotional, psychological experiences to another human being.”


He nails it. This is why I responded to JOKER. Wow. Real human emotions on the screen. What a treat.

 

Maybe, but at least the Avengers producers can say to Scorsese, “Hey Marty, you know how you feel right now? There’s your emotional, psychological experience!”

 

You know what he shoulda said, after that statement?.......

 

Take the beginning of Guardians of the Galaxy for example. Is it really "fun" to see a boy lose his mother to cancer in the opening moments of the film, being too scared to connect with her in what were her final seconds of life, realizing his mistake and rushing out into the night? Does anyone not see the ensuing abduction by aliens and fanciful adventure taking place after that as an escape from the horrors real life can throw at us? Will the protagonist overcome his failure that defines and haunts him? Is this not a legitimate arc used in less original ways by countless films that Scorsese might consider high art?

MCU films actually can take more resources and discipline to write, direct and produce. As for formulaic, Scorsese delivers yet another gangster film featuring De Niro, Pesci, Pacino, Keitel. If someone doesn't like the superhero genre, that's understandable--just as it's understandable if someone doesn't like New York crime dramas or foreign films. But preferring the latter doesn't make you an intellectual or a patron of the arts. It could just as easily mean you're a bit elitist and close-minded.

Reading between the lines, I think Scorsese cracked his calzone trying to get studio support and funding for Irishman, and resents that it ended up on Netflix rather than a more established movie studio. He sees the budgets and box office returns that Avengers command, and he is understandably a little resentful. He should just be honest about that and avoid these unfortunate blanket statements.

 

Several caveats here, so bear with me.

First one is that Scorsese is likely my favorite working director. There's not a movie of his I've seen that I didn't love, & I own more of his films on physical media than I do any other director. Though he champions many genre films & has dipped his toe in the pool more than once, he's more than a genre director. That's just one facet of his many directoral talents.

Next, the last superhero movie I've seen was The Dark Knight Rises, & that was seven years ago. I have less than zero interest in anything in the MCU, the endless sequels, reboots, et al. I loved the Nolan Batman trilogy, & felt it sufficed perfectly for the character, & again I have less than zero interest in their continuing storylines. As to the MCU flicks, I loved the first two Raimi Spiderman movies, & felt the third was overstuffed. I liked Iron Man, but found Iron Man 2 average at best, & stopped keeping up with the MCU after that. And I still read the occasional graphic novel, so it's not a dislike of the genre as a whole, but of the genre as films. For the most they simply don't work for me or appeal to me. Better left on the printed page in my opinion.

Now, with all that, sometimes I do love a good popcorn/cheeseburger movie. 007, the Mission Impossible franchise & other action films are among my favorites. I also love horror movies, but more the "classics" than a lot of what passes for horror movies these days. Violence doesn't bother me in the least in movies. The super hero films may tug at one's emotions, but I've found when they do, usually it's in the broadest & most obvious way possible, without subtlety. Since everything in them is bigger & louder, obviously the emotional segments have to be played that way, in order to be noticed.

With all that said, I agree with him on several levels. The whole MCU franchise has gone beyond interminable, & other than a mild interest in the Joker, I care not for the DC films either. I feel like the entire superhero film genre is beginning to collapse under it's own weight, & for me that can happen none too soon. When we can return to a better balance of films other than the endless super hero "theme park ride" flicks & the equally endless animated "kiddie ride" sequels, (it's sad & telling that Pixar has developed few new ideas, but has also coasted on endless sequels of late), we all benefit as filmgoers. There's a place for such films in the universe of course, but they have dominated, (& in my case, bored me, & I mean the entire conceit of their existence), for too long.

 

Excellent point.

I'll definitely see The Irishman, but I don't expect that it will be groundbreaking.

A famous director no longer being able to get financing for his projects has nothing to do with the popularity of Superhero films - Orson Welles had the same problem, and what was to blame in his case? Did Superhero films cause the studio to take final cut away from Sergio Lenoe on Once Upon A Time In America?

 

He is correct, without a doubt. Obviously though, there is no reason to feel put upon or defensive if one enjoys circus movies. it's entertainment. Perhaps what is a bit perplexing to him and many of us is the sheer volume of those movies these days and the relative scarcity of meaningful Cinema.