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

I think a good argument can be made that all these movie-making schemes are bland, soulless recyclings of the same ideas. It gives me some hope that audiences are not flocking to see Maleficent. I think what Scorsese is complaining about is really that studios are not taking any chances: instead, they're making endless superhero movies, huge action blockbuster sequels, and remaking old ideas we've seen before, because there's less risk in losing money on them. In other words, it's much more about business than art. It's always been more about the business at the studios, but it kind of feels like 90% business/10% art these days, which is a shame.

If enough of the remakes and superhero movies start failing, maybe this will change. And I have to say, there are occasional surprises like the current Joker movie, which has gotten rave reviews, has terrific performances, and goes to places we've never seen before. It's not really a superhero movie: I'd call it more of a psychological horror/thriller than anything else, so it's pretty far removed from the Batman and Superman saga we've seen so far. The shocker is that this relatively modest film (which cost half as much as the big movies normally cost at $70M) is going to go past $900 million gross, which I don't think anybody expected. And I would bet that Scorsese would be very reluctant to criticize anything that co-stars his good friend Robert De Niro.

 

Maybe it's because a single mid-western theatre is not representative of global box office showings and all it actually demonstrates is that you seem to be lucky enough to have a good movie theatre near you?

I'd never argue that cinemas only show superhero films, (although I'm yet to see a listing so far this year where at least one of the screens at my local isn't showing a superhero movie) but I would argue that the majority of films getting wide releases are fantasy-based fair that rely on spectacle as their chief selling point (which there's nothing wrong with) and that realist, character-driven drama (especially mid-budget, which used to make up the majority of releases) is being squeezed out. I'm not saying marvel films don't have character moments, or that they can't be well-written or engaging, but to call them either realist or character-driven drama is more than a little stretch. I think that's what the 'new wave' directors are decrying, is the loss of cinema driven by character choices rather than plot and spectacle (again I'm not saying that Marvel movies don't have character moments and don't make character choices, just that plot necessity chiefly informs the character choices rather than character choices chiefly informing the plot. Character is not the driving force of the script, the focus of most of the run time is, or the intent generally).

Here's what's showing at my local Odeon (big UK chain) in London (which tends to have a more diverse range of films than anywhere outside of the capital):-
Abominable
Farming
Gemini Man
Joker
Maleficent: Mistress Of Evil
Playmobil: The Movie
Shaun The Sheep: Farmagedon
Terminator: Dark Fate

Love or loathe the movies on this list, there's very little that can be described as character driven rather than plot driven outside of Farming and (ironically) Joker.

 

This .

 

This is all true. The crux of the debate appears to be whether one is personally okay with this.

I most certainly am. I would suspect that many people have enough "character-driven drama" in their own life and the escapism is welcomed, hence the success. Combine that with the Hollywood need to repeat success, for better and for worse, and you have the current situation.

 

I agree with you, that's the crux of it. For me, I'm not ok with it, much as I like - and often reach for - escapism, I'd like to see a more balanced offering.

Curiously as someone that's had rather a lot of drama in their personal life in the last 18-months (a father sent to prison that I no longer speak to, a wife going through early menopause when we'd been trying for our first child, a bout of pancreatitis that nearly killed me) I still like dramatic character-driven films (as well as a healthy dose of escapism and comedy), and I've always found this argument curious. Stories have always sought to illuminate life in all its forms and to transcend and help us understand (as all art does). Indeed their the way we seek to understand and shape the world, I don't see what personal drama does to change that much, in fact if anything I feel the opposite, the more drama I've had the more I've sought to understand and the deeper stuff I've been interested in. Still love me some escapism and that will always have a place, but it doesn't offer me transcendence, and it doesn't offer me hope, or understanding, or connection (it merely highlights the artifice and how unlike life it is - my own drama becoming the barrier to connection), the way someone bearing their soul does. I'd love to see both escapism and exploration represented at the cinema. I'd love to see a place for both. At the moment, though, the pendulum is too weighted toward escapism. But that will no doubt change, these things always go in cycles.

 

Arty directors in their 70s are hardly likely to be into them so why anyone is offended or surprised baffles me.

Others buy the Blu-Rays on day of release so I see them for free. If I had to pay then I think I’d just wait very happily for the ‘free’ Netflix or TV screening. I don’t think I’d even buy the DVDs (£3) or Blu-Rays (£6) at discount prices as I wouldn’t care enough. They don’t excite me. I think the Ant-Man movies are the only ones I had real anticipation for (the size thing really appeals to me and I like the overt comic tone). I can take or leave these MCU movies and it doesn’t bother me to see them years after they are released (I sat on CA2 for years before watching it). I have never watched any of them a second time. I see no reason to put them on again. To me they are efficient, competent, sometimes clever and inventive, but mostly uniformly bland. It’s not a bad blandness, but there is something very safe and homogenised about them that doesn’t let them off the leash and be truly creative.


IMO for all of them. From imperfect memory.


IM1
OK, perhaps even good, as far as I recall.


Hulk
Didn’t work. Gave up 60 minutes in.


IM2
OK.


Thor 1
Tedious, unappealing, poorly made and pompous despite being super silly.


CA1
Very tedious. Hated it. A real challenge to sit through it.


Avengers 1
Good.


IM3
I enjoyed it. Funny.


Thor 2
Skipped it.


CA2
Strong movie. Possibly has the best plot of all of them.


GOTG1
Did nothing for me. Didn’t like it. Too much CGI which sucked the human life out of it. If I watched it again I might like it more but I have no desire to do so.


Avengers 2
Above average after the awful opening that stopped me in my tracks for years before returning to it.


Ant-Man 1
Fun. Funny. Good inventive action scenes.


CA3
Strong movie but I have little recall of it now.


Dr S
Utterly tedious. Pointless. It told an origin story over 2 hours when it could have been covered in three lines of dialogue or a 1 minute pre-credits montage. Hated this piece of time wasting ****.


Spider 1
Very strong. The best film in the MCU.


GOTG2
Much better than GOTG1. Enjoyable.


Thor 3
Above average. A lot blander and not as funny as I expected.


Panther
Fairly good. Maybe overlong.


Avengers 3 IW
Indifferent. I can barely remember it.


Ant-Man 2
Not as good as the first one. Good as far as I recall but my memory is weak on it.


Cpt Marvel
I liked this. The breezy comic tone and 90s nostalgia worked for me.


Avengers 4 EG
Weird movie for a teenage audience as there was remarkably little action. Instead lots of dialogue. Long, dramatically limp and just not very engaging. It was OK but half an hour could have been cut.

 

Here's an interesting take from a really small budget indie director.

Alex Ross Perry: Why ‘Avengers: Endgame’ Deserves the Oscar for Best Picture

Also I don't seem him complaining that these huge budget comic book movies are making it harder for him to get his small indie films done.

 

And in the latest development, no less than the CEO of Walt Disney Studios, Bob Iger himself, has weighed in:

“If they want to bitch about movies, it’s certainly their right,” Iger said, as reported by The Wrap. “Are you telling me that Ryan Coogler making Black Panther is doing something that somehow or another is less than anything Marty Scorsese or Francis Ford Coppola have ever done on any one of their movies? Come on.”

Disney CEO says Scorsese and Coppola can ‘bitch about movies’ if they want

 

What else would you expect him to say?!?

 

Yes, those times.

 

well played

 

It’s kind of an obligatory statement from the head of the studio that distributed the film and made a buttload of money from it, isn’t it?

 

for sure. but his wording and the movie he picked is a killer choice if he wants to deflate an argument...

 

I'd also suggest Black Panther to this list of marvel films that may surprise. The villain / hero dynamic in that one had some surprising heft and themes there, along with plenty of references of our current social issues.

 

He did make Hugo, which I thought was a snooze. I also can't imagine Scorsese viewing Coppola's Twixt and thinking "solid cinema, will definitely revisit this film again."

 

Exactly. Both Coppola and Scorsese have made some crappy movies that they just did for a paycheck, not any deep "artistic vision" or something beyond that.

 

Which begs the question: would they call those movies "cinema?"

 

lol

Shorter Bob Iger - these comic book films are as good as Kurosawa, Antonioni and Bergman combined !!!!

Even shorter Bob Iger - Faulkner ain’t got nothing on Howard the Duck !!!!

 

No, my point is that this is what is showing at a pretty typical large theater. I'll pick a city I'm nowhere near, Columbus, Ohio. Here's what's playing at the AMC Easton 30:

1. Maleficent: Mistress of Evil
2. Joker
3. Zombieland: Double Tap
4. The Addams Family
5. Gemini Man
6. Abominable
7. Downton Abbey
8. Hustlers
9. IT Chapter Two
10. Jexi
11. Rambo: Last Blood
12. The Lion King
13. Good Boys
14. Promare

It's some heroic goal post moving to claim that I was saying that any single theater is "representative of global box office showings". I claimed that the average US theatergoer has access to a lot more films than they think and, what my point actually was and remains most of them are not actually showing "comic book" or "superhero" movies. Not one of these films at this theater fits that description, Joker only if you fold it up and insert it sideways.

 

Black Panther was middling, in spite of its accolades. I think the Dark Knight trilogy was elevated beyond the genre by Nolan, and really the Marvel films are at their best when they achieve a lighter, more humorous touch. @Bluesman Mark is holding these films up against Godfather, Raging Bull, Citizen Kane, etc. That is simply not a valid comparison--it's not even an instructive comparison because Marvel is often spoofing the traits of humanity that make those classics what they are.

I thought Hugo was worthy of Scorsese, Kingsley et al. It worked for me on many levels. The most compelling was the reveal of the Méliès character being haunted by the sound of women walking in the train station, knowing that his films had been melted down to make shoes. In their own way, each character was broken. And in their own way, each was fixed. And not surprisingly, Scorsese got great performances out of everyone, including the child actors. No easy feat. The film was also visually compelling, and Scorsese's love of Méliès and film in general shone through.

 

I thought that too when I saw Black Panther in theaters but on second viewing I thought it was much better and appreciated it's story and characters much more. I've watched Hugo twice and fought sleep both times and thought Chloe Moretz was at best, average. I haven't yet seen her most recent films but her prior work never left me with much impression about her talent. I did work with her once though and she is a consummate professional, so hats off to that.

 

I didn't even need to summon you this time!
wait....theres another Addams Family? I need to get out more

 

It's an animated one. It's pretty mediocre according to Vickie.

 

Did you see her in Let Me In, the English language remake of Let The Right One In? I thought she was excellent in that.