In the first ten minutes of Gangs of New York, he says “Look at this big fight scene! It’s cinema!”
The running theme in Stark’s characterisation is that he backslides, like an addict.
The creepy slow-zoom when he’s explaining how to make lamb chops was probably the best gag in the movie.
A thematic motif can be objectively measured? What? And I’m not sure why you’re fixated on trying to impose objectivity into art critcism. I can’t imagine anything more pointless. “Sally Smith has directed 13 movies and they always have turtles in them,” would be an objective, measurable truth, but I doubt that…
I mean, if that’s all you think about after seeing the movie, that’s down to how you watched it. But for me, ‘The Winter Soldier’ engages with the themes of the compromises we make in desperate times (drawing the analogy between Project Paperclip and SHIELD hellicarriers) and the consequence of turning living,…
Yes. And it wasn’t even as grand as being the favorite. It was being valued at all. Her constant and increasingly desperate efforts to please her father, when she absolutely never will because he despises her for wanting to please him, is just incredibly sad.
“Literature” and “cinema” are arbitrary terms that have no definitive criteria. I have no interest in arguing them here. But they’re both books.
By that virtue, I can boil a Scorsese movie down to “man becomes embroiled in a situation that increasingly escalates to an illegal situation and ultimately experiences a downfall.”
When you say “the day will never be saved by someone not super”, that actually leaves you open to being wrong NUMEROUS times. Like, is Black Widow or Hawkeye a super? If you’re saying yes, you’re already on shaky ground, claiming that people who are merely very talented and highly trained are now supers. Ignoring all…
Nebula never struck me as a typical “strong female” character at all. She’s got a strong demeanor at times, but she’s pathetically eager to please her father and sister in a constant effort to impress that she will never actually achieve. The moment when she shoots her other self because she knows that, at that stage…
Scorsese’s films are popular art. They’re a commercial product. He’s making distinctions within popular art, saying the balance between art and commerce is different in superhero movies.
I think the fact that he does see them as soulless, money grabs sort of shows that he hasn’t seen them. I’m not a huge Marvel fan, and I get that they may not be high art, but at least the MCU movies have had a different sensibility about each of them. They differ in tone and style. Yes, there are “dictated” elements…
Who said anything about “challenging”?? Since when is that an indication of quality for a movie?
This is a stupid argument and Scorsese is being a jerk by using it. It’s especially annoying that he goes the “hey, ain’t a damn thing wrong if you like the thing I just said is unworthy of its own medium, you go do you” route.
Also I’d like to point out that Tony Stark sacrificing himself is pretty much the most “earned” moment in the MCU, as you have to look at his arc over the entire franchise.
All movies are emotionally manipulative. What sort of movie tries to not elicit a response?
We ALL understand what he’s saying and the point he’s making. It’s just not a useful point because it’s an old-ass argument that predates cinema/movies. High art/popular art. Big deal. He doesn’t bring anything new to the table and is more dismissive than he should be given his admission about Hitchcock being the MCU…
I’ll take a crack at it. There are three major problems with his argument:
Nebula is a better character than Travis Bickle