David Cronenberg says some stupid things about superhero movies

[TinkerTailor]

Originally Posted by Steyin

I can't begin to argue how wrong and ignorant this quote is.

I actually think that's a beautifully accurate way to describe comics. He also states that comics can lend themselves to cinematic adaptations through characters/stories etc. I really don't see what's wrong with that quote.

It's so poetic.

Originally Posted by ultimatefan

He sounds jealous and bitter cuz he knows TDKR is gonna stomp all over his new movie at the box office. and it´s not being praised as supreme cinema art either. He should be reminded on how much of his clout to get movies made in the first place came from blowing up heads and making Jeff Goldblum decompose himself into a giant fly.

This quote on the other hand...
Yeah... The Fly was just about Jeff Goldblum turning into a fly. Just like TDK was just about a guy dressed up like a clown.

Originally Posted by Motown Marvel

i dont think his comments are anything more than him giving an answer to a question he was asked. you might not like what cronenberg has to say, but he's not the type of dude who is cheap enough to say things like this for subversive reasons. he's not doing this for attention, since the only limited attention it could ever garner is negative reaction from internet fan boys on stupid message boards. and theres nothing advantageous for him to garner such attention. it has nothing to do with box office returns either. cronenberg is well aware of his films' place in the general public.

as for casting pattinson: he took a teeny bopper star and put him in a movie that requires him to get a rectal exam in the back seat of a limo. imagine all the twilight girls who are going to this movie to unexpectedly endure watching that and tell me yer not amused.

Well said.

[chintai80]

Originally Posted by Motown Marvel

i dont think his comments are anything more than him giving an answer to a question he was asked. you might not like what cronenberg has to say, but he's not the type of dude who is cheap enough to say things like this for subversive reasons. he's not doing this for attention, since the only limited attention it could ever garner is negative reaction from internet fan boys on stupid message boards. and theres nothing advantageous for him to garner such attention. it has nothing to do with box office returns either. cronenberg is well aware of his films' place in the general public.

as for casting pattinson: he took a teeny bopper star and put him in a movie that requires him to get a rectal exam in the back seat of a limo. imagine all the twilight girls who are going to this movie to unexpectedly endure watching that and tell me yer not amused.

i wanted to see cosmopolis. but now you've made me want to watch it even more now. haha

[ultimatefan]

Originally Posted by TinkerTailor

I actually think that's a beautifully accurate way to describe comics. He also states that comics can lend themselves to cinematic adaptations through characters/stories etc. I really don't see what's wrong with that quote.

It's so poetic.



This quote on the other hand...
Yeah... The Fly was just about Jeff Goldblum turning into a fly. Just like TDK was just about a guy dressed up like a clown.



Well said.

I didn´t say that. What I meant is Cronenberg was being prejudiced about a genre that tends to get unfair backlash, while he himself worked on the horror/sci-fi genres that also tend to get prejudiced, unfair backlash, and built much of his career out of it. If someone had said those things about Scanners or The Fly, he would probably have considered them elitist snobs.

And that wasn´t well said at all. He could have simply said something like, "I know some people love these movies, but they´re just not my cup of tea", which would have been an honest answer without being inflammatory. It was clearly intended as a jab. You say what you want, be prepared to hear what you don´t.

[Baneis8feettall]

Super hero movies gets all the money and popularity and if they get critical acclaim then there will be nothing for directors like Cronenberg. It's very natural, very human to be bitter about it."Kids stuff" was their argument for big budget movies and we all know Nolan destroyed it with TDK & TDKR.

Superhero movies are a part of fantasy genre. (I don't like "superhero movie or comic book movie" term.. Do we say "novel movie" or "animal movie" for Jurassic Park or Jaws?)

[Agent Orange]

Yeah, I think it's wrong to pigeon hole films into specific sub-genres. Where does it stop?

[BatLobsterRises]

When a movie is as popular as The Dark Knight series has been, for all the right reasons, it's probably not a good idea to infer that the audience is overrating it and don't know what the **** they're talking about...when chances are, you're addressing some of your own fans and audience as well.

[chintai80]

also, in regards to batman, i think he's become more than just a comic book character a long time ago. batman is now a pop culture icon.
you can even say he might be a major figure in literature - almost in the same league as robin hood or zorro. so batman movies, stories, etc are a legit art form. maybe not the high-brow stuff. but it's not kid stuff either.

[BatLobsterRises]

Originally Posted by chintai80

also, in regards to batman, i think he's become more than just a comic book character a long time ago. batman is now a pop culture icon.
you can even say he might be a major figure in literature - almost in the same league as robin hood or zorro. so batman movies, stories, etc are a legit art form. maybe not the high-brow stuff. but it's not kid stuff either.

Yup. If you want to say Batman disposable entertainment, it's basically saying anything involving an action hero is disposable. A notion that isn't going to sit well with most people.

[TheVileOne]

Unfortunately the only kids comics these days are like Shounen Jump manga.

Cronenberg fails to realize kids aren't really reading comics anymore.

But to denigrate material like that is lame to me. Harry Potter books are children's book. Generally aimed at young readers and adolescents and pre-teens. Yet Adults also read and love them and find it compelling. Doesn't mean it's bad.

I mean to some of these things there is an embracing of your inner-child and sometimes that is a good thing!

[Killgrave]

I thought I would bump this thread back up, as Cronenberg seem to clarify and give us more of his thought's on comic book movies...

"No, I haven't seen [The Dark Knight Rises]," Cronenberg told The Playlist, when asked what it was that prompted his anti-superhero rant. "See, this is how it all gets distorted. The question was asked, to me. And, of course, when they quote me, they never quote themselves or the question that provoked the response. "I was asked, then the journalist woman said, 'By the way, superhero comic book movies have shown to rise to the highest level of cinematic art – would you be interested in doing one?' And I said, 'Wait, who said they have risen to the highest level of cinematic art?' That's when I started my little rant. I was really responding to that. She proposed that about the new Batman movies. I had seen the one before this [The Dark Knight], not the new one, and I think at that time only journalists had seen it. So I wasn't talking specifically about that movie and I wasn't criticizing it directly."

Cronenberg then went on to enlighten us about why superhero movies are so childish: "What I was saying was that a comic book movie is really a comic book movie. Comic books were -- especially those comic books which I was raised on (I loved Captain Marvel) -- created for adolescents and they have a core that is adolescent. To me, that limits the discourse of your movie if you're basing it accurately on that, and you cannot rise to the highest level of cinematic art. That's my take on it. I went on to say that, of course, technically they can be incredibly interesting, since there are very clever people making the movie and of course have a lot of money they are throwing at it. But creatively, artistically, they are incredibly limited. It got bent out of shape that I was dissing Christopher Nolan, which just wasn't the case."

Link

[TheVileOne]

Sounds like backtracking to me.

[Schlosser85]

I hate that kind of condescension toward comic book movies.

Movies should be judged on their own merits, not based on what genre they're in.

[AnneFan]

Originally Posted by Schlosser85

Movies should be judged on their own merits, not based on what genre they're in.

Full agreement.

[TheGuy]

Originally Posted by Schlosser85

I hate that kind of condescension toward comic book movies.

Movies should be judged on their own merits, not based on what genre they're in.

Agreed entirely.

[Tequilla]

Originally Posted by Schlosser85

I hate that kind of condescension toward comic book movies.

Movies should be judged on their own merits, not based on what genre they're in.

You're right....but he's also right. The genre itself has through time and many iterations shown that its anything but cinematic art (whatever this means). Most superhero movies are trashy as hell. Whether we like them or not. That's why some directors where Nolan is included , got so many accolades by changing the perception we have of the genre. But we just need to look at this year , that nothing is going to change. Superhero movies will continue to be simple entertainment vehicles , director-less efforts ...and there's absolutely nothing wrong in that. Maybe what's wrong is some people actually treating these movies as the so called" cinematic art".That is being as biased , as anyone who trashes any movie because of the genre itself.

[TheVileOne]

Superman and Batman back in the day basically changed the perception that these movies can be something more than trashy b movies or TV shows. They can be big event cinematic adventures.

X-Men sort of brought it all back to the forefront after the failure of Batman and Robin. And then you had Spider-Man which was gigantic.

But those proved you could have legit critically acclaimed directors working on these flicks instead of these inexperienced amateur dudes whose names you never heard of. Now you had the guy who did Usual Suspects and Apt Pupil doing a comic book superhero movie.

Whether you consider the Nolan Batman movies cinematic high art or whatever is debatable, but I think if you look at the high points of comic book superhero movies the biggest success stories were not just crowd pleasers but they also were very well reviewed by critics as well. Case in point: X-Men 2, Iron Man, Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2, The Dark Knight, The Avengers.

I think ultimately what one views though as high art is subjective though and open to opinion and interpretation.

[The Englishman]

Cronenberg directed A History of Violence. He movies based on a graphic novel that certainly is not for kids. I don't understand his comnent. If he didn't like Nolans Bat-Films hen that's fine but to just dismiss the entire genre is ridiculas.

[Killgrave]

Originally Posted by TheVileOne

I think ultimately what one views though as high art is subjective though and open to opinion and interpretation.

Yeah, pretty much this.

[Motown Marvel]

Originally Posted by Schlosser85

Movies should be judged on their own merits, not based on what genre they're in.

I agree. And I think most everyone is plenty cool enough to view the films beyond their pigeon holed genre. But first that would require the film makers to not pander to comic book movie formulas and convention. And that's rarely been the case with comic book movies.