The Civil War Thread Was In The Amazon With My Mom Researching Spiders Right Before She Died

I get Scorsese's view but since superhero films have helped theaters to remain relevant, and by extension other types of films that aren't as widely appealing, he does seem to miss a bit of the entire picture. I don't think there are any fewer chances for filmmakers to make other kinds of film and in general we've just gotten more of everything as time has gone by (the Covid effect of course changing that, but for entirely different reasons).

People have different opinions though and while I don't know if it's a common criticism in the US I've heard quite a bit of complaints about Hollywood remaking foreign films that already are really good, which Scorsese of course has been part of. That's a case where the shoe sort of goes on the other foot so it's all about opinion.
Marty back at it again :o

If I'm reading it right, he literally never says "comic book movies." So once again I don't know why some are bothered by this.
I get clickbait isn't new, but people really need to read.
Scorsese is often cast as a retrograde defender of how things used to be, in part because of his work with the Film Foundation, a nonprofit he helped found and which has since preserved and restored hundreds of films, but it’s not exactly that simple. He believes that movie theaters are not dying, precisely. “I think there will always be theatrical, because people want to experience this thing together,” Scorsese said. “But at the same time, the theaters have to step up to make them places where people will want to go and enjoy themselves or want to go and see something that moves them.”
Here I suggested to Scorsese that the movie theaters could show only the films that Hollywood actually made, and therein might lie the problem—that if Hollywood makes nothing but comic book and franchise movies, and certain segments of the audience don’t want to see those films, then nothing is going to get them to a movie theater. I feel bad about having done this, since Scorsese’s skeptical comments about Marvel and comic book films in the past have attracted a lot of vitriol, and…here I am, inviting more vitriol for Martin Scorsese. Please complain to me and not him.
But he does see trouble in the glut of franchise and comic book entertainment that currently makes up much of what you can see in a theater. “The danger there is what it’s doing to our culture,” Scorsese said. “Because there are going to be generations now that think movies are only those—that’s what movies are.”
I think people already think that.
They already think that. Which means that we have to then fight back stronger. And it’s got to come from the grassroots level. It’s gotta come from the filmmakers themselves. And you’ll have, you know, the Safdie brothers, and you’ll have Chris Nolan, you know what I mean? And hit ’em from all sides. Hit ’em from all sides, and don’t give up. Let’s see what you got. Go out there and do it. Go reinvent. Don’t complain about it. But it’s true, because we’ve got to save cinema.” Cinema could be anything, Scorsese said; it didn’t just have to be serious. Some Like It Hot—that was cinema, for instance. But: “I do think that the manufactured content isn’t really cinema.”

Again, you don’t need to say this.

“No, I don’t want to say it. But what I mean is that, it’s manufactured content. It’s almost like AI making a film. And that doesn’t mean that you don’t have incredible directors and special effects people doing beautiful artwork. But what does it mean? What do these films, what will it give you? Aside from a kind of consummation of something and then eliminating it from your mind, your whole body, you know? So what is it giving you?”

The art of movie-making, Scorsese says, is in need of filmmakers who want to save it. “Go out there and do it. Go reinvent. Don’t complain about it.”
He is not a Luddite or a technophobe. He is as excited about Avatar: The Way of Water, about 3D and IMAX and formal and technological experimentation as anyone else. “I’m looking forward to new ways,” he said. “It’s just, I got as far as this. And that’s what I do. That’s it. And if I could just muster up the energy, God willing, to make a couple more, one more maybe, and that’s it, okay? That’s as far as I got. You keep going until you can’t. But what I mean is that you gotta rip it out of your skull and your guts. To find out what the hell you really…what do you really feel should be said at this point in life by you? You gotta say something with a movie. Otherwise, what’s the point of making it? You’ve got to be saying something.”

He literally praises the artwork of SFX/CGI. He's not saying "cinema" has to be serious. He's looking forward (or was looking forward to) Avatar 2. And he's not wrong that there is a growing group of people who act like the only movies are blockbusters and franchise films. At least from what I've seen. Look at this site or r/movies and r/boxoffice alone. And he's not wrong look at the movies studios are giving wide releases to. Big budget blockbusters, blockbuster horror...and then indies. As he says, clear as crystal in the article (which is a good profile GQ does good ones) he's against manufactured content.

Really this seems like a nothing burger and I'm not sure if people are that sensitive or if people are that obtuse about what he's saying
Last edited:

J.J. Abrams: What if we drop hints that Damien wasn't really Bruce's son. What if he was a clone of Ra's Al Ghul and Bruce Wayne's DNA. :o
J.J. Abrams: What if we drop hints that Damien wasn't really Bruce's son. What if he was a clone of Ra's Al Ghul and Bruce Wayne's DNA. :o
We'll make him feel better by injecting him with a sample of Bane's blood.
This Scorsese debate again? I could not care less! Scorsese makes amazing films. I love his work. I'm allowed to also enjoy superhero movies. I don't care if he hates them or thinks they're ruining cinema. This entire debate is an excuse to make 1000 online YT vids and think pieces for cheap clicks. It's noise. None of it matters
For me it's more that he keeps whining about it long after he made his point the first time. Marty, we get it. No one is arguing. Looking at the box office returns this summer and seeing a biopic about Robert Oppenheimer outgrossed a Spider-Man movie and a Guardians of the Galaxy movie clearly shows that people are at least somewhat getting tired of superhero movies.
Scorsese isn't just talking about superhero movies. He's talking about blockbuster tentpoles in general. And he's 100% right. How many people skip smaller films, comedies, character driven dramas, etc. in favor of waiting until their home release? It's crushing that market, leading to few and few films being made for theater.

Consider how studios are talking about "content" these days and their homogenizing around franchises. Look at the dreck some of these people are willing to say, like that dude at Warner Discovery who wants to charge more, while they vault material because it isn't driving enough engagement.

Oppenheimer isn't a good response to what Scorsese is saying, because it's a one off from a director who himself, is a franchise. Look at the rest of the top 25. The only other non-franchise/tentpole, is Sound of Freedom aka the cult movie. It's not great. At all.
I think its undeniable we are suffering from a glut of tentpole blockbuster movies. And yes it is getting tiresome. It used to be you had your one or two summer event blockbusters that EVERYBODY flocked to: your Jurassic Parks, ID4, Armageddon, Phantom Menace, Con Air, Terminator 2 etc. They were the movie events of those years but now theres just so many of this ilk its not as special anymore and like Darth says it does cause the smaller releases to get swallowed whole.

I dont know how, but i would love to return to that kind of business model where smaller mid sized films can have their floorspace throughout the year and then you have 2-3 big summer event movies that everyone flocks to. But…i dont think that genie will ever be put back in the bottle. These studios now literally depend on these tentpoles to keep their studios afloat financially.
Last edited:
I mean, there is a way. You do what Disney did. Buy a competitor and essentially kills it's blockbuster business. Its not a great option, but really, that is how you slow it down. By monopoly.
What Hollywood puts out won't change until consumer buying habits do. So sure, I want more comedies and variety and stuff. But unless people go see those movies in amounts that matter, nothing will change regardless how much people complain about it. So want change? Convince friends and family to see more movies so they make money.
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Latest member
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"