Martin Scorsese Compares Marvel Movies to Theme Parks, That's Not Cinema.

https://variety.com/2019/film/news/martin-scorsese-marvel-theme-parks-1203360075/

An excerpt:

In an interview with Empire magazine, Martin Scorsese gave the Marvel Cinematic Universe the cold shoulder, comparing the billion-dollar franchise to theme parks.

“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.”

His comments on superhero movies incited responses from other filmmakers like James Gunn and Joss Whedon, as well as some comic-book personalities. Whedon, a frequent collaborator in the MCU, responded to Scorsese’s comments by highlighting the work of “Guardians of the Galaxy” director Gunn.

Gunn also spoke out on Twitter, saying, “I was outraged when people picketed ‘The Last Temptation of Christ’ without having seen the film. I’m saddened that he’s now judging my films in the same way.” He added, “That said, I will always love Scorsese, be grateful for his contributions to cinema, and can’t wait to see ‘The Irishman.’”

Martin Scorsese taking a shot at the MCU? I must be in heaven. He is right, MCU is pretty much (from what I have seen, maybe Guardians 1 being an exception) junk food. And I love junk food! I pretty much have never felt invested in any of the characters. They do stuff, I see them, but I don't really much to what happen to them.

Nothing interesting happens and when it does, like Thanos snapping his fingers, you can't care about that either because you know they will never let it stand.

So what say you OT? Scorsese is being a snob or is he speaking da' truth?

what he said is kinda pretentious but I definitely agree with him.

Marvel movies (and most superhero movies in general) are pretty lame and throw-away as entertainment goes. its like the movie equivalent of Call of Duty

He's right. I've already sworn off superhero movies, and I barely watched any to begin with. They're so lame and shallow and have probably been put ahead of so many more interesting scripts. I'll still probably watch the Batman movies, because he's the only one I've ever given much of a damn about. This doesn't include those anthology movies. I'm not watching Joker or any other side character movie. Oh, and Scorsese is more talented than most of these directors put together.

Anything that pisses off the Twitter mob is alright in my book.

Scorsese is an adherent if the auteur theory of cinema, wherein the director is the author of the work. Under that thinking, although cinema is highly collaborative, it is the director’s vision and reflects the director’s tastes, personality, artistic views, etc.

It may be to him that the MCU flicks aren’t very reflective of their individual directors. Yeah, there’s some slight flourishes here and there, and there are different directors, but let’s be honest. Blind taste test: if you didn’t know that those flicks were directed by different people, would you really be able to tell that they were? How? A Scorsese film feels like a Scorsese film. Same with other auteur adherents. Del Toro feels distinctively Del Toro. Tarantino the same. Spielberg. Kubrick. Hitchcock. They all “feel” different because each carries a very different sensibility.

Who is the auteur of the MCU movies? Individually, they (mostly) all have a similar if not the same formula (albeit an extremely successful one). The direction, cinematography, shot selection, music, design all feels similar if not outright the same. So the authors are not the folks working day to day on the flicks as the usual credited creatives. No, the closest thing to an auteur for MCU flicks in Kevin Feige. And he’s the producer, The “money man," The “suit” guy. To someone like Scorsese, that is likely inherently indicative of a product being pushed, not a vision. Commerce rather than art.

I like the MCU but in some ways, he does have a point. I will agree with him that most (but not all) of the MCU is depthless, mindless popcorn entertainment that prioritizes making their audience chuckle, and pandering to the widest audience possible instead of telling a good story.

Well I won't say he is right, but he is not wrong.

The Marvel movies don't really offer anything other than a good time. The great movies always do something significant; pose questions, criticize or motivate society, bring attention to things, and above all else educate the mind.

The Marvel movies are just entertainment. The acting is never great, merely decent enough. They don't really contribute anything to the arts (and, as movies, they are part of the arts).

He's not wrong. I mean they are okay action popcorn movies but really have no depth.

I agree. I don't think any of the Marvel films have blown my mind sort of thing.

I think plenty of movies fall into the 'theme park' area. They're still fun to watch but they all follow the same formula and arc. Does it make them shallower by comparison to other films? Sure, he's not wrong there.

They're still fun to watch though.

If anyone has a leg to stand on with issuing criticism it's him.

I disagree. I dont think any Marvel movies were great but they sure are entertaining to watch.

I don't agree with him. It's shitty cinema but it's still cinema.

Art and movies have many different layers and taste, he just sounds like a bitter old man who can't stand that his genre of film isnt making billions. That's not to say all comic book movies are good, bit its also not saying all his movies are good or ones like his.

You totally missed the point of his comments.

I see where he's coming from. Marvel (and most superhero) movies in general don't offer much other than pure spectacle and entertainment. But they're still "cinema", quality or not.

Much like when Spielberg said the superhero genre will go the way of the western - I don't think these "criticisms" are necessarily a bad thing.

To say the superhero genre will go the way of the western means the genre must live up to a major chapter in cinema. Superheroes are destined to go that route forever having its place in cinema history.

Now Martin Scorsese is right. Marvel movies are entertainment first and foremost. Marvel movies have never been around to make artistic statements. Marvel movies have been around under the ambition of creating a shared universe of action heroes going on big Earthly and intergalactic adventures, and having soap opera sensibilities in the mix.

Martin Scorsese is a true living legend in cinema, and he has long-proven to be an auteur in the craft. Calling them like theme park attractions is not really a bad thing. The Matrix is a theme park attraction and so is Inception. They also happen to be great films.

At the end of the day I don't see Scorsese passing off superhero movies as a bad thing, he is just labeling them for what they are; in-fact, in the same interview he said they are very well-made films and the actors do a fantastic job at what they're doing.

To have such prolific and legendary filmmakers acknowledge these comic book films at all is saying quite something.

in his mind, by his definition of "cinema" it may not be.

how does he define "cinema" in the first place??

have we agreed on a universal definition of the term?

Good question. I jut finished watching a film on Shutter focusing on black horror and unless you watch the genre there are so many pieces of cinema unfamiliar to you. If you focus strictly on the status quo, you miss a lot of good product.

His definition of cinema is the kind that he paved alongside the generations of filmmakers that inspired him before his time.

What Marvel is doing is something wholly new and to much of these old-timer guys, it's a concept of filmmaking that's hard to grasp.

It's kinda unfortunate some of these old-timer legends just don't get the modern age of cinema; but hey, not every prolific director is taking the Marvel universe negatively.

Quentin Tarantino is a couple generations ahead of Scorsese but he has become one of the legendary director's of this time as well. While Marvel has nothing to do with Tarantino's style, Tarantino has gone on record numerous times saying how he's a fan of the MCU and how he's binged watched their movies.

If only Scorsese can be more like Tarantino and understand that not every form of cinema has to be like yours to be justifiable.

Eh that's a simplistic view. There are differences in genres. That's like saying all music is the same when there are big differences. Movies and Cinema are different genres of film to break it down to an easy way to differentiate them. Marvel is big noisy popcorn movies where film exists that are slow studies of character. Not the same. I think he's just pointing out a difference. Obviously he prefers the latter not the former. That doesn't mean you can't enjoy the superficial Marvel approach to cookie cutter movies. Just don't expect much depth. I would hope not all film makers are going to create marvel style movies. That would suck. I like deeper movies.

@LJS9502_basic: That's exactly the point I am saying: There are differences in genres, there are differences in style, there are differences in ambition and there are differences in quality - and yet it is all cinema.

Neither you nor Scorsese have a say in whether or not Marvel movies are cinema, because that is an objectively false statement and no matter what kind of cinematic profile Scorsese has, that is a false statement.

The quality and approach of these movies can be argued but regardless these arguments don't change a simple fact.

One thing Scorsese admitted in this very interview is "I don't see them" so that right there shows he's about to send off a short-sighted opinion that even he had to disclaim he's not the most informed.

With all due respect towards Scorsese - because he is among the best living directors - his opinions are not always right. This is one among the latter.

Hardly any filmmakers are making shared-universe movies to begin with, and the ones that are not Marvel that attempted shared-universe have been met with abysmal results.

See your argument is coming down to semantics. He's using cinema a specific way and you want him to use it your way. As I said use cinema and movie as two different styles and it might make sense to you.

Marvel is a loud action movie that unfortunately has started to rely on too many jokes to take the movies seriously. See the last Thor for an example. They use the exact same formula for their movies. He's more interested in the art of movies and deeper character studies. One can enjoy any movie they want but not all movies offer the same deep dive in the story.

Marvel has a simple plot. The good has to triumph over the bad with fights etc and many jokes. I like superhero movies. I go to Marvel. But their movies aren't the pinnacle of what film making can be and I haven't left one of their movies musing about a higher concept.

Scorsese likes a different style of movie. He calls it cinema...think more artsy perhaps. Those movies tend to make you think about them. And no I don't mean an action piece or fight. But about concepts and ideas.

As for shared universe DC animation did that long ago. And their live action TV. I liked their recent movies where they tried to create a shared universe but because they weren't Marvel it didn't work out for them. Well I wasn't really impressed with Suicide Squad. I guess what I'm trying to say here is if you hold Marvel up as what cinema should be then you miss what else is offered because you want to compare them.

His opinion is not right to you. Several people in this thread have agreed with him. So if you're saying he can't have an opinion then why do you get to have the opposite opinion and expect us to take it as fact? It's not.

I think we are headed towards a world where we are unable to communicate with each other because no one can agree on what words mean now.

In English: film, cinema, motion picture, movie can be used interchangeably.

He either really wants to argue semantics, or he is salty that a basic action flick gets more attention than his movies in certain demographics.

Either way it sounds like a stupid thing for a person to say. MCU stuff is objectively cinema by the English definition.

I should point out I'd much rather watch something from Scorsese than something from the MCU.

Actually, I understand perfectly well where you are coming from.

You are being a separatist right now over your taste (or Scorsese) of film over ones you do not like. I get it, but here's a newsflash: cinema and movies all boil down to the same thing.

I used to think that way too...Separate a film from a movie...eventually I realized how pretentious that was and it's all the same thing.

The MCU is a part of modern cinema. It's not really a place for you or Scorsese to take out of the books just because you don't like the franchise.

Case and point: the rest of your post boils down to your opinions on why you don't like the MCU - and that is fine - but that does not negate the fact the MCU is a part of modern cinema.

He kinda has a point... I'm beyond sick of these "superhero" movies. Haven't watched one in years.

@hrt_rulz01: He kinda has a point... I'm beyond sick of these "superhero" movies. Haven't watched one in years. They're all the same.

@jaydan: You might want to actually read my posts before arguing.

While I can enjoy a Big Mac just as much as eating at a five star restaurant, one is cuisine, and one isn’t. He’s right.

@speeny: Exactly, that's just what I want to say

@hrt_rulz01: A lot are the same, but some are really different or unique. And we (should) be getting even more variety in phase 4 of the MCU, horror themed movies like the new Doctor Strange and a host of other (possibly) unique movies crossing genres.

Oh I did read your whole post - but there comes a point where there's nothing more to say over the substance of the other points you're making as nothing more than a matter of opinion.

People can have opinions all they want, but when it comes to having an opinion over objective manners - well - the objectivity will rule over your subjective opinion.

Cinema and film are not even the same thing. Cinema is a PLACE that houses film, and film is the product that keeps the doors of that cinema open. The only reason why they're being grouped together is by association of one another, and yet they're not the same thing.

You don't need to try to educate me on cinema. I am very well educated. Remember FAU back in the day on this site? I used to be one of the admins on that union. I've watched endless cinema off all shapes and sizes from every era. I have studied film in school and I have worked in film as well.

My knowledge and appreciation of ALL types of film is not belittled just because I also happen to accept the MCU as a part of cinema.

It is not a genre - it is a place that houses movies.

Yes and you seem to think YOUR opinion is the only one that matters.

It's not about an opinion anymore.

You are trying to justify film and cinema are the same thing. They are not. One is a place and one is a thing.

Objectively, that is incorrect. Cinema is not a genre. Try looking on any movie platform (like Netflix) and go to the genres and look on the genre tab "cinema"; actually, it does not exist.

Just because you have a prolific director - and quite frankly, among my favorite director's - voicing an opinion, does not suddenly make it a fact.

I think you are struggling between the subjective and objective voice here even though you're saying I'm struggling to accept an opinion. I am wholeheartedly accepting your opinion (an Scorsese) - I am just telling you it is factually incorrect. Just because you have an opinion does not make it true.

In your opinion, the world can be flat. That does not mean it is true, and just because I would tell you "the world is not flat" does not mean I am struggling to accept your opinion - I am telling you objectively your opinion is wrong.

What he said makes sense, especially coming from him. He's an artist. People who blow this non issue out of proportion are fucking annoying.

"Nuh uh, those movies ARE cinema. Scorcese is a dumb-dumb!"

This kind of shit makes me embarrassed to be the same race. The size of this story is only due to mankind recently making earth into a new whiny and ignorant little bitch planet where everyone are suddenly offended by everything.

If any film maker is offended by this, it's probably because they know Scorcese has a point and are afraid of that point and that people might agree with it, and wants to defend themself against it as they see it as a threat to their already huge money pile.

Well said.

I think it depends on your perspective. There are many people that look down their nose at genres they are not familiar with. Lots of people think that sci fi movies are crap or shallow, I like a little of everything. I've found some marvel movies to be great and captivating and others to be mediocre. Like most movies.

It’s concerning how big Disney is getting

I think cinema encompasses a wide variety of things. He's focusing on superhero movies (because of their recent success), but there have always been movies that focus on more entertainment than deep character study. Most of the best performing movies tend to be on the more shallow side - Avatar, Titanic, Star Wars, any Stallone or Arnold action movie, the entire slate of rom-coms, etc. But so what? It's not like directors haven't been making movies that provoke deeper thought or reflection as well.

Some movies make you think or try to understand what they are about, others are designed to invoke strong emotions, some are simply designed for escapism and joy. After a long week and stressful week at work, sometimes I like to watch captain america take down a world killing madmen or see Batman beat the crap out of a psychopath. Other times, i feel like something more profoudn. Nothing wrong with that.

And that right there is pretty much the sum of all cinema through its entire history, and I have perfect reason to believe the Marvel Cinematic Universe is the pure definition of escapism and joy for the fans on board with its entire scheme. The MCU is escapism and joy to the tee.

Escapism and joy is what brought Hollywood into the golden age back in the Depression era - that's something for you pretentious movie "historians"/"appreciators" to consider, and the MCU lives to the very practice that's been prominent in cinema in its best eras that even predate Scorsese.

This post above me that I have quoted gets it ^^^

You guys are entitled to opinions and if the MCU really isn't your thing that's fine, no arguments there - but opinions no matter how high that opinion comes from (Scorsese), still does not de-merit the mark the MCU has left in cinema history in modern years.

And yes, the MCU still is cinema. Cinema is cinema. It's not a genre, it is a place. Don't try to argue that cinema is some sort of genre Scorsese was referring to, it is not one.

As a cinema fan I embrace cinema from the past, present and future - and that is something some movie fans here are lacking.