"In other news, Bitter Old Director refuses to admit a superhero film has merit;making this reporter pity Mr. Scott. Read a good comic book, ya daft bastard!"
Ridley Scott Thinks Current Cinema is Bad, Hates Superhero Movies
- Thread starter Marter
- Start date
Given his rather narrow minded generalizations it's clear he hasn't actually WATCHED many superhero movies.
Pulp fiction is boring and pretentious. Jackie Brown is just a bit boring. Kill Bill is ghastly. Death Proof is ghastly. Inglourious Basterds is pathetically stupid. Django Unchained is a bit silly and a bit boring. Hateful Eight is back to the dizzy heights of merely being boring, although the cinematography is good. He's a great talent constantly held back by his own addiction to garbage cinema.kordo said:
The biggest fault of today's... and honestly, western in general... action movies is that their fight scenes are a cut-fest extravaganca. That's why I enjoy Matrix, even Reloaded and Revolutions at least for the action.
If they would keep themselves from cutting to another angle with every move, those action scenes and fight scenes would gain much more impact. Then the movie would gain more seriousness. Then more people would take them seriously.
I'm dead serious about this; those cuts make or break a movie for a lot of people. Makes them seemingly more violent, too, though, since even though the choreography is supposedly the same, the impact is of another dimension.
If they would keep themselves from cutting to another angle with every move, those action scenes and fight scenes would gain much more impact. Then the movie would gain more seriousness. Then more people would take them seriously.
I'm dead serious about this; those cuts make or break a movie for a lot of people. Makes them seemingly more violent, too, though, since even though the choreography is supposedly the same, the impact is of another dimension.
Ridley Scott is a pretty good director. But he is not the God of cinema. In addition to his better flicks most of which are decades ago he laid a few rotten eggs. Anything that was even remotely "historical" ranged from passable (Gladiator) to out and out horrible (Kingdom of Heaven).
The thing that gets me right now is everyone crapping on superhero movies as if they are some kind of new virus to inflict on cinema. Anybody who has ever watched an 80s era action flick knows that this is not a new thing. but no one really talked down on them then as if they were some kind of scourge on culture. People either liked them and watched them or didn't. They didn't act as if they were the end of the world or even culture. Scott seems to be whining a bit about not getting any work. He can fix that by not making expensive bombs.
The thing that gets me right now is everyone crapping on superhero movies as if they are some kind of new virus to inflict on cinema. Anybody who has ever watched an 80s era action flick knows that this is not a new thing. but no one really talked down on them then as if they were some kind of scourge on culture. People either liked them and watched them or didn't. They didn't act as if they were the end of the world or even culture. Scott seems to be whining a bit about not getting any work. He can fix that by not making expensive bombs.
Objection! [https://i.ytimg.com/vi/W8QRExBfQhs/hqdefault.jpg]CaptainMarvelous said:
Mad Max, the original, wasn't silly at all (well, not intentionally); nor was Road Warrior, except maybe when it came to characters' costumes (and the names of the gangs under Humungus' control).
Can't really argue that it became silly, though, starting with Thunderdome and falling into straight self-parody territory with that 2015... thing.
Ok.. So I guess I have to resign myself to the fact that I'm the only human being on God's green earth to have actually liked A Good Year. The movie wasn't so much about the unfolding story, to me, as much as it was about the atmosphere, and having watched it while kicking back, lounging at the comfort of my home, as opposed to a cinema, I found it to be pretty fulfilling, but I digress..
As someone who personally dislikes superhero movies, I still understand their charm, and the fact that they're, despite their mass appeal, still not for everyone. They are pure entertainment without any conceit of depth, as far as I can tell, and intended to just give you a good time and nothing else. So when you're not getting that from them, then its solely subjective, and it's because of your preferences, not because of how bad they're bad _ though some of them are objectively bad, but that's another discussion.
But yeah, his statement is rather disappointing, despite the fact that I can, somewhat, relate where he's coming from.
the highest percentage of Major releases has became commercialized, with massive budgets being squandered on average or less movies. However, is that something new? Also can't just go about and decry the entirety of the industry and ignore the mass of its output.
There's good stuff out there, from indie movies to the great stuff that slip through the corporate seam, and I think rather than just claiming that ALL HAS BEGONE, a healthier activity is to try and point people in the direction of the quality content and let them decide for themselves, and not to mandate your own opinion on them.
As someone who personally dislikes superhero movies, I still understand their charm, and the fact that they're, despite their mass appeal, still not for everyone. They are pure entertainment without any conceit of depth, as far as I can tell, and intended to just give you a good time and nothing else. So when you're not getting that from them, then its solely subjective, and it's because of your preferences, not because of how bad they're bad _ though some of them are objectively bad, but that's another discussion.
But yeah, his statement is rather disappointing, despite the fact that I can, somewhat, relate where he's coming from.
the highest percentage of Major releases has became commercialized, with massive budgets being squandered on average or less movies. However, is that something new? Also can't just go about and decry the entirety of the industry and ignore the mass of its output.
There's good stuff out there, from indie movies to the great stuff that slip through the corporate seam, and I think rather than just claiming that ALL HAS BEGONE, a healthier activity is to try and point people in the direction of the quality content and let them decide for themselves, and not to mandate your own opinion on them.
It started pretty well. No such much animosity, but just saying it wasn't his thing. He had some points about how someone may not like a particular genre, and it is natural for people not to be into every genre there is... until we get to:
Yeah, sorry, that is when you crossed into "old man screaming in his porch" territory, and no longer can take you seriously (and I am one of the people that things Batman v Superman is one of the worst movies of last year). Your record is not so flawed that you can make such a claim, and even it if was, it is one thing to comment in a genre in general, it is another to claim you can do it so much better than the people involved. One is possibly him being out of touch, the other one reeks of ego...RJ 17 said:
>Old director hates everything new.
>Everything you like is garbage.
I wish these discussions would take different turns than this...
>Everything you like is garbage.
I wish these discussions would take different turns than this...
I admit that there are good superhero movies, but I agree there's a bit too many of them. We do need more original content in cinema and stop relying on what was original last century. Which is precisely what Scott is doing by banging on the Alien franchise drum. Sometimes you've just got to let it rest and move on and actually think of new ideas for cinema and stop relying on what people came up with 30 odd years ago.
And yes, I know its because studios are risk adverse and know an established franchise is more likely to make money in the cinema because even if its crap you can still rely on fans to go and see it. That understanding though doesn't change the problem that there's a frustrating lack of big budget original films.
And yes, I know its because studios are risk adverse and know an established franchise is more likely to make money in the cinema because even if its crap you can still rely on fans to go and see it. That understanding though doesn't change the problem that there's a frustrating lack of big budget original films.
Obligatory snark: "Thin like the scientist who opens her helmet on an alien world just because the atmosphere is breathable- whose father, we later learn, DIED OF EBOLA?!!!"
But, more seriously: he's entitled to his opinion. As far as cinema goes, more so than most. I happen to disagree; I think as far as pop-culture goes, Marvel's superhero offerings have been better than most.
But, more seriously: he's entitled to his opinion. As far as cinema goes, more so than most. I happen to disagree; I think as far as pop-culture goes, Marvel's superhero offerings have been better than most.
So basically, he's pre-emptively assigning blame for the failure of his film. Classy, real Classy Riddley.
Couldn't agree more. I feel like many western movies have been moving away from this so when I saw the shaky cam and aggressive cuts used in the latest Bourne movie it was extra awful to watch. After seeing movies like The Raid and John Wick where you're actually allowed to see the choreography it's hard to go back. Hell, take any Eastern martial arts movie and you feel everything while you're watching it.Naldan said: