Martin Scorsese on the state of the affairs / Art @ the service of box office numbers

[LordoftheRings]

Movies / Business & Art

▪︎ https://movieweb.com/martin-scorsese...ffice-results/

I agree, movie art in Hollywood is dead; it's all about $$$ the cash register, the "job".
Art has nothing to do with business; that's why it's rare as diamonds in the rust.

What do you think, what sez you? ...About the state of movie business vs cinema art form.
Do you need a 4K TV or a 3D front projector to appreciate cinema art?

Did you see 'Blonde' on Netflix, and if yes what do you think of the cinematography, of the art, of the images, of the music, of the acting, of the direction, of everything in it and beyond?

[Poya]

You think he's a bit miffed that Shark Tale was more profitable than the majority of his flicks?

[Hindustani]

Scorsese is not really thinking "thru and thru" If I may.........

I have said this before and I'll say it again.

Cinema is dying not only because of emphasis on fantasy rather than content....this is only a part of a big picture.

Cinema is also dying because everything went "DIGITAL" including that 4K Hard Disk that shows up in digital projection room every friday these days.

You can display "This theatre is DTS X Theatre" or "Dolby Theatre" all you want.....If end-to-end production line is all digital, audience are liable to develop so called DIGITAL FATIGUE.

My point is.....If I can watch Digitally shot, digitally encoded, digitally decoded 4K feature length film on my home theatre.....what is the point of going to cinema to see the exact same thing on bigger screen which is considerably more expensive for a couple.

I am also getting Dolby Atmos at home theatre that I do not get at majority of non-Dolby Cinemas.

Where is the DEAL BREAKER so to speak?..................

Audiences ran to Nolan's THE DARK KNIGHT because it was filmed in IMAX and Screened in IMAX 15/70 at local or regional IMAX screens in 2008 thus making it largest IMAX collection ever to that point to R rated movie.

The same audience knew they can never 'project' an imax print at their home theatres. This creates so called "buy in"s, "cravings" to go catch that movie this weekend on big screen.

[stvn1974]

Hasn't it been this way since Jaws? Just from looking it up Goodfellas made $41 million and the same year Dances With Wolves made $400 million plus. Blockbusters and pretentious art flicks that are made just to win awards can coexist.

Also, I want whatever the person who greenlit $150 million for The Irishman was taking. Sounds like it would be a fun trip.

[dkelly26666]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

Hasn't it been this way since Jaws? Just from looking it up Goodfellas made $41 million and the same year Dances With Wolves made $400 million plus. Blockbusters and pretentious art flicks that are made just to win awards can coexist.

Also, I want whatever the person who greenlit $150 million for The Irishman was taking. Sounds like it would be a fun trip.

No, it hasn't been THIS bad since "Jaws", no.

Your statement that blockbusters and art films can co-exist WAS true in the 70s, 80s, 90s, etc.

Of course the blockbusters made more money. But the fact is, the studios ALSO made adult, dramatic films for the theaters, as well.

When "GoodFellas" came out, not only did it get made and wide released in theaters by a major studio, but this was also the era when indie film was taking off, too.

I used to could see "Jurassic Park" playing in the same theater next door to "The Piano". Or "Aladdin" or "Home Alone 2" playing next door in the same theater to "The Crying Game".

Today, studios are NOT making mid-budget films for grown-ups much anymore, and indie cinema is largely dead. Any of those films that DO get made are getting made by streamers, for streamers. Or straight to video.

ALL the big studios are doing are blockbuster, fantasy, comic book, franchise fluff. For money and money only. Not for quality.

His and others' frustrations lie with there NOT being room for blockbusters and art films to co-exist. Art films have been pushed out almost completely.


I saw someone make the argument that Scorsese is saying that everyone should go to the symphony, and no one should go to football games.

That's not it. He's saying everyone is ONLY going to football games, and the symphony closed down.

[stvn1974]

OK, but if superhero films went away tomorrow all of a sudden and there was nothing but art flicks theaters would also die. People go see what they like, there is a reason that football players get $500 million contracts and violinist don't.

[Deadend45]

I know I am talking to brick wall here but Martin did Not say he was against 'superhero' movies, he stated the the Marvel products were theme park rides not cinema and he is correct.

Originally Posted by Poya

You think he's a bit miffed that Shark Tale was more profitable than the majority of his flicks?

It was not his flick in the slightest genius.

[Deadend45]

“Since the ’80s, there’s been a focus on numbers."

You can tell a lot of posters here did not read the interview and lets face many more posters here will not either.

[stvn1974]

Originally Posted by Deadend45

“Since the ’80s, there’s been a focus on numbers."

You can tell a lot of posters here did not read the interview and lets face many more posters here will not either.

I read the article, movie making is a business, he needs to get over it.

[JEDGAR1000]

Originally Posted by Deadend45

I know I am talking to brick wall here but Martin did Not say he was against 'superhero' movies, he stated the the Marvel products were theme park rides not cinema and he is correct.

And, Scorsese is on record stating that he liked Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films.

Martin Scorsese on Sam Raimi SpiderMan movies - YouTube

[Deadend45]

In 1930s and 40s wrestling pictures brought in the big bucks for the studios as were other trivial stuff like water skiing, figure skating, wall-to-wall musicals, etc.

They are almost completely forgotten now cause they were crap just like the Marble flicks will be forgotten.

[stvn1974]

Originally Posted by Deadend45

In 1930s and 40s wrestling pictures brought in the big bucks for the studios as were other trivial stuff like water skiing, figure skating, wall-to-wall musicals, etc.

They are almost completely forgotten now cause they were crap just like the Marble flicks will be forgotten.

So you are the defender of what is and isn't art? I hate superhero films but you are just being ridiculous. Anyway, I am going to go watch the NFL game that is about to start instead of going to the symphony.

[Hindustani]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

OK, but if superhero films went away tomorrow all of a sudden and there was nothing but art flicks theaters would also die. People go see what they like, there is a reason that football players get $500 million contracts and violinist don't.

again, problem is only 'partly' addressed.

yes its true what you said, but its only half truth. what about the other half.

Even though AVATAR was digitally shot, enough "noise" was created by cameron and other professionals, you had to see it in 3D DIGITAL IMAX at least once on big screen. That is also an incentive or so called "buy in". Do remember, AVATAR was never best selling on small screen. it was a very good movie but made for big screen only and mostly.

another example.....

THE HATEFUL EIGHT was 3 hrs long. Not remotely close to Tarantino's best work. should've bombed badly. boring, 18th century western subject in today's superhero marvel world. on a budget of $44 million, it crawled to $54 million in US BO ($156 million worldwide).
Had tarantino shot this digitally, non-70mm, academy flat 1.85:1, its fate would've been $35 million in US BO.

Jordan Peele, NOPE followed same. created "filmed in IMAX" noise. enough people went for IMAX screening despite never screened IMAX print. Budget $68 million now a hit at $124 million at US BO.

50% of the audience will go see what they want to see.

Its the other 50% that has to "buy into" it to make it a friday night or saturday night event.

[Deadend45]

Originally Posted by JEDGAR1000

And, Scorsese is on record stating that he liked Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films.

I liked the first Raimi one cause unlike the current Marble flicks it was an actual adaption of the first comic, not merely taking snippets from far superior stories.

And no 'Marble Universe' crap in it. lol

[Poya]

Originally Posted by Deadend45

I know I am talking to brick wall here but Martin did Not say he was against 'superhero' movies, he stated the the Marvel products were theme park rides not cinema and he is correct.



It was not his flick in the slightest genius.

Never said nor implied such.

[Joey9775]

Originally Posted by Deadend45

I liked the first Raimi one cause unlike the current Marble flicks it was an actual adaption of the first comic, not merely taking snippets from far superior stories.

And no 'Marble Universe' crap in it. lol

Saying "Marble" means you're cool.

[dkelly26666]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

OK, but if superhero films went away tomorrow all of a sudden and there was nothing but art flicks theaters would also die. People go see what they like, there is a reason that football players get $500 million contracts and violinist don't.

Not true. Theaters existed for many, many decades without a landslide of superhero films. They'd just be replaced. Plus, no one's saying there can't be super hero films. They're saying there shouldn't ONLY be those kinds of films.

People like what you tell them to like. Masses are conformists.
There's a whole world of different kinds of music out there, but there's a reason why most of the young people today mainly only listen to the likes of Doja Cat and Billie Eilish and Taylor Swift, etc.. It's because that's ALL mainstream radio is spoon feeding them, while refusing to play anything else. It's the same with theaters/studios, now, too. It's like mainstream pop radio, now.

Again, it's not a case of someone trying to push the super hero movies out. It's someone saying leave room for other things, too.

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by Poya

You think he's a bit miffed that Shark Tale was more profitable than the majority of his flicks?

How old is Scorsese, how is his vision? What cereals does he prefer?

Is Top Gun: Maverick a work of art?

[moreorless]

Really though I think you could argue the period in which Scorsese broke though was actually the anomaly, the New Hollywood period of the late 60's and 70's was a rare time in which mainstream Hollywood made art cinema on a large scale.

[klauswhereareyou]

Streaming has produced content overload. People want to do something when they leave their home other than watch a screen.