Scorsese calls marvel movies an invasion of cinema.
What invasion? We had just three this year and two next year. You've earned a place in cinematic history to be above this kind of thing Marty.
shareITS TRUE...ALL THE COMIC OVERLOAD GARBAGE TALK RUNS RAMPANT HERE.HOWEVER IF YOU LOOK BY YEAR..EVEN A HEAVY HEAVY COMIC BOOK FLICK YEAR YIELDS WHAT? 6 OR 7 AT THE VERY MOST.A DROP IN THE BUCKET COMPARED TO THE HUNDREDS OF OTHER FILMS RELEASED.
shareITS TRUE...ALL THE COMIC OVERLOAD GARBAGE TALK RUNS RAMPANT HERE.HOWEVER IF YOU LOOK BY YEAR..EVEN A HEAVY HEAVY COMIC BOOK FLICK YEAR YIELDS WHAT? 6 OR 7 AT THE VERY MOST.A DROP IN THE BUCKET COMPARED TO THE HUNDREDS OF OTHER FILMS RELEASED.
Exactly, other movies are still being made.
MARTY IS BUTTHURT THAT HE HAD TO LOWER HIMSELF TO NETFLIX.NOONE WAS LOOKING TO INVEST TOP TIER CASH IN AN ADULT DRAMA DIRECTED BY A GUY WHO MAKES BRILLIANT YET SOMETIMES ANTI-BLOCKBUSTER FILMS.
share
He's become an old man. In his youth, he was a rebel and was for any kind of film. For instance, one of his
favorites is "The Brain That Wouldn't Die." It doesn't get "lower" than that, Marty.
The retort that someone has gotten old for criticizing something is the only thing a culturally bankrupt generation has going for it.
shareThat's cute, Toots, but you know as well as I do that there have been BAD movies made since the beginning
of film. Look at the endless sludge of awful '50's/'60's sci-fi/horror films.
Marty used to be cool, now he's acting like a pompous snob. And, no, he would not have made such a
comment in his younger days.
You stand corrected.
The retort that someone has gotten old for criticizing something is the only thing a culturally bankrupt generation has going for it. I guess it's a lot easier than saying, "We can't disagree with you, because we've got shit to show for our creative output."
You have no idea what you're babbling about in terms of movie output; like a typical millennial/Gen Z, you either "guess at" what the past was like or just look things up on Wikipedia to substitute for your lack of experience. I can remember the era in movies when we would have 5-7 great movies coming out the same year. In 1968, there was 2001: A Space Odyssey, Planet of the Apes, Romeo and Juliet, Bullitt, Rosemary's Baby, The Producers and Yellow Submarine. In 1980 alone came The Shining, Raging Bull, Caddyshack, Airplane, The Blues Brothers, Star Wars, Ep. V and The Elephant Man.
I could do that for practically every year since 1980, including the last great year of movies, 1999: Fight Club, The Matrix, Blair Witch Project, American Beauty, The Sixth Sense, Toy Story 2, Life is Beautiful, Being John Malkovich and The Iron Giant. That was just one year of movies.
Now there's just an endless stream of garbage, a million sequels, reboots and shitty CBM movies. Martin Scorsese isn't wrong because he's "old"; you're wrong because you're young.
From the sound of it, you recently celebrated your 85th, sexless birthday, no?
shareFor all the stuff you mention there probably tons of shitting movies. You Remember Super Mario Bros: The Movie, Howard the Duck, Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot . In the 50's there probably was plenty of people bitching there were too many alien invasion and giant monster movies. In the 80's there people bitching that there too many movie about sweaty guys blowing shit up. Now people are bitching that there too many comic book movies. Not that i totally disagree. But its just the same shit over again. There nothing wrong with Escapism. Not all of us want to watching depressing shit all the time.
P.s. American Beauty was pretentious crap.
The difference is there were GOOD movies alongside those shitpiles. Now it’s just a steady stream of garbage.
shareFor instance, one of his favorites is "The Brain That Wouldn't Die." It doesn't get "lower" than that, Marty.
It's easy to sneer in bemused contempt at old low-budget horror movies with lame names like "The Brain That Wouldn't Die" after the advent of blockbusters in the late 70s (e.g. "Star Wars"), but – believe it or not – they were relevant at one time. If you can ignore obvious plot holes and the cheap production values there's quite a bit to enjoy, which isn't to say that it's a great movie, just that it's entertaining in many ways and even unexpectedly horrific.
Yes, it's basically a Frankenstein rip-off, but the "Jan in the pan" element offers an intriguing angle with the idea of a head transplant (head transplants were already being done with animals in the 50s and are only lately surfacing as a legitimate possibility for humans). There are a few surprisingly horrific or gory scenes that are still somewhat disturbing to this day. Jan's demonical laughing in the midst of fiery perdition is effective, plus the irony of who the real monster is and isn't.
The flick scores unexpected high marks on the female front with Adele Lamont standing out as a petite babelicious model. share
You're preaching to the choir. I am ALSO a fan of the film, which I now have on Blu Ray (it looks
terrific).
My point is, he seems to have become a snob, and who can be a SNOB when they've claimed TBTWD
is one of their favorites.
My Blu Rays include "Double Indemnity", "The Wizard of Oz", "In a Lonely Place", "The African Queen",
and others. But I don't like them BECAUSE they are classy, well-made movies (there a thousands of
well-made, classy films I don't like). I just like them. Marty has seemed to forgot that, in the end,
we watch what we watch because we LIKE THEM.
As for Brain, it scores unexpected high marks on the MALE front with Jason Evers, who was SMOKING HOT!
Well said. I wasn't expecting much with a title like "The Brain That Wouldn't Die," but I was genuinely surprised by it's quality despite being low-budget B&W horror from the early 60s.
share
And the film IS eerie, subversive, and had a decent director of photography. Only in the blu ray can
we see the sharp, deep-focus photography, especially in the creepy lab scenes.
Also, it boasts one "special effect" that I do NOT know how they accomplished! Just as the car
goes through the guard rail, the camera goes right under it!! Any camera man would've been
instantly killed, and if the camera was just bolted to the car, and somebody drove it through the
guard rail, it would've required a strong, experienced stunt man, and the camera itself would've
been destroyed!! There was no room in the $60,000 budget for that!
I've watched that moment countless times for over 40 years, and have no idea how they got that
disturbing shot.
I'll give it a rewatch soon and be on the lookout for that scene. Thanks.
share