[quote=Wyldesyde19][quote=Mr Minio]Another complaint about cinema, and American cinema in particular, is the overt reliance on evenly distributed elements of the plot, acting, and visuals. God forbid should a filmmaker make a visuals-heavy movie. Unless his name is Godfrey Reggio, they'll get a lot of "style over substance" comments from film buffs addicted to the "serve the story" approach. This unexplainable mania of nicely balanced films that are too afraid to scream at the viewer in any way makes for a queue of solid but unremarkable movies. I mean, not everybody is Mizoguchi
.[/quote]
While it depends on the movie, obviously, the story is an important part of a film. Even many of your own top 300 films have an important story to tell.  
So yes, depending on the film, serving the story is important.[/quote]

[quote=Mr Minio]Another complaint about cinema, and American cinema in particular, is the overt reliance on evenly distributed elements of the plot, acting, and visuals. God forbid should a filmmaker make a visuals-heavy movie. Unless his name is Godfrey Reggio, they'll get a lot of "style over substance" comments from film buffs addicted to the "serve the story" approach. This unexplainable mania of nicely balanced films that are too afraid to scream at the viewer in any way makes for a queue of solid but unremarkable movies. I mean, not everybody is Mizoguchi
.[/quote]

[quote=Wyldesyde19]I feel there are more actual complaints to be made at cinema, particularly American cinema, such as too much reliance on sequels and remakes. Which sort of ties into Marvel films, actually.  While I have enjoyed some marvel films, I don’t think I’d call many, if any, classics. Definitely a few DC films, but those ( The DarkKnight Trilogy) existed outside the current DC universe.  Superman has stood the test of time and has been considered a classic for decades. But it, too, exists outside of the current model.  
While I have enjoyed the films, it’s time for it to move on, for sure.[/quote]

[quote=SpelingError][quote=seanc]Samesies, but that's mostly what I am on anymore.[/quote]
Rejoin the PC generation. That's what all the cool kids are doing.[/quote]

[quote=seanc]Samesies, but that's mostly what I am on anymore.[/quote]

[quote=SpelingError]Btw, I'll always hate typing on mobile.[/quote]

[quote=SpelingError][quote=seanc][quote=SpelingError][quote=Yoda]I think Spaghetti Westerns are an interesting comparison, because I'll bet people said a lot of the same things about those. I think it's only with time and distance that we can see the subtler ways in which they vary.

I am not suggesting superhero films are comparable, but it also seems clear to me that all sorts of eventual classics are pilloried as mindless entertainment when first released.[/quote]
Good point, but superhero films have also been a trend for at least 1.5 decades and [b]I've still yet to see much evidence to the genre that they're very good or great entertainment (generally).[/b] Also, while I'm not the biggest action film fan out there, I think some action films released in the past decade, like Mad Max: Fury Road, 1917, All Quiet on the Western Front, and Everything Everywhere All At Once (I might be missing a couple) received a great deal of positive reception when they were released and, for the most part, weren't dismissed as mindless, disposable entertainment.[/quote]

To who though? I am getting a little wore out on MCU, but generally have enjoyed. Meanwhile stuff that seems to be more digestible, or even loved, like the F&F franchise or John Wick are absolute garbage to me. They keep getting made, I just don't go watch them. 

I think there are conversations to be had about superhero movies, I have them often actually. I just get frustrated when people like Scorsese talk as if the movies are somehow stepping on auteurs toes. 

Scorsese's new movie is my most anticipated of the year, and I will probably be seeing it in freaking IMAX. I don't think auteur cinema has died.[/quote]
To me. I'm not acting like my opinion bears any objectivity. I'm fully aware that the MCU has a lot of fans and, if you and other people really enjoy them, go for it. I just don't care for the majority of them and don't think a lot of the genre overall. Spaghetti Westerns and Giallos matter a great deal more to me.

I don't quite have the hate for superhero films which Scorsese has, but I think he's very much correct that they represent the homogenization of film. His points were also taken out of context and misrepresented by many people. His argument was not and has never been that superhero films don't count as cinema.[/quote]

[quote=Mr Minio][quote=seanc]We aren’t suggesting these directors were making the mainstream movies of the 60’s and 70’s are we?[/quote]

Depends on how you define mainstream, but I'd say yes, the movies they made were mainstream. They were studio directors working under a contract, churning out works for money. Suzuki made 5 movies in 1960 and 6 movies in 1961. He was getting so bored he started experimenting. Another director who made mainstream movies was Michael Curtiz. He had been making from 3 to 6 movies a year every year from 1934 to 1942. The Italian directors were mainstream directors in the sense that they made cheap movies that were mainly watched by the proletariat populace for cheap thrills. Those B-movies movies were frowned upon by serious snobs who'd rather watch a Fellini or an Antonioni.

SpelingError's point is a valid one, too. While those directors worked within the constraints of the studio system, they could still find ways to make their work more interesting and unique, often excelling in the art department which allowed them to reach the artistic hights of art cinema proper. Even though they directed exploitation films, those were works of art, too. In comparison, Marvel films feel like commodities or products rather than idiosyncratic works of art. Even cookie-cutter films of the past had at least one interesting element about them. Many Marvel films don't even have one. They're just unrelenting assaults on the senses worthy of the TikTok generation.

Yoda makes a fair point, but I'd modify it into: "Many future classics are initially underrated when first released.", i.e., sometimes we need time to catch up with a particular film because it's so ahead of its time. Or sometimes re-evaluate films in ways we never saw them before. But I doubt Marvel applies to either of these categories. The first Avengers film was released more than a decade ago. And nobody is talking about it anymore. Nobody's saying it's a misunderstood classic. It was released, made money, and then it was forgotten.

The interesting thing with Kurosawa is that he wasn't as appreciated at the time as he is now. And even now he's not as appreciated in Japan as he is outside of Japan. He is an arthouse director but his films were mainstream. I think the idea that arthouse and mainstream cinema are somehow mutually exclusive is clearly false. Fellini is one of the most beloved Italian arthouse filmmakers and yet his films were boxoffice hits!

I think the problem is not so much that Marvel makes it impossible for other movies to exist, (which actually might be true, meaning producers are more prone to give you money for another Marvel film, knowing it'll have a handsome net rate, than a personal arthouse project) but that it poisons the general consciousness, making people more lazy, more after cheap and easy cinema without a pinch of artistic mastery or even good cinematic craftsmanship.

Of course, Everything Everywhere All At Once is mindless cheap ADHD entertainment and this is the hill I'll die on!

John Wick keeps getting better with each film. There's genuine high-level craftsmanship to the 3rd and 4th movie, if not art. Especially in the scenography of the Fourth Chapter. The Fourth one has some of the best action sequences since Hard Boiled. This movie is as unashamedly kinetic as John Woo's bullet ballets or Keaton's stunts. It has great cinematography and many references that don't feel like a rip-off (The Matrix, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, Hotline Miami). Plus great scenery, from Osaka, through Berlin, to Paris.

PS: This conversation is more in-depth than many actual MoFo posts, so I think Yoda should move it to a thread.[/quote]

[quote=seanc][quote=SpelingError][quote=Yoda]I think Spaghetti Westerns are an interesting comparison, because I'll bet people said a lot of the same things about those. I think it's only with time and distance that we can see the subtler ways in which they vary.

I am not suggesting superhero films are comparable, but it also seems clear to me that all sorts of eventual classics are pilloried as mindless entertainment when first released.[/quote]
Good point, but superhero films have also been a trend for at least 1.5 decades and [b]I've still yet to see much evidence to the genre that they're very good or great entertainment (generally).[/b] Also, while I'm not the biggest action film fan out there, I think some action films released in the past decade, like Mad Max: Fury Road, 1917, All Quiet on the Western Front, and Everything Everywhere All At Once (I might be missing a couple) received a great deal of positive reception when they were released and, for the most part, weren't dismissed as mindless, disposable entertainment.[/quote]

To who though? I am getting a little wore out on MCU, but generally have enjoyed. Meanwhile stuff that seems to be more digestible, or even loved, like the F&F franchise or John Wick are absolute garbage to me. They keep getting made, I just don't go watch them. 

I think there are conversations to be had about superhero movies, I have them often actually. I just get frustrated when people like Scorsese talk as if the movies are somehow stepping on auteurs toes. 

Scorsese's new movie is my most anticipated of the year, and I will probably be seeing it in freaking IMAX. I don't think auteur cinema has died.[/quote]

[quote=Corax]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3x9iUL-74w

A24 the weird little studio that could?[/quote]

[quote=SpelingError][quote=Yoda]I think Spaghetti Westerns are an interesting comparison, because I'll bet people said a lot of the same things about those. I think it's only with time and distance that we can see the subtler ways in which they vary.

I am not suggesting superhero films are comparable, but it also seems clear to me that all sorts of eventual classics are pilloried as mindless entertainment when first released.[/quote]
Good point, but superhero films have also been a trend for at least 1.5 decades and I've still yet to see much evidence to the genre that they're very good or great entertainment (generally). Also, while I'm not the biggest action film fan out there, I think some action films released in the past decade, like Mad Max: Fury Road, 1917, All Quiet on the Western Front, and Everything Everywhere All At Once (I might be missing a couple) received a great deal of positive reception when they were released and, for the most part, weren't dismissed as mindless, disposable entertainment.[/quote]