https://www.msn.com/en-ie/entertainment/indepth/martin-scorsese-i-said-marvel-movies-arent-cinema-let-me-explain/ar-AAJSMU9
He's a great filmmaker, so his commentary is insightful. Mind you, I just don't care for the subject matter of most of his films. An exception is Silence. Two quick points:
1. First of all, there's the artist who's the primary audience for his own work. He writes fiction or makes movies which reflect what he cares about, what's important to him. In the case of a great artist, that indirectly appeals to many others, although in some cases the work is for connoisseurs.
That's in contrast to stuff that's made to sell. Where the creators are thinking all along, how will this play? They begin with a target audience, and work back from there.
2. Good art or great art is idealistic. It presumes that life is worthwhile. So quality matters.
But consistent secularism cuts the nerve of artistic idealism. And if there is no immortality, and what we value is merely the instinctive byproduct of blind evolution, then everything is ephemeral. It's silly to be a serious artist. Nothing endures.
So why not go for the buck? Quick money? Forgettable films?
Good or great art is an act of faith, even if the artist isn't consciously Christian. But secularism erodes the faith necessary to create good or great art. It replaces faith with cynicism.
At the moment I'm not taking a position on Marvel movies, but just making a general observation that's pertinent to all kinds of movies.
It's just another riff on the old art house cinema versus mainstream Hollywood. Art house is art whereas mainstream Hollywood is all about money. So the argument goes.
ReplyDeleteSome people regard Raging bull as the greatest movie ever made. It certainly has a stunning performance by Di Niro. The subject matter is just too off putting.
My favourites of Scorcese are Goodfellas and Casino. Especially Casino. Such a great portrait of mob controlled Las Vegas.