This Scorcese op-ed is an elegant expression of a philosophy of aesthetics that is, I believe, ultimately indefensible https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/04/opinion/martin-scorsese-marvel.html …
-
-
That's definitely in there. I think there are two arguments: 1) Current film economics are crowding out non-franchise films 2) That's bad because non-franchise films are better art than franchise 1) seems undeniable, and there are reasons why it's bad beyond 2)
-
On point #2 I think the interesting question is why he thinks it was possible for earlier studio-made highly restrictive genre movies (noir, westerns) to be top-notch art but not possible for current franchise movies to be. He might be right but it needs to be spelled out
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I feel like I see a ton of movies that qualify as mass entertainment and personal art, they just aren't about the 3 things Martin Scorcese finds interesting.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.