“I don’t love them,” Tarantino told Tom Segura’s 2 Bears, 1 Cave podcast when asked about superhero movies. “No, I don’t. I don’t hate them. But I don’t love them. I mean, look, I used to collect Marvel comics like crazy when I was a kid. There’s an aspect that if these movies were coming out when I was in my 20s, I would totally be fucking happy and totally love them. [But] they wouldn’t be the only movies being made, they would be those movies amongst other movies. I’m almost 60 so I’m not quite as excited about them.
“My only axe to grind is they’re the only things that seem to be made,” Tarantino continued. “And they’re the only things that seem to generate any kind of excitement amongst a fanbase or even for the studio making them … So it’s just the fact that they are the entire representation of this era of movies right now. There’s not really much room for anything else. That’s my problem. It’s a problem of representation.”
He is not wrong here. If people look back to this time they will call it the “Marvel period of movie making” and that IS bad.
Since I am absolutely not into super hero stuff aside from somewhat Deadpool and I had enough with the first movie about him, there hasn’t been a movie I was excited to watch forever, instead I watch old films or occasionally an older series.
I wrote this in the main site and I don’t even know how I did it xD
I strongly think that people exaggerated when they say that superheroes movies are bad. I actually think the blockbuster films (that exists since EVER) are now better than ever. You just have to look at the superheroes movies before the UCM. On the other hand, nowadays we DO NOT have less non-comercial movies than in the past.
In ten years, in the 60s, more than FIVE HUNDRED of western movies were filmed, and I assure you that more than 90% of them were trash. Forgotten trash. Only the good ones are remembered, and that’s why it looks like that age was better in that sense. Have you watched average European comedy in 50s age? The fifty Godzilla movies? The sixty Tarzan movies? Can anyone really claim that was better than the actual UCM? It was not. Not at all.
Of course, it’s not ideal to have an standard which is used by tons of movies, but that standard exists since the very beginning of cinema story, exists now and will exist forever. Who knows? Maybe in 20 years most of people say “vampire robots movies are trash, nothing compare to the golden age, the 2020s”.
See, I’ve always taken that kind of thing almost exactly the opposite. I see it as the film makers saying that they understand the world they are playing in - and arguably more importantly in the case of Marvel, where it all came from - and use those little nods to set long time fans at ease. I think Marvel for the most part does it really well (how many people who aren’t long time Marvel fans picked up the Betta Ray Bill cameo in Guardians 1 or who noticed, let alone recognised, the big important cosmic entity who is briefly seen in Loki and Love and Thunder, but actually made their first appearance in the pages of Dr. Strange?) and rarely if ever beats you over the head with it.
Similarly, I think Ghostbusters: Afterlife did a pretty good job with a number of it’s references. Yeah, it basically retells the original film, but there is some stuff in there that people who aren’t big fans would miss, like the meaning behind the pots of mould, spores and fungus.
Having said that, I did feel Jurassic World was nowhere near as subtle, and the sequel was a downright terrible film (didn’t bother with the third).
Al this is to say that references, if done well, can be a good thing and now little extras for long time fans.
On another note; I feel like the current trend in superhero films is pretty much like the previous trends of musicals in the 30s and Westerns in the 50s/60s (might have my dates a bit out there). Eventually it’ll end and something else will take its place. That’s true for all media; stuff is popular for a while and then goes away. Just look at how many procedural cop shows were Ari nd in the 90s, now there are hardly any (as far as I know anyway).
That’s true. I think Guardians of the Galaxy is a great film, but if a film can’t combine jokes and seriousness properly, one part kills the another one.
That’s what happened to Thor films, for example.
Take yourself seriously
It’s all subjective and personal. Different people will enjoy those things differently and as a result they can claim some of those are better, by their personal standards. I find plenty of Marvel movies entertaining, with some much more entertaining than others, but I also adore Godzilla movies and I’d probably rewatch many a Godzilla movie before I’d rewatch many Marvel movies. Marvel movies may objectively have more production value poured into them, but that doesn’t make them necessarily better. Disney employs a very efficient and successful model of filmmaking that has proven financially successful. But that doesn’t make them better, or necessarily worse than other films. They are definitely competently made, but plenty of people find that kind of structured approach to commercial filmmaking less interesting. Everyone is different.
I would also suggest, as I did above, that many people concerned about cinema right now are less concerned with the individual films being made, and more concerned about the way a very small minority of very wealthy companies have bought their way to dominance by controlling a significant element of both distribution and exhibition making it harder for smaller films to circulate. For some, declaring the current period problematic for cinema has nothing to do with the types of films anyone is making, or their quality, it has everything to do with concern for industry practices and studio greed. A perfect example is what is currently going on with WGA negotiations and the writer’s strike, all the result of film industry workers being undervalued and under appreciated. And although Hollywood has always been very risk averse, there is a current trend from many of the big studios and streaming platforms to immediately sink anything that doesn’t grossly over perform and it’s causing a loss of faith in the system from the part of the actual creatives and technicians that make the films.
As a general thing worth noting, it’s useful to keep in mind just how different the role of the movie theater was in decades past, increasingly more so the further back in time you go. When there were no videos to buy and only a few channels on TV, it’s understandable that there’d be tons of cheap-as-dirt films pumped out for the movie theaters. Do you want to watch that Gilligan’s Island episode for the 50th time, or do you want to go see whatever double-showing was at the theater whenever you and your friends got there? A couple westerns, a couple surf movies, a couple Attack of the Giant Scorpions – the content didn’t matter nearly as much as it just being a place to meet up with friends and be entertained for a few hours, seeing something new. So in the present era, instead of having 100 Tarzan films release in a year, you’d just have two or three Tarzan-themed series airing on Netflix and Disney Plus, etc.
Related: It was interesting to learn just how much the film Psycho influenced the movie theater-going experience in general. Alfred Hitchcock made it very clear that rowdy film-goers were not to casually show up in the middle of the movie whenever they felt like it – you needed to be there when it starts, or else you’ll spoil the experience. (Don’t arrive on time? Gotta wait for the next showing.) For those who don’t know what happens about a third of the way into the movie… well, I suggest giving it a watch! A film that’s even more genius when you learn the context of when it released (i.e. there were a ton of “on the run from the law” films releasing during the time – either via the “wrongfully accused” trope or the “rebel without a cause” sort of trend).
Have you watched average European comedy in 50s age? The fifty Godzilla movies? The sixty Tarzan movies? Can anyone really claim that was better than the actual UCM? It was not. Not at all.
Oh this is a fun subject becuase thers much more than what you mentioned. Throughout the 20th century you’ve had bandwagons like this. For example, Italian Poliziotteschi (Euro crime) which was basically not all that different from Italian Giallo movies… however the context was quite different. Giallo movies are usually film noir inspired movies that deal with the same subjects… however where the inpsiration for Giallo came from Film Noir, the inspiration for Euro Crime came from political unrest in Italy in the 1960’s along with (mostly communist) terrorism, and government corruption across the board in the era in which they became popular. Compare this with all the dystopian/post apocalyptic films made in the 1980s (a personal favorite of mine) seems very simliar… a LOT of little bandwagons are like this (and i’d argue the Godzilla movies were made popular for the same reason due to some of the themes/fears which were relevant at the time)
Not all bandwagons operate this way (but many seem to) I’m not sure any of the modern popular stuff follows the format, I think its just profitable and easy to create products.
At the same time, the direction in newer products is better or at least smoothier, but, in the end, it all depend on which products you like the most.
At this rate I’m mostly tired of action films of special agents and police, never found in detective stories the thriller I was looking for and it’s better if we don’t talk about comedies (even though 90s/ early 2000 ones were more… amusing)
About superheroe movies… I can agree they need to renew the formula at least a little, but I wouldn’t consider they are bad and there are not too much of them (Marvel has around 2 films every year, not much more).
People who dislike them are going to find reasons why this is worse than every other trend in cinema history, but that’s all.
If I have to say what is the major problem in actual cinema, that would be people patience.
They can’t be far of their mobile phones and they can’t keep watching a film if it’s not inmediatly fun, so these films keep making jokes and action scenes to have that audience hooked.
And that’s a problem because tons of times is better to slowly prepare the plot.
This is entirely subjective and and potentially even contextual.
I’m going to use Scorsese as an example for this part of the discourse. A lot of people think he dislikes comic book or superhero movies. He doesn’t. What he dislikes is the way large companies like Disney are using their power to dominate exhibition avenues to monopolize time for their own movies while preventing other small movies from securing wider distribution. So why he’s concerned is that the industry is more lopsided than ever, except potentially for the pre-Paramount Decree Hollywood era. A lot of people react hyperbolically to the things that Scorsese is saying about the contemporary film industry, but what they don’t understand is that Scorsese came up during a particularly rebellious time in Hollywood cinema, when filmmakers that were inspired by movements like the French New Wave were pushing back against the corporate Hollywood structure and were making increasingly subversive films. People like Scorsese see an industry now that has returned to a top heavy structure where a very small number of corporations control 90% of media in the US. That fact means that it’s much harder for smaller, marginalized and subversive voices to make films or reach audiences the way they potentially have in other cinematic eras. This is one of the core reasons people are concerned right now and believe current trends are disconcerting.
But I’ll say thing from a personal standpoint. I think lots of MCU movies are fun to watch, but very few of them resonate with me in ways that other movies, both past and present, do. I tend to watch them, have a good time for a couple hours and move on without really thinking about them again. I find a lot of contemporary blockbuster content operates that way for me, because it leaves very little lasting impression on me. Of course it’s all subjective, and that might not be true for everyone. Nonetheless, I do empathize with people that don’t particularly think MCU movies do very much for them. That said, I really don’t think the essence of why people in or out of the industry are concerned hinges on the content of the films, for the most part. They are concerned about the machine behind those films.
Monopolization is ALWAYS bad in art, so that point in definitely true.
About the quality… There are around 10 films I would consider great there, but most importantly I consider just a very few to be bad… And they are not that bad either.
And about the direction… The rythm have improved in the last years. That doesn’t mean every new film has better rythm than every older one, of course, but I find older movies to be slower, even when the narrative ask for velocity. That’s an opinion since we are talking about art, obviously.
Just watched Pulp Fiction for the first time, what a great film. Funny as all hell, and the actors all played their parts exceptionally. The out of order vignette style is a really neat artistic choice and the little touches that tie them together is just great, especially the little references to cinema, like the fake background when Butch is in the taxi with the Colombian woman, or the wild west style ending with Travolta and Jackson walking out while still dressed like ‘dorks’. I don’t mean to sound a pretentious hack, but that was easily the best film I’ve ever seen (I don’t watch many films whatsoever).
This is obviously an unpopular opinion, but when I watched the film I didn’t understand what was so good.
Sure, both characters and narration has its charm, so its fun to watch indeed… but nothing else.
As you can imagine, most of times I say things like that I get a lot of hate and indignation, but I watch one film almost every day and rarely find great classics to be… great.
Mate, anybody that gives you ‘hate and indignation’ for having an opinion on a film that is somewhat overrated clearly doesn’t understand how flawed films can be. I can say as someone that loved it, I think your opinion is valid. Probably more so than mine because I don’t know a thing about cinema, and because it’s kind of described as being better than it actually is by people who saw it once and forgot about most of it.
I think it’s pretty normal to have at least a few “must-watch classics” bounce off you. I finally watched The Godfather last year for example, and in the end I didn’t get all the hype. Like, I read up on why it was such a big deal so I get that on paper, but it just didn’t resonate with me personally.
At the same time though, you never know when a must-watch classic will click with you. A few years back I decided I’d watch Citizen Kane just for the sake of being cultured, not really planning to give it my full attention. But I ended up glued to the screen the whole time – it actually was good, lol.
I use to be disappointed with claasics, but of course I want to like them, so it’s great when you watch someting and it is as good as people say.
I didn’t expected that precisely Rocky was a film so good.
The Shawnshak Redemption was one of the best films I watched in a year I watched three hundred of films.
But, if I don’t like a classic, I don’t like and that’s all.
I haven’t watched Citizen Kane yet, but I liked The Godfather. I had read the book before and that helped me to get into the story easier, though.
Ah, the book is great. I recommend it.
The most “classic” classic - if we use the term “classic” to mean “old” - I truly enjoy is The Day the Earth Stood Still. I think that is easily one of, if not the, best sci-fi films ever made, and possibly one of the best films full stop.
As for Pulp Fiction, I thought it was pretentious crap. Citizen Kane was too boring for me to get through the first half. But then I also don’t rate Blade Runner, Alien, (love the sequel though) or the Star Wars films (any of them) so I’m probably an uncultured moron.
On the topic of classics, I did have a month or so last year when I was watching a bunch of older films for the first time. I’ll recommend these five pre-1960 films as new favorites of mine:
Safety Last! (1923) – I’ve hardly watched any silent films, so I wasn’t sure what to expect from this. The title made me laugh though, so I gave it a go… and yeah, hilarious movie from start to finish. Blew my mind that a movie a century old could be so funny. And the whole skit that’s just “aren’t customer service jobs the worst?” hasn’t aged a bit since then. (Some things really don’t change.)
Casablanca (1942) – Yeah, a film that usually makes it into “greatest films of all time” lists. Despite it being so famous though, I didn’t really know anything about its story beforehand. Great stuff! Was surprised just how many famous lines were in this one movie. And also, kind of mind-blowing this came out during World War II. Like, nobody was really sure what was going to become of Europe (and Morocco) at the time, right? Just wild.
Brief Encounter (1945) – A British film about a married woman and a married man (as in, not married to each other) who fall in love with each other, and… well, what are they to do? An engaging film that’s well-acted and well-shot, with a tension that’s slowly built up over the course of the entire story, and an ending that’s really going to stick with me.
Ikiru (1952) – Akira Kurosawa is probably best known for his epic samurai films, but here’s a present-day story about an aging man who discovers he’s terminally ill… and realizes he’s done nothing with his life. (The character works for city hall, so much of the film is commentary on the inefficiency of bureaucracy… Some things really don’t change.) At any rate I’m a sucker for sad but thoughtful stories like this, and I found the way the epilogue was handled to be surprisingly unorthodox.
Singin’ in the Rain (1952) – One night I was in the mood for something lighthearted, so I figured maybe it was time I finally watch that musical about the guy who goes singin’ in the rain. And boy, was I in for a treat. The movie is about as cheesy as it gets, but it’s good cheese. Lots of humor, lots of heart, and lots of amazing songs and dances. (And the title song it’s most famous for is so much better once you have the full context surrounding it.)
This is why I deeply dislike film canons or lists of “the best films of all time”. People start latching onto the idea that specific films are “good” and faulting audiences if they don’t agree. But film canons are very exclusionary and often limited by the biases of a select few which means lots of fantastic films don’t make it onto film canons.
It’s perfectly valid to dislike films that people say are essential or the greatest films of all time. My example is Casablanca. I recognize it as a well made film, but I have zero love for it. Same for The Maltese Falcon, despite their importance to Noir. I adore other films in the genre but those two do very little for me affectually. Film is about experience and if you don’t feel it, no list of greatest films can change that.