Unpopular Geek Media Opinions

Yes. I think you can both find an appreciation for ingenuity, creativity, and historical significance in artist's work. I think a certain legacy gets attributed to some folks that makes criticism often difficult. Like everything they do gets an automatic C because they did Citizen Kane, Blood on the Tracks, etc...

I think the big difference between Orson Wells and Scorsese though is the latter continued to make great movies. I would agree with you to the extent that, like most directors, his much more recent films haven't been as exciting for me to watch as his first three decades of film making. But even in his later movies he still can make a very good, solid work. When I saw the Departed, I felt that it was a bit of a step down for him (it is a good movie, but it didn't feel as tightly made to me as Mean Streets, Taxi Driver or Goodfellas----even though it was operating in a similar genre). There is just something a little bit shaggy or untrimmed about it. I also feel it is a movie where his use of music becomes more of a weakness. In his earlier movies, his music selection feels like he is taking songs he gets and applying them skillfully, but throwing in the Drop Kick Murphy's to Departed, just felt off to me---I like the song fine, I like the movie, but I wince a little at that fusion of film and sound. And I think it is because it is music that isn't particularly personal to him. Same thing with Shutter Island. I quite liked watching the movie. I think I have seen it twice and will probably watch it a third time at some point. But it didn't captivate me the way something like Goodfellas did. I haven't seen Silence yet so I can't comment on that.

Overall I would say he has an incredible film catalogue and is one of greatest filmmakers
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Based upon my understanding, it's the Hollywood equivalent of a loss leader. In other words, the companies that are doing it now (such as Apple) are in it for the prestige.

Giving Scorsese all that money to burn (when you have the money to burn) has a lot of collateral benefits. You (the executives) get invited to the swanky parties. This actually matters! And you have a leg up with the high-end talent. And you have the possibility of awards. Not to mention that you're now known as a serious player in the Business.

It's not about the money- it's about the prestige.
Funny thing is I feel like that backfired for Netflix. Scorsese's film didnt do so well and then he went on rants about streaming and how cinema is dying. So, Netflix was like "whatever, we'll just do another flick about a hitman with a heart of gold with Chris Evans or Brad Pitt."

On the subject, it seems like prestige TV and the series do well in the stream. However, nobody has quite figured out how to do a film on a stream platform. Is this an unpopular opinion?
 


Highly recommend, but just know going in it's more in the Last Temptation / Kundun style.

Actually, that would make a good triple feature if you wanted to examine Scorsese's view of faith.

I love the Last Temptation of Christ so I have actually been looking forward to Silence. I just haven't sat down to it yet.

It has been a very long time since I saw Kundun. I remember seeing it when it first came out, but it was the 90s, so my memories are hazy (I recall liking it).
 


Funny thing is I feel like that backfired for Netflix. Scorsese's film didnt do so well and then he went on rants about streaming and how cinema is dying. So, Netflix was like "whatever, we'll just do another flick about a hitman with a heart of gold with Chris Evans or Brad Pitt."

Whether you agree with him or disagree with him, Scorsese has been consistent about the need for the theatrical release (and the value of cinema qua cinema). He and Nolan continue to beat that drum.

As for Netflix, that switch has been going on regardless of Scorsese. Unfortunately, they have pivoted to giving the customer what they want. And most people want (rhymes with map). It's also the same reason that they cancel shows so early- the vast majority of shows lose audience with time, and cost more over time. So as much as it sucks, it's also a sound business strategy (unfortunately).

On the subject, it seems like prestige TV and the series do well in the stream. However, nobody has quite figured out how to do a film on a stream platform. Is this an unpopular opinion?

I don't think so. I think that one thing that streamers are struggling with is this- movies that do well in theaters (or even are shown in theaters) do better on streaming because they have a built-in marketing advantage. People have heard of it and they want to see it. It's a lot harder to generate that demand just by having it on streaming; I know that the feeling that I have is probably similar to that of a lot of other people- when I see a movie on streaming, I view it similarly to the old "straight to DVD" - that it is of lesser quality.

That's why the other streamers are pivoting to releasing their movies in theaters first. Unfortunately, that business is also ... struggling.
 



Remove ads

Top