The ongoing The fight between New Hollywood and the Hollywood superhero became hot on Saturday, when Apocalypse Now director Francis Ford Coppola told reporters in Lyon (France) that he was Marvel Watching movies as "despicable". Coppola in France receives the Lumière Prix At the Lumière Film Festival, he joined a quarrel launched earlier this month by his colleague New Hollywooder Martin Scorsese when cab driver told Empire Magazine he I've been trying to watch Marvel movies without taking movies into account, or at least not the "cinema of people trying to impart emotional, psychological experiences to another person". Scorsese likened Marvel films to theme parks that can at least be fun, but Coppola wen Next says in France 24:
When Martin Scorsese says Marvel pictures are not cinema, he's right, because we expect to learn something from cinema. We expect something – some enlightenment, some knowledge, some inspiration. I do not know that anyone has any idea about watching the same movie over and over again. Martin was nice when he said it was not a movie theater. He did not say it was despicable, which I'm just saying.
Coppola's utterances have sparked another round of reactions from filmmakers and fans on the pro-Marvel side of the aisle, notably Guardians of the Galaxy director James Gunn. When Scorsese made his comments, Gunn tweeted that he was "sad" and recalled the people who staked Christ's last temptation. In the following weeks he seems to have decided that this is just a generational conflict. He wrote on Saturday on Instagram that John Ford, Sam Peckinpah and Sergio Leone were similarly little appreciated by their elders:
Judd Apatow, who has not yet made a Marvel film, argued somewhat cruelly:
There are so many different cultural, psychological and generational conflicts that are involved in this spewing about Marvel films is difficult to enumerate them at all. The least interesting part is the dispute over taste – James Gunn likes to watch Marvel films, Martin Scorsese does not – which is a waste of everyone's time. Another, somewhat less boring, part is the systematic way Marvel's defenders treat criticisms of the MCU's mode of production – the slate-eating budgets, the multi-film contracts, the harsh franchise management – as a dispute over taste. Then there's the Smarm Front, as bloody as ever, as fans of superhero films, the dominant cultural form of the time, re-reveal that their confidence in their own tastes is so fragile that they get angry when their opinions are loud will not be unanimous. There is the "plague in both houses," which argues that Scorsese's gangster films and Gunn's superhero films are rotten fruits of the same poisonous male tree. There is the usual generational conflict, "Father shall finally love me," which is an inevitable part of every conversation between older statesmen and aspiring statesmen. And, of course, there are people who somehow position themselves above the fray in unbearable news stories, while clearly leaning on one side or the other, based on nothing but their personal tastes, which by definition is not meaningful.
In other words, while there is no indication that this argument about Marvel films ever becomes a meaningful or interesting conversation that improves understanding of filmmaking, art, commerce, or life in general, we can assume that it continues with a deafening volume for the rest of our lives, occasionally bombasting it alone to the level of "slightly entertaining". Be curious about the continuation of next week, when we find out what Peter Bogdanovich of Avengers: Age of Ultron (19459014) held when the Marvel discourse enters the fourth phase!