Where does he get off trashing comic books?
-
Hash_Slinging_Slasherr — 13 years ago(January 04, 2013 03:08 PM)
I agree with you on some extent. Although he was discrediting comic books, he was referring to superhero titles. I'm a fan of Nolan's Batman series, but if someone didn't like it I'd understand their reasons. But this guy has a totally misguided and biased sense in him. Only reason he didn't like Batman is because he believes comic book superheroes are childish and immature. I don't know about him, but I can't show my 12 year old cousin The Dark Knight because he'd probably turn his attention somewhere else by the time the first act finishes. Because of his biased reasoning, he doesn't want to see Nolan's batman films as an actual art because he's too pompous. He'll always look at batman as some childish character who runs around with a cape than an actual person with an ideal.
-
sammie1863 — 13 years ago(January 07, 2013 03:36 PM)
Didn't Croneberg state that, because of the industry's self imposed limitation on the superhero genre- that the films must be wedged into the restrictive PG13 rating to reach a certain audience- the director's artistic vision was restrained and/or diminished? The industry's 'rules' not the genre were the target of his criticism not the source material or the directors. He found it boring to have one's vision restrained by the requirement of always having to consider the 12/13 year old in the creative process. I tend to agree. Can you imagine what TDK or TDKR could have been without the constraints of the ratings system? Croneberg is very pro the creative process and he abhors any unnatural constraints being placed upon an artist's vision. That is why he has worked outside of the studio system. I think many of you would agree if you would allow yourselves to move past the perceived slights and open your eyes to the reporter's obvious editorial license/manipulation which was the cause of this whole ridiculous controversy.
-
sammie1863 — 13 years ago(January 07, 2013 07:20 PM)
Who said anything about childish? The issue is being restrained by a rating system. This is the view that a fil5b4m should be completed to a director's vision without superficial/artificial controls or limits being placed. Some can work within those limitations others feel confined and would be bored and frustrated by not being able to take the work in any possible direction appropriate or necessary for the material. This is opinion and preference and nothing else, but, somehow has become a personal affront to some. That is what is absurd.
-
InternationaleClique — 13 years ago(March 15, 2013 01:24 PM)
So every film has to be R-rated in order not to be considered childish? Thats absurd. What about TV shows then? None are R-rated except the HBO,Showtime etc premuim pay-tv stuff.
And coincidentally series like Six Feet Under, The Sopranos, The Wire and Deadwood are in a class of their own compared to anything on network tv.
A film doesn't have to be R rated, but if you're goal is to make a PG13 fit you inevitably end up compromising the artistic vision. It's about the mindset. Sometimes you have an idea that requires an R rating, sometimes not. -
Trp1985 — 13 years ago(March 21, 2013 11:06 AM)
I don't think a guy as intelligent as David Cronenberg would discredit comic books as a valid form of artI'm pretty sure he was dissing "superhero movies". Let's face it, the American audience is juvenile at best, and this current trend of deifying superheroes and trying to make them 'realistic' is a beep joke. I laugh my ass of when people try to 'analyze' the psychology of batman etc. taking superheroes way more seriously than any intelligent person should.
So yes, compared to the themes Cronenberg tackles in his movies 'superhero' movies are infantile, regardless of how any director tries to make it 'realistic'. -
starkiller92 — 13 years ago(January 11, 2013 09:58 AM)
A) Cronenberg has been writing scripts for his own films for the past 4 decades, not just his older work.
B) Cronenberg was talking about the inherent conceit of comic book filmmaking as it stands today, if the darkest or most complex films in the genre are the Nolan batman films, then I would agree with him completely. Nolan's films are clever and done in a reality based way, but high art they are not. Great entertainment? Yes. You could easily use Marvel's entire stable of films would suffice as evidence to support his theory
C) Cronenberg's "schlock" exceeds any bar or notion of what you can or can't do with the horror genre. Watch 'Spider' and tell me that that film is schlock-y in any possible way.
D) I'm a huge fan of both directors, but I can disassociate their obvious talents (Nolan's best work is in films like 'Memento' & 'The Prestige') from what they're trying to do with certain types of films. Cronenberg is probably one of the most challenging filmmakers out there, every film ('Fast Company') excluded challenges your preconceptions of genre and basic principles, and probably my favorite filmmaker period. Nolan is merely a clever and extraordinarily gifted entertainer. Nothing wrong with that in my book. -
peter_t_2k3 — 13 years ago(January 27, 2013 07:13 PM)
I've seen a few Cronenberg films and think he's a great director, one of the best in the horror genre, but I disagree with some of his comments.
He seemed to be generalising comics as if they where just something for children. A lot of adults watched the batman trilogy, many who have never even read the comics because it had a larger appeal. Many comics even Batman in my opinion, have very adult subjects at times.
Oh and comics can be arty. -
Injectionlethal — 13 years ago(February 05, 2013 10:53 AM)
He's my issue with his statements: He can have his opinion, all good and dandy, but it's a cop out to use that as a main point of supporting his statement. This is all coming from a guy that has crafted some very ridiculous films. It's the equivalent of an individual with dwarfism making fun of a smaller individual. In his opinion the smaller guy is funny for being small whilst disregarding the fact he himself is a dwarf as well. It's just very hypocritical. I still respect him, and his work, but to berate another form of ART just because he isn't a fan is ridiculous. Many people have made the case that horror has no value, but yet that is what put him on the map.
In short, I would have hoped for more from a film maker whom knows what it is like to work in a genre that some are just disgusted by, and making work as a piece of art.
I just realized Shaft Juice sounds like semen. -
franzkabuki — 13 years ago(February 13, 2013 03:01 PM)
All this study in "dwarfism" seems to be founded on some unsupported premise that Cronenberg "has crafted some very ridiculous films" which is not really true (and, for that matter, I dont think even Nolan has made stuff that would quite qualify as such. Plus his Batman fare is being taken seriously enough by a lot more folk than it necessarily deserves - its not like Cronenberg is maliciously having a go at some poor little outsider). Not to mention the whole charge of "hypocrisy" hinges on this same strange assumption that Cronenberg should somehow himself recognize hes made these "very ridiculous films".
Also - as argued elsewhere - I dont think he meant to make some blanket statements about all comic book movies being unworthy by default.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan -
MrBook_ — 13 years ago(February 21, 2013 10:20 AM)
It's always funny watching comic book nerds get worked up over anyone saying anything remotely critical of comic books. (Ditto with video game nerds, etc.) Listen, if you have that bad an inferiority complex about what you read, maybe you should read better stuff.
For the record, I read comic books myself, but I also read other stuff (including, you know, GOOD comic books, sans guys in tights), and I don't have my whole identity tied up in what crappy mass-market shlock I consume. You guys should try it!
HAIL SAGAN -
Multidirectional — 13 years ago(February 22, 2013 02:08 AM)
What's also funny is that a lot of these dumb nerds obviously haven't even read the said interview and blow this stuff way out of proportion. It's the interviewer who said that Nolan's Batman films elevated superhero genre into a higher art category, with which Cronenberg simply disagreed. And he was right to do so, Nolan's films haven't elevated anything, even though I still prefer them to older Batman movies. In the end though they still adhere to old established cliches, especially the last part of the trilogy. And superhero comics are the kid's stuff, face 1c84it. It's ok if you enjoy them as a grownup, but pretending they're something other than that just makes you dumb. Hell, I enjoy a lot of really juvenile videogames but I don't go around pretending they're some high art. I don't need to, because I'm not some insecure dumbf^ck, I completely embrace the concept of "dumb fun".
And now these morons go around the internet creating fake "Cronenberg vs Nolan/comic books" battles. Good job, you're certainly helping your cause a lot. -
MrBook_ — 13 years ago(February 28, 2013 10:51 AM)
What the beep are you talking about? Comic Books are a medium, not an individual piece of work.
There's nothing in my post to indicate I think otherwise, and in fact it should be pretty clear that I
don't
think otherwise from my comment about good, non-superhero comics.
Anyway, Cronenberg was clearly talking about corporate superhero comics and other crappy, commercial geek-consumer swill, as are all the people going into conniptions over him said something vaguely critical about their awful taste in art and entertainment.
HAIL SAGAN -
rupertpupkin702 — 13 years ago(March 02, 2013 03:27 PM)
I would disagree with you completely. The super hero genre has produced some of the best work that has been done in the comic book industry, Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns, Brad Meltzer's Identity Crisis, etc. are all powerful works of art.
-
LifeVsArt — 11 years ago(January 10, 2015 10:48 AM)
It's always funny watching comic book nerds get worked up over anyone saying anything remotely critical of comic books. (Ditto with vid5b4eo game nerds, etc.) Listen, if you have that bad an inferiority complex about what you read, maybe you should read better stuff.
I don't have any problem with comic book/superhero/video game stuff either, except when it's marketed as being something that it isn't, as what Cronenberg calls "elevated art". It's similar to all the young adult novels that have increasingly been marketed to a non-juvenile audience by being presented as something more than they actually are, as something that's now "cool" for adults to read. IMO it's "cool" to read anything that brings you pleasure, whether it's "Madame Bovary" or "Hunger Games" or "Twilight", but let's not pretend that they're artistically equals. In other words, let's not diminish the great accomplishments of brilliant artists throughout history by putting everything on the same level - sure, the juvenile stuff is easier to digest by more people so it makes more money, but that's big money and business setting the standards.
I think the incredibly over-sensitive reaction by the "comic book nerds" (as you call them) is based on brand identification. These franchises, and companies like Marvel, have marketed successfully to a large number of people who get a personal sense of identity from the brand itself (reinforced by a group of others who also identify with the brand) - they feel a connection to this group and a sense of power - they ARE powerful when 2000moved as a mass to produce large box office returns, sell video games, etc. This goes way back in the history of comic books, when one was an E.C. Fan-Addict, for example, and loyalty to that company was cleverly marketed and reinforced to sell a lot of different products. Anyway, I think it's wonderful that people get pleasure from entertainment (that's what it's for), but it's also important that some people have the guts to say out loud what a lot of other artists, and lovers of the arts, say to each other - that everything is NOT equal.