features

Superhero movies are ruining cinema, says 'Exorcist' director

22 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2015 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

22 Comments
Login to comment

Sorcerer was an excellent film, a re-make of a great European film, but excellent in every respect.

However... For the director of The Exorcist to complain about the take over of Hollywood by fantasy films as opposed to those 'rooted in realty' rings just a tad bit hallow. Besides, it was Woody Allen's Annie Hall that won the Oscar for best film in 1977, not Star Wars.

That said, Friedkin is absolutely correct, some of the very best work is being done on television, particularly stories that require time to develop their plot and characters. We can hope that Friedkin does direct again.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Any time a commentator confuses genre for quality of content, they demonstrate conclusively that they aren't as clever of a commentator as they think they are. It may well be that today's over-emphasis on simplistic blockbuster pap makes for dumber movies, but they aren't dumb movies because they're comicbook movies. They're dumb movies because they're simplistic blockbuster pap. They would be just as much simplistic blockbuster pap if they were in the genres that were popular for simplistic blockbuster pap in previous decades, like dance films, 80s action films, sword-and-sorcery (or sword-and-sandal), Westerns, and the ever dreaded romantic comedy.

Genre decides the set dressing. It doesn't decide the content. Friedkin should really know this already.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Basically, he just said one thing: "I'm old."

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

I guess I'm old, too, but superhero movies are dumb. I liked the original comics as much as anyone, but I was 12 then.

4 ( +7 / -4 )

I think in many ways, Friedkin is pointing out that a circa two hour movie can compromise decent storytelling. Small wonder why the movie studios are pouring in a lot of money for 10 to 13 episode per season scripted drama series, as we note by the tremendous success of shows like Game of Thrones and House of Cards. I would not be surprised that Friedkin will be asked to direct a 10-12 episode TV series for distribution by HBO, Netflix or Amazon Prime Instant Video very soon.

Alas, for Friedkin, superhero movies are the current wave for now, since Disney discovered to their horror that big-budget movies away from the superhero format are huge money losers, like John Carter and The Lone Ranger.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

So he basically says: I don't like it so nobody should. Way to put your opinion out there. I don't think things are ever unaffected by change. Not even cinema.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

I have watched only one one of the super hero movies: Iron Man, which was quite fun given the excelent Downey Jr. And I have stopped there: no more money spend on men flying on spandex, not out of stuborness, but out of interest. You see one, you have seen all of them. But each to his own.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

I have found the superhero movies of the past decade or so to be a mixed bag. I enjoyed the Iron Mans and Avengers, but found Captain America, Man of Steel and Thor (even though I liked the guy who played Thor) boring.

For me the real problem - and this does relate to genre- is the sheer volume of them. I don't mind superhero movies but I do dislike the way almost every major blockbuster getting pushed out of Hollywood is either a superhero film or some 80s remake.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Honestly, nobody over the age of 16 should care about comic books and comic book movies. I think what Friedkin is hinting at is the slow deterioration of popular culture and overall maturity levels.

For me the golden age of cinema was the 70's with great movies largely written for adults, and as Friedkin points out "real people doing real things".

Its a sad commentary when a film like "Raging Bull" would be poorly received by today's movie-goers for its lack of explosions, shot-length more than 3 seconds etc..

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Honestly, nobody over the age of 16 should care about comic books and comic book movies.

You're going to have to explain that logic. Why shouldn't they?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

For me the golden age of cinema was the 70's with great movies largely written for adults, and as Friedkin points out "real people doing real things".

Yes, like driving out Sumerian demons who possess people and make them backwards spider walk. Real people doing real things.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

He's right! Superhero movies are lame indeed. No story, just special effects. I got tired of this loong ago.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Strangerland - the same reason why you stopped playing with toys. They're for kids.

katsu78 - The Exorcist is a classic horror film based on religion. Adult themes meant for adults. Definitely not for children.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Strangerland - the same reason why you stopped playing with toys. They're for kids.

You've essentially just repeated the first thing you said. You haven't said why. What makes them for kids only and why shouldn't anyone over 16 be interested in them?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Some of those "kids" toys from Sideshow Collectibles, etc go for a lot of bucks like this one. http://www.hlj.com/product/SST36327/Fig

Still kids stuff? And there is a heck of a lot more stuff out there.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@clamenza

Honestly, nobody over the age of 16 should care about comic books and comic book movies. They're for kids.

The US Marvel is safe for kids, but European Marvel isn't any more. There are some official Marvel stories like X-men story drawn by Milo Manara, who normally draw porn. It would be very hard to explain little kids why the bad guys undressed the x-women and pee on them. On the other hand it would test your maturity level to explain it. Instead you would propably write angry letter to publisher, because all comics are for kids.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There are some official Marvel stories like X-men story drawn by Milo Manara, who normally draw porn. It would be very hard to explain little kids why the bad guys undressed the x-women and pee on them. On the other hand it would test your maturity level to explain it. Instead you would propably write angry letter to publisher, because all comics are for kids.

Oh dear...

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Wait a minute! He's saying The Avengers aren't real???!!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I agree with him.

I'm sick of stupid dumb superhero movies.

This genre has been thrashed to death.

Time for Hollywood to move on.

Movies were a million times better in the 1970s.

Actually, most things were better in the 1970s.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I'm not a fan of the superhero movies either, but I still don't understand why someone over 16 shouldn't like them. I'm of the opinion that if you like something and it's not hurting anyone else, then go with it and enjoy it. But for some reason Clamenza thinks they shouldn't like these movies even if they like them, and I'm failing to see the logic in that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is all about the money, and Hollywood listens closely to the cash register, after all, they call this "Show Business" for a reason.

So vote with your wallets. Go to those stories you want to be told.

That said, some stories really do work better on television. Stone's Alexander the Great is a case in point. Stone has recut the film half a dozen times now and still can not seem to get the film the way he wants it. This may be that the story of Alexander is simply too great to be told effectively even in a 3+ hour film. However, as an episodic series, like those on HBO, he just might be able to tell the story he wants to.

On the other hand, a film like Zack Snyder's 300, is all about the visuals and so works better on a larger canvas where the visuals can easily overwhelm the viewer.

As for the 70's being the "Golden Age" of cinema... Yes, there were lots of great films in that decade, but the golden age? In the 70's they were talking of the 40's as the golden age, and no doubt in the 2020's they will be looking at the 90's as the golden age.

It is story telling and every year there are stories well told and not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sounds like This guy is suffering fro. A bit of envy or arrogance. Arrogance typical of an industry which pats itself on the back with awards for films which most people don't really care about and then blaming the audience for being too stupid to know a good film when it's made. People like superheros because they like thinking some is,watching your back and there are real heros in the world too. Which gets to the claim movies of the past were all deep substance and,real? Exorcist? What exactly was real about that movie? Try making movies people want to see and leave some of that envy out of it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites