You may also like...

8 Responses

  1. After seeing THE MASTER I don’t know how Joaquin Phoenix doesn’t win the Oscar this year. Then I look at that picture. Man, that’s going to be a crazy race.

  2. Steven says:

    The thing that confuses me most about Cronenberg’s comments is the fact that he has already directed a comic book movie. A History of Violence is based on a graphic novel. I can understand if he doesn’t care for superhero movies (to dismiss them completely I find difficult but not unheard of) bbut to say comic books and movies that come from them are for kids is just plain stupid.

  3. antho42 says:

    Steve, he is talking about the superhero sub-genre, and I agree with him. The full potential of superhero films is to embrace it pulpy/adolescent nature. Watchmen works because it is a deconstruction of the superhero subgenre.

    • Steven says:

      If he is only talking about the superhero genre then he must have misspoke because one of his quotes is “But a superhero movie, by definition, you know, it’s comic book. It’s for kids. It’s adolescent in its core.” I don’t think there is any other way to interpret that than to say he is saying super hero movies are comic books which are meant for kids. It may not have been what he meant but it is what he said.

      • Steven says:

        Also I just want to say I not a comic book reader myself. And its not because I feel like they are immature or not meant for adults. Just don’t have the time or enough interest.

  4. Ray Mangum says:

    Daivd, you’re overthinking the word “obtuse.” It simply means dull, as opposed to sharp. Google it, and the first definition which comes up is “Annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand,” which certainly fits Cronenberg’s comments.

    • Battleship Pretension says:

      Okay, that makes sense. I still think, though, that it’s taken on a connotation closer to what I said. Or, at least, I hear it used in that way a lot.

      – David

  5. Aaron B says:

    The reaction you have to The Hobbit being a trilogy is I think probably the natural one most of us had, but I’ve warmed up to it. Consider the following:

    When’s the last time you read the Hobbit? Because despite it’s short length A LOT happens. Remember what Jackson did to Helm’s Deep? He could easily do that with the battle of 5 armies alone and we’re still left with about 6 major set pieces (not including the material he’s injecting from the appendices, etc).

    Also, it’s widely accepted that for the original trilogy the extended editions are vastly superior to the theatrical releases, so him adding on another couple hours isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

    Basically, the LOTR trilogy altogether is probably my favorite work of the 2000s. If “The Hobbit” trilogy actually manages to be a comparable work, there will be no complaints from me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Verified by MonsterInsights