yes, i know he likes violence - i don't sync that with character.
Not even Raging Bull?
perhaps it's also that i feel his films are symptomatic of what could be called "movie buff" syndrom.
What about the French New Wave?
another part of my dislike and even derision of his films comes from the populist aspect; he's simply too popular. ...a thing can have broad appeal if it has a less than distinct mood, but when something is broad, proportionally, the personal and impassioned aspect of it is questioned.
What about da Vinci, Michelangelo, Shakespeare, Mozart or Beethoven? Or great leaders like Gandhi or Martin Luther King? I think the reason they all have broad appeal and influence is becase they absolutely merit it. Their lives and works have shifted their medium and/or the lives around them. I think the same could be said of the best of Scorsese. He has certainly left his mark on the medium, and his influence will be felt long after he is gone, just like the masters before him. I think you cheapen his style when you narrow it down to just cuts and baby boomer music. Was Gandhi just a bald guy in a towl who didn't care to eat? Was King just a outspoken preacher at the right place at the right time? It's just an opinion of course, and you're entitled to it...
taxi driver is incontestably close, but i wager that's more because of schrader than anything else.
Why stop there? Wasn't it the diary of would-be George Wallace assassin Arthur Bremer that started the whole damn thing? Come on. I don't buy that shit that Scrader was merely depressed and it king of popped out, but that's just me.
this is, as clear as i can put it, what differs for scorsese and my reaction to his films. they are incapable of making me feel anything in this manner, they cannot astound or destroy my senses as resnais and countless others have - they are simply films to me, films that do not move nor flit beyond what they are merely capable of doing - entertaining. as should be stressed, nothing is wrong with this, but comparatively i favor one highly above the other. if i watch eraserhead, i breathe with it, if i watch veronique, it courses like ichor through my veins - these films and films like them open up the possiblity of beauty to me, and it is something simply to which scorsese is not predisposed.
I can deal with that...
1) i didn't mean character associating with violence in terms of an actual character, i meant the character of a film - the style, the mood, etc. simply a confusion of usage or your understanding of what i meant
2) "movie buff" syndrome precludes things like the new wave either french or czech, it instead indicates a strong proclivity for al pacino movies and blockbuster patronage. it's more like my ex-girlfriend's brother, who owned nearly 200 films, all of which were mediocre - he thought foreign films were weird. once again, i think you misread what i meant. a cineaste is a somewhat classier form of movie buff, like a wino to a meth addict.
3) it seems my poor attempt at humor was entirely lost upon you. the part about his popularity was a joke. however, you cannot qualify the validity of art by its popularity or mass acceptance. you are indoctrinated and inculcated in schools to believe shakespeare is great, schools make no attempt to articulate why it's good - it's simply become part of a canon which is to exist beyond reproach. personally, i dig hamlet. if you're going to cite his popularity as defence then you have successfully scraped the absolute bottom of the barrell. that is by no means any indication of anything, but instead validates what i said, that things which have a broader and less particular mood appeal to more people. virtually everyone knows who brittany spears is, and comparatively her popularity eliminates the mere thought of the velvet underground having any relevance on these grounds. why? because brittany's music or michael jackson's music or whomever else's music is desalinated and more palatable to mainstream tastes than something like the velvet underground. people read john grisham and not marcel proust, am i to believe one's talents trump the other solely because of numbers? there is no accounting for taste in a tasteless majority. the fact you invoke fucking gandhi and martin luther king jr is indefensibly asinine, i'm sorry. take everything pejorative and insinuating you want from the tone of this particularly numbered reply, and know deeply that your reasoning is embarassing. i don't think scorsese's style is as striking as some of his contemporaries, nor do i think it's intellectually honest to equate him with civil rights leaders. there is a basic moral barometer which lends to the creedence and popularity of these figures, the same does not apply to art and the differing preferences for it. why do more people like terminator 2 than like persona? why do more people like martin luther king than david duke? the empirical or ethically perceived truth only emerges from the latter, the former exists independent of this reasoning and therefore cheapens your argument.
4) regarding taxi driver, you have convinced me you are a man of hollow argument. what in the hell are you driving at? i implied taxi driver was more personal because it arose from schrader's depression - the film worked and had more of an atmosphere and personal degree because of the script and the writer's empathy for the character, his ability to in some sense understand travis. my reasoning stands that the only films i've been able to enjoy of scorsese's were raging bull and taxi driver (latter infinitely more than the former), and incidentally they're both authored by paul schrader. therfore, i give the benefit to paul schrader as i've seen nearly everything else by scorsese and none of it yielded these same effects. to me, it's quite obvious that schrader is the cause. i don't see what there is "not to buy."
5) well, there's no need for argument for the last quote, i suppose, and i'm glad i could present some satisfactory view of my sentiments.
in regards to your perception of the conformist, i should specify that the intellectual content and the main idea of the film accelerated my interest a great deal, as i'm desparately affectionate towards things which deal with emotional fascism. i would've given anything to see its wonderful colors and compositions on a large screen