Simu Liu responds to Quentin Tarantino’s Marvel comments
The Shang-Chi And The Legend Of The Ten Rings actor praises Disney's "sustained efforts to improve diversity onscreen"
Aux Features Simu Liu
The Marvel discourse is far from over. After Quentin Tarantino said that the comic book series had changed the modern movie star, Shang-Chi And The Legend Of The Ten Rings actor Simu Liu took to Twitter to defend his job.
“If the only gatekeepers to movie stardom came from Tarantino and Scorsese, I would never have had the opportunity to lead a $400 million plus movie,” he wrote. “I am in awe of their filmmaking genius. They are transcendent auteurs. But they don’t get to point their nose at me or anyone.”
Before becoming part of the biggest franchise in the world, Liu was primarily known for the Canadian sitcom Kim’s Convenience. He made his debut in the Marvel Cinematic Universe last year.
“No movie studio is or ever will be perfect,” Liu continues. “But I’m proud to work with one that has made sustained efforts to improve diversity onscreen by creating heroes that empower and inspire people of all communities everywhere. I loved the ‘Golden Age’ too.. but it was white as hell.”
Tarantino’s statement may have proven particularly provoking because of the writer and director’s various controversies regarding race throughout his career. Kill Bill has long been the subject of debate, and just last month, Meghan Markle cited the 2003 release as “[presenting] these caricatures of women of Asian descent as oversexualized or aggressive” on her podcast Archetypes.
Back in 2019, the Pulp Fiction director was further criticized by many Asian American cultural commentators for his interpretation of Bruce Lee in Once Upon A Time In Hollywood, which was widely considered to be disrespectful. The martial arts legend’s daughter Shannon described the portrayal as “directed to be a caricature.” Though Liu seemingly did not weigh in on the contentious scene at the time, Lee was a primary inspiration for Shang-Chi when Marvel Comics created the character in the ’70s.
157 Comments
After Quentin Tarantino said that the comic book series had changed the modern movie star, Shang-Chi And The Legend Of The Ten Rings actor Simu Liu took to Twitter to defend his job.Tarantino wasn’t attacking it though.
Exactly. One way to interpret his comments is “The characters in Marvel movies are so iconic that actors who play them are overshadowed.”
I kinda think QT was somewhat attacking MCU actors, but it’s a strange attack unless they’re actually publicly placing importance on being a movie star. It’s strange partly in that most actors at least try to pretend to be modest that it’s not about being a movie star, and that rather it’s about “the craft”.So, when I read QT’s statement as a little nostalgic for older-school movie stars, what I’m thinking is “is it really a bad thing to have the characters be the stars?” Was that a dig and should it have been taken as a dig? While you have legit stage stars, I feel like it’s fairly common for theater roles to be the real stars (Hamlet, Willy Loman, Jean Valjean/Eponine, Blanche DuBois, Elphaba, Alexander Hamilton, Georges Seurat). I guess I’m surprised that people would argue about whether or not they’re a star, again at least publicly.
Eh, he also went on to say: “I mean, I’m not the first person to say that. I think that’s been said a zillion times…but it’s like, you know, it’s these franchise characters that become a star… I’m not even putting them down frankly, to tell you the truth… But that is one of the — the legacy of the Marvel-ization of Hollywood movies.”I think for Quentin, part of the reason to mourn the loss of movie stars is that, for a director/producer/general filmmaker, getting a movie star attached to a project could be the difference between a movie based on an original script getting greenlit or not. Either way he doesn’t sound like he’s attacking anyone to me.
“I’m not even putting them down frankly”Yeah that’s like when someone says “no offense.”
“Yeah that’s like when someone says “no offense.””
Except it’s not an insult to imply that an actor isn’t a movie star.
So what was the put down? What he says is completely accurate.
I mean, it can be completely accurate if I tell a fat person that they’re fat. That doesn’t mean it’s not a putdown.
Okay. So what did he say that was the equivalent of calling someone fat? He didn’t say anything negative or critical of anyone.
Are you asking me to just quote you back what he said, because you can go up to the article to see what he said. I already know that you don’t think it’s an insult. My quoting it here isn’t going to magically make you think it’s an insult. Just say you don’t think it’s an insult and go.
He also said, “My only axe to grind against them is they’re the only things that seem to
be made. They’re the only things that seem to generate
any kind of excitement amongst a fan base or even for the studio making
them. That’s what they’re excited about. And so it’s just the fact that
they are the entire representation of this era of movies right now.
There’s not really much room for anything else. That’s my problem.”Except, they aren’t. They aren’t winning awards. The three MCU movies that came out this year, plus The Batman and Black Adam, are far from the representation of the year, whatever that means, and hardly something to have a problem with, and he sure as hell shouldn’t have a problem with people being passionate about them.
Ehhh… I dunno’ that it really matters that they aren’t winning awards. Especially around here, it’s not hard to find people lamenting that the Best Picture Oscar goes to some boring, pseudo-intellectual, movie that “no one has seen” instead of whatever movie left the biggest impact on popular culture (I don’t agree that that’s how the Oscar should be awarded; I’m just saying that argument’s out there). Movies that win awards and movies that leave cultural impact aren’t always the same. And I can see how Tarantino feels that the entire MCU can be described as a representation of the last decade.I can see arguments against it too, but I don’t fall one way or the other on it.
You’d think a guy like Tarantino would be excited about the horror renaissance that’s going on right now.
“I kinda think QT was somewhat attacking MCU actors”
No, he wasn’t.
I think for big musicals like Wicked or Hamilton people are there for the show, not necessarily the actor, especially on a national tour or regional production where the big stars rarely appear. Although Les Mis, Wicked, and Hamilton would be able to jack their prices even higher if Colm Wilkinson, Adele Dazeem, or Lin-Manuel Miranda returned.But for plays like Hamlet or Death of a Salesman, the star is often the main attraction. Death of a Salesman especially seems to have a Broadway production with a big movie star every few years.And what’s Tarantino famous for? Making has-beens famous again. Of course he loves movie stars. They’re the reason he has a career. He wouldn’t have gotten financing for Reservoir Dogs without Harvey Keitel. Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown were both comeback vehicles for their stars.You might say that Marvel did the same thing with Robert Downey Jr. in Iron Man. But really, they do it with their corny old IP.
Well I mean Simu Liu has only been in a total of one films. And he got pretty famous for it. So yeah Tarantino is directly taking a stab at people like Simu Liu. I’m surprised Tom “owes his career to Spider-Man” hasn’t chimed in with a “hold my beer” yet cuz he’s probably the biggest contradiction to what Tarantino said considering that he’s headline soulless action films like Uncharted now. The MCU absolutely turned Holland into a movie star and it’s not really debatable.
I saw Slumberland last night (it sucks). I’d love to hear Quentin Tarantino try to argue that Jason Momoa got that for some other reason beyond Aquaman shooting him to fame. It certainly wasn’t his acting chops that got him the lead in Slumberland.
The bottom line is that like Tarantino is invalidating Simu Lius career with his statement cuz he hasn’t really done anything else. So on its head he’s immediately saying that Simu Liu either isn’t a real movie star or he is incapable of becoming a real movie star. So yeah I can understand his frustration especially as a POC.
Uncharted isn’t really the best example of how Tom Holland is a huge movie star who can carry a movie single-handedly, though, since it’s also based on a hugely successful prior IP; Nathan Drake is a pretty iconic video game character. And IIRC Cherry didn’t exactly set the world on fire.
I believe that Simu Liu is incapable of being a real movie star. This guy’s basically the Dolph Lundgren of his generation.
This trend of deflecting any and all criticism against your work by playing the ‘diversity’ card is getting tiresome. The fact that a Chinese born actor would celebrate Disney who has a long history of blatant racism and kowtowing to China on LGBTQ/diversity issues is too perfect. Yeah, we get it. Your paycheck means more than your ethics. shut up already.
Well the past few MCU movies (and some other Disney movies) have been banned in China and other regions for those exact reasons. Also, what exactly is the alternative? Just keep letting white actors get all the lucrative, high-profile jobs while all the actors of Chinese descent (and other POC) just sit in the corner? That’ll sure show Disney.Not to mention the fact that having an Asian leading actor in a high-profile movie might be good representation for certain groups of people in a world where shouting “China flu” at them or physically attacking them happens on a regular basis.
Yeah man. Just like how Denzel Washington and Will Smith ended racism against black people
kowtowing to China
But they don’t get to point their nose at me or anyone.
Can Marvel fans and it’s famous stars just be happy they completely dominate modern cinema, are financial blockbusters, and also get recognized at the highest levels of award shows? Why do they treat any criticism of the MCU as an insanely personal attack? Not everyone has to like your movies guys
Citation please.
https://gen.medium.com/the-decade-comic-book-nerds-became-our-cultural-overlords-f219b732a660There ya go.
Yeah, that’s not a fucking citation of the claim. That’s just another person making some stupid fucking generalizations about a fandom while using a single Twitter user as their evidence.
You don’t think your angry, nerdrage hostility to anyone who’s dares criticise Marvel’s dominance isn’t evidence enough?
I’m more angry as a scientist that idiots think that any link they can google using some of the terms in a claim is a citation in support of that claim, kiddo.
as a scientistAh. The neckbeard equivalent of “as a mother”. Love it.Well, as an artist and a journalist, you’re not qualified to comment on art and media, so stay in your lane, or, as is more likely, rancid basement.Y’know, since you want to play the “muh qualifications” game. But really, I don’t give a shit, because unlike neckbeards, I’m more than confident to state whatever I want and not have to fall back on institutionalised cultural capital. I’m not a dweeb – I generate my own, baby!This is an internet comments section. Not your Phd thesis. But again, thank you for continuing to prove that article I posted correct: you basement-dwelling neckbeards bleating about your STEM qualifications as if it matters where it doesn’t not only don’t deserve happiness and the pop-cultural prominence your Disney movies have given you, you’re not emotionally mature enough handle it either.
This whole “not real cinema/movie stars/etc.” argument is an opinion, usually one based in emotion.
“I loved the ‘Golden Age’ too.. but it was white as hell.” is the first time I can recall someone providing a counterargument that’s just a fact.
““I loved the ‘Golden Age’ too.. but it was white as hell.” is the first time I can recall someone providing a counterargument that’s just a fact.”
Sure, except that it’s not a counterargument, and it’s got literally nothing to do with the topic.
Tarantino wasn’t talking colour, he wasn’t talking diversity, he was talking about the FACT that nobody is seeing Marvel movies because of the actors.
When was the last non-franchise movie that a Marvel actor opened?
The people who are movie stars in the Marvel Universe were movie stars before Marvel. People like RDJ and Paul Rudd.
Shang-Chi was Simu Liu’s first film… I mean like he owes his current level of fame entirely to the MCU. He’s also actually making a great point about representation (he is a minority)…. so shutup?
Hey look someone with a Marvel related username absolutely overreacting to mild criticism and telling them to shut up on the section of website solely dedicated to discussion.
So all of these directors who weren’t involved in these movies at all are good to criticize them from the outside but stars and directors who are involved should shut up about it?I always kind of wonder if people who post this type of comment take pride in their own careers or accomplishments. Because I’d sure as hell be pissed if someone who has never worked with me personally tried to diminish what I’ve done in my career as QT did.
I mean, Shang-Chi was his first movie, so I think it’s pretty diminishable.
“My only axe to grind against them is they’re the only things that seem to
be made,” he continued. “They’re the only things that seem to generate
any kind of excitement amongst a fan base or even for the studio making
them. That’s what they’re excited about. And so it’s just the fact that
they are the entire representation of this era of movies right now.
There’s not really much room for anything else. That’s my problem.”
That Liu (and harcore Marvel fans) can take this absolutely mild criticism, that isn’t even directed at any exact film and more just a critique of the current state Hollywood, as a personal attack is quite strange to me. He’s not even ‘diminishing’ Liu’s career as an actor at all. I don’t understand how a critique of an umbrella of 27 films (more really if you include DC movies which he is also alluding to in his quote) is him looking down on you specifically (in Liu’s case).
C’mon dude – that is clearly not the quote Simu is responding to. It’s the other piece QT said about the movie stars in MCU movies not really being movie stars.
I like what he said here but yeah, I remember took Disney’s release plan for Shang Chi as a personal attack too.
I don’t care about Marvel but the criticism is rich coming from Tarantino, who wrote a superhero white man to beat the real-life best fighter in the world, needlessly stretching the bounds of credibility and good taste beyond any capes and tights. Still don’t understand his motivation, but for doing doing that to Bruce Lee, Quentin Tarantino can eat shit.
Isn’t your nose always pointed at whoever you’re looking at?
“Isn’t your nose always pointed at whoever you’re looking at?”
He wasn’t looking at the unknown guy who played Shang Chi and who fucking DEFINITELY, out of EVERY SINGLE ACTOR IN A MARVEL MOVIE is not a movie star.
Awkwafina is more of a movie star than he is.
I think he meant ‘thumb their nose’?
oh, ok.
Not always if you’re one of those anteater things or an elephant
Right, of course.
He got Chinese eyes
For what it’s worth, Simu was basically unknown before his debut and Shang Chi rocketed him to international stardom. It’s not surprising he felt personally attacked.
But that proves Tarantino’s point. He became famous because he was attached to the Marvel brand. It would have been the same with literally any other actor taking that role. None of the people who became famous from Marvel can open a movie, not Chris Hemsworth, not Chris Evans, and not Simu Liu, because they’re replaceable. And that’s why he’s getting defensive about it. Nobody wants to hear that they don’t really matter.
Chris Evans was a bonafide movie star long before the MCU.
Chris Evans was a working actor, full stop.
The guy who plays Mayhem in the Allstate insurance commercials is a “working actor”. The Human Torch was a tad bit more than that.
Every single person in both of Tim Story’s FF movies was a working actor, with the possible exception of Lawrence Fishburne.
*fun fact: I work in the back end at Hulu and I’m working on an Allstate ad right now.
Jessica Alba had a bit more of a profile, but I’m not sure I’d call her an actor.
Oh, totally. I remember taking a class on writing and developing pilots in college and the instructor held up a copy of the pilot for Dark Angel, asking why this one went to series when others didn’t. (I don’t think she liked my answer when I said it was James Cameron’s follow-up to Titanic, and his first ever tv project, so FOX would have bought literally anything with his name on it, including a show where he just sits and reads a phone book.)
That’s Dennis Duffy you’re talking about!
Lucas Lee had like 6 movies out before he was Captain America! Action Doctor!https://twitter.com/edgarwright/status/1263269221519196162
No he wasn’t. He was in movies, but hardly anyone was going to Sunshine or Street Kings or even Scott Pilgrim based solely on Chris Evans being in them. Maybe the Fantastic Four films, but that’s largely a ‘best of a dud’ factor.
That just isnt true.
Yeah, that was a stupid take. As others have pointed out, Chris Evans was the star of multiple films before joining the MCU. Not to mention Robert Downey Junior, Paul Rudd, Scarlet Johannson, Florence Pugh, Anthony Mackie, etc. I’m not sure why he (and apparently you) think casting talented unknowns and turning them into knowns is shady, while casting has-beens and making them stars again is totally awesome.And mighty white indeed of you to say that arguably the biggest Asian star right now doesn’t matter and is replaceable. I guess they all look alike, right?
And mighty white indeed of you to say that arguably the biggest Asian star right now doesn’t matter and is replaceable. I guess they all look alike, right?C’mon, Stegrelo isn’t saying no one would notice if Liu was replaced because no one would notice it’s a different person. They’re saying that, and I happen to agree, there’s nothing too uniquely special that Liu brings that no one else could. I can’t imagine anyone saying, “this Simu guy, he’s got that it factor! No one else could be Shang-Chi!” He’s replaceable.
Anyone’s ultimately replaceable in anything, but Liu is incredibly talented and has a huge fanbase. I guess you don’t connect to him, but I’ve always thought that the majority of our “movie stars” were pretty untalented.Also, who exactly would you say is the marquee Chinese American movie star right now? Who would have made a difference here, in the “movie star” sense?
Some people will say he’s too old, but James Hong could step into the role, because that man can do anything.
I love James Hong, but the fact that he was the first who came to mind really underscores my point.
To me, Simu Liu was effectively an unknown pre-Shang-Chi. As other people have said, he got really big as a result of Shang-Chi rather than having been cast in a big movie because of being marquee name. So, when I say he’s replaceable, I think any other ‘unknown’ might have been cast for the first movie. He just wasn’t a movie star at the time. But, you’re right that I don’t connect to him, so he still doesn’t feel like a movie star to me even now.Liu probably is one of the bigger Chinese American names out there, especially with still so few Asian men in Hollywood, but pre-Shang-Chi was as unknown to me as Ross Butler was. If they had originally cast Chris Pang or a martial arts actor from HK, I don’t know how much worse off we would have been.
Chinese-Canadian. Or just Canadian?
Funnily enough, when I watched Shang-Chi, I wasn’t too enthused about watching a movie about Shang-Chi the character (Dr. Strange and Iron Fist turned me off watching anything Asian-flavored by Marvel). And Simu Liu was only a mild draw. I mainly watched Shang-Chi because I wanted to watch movie stars like Awkwafina, Tony Leung, and Michelle Yeoh to see what they would do in a big budget American movie.
Awkwafina is right there in the same movie.
after watching Shang-Chi, the least I remember is Liu’s performance…
Holy crap, that is the mos disingenuous and outright hostile interpretation of someone’s comment I have ever come across. Have you thought about going pro?
Dramatic much, son?
Let ‘em have it. Anyone who puts this much energy into defending their favorite comic book movies probably doesn’t have much else going on.
To be a movie star doesn’t just mean “played the lead in a film”, though. It means being famous enough to be a household name and be able to greenlight a movie by just being attached. Tom Cruise is a movie star. Chris Evans isn’t a movie star before or after Marvel.
Cool. Why the fuck is it a bad thing to cast actors that aren’t Tom fucking Cruise? Like what even is this criticism? I kind of feel like casting the best person for a role rather than just grabbing one of the 10 overexposed “movie stars” has always been considered a positive until Marvel did it.Like, are you and Tarantino seriously saying that a movie is no good unless they put Tom fucking Cruise in it?Of all the desperate criticisms of Marvel (while there are plenty of valid ones), this is just like insanely fucking stupid.
It’s not. There are reasons to cast unknowns and there are movies that benefit from this because often with stars you see the actor more than the character. But the fact is, as others have mentioned, Marvel movies aren’t generating stars for that very reason. The actors are in third place behind the IP and the CGI (and in the future may very well be replaced entirely with CGI). My argument is with the laughable assertion that Chris Evans was (or even is) a “Movie Star” for good or ill.
So like, your argument is that the ideal is movies where the appeal is all the “movie star” rather than the actual content? Shame on Marvel for prioritizing the actual story etc. and just casting who they feel would be the best rather than only casting on the basis of box office appeal! Is that seriously what you’re arguing? You seriously think that studios constantly using the same actors regardless of their fitness (or talent) in order to get asses in the seats was awesome and the goal of all casting, and that it’s shameful that Marvel has stories and characters that people want to see and don’t have to convince people to see their movies because fucking Affleck or J-Lo are in them?This is so bizarre.
A true wokester at work
Incels gotta incel, huh?
Shit, buddy. How long you gonna be like this? We gotta get you laid ASAP. Hell, I’m feeling so bad for you that I’m actually considering fucking you in the ass myself.
“But they don’t get to point their nose at me or anyone.”
It’s amazing this guy does an acting gigs, he’s so busy defending himself against the entire world that has it out for him.
I get it if you’re defending a writer, a director, an actor, etc.But as it’s quoted here he’s defending a studio. Studios are billion dollar soulless corporate entities focused on profit above all else. They don’t deserve nor need defending.
Disney soulless? Excuse me
First of all, he’s defending himself and his peers from QT’s shade about them not being bona fide movie stars.Second, he isn’t defending a studio, just making a point that this particular studio has a dedication to diversity that is rare in the industry. I can remember exactly one major Hollywood film with an Asian cast, like ever. So credit when credit is due.
It’s not “shade,” it’s criticism. When you put art out in public, you are subjecting it to criticism. Trying to deflect that criticism by saying, “I’m not going to stand by while people insult diversity” is just about the most bullshit move you can possibly pull. Marvel is not a social justice movement. It’s a corporate entity that tries to make as much money as possible. Also, it’s unbelievably condescending to creators who belong to underrepresented groups to suggest that their work can’t be subject to criticism out of diversity concerns. Simu Liu ought to be proud of having helmed a successful Marvel movie. That is a thing to be proud of. But people are going to have opinions about his movie in particular and about Marvel generally, and no one has to care about his pride.
This wasn’t a critique of the aesthetic qualities, son. This is shade.Who the fuck said “their work can’t be subject to criticism out of diversity concerns?” Tarantino SHADED him as not a real movie star and SHADED Marvel for its role in elevating “non-movie stars,” and Liu said D&I was one of the great things about Marvel.Burned the fuck out of that straw man, bruh.
No disrespect to the guy, but Simu Liu has starred in one movie to date, and that one movie is part of the MCU. Hardly anyone, to date, is going to see a movie purely because Simu Liu is in it. He’s not a household name. It’s not throwing shade to suggest he’s not yet a movie star in the sense that Tarantino is clearly discussing, because he hasn’t shown that he is one yet. When movies are getting greenlit and promoted and released and making money because his name is attached to them, then we can talk whether he’s a bona-fide movie star, but he hasn’t demonstrated that ability yet.George Clooney is a movie star. Samuel L Jackson is a movie star. Julia Roberts is a movie star. Comparatively, Simu Liu is an actor who has starred in a movie.
Cool story. Who was the movie star in Reservoir Dogs? When was the last time Travolta, Greer, Forster, etc. had a hit movie before Tarantino cast them.I’m not arguing that Liu is a big movie star. I’m questioning why we are criticizing a successful studio whose films are going to make money regardless for giving relatively obscure actors the spotlight rather than just using the same 10 big stars as anyone else. Isn’t that kind of thing supposed to be good? And isn’t that something that Tarantino himself, and every single fucking movie that he treats like the greatest shit ever and emulates?Marvel has become the cinematic Hillary Clinton. Everything they do is subject to so much criticism, even when it’s something that everybody else does and no one ever called out until they did it. It’s sad. And revealing.
This bootlicking is pathetic. Grow up.
Whose boot am I licking, dickhead? Forgive me for not keeping Tarantino’s dick in my mouth and supporting him no matter how nonsensical his bullshit is, son.There’s plenty of things to criticize about Marvel Studios. This stupid nonsense that Tarantino said isn’t it. It’s not 1994 anymore; we don’t have to keep pretending that he’s a pure voice.
Cool story. Who was the movie star in Reservoir Dogs?Harvey Keitel was probably the closest, but when did I or anyone else say that Quentin Tarantino worked exclusively with movie stars? He’s simply nostalgic for an age where they were popular. Also, maybe dial back the condescending jerk tone a little? We’re just having a conversation about movies here. I’ve tried to be polite to you despite any disagreement we’ve had, and I’d appreciate the same courtesy.I’m not arguing that Liu is a big movie star.
I mean, you’re also arguing that it’s an insult when people suggest that he isn’t, so… kind of seems like you are. Marvel has become the cinematic Hillary Clinton. Everything they do is subject to so much criticism, even when it’s something that everybody else does and no one ever called out until they did it.
Dude, come on. They’re a movie studio. They make good-t0-okay superhero action flicks. They make billions of dollars every year and dominate modern popular culture. They’ll be fine if not every single thing people say about them is absolutely fawning praise about how amazing in every respect they are.
I’m not particularly defending Marvel here.My only point is that lamenting over the fact that people care more about the story than the movie star is fucking stupid.
Really? Because comparing Marvel Studios to Hillary Clinton of all people again kind of suggests otherwise. Also, it’s not that people care about the story over the star that Tarantino’s talking about. I suspect that, whatever else you say about him, he’d be perfectly fine with that. Like his movies or not, most of his career has been based around playing around with narrative and story. It’s that people care about the fictional character over the star. Let’s be totally honest here, no one’s getting that excited over the stories in Marvel movies, they’re for the most part pretty standard and formulaic. Tarantino’s point is that the stories themselves aren’t particularly interesting and people don’t really care about them, but where they at least used to care about a real person they now care more about the imaginary fictional character the real person is playing.
Once again, why is it better for people to go to the movies because they love the actor rather than the content?Why the hell is this suddenly aspirational?
Again, you seem to be trying to change the goalposts a little there; it’s not the ‘content’ Tarantino is arguing they care about (the content itself is often okay but unmemorable), it’s a fictional character specifically. As for why, you’d probably have to ask Tarantino himself that, because it’s really more his point of complaint not mine (and, as I’ve suggested elsewhere, really more of a side-issue to his broader concerns). But I suppose, if nothing else, at least following the career of a real actor is at least following a real person who actually exists rather than someone who is completely made up. It suggest a certain willingness to engage with the real world rather than a purely made up one. I suppose also that following the career and filmography of a real actor also means a greater chance that the audience will see that actor in a wider variety of genres, performances, and movie experiences, where following a fictional character is tying you to one specific character who exists to tell one kind of story in one kind of genre. Deciding to go see movies just because Robert Downey Jr is in them doesn’t guarantee that every movie you see will be great, but it does open you up to seeing dramas, romances, comedies, mysteries and, yes, superhero films. Going to see movies just because Iron Man is in them, however, means that you’re just seeing nothing but superhero films, and usually the same kind of superhero film. Fine if you like superhero films of course, but it is, if nothing else, a little limited. So it kind of is about the content as well, I guess, variety being the spice of life, and such.
Also, late thought, but I’m not so sure it’s either ‘sudden’ or ‘aspirational’. Audiences have been fascinated by and shown brand loyalty to their favourite movie stars since at least the 1920s, it’s a think we’ve done for about as long as there’s been cinema. It’s hardly a sudden thing. And I don’t think Tarantino views having a favourite movie star as being a marker of someone’s prestige or social importance or anything, it’s just a part of the overall cinematic experience he kind of enjoys and thinks has some value.
This is fucking bizarre. Oh, no, people are too focused on the art itself rather than the personalities behind the artifice! Alternatively, the personalities behind the artifice simply aren’t from the pre-approved list of major starts without whom one simply can’t make a film!!!At least if you’re Marvel, that is. QT sure as shit never lamented the lack of movie stars in all of the genre films he has always celebrated and ripped off.I remain flabbergasted that so many people have spent so many words defending this absolutely stupid thing that Tarantino said because it allows them to dunk on Marvel.Surely there are more legitimate complaints than that they are making blockbuster films that don’t follow this arbitrary rule for how one should cast blockbuster films.
Once again — try to dial down the snide snappy tone, please. Disagree with me all you want, but I’ve been perfectly polite to you and we’re just talking about Marvel films, it doesn’t matter enough to justify acting abrasive, condescending and hostile. It just makes you look like you lack perspective on the issue. They’re just superhero movies. Also, once again — please stop trying to change the goalposts. You’ve done that repeatedly every time you’ve tried to complain about Tarantino focussing on movie stars instead of ‘story’ or ‘content’ or ‘the art itself’, and it’s not working. For all that you’re repeatedly trying to make it seem so, that’s not what he’s doing and you know it full well. He’s talking about the emphasised importance being placed on the fictional character, not the story. What he is talking about is, ultimately, the exact same artifice you’re sneering at Tarantino for embracing with regards to movie stars; the only difference is that movie stars are at least real and superheroes are made up. Disagree with Tarantino or me all you want, but at least react to what we’re actually saying, not the strawman that you’re twisting the words into saying because it makes it easier for you to try and dismiss Tarantino as some sort of philistine for not appreciating the art of, um, the Marvel Cinematic Universe. You just come across as a bit disingenuous.As for all that stuff about ‘legitimate complaints’ and whatever, I’ve repeatedly suggested that Tarantino’s point about movie stars is, if anything, a secondary issue to the larger concerns of filmmakers like him and Scorsese. If anyone’s spending too much time and too many words blowing this out of proportion because it allows them to dunk on someone they disagree with, it’s arguably you. Especially since the harshest thing I’ve personally said about Marvel in any of my responses to you about this is that the quality of their films is generally good-to-okay. Man, however will you or they recover from such a dunking.
Really tying yourself into knots trying to defend QT and come for Marvel while not actually directly defending the stupid fucking “movie star” fetishism.Son, why not find a totally different article where someone is making a criticism of Marvel that isn’t totally fucking stupid and go die on that hill, rather this one where you’re committed but also obviously embarrassed about the stupid fucking argument that you’re defending?I didn’t say QT was a Phillistine for not loving Marvel. I said he’s a fucking clown to call them out for casting whoever the fuck they want because they know that their content will sell tickets so they don’t have to just use overly familiar faces to do so.There are unquestionably valid critiques to be made of a juggernaut like Marvel studios. Them not adhering to a hopelessly outdated Tiger Beat movie star model is not one of them. Just stop.
Son, why not find a totally different article where someone is making a criticism of Marvel that isn’t totally fucking stupid and go die on that hillWhat, and rob myself of your charming, pleasant and delightful company? You jest, surely.You know, for someone who’s “not particularly defending Marvel” and thinks this whole thing is “totally fucking stupid”, you sure do seem weirdly wound up, aggressive and — dare I say — committed about all of it. Might want to take your own ‘just stop’ advice there as well. It takes two to tango, after all. Also, I did defend it. Like, two posts up. It’s right there.
My dude, I’m not wound up. I’m beyond amused at the number of people who think that the best way to score points against a big studio in the name of art or something is to get behind this stupid assault on them not casting Tom Cruise in all their films or something. It’s the saddest, most nonsensical attempt to be edgy I’ve ever seen, and yet it’s sucking in so many super unique and awesome people.
I’d like to believe that, but honestly? You haven’t been sounding amused. You’ve been sounding very annoyed. Also… no one’s mentioned Tom Cruise. At all.
Well, I’d hardly expect someone white knighting for movie stars to be sensitive to tone.And I’m so sorry to misrepresent you by using one big movie star as a metonym for the movie stars that are important enough to write hundreds of words of complaint about the fact that sometimes people make movies without them! What’s your list of the movie stars without whose presence a movie is worthless?
Says the person white-knighting for the entire Marvel Cinematic Universe.
Kiddo, not even. Make any one of hundreds of valid criticisms of the MCU, and I’ll probably agree.Cry about how the studio is disrespecting “movie stars” by casting other people and emphasizing the ACTUAL content of the films (and actual abilities of the cast) rather than simply the fame status of the stars, and I’ll laugh and how fucking stupid you’re being.
If you say so, my friend, I’ll leave it there. Just know that your general tone, attitude and the nature of your responses throughout this page have very much suggested otherwise, no matter how many times you patronise me by calling me ‘kiddo’.
Hey that’s super cool. Let me know all of the other things I’ve discussed here or defenses I’ve made of Marvel, beyond “Tarantino’s take on how essential movie stars must be when casting a film is stupid as fuck.” Then you can put on your big boy pants.It’s kind of hysterical how so many of you guys needed to go scorched earth here defending Tarantino’s super brilliant critique, and then in the second article about Sam Jackson basically saying the same thing I said about how fucking stupid Tarantino’s take was, all the commenters suddenly agree.
Dude, surely you must realise that the fact that you’re still keeping this going even after I’ve offered to let it drop is just further evidence that you’re obviously really unnecessarily invested in this despite insisting otherwise.Especially since of all those people on the other article you’re talking about, I’m not one of them.Just let it go, man. It’s been, like, almost a week.
Right. I should let it go because you realized your argument was bogus, so you dropped it and just came for me? Like seriously? We both know that your take was inane, but you returned another day to insult me and get the last word? And you’re disappointed that I didn’t demonstrate the maturity to let you get one more nonsensical dig in without responding?Tell it to your copies of Tiger Beat.
Okay, I’ve been prolonging this discussion for longer than I should have as well. I’ll concede that. I could have dropped the matter much sooner as well. We could have agreed to disagree. I mightn’t have been acting as maturely as I could have throughout our conversation. And if I’ve said anything that has caused offence, I genuinely apologise. It was unintended.But frankly, of the two of us, you’ve been far more abrasive and rude to me throughout our conversation than I have been to you. (For one, I’ve not called anything you’ve said ‘inane’.) I’ve said several times that I’ve found your tone unnecessarily hostile and asked you to moderate it, and have been ignored each time. So if you do feel insulted by anything I’ve said, frankly, you’ve only got yourself to blame. I’ve tried very hard to be polite to you and have received nothing back from you but sneering, hostility, and barely-veiled insults. So please don’t act the victim. My patience is not limitless, and you haven’t been your better self in this conversation either.I think we should leave it there. Please don’t reply to me again.
You have zero self-awareness.
QT is one of the main reason there is a hong kong cinema scene in the americas and disney explcitly tried to get MS’s all asian cast film banned from ever being shown while communicating with the chinese government about it. These movies are for babies and you are crying that gordan ramsey doesnt like mcdonalds
Riiiiiiiiiight. None of us in the U.S. were watching Hong Kong films until Quentin fucking Tarantino did a pastiche. Give me a fucking break. Not only has that been a thing in the states since, fucking forever, the Wu-Tang Clan did way more to drive attention to Hong Kong cinema than Tarantino, more than a decade earlier. Just because you didn’t discover all of the genre films Tarantino borrows from until you saw him do it does not mean that the rest of us needed QT to teach us about film.I’m not sure what all-Asian film you are talking about, but that story also kind of sounds like bullshit. Maybe some more detail would help, but it sounds unrealistic, and given that you’ve already been unreliable with facts, I’m beyond skeptical of your account.And yes, Marvel makes all-ages films, but let’s not pretend that Tarantino is making super sophisticated and adult films. And it’s weird; like, I thought you were acting like QT was awesome, but then you compared him to Gordon Ramsey, so it seems like you think QT is an obnoxious narcissistic blowhard of questionable talent that has made a career out of being a complete fucking asshole and trashing other people. It’s bizarre.Trashing Marvel films online and sucking Tarantino’s dick (in 2022, no less) does not make you a sophisticate, you delusional sophomore.
Lmao you act like an expert and you dont even know what Kundun is or the history behind it. It is obvious you are maybe 15 years old. Also enter the 36 chambers came out in in 93 and QT put out the Chungking Express in 94, not a decade later. Now you seem to have a personality flaw that makes you think ignorance is some sort of virtue. Go watch your childrens movies and think you are the next Jonathan Rosenbaum I guess.
QT didn’t promote Chungking Express until 1996, dickhead. And many of us had been watching actual Hong Kong movies for years by then, including just about everyone from NYC on Saturday afternoons since the 1980s. I was referring to QT’s tacky tribute to Hong Kong cinema (Kill Bill) anyway. And tf does Kundun have to do with this conversation?Nice try, kiddo.
Wow reading comprehension is getting lower and lower with these kids. You should check out the novel Enders Game and try reading it from start to finish, it probably is a little mature for you but you will really get a kick out of it kiddo.
Wow that has to be one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen. Dude tries to flex that he’s read a 200-page YA novel. Super impressive.It seems like the plight of the poor unfortunate movie star is really bringing out the absolute saddest kids overcompensating to restore their self-esteem. Is it your thesis that, had I read that corny 7th grade reading level book written by the batshit crazy Mormon homophobe that you are super proud of having finished, I would suddenly understand why it’s super important to always put a certified official movie star in every film ever?
You struggle with reading comprehension so much that you cant tell I was impling Enders Game is about the highest level of book you could read. I think Cities of the Plain or even Dune would likely be too boring or challenging for someone such as yourself.
So, I take it you haven’t actually read many books for adults, huh? Your new reach is a fucking Dune book? Jesus Christ.It’s pretty weird that your final conclusion here is that anyone who doesn’t debase themselves in the name of the absolute primacy and supremacy of fucking MOVIE STARS must be illiterate. The absolute opposite conclusion seems way more likely.Seems like you spend most of your reading time on People Magazine, starfucker.
Your writing really shows how insecure of a person you are. So desperate, agressive and pathetic all at once.
All I ever said was that this arbitrary starfucking was stupid, and like two dozen starfuckers came for me, with the weakest shit.You’re the one who embarrassed yourself first saying I’m “anti-art” because I don’t think movie stars are super important and then tried to position yourself as my intellectual superior because you read some books most people read in grade school, son.Nothing says “secure, non-agressive, and just totally awesome” like calling yourself “destroy god.”By all means, you staggering intellectual giant, carry on only watching movies that start Tom Cruise or Tom Hanks or whoever the fuck is enough of a movie star right now to justify the film’s existence. The rest of us will just enjoy whatever art we like, even if it doesn’t have a megastar attached.
If this is how angry you get in comment sections I would hate to see your bedroom walls!
this is actually the most anti art thing I have ever read. You dont like movies or films or anything at all, you just like feeling like you are smarter than everyone around.
Yes, I feel like I’m going crazy when I see how people talk about Disney-Marvel like it’s some well-intentioned underdog and not McDonalds or Bank of America.I genuinely don’t think QT was saying MCU actors aren’t or don’t deserve to be stars because of their talent. He’s saying that the focus of the studio is the IP, not the actors portraying it. Simu Liu is great, very good in this role, but when it comes down to it the MCU train would keep going with or without him. He could be Denzel Washington or Daniel Day-Lewis, and it truly doesn’t matter. Chadwick Boseman died, and we still got BP2 with only a slight delay.It’s true that Marvel casts more diverse actors than 90’s-era Miramax ever did. But things have nuances. It’s good that studios have realized the world isn’t totally white, but it’s bad their primary focus is the IP they own and not the people who give it life. Don’t forget: Disney is also the studio pioneering the tech to digitally raise the dead, creating CG Carrie Fisher and Peter Cushing. De-aging Mark Hamill and Harrison Ford so they can make new Star Wars and Indiana Jones forever. Would it feel better if the soulless CGI puppet looked like a POC?
We sure we got the right guy here? No one seems to be talking about the n-word or feet.
MCU won who cares what QT or Scorsese says. I agree with them 100% but nothing is going to change until MCU movies start bombing hard. Hopefully the fall of Marvel leads to another golden age of cinema but who knows.
I mean, unless his response was “Tarantino is clearly right,” who cares?
Also, who actually gives a fuck about how robust the crop of “movie stars” is right now. All that ever meant was seeing the same generic white faces in many movies and those movies, often awful, selling well. The attacks on the MCU come from opposing sides. Scorsese says they aren’t art. QT says they lack commercial “movie stars,” even though that’s provably false. If you think this kind of film isn’t cinema, why even care about it at all? Go ahead and make your art films, just like you did when we had different models of commercial films. If you resent Marvel’s ongoing commercial success, go make something people want to see.
It kind of reminds me of the ‘Lord of the Rings’ films. Christopher Lee was obviously a well-respected actor, and Ian McKellan had a bit of name recognition, but a lot of the other cast were pretty low-key or complete unknowns. Sean Bean and Hugo Weaving were probably the more famous cast members and they weren’t exactly superstars. But it was a fantastic cast. Can you imagine a better Aragorn than Viggo Mortensen? A better Samwise than Sean Astin? Peter Jackson could have rounded up a bunch of stars to sell his movie, but instead he got great performers to fill the roles and it was glorious.
That’s a great example, It sure used to be the case that film productions were praised for elevating relative unknowns rather than only casting leads from the tiny pool of approved movie stars. People still talk about films like Diner that cast people who only went on to stardom afterwards. I get that Marvel is such a juggernaut that it inevitably draws resentment, but people sure love to come for Marvel for doing things they’d be fine with otherwise. It’s like Marvel is Hillary Clinton or something.
Reading these guys lamenting blockbuster movies just reminds me of how the column that used to be on here, The Popcorn Champs, basically revealed that the period in the late 60s/early 70s where auteur films were the big hits instead of big crowdpleasers was an anomaly.
“The Popcorn Champs, basically revealed”
Opined. The word is opined. They didn’t prove anything, just offered opinions.
The big crowdpleasers used to have a little more variety than we have now. Jaws and The Sound of Music are not terribly similar.
The attacks on the MCU come from opposing sides. Scorsese says they aren’t art. QT says they lack commercial “movie stars,” even though that’s provably false.In total fairness, that might be because they’re ultimately just two individuals offering their personal opinions based on their own interests and priorities, not the vanguard of a coordinated attack or anything. Scorsese is interested in cinema more as a form of artistic expression rather than as blockbuster entertainment, while Tarantino is a fan of cinema from an era where the personalities and interests of the actors and directors were given more room for expression rather than asked to conform to the demands of recognisable IP and studio-driven cross-platform synergy. Hence why they have different criticisms of an era where cinema is made and presented largely in the form of blockbuster entertainment where the actors and directors are largely asked to conform to the requirements of recognisable IP and studio-driven cross-platform synergy. It’s fine if you like that form of cinema, of course, but it’s also fine if people don’t and have things to criticise about it.If you think this kind of film isn’t cinema, why even care about it at all? Go ahead and make your art films, just like you did when we had different models of commercial films. If you resent Marvel’s ongoing commercial success, go make something people want to see.They would if they could, but it seems that a large part of their complaint is that, thanks in part to the dominance of MCU-style movie-making, it’s becoming a lot harder for them and filmmakers like them to make the films they like to make and see.
“QT says they lack commercial “movie stars,” even though that’s provably false.”
I mean, that’s not remotely what he said, but sure.
What the hell does the MCU have to do with Scorsese and Tarantino making films? Are we pretending like big action blockbusters haven’t been dominant for like three decades?My point about the opposite sides wasn’t a coordinated attack. Just that when you have that kind of success, people are going to attack you, from any side, regardless of what you do.
What the hell does the MCU have to do with Scorsese and Tarantino making films? Are we pretending like big action blockbusters haven’t been dominant for like three decades?Their argument goes: there’s only a limited amount of money in Hollywood, and roughly the same amount of movies are being made and released as ever there was (not counting no-budget straight-to-streaming style cheapos). But if more of those movies have to be big-budget blockbusters connected to some existing IP and/or part of some Marvel-style pre-existing cinematic universe network of films that can be easily translated into the foreign market (read: China) and near-guaranteed a billion-dollar opening weekend in order to be made and released, that means that there’s less room for the kind of individual mid-level standalone less-immediately-lucrative projects that characterises the work of Scorsese and Tarantino to be made and released as well. Blockbusters have existed since the late seventies, but they’re arguing that the trend is to make every movie not just a blockbuster, but a blockbuster than can be or is linked to a preexisting universe of existing IP. I’m surprised you haven’t heard it; it’s been pretty well thrashed out by now.
This argument doesn’t make any sense. How is what a single studio is doing impacting the ability to make other films? I think nearly the exact opposite is true. Movie theaters are dying. With the wealth of home viewing options, there’s very little reason for anyone to go see a movie in the theater, but the film industry has been stuck on that model for so long they continue to struggle to figure out how to budget a movie correctly to recoup their investment given that box office is less of a thing. It’s not that people don’t like comedies anymore; it’s just that most people are perfectly happy to wait for it to be available at home.As a result, there are only a narrow slice of film genres that make enough box office to be successful (Marvel, some horror, some kids animation), and these movies are keeping theaters alive.If Marvel suddenly disappeared, it’s WAAAAAY more likely that movie theaters would just start to vanish than that there would suddenly be a viable commercial case for other films in theaters (which would need to change pricing and margins to make up for the loss of all of the revenue from the actual blockbuster films that enables them to stay operating).The people making this argument should (1) figure out how to make a movie that people want to pay to see in theaters or (2) figure out a different way to make commercially successful films. Either way, they should stop pretending it is the fault of the few studios who know how to make money, or they will never figure things out.
This argument doesn’t make any sense. How is what a single studio is doing impacting the ability to make other films?Because Marvel’s model of filmmaking is currently popular, financially successful and the one everyone’s trying to emulate. They don’t exist in a vacuum. Though I don’t think anyone’s arguing that Marvel are controlling Hollywood like Hydra; they’re just using them as the clearest and most high-profile example of the current trend in movie-making and the effects it’s having on the industry as a whole.
If the primary effect here is that it’s allowing people to make successful films without having to cast one of a handful of bona fide “movie stars,” I cannot fucking understand why that’s a bad thing.
But that’s not the primary effect they’re arguing. They’re arguing that the primary effect is that it’s limiting the kinds of movies that get made to a handful of formulaic genres heavily reliant on pre-existing IP, with even less chance for anything different to be given a chance to break through than there used to be. That’s the bad thing. The “movie stars” thing is just Tarantino being nostalgic for a time when the personality of the creatives involved was the main draw rather than the pre-existing characters they were playing
Hi ‘Mr Late To The Conversation’ here
I’d say stuff like Harry Potter, Twilight and The Hunger Games are equally to blame, as those adaptations also introduced the “least milk this for all we’ve got” practice of splitting the last book into two films.Hollywood likes money and will follow whatever trends are hot. Marvel’s connected universe/’set up the next film in the franchise’ is just latest trend. Western were big until they weren’t and then got reinvented thanks in part to Eastwood and Costner.
I daresay the same will happen with superhero movies and the film industry will adjust accordingly.
Their argument goes: there’s only a limited amount of money in Hollywood, and roughly the same amount of movies are being made and released as ever there was So maybe the solution is— assemble a glove composed of ancient magic space rocks and murder half the people in Hollywood so that there will finally be enough resources to fund the remaining projects?Asking for a large purple friend
I like the way Mr Sonaht thinks!
“All that ever meant was seeing the same generic white faces in many movies and those movies, often awful, selling well.”
Yeah, because before 10 years ago there were only a handful of people in all movies, right, FullOfShitMultitudes?
All that ever meant was seeing the same generic white faces in many movies and those movies, often awful, selling well.So now we get the same generic movies with super diverse casts and those movies, often vapid, repetitive and boring (if not also awful), selling well.
AV Club and any criticism of comic book movies.
The real stars of Marvel movies are the VFX artists. 98% of any Marvel movie is CGI, and a good percentage of the character’s action performance are animated, on top it. I will give the actors credit for being able to live on steamed chicken and broccoli for months. That would be rough.
Couldn’t agree more. The cult of celebrity worship is so very gross (and unearned).
Nobody ever gives credit to the tennis ball on a string that represents the bad guy’s face. That thing works fucking hard.
Not exactly a fan of Simu Liu, but yes, fuck QT.
The fragility of Marvel movie fans (and stars, apparently) is incredible.
It cracks me up that people not at all involved with any movies are out here saying Simu and others should just accept what QT, Scorcese, and others are saying. Shang-Chi was Simu’s first big starring role in theaters – it should be a launching pad for better paying jobs for him. And the super successful old guard is out here trying to diminish the role and what it means.He absolutely is in the right for speaking out and saying his own piece. I’d do the same thing.
While I totally understand an actor getting upset that an industry legend such as Scorsese would condescend their work some way (even though to this day I still think Scorsese was more trying to distinguish that there are different types of picture show and it’s a shame one of them is being pushed out financially by the fun one), I simply can’t understand why someone would be hurt what Quentin Tarantino thinks.It’s fairly well documented that Tarantino is a talented hack, who is abusive to cast members and enabled one of Hollywood’s greatest abusers, let him have his criticisms because of COURSE a guy like that will be dreaming of the “glory days”.
Disney literally had redditors killed to keep this guy’s posts quiet. He has no choice but to stan.
Mr. Liu’s argument is puerile, self-important, and cheap.No one “pointed their nose at you,” Mr. Liu. This conversation isn’t about you, but thanks for sharing.It’s telling when adults show such offense when other adults (to say nothing of all-time masters of the craft in question) mention that maybe it hurts US films when studios marginalize original, artistically daring ideas by relentlessly prioritizing comic book films and franchise products. Something’s hitting a nerve there.For Mr. Liu to insinuate that these film studios that relentlessly proliferate comic book movies for maximum profits and maximum profits alone are intrepid progenitors of social justice, and that criticizing these studios is tantamount to being anti-progress is patently laughable, cheap, and pathetic. Dragging these irrelevant allusions into his argument, as well as the allusions to diversity-deficient days of yore are all lovely red herrings.He’s irked that grownups won’t just keep quiet about being provided an overwhelming dominance of dirt-stupid, endlessly-formulaic, vapid drivel when endeavoring to watch contemporary US films, and apparently he’ll stoop to any subterranean level of logic, reason, and intellectual integrity to lash out at these mean, old men. I mean, he is toiling, after all. He’s providing the world with an acting performance in a comic-book movie. This is a powerful tool for combating injustice and stimulating social progress after all. He’s making a paltry sum for his thankless, faceless, anonymous, vital, important altruism. How dare anyone criticize this.
Why do fans of these shitty movies always get mad when people all them shitty movies?
Just got home from, of all places, Disneyworld. Funny enough, Wednesday I shook this dude’s hand and told him I was a big fan. He walked right past me going into the hotel, and it took me a second to realize “hey, that was an Avenger” and nooobody else seemed to notice him. Talked to the guy showing him around and said “I’m not crazy, right?” “No, you got that right.” He was there to do a Xmas reading at Epcot. And I might not have as quickly recognized him without the MCU, but was already a big fan of his from Kim’s Convenience.
QT’s arguments would have more ground if he didn’t waffle between projects and retirement. The entire industry can’t run on quirky artistes whims.