正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

Martin Scorsese on why plot doesn't matter "Marty said many times that plot is irrelevant to him. He wants to follow the soul of that certain character and all the plot mechanics or how things work out are sort of secondary." "You take a film like Vertigo. The plot...

804,339 次观看 • 1 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

26 条评论

Right Handed Power 的头像
Right Handed Power1 个月前

Vertigo had a legendary plot. The plot:

Abhinav 的头像
Abhinav1 个月前

Scorsese's movies are not really as absurd or abstract as he and his fans claim them to be. May be a few (like parts of Hugo and Aviator) but overall he's only a good storyteller.

Satyam Sai 的头像
Satyam Sai1 个月前

Except THE DEPARTED. That film works because of plotting.

Ren Clips 的头像
Ren Clips1 个月前

ft: @TIME | Leonardo DiCaprio & Martin Scorsese

MATT TRIANO 的头像
MATT TRIANO1 个月前

The problem with this thinking is that nearly every genius filmmaker is half vibes. That's the magic of cinema. That doesn't really work in narrative outside film.

Kino Recommender 的头像
Kino Recommender1 个月前

Coppola disagrees.

Shudder Butter 的头像
Shudder Butter1 个月前

Yes I think execution is way more important than plot, a movie can be about anything but if it’s executed poorly it’s no good and vice versa. Oscars blow because their criteria is the opposite where what a film is about is more important than execution.

Tex Avery 的头像
Tex Avery1 个月前

No wonder his last 3 movies have been so fucking boring

Sarah T 的头像
Sarah T1 个月前

What utter nonsense. Not much beats a GOOD STORY. How's about a good story with interesting characters-is that hard?

🖋️Andrew Fox Ⓥ 的头像
🖋️Andrew Fox Ⓥ1 个月前

Killers of the Flower Moon was the worst movie ever. Dnf

Dimitri Athanitis 的头像
Dimitri Athanitis1 个月前

A director with no personal style or vision or cinematic world, says he wants neither plot. His only film that stands is Taxi Driver because of Schrader's script. He made a career as a protegee of the system, now he is ready to accept studios's diving into complete void with AI.

Paul Roland 的头像
Paul Roland1 个月前

I'm of the opinion that both mutually benefit the other. You think of a basic plot or concept, fill it with characters, and tinker with them both until they are interlinked

Laura Palmer Corinthiana 的头像
Laura Palmer Corinthiana1 个月前

And what does it mean "do not have a plot" or that the plot doesn't matter? Like, when you follow the soul of certain character, that is the fucking plot

daps 的头像
daps1 个月前

@prempyne

madsickcaesar 的头像
madsickcaesar1 个月前

I don't know, it's kind of like they just say stuff. Hitchcock's films having excellent plots wrapped in a special magic unique to his mind, eye, and experience. scorsese has syncophants, and then the general public that he bores to death

natxo iraceburu 的头像
natxo iraceburu1 个月前

Leo still overacts; he needs to reach the point where Pitt is and stop doing that.

Ren Clips 的头像
Ren Clips1 个月前

Hmmm

Rem Rieder 的头像
Rem Rieder1 个月前

The great Howard Hawks also believed that atmosphere and character are much more important plot.

Seth Vargas 的头像
Seth Vargas1 个月前

Scorsese agrees with me that Vertigo is terrible. That’s what I’m taking from this.

Martinez eli 的头像
Martinez eli1 个月前

NGL you already said it, it scorsese-DiCaprio partnership in three lines

Jonathan Swift 🇪🇦 的头像
Jonathan Swift 🇪🇦1 个月前

Ha puesto como ejemplo a Hitchcock, y al inglés jamás se le notó ese truco... Sorry, a Scorsese no le funcionó jamás y menos en sus últimas producciones...

Henry Krinkle 的头像
Henry Krinkle1 个月前

Plot emotions

fast pants 的头像
fast pants1 个月前

Seems like Leo is on this tour of disinfo on how a movie is easy to make. It’s also possible that he disassociates so much he doesn’t remember what he was doing the weeks he was on set. And, Marty just wants to be as “cool” and fawned over as Leo and goes along with it.

Batsy 的头像
Batsy1 个月前

That's why he makes character driven movies.

Max Bills 的头像
Max Bills1 个月前

Scorsese and Hitchcock both suck

Michael Schumacher 的头像
Michael Schumacher1 个月前

sorry... marty, but you're wrong. your example of Vertigo was a false equivalency... I can name a dozens of films that are NOT visual, or cinematic, but are immutably re-watchable solely because of 'Plot. what you are saying is... that 'Plot' doesn't matter to you in your films, and that is why your films, in this modern era, suck.

相关视频

I have a friend who doesn't read anything published in the past 50 years, and the more I think about it, the more I think he's onto something. The reason is that time is the best filter we have for quality. People are bad at judging quality in the moment but very good at getting rid of junk over time. — — "History is not very good at capturing all that is great in art. It is not good at that. There are many great symphonies that have been lost permanently, there are many great painters that died unknown and their paintings are gone, there's novels that have been written that no one will ever read. So history is not good at capturing all this great art. But history is very good at discarding all that is mediocre. And the amount of time that that takes, it's something like 50 years. So over the course of 50 years, what will happen is a lot of stuff that was prominent will be re-filtered and re-filtered and re-filtered, and you'll end up with a smaller group of things which have survived that test of time. So if you think about it right now, if you go back and look at the bestseller lists for 1974, 1973, there's a lot of that that would have been highly regarded at the time, which people do not read anymore for a variety of reasons, and there's some that has survived, and that's a very telling distinction. So in a world where I'm turning 60 this year, you have a limited amount of time, all four of us have active lives, we want to make sure that if we're going to sit down, we're going to read carefully, we're going to meet and we're going to discuss it in detail, we want to make sure that the work is rewarding. And the best way to ensure that is by drawing from the past." amor towles

David Perell

86,765 次观看 • 1 年前

Andrew Huberman on why you can't think your way out of stress: Huberman is asked what he means when he says you cannot control the mind with the mind. His answer reframes how we should approach stress, anxiety, and emotional regulation entirely. "If you're very upset, it's hard to talk yourself out of it. If you're stressed, it's hard to think yourself out of it." He explains that when we're in heightened emotional states, we tend to default to mental strategies, rationalizing, "third personing" ourselves, texting a friend, trying to reason our way back to calm. But according to Andrew D. Huberman, Ph.D., this rarely works: "It's very hard to get yourself out of those states with thinking alone." The solution, he argues, lies not in the mind but in the body. "The beauty of the autonomic nervous system is that it traverses the brain and the body and it connects to essentially all the organs of the body. And it's a two-way street such that certain behaviors, even certain patterns of breathing etc. allow us to shift between very very alert and stressed and very calm." This two-way street is the key insight. The body doesn't just receive signals from the brain, it also sends them back. Shifting your physiology shifts your mental state, which in turn shifts the kinds of thoughts and actions available to you. "If you're very very stressed, you're very very upset, two things happen. One, it's very hard to take your focus off whatever it is that's upsetting you. And if you don't know what's upsetting you, you know, pure anxiety, but you don't know why, it's very hard to take your mind off of the feelings of anxiety." In other words, anxiety hijacks your attention and then traps you there. Trying to think your way out only tightens the grip. The way out is to move through the body first: "If we turn to the body and certain behaviors, we are able to move ourselves along the autonomic continuum. And at that point, when we've done that successfully, we are able to think about things differently." "If you can't control the mind with the mind, look to the body to control the mind."

Kevin Tanaka

27,792 次观看 • 5 个月前

"Courage is far shorter in supply than genius." - Peter Thiel "One of the challenges in writing a book about entrepreneurship or teaching a class on this is that there is sort of no formula. And I think science always starts with a number two. It starts with experiments you can repeat, things you can do over and over again. But there's sort of a sense in which every moment in the history of business, every moment in the history of technology happens only once. The next Mark Zuckerberg will not be starting a social networking company. The next Larry Page will not start a search engine. The next Bill Gates will not be starting an operating system. And so if you are trying to copy these people, you're in some sense not learning from them. And so I think one of the really big challenges in teaching or writing about entrepreneurship is what can you say about being an entrepreneur at all when the key thing is always to do something new, different, that's not precisely been done before. And so the point of departure I start with in Zero to One is a somewhat indirect approach by asking a series of contrarian questions. The business question is, what great company is nobody starting? The more intellectual version of this question is, tell me something true that very few people agree with you on. And this is a fantastic interview question. It turns out to be quite a hard question, even when people can read on the internet that you ask of everybody who comes in the door, it still is a hard question. It's one of those unusual questions where if you know it's on the test, it's still hard. And it's hard not just because we sort of think that new things require brilliance or something like that, but because it's socially difficult. If I ask you that question, if you tell me something like the education system is screwed up or our political system doesn't work very well, those are true answers, but they're not actually good answers because all of us already know them to be true. The good answers are ones that are somehow uncomfortable that the person interviewing you does not actually want to hear. And I think we live in this world where courage is in far shorter supply than genius. And so it is sort of this, it is in a sense this problem of political correctness properly understood, is this very deep, very, very broad sort of a problem."

Founder Mode

12,339 次观看 • 8 个月前