[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by demonrail666

It's Scorsese lite cos he's copped Scorsese's style and taken it in a lighter, safer direction. It's a poor man's Scorsese, played for laughs. The irony there is Scorsese makes funnier dramas than Russell does comedies. (IMO)

i won't argue that russell is a better/greater director than scorsese-- he isn't.

but russell is one of the best filmmakers of his generation. the previous generation just happens to be better. new hollywood generation >> big indie generation.

in spite of this generational inferiority, russell is definitely idiosyncratic and his own man. his movies may not be as great, but they are his own, in his own style, and they reflect his own obsessions. the reason i resent this subordination and argue so vociferously about it is because it attempts to erase that which makes him an artist in his own right.

russell makes russell movies. one can like them or not (i happen to like them a lot), but this reductio-ad-scorsese is missing the point of them almost on purpose-- it's unfair, and the unfairness is maybe justifiable from ignorance, but from non-ignorance it comes across as a form of ill will.