“I still hunt out the good shit because I don’t want to be in Black Widow,” the True Detective actor told the newspaper. “It looks like garbage to me. It looks like a bad video game. I’m embarrassed for those people. I’m embarrassed for Scarlett! I’m sure she got paid five, seven million bucks, but I’m embarrassed for her. I don’t want to be in those movies. I really don’t. I’ll find that kid director that’s gonna be the next [Stanley] Kubrick and I’ll act for him instead.”
Well, if someone the likes of Stephen Dorff, star of Blade, Immortals, Leatherface, and Alone in the Dark is saying this then we should all definitely be listening.
Technically Blade is (or was) classified as an action-horror film, and it really was. Anyone unfamiliar with the source material likely wouldn't watch it and go "Ah, this must be a superhero flick". It was very similar in tone to the original Underworld film, which was also based on a graphic novel, but felt very different at the time given the way both it and Blade were filmed and structured.
Also, Dorff had a lot of screen time in Blade. He wasn't just a typical Marvel villain given five minutes of total screen time and a cheesy send-off with a quip or two from the hero (ala Mickey Rourke in Iron Man 2).
I won't say his character was layered or complex, but it did represent -- at the time -- the edgy, grunge, counter-culture persona that echoed through the belly of society during the mid-to-late 1990s. I know it still doesn't detract from Blade being considered a super hero film, but at the time it really wasn't considered much of a super hero film. It's still a badass action flick even to this day, and holds up quite well both in the effects department and action-choreography.
I tend to doubt we'll be saying the same thing about Black Widow, 20 years from now.
I would argue his villain character was very much on par with typical superhero villains. I barely remember what he did besides turning into a blood god at the end. Blade is a good movie but he isn’t one of the reasons why.
And while Blade isn’t a standard superhero movie, it’s still a part of that genre. It still seems a but odd that he is criticizing an actress for being in one without at least acknowledging his own filmography.
Blade is a good movie but he isn’t one of the reasons why.
No arguments here. Dorff definitely had more screen time than a typical Marvel villain (Yellowjacket and the evil elves from Thor 2 come to mind). But he definitely didn't do much to stand out, certainly not the way Luke Goss in Blade 2 as Nomak.
And while Blade isn’t a standard superhero movie, it’s still a part of that genre
That's true.
It still seems a but odd that he is criticizing an actress for being in one without at least acknowledging his own filmography.
Yeah he's also been in some real stinkers, too. As someone above mentioned, Immortals was pretty awful. Then again, on paper it didn't seem like it would be as bad as it was in execution. I'm sure most people who signed on thought it was going to be like a cross between 300 and Clash of the Titans, but it was just more like... meh. The only good scene was when the Olympians were fighting those things at the very end.
The thing is, I suppose an argument could be made that most of the films Dorff signed on to do probably weren't pitched as the formulaic Marvel tripe that some of the MCU films are. I also wonder if he would still have the same feelings if he were offered a role in Winter Soldier or Civil War, which are arguably two of the best films from the MCU archive and actually hold up as decent action-oriented espionage/political thrillers?
DORFF IS A MEDIOCRE ACTOR WHO GENERALLY APPEARS IN SUB-MEDIOCRE FILMS...OCCASSIONALLY HE GETS LUCKY...LIKE BLADE...ALTHOUGH DEACON FROST IS A FAIRLY WEAK VILLAIN...NORMALLY HE CHOOSES PROJECTS LIKE IMMORTALS,AMERICAN HERO,LEATHERFACE,BUCKY LARSON,ALONE IN THE DARK,FEARDOTCOM,COLD CREEK MANOR,DEUCES WILD...IN FACT HERE ARE THE DORFF FILMS I FIND TO BE "GOOD" FILMS...UM...BLADE?🤔
"Anyone unfamiliar with the source material likely wouldn't watch it and go "Ah, this must be a superhero flick". It was very similar in tone to the original Underworld film, which was also based on a graphic novel, but felt very different at the time given the way both it and Blade were filmed and structured."
People unfamiliar with comic book movies at the time didn't watch Blade and go "This was a cool comic book film", they watched it and went "this is a cool action-horror flick". It was popular because it didn't use the typical super hero tropes for a story structure (i.e., the Hero's Journey). Instead it started with Blade being bad-ass and ended with Blade being even more bad-ass.
Structurally, and story beat wise, it was also very similar to John Carpenter's Vampires.
While people retroactively say that Blade kick-started the blockbuster super hero genre, it did so without presenting itself as a typical super hero film, which is what helped separate it from the super hero films that came before it.
Apparently not, because you proceeded to tell us two movies don't "feel like" comic book movies and then proceeded to tell us they are indeed based o comic books. *slaps forehead*
Apparently not, because you proceeded to tell us two movies don't "feel like" comic book movies and then proceeded to tell us they are indeed based o comic books. *slaps forehead*
Words have meanings. Pay attention to what the words are saying: These are movies that are BASED on comic books but don't FOLLOW the archetype of typical comic book films.
I thought that was made pretty clear, given that -- as I explained -- the movies fit more into the action-horror category than the typical super hero/comic book category.
I don't disagree with what he had to say. This comic book superhero stuff is thoroughly played out. I agree with Steven Spielberg who believes that the genre will inevitably burn out & go the way of the western film genre. That being said, while I do believe Dorff is being honest with his opinions towards the genre, I'm less convinced that he would refuse to star in one if the opportunity of a big super movie pay day was offered to him. I also remember another director or actor saying that future generations will largely look back on the era of oversaturated superhero craze with derision & embarrassment.
To be fair, Blade was over 20 years ago & was the the first successful film based on a Marvel comic well before the industry started churning them out like corporate hotcakes. Comic book movies were far more rare at the time & I'm pretty sure that until Blade came out, Batman was the only commercially successful superhero franchise throughout the entire 90s. I guess it is still somewhat ironic that Dorff starred in a movie that was instrumental in sparking the explosion of the comic book superhero genre that would occur over the next 2 decades.
I definitely sense some bitterness from an actor who was once a young rising star, only for his career momentum to fizzle out prematurely & never truly recover. Again Ironically I feel like after starring in Blade was where his career immediately plateaued.
I had never even heard of his American Hero film but honestly after watching at the trailer, it looks like a "Far Cry" from any sort of conventional Marvel superhero movie.
I mean eventually everything will burn out, so eventually he will be correct. Superhero movies have been a staple for 20 years now, and they won't be going anywhere in the next 10 years. So after 30 years they might burn out, sure. Why would they look back at superhero movies with embarassment? Do we look back at westerns with embarassment? Or are they still considered classics?
I do believe the genre is largely oversaturated and formulaic. I do believe the interest in the genre will take a sharp decline in out in about 5-10 years so I guess having a good near 3 decade run is still impressive. A part from maybe a few classics I would say the old timey western films are often looked back on as a bit of a joke by the younger generations. I think the superhero genre will likely have even more of of backlash. I mean I still can't believe that on IMDB, The Dark Knight is still rated as the fourth greatest film of all time right after Godfather II & I'm part of the generation at that time that made that film one of the most overhyped & overrated films ever.
He is definitely entitled to his opinion and I respect him. But he is wrong imho. Every film does not have to be Casablanca, Lawrence of Arabia or Chinatown. Some films and genres exist to merely entertain and that’s fine. He could have easily said the same about the FAF franchise or the Star Wars franchise. It sounds a little like sour grapes to me.
FAF and Star Wars are actually creatively bankrupt. Marvel movies have been superbly crafted, combining super visuals with the indivudual creative vision of directors and great actors. It does look like it has becoming such a huge franchise that creativity much be smothered in favor of safety, which will spell the death of the franchise of course. As bold as Wandavision and Loki were in their presmises, they kind of bottled out in favor of a safe and friendly simple MCU appeal.
I agree. I am finding myself less interested in the MCU even though as a child born in 1967 and one who was an avid Marvel comic reader I am not down with all this multiverse stuff. Although I do look forward to the introduction of Namor, The Silver Surfer and the Fantastic four. I quit Loki after 3 episodes.
I agree that what we have seen since Endgame hasn't blown me away, but I'm glad they didn't jump right into the new direction they will be going. Even the shows are just pointing at it, but not really invested. I think the new MCU will be primarily cosmic based, and will feel like a new chapter. How good it will be is the question, but Marvel has a good track record.
he did pick the wrong actor to say this about: she has two oscar nominations. has been in films with up and coming directors, established directors; independent films and blockbusters. she is certainly diverse in her choices. can't blame her for taking the big checks here and there.
I think that's his point. He recognizes her talent and thinks she has so much more to offer than this. It's a bit like when Angelina Jolie made a big turn (Tomb Raider) in her career, leaving independent productions and dramatic roles for blockbusters and bigger pay checks.
I don't blame them for going where the money is. At the same time I do understand what Dorff means.
He has some valid points and is entitled to his opinion. However, he really hasn't made it to the "A-list status and just comes off as jealous and bitter.
I happen to like him and would like to see him take some better roles. I also enjoy the Marvel and DC movies 😊
On the other hand, I have absolutely no doubt that if he was offered a major role in one of these movies or a future movie he'd jump on it.