Martin Scorsese: “The Whole World Has Opened Up to Me, but It’s Too Late” | Hacker News Reader

Martin Scorsese: “The Whole World Has Opened Up to Me, but It’s Too Late”

thefilmstage.com

36 pointsthunderbong9 comments

Very short article, the meat of it is:

> the most heartbreaking, revelatory moment of the interview is when the 80-year-old Scorsese opened up about the stories he wants to tell and how little time he has left to tell them. “I wish I could take a break for eight weeks and make a film at the same time [laughs]. The whole world has opened up to me, but it’s too late. It’s too late,” Scorsese said. “I’m old. I read stuff. I see things. I want to tell stories, and there’s no more time. Kurosawa, when he got his Oscar, when George [Lucas] and Steven [Spielberg] gave it to him, he said, ‘I’m only now beginning to see the possibility of what cinema could be, and it’s too late.’ He was 83. At the time, I said, ‘What does he mean?’ Now I know what he means.'”

Maybe Scorsese could try making a movie with a way way more limited budget and in limited time, up his efficiency so to speak.

There is definitely something to be said about how age is the greatest enemy of humanity. We are robbed, robbed of our greatest, always too soon. I suppose this is greed as well, but I wouldn't call it a sin.

Absolutely. Aging is a reality, but I won’t stand for anyone romanticizing it. It is almost entirely a destructive force.

The best we can say is that the limits it brings provides meaning to life. But even that does not ring true to what I’ve seen. Watch children who are still too young to know about death. Do they feel that life is meaningless? No, they jump up out of bed more full of life and drive and (what seems to me) meaning than any adult aware of life’s limits.

> The best we can say is that the limits it brings provides meaning to life.

There is no way that Stalin could still be the ruler of the Soviet Union today because he would be 144yo and people don't live that long. I think mortality prevents individuals and groups from dominating politics, art, and science forever.

The reality of aging and death is terrible, no doubt. I think about it every day. But I see it as a necessary force to prevent stagnation and to ensure that our culture, values, and institutions are continually "redeployed" onto new people.

Maybe I'm wrong. Well mortality means new people will have the opportunity to reevaluate these questions.

That's a touching sentiment, but I'm not sure its true. To me, The Irishman was incredibly disappointing. His best work is sadly behind him. We are all better off for having it. Also, sometimes it's ok to step aside and make space for new voices.

But he doesn’t want to step aside! He is one of the most prolific filmmakers of all time and wants to continue doing what he absolutely loves. Why should he simply ‘step aside and make space’ for new voices? I’m pretty sure he’s earned the right to continue to do what he loves.

Compare and contrast this situation with an established tech company that used to innovate but now puts out derivative drivel. An artist is not a company but there might be parallel incentives and desires.

The Irishman was just okay. I think the problem with stepping aside is that there isn't another Scorsese. Nobody really compares in quality or cultural impact.

He was only allowed to break onto the scene because Hollywood had grown stagnant and their formulaic money makers stopped making money. Many of our best filmmakers of our time came of this brief period of rebirth. Perhaps if superhero movies stopped being so successful, we might enter into another golden age of movies.

Yeah I thought the same thing. I enjoyed his movies but they weren't life changing or anything. Seems a little primadonna-ish. If he wants to retire he can retire. It's fine, there's tons of people making cool stuff nowadays.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com