Grotesque Neo-Realism: Discussing Martin Scorsese's Confounding Style

Is this a college film essay?  This is neither entertaining, nor insightful. How many words is this?  This’as too many words.  There’s no Journalistic logic in this—Who’s gon’ read all this! (Well, somebody’s professor, of course)

This is asinine pedantic pap

Comment by Frank Murphy — June 29, 2007 @ 10:53 am

“Through a mosaic of simulacra, a hyperbole, a-canonical plot structure, and a salient omission of clear protagonist antagonist demarcations, Scorsese creates what a “grotesque neo-realism”.”

Yes, I’ve said that many times.

Comment by nick — June 29, 2007 @ 3:10 pm

This essay actually presents some good arguments, but boy is it overwritten.  “...to rectify his ethical trajectory”?  Don’t you simply mean “to save himself”?  In the context of that sentence, isn’t that all you need to say? 

I have a Master’s and a PhD in English/Literature, and even I dislike this kind of hyper-intellectualized academic writing.  It does what you should never do in any kind of writing: it takes an inherently interesting topic (the films of Martin Scorsese) and manages to make it NOT interesting.  No need to dumb things down; just write with some clarity.  PopMatters is a great site, but y’all need to edit writing like this.

Comment by Vu Tran — June 29, 2007 @ 7:00 pm

i like Martin, i like Taxi driver and red dark blood.  but i can not understand this complex article.  i love english, i love films, i love popcorn and raging bull.  can you make it more simple for simple people to read?  i like short scrocese article please.

Comment by Tanaka Yoshii from Japan — June 29, 2007 @ 10:47 pm

wow ... I gave up 1/4 of the way into this piece. Not because it was too difficult, but because I just couldn’t take it anymore.

To lend the writer some constructive criticism:
A) copious use of large words does not a good writer make - your writing should be clear and concise. This is neither.
B) overusing extremely academic words is too often a way to cover up a lack of any substantial content. Even when this isn’t the case, most people will assume this anyway - even those who can understand what you are trying to say.
C) being able to put all the words you learned in your critical theory class to use in the same paragraph is not good writing.

Comment by Aaron McMaster from Canada — July 5, 2007 @ 3:21 pm

EriK:

You win. Your vocabulary is greater than mine. But I still do not know what your gut feels when you watch a Scorsese film. I could not wade through the thickets to find the feelings.

From an old K-D graduate.

Roger Wilson

Comment by Roger Wilson from New Park, PA — July 13, 2007 @ 5:08 pm