From the article:
“the theaters support the films. But right now the theaters seem to be mainly supporting the theme park, amusement park, comic book films. They’re taking over the theaters. I think they can have those films; it’s fine. It’s just that that shouldn’t become what our young people believe is cinema. It just shouldn’t.”
He then goes on to "lament" the way that this generation has no idea who Jimmy Hoffa is, and that he doesn't get what children "are doing with those devices", and finally,
“How are they going to know about WWII? How are they going to know about Vietnam? What do they think of Afghanistan? What do they think of all of this? They’re perceiving it in bits and pieces. There seems to be no continuity of history.”
Later the conversation turned to the overwhelming maleness of "The Irishman".
A member of the Italian press also asked Scorsese why his films’ protagonists are mainly men, showing few interesting female stories. The Hollywood Reporter’s review of the film called The Irishman “very much a movie about middle-aged men, and you miss the electric female energy of great roles that Scorsese shaped for Lorraine Bracco, Cathy Moriarty and Sharon Stone, among others.”
A somewhat frustrated Scorsese immediately shot down the journalist's question. “No. That’s not even a valid point. That’s not valid. I cant…That goes back to 1970. That’s a question that I’ve had for so many years. Am I supposed to?”
“No,” chimed in Koskoff.
“If the story doesn’t call for it…It’s a waste of everybody’s time. If the story calls for a female character lead, why not?”
His producer Emma Tillinger Koskoff, who was also on stage, defended Scorsese, shouting names of movies like "Alice Doesn't Live Here", "Casino", and "Age of Innocence" to prove that he is in fact capable of highlighting female characters.
ontd do you find it a "waste of everyone's time" to add female characters to media if the "story doesn't call for it"?