Surrealism done well is my favourite aspect of filmmaking

Coen Bros also. Prime examples of a surreal narrative and execution without directly surreal imagery, from Barton Fink to A Serious Man

what I mean is surrealism in film hasn't been anything besides trying to mimick surrealism language from paintings
the same way film used to be theater with footage in its earliest years, they still haven't developed a surrealist language that takes advantage of the medium's tools of linear narrative

Phantasm did a pretty good job with it. Granted it made no sense most of the time.

Attached: feratu.gif (635x508, 1.72M)

If this is surrealism, does that make brainlet wojaks fine surrealist art?

Attached: d29.jpg (326x294, 18K)

Not really "fine" art since it's basic visual symbolism with singular meaning behind it, but yeah

Dali did a pretty fair job. I agree with you though the basic bitch notion of "surreal" is something else.

Attached: Hereiswhereikeepmyroach.jpg (1017x897, 73K)

Why is this thread dead? Do we really need more tranny, fatty and cape threads?

Attached: ingmar_bergman_seventh_seal_2a_4-998x758.jpg (998x758, 77K)

i dont know a lot deep artsy stuff I can brag about but I liked devilman crybaby and bojack but I don't think modern stuff is welcome here

surrealism is based on symbolism, it uses the symbols to point towards the subconscious content of the symbols. without the symbols there is no surrealism.

Why wouldn't modern stuff be welcome? Surrealism isn't a definite period

Attached: Under The Skin.mkv_snapshot_00.34.47_.jpg (1920x1038, 605K)

No it isn't, both for painters and filmmakers. Lynch never uses any symbolism of any kind

not all forms of expression are symbolic, surrealism is almost the opposite of symbolism since it is drawing your attention to what isn't there, or into a perspective that causes you to question the meaning behind the visuals due to it's inorthodoxy or distortion.

This is exactly why I love Lynch so much. None of his surreal shit symbolizes anything, it all actually is what it is, and when people ask him to "explain what X meant" he spergs out at them because they're being retards. There's nothing to explain, no deeper meaning, it's all there on the film.

Eraserhead is full of symbolism. Do you mean he doesn't use archetypes? And he can claim all he wants that he doesn't intend symbols but anyone with half a brain knows that isn't how symbols work at all. Symbols are fascinating BECAUSE they defy intention. That is the thrust of Freud's argument and Freud was seminal to Surrealism. Wordplay intended.
Surrealism is only an expression of the subconscious and unintended content of imagery, signs and symbols etc. "Anti symbolism" is such a fucking meme on here based on that one pretentious tarkovsky quote I swear to god. People do not create symbols, symbols are a product of our thoughts. You can't intentionally construct a symbol.

>Eraserhead is full of symbolism
No it isn't. Metaphors, themes, ideas yes, but absolutely no symbolism.
>Symbols are fascinating BECAUSE they defy intention
Not really, symbolism are more than often exactly the product of one-dimensional intention. A symbol can only have one meaning, one answer that you have to "figure out", that is not the case with literally any Lynch film.

is it okay surrealist art then?

>You can't intentionally construct a symbol.
lmao what? Here's a large black phallic object entering a wet orifice, ooopsie what did I unintentionally construct there

I should get around to watching this in its entirety.

You aren't even talking about symbols, what you are describing are signs, which are completely different. A sign is functional, it stands in place of an idea and represents it. Symbols come from a much deeper part of consciousness, their power and duration are due to the amount of unrealized content they possess. Symbols represent but they also repress. What surrealists do is to expose the repressive function of symbols. This does not mean that they lack symbolism, it is far more radical, because they are vivisecting symbols. Lynch is just a second rate surrealist, who doesnt understand the concept himself. He is technically good, and Eraserhead possesses symbolic power despite what he intended perhaps. Just because something is "real" doesn't mean it is not also a symbol. Your father is a man. He is also a symbol.

>You can't intentionally construct a symbol.
I suppose if you're retarded. A retard would make the same argument for this masterful bait.

You constructed a representation. That isn't symbolism. High school English teachers have ruined literature.

You don't know what a symbol is. You think any representation or sign is a symbol and that is wrong.

>You aren't even talking about symbols, what you are describing are signs, which are completely different.
Literally google the definition of symbolism.

What is a symbol o learned one?

>Literally google the definition of symbolism

But what does this symbolize

F

Attached: face lift.jpg (970x547, 110K)

knifeman > acidman

Are there any other surreal WW2 films similar to Come and See?

Attached: Idi i smotri (1985)_snapshot_01.22.20_.jpg (704x528, 55K)

A symbol is unintended. It is a construction of subconscious thought. It can function as a sign, but this function is misleading, because what a symbol signifies is never what it means. A symbol represents and represses. It creates tension, it is a product of tension. A sign fulfills a purpose it is meant to clarify and represent, symbols confuse because of what they reveal. Symbols are never expedient.

If you can't consciously construct a symbol then how can you consciously identify a symbol?

Furthermore, auteurs HATE the idea of symbolism because the symbol is diffuse, it is an inconsistency, it is an intrusion by the audience into the work of an artist. Surrealists, real surrealists, are the most honest and realistic artists. This follows from an early definition of the surreal as "super real".The difference between real surrealism a la Dali and pop surrealism e.g. Lynch is the difference between hard science and Bill Nye.

>It creates tension, it is a product of tension.
You have to be baiting now.

I met Ferdinand de Saussure
On a night like this
On love he said
I'm not so sure
I even know what it is

There's the rub. Symbols are metastatic. This is there power and fascination. They cannot be deciphered, they work like a virus.

So by your logic, a symbol remains undefined and unidentifiable. Roger.

Based. How to get into the magnetic fields?

Yes exactly. They produce an effect like a drug. They are existential phenomenon, they are not a language. Anyone claiming a symbolic dictionary is a charlatan. This is why religions are so fucked up

Super real doesn't mean the same as hyper real, the "super" part comes from the latin super, which means "above".
Surrealism in my language is literally called "above realism"

Attached: 1550992410984.jpg (200x313, 10K)

I know it is different than hyper real. But we can argue what "super" might mean in Latin all day long. I may be wrong. But I think the point of surrealism is real realism.

Attached: wojak_01.nocrop.w710.h2147483647.jpg (710x823, 136K)

>Lynch never uses any symbolism of any kind
Maybe not consciously.

>But we can argue what "super" might mean in Latin all day long.
No we can't, it means above. You literally can't argue otherwise. And look up the meaning of surrealism or translation in almost any other language

You're spouting random bullshit as you go my dude

Well what do you think "above real" means then? To me it means more real. But let me know what you think. I'm just typing my own bullshit for real discussion.

Just look into the Dada movement surrealism spawned from and what any of the founders of surrealism said.

Here's Breton's definition of surrealism: >"Psychic automatism in its pure state, by which one proposes to express…the actual functioning of thought…in the absence of any control exercised by reason, exempt from any aesthetic or moral concern"
So it's the dismissal of the "real" we know, denial of all known moral or formal rules which supress emotion and expression

Sorry for a late reply was caught up in the jazz thread. I think Breton was right, the "real" we know is the inheritence of mental slavery all the way back to 3000 years of Egyptian art. Images can control, but symbols are dangerous and liberating. Hitler understood this (or maybe one of his advisers did). Liberation is dangerous it can lead to very bad outcomes. This is why society take great care to make a symbol into a sign.

>Lynch never uses any symbolism of any kind

Never seen someone scramble so fast to get to the top of the retard pile.

You literally don't know a single thing about Lynch if you think he uses symbolism.

you literally don’t know a thing about semiotics if you think he doesn’t. you’re pointing to a spider making a web and calling it god.

In lost highway robert blakes character literally SYMBOLIZES the main characters guilty conscience over killing his whore wife. Eraserhead is also full of symbolism

Attached: F9F9380F-06AA-44A6-B34C-A55ED58AA651.jpg (496x279, 26K)