I used to come here a long time ago but left around the time cuck memes became popular after the force awakens trailer dropped. Are there any people left here that like to talk about craft or film theory?
I know a lot about the following subjects in film: New Hollywood Pre-Code Hollywood The French Left Bank The Japanese New Wave New Taiwanese Cinema
I also know a lot about the following directors: Chris Marker Oshima Nagisa Michelangelo Antonioni Chantal Akerman Ingmar Bergman Abbas Kiarostami Willaim Freidkin Josef von Sternberg (And many more.)
What is oshima’s best film and why is it death by hanging?
Grayson Flores
Does your father know you suck dicks for a living?
Liam Bell
Death by Hanging is okay but not my favorite. The movie of his that I watch most is The Cruel Story of Youth. The one I think is his best or at least is one of my favorites is The Ceremony.
I am bi, and yes my dad knows.
Wyatt Wright
What movie should i watch that represents jap new wave?
Noah Martin
People here don't care about discussion. It's just meming and complaining about populist movies. r/ true film is better for what you're looking for. I tried to criterion thread going and people were complaining about it being entry level and pretentious.
These are my top 10 films: Կոմիտաս (Ասկարյան, 1988) ボクサ(寺山修司, 1977) Al primo soffio di vento (Piavoli, 2002) వాల్మీకి (దుంగన్, 1945) Игpoк (Бaтaлoв, 1972) Galini (Markopoulos, 1958) 香雪海 (費, 1934) O Desafio (Saraceni, 1966) ምርት ሦስት ሺህ ዓመት (ገሪማ, 1976) Ko puca otvorice mu se (Babac, 1965)
I guess it would depend on what you are most interested by in movies. Are you looking for something fun, something experimental, something cool.
Some of the best come from Hiroshi Teshigahara but aren't experimental in the same way as someone like Godard or Oshima. The Face of Another is a good all around film for most aspects of the New Wave with several Oshima films that I already mentioned being good as well.
Haha, Sorry. I have tried everywhere to find good discussion. nothing is as good as Yea Forums from about 2010-2013 at least in my experience. I have just stopped talking about movies with people on the internet. Oh, and Criterion is pretentious and a lot of it is entry level but it also provides an important service by subsidizing the release of tiny appeal classics like Detour and The Last of the Chrysanthemums with broad mainstream releases like Dr Strangelove and Blue Velvet.
An old meme, severely overplayed now. I like older iterations better.
>Nikon FM-10 lmao, you'd think she could afford a better film camera with all her marvelbucks
I have never delved into his films or mainland chinese cinema really. I just don't find much of it interesting.
Carter Martinez
The main theme of Malick's films on spiritual dematerialism is not eschatological, but a phenomenological ontology. Thus he implies that we have to choose between predialectic construction and deconstructivist neodialectic theory, essentially Heideggerian as seen in the concept of Dasein. The subject is interpolated then into a cinematic dematerialism that includes spirituality as a whole. But if the Kierkegaardian worldview holds, we have to choose between the cultural paradigm of expression and atomism. In Malick's own "The Concept of Horizon in Husserl and Heidegger" he says that "dread marks the ‘collapse of the world’”. Inherent in this is how the function of Lebenswelt (translated by Malick as "world of life") operates in all his films, chiefly in Days of Heaven and The Tree of Life. We see a phenomenological approach to the world showing a cinematic logic that presupposes a strucutral constraint in rootedness, another intentionality central to his filmography and philosophy. Because "metaphysical comfort" is not an object of temporality per se, but rather an aspect of automatic condition, as suggested by Cavell. Hermeneutic interpretations are also apparent in his post-hiatus movies; in fact the interchangeable subjectivities are but another representation of Husserl's and Wittgenstein's "form of life". As his academic hero Heidegger succintly noted, "freedom is the ‘abyss’ of Dasein, its groundless or absent ground". This is essentially the thesis operating in Malick's films.
>>Nikon FM-10 Thanks I was wondering which was the model that looked like the boxy 80s ones but which had the modern logo
Ryder Bell
>lmao, you'd think she could afford a better film camera with all her marvelbucks Yeah you really got her kid, how will she go on
Kayden Anderson
So this is very clearly copypasta, but I'll repond anyway. I don't care for Malick's movies. His most successful film imo is The Thin Red Line, the rest communicate very little to a general audience. I respect him for trying the things he is trying and generally think he provides a unique perspective but I can't say I am really going to seek out his films in the future.
I'm a Photographer and well also a camera and lens repairman. The FM10 is the only old style film SLR Nikon still sells. It's cheap, plastic and not actually made by Nikon but instead licensed from Cosina. Also buying one new is much more expensive than just getting a better quality used film SLR from the 80s. Why anyone would buy one in this day and age is beyond me.
John Moore
>So this is very clearly copypasta, but I'll repond anyway. I don't care for Malick's movies. His most successful film imo is The Thin Red Line, the rest communicate very little to a general audience. I respect him for trying the things he is trying and generally think he provides a unique perspective but I can't say I am really going to seek out his films in the future.
Sure, I really have no concrete claims to make about it other than what I have already said.
Thin Red Line works for me because it juxtaposes war with the natural happenings on the island and implies that humans are yet another aspect of nature even though we concieve of ourselves as something wholly outside of nature.
The rest of his work though is, for me, not particularly interesting. I think badlands is okay but unremarkable (which is fair since it is a first film). The rest of it is pretty but not particularly moving to me.
Xavier Scott
Wow you found something interesting but not another thing. Very good.
If you just wanted to be dismissive, you could have left it at your first post. When you said >Let's discuss Malick's work. I kind of assumed you might have things to say about it instead of just posting memes.
Kevin Bennett
I'm not saying more than you >I like one movie but I not like other movie
>Romanticism >existentialism >the Sublime >family >love >gorgeous blend of music and images >pretty girls twirling in wheat fields during the golden hour
This whole exchange is the internet in a nutshell. Trying to have an honest conversation requires opening oneself up. Opening oneself up leaves one vulnerable to bad faith posters, low-effort snark, and retarded contrarians. The only winning strategy is to go into an echochamber or cloak all one’s opinions under a thick layer of irony and memes. And thus discourse falls apart.
When I was a kid I thought the cinema is valuable because it can show as many places and people as it wants, unlike stage drama. I thought it should imitate the randomness of real life travel experience. It should show many random people just once (extras) and it should visit some insignificant places.
But one day a professor told me: a good movie director is like a stage director. He should exploit the logical connection within the plot to limit the amount of characters and locations shown in the movie, and he should try to give them balanced screentime.
He gave an example: the adaptation of a novel. In the novel the writer is free to write an insignificant character who only appear once. But in the movie adaption the director would try to merge several small characters into one, delete the character, or even add scenes for the character, so that the hired actors and actress can be used evenly.
But is what my professor said true?
Asher Howard
Your professor is a retard who wants movies to be filmed plays which most of them are. People like him are why cinema has not had much to show in terms of how independent it can stand along with other art forms.
Matthew Gray
No he sounds like an idiot
Joshua Rivera
Would you say then that your interactions with his films are primarily aesthetic rather than intellectual? Are you moved by his films and do you find yourself contemplating your own experiences in relation to his films? Could you possibly discuss a specific example from his work that stands out in your mind?
To be fair to the Malick poster, he did respond with some information when I asked him to elaborate.
My feelings on this are that any hard proclamations about what makes great films are foolish since in my opinion the making of a film and especially an adapted work for film is inherently a case by case basis. It is true that the when producing a commercial narrative film the scope a story can tell is often limited but there is by no means a limit on what film can show as far as unseen or underseen experiences are concerned.
Sans Soleil, one of my favorite films, for instance is a kind of travelouge that weaves together and thematically ties hundreds of anecdotes and documentary moments from at least 10 different countries into a coherent work.
Gavin Perry
And he gave another example: If the story happens in New York and the guy visits Netherland once, the director should reduce the scenes over there and focus on the one scene that makes people think he is really there, and try to film the rest in a studio just to save money.
Jack Diaz
Yeah, that is an extremely weird and specific stance that is probably not altogether helpful to anyone.
Every movie has different requirements and it is the scope of the story that you want to tell that should determine things like locations, etc. Money is a factor obviously and learning to write for a budget is an important skill but only a director can decide whether it is important to have a scene in a specific place. There probably are circumstances where your professor would be right but it is very easy to think of ones where he is wrong.
Andrew Sanchez
The aesthetic is the intellectual. Malick's films (especially his newer ones) have protagonists who don't say much or struggle to express themselves in words. You get to know through their broken voiceovers or by them doing silly things like spinning around with cute girls and deepthroating Hershlag's feet. This is clearly autobiographical since we know that Malick has been described as someone who himself struggles with words but is a very intelligent man who studied philosophy at Harvard and Oxford. This also speaks to me since people who know me always tell me that my intelligence and passion doesn't come across when they talk with me, it comes across in my writing and the little bits of art I sometimes make. His movies are also filled with little details and random things that you notice all the time day to day but you almost never seem to find in movies, like focusing on how someone's arm looks or how light and shadows seem to fall over some scenery. It's like what's also being discussed in this thread about how cinema shouldn't be limited to stage conventions. OK bye.
He actually gave us many similar examples. The one more one I remember is a director from an old studio. So he made several formularic comedies with his regulars. Similar to slapstick comedies. He made them probably to pay back his debts. The professor said that when you compare his two movies you see that the dialogues are nonsense, and the regular things in one movie are interchangeable with those in another. But these repetitions are practice and from these the director developed his style and made the few masterpieces. The professor seemed to be saying that the director must work in a studio to make repetitive things so that he can save money and develop a style. But he retired before I figured this out.
Lucas Harris
>The aesthetic is the intellectual I mean, Intellectual concepts can of course be conveyed through aesthetics, but they are not the same thing.
Yeah, I mean it is important to actually make things but his sort of contention that you have to do it in this way is preposerous. You don't need to add additional constraints to your work when you are starting out. There are enough to force you to develop a style.
Nathan Hughes
what is your favourite action-film? How about blockbuster? and superhero-movie produced after 1995?
who's the best hollywood actor and actress currently?
what of your works are you most proud of?
how do you watch films and how often do u watch em? how many films have u seen?
why do you like the films/genres u like?
Austin Jenkins
>what is your favourite action-film? Die Hard
>How about blockbuster? Die Hard
>and superhero-movie produced after 1995? The Incredibles, I think? Not super into superhero movies.
>who's the best hollywood actor and actress currently? That's a really difficult question. I really like Ben Mendelsohn but I don't think any film has particularly used him to his full potential.
>what of your works are you most proud of? I have made a few shorts and two feature documentaries. I made one about disappearing NYC landmarks that I think I am most proud of.
>how do you watch films and how often do u watch em? However I can find them. I take what I can get when it comes to some of the harder to find movies I want to watch. I watch maybe 3-5 per week but that can sometimes be much higher depending on how much free time I have and how I am feeling.
>how many films have u seen? I have no earthly idea. Thousands probably.
>why do you like the films/genres u like? I don't have a particular genre I like a lot more than others, but movies I like most usually experiment in some way with the medium.
Juan Nguyen
Die Hard, that is my fav one too. It has some of the best kino shots of all time, uses the bombastic beethoven soundtrack incredibly well with the tracking shots.
Ben Mendelsohn from TDKR? did he overact in it? what kind of film would make best use of his potential? How do u like actors like Nicholas Cage that like to act ovetthetop?
whats dream project of yours? do you think your talented enough to be able to shoot bigbudget stuff? How do you feel about budgets being $200 000 000 nowadays? Is it defensible?
what criteria would you base your top50 films you have seen-list on?
why do you say that Yea Forums doesn't talk about movies? I've seen plenty of tarkovsky.-threads recently.. and there's been a bunch of yiyis absd ed wang threads also.
what experitmental film blew your mind at the first watch but didnt hold up on a rewatch?
how do you like the top 1 film on imdb, the shawshank redemption and why do you think it's #1?
Camden Roberts
what made you able to watch those pretentious directors you named in the op?
have you always liked that stuff or was it progressive, being tired of the hollywood formula?
have you ever gone full tarantino on a film you've seen?
what is your best in-depth analysis of a film? have you ever thought something that no one else did?
Jason Davis
>Ben Mendelsohn from TDKR? did he overact in it? what kind of film would make best use of his potential? Yes, he was in that. I think his best movie so far has been The Place Beyond the Pines but he was great in Animal Kingdom as well.
>How do u like actors like Nicholas Cage that like to act ovetthetop? Ha, I love Vampire's Kiss but I wouldn't say it's my favorite style.
>whats dream project of yours? do you think your talented enough to be able to shoot bigbudget stuff? How do you feel about budgets being $200 000 000 nowadays? Is it defensible? I want to adapt the book The Invention of Morel. I don't think big budgets are ever where I really want to work (Not that I wouldn't if given the chance). Big budgets are a side effect of a business model that I think if fundmentally flawed from like an artistic and maybe moral standpoint. It's probably the best way to make money though so whatever. The people giving out the $200 million budgets don't care about me or my opinions anyway.
>what criteria would you base your top50 films you have seen-list on? I guess just how much I was moved or admire any particular movie.
>why do you say that Yea Forums doesn't talk about movies? In my experience, way movies are talked about here are very "good or bad" with little actual substance. Lots of lists.
>what experitmental film blew your mind at the first watch but didnt hold up on a rewatch? Probably something by Godard who I like less now than I did when I first watched his movies.
>how do you like the top 1 film on imdb It's okay. It's popular because it is a competently made life affirming movie. I don't hate that people love it.
Jeremiah Smith
>what made you able to watch those pretentious directors you named in the op? I'm trying to think about if there was an actual gateway that I had which led me to them. Essentially, I think that I really wanted to learn about films and would watch a lot of director commentaries for movies I really liked and whenever they would mention a director or movie I would look it up and decide if it sounded like something I would be interested in. Then I would watch director filmographies chronologically to see how their styles developed. I find that most of the time the first films by directors are very straight forward and accessible and their films get progressively more subtle as they develop.
Tarantino is pretty bad. I mean, I usually don't want to be too outspoken about how bad I think a filmmaker is but Tarantino is just awful.
I do have in depth readings of various movies, some of which are counter-intuitive to common readings but none particularly stand out to me as noteworthy.
Carson Morgan
Yeah, I asked because when I tell friends I watch old movies they don't seem to get it. why watch old instead of new. "i don't like the pace, the acting, the story" "it's so old" and such excuses
And you hit the point, it's about tracing the trail of thought. Getting to the bottom, the original creative source that gave food for more creativity.
So I am trying to set up a route of films, going back from the 90's a trace back. What made Jurassic Park, Die Hard, Terminator 2, The Matrix, Gladiator, and those universally acknowledged movies, great? what films did they rely on as a foundation.
Noah Lopez
Do you agree that black and white films can be colorful?
Bentley Stewart
based op, the ceremony and dbh are great. never seen the other one tho
>thread turns into copypasta and discussing directors from 1980+
wow! never would have guessed
Thomas Cook
Has anyone ever told you you sound like Patrick Bateman?
Easton Thompson
>The Invention of Morel I wikipied it, and there's been 2 movies made based on it. what did they do wrong?
>In my experience, way movies are talked about here are very "good or bad" with little actual substance. Lots of lists. well, you have to contribute with original thoughts or provocative stands. like chris marker. u start a thread saying that la jetee is better than 12 monkeys (which it isnt), and then you back it up by saying that he is much more accomplish director than terry and u derail the thread so u end up talking about sans sleil.
or u spam kubricks top 10 list so people here start watching antonioni
Bergman is very easy to start threads about. just talk about his ladies, or the positioning of his acters and such: youtube.com/watch?v=NSctD5EcL6A
well, contribute then. If I like The Dark Knight. What films should I see to go back to 1940?
>Heat (1992) scenery >Batman (1989) original adaptation >Black Sunday (1977) about terrorism and the joker >A Clockwork Orange provides base for the Joker character >The Killing (1955) story, is the base for the intro >cat people 1942 batmans transformation >Citizen Kane cinematography >King Kong (1937) story >The Testament of Dr. Mabuse (1931) story >The Man Who Laughs story and make-up
Jeremiah Rodriguez
ITT pretentious faggots think anybody cares about their knowledge of what institutionalized faggots told them to like.
i have no idea what the fuck you're saying. go back to 1940... how? what are you listing those movies for, did someone ask for that? are you asking for more? what is the point of this post
Nathaniel Johnson
yes, teach me to see old movie (earlier than 1990)
Liam Collins
what film discussion forums do you frequent nowadays if not 4channel?
Also your opinion on Imamura?
Parker Fisher
watch the seventh continent then decide if you want to be emotionally manipulated more or not
Cooper Morris
I've seen it, I choose "not". whasts next, friend?
Sebastian Sullivan
watch Coбaчьe cepдцe then decide if you're a man who likes humor or not
cuz im not op doofus all dogs go to heaven ii i'm just a man who likes comedy
Michael Carter
whats best hollywood comedy post millenia? u aint allowed to kaufman ur way outta it
Jaxon Peterson
Yea Forums is dead
another victim of /pol/
Gavin Wood
christ that's a lot of qualifiers. i'm gonna somewhat cheat and say le dubs movie since it was made in 2000 and i guess it's technically hollywood?? i'm not sure. i dont watch much of that shit. i'm looking at my ratings and there's literally not a single movie that meets those parameters that i've rated above average aside from american psycho which despite its meme status on this board and the fact that it was directed by a roastie is surprisingly good
Austin Perez
good answers, both ap and ld are great flicks.
im curious, how u rate films? what scale of your choice and why? how many sub 100 votes on imdb movies have u seen?
Nolan Murphy
u guys saying tv is dead aint understand nature nature evolves so does things tv is things tv evolves and u guys must evolve it to what u wanna it to b ya evolve it with threads like this cintribute or blame yaself!
Kevin Rodriguez
Bump, going to take a shower, I'll write something after that
Mason Moore
Bump, going to the toilet, I'll write something after that
Alexander Morgan
whats are the most overrated movies, by critics, by normal people, and on this board?
Jack Reyes
Why do plebs still deny that Winter Light is the best Bergman film?
Lincoln Ortiz
You should come by bretty good dot com sometime in the evening, we stream lots of kino from those directors/movements. If you go there right now though it's just an auto-stream playlist we don't control.
Terayama is one of my faves from the japanese new wave, his shorts are fun if you haven't checked them out.
>Chris Marker
Sans Soleil whoosed over my head pretty hard ngl. I tried to read some writing on it but it everything read like a 2nd year college text on metaphysics of history and media which became way too abstracted from what I felt like I had watched.
>new taiwan
What Tsai watch after Rebels of the Neon God?
Grayson Powell
So where to start with the New Taiwanese Cinema?
Brody King
Pls respond
Hunter Kelly
I'm not that privy to film theory or craft, I mainly watch films that I bump into and see what it stirs inside rather than focus on the technicalities. Though one might find it unorthodox, I try to distance myself from any authorial intent or similar and try to view the film in isolation. This approach can come biting me in the ass, like in Thief or Reality. Pure symbolism and subtext that couldn't possibly be penetrated without looking into the auteurs life and previous works. Still, I feel it's the best way for me at least to approach film. Here's a few directors I think deserve the limelight, Tengiz Abuladze, Frantisek Vlácil & Yong-Kyun Bae. All have a somewhat spiritual approach in their films I've found, much like Tarkovsky and his protégé Konstantin Lopushanskiy (another one worth checking out). Yeah, I agree it is the best of Bergman's. From Hsiao-Hsien, check The Assassin, A City of Sadness & Dust in the Wind. From Tsai, check Journey to the West, if you're willing King Hu's Dragon Inn, A Touch of Zen & Legend of the Mountain and then Tsai's Goodbye Dragon Inn. Also What Time Is It There? is worth a view. Also, though Ang Lee tends to bounce around the globe when it comes to the setting for his films, Eat Drink Man Woman is worth checking out.
