People who watch old movies treat film like a dick measuring contest

because we're scared for our dogs buttholes

he fucks dogs

Based. Dogs also deserve love.

>Why watch old films when you can watch new ones that have been inspired by the old ones and only are able to remove the bad stuff and only take the good stuff.

Attached: helmet.png (403x448, 53K)

he fucks dogs and believes that nearly all aspects of film prior like 40 years ago can be boiled down to “people messing around with cameras”

I've heard it's legal in Canada

You must be 18 or older to post on Yea Forums.org

Have you watched old movies. The good ones are only considered good because they were good at the time. Had they come out today no one would actually like them, because newer films have done what they did but better.

he's an example of a man that completely fails to see the value of art and only accepts ONIONS-programmed flashy entertainment into his brain
and then goes and fucks your dog

I watch many old films, and if you did too, you'd see how retarded you sound

I have watched plenty and, if you watched enough good modern films, they can only really be appreciated if you consider the context they were made in.

So did your dad and you turned out acceptable

>all aspects of film prior like 40 years ago can be boiled down to “people messing around with cameras”
This is honestly what confuses me more than dogfucking. How the hell do you dismiss decades of movie making just like that, and still have the audacity to call yourself a movie critic.
Call me back when somebody makes a better version of The Hustler you underage scum.

you realize he fucks dogs right

See

exactly this. i’m not proud to admit that i was subscribed to him for the longest time; it gets to a point, when you factor everything in about him (the dog fucking, the drug problems, and most especially his insulting takes on cinema as a whole) that it would be ridiculous to stay subscribed to him though

Name some old films that you don't like. Not all of them are good, but to dismiss all of them is retarded

it wasn't all film prior to 40 years ago, it was all film prior to citizen kane
he's still a retard who is completely wrong though

>whiteknighting for random youtube movie critics
Jesus user, if you are going to waste your time here post sneed or something

Citizen Kane, Lynch and Kurosawa were refuted.

>I'm more into dog fucking
ftfy

It's not that I don't like them, it is just that you can better spend your time watching modern movies, because they have the advantage to look back at what the old ones did.
The one thing I prefer with old movies is the pacing. Which seems to just be something modern audience doesn't care for.

Jesus what a fucking retard

Give us some examples. What old movies are obsolete because of newer better ones?

This guy is correct.

Listen to medieval music and then listen to baroque or classical. It's so substantially better that the former isn't even worth lending time to, except as a novelty. The same applies to fipn5

>Reddit the commentator.

Older movies are pretentious. Newer movies are all blockbuster pleb garbage. Only MY taste is supreme.

He is literally a gay furry version of Cinema Sins who picks apart movies in completely arbitrary ways.

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 77K)

There are plenty of older movies that will not be replaced by newer, better versions because the industry has regressed and churns out mainstream shit. The film industry is concerned with so much surface level crap that you’re lucky to get a handful of creators and crew members that have the same talent as the talents of old Hollywood.

The Goodfellas

You’re comparing music composition with essentially photography. At the end of the day, a film’s story is told through photos, and while the method of making films has progressed it doesn’t make the visual storytelling of older films obsolete

>comparing music history to film history
Film is a little over a hundred years old. That's nothing compared to other arts like music or painting. Of course that happens over hundreds of years, but it hasn't happened to film that much
nice b8

>medieval music and then listen to baroque or classica
And then listen to Lil Nas X. By that logic Lil Nas X is better because he is a product of centuries of innovation within music production world so he is apparently the best what music has to offer.

i know hes le dogfucker meme but he's right about people who watch films treating it like a dick measuring contest

>Goodfellas

Lil Nas X specifically doesn't have to be better than classical. But modern music as a whole is better than classical as a whole.

You do know that symbol means he thinks Wolf is better right?

I'm gonna have to dick a few points, this movie had children in it...

>people who watch films treating it like a dick measuring contest
This is true, but dogfucker said specifically people who watch OLD movies
nice b8

dog

Just because we have one or two bad composers today that doesn't prove me wrong. I mean Haydn lived at the same time as Mozart

yeah but it only really makes sense if you take out the old part

>doesn't know what < means
>it's fast paced so it's better
>muh nudity, literal cumbrain thinking
How long until the summer break ends?

cinema sins probably doesn't fuck dogs but he has even worse opinions

Fuck. In school they taught it like an alligator mouth so I thought that Goodfellas was chomping on wolf of wallstreet which made it better. Either way my point stands

He's correct but he engages in the exact same behavior

>people fucking around with a camera and doing funny thing...

youtube.com/watch?v=BYWNFwwOqYQ

Attached: 1438404147414.jpg (546x618, 66K)

Attached: 1562866640305.jpg (680x681, 53K)

you were right the first time you dingus

Updog.

That anons right you know. What old movies are utterly superior to modern movies?

Yes, and people writing orchestra music then were better at it than people writing orchestra music today. So dismissing Haydn and Mozart because they are old and because now we have new composers is retarded.

t. underage retard who has only seen 5 movies made before 1977

Ones without the samefaging

Roman Holiday

>so that dogs ass was pretty tight and i enjoyed it. i'm giving this one a 7/10

It Happened One Night did it better
19 years earlier

what's uplink

Based

>No Audrey
C'mon son

Don't listen to the haters Adam, they are just jealous.
Love is love, no matter what anyone says.
But be carefull, in Canada its only legal to give your dog blowjobs. You can still blow him in public, but you have go to the bedroom if you want to penetrate its tight canine rectum.

Whats the barrier between new and old movies? 1980?

i agree, let's all post stuff for him to jerk off to

Attached: 1493533961882.webm (640x640, 2.47M)

Remember when he got pissy that David Lynch doesn't have chapter selection in his movies, so he refused to continue watching Eraserhead?

There is no barrier. If movies in 2019 does everything a 2018 movie does but better than the 2018 movie is now old and outdated.

Wtf are you retarted. The cutoff is 2000 maybe as low as 1995, but that depends on genre

youtube.com/watch?v=YPUuQnwFTWM

Can you retards stop spamming threads about this furry faggot no one gives a shit about

1968

movies in august 2019 are significantly more advanced and better than july 2019 you idiot

They could be, but unlikely since they would be made around the same time.

His reviews are good and he is mostly on point. Just like the videogames' industry, the triple A market/ hollywood, is full of shit. YMS is right when he gives shitty movies a shitty score, and good movies a good score, and it isn't mostly indie films that recieve his best scores either, faggot.

terminator 1 (1984)
terminator 2 (1991)
star wars (1977-1983)
Tarkovksky died in 1986, his worst still unmatched
lion king(1994)
all modern classics, and the list goes on and on

What a fucking dunce

I saw the first Muppet Movie and that was legitimately funnier than most new comedies, and more technically impressive

who could have possibly handled listening to this shit in order to find the dumb things he said

Hahahaha Nigga Just Write Down The Time Stamp Like Nigga Pause The Movie Haha

Attached: nYTAFuN.jpg (1710x2048, 212K)

Lion King can be grandfathered in to modern. But the other movies are only remarkable for their time, not worth watching today necessarily. And tarkovsky wasn't even entertaining for his time, he was just the first pretentious director

>he was just the first pretentious director
Explain.

Attached: 1540888735561.jpg (450x418, 29K)

Attached: 1564723938713.png (1316x723, 1.14M)

>listening to this shit in order to find the dumb things he said
It really doesn't take too much effort

Retard

>this is your brain on youtube pseuds

>he was just the first pretentious director
Okay, so you really do know nothing about film history
Also, Lion King is the only shitty movie mentioned

>I like movies that I can interpret, but with David Lynch, sure there's some of that there, but with a lot of it, he puts stuff in that is like "Oh, I think this would look cool."
I had to stop listening here, holy shit. Holy fucking shit. You can interpret things that were not intended to be interpreted from a work of fiction. Things included by an author/director do not have to be purposefully meaningful to have meaning.

>Tarkovksky
Watch Andrey Zvyagintsev' movies.

>the first pretentious director
are you really this much of a fucking pleb?

Most movies before his time focused on special effects, creating dramatic tension, and having fast paced plots with interesting plot twists.

Because tarkovsky lived in a poor country he was forced to do the 2nd best thing which are slower movies that focus on psychology. It's a good effort on his part but by no means are his works praiseworthy on the same level as a Kubrick

With old movies most of the time the ones you're going to be watching are the good ones because the trash has been forgotten and left undeveloped in digital form. Because of this most old movies (pre-1960) are going to be decent. It's like if the only movies released now were ones which will be revered as critically acclaimed/cult favourites in the next 15/20 years

there needs to be a /yt/ - YouTube board, so i dont have to read posts like this anymore

HI ADUM!

>Things included by an author/director do not have to be purposefully meaningful to have meaning
This trolling is so obvious it's almost impressive. So a movie doesn't need any thought behind it? It can just be randomly generated scenes?

>terminator 1 (1984)
>terminator 2 (1991)
>star wars (1977-1983)
There has been plenty of better sci-fi movies, that does similar, things better than these since they came out. And Star Wars and Terminator 2 was never good.

I mean I’m not a huge Lynch guy so I can kinda see the “argument” but Lynch does have a background in painting and general art, so a lot of his approach to film comes from that background. So I don’t see him as having the same pretenses that YMS accuses him of

yeah no shit idiot
nobody is saying that movies pre-1980 are better on average
we are just disproving Adams point of "old movies are just people running around with cameras."

name two, so i can laugh at you

Tarkovsky and Zvyagintsev are nothing alike.

i kekd

No good films were made before the '70s, and even that is pushing it for the sake of a few exceptions. Actual good films started in the '90s.

Attached: 1553779325751.jpg (1080x995, 92K)

Yeah, Zvyagintsev learned from Tarkovsky and made better movies thanks to that.

Somewhat true but with a caveat. No movie before the 70s is good by our MODERN standards. They may be perfectly great movies when compared to others movies at the time

interpretations don't have to be intended by the director

Andrei Rublev is good by modern standards.
Once Upon a Time in the West is good by modern standards.
8 and a half is good by modern standards.
Onions Cuba is good by modern standards.
The Wild Bunch is good by modern standards.
Easy Rider is good by modern standards.
Lawrence of Arabia is good by modern standards.
Cool Hand Luke is good by modern standards.
Vertigo is good by modern standards.
12 Angry Men is good by modern standards.
The Lost Weekend is good by modern standards.
Casablanca is good by modern standards.
Now unless you idea of "not good by modern standards'' is a lack of zoophilia scenes, you can just fuck off to whatever youtube movie analysis comment section you crawled from.

This isn't what I said, in any sort of way, you fucking retard. I said that things unintentionally included in art can add meaning that was not intended by the artist. What may have been meaningless to them may hold meaning for a critic, and as long as the critic can substantiate that claim, that interpretation is valid. Why are you arguing about this when you don't know the first thing (quite literally the first thing) about film criticism?

>No movie before the 70s is good by our MODERN standards. They may be perfectly great movies when compared to others movies at the time
You must be 18 or older to post on Yea Forums.org

You guys don't really believe this, do you?

No he didn't, he makes completely different films. Sokoruv learnt from Tarkovsky.

Obvious bait thread, but I liked The Holy Mountain too

The modern Star Trek movies.
Ex Machina.

You’d think the man who sperged out for six minutes about how a title card fading in time with a clock ticking as if it’s important to the theme would’ve learned that lesson.

Tfw you only watched old movies with your dad but hes dead now so you watch them alone and sad

>comparing tarkovsky to kubrick
oh shit nigga what are you doing

Attached: 50911C3D-49EF-4736-B272-1C315AB6762E.png (241x209, 4K)

Attached: lol, look at the retard.png (704x528, 473K)

He obviously makes different kind of movies. There would be no point to just make similar ones.

His videos on synecdoche are so fucking terrible

I'm more into foreign, arthouse, and independent pinball machines.

Attached: Lortium pinball playfield.jpg (768x1024, 149K)

based

Just say you suck CGI cock and save us the time.

youtube.com/watch?v=ZLjtofl6Uc8

Not even, I'm just a random who sAw a good chirp opportunity

literature and poetry would like a word with you

Of course you backpedal immediately. If somebody extracts meaning out of something that was not intended to have meaning, then the director did not do their job and instead created a confusing unfocused mess.

And stop bragging about your film school diploma, I perfectly well understand film criticism

Worst thread on Yea Forums right now.

Okay, Adam

I didn't backpedal at all, I pretty much just restated what I already said. You clearly don't understand film criticism, or reading comprehension, for that matter. People extract meaning from things not intended to have meaning all the time, in every artistic medium and in everyday life; it pretty much has nothing to do with the director. A director should obviously try to include meaning in their films and have a point to them, but there will inevitably be something that they did not intend to be interpreted that WILL be interpreted. It doesn't make a "confusing unfocused mess," in fact it could support the theme they intended to be derived from the film in the first place. Again, you are a fucking retard.

Its only that way cause we're not shitting on the dog fucker as much as we usually do in these threads.

That has nothing to do with creativity, or art

Children are creative. There are a lot more to making art.
The technical aspects of art are usually the most interesting because anyone can think up the same thing as someone else, but how you decide to show that is a lot more interesting. And new techniques gets discovered so that future art can be even better than what came before.

Lol I read this paragraph like 2 times (nice essay BTW consider learning brevity) and I'm not even sure what your point is. Why are you talking about themes I never even mentioned themes?

I'll keep it brief: Kill yourself.

Even when I was your age (12-14) I wasent that retarded.

That's partly true, but I would also argue that the public's tastes are arbitrary.

I don't get that form of opinion; that is, the "if you like something, you're pretending" thing. The only way to truly decipher if a taste is legitimate would be based upon their identity or the authenticity of their identity (i.e. a philistine that you know suddenly talking about x "unique director"). Otherwise, you're applying your solipsistic autism to taste, as if there's any true validity to be had.

Why are people like this allowed to post here?

Because if you banned people like that, no one would be able to tell you that old movies are pointless.

But they're not, go back to fucking your dog you degenerate faggot

Lmao he got mad

Attached: Screenshot_176.jpg (1049x192, 67K)

I'm guessing you've only seen 2 or 3 films made before 1950

fuck off, retard

based

youtubemultiplier.com/5d47f45cf27aa-yourmoviesucks-latest-review.php

based

>damn dude

Attached: Trump+almost+lunged+at+this+fucker+and+beat+his+ass+_6961fd08efc37055e2a1fdc8e240ec70.jpg (728x640, 500K)