Could anyone explain why people gush over this film? It's a nice study of descent into madness...

Could anyone explain why people gush over this film? It's a nice study of descent into madness. The picture is nice and painterly. Kinski is too perfect for the roles of madmen. But one of the best films of all time? Are you kidding me? It doesn't provoke any particularly strong emotions. The entire plot becomes 100% clear in the first 10 minutes. In spite of its short running time, it's often boring. Was there something about the time when it was released that made people overreact? I want to understand why people call this nice, but ordinary movie a masterpiece, because I'm not seeing it.

Attached: aguirre-the-wrath-of-god-md-web.jpg (960x1356, 370K)

What? No way!?

Attached: 1567003573962.png (569x800, 785K)

people praise the effort they went through to make the film. To even get it done entailed a level of dedication to kino that you wont ever see these days. And on top off that its a pretty good film.

because it was on Martin Scorcese's essential films list and giant brain man must be aped by big brains

I hate the godfather. Stupid melodrama about criminal scum

I liked Fitzcarraldo better.

Attached: review_fitzweb.jpg (420x480, 49K)

I liked Nosferatu much better than both.

shitty soundtrack doesn't fit at all

Basically this was made during a time when the most ambitious film of the time was 2001 and it was all made on a set with computer. This german nigger came and reminded everyone of the true passionate ways of making cinema. I think Tarkovsky was close but had almost no recognition in the west. Aguirre also influenced countless other directors with the whole "descent into madness" now-meme, Coppola among them.

I agree. It's rubbish.

the soundtrack is perfect and if you can't appreciate krautrock and opera then you should stick to superhero movies and cloudrap

Because it has the greatest opening shot ever, no director would have the patience to set a similar scene up.

Most ciñépedophilês have never seen a film made before 1950 and subsequently have no idea what they're talking about.

Bleesed soundtrack from one of the greatest bands of all time, incredible scenery, the way it was filmed is very beautiful.

A Field in England is much better

Attached: a_field_in_england.jpg (1000x1426, 1.34M)

>Bleesed soundtrack from one of the greatest bands of all time
Do you mean the monotonous electronic bleeps or the insanely shitty indian flute player?

No, at least Aguirre is a real movie, whereas Field in England is pretentious arty farty trash.

Attached: btwog.jpg (605x431, 75K)

I think the shittiness of the flute player might be the point

I'd watch this.

MULTIPLE plans to murder Kinski.

What did Tarkovsky do? Or are you talking more of the passion/craft of cinema?

What the fuck was his problem though?

I, too, like Fitzcarraldo a lot.

He was already batshit insane before he went on the expedition. Read about his life. He chased a judge who slighted him for three years throughout South America, barefoot.