/lit/ - Literature

>>4173622
>implying I didn't win fair and square

If two pseudo-intellectuals think the same thoughts, they would be independent of the state of being an independent thinker.

Therefore, conformity is a form of independence.

>>2691583
>Cinema includes all films, but some films are either aimed at an intellectual audience that wants more than simple entertainment and escapism, or have simply come to be regarded as exceptional works of art in their own right.
This is a platitude and a cop-out. What the fuck does intellectualism have to do with films like Possession or Wild at Heart? Those are films that stand out really for their histrionics and rather extreme sex/violence, and little else. The idea of high art that somehow has transcended mere entertainment is also a particularly stupid and elitist notion that I've never seen explained in any way that itself transcends "the tropes I like in my art are smarter than the tropes you like in your art".

>It's not that these films are superior - to each his own cinema - rather /tv/ has no place for these films or any discussion relating to them. Judging from the cinema threads on /lit/, that's not the case here.
Art house films have a marginal audience on /tv/ as they have a marginal audience in the world, but I've encountered plenty of threads devoted to them.

>A good rule of thumb that demarcates these films from other films is whether they would be taken seriously and refered to as "cinema" or "films" by viewers rather than just being called "movies" or some equivalent. "Cinema" is shorthand.
This is nothing but a particularly blatant tautology.