/lit/ - Literature

for the sweet chance to get a rare good result and thereby expand the artform. this is how art works, you cinema-traditionalist reactionary tool.

>>4513118
You do sort of have a point, but shit art is really just what's made by shit minds. I mean, 90% of the story ideas you hear on /lit/ are fucking atrocious, it seems almost every halfwit social reject thinks that his depression and inability to function in regular society means he is profound and has something meaningful to say.

>>4513118
>Why can't we do both.jpg

>Tfw no Kubrick adaptation of Julian.

>>4513122
Abel Gance probably contributed more to the cinematic language than any other person in the history of the medium, and all of his films managed to communicate characters, narratives, and ideas seemingly effortlessly regardless. Contrast that with someone like Hollis Frampton who, despite all his posturing about experimenting with form, has not managed to influence anything outside of other filmmakers who posture about experimenting with form and academic papers.

>>4513141
>implying that isn't often the case

>>4513141
tips fedora

>>4513185
>shitposting
>2014

>>4513141
It sure as hell gives you a better shot than the average joe. And I say its better that everyone that can write does rather than we miss any chance of something great.

>>4513157
but most of those contributions have been attributed to griffith or even vertov. the thing with film theory and "contributions" is that most people assume that if someone hadn't done it then someone else would have done the exact same thing at some point because what you can do with a camera is incredibly limited compared to what you can do with written language or whatever. not necessarily true, but in following a "contributions" mindset you could just say that gance's work is just derivative of what griffith was doing.
and frampton is a bit too pigeonholed of an example, to be honest. vertov himself was a big experimentalist and his works have had a definite influence and acknowledgement by both avant-garde and "conventional" filmmakers.

>>4513446
Vertov and Bunuel and avant-garde filmmakers of that period came out of a different culture though. Vertov was working before there was an academic culture surrounding film, and while it was still struggling to emulate theater rather than be its own medium.

I deliberately used Frampton because guys like him and Stan Brakhadge are all given the credit of experimenting with form that is rightfully given to Vertov when their experimentation just produces mind-numbing results. They rebel not because they have some new insight or concept that cannot be communicated in the established language of film, they rebel just to show us that the rules of film can be broken, which is self-evident to most people. Yet academic film culture swallows it up, because academic art culture in general rewards banal rebellion.