/lit/ - Literature

>>5375844
Buy compilations of Cahiers du cinéma.
Read pretty much anything from Bartes about the subject, at least to understand how cinema critic used to be before we had personal copies of movies.
After that you may want to check Sculpting in Time by Tarkovsky, it sums up his view on cinema and it's a great companion read for his films. If you happen to like that and want to enter more into theory Michel Chion's Audiovision is the go to book for sound cinema in general even if some parts of the content seem pretty obvious by now.

Avoid revisionist crap since its an art too young to already start pretending people didn't know their shit, usually newer authors have horrible perspective and try to propose a "new cinema" or shit like that when there's no need yet.

Check Deleuze's work on cinema. If you're fluent in french, you can aswell listen to all his lectures on the subject and others on Youtube.

don't go to film school, go to films

>>5375844

Film Grad here, don't read books on film, just watch a crap ton of film from every country and time.

Also, youtube is great for learning stuff.

BBC's film doc on filmmaking is cool.

Get weird, man.

>>5375885
>>5375905
I can't go to film school, and I do watch a shit ton of movies of wide variety. Was just looking for some supplemental material to increase my understanding.

>>5375876
What subjects does he take?

>>5375885
Is that a title or a general idea?
Some film schools are pretty decent if you're gonna take them the same way you'd take however americans call literary analysis. Some of us don't dislike the idea of having an intelectual life while doing a shit job, I'd probably be working in an office anyway.

Amos Vogel film as a subversive art
Robert Bresson nots on cinematography (amazing filmmaker too)
Cahiers du cinema and deleuze as mentioned earlier are great as well. Read reviews from people like Sontag and rosenbaum.
Watch Histoire du Cinema.

film scholarship is a joke

what you actually need to do is find some movies that have had commentaries made for them throughout the whole film and learn from that

that's how you'll find out about editing panning angles etc and the unique way they interact with thematic progress of the film

a good one I can recommend off the bat is the one done for Tokyo story

also you should focus on a specific area of film history rather than general (ie precode) so that you'll learn more.

Not OP, but I'm learning the technical aspects of filmmaking, especially digital post-production. What are good resources for this?

>>5375885
This is bad advice.
Filmmaking involves special techniques like staging, illumination, editing etc. "movie magic" in practice these aspects turn into direction, composition and rhythm through the patterning of film narration which are designed to conjure, in the end, determined effects on the viewer.
This can be understood either by self investment, learning about theory in books and the processes online/getting involved in a production, or you can have it grouped nicely in a study plan with peers who are equally invested and teachers who know their stuff.
In any case watching a ton of movies without proper context won't help you achieve any serious depth.
Great recs here: >>5375858 >>5376252
I would like to spotlight Tarkovsky's Sculpting Time, Notes on Cinematography by Bresson, the Cahiers compilations of the 50's and 60's and add a couple of essentials, being Pudovkin's Film Technique and Hitchcock/Truffaut.
I always come back to David Bordwell and would particularly recommend his Poetics of Cinema.

>>5376252
>Watch Histoire du Cinema.
I'm still intimidated by the first chapter that I watched a few years back and I have it on dvd as a reminder of my weak intellect.
Is there any advice you could give on how could I get the most aout of this massive work? Do I need to understand Deluze?
Do I have to be french to understand what the fuck is Godard all about?
I love the way he uses title screens, can't wait to see the 3d experiments he made recently.

>>5375844
"In The Blink of an Eye" by Walter Murch, great one on editing, plus a whole lot of personal insight (guy worked on Apocalyse Now, to name one).

>>5375905

>Film Grad here, don't read books on film, just watch a crap ton of film from every country and time.

Don't listen to this idiot. Do both.

>>5375844
Is there a good book on the influence of cinema and television as a medium? McLuhan is too crazy for me, but I'd love some more sane works analyzing the psychology of this medium.

>>5375844

Read more philosophy. Lots of it. Not merely books that are "film related". It will absolutely strengthen your understanding of cinema.

I'd recommend 'Matter and Memory' by Bergson and 'Francis Bacon: The Logic of Sensation' by Deleuze as a good start.

>>5376461
I know this was posted over an hour ago but does anyone know where I can find that Tokyo Story commentary? Or the name of it or something

>>5376790

karagarga is probably your best bet

I'm >>5375858

>>5376252
>Amos Vogel film as a subversive art
>Robert Bresson nots on cinematography
>deleuze
>Anything and everything by Susan Sontag and rosenbaum.
Seconding/thirding this
>Watch Histoire(s) du Cinema.
Not at all Godard should only be taken in consideration after you are well versed in pre nouvelle vague cinema. His vision is the quintescence of burgoise and elitist cinema, which in itself isn't absolutely bad, but while painting himself as some sort of popular left wing hero. A lot of people take Godard at face value and it does no good.

>>5376461
>listen to an author ramble for hour and a half instead of reading what he writes after years of consideration
>starting off the bat with Ozu
>sticking to one period
>chosing american pre code
hahahaha
no, stop.
Film history makes a lot more sense with a world view and unlike literary history you can easily go from one place to another noticing the interaction since most film studentes came and went around the world. Japan and Polland had pretty much the same influences and seeing how each other's context affects their interpretation is way better to understand both the underlying content and those countries history.
Film scholarship is as much of a joke as studying any other art. If you are against that you are free to have your opinion, but don't go around pretending it's anything else than that.

>>5376490
Video Co-Pilot has a good tutorial series for after effects. I don't know what software you are going for, but if you want to work on a certain particular aspect the best you can do is learn how to use your tools and practice a lot.

>>5376628
>Pudovkins Film Technique
This, a lot.
Bordwell ends up being too tied to the american 50's, it's okay to read him to get a synopsis of a lot of stuff that took decades to notice (for example, many early Hitchcock films brake what's called the 180º rule, two characters going in opposite directions move in the same direction in the screen) but most of the content is already assimilated in our culture.
Hitcock by Truffaut is funny and cool, not really a big theory book, though.

>>5376675
Godard requieres context, at the very least a general knowledge of 40's to 70's european film, mainly german and french with some british and post war italian. You can get a lot more out of cahies du cinema, but you can just watch all the episodes to get the general idea and then rewatch them once you get more info around the subject.
Taking Godard as word of god is a common mistake. It's similar to reading only neo liberal economics and thinking that they must work because it's all you know, a lot of his intepretations are very personal (and he constantly says so) and fall apart as soon as you take in consideration outside sources or works from other continents.

>>5376714
Murch has some really nice works, it's the kind of thing that makes you feel film is really cool.

(cont.)

>>5376738
Well, McLuhan isn't even the craziest there is. Have you tried Noam Chomsky? Americans hate him but he has some interesting ideas.
Do you have something more particular in mind? Otherwise I may just regurgitate some rec reading from some first year class, but a lot of it may be boring or useless for you.

>>5376772
Isn't reading more philosophy a good recommendation for anyone anytime?
---------------------
Hobbsbawn has some really good works about film history, although all I've seen is more author related. He takes a deep analysis of both work, context of creation and posterior influence.
But I believe history majors hate him, so step lightly, I guess.

>>5376826
Fuck Karagarga I just use rutracker

>>5376252
Rosenbaum is great, I always use him for recommendations of what to watch

>>5377378

>aka I don't have an account on Karagarga and I'm super buttvexed about it

KG has the greatest subtitle community for arthouse on the internet. Every non-pleb knows this.

>>5377466
>non-pleb
>non friends with someone who collects material since film only times
your life is a subpar hole, your friends and family are only nice to you because they pity you and they have been doing so for so long that you no longer are able to distinguish real affection.

>>5377502

Wow you just completely unraveled into a one big projection over this.

It's just a subtitle community, ace. You don't need to catch feelings this bad over a tracker.

I'm not even going to take shots at you because you're very obviously going through some issues right now.

>>5377547
I was joking man, most international material was absurdly hard to find before. For example Kieslowsly only became well know in europe with the Decalogue, and that's because it was a tv property, it took another decade for his films outside of the three color trilogy to reach most countries, and now a days it's a pretty middle ground know name.
Also, why would someone think that your family would reject you for how you get your films?

>>5377466
Yeah right. I'll bet they don't even do anime.

>>5375905
>Film Grad here
you invalidated your point before you even established it
>>5375885
also a stupid fucking post, you know jack shit about filmmaking until you pick up a camera and go through the process. i don't care how much lit you've read about lighting or how well you can appreciate bertolucci's use of it or how keen an eye you have for it in your everyday life, unless you yourself have designed a lighting setup and shot with it, you don't know what you're talking about.

>>5377406
Do you have a particular rec or should I just go for the first thing I can find?