/lit/ - Literature

>>7116656
bump

fuck /tv/ btw

>>7116656

Good cinema is on the same level as good literature. They're all just different mediums to convey complex messages

You know what the funny part is? Tarkovsky adored Tolstoy and tried to follow His radical moralism when judging art.
The thing is that Tolstoy argued for art that would be easy to understand to most people because it would be so human and so clear while Tarkovsky's movies are complex and hard for uneducated people to understand and enjoy.

>>7116691
What is true is that Tarkovsky did not mimmic or borrow much and his film making was obviously personal and honest in most respects.

I think the only thing that can really be compared to literature is what people call "arthouse films". But yeah Andrei Rublev is one of my favorite films of all time.

>>7116691
>Tarkovsky's movies are complex and hard for uneducated people to understand and enjoy
uneducated people adore Tarkovsky

Tarkovsky, Antonioni, Bresson, Malick...Maybe Bergman...

It's all just entertainment

Cinema is still young, unlike literature, so it's underdeveloped compared to it.

Anyways, I have a low brow fetish for camp films and films made by hacks, such as the Big Lebowski, Pan's Labyrinth, and Star Wars. I might as well not contribute to discussion.

>>7116706
More like most have never heard of him and the people who adore him are film critics.

Yeah, I've enjoyed film as much as literature for most of my adult life. Haven't really been into it lately though. My exploration of the medium just kind of stagnated after a while. Who wants to keep watching the same arthouse classics over and over and over?

>>7116691
Tarkovsky's movies are incredibly straightforward and mostly aesthetic experiences.

>>7116656

I like literature more but film is equally capable of giving me a profoundly moving experience.

Lately I've been getting really into Ozu, he was one of the biggest directors I had neglected up to this point. I really love Linklater's approach to film and Ozu's feels similar to me.

>>7116729
Nostalghia is straightforward?
Compare that to what most pleb film goers consume...

Tark and the majority of the arthouse is severely overrated. There is a difference between challenging art and art with little or no pay off, most avant-garde and arthouse would fall into the second category. Cinema will always be at a disadvantage for complexity and subtlety compared to literature because there is a lot of pleasure from just decoding words. I would say that cinema is better for entertainment than art, most of the attempts at 'art' in film are boring or pretentious.

Going off topic a bit.
Massive weeb here. I want to branch out from anime to animation as a whole. Is Homers papyrus flip book a good place to start?

>>7116822
In what way Are Bressons films pretencious or complex? In what way is Something like Stalker or Mirror not visually interesting?

>>7116849
Or in what are films of Malick, like To The Wonder or Days of Heavne pretencious or not beautiful?
They are crystal clear and visually interesting.

>>7116825
Is this how literary types feel(the disgust im feeling now) when someone starts talking about cinema all of a sudden?

>>7116853
Days of Heaven was good, Stalker was bore minus two scenes (underwater tracking shot and tunnels), have not seen Mirror yet, of the Bresson's I have seen (Lanelot and L'argent) were incredibly pretentious.

>>7116869
What's wrong with animation?

>>7116853
God I'm fucking tired of you /tv/ faggots still riding on their babbys first art house films like they're worth the amount of praise you give them.

Days of Heaven is Malicks only masterpiece and he hasn't made a great film since the 90s. Just kill yourself and go back to reddit.

>>7116991
Sorry but To The Wonder is his best.

>>7116683
THIS

also i'm a huge 2001 geek. Greatest book/film one two punch I've found

Winter Light by Bergman, Seven Samurai, and I'll even count Akira up there

Absolutely not. Cinema has not had nearly enough time to mature and lacks nuance.

>>7117070
What exactly do you mean?

While we're talking about different media, I'm tempted to start regular comics threads here because /co/ is terrible and I've had better discussions here. But I don't want to contribute to off topic discussions.

>>7117122

"No"
Literature and cinema can be art but comics cant.

>>7117186
Why not
Paintings can be art
You get a series of pictures and give it a story
There's plenty of room there for art

>>7117191
I was kidding hombre.
What I want is a movie about "the multiversity: ultra comics".
A movie about that would be freaking amazing.

>>7117214
THE MULTIVERSITY: ULTRA COMICS #1

>>7117122
>>7117186
HOW BOUT THEM VIDEO GAMES HYUK HYUK

>>7117218
Seriously though, take a look at this. It would be fucking amazing as a movie....

>>7117220
>>7117214
>>7117186
there are more than just superhero comics

>>7116706
this, Im uneducated and I love Tarkovsky

>>7117383
I meant inexperienced with films.

>>7117392
I am also inexperienced with films, naturally I jumped into him because he is a big name

>>7116815
Nostalghia is extremely straightforward. It has literally one theme, and the theme is the fucking title. Tarkovsky says in his own writings it was the one film he made where he wanted to cut out anything extraneous to the core idea.

Sure it's a little weird, a little disorienting, a little mystical and unexplained at points. So? Aren't most Disney Cartoons?

You have this false sense of elitism and perception of the general public and complete morons. People mostly aren't interested in that kind of art anymore. That's fine. It's not relevant to the masses anymore. If you find pleasure in it, as I do, you go out of your way to seek it out. But it's not exactly obscure or complex. My mother loves Tarkovsky's films. She also likes Murder Mystery books and romantic comedies with aging actors like Steve Martin.

>you will never have the time to deeply explore the world of cinema
>you will never have a strong knowledge of both poetic, meditative films and classic martial arts films

>>7117438
>tfw you do know about film and get paid to write about it, said money you then use to buy books
feels great

>Griffith
>Begman
>Tarkovsky
>Kubrick
>Herzog
only literary tier directors tbqhwyf

>>7117453

>Picks kubrick but not malick.

You must be out of your mind.
Only god tier kubrick film is Eyes Wide Shut.

>>7117445
Did you study film?

>>7117438
Where is that?

>>7117458
>picks Malick but not Canon-tier (according to Bloom) poet and paiter Pier Paolo Pasolini.

Fucking Americans. When will you idiots learn some good taste? Good Lord...

>>7117469
>according to Bloom
>says this ridiculous shit and then proceeds to mock an entire country
>hurr discuss my country's art on an english language board so I can jack off to it
you're clowning tbh

>>7117469
But he only made one good film.

>>7117411

>anymore

They never were, dummy.

>>7117458
Lolita and Barry Lyndon are both masterpieces lad

>>7117461
Majored english in school, took a few film classes as electives but they were pretty mickey mouse. Really I've just always loved film as much or more than literature and spent a lot of time watching and reading about it. studied it in that sense.

>>7117485
correct, those and Strangelove are his 3 best

>>7117480
No, he made about ten. My favorites are Medea (with Maria Callas), The Canterbury Tales, The Arabian Nights, The Decameron, Pigsty, Mamma Roma, and Teorema.

>>7117485
Kubrick is ameritrash.

>>7117485
Barry Lyndon was pretty.
It was masterfully crafted, had amazing lighting and sets and costumes but it wasnt art.
It was like watching a very high budget history channel program.
It wasnt honest and there was nothing of Kubrick's worldview in it.
Lolita was a pointless movie. If he had been a real artist he wouldnt have done a staightforward adaptation like that.
There is no point in a straight adaptation when Nabokov's lolita is literally god tier literature.

Kubrick was a master craftsmen but only Eyes Wide Shut was art in the truest sense.

>>7117528
Eyes Wide Shut is first year creative writing tier.

A good aesthetic experience, but pretty shameful from a writing position.

>>7117524
>Kubrick is ameritrash.
kek I knew it, you're butthurt about other countries and you're looking for an opportunity to jerk yourself off, pretty pathetic

>>7117528
Just compare 2001 to Solaris and Barry Lyndon to Andrey rublov and you immediately understand why Tarkovsky was a through and through artist while Kubrich was not.

>>7117531

>cant stop the memes

>>7117543
shit tier post tbqh

>>7117543
solaris is embarrassing

>>7117543
>Solaris

>>7117543
2/10

Everyone memeing saying nothing.
Cant expect too much from /lit/.

>>7117559
>>7117567
>>7117572
>>7117594
Samefag.

all this whole thread its embarrassing, /lit/

please get some taste.

>>7117594
>>7117595
>>7117605
>>7117609
samefag.

>>7117610

>>7117615
nice ms paint lad

>>7117049
I've never been more moved by a film in the To the Wonder moved me.

>>7116683
>geek
get out

>>7117752
What?

>>7116656
Yes, cinema is Art. Younger but still not better than literature.

Fav. Movies - Mauvais Sang, Virgin Spring, The mother and the Whore, Magnolia, Uzak ,One upon a time in Anatolia, Vertigo, La Grande Belleza...recently .... etc...etc..

Art is not on levels. This is a myth created by the market, critics and by tier-ranking anons.

All that you like or dislike is the experience of living it and that is fleeting, always changing.

>>7118040

Bravo, Bravo!!!

>>7116656
>what are your favourite films?
i made this lame, pretend ballot for the BFI Sight & Sound poll a few years back. i still more or less agree with it, and I limited it to one film per filmmaker and decade

1. Sans soleil (Chris Marker, 1983)
2. Sansho the Bailiff (Kenji Mizoguchi, 1954)
3. Playtime (Jacques Tati, 1967)
4. Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom (Pier Paolo Pasolini, 1975)
5. Late Spring (Yasujiro Ozu, 1949)
6. L'Atalante (Jean Vigo, 1934)
7. Man With a Movie Camera (Dziga Vertov, 1929)
8. Intolerance (D.W. Griffith, 1916)
9. Hélas pour moi (Jean-Luc Godard, 1993)
10. Secret Sunshine (Lee Chang-dong, 2007)

>>7118496
>Salò
You cannot be serious

why no eisenstein

>>7118678
Yeah, I think passolini made better movies

>>7118496
My top 10 films are:

Toransufômâ (2007, Bay)
O Cavaleiro das Trevas (2008, Nolan)
Бoйцoвcкий клyб (1999, Fincher)
Pirmsakums (2010, Nolan)
Fiction pulpeuse (1994, Tarantino)
Kahe tule vahel (2006, Scorsese)
Smrtonosná past 4.0 (2007, Wiseman)
Hämmästyttävä Hämähäkkimies (2012, Webb)
Huan Tai Ping Yang (2013, Del Toro)
Les évadés (1994, Darabont)

>>7118718
wow you come across as such a patrician :D

>>7118712
October is just too good for most people

>>7116656
Sure, though I'm more of an animation fan. I just admire works in which the creator has to basically design not only the story but the world and the way it looks from scratch practically. My favorite works are Alice by Jan Svankmajer, Angel's Egg, Beautiful Dreamer, End of Evangelion, Feherlofia, It's such a Beautiful Day, Mind Game, Nausicaa, Persepolis, Princess Kaguya, Song of Kells, Waltz with Bashir, Yellow Submarine, Perfect Blue and Millennium Actress. I'm also a fan of not just films but series like The Maxx, Samurai Jack, Evangelion, Utena, Kaiba, Tatami Galaxy, Mononoke, Mushishi or Haibane Renmei.

>>7116656
It's better than literature, prove me wrong.

>>7118718
>Fiction pulpeuse

I kek every time

>>7118764
Greatest book (Ulysses) > Greatest film (Citizen Kane)

>>7117062
Hoo boy

No more of you

>>7117543
Solaris wasn't good at all, but tbh it should have never been adapted in the first place.

My favorite films, of late

The Devils - Ken Russell, 1971
Chungking Express - Wong Kar-Wai, 1994
Pierrot le Fou - Jean-Luc Godard, 1965
Inserts - John Byrum, 1974
Wake in Fright - Ted Kotcheff, 1971
The Hole - Tsai Ming-Liang, 1998
Design for Living - Ernst Lubitsch, 1933

Wish I could think of more. I'm just not nearly as movie-centric as I used to be.

>>7117477
>on an english language board
The fact that he isn't American doesn't mean that his first language isn't English.

>>7118758
Watched Angel's Egg recently, what an absolutely gorgeous movie.

>just a bunch of Tarkovsky, Kubrick, and Malick shitflinging

it's like i'm really on /tv/!

>>7118758
>what is cat soup

>>7118907
for you

>>7118939
I prefer when the weirdness has some consitency to it, I can enjoy total of the hook surrealism I can't admire it as much.

>>7117062
Akira is bad and you should feel bad for liking it.

>>7118966
what? akira was great my dude

>>7118768
>Implying Citizen Kane is anywhere close to being the best movie of all time

It just used revolutionary camera and editing techniques, and that's why people can't stop sucking Welles' dick. The core narrative is nothing special.

>>7118987
Yeah sure, if you're a fan of Michael Bay's stuff. The manga is half-decent but the movie? Trash.

>>7118992
Ulysses' "revolutionary" technique is what gets people going too. The core narrative is nothing special as well.

>>7119001
fam...

>>7116711
> Malick

Not really. He's competent but he's not as important as Bresson, Tarkovsky or Antonioni.

>>7119021
Tarkovsky is pleb shit m8

>>7119001
>He bashes Michael Bay

what a pleb. back to reddit

>>7118992
>watching films for the plot

ok kid

>>7118496
>Secret Sunshine
>not Oasis
SS is my second fave of his though.

>>7119049
Yeah, it's close. I gave Secret Sunshine the edge because Jeon Do-yeon gives probably my favorite acting performance of all-time. the scenes where she's just wailing in church and when she meets the guy in prison are just devastating, and at those scenes are completely opposite ends of the spectrum, too, one is just full-on emotion and the other is so restrained and nuanced

as far as audiovisual experiences go I recently saw 'man with a movie camera' (1929) with a score by the cinematic orchestra and it was just UNBELIEVABLY good
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zeCdQJcA88
probably bad quality but whatever, check it out

I need to see more experimental and surrealist silent movies to get more of that pure cinematic expression that couldn't have been realized in any other medium

>>7118959
Fair enough. Will probably add the other favourites you listed which I haven't yet watched to my backlog, thx

>>7119040
That might be, but he's more important than Malick.

>>7118758
Just replying to say you have an amazing taste in animation, my man. Been meaning to see Angel's Egg for years but it's pretty difficult to get a copy in the UK.

>>7119078
It really is amazing, man. If you're interested in more technically impressive films that could never work in any other medium, check out Russian Ark: it's a dream-like Russian history lesson that is delivered through a single take.

>>7118758
Where is Hedgehog in the Fog?

FUCKING PLEBS

>>7119078
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeosT_6vG7g

the goat

>>7118758
D-d-do you like Lotte Reiniger, a-anon?

>>7119123
sorry, ment this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QV9-l-rXOE

>>7119112
>>7119123
>>7119133
thanks homies

>>7119112
>technically impressive films
literally the least technically impressive film. film's power lays in edits and montage. the fetishism for long takes is what's killing film. tarkovsky's a retard

>>7119147
I politely disagree, anon. The amount of effort needed to organise and plan a long take is very challenging - Russian Ark took 3 years to plan, making sure nothing was out of place in terms of props, extras or character movements all while the camera crew could move seemingly effortlessly around the scenery. Although I agree that much of film's power lies in post-production, there's certainly much technical effort needed to create a successful and effective long take.

>>7119147
>montage
It's literally comic book tier and doesn't make use of film's greatest weapon - time.

>>7119147
I agree
>>7119168
total continuity isn't the only way of conveying time

>>7117528
>Nabokov's lolita is literally god tier literature.
Is it a cringe thread or did I miss something?

>>7119174
Of course not. But film can use something that's in a sense unique to it alone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sg3caRJCaQs

Máj (1936, Burian & Zahradnícek)

>>7119297
Music is temporal

>>7119190
>or did I miss something?
Indeed you did. /lit/ is a cringe board full of cringe people.

>>7117524
Gospel According to St Matthew is his best fam

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmzPH2B9P3k

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu_pqP7_IUE

>>7119133
The soundtrack is awesome, holy fuck

>>7116656
no

anyways 2001 is my fave movie. I actually like it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqGnfxa8-pg

How come Andrei Rublev is deified when his actual art is potato faced looking shit?
Move was good tho

>>7116656
It's as good. The problem is that there are far fewer artists of cinema compared to literature.

>>7116656
Doesn't matter since cinema and literature are both far below music.

requesting _patrician_ comments on "takeshi kitano", in particular "sonatine (1993)" and/or "brother (2000)"

test

I have always considered music to be the most entry-level of the arts. It can be appreciated by a 6 year old, provided he or she is not deaf. The experiences of Proper Literature do not come so easily. One dos not simply understand a man as cryptic as Ahab or Raskolnikov. Yet, anyone can play a little Motzart or Bach in the background as they eat their Spaghettios. Music hardly requires attention. It demands virtually nothing of one's cognitive abilities. Such cannot be said for the rewards offered by Finnegan's Wake or Borge's Ficciones.

>>7119469
>>7119600

>>7116656

I like some books and I like some films.

No, despite the fact that most novels can be read in 5 hours, films are too accessible. So how could they let me have a false sense of superiority? Novels can do so many important and profound things cinema can't and if you don't believe/know what they are then you are a pleb.

>>7117512
Where do you write about it and how do you Get paid for it?

>>7116718
>>7116718
>>7116718
>dismissing movies for pop aesthetics
>dismissing a fledgling medium's potential artistry merely because It's young, as if would dare say the same shit about the Greek Tragedians.
>dismissing it as 'underdeveloped' in the first place, as if film fell from the sky and was not built upon old and rich traditions of literature, photography, theatre, etc..
>dismissing the structural mastery of the first two Star Wars films merely because they're popular.
>dismissing your own thoughts and feelings because they're uncool.

While I agree that film has a long ways to go, denouncing great works of pop, or 'camp', is not the best place to start. They're considered classics for reasons deeper than 'muh philistines'. Some might say movies like Star Wars lack the originality, compelling dialogue, and cerebral themes that push movies beyond cheese; in other words, they are 'not literary." Art/film pedants love that term, 'literary' films', for it weds film with the medium they are so awfully jealous of. The irony, of course, is that their proposition for evolution is regression into a separate, dustier artistic tradition. The greatest strength of the film, as opposed to the novel, is its imagism, for stories can be told in a wholly separate way through pictures. After all, we have been looking at pictures for millions of years, and reading text for thousands. By way of this difference in form, it is required that a novel be cerebral to also be good; the medium is composed solely by ideas, and therefore works within the medium depend upon them as foundation. While images also represent 'ideas', in the semiotical sense, they are ideas more immediately evocative and graspable by the primordial mind.It is for this reason that Star Wars would never work as a book; its themes, characters, and plot are too pedestrian to survive by prose alone. As a film, however, action, drama, lore, immersion, and thematic drama, as opposed to thematic complexity, make both 'empire' and 'new hope' fucking awesome.

Tl;dr; Pop movies are cool, and they shouldn't feign literary 'sophistication' to be seen as art, for while they may not require sophistication to understand, they are nevertheless sophisticated in their composition and artistry.

>>7119115
I'm that guy and I actually preferred Tale of Tales, thought I mentioned it. Guess I was thinking more in terms of features. I really hope we get to see the Overcoat someday
>>7119112
Thanks, was there even a release in Europe?
>>7119130
I do, but I actually liked the works of Noburo Ofuji more when it comes to sillhoutte animation.

>>7119931
>The greatest strength of the film, as opposed to the novel, is its imagism, for stories can be told in a wholly separate way through pictures
>While images also represent 'ideas', in the semiotical sense, they are ideas more immediately evocative and graspable by the primordial mind

fucking thank you. been looking for a way to articulate why it is really good pop movies can be so effective and even evocative. no one would call mad max high art but the sheer dynamism and, for a lack of a better word, pop of its imagery is extremely effective and well-made which is why I still enjoy the shit out of big-budget flicks and will always continue to do so.

>>7117543
Tarkovsky thought Kubricks work was without spirit

>>7119931
>>dismissing a fledgling medium's potential artistry merely because It's young, as if would dare say the same shit about the Greek Tragedians.
I would. The Greek tragedies have terribly written plots and the characters are not only paper thin but basically all insane.

>>7119952
>fucking thank you. been looking for a way to articulate why it is really good pop movies can be so effective and even evocative.
>I had an opinion I couldn't justify myself but I held it anyway
You should probably work on that.

>>7119940
Forgot that chart doesn't have non-japanese films anymore.

>>7119980
lol what

Yeah

In Bruges, Dr. Strangelove, 8 1/2, Calvary and This is England are some of my faves.

>>7119999
I can't "articulate" why you and your whole family should be tortured to death but I'll wait until someone else does it for me, doesn't matter how they justify it, so long as they do, then I'll tell myself I had a good reason to think it all along.
I can't "articulate" why the world is flat but I'll wait until someone else does it for me, doesn't matter how they justify it, so long as they do, then I'll tell myself I had a good reason to think it all along.

>>7116656
Literature > Cinema > Art > 'movies' > comics > video games

>>7119972
Well have fun with that opinion.

>>7120029
you forgot about music, also you could consider putting anime at the veryy bottom after a couple >'s

>>7120044
forgot about that

Literature > Cinema > Art = music > 'movies' > Anime > comics/manga > video games

>>7120041
It's pretty categorical.

>>7120044
anime is just movies or series in some cases

It's

Music > Literature = Cinema = Painting > Sculpture > Architecture > Everything else ... ... ... Anime and Vidya

>>7120022
you this fucking butthurt cause I pretty much said "thanks for putting something I've always thought about into words?"

christ you fucking autists will whinge about anything

>>7119469
>>7119600
I always think of art forms in tiers based on how well mastered they are (in that one can control all of the elements of the artwork to most clearly present a unified whole).

In my estimation, sculpture is at the top, with literature, architecture, painting, and music close behind, and with theater slightly below those.

Film is the lowest, because you cant perfectly manipulate the actors, the directors, the costume designers, etc etc to do your bidding. And someone probably needs to finance your movie, and they probably have an agenda. Most directors dont even get final cut privileges.

>>7119940
glad to see Utena in there, truly the greatest work of animation Japan has ever produced.

>>7120087
So basically the less a medium has to offer in terms of form, the better it is? Film has everything literature has to offer plus the audition of audio and visuals, animation is the same but has more creative control in terms of the last one. Games have all this plus the gameplay mechanics. It's the only consistent way of evaluating art.

>>7120096
According to that reasoning comic books would be higher than film and theatre. Possibly even higher than literature and painting, because really it's both in one package.

That's fucking retarded. Auterism and control does not equal great art. If I were to try drawing a straight line with a ruler, it would inevitably be more precise and loyal to my vision than, say, the Mona Lisa was to Da Vinci's. Does that make my line better than the Mona Lisa? Of fucking course not.

>>7120108
It's like fear. Something you can see is a lot less scarier than something you can't. Music is pure emotion, pure vibration. Literature is second; the words are just signposts for the imagination. Film and painting are a bit more restricted in this sense, but that doesn't mean it can never be beautiful or anything, and in fact incidental images can almost be as moving as the more intentional scenes.

I've been just as moved by the way sunlight catches the leaves in a certain scene in Me, Myself, and Irene almost as much as anything else (being high as fuck and going through some shit when I watched it help, as always context is huge). Either way, all art is fucking beautiful tbh

>>7120141
Meant for
>>7120096

>>7120122
no, combining mediums necessarily consolidates both of their flaws, not both of their merits.

Also unless I missed something really obvious, any art form I ignored in my list is probably negligible. Comics/Vidya/etc arent high art. theyre really not in the same realm.

>>7116711
How original

>>7120141
>>7120151
see below
>>7120160

a straight line is a negligible form of art, and it also presents no unified message.

Please understand that I'm not really trying to provide a flawless metric for evaluating mediums, just presenting my personal take on the issue.

>>7118718
There are legitimately great films there.

>giant obelisk from space tells apes how to use tools, then turns a human into a giant space foetus
>in the middle there's a somewhat interesting bit about AI

Have I missed the point? Can someone please explain why this isn't seen as dumb.

n.b. I haven't read the book

>>7120213
>watches 2011
>gets hung up on the plot
top pleb

watch barry lyndon i guess

>>7120087
>music in top 3
lol

>>7116871
>Stalker was bore

>>7120259
What's the merit in it then? Other than it looks pretty. And don't say that famous shot with the bone because that's just heavy-handed and corny

>>7120555
im not that well-versed in the formal aspects of cinema so im not going to attempt an explanation, but if you dont get it you dont get it. its fine, a lot of people dont.

>>7119047
>>7118768
Well memed

>>7120087
>cinema and music in top 2 tiers

cuck list TBH

>>7117524
Mamma Roma iz gud. His essays on film are top rate too. I'd put that one on poetry and film on a syllabus, then screen C-berg's Maps to the Stars and discuss the linguistic drift from the Eluard poem to Havana's mother's dialogue in her cult film. It'd be so cash man.

>>7116656
Is this discussion limited only to film? Because The Sopranos reached a level of sublimity that surpasses almost anything I've seen or read. I can't emphasise enough how much of a genius this man is.

>>7117524
>Kubrick is ameritrash.
confirmed pleb tbh

>>7120932
confirmed bait you mean

>>7117531
>first year creative writing tier.
>traumnovelle

>>7119167

Yeah man. I tend to have an Eisensteinian approach to film but you have a point. Rope is just two long takes, and I really think it's a perfect film.

>>7119469

Go to bed Schopenhauer. Your aesthetics suck.

>>7120970
>he thinks music just means whatever garbage indie pop he listens to

git gud m8

can someone recommend German language directors? Preferably Austrians or Germans but it doesn't matter. Who are the classic German directors?

>>7120979

I was listening to Liszt last night, Glass tonight, Britten tomorrow, and Mussorgsky on all hallow's eve.

Schopenhauer 's aesthetics still suck.

>>7120988
The best film of all time happens to be German, so you might want to check that out

"Das Boot" is another great German film

>>7120988
Michael Haneke is Austrian. His films are damned good, but usually French or English. Kris Markovics's Breathing is good.

>>7120988

Classical German cinema: Murnau, Lang, Lubitsch. Von Stroheim.

New German cinema: Fassbinder, Wenders, Herzog

>>7116718
>Coens
>hacks

>>7116656
I firmly believe Good Will Hunting is better than most books

>>7119998
I love Hertzfeldt with a deep passion, despite him being a tick too popular

>>7120927
Six Feet Under was the best show HBO ever put out.

>>7121509
That's not a high compliment, which I assume is what you were hinting at.

>>7116656
For someone who is not a fan of Tarkovsky I've seen quite a bit, but I will say I fucking loved Stalker. Something about that movie just clicked with me. I love the atmosphere and the tone of the movie.

>>7117062
Winter Light is up there as my favorite Bergman. Check out Fanny and Alexander, the 4 part tv version.

>>7118966
You poor stupid fool.

>>7121040
>Von Stroheim
he made all his films in America, m8

>>7120988
HANEKE
A
N
E
K
E

>>7121592
Wasn't he austrian to begin with? kek
>guy reccomends an Austrian-American when asked for german directors

>>7121017
>aguirre
>best film
mein seiden

>>7121513
Yeah what an asshole. Did no one tell him he needs less fans!

>>7121515
No it wasn't.

>>7121691
Writing-wise, yes it was.

>>7121513
I'm always glad when people I admire are recognized.

>>7116718
>Big Lebowski
>Made by hacks

maybe they're not the best filmmakers ever but that's far from being "hacks".

fargo is a masterpiece imo

>>7121853
>>7121619
You're right. That came out wrong.

I only worry that people are liking him for the wrong reasons. I made the mistake once of showing one of his shorter works to my younger brother, who I believe appreciated it. Unfortunately, this meant that all his friends saw it as well, and I am constantly hounded by shrieks of "FOR THE LOVE OF GOD AND ALL THAT IS HOLY, MY ANUS" whenever I come home and happen to pass by one of his titles on Netflix.

While it is good that he is finding popularity because it means that he is introduced to more capable of appreciating him, I fear he will come to be synonymous with the cancerous trend of "random" humor.

>no mention of lars von trier
good, he's a hack

>>7118758
Angel's Egg! Thank you anon. I remember seeing bits of this as a kid and being enchanted. Now I can actually watch the movie.

>>7120649
>you don't get it
>but I can't explain what "it" is
Maybe, just maybe, there's nothing of value there

>>7121972

What have you seen of him, and why?

>>7121735
No it wasn't.

>>7120416
Art in my eyes is intended to convey emotion and beauty effectively, music is the most successful at that

>>7122548
>convey emotion and beauty
pleb or underage

>>7122548
It's the most successful because somehow it's the easiest to touch us. There's no need of knowledge to understand why it does either.

>>7122613
Lmao yeah ok kid go wax poetic about a urinal some more

>>7123140
>wax poetic
definitely a pleb

>film thread
>no mention of Max Ophuls, Powell and Pressburger, Buster Keaton, Hitchcock, Howard Hawks, Douglas Sirk, Billy Wilder

You know guys, movies can be fun.

>>7121592
So what? Most Jewish and gay German directors made films in murrica after leaving Germany in the thirties. If the Nazis hadn't happened, it's very possible that Germany would have the dominant film industry in the world today. Every classical German director I mentioned ended up in America.

>>7122014
>expects someone to bother explaining all of 2001 on a cartoon image board.

just go fucking read about it online

>>7124084
Madame de ...
fucking great movie

>>7124546
yeah but whats with the retarded way they duel.

hombre can just shoot de seca, its not really a duel if you take turns

>>7116871
>incredibly pretentious.
thats not a criticism

why do people fucking say this shit

>>7120029
>>7120050
>>7120087
Music = Literature = Cinema = Painting =Sculpture = Architecture = Animation = Vidya ≥ Everything else

>>7119998
What is in the botton right corner?

>>7116656
Tarkovsky is essentially one long ASMR video tbh fam

>>7118040
Saved tbh

>>7116718
cinema peaked too early

>>7118758
are you me

>>7117528
This post is a perfect example of slipslop.

>>7116713
underated post

Since there are so many cineasts in here...

Can someone please recommend me important German films/movies? Just watched 'Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari' and it was quite good (except that twist in the end). I guess I'm watching Metropolis next.

Also more generally speaking: What does enhance a cinematic experience, what does one need to know or pay attention to, if he wants to 'advance'?

>>7120104
I don't consider myself that good at evaluating art to claim which one is best. I personally find it to be my 5th favorite, first being EoE.
>>7121899
Even then, I still don't get how that would effect you liking him or not. In addition, I remember Osamu Tezuka saying in an interview that he thinks animation should have some humor. While I don't think it's a necessity, I think in the case of Hertzfeldt it is a vital part of his works. Just look at It's Such a Beautiful Day. I'd it was made so that we would laugh, so that later on we'd kind of feel bad for it.
>>7124715
Heavy Metal. Essentially an animated rock music video. I can't say I admire it to the same extent as the other works on that chart, but it's still a great ride.
>>7125311
Nope, but I like you already.

>>7126005
See M(1931) it's one of my all time favourite films. Also Sunshine by murnau, it's extremely beautiful and very innovative for its time.

>>7119940
>>7119998
Anyone have some live-action film recommendations for someone with these favorites?

I prefer films as a medium, but I think books are better in some ways.
>>7124084
>Hitchcock
>fun

>>7126140
>See M(1931) it's one of my all time favourite films.
I've seen it when I was a teenager. The thing I remember most was of course the last scene, which was quite impressive (I dare to say kafkaesk), but everything else is kinda blurry. I should watch it again some time.
So, why is it your favourite? infect me

>>7124678
>>7116871
Yeah. "Pretentious" is the worst word in the English language, and no one uses it properly.

>>7116822
You're lucky I haven't had my morning coffee.

>>7120180
leave /lit/ forever

>>7126179
>North by Northwest, Rear Window, The Birds, Spellbound, Rope, The Lady Vanishes
>not fun

>>7119600
I have always considered literature to be the most entry-level of the arts. It can be appreciated by a 6 year old, provided he or she is not blind. The experiences of Proper Music do not come so easily. One dos not simply understand a man as cryptic as Tchaikovsky or Verdi. Yet, anyone can play a little audiobook in the background as they eat their Spaghettios. Literature hardly requires attention. It demands virtually nothing of one's cognitive abilities. Such cannot be said for the rewards offered by a Piano Concerto or Bieber's Baby.

>>7120555
IT'S ABOUT OUR STEP FROM BEING PRIMAL ANIMALS TO BECOMING HUMANS. THEN WE BECOME UBERMENCH

>>7119010
>fam...
Yeah, you seem like the type of guy who would like animes about immature teenagers with emotional difficulties

>>7126509
>he doesn't realise fam is London slang m808

>>7119600
>>7121004

>>7119443
Finished watching Satantango the other month - took me 3 days to actually finish but I loved it. It's a shame Bela Tarr has retired from filmmaking, his work is immense.

>>7119688
> Shoah
> Ikiru
> La belle Et la Bete
> The Passion of Joan Of Arc
> Tokyo Story
> Apu trilogy
> last year in Marienbad

Please be my wife or husband.

>>7119998
Did you order one of the Hertzfeldt Blu-rays signed by the man himself ?

>>7124084
> no mention of Hitchcock

Someone said earlier that Rope was a perfect film, anon.

>>7116815
I'm an idiot and his movies are just really great to look at. I'm always taken back at how everything moves like it's a dream. Just look at the seaweed from the beginning of Solaris. I really like how it moves.

>>7126610
>Critetion-core
Literally all entry-level classics. You guys are really going out on a limb saying these are your favorites.

>>7126764
I live in the UK where we don't have Criterion, how am I meant to know what's Criterion-core or not?

>>7126818
>I live in the UK where we don't have Criterion

Criterion is very much a part of the UK

Films age poorly. A lot of the classics are unwatchable unless you have a interest in filmmaking or the history of film, both very uninteresting.

"This movie sucks"
"Yeah but Schullenbacher practically invented the zoom"

>>7126863
It's not a collection sold in the UK, mate. If I wanted Criterion films, they'd have to be imported from the US.

>>7126863
where do you even buy criterion films in the uk then anon

instead we have the bfi, eureka, artificial eye, curzon, etc but no criterion.

>>7116656

Definitely YES. Everything can be art, the point is if its a GOOD or BAD art. ask Warhol btw....
in a perfect future we'll hang Chris Ware's work near Velázquez....of course a perfect future it's a silly utopia....

>>7126929
Criterion is unnecessary since BFI, Artificial Eye, and especially Eureka/Masters of Cinema produce work on par or better than them

>>7126764
I've noticed that /lit/ is the only board where the majority don't regularly shit on the classics and other canonical or highly-regarded works of any media.

>>7127581
oh fair enough then, we're all good then

Cinema threads are better on /lit/ than on /tv/.

Why do you think there are such few good epics on cinema, anon? There is Ben-Hur, There Will Be Blood, 2001, Lawrence of Arabia... I can't think of anything else? Also

>epics on paper or screen?

For me its definitely literary, even though i enjoy cinema

>>7127742
op's pic related, for one

>>7126927
>>7126929
This is wrong, I've bught Criterion collection DVD's in HMV and Virgin megastores (when it was still operating)

>>7126162
Black Swan if you really enjoyed Perfect Blue.

inb4 anfronsky haters.

my top 10

1. Apocalypse Now - Francis Ford Coppola
I one day hope to make something on this scale. It's simply astounding. One of the only ever good uses of voiceover and a level of intelligent political commentary to be envied.

2. L'Eclisse - Michelangelo Antonioni
Meticulous framing that uses the height of the frame (very uncommon) as well as the width. The sense of restraint in terms of narrative and camera movement as well gives every decision a weightiness lacking in lesser directors' choices.

3. Woman in the Dunes - Hiroshi Teshigahara
Another instance of meticulous framing and restraint. The setup, a man tricked into a Sisyphean captivity, is instantly gripping and the sense of dread that permeates the film gives the viewer a first hand sense of the characters' alienation.

4. Throne of Blood - Akira Kurosawa
Both one of Kurosawa's most nihilistic as well as one of his more supernatural affairs. Full of beautiful black and white cinematography, well developed characters and gripping subtext.

5. Network - Sydney Lumet
Probably one of the best (if not the best) written films of all time. The deadpan satire of Chayefsky, the downright prophetic condemnation of sensationalist media, and the technical mastery of Lumet all come together into a perfect cinematic storm. Specifically, the idea to gradually change the lighting in the film from naturalistic to overly dramatic as characters descend into corruption has greatly influenced my notions of how to use lighting thematically in film.

>>7127810
6. Mirror - Andrei Tarkovsky
Non-linear, poetic film-making has always interested me and this is the gold standard. Filled with emotion, natural beauty, subtext and gorgeous color cinematography. Don't overthink it, this isn't a film for academics. Just watch and feel.

7. Au Hasard Balthazar - Robert Bresson
I'm not exactly certain why but this film never fails to make me cry. The combination of loss of innocence and personal endurance as central themes, not to mention the subtle use of Schubert never ceases to distract from the wooden acting in any Bresson film. As always, much more is expressed in body and hand movement than face or voice.

8. The Master - Paul Thomas Anderson
Maybe it's because I feel like an outcast and an animal that should be ashamed of himself most of the time, but for whatever reason Anderson's tender portrayal of the ways people deal with their deficiencies spoke to me on a profound internal level. Some of the most beautiful cinematography of the new millennium for those interested.

9. The Killing of a Chinese Bookie - John Cassavetes
I really appreciate the method of shooting Cassavetes used to give his actors as much creative freedom as possible even though the results can be mixed. With Killing, I think he struck the perfect balance between directorial intent and actor freedom allowing for a simultaneously raw and measured film with plenty of subtext about the struggle of the artist to maintain his integrity.

10. Harakiri - Masaki Kobayashi
A damning look at the implications of the Japanese samurai genre. Kobayashi seamlessly integrates criticism of both the veneration of the sengoku warrior class as well as remaining true to his new left proletarian sympathies. Beautiful architectural cinematography and striking imagery all in black and white.

>>7127742
>few good epics
>Gone With the Wind
>Quo Vadis
>Intolerance
>Birth of a Nation
>Reds
>Bridge on the River Kwai
>Apocalypse Now
>Barry Lyndon
>The Ten Commandments
>King of Kings
>Lola Montes
>Napoleon
>Samson and Delilah
>The Good the Bad and The Ugly
>The Searchers
>Master and Commander

what are you on about?

>>7127742
Metropolis was pretty good, if that's considered an epic.

>>7126621
fair enough, except for the part where Rope is talky, stagey and minor Hitch

>>7127760
Has Criterion's UK branch gone defunct then because I haven't seen Criterion at all in HMV and any Criterion releases I see online are all region 1.

I have nothing else in life.

>>7117220
mgs2 is art tbh

>>7126162
If you like Stand Alone Complex, check out Mishima's Patriotism. The revolutionary philiospher character of Patrick Sylvester and to an extent Ghouda and Kuze are based on his him

>>7127827
I don't know, I don't buy DVDs anymore. But I remember only seeing them in the world cinema section, they're basically the only publisher who do those old obscure foreign classics

>>7127813
>Mirror
While very different, I think Ashes and Snow is equally as poetic and beautiful.

>>7127875
That's not true, though: most of my foreign classics have been distributed and re-distributed via Artificial Eye, BFI, Eureka and Optimum Releasing. I don't want to argue or anything, man, but count me politely skeptical.

>>7127841
oh this is an amazing movie, anon

"I was born when she kissed me. I died when she left me. I lived a few weeks while she loved me."

>>7127887
I just checked my collection, they are Artifical Eye after all. Sorry about that, I don't know how I thought they were criterion

>>7127893
I lived a few weeks while you loved me. Goodbye, Dix.

>>7127893
>>7127910
Have you also seen They Live by Night? It may just be my favourite Ray film, and its ending is on the same level as that of It's a Lonely Place.

>>7118758
>Beautiful Dreamer
Which one?

Big Trouble in Little China > Every book ever written

>>7127904
It's alright, anon. No harm done.

>>7127827
There has never been anything but Region 1/A Criterion releases, not even Region-free offerings. Any one you saw in the UK were imports, and the company has literally no official European presence.

A lot of this has to do with home video rights changing holders from country to country.

>>7128041
this tbf

>>7126583
I appreciate the remark Anonymous.
However in today's world of decadence and sitcoms, the epaulettes of intellectualism are handed out like blue participation ribbons at a public elementary school.
I am above all else, humble. And so I confess, I only appear as a intellectual relative to the mediocrity of the mass populace.

>>7128189
do you talk like this when you have sex? i'd totally cum in your mouth if you do.

ITT: /lit/ exposes themselves for the pretentious plebs they really are.

>>7116704
Yeah... compared to autism(:

The best film is as good as the best literature.

Some of my favorites

Ran
Purple Rose of Cairo
The Searchers
Raging Bull
Thin Red Line
Aguirre Wrath of God
In The Mood For Love
Taste of Cherry
Synechode New York

>>7127824

Fuck you. His use of off screen sound and fragmentary dialogue is definitely not stagey. That's part of the genius of the film - it feels like a play while remaining purely cinematic. You would never get the experience of the close UPS of the rope, the close UPS of Philip's hand, the quick pans from character to character during crucial moments of dialogue, and that genius still shot near the end focused on the trunk and Alice cleaning it off, with the other characters having a related conversation off screen. None of the sensations these techniques evoke are possible with the theatre.

This all eschews Hollywood dialogue style to boot, establishing believable dynamics between characters. The writing is impeccable.

Rope is a god-tier film that borders on a hoax to dupe people into the facile notion that they're watching a filmed play.

>>7128325
Shit taste detected

>>7128325
/tv/ pls

>>7117411
dude the masses were never into it to begin with