[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 615 KB, 879x498, IV%2BPOSTER%2BHORIZONTAL.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5768407 No.5768407 [Reply] [Original]

>yfw pynchon gets a screenplay Oscar

>> No.5768413

>>5768407

Anderson adapted it so he would get the Oscar, not Pinecone.

>> No.5768414

my body is ready
I love PTA and i want to see his version of big lebowski

>> No.5768417

I never want to see Gravity's Rainbow as a film. It wouldn't work and it would ruin the book.

>> No.5768419

>>5768417
>it would ruin the book.

xD

>> No.5768429

>>5768417
Yeah but this is not Gravity's Rainbow so how about u shut ur pretty face u faggot

>> No.5768442

wish I wasn't such a slow reader so I can read this before the movie comes out

Watching then reading is no way to do things

>> No.5768443
File: 162 KB, 649x463, 1412622891009.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5768443

>>5768413
>implying pinecone didn't ghostwrite it

>> No.5768557

>>5768417
nice blog

>> No.5768706

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqQ_7CpU-_g

The only member of the cast who actually read the book was Joanna Newsom.

>> No.5768781

>>5768442
Just read longer

>> No.5768784

>>5768706
I'm in with love her

>> No.5768788

>>5768706
Owen Wilson is a lit major

>> No.5769300

>>5768706
>book = film

lel

>> No.5770956

>>5768706
Wow, they have no chemistry

>> No.5770978

>>5768706
why is pauly boy turning into a linklater character

>> No.5770984

>>5770978
I laughed at this but I seriously have no idea what you're saying

Just his haircut?

what's linklatery about it?

>> No.5770997

it even says on the poster you posted that anderson wrote the screenplay

i mean fuck, if the coens can win one for adapting no country for old men pretty much scene for scene

>> No.5771012

>>5768706
Joaquin Phoenix read it too probably, he's a method actor

>> No.5771025

>>5768417
Actually, it would work if it were directed by David Lynch, and in that case would only enhance the book.

>> No.5771033

>>5771012
They asked who read it and only 3 people put up their hands, Newsom, the asian chick and Martin Short

>> No.5771044

>>5771012
>>5771033
Well there are set pictures of Joaquin holding a very, very worn copy of the book.

>> No.5771052

>>5771044
He looked pretty stoned in the interview
Maybe he was zoning out

>> No.5771065

>>5771052
I think he just hates doing those kind of things. He spent the whole press conference for The Master just sitting behind the table chain smoking bored out of his mind.

>> No.5771069

>>5768414
http://youtu.be/4gH542wIZA8

>> No.5771101

Saw the movie, leaves a lot of the book out but decent and fun movie didn't like the ending change

No Doc driving through the fog, it's Doc and Shasta driving away together

>> No.5771105

>>5768706
fuck salinger was right about the movies

>> No.5771184
File: 41 KB, 197x220, 1349008885432.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5771184

>>5771101
>Doc and Shasta driving away together

>> No.5771194

>>5768407

PTA and and Pynchon are a match made in heaven, since both represent, respectively in cinema and literature, the epitome of inauthenticity. Both are very cunning imitators of authentic art, so that, superficially, PTA's flicks and Pynchon's penny dreadfuls look like great works of art. And the unthinking will consider themselves ''connoisseurs'' for liking this inauthentic trash disguised as great art, and will happily pat themselves on their backs.

This whole thing is nothing more than an IMDB-core flick-maker adapting a meme author's most unabashedly memetic work into a flick that will make every lover of inauthentic art out there (fans of Tarantino, Fincher, etc.) salivate.

Truthful and authentic filmmakers such as Korine will go unappreciated, and hacks like PTA will be celebrated. I, being a proponent of authentic cinema, will not be seeing it.

>> No.5771205

>>5771194
>inauthenticity
There he is. There he goes again. Look, everyone! He posted it once again!

>> No.5771211

>>5771194
>Truthful and authentic filmmakers such as Korine
>I, being a proponent of authentic cinema
>meme author
>Pynchon's penny dreadfuls
2/10 made me reply.

>> No.5771266

>>5771205
>>5771211

This is what I truly believe. You can mock me as much as you want, but I won't stop my battle for authentic cinema. PTA is just an imitator, stealing from early Scorsese (who became another master of the inauthentic), Ophuls and Altman and many others. TWBB is a memetic flicks, as are all of PTA's flicks. Believe me, I've tried to like him. I've watched all of his flicks, and a few of them I've watched more than twice. But the inauthenticity is overwhelming. It should be obvious to any intelligent appreciator of cinema.

When the trashy style of PTA is paired with the vulgar and memetic style of Pynchon, it will produce an extravaganza of inauthenticity. I can foresee that the flick will immediately leap to the top 10 on IMDB, and the people like you will have many a discussion about this ''cool'' scene or that one. ''Remember when he did that? Man, wasn't that cool?'' or ''And then he like totally did this thing, and it was super awesome and cool!''

But this is not authentic cinema. The Tarantinos and PTAs and Finchers have absolutely destroyed filmmaking. Look how bleak the cinematic landscape looks. There are a few authentic auteurs out there still, like Korine, and Herzog, and Cronenberg, and so on. But it is directly due to the aforementioned masters of inauthentic cinema that people like Nolan get so much praise. They are actively polluting the minds of the people who see these flicks.

You can hate me as much as you want, but I am sincere. This is what I believe. I am a warrior of authentic cinema, and I'll continue to fight until my last breath.

>> No.5771279

>>5771194
>>5771266

What do you even mean by authentic?

>> No.5771288

>>5771279
I do not spoonfeed people. Sorry.

I pride myself on my extreme authenticity in all areas of life, and I have reached this transcendent state through years and years of intense thought.

Inauthenticity of the soul and of the mind cannot be destroyed by quickly reading some Wikipedia article. It is a state of enlightenment, reachable only by an arduous intellectual journey that is no less difficult than dragging yourself through miles of broken glass.

I understand that, more often than not, I am throwing pearls before swine. But if I have set even just one person walking in the right direction, then I have done my duty. Cinema is in a dire state, but someday authenticity will reign supreme. And on that day, I can rest and say: ''I put it all on the line. I did my part. And now we have won.''

>> No.5771315

>>5771288
Okay

>> No.5771322

>>5771194
>>5771266
>>5771288
This is parodic performance art, yeah?

>> No.5771328

>>5771194
>>5771266
>>5771288

Wow, can't possibly be a troll just due to the volume of shit written. I can't believe someone like this actually exists.

>> No.5771329

>>5771322
o i am laffin

>> No.5771335

>>5768413
This. It's like you guys don't even know how the Oscars work.

The award is for the screenplay, not the novel it was based on.

Also, just because PTA wins an Oscar once for this doesn't restore the Oscars's dignity. I haven't watched that shit since Titanic won 20 awards--some, I think, in categories where it wasn't even nominated.

>inb4 b-but Shakepeare in Love!!!

Shit.

>Tom Stoppard wrote it!

It's shit, Stoppard's shit, and you're shit for liking it. It's excrement-by-association.

Have I convinced you with these hot opinions? Yeah, for real.

I'm Pynchon, by the way.

>> No.5771342

>>5771266

Incredible pretentious.

There Will Be Blood is a masterpiece. Don't kid yourself into believing it's not. It's a craftsmanship at its finest.

What you're looking for is unreachable. This "authentic cinema" will never dominate Hollywood. Even in the '70s, the greatest decade in Hollywood; Scorsese, De Palma, Lucas, Coppola, all those guys took stuff from the french new wave.

Malick, Altman, Cavassettes, Roeg; you can almost count the pure auetur-driven directors from the US on your fingers. It's just not possible for that sort of cinema you're looking at.

Painting down PTA as a destroyer of cinema is absolutely wrong. He's a good director who makes good movies.It's all about perspective. There is a Michael Bay out there and Fast and Furious movies that almost make a billion. That's a far bigger problem. In the '70s it was movies like The Godfather that cashed in.

>> No.5771345

>>5771194
>Both are very cunning imitators of authentic art, so that, superficially, PTA's flicks and Pynchon's penny dreadfuls look like great works of art.

Both are actually the real deal. It's writers like DFW that's are imitators.

>> No.5771346

>>5771288
God, reading your posts has been a delight. I truly hope you are completely serious and espouse these opinions to everyone you meet.

If you don't mind, you should take pictures of people's reactions after you've had your say and post them here for us so we can know to identify what sudden enlightenment looks like.

>> No.5771353

>>5771266
>>5771288
'Start copying what you love. Copy copy copy copy. At the end of the copy you will find yourself.'
Yohji Yamamoto

'Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal'
TS Eliot

'When there's anything to steal, I steal'
Picasso

'Really the truth is just a plain picture. A plain picture of, let’s say, a tramp vomiting in the sewere. You know, and next door to the picture Mr. Rockefeller or Mr. C. W. Jones on the subway going to work. You know, any kind of picture. Just make a collage of pictures.'
Bob Dylan

'It’s not where you take things from—it’s where you take them to.'
Jean-Luc Godard

'Those who do not want to imitate anything, produce nothing'
Dali

'Old and new make the warp and woof of every moment. There is no thread that is not a twist of these two strands. By necessity, by proclivity, and by delight, we all quote.'
Emerson

i could try to make my own arguments against your conceptions of authenticity, but for the moment ill try and let these great artists (IMO) speak for themselves. there are others who have spoken similarly, but i hesitate to quote them because others would likely dispute their artistic achievement (eg jarmusch)

>> No.5771361

>>5771194
>I, being a proponent of authentic cinema, will not be seeing it.

So, you have all these bombastic opinions about a work of cinema you've never even seen and won't ever see? Hmm. Forgive me, but your words on the matter sound dreadfully (all together now...) inauthentic.

>> No.5771362

>>5771105
why, what did he say?

>> No.5771365

>>5771315
>>5771322
>>5771328
Regarding authenticity.

I am a poster who for a long time has vocally protested the praise of directors such as PTA, McQueen, Nolan, Tarantino, Nichols, McQueen, and writers such as Pynchon, Dostoevsky, Tao Lin, DFW, Williams, and instead promoted a more authentic form of art made out of pure expression, rather than cultural meme pandering. This isn't some let's-hug-each-other-while-watching-Tarantino-flicks reddit playground. This is a battleground where the war between inauthentic and authentic thought is being fought.

I cry with laughter when I see people dismissing Korine out of hand while they're salivating over the latest PTA flick. Top fucking laugh. Spring Breakers, Trash Humpers, Julien Donkeyboy and Gummo are far better than any film made by the imdb auteurs.

>> No.5771366

>>5771194
>>5771266
>>5771288

The worst part is I actually like all the filmmakers you complimented and prefer to avoid the ones you insult, yet, you seem like such a fucking pain in the ass that it makes me want to sit and bingewatch every fucking Cristopher Nolan movie while writing 10.000 word reviews on iMDB claiming he's the best writer for intelectual individuals who smoke marijuana and are atheists like myself.

Holy shit, it's not even that you're wrong to plead for authenticity, that's a noble "cause" as far as I can see, but the way you paint yourself as such a enlightened and (urgh) authentic individual makes me think you probably saw someone who's a better artists or writer than you and intended to steal the buzzword to seem deep to the hairy chicks in your community college's arts department.

Also, as far as "inauthenticity" goes, Pynchon pretty much created the "inauthentic" writers of today's ticks, therefore, he's just too emulated, and seems like part of the problem, when he was, in his time at least, part of the solution.

>> No.5771369

>>5771101
I don't even believe you man

>> No.5771370
File: 34 KB, 480x640, 581828_621735554503469_479893879_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5771370

>>5771365
>Dostoevsky
>cultural meme pandering

>> No.5771373

>>5771194
/tv/ shitposting in full effect

I reckon you haven't even read any Pynchon

>> No.5771374

>>5771365
>>5771366

Oh, I actually understand now.

It's not so much that you think Pynchon is bad, you're just a TV shitposter who's jumping on Inherent Vice's ride and shitpost on /lit/ too, while banding whatever popular writer's names you've managed to catch on your preparation to shitpost time with the directors you hate.

>> No.5771378

>>5771365
I'll watch some kornie tonight.

I think you're a little too much of a purist though. I get what you are generally tryinf to say but you are missing out on a lot.

>> No.5771385

>>5771374
Yes. He shitposts every PTA thread on /tv/ and has literally no knowledge of literature. Note he makes no real critique of Pynchon beyond the "meme" label.

Everyone on /tv/ just learned to ignore him so he's looking for a new place to shitpost.

>> No.5771388

>>5771266
>Nolan
Fuck you, Interstellar was good.

>> No.5771397

>>5771385
Which is funny, these people who love to call Pynchon a meme autor could actually claim that indeed, he's too full of ticks and manias that are commonplace today. But then, they'd have to read Pynchon, and upon seeing how he manages to avoid these manias when he needs / wants too, and the problem is the absurd amounts of writers who have been miming these aspects without his skill to avoid them.

Then again, these people would actually have to read and quit shitposting, so.

>> No.5771404

>>5771388
>Interstellar was good.

You best be joking.

>> No.5771415

>>5771266
Do you prefer the Anglo classics or the euro "existentialist" style flicks?

>> No.5771420

>>5771342
TWBB is a ''masterpiece'' only to those who thoughtlessly accept counterfeit art as ''great''. It is in the same league as TDKR or Pulp Fiction or Inception. Authentic cinema is that which actively antagonizes the masses.

Michael Bay is perhaps the best flick-maker currently working. It is not great cinema, but it is honest. It doesn't pretend, it simply is. They are, essentially arthouse flicks. The Transformers series is hit or miss, but Mauvais Garcons parts one and two are wonderful, as is The Rock.

>>5771345
If you cannot see PTA for the counterfeiter that he is, then you are, at least for now, incapable of discerning authentic cinema.

>>5771353
And is it a coincidence that all these ''artists'' who propagate inauthenticity happen to be agents of the inauthentic?

>>5771361
Actually, I pride myself on being authentic in all areas of life. Why would I go and see the kind of movie I just described? I've seen all of PTA's movies, he won't suddenly, this late in his career, turn out an authentic film.

>> No.5771432

>>5771420
What do you think of the following

Jodorowsky
Refn
Shane carruth

>> No.5771434

>>5771362
I'm also curious.

>> No.5771436

>>5771420
>Actually, I pride myself on being authentic in all areas of life.

Next time you take a turd, ask yourself if it's authentic.

>> No.5771437

>>5771404
Why?

>> No.5771442

>>5771420
what kind of a mess

>> No.5771444

>>5771420
don't even pretend you're familiar with the work of even half those artists. at best youve read 'The Wasteland' in freshman english lit and saw posters of 'The Persistence of Time' and Guernica

>> No.5771451

>>5771362
>>5771434
read Catcher.

>> No.5771454

>>5771194
>>5771266
>>5771288
>>5771365

The only way I could picture this getting better is if we had monsieur guy replying to him.

>> No.5771463

>>5771451
i read it ten years ago. but nvm, google helped me, unlike you.

>> No.5771482

>>5771415
I don't think in terms of ''schools'' or ''movement'', which are usually used to smuggle in many second-rate writers because they represent this or that ''school'' or ''movement''.

The writers I enjoy, at least currently, are: Green, Nabokov, Gass, Joyce, Beckett, Melville, and many others.

The euro ''existentialists'' are awful. Fad-mongering, social-comment type books written entirely in journalese (note the hundred percent banality of every word) with no art (authentic or inauthentic) to them.

>>5771366
I do not ''paint'' myself as enlightened or authentic. I am a warrior for authentic cinema. Pynchon created spawned many imitators the same way Tarantino did. Pynchon is the literary equivalent of Tarantino. His books are imitations of imitations, they are maximally inauthentic.

>>5771378
I spend much of my time appreciating cinema. Which means I watch films actively, rather than passively. I've seen more bad movies than good films, so I'm not missing out on anything. My opinions, because they are informed by a firm belief in authenticity, are different and antagonize many people.

>> No.5771494

>>5771482
The difference being Tarantino very clearly rips other people off, and I can see how one would call him inauthentic.

Pynchon, at best, pastiches old pulp characters or XVIII century language.

>> No.5771500

>>5771482
>I am a warrior for authentic cinema.

You're an opinionated fat guy on 4chan.

>> No.5771508

>>5771444
he is right though, Picasso and Dali are hacks.

t.artist

>> No.5771510

>>5771432
Jodorowsky's ''prophetic'' imagery gets tedious very quickly.

Refn is a lower-tier maker of inauthentic cinema, but nonetheless a maker of it. Drive, which steals elements and whole scenes from (and doesn't do anything interesting with them) Walter Hill's The Driver, is a favorite of IMDB-dwellers and poltroons of inauthentic cinema. Just watch a Walter Hill movie instead.

>>5771444
I'm familiar with all their work, actually. T.S. Eliot (Toilets) impressed me very much as a child, before I became a fighter for authenticity. Familiarity with the others is a given.

>>5771436
No.

>> No.5771511

I really would like to watch this movie but I still didn't read the book or any other by pynchon... I wanted to start with anyways, but you this could also be a good starting point?

>> No.5771517

>>5771511
I generally recommend the Crying of Lot 49 as a starter for people who want to read Pynchon, but I guess inherent Vice is an alright place to start too. It's his most easily accessible novel

>> No.5771524

>>5771500
I am a samurai fighting for authenticity. I train extensively both physically and mentally.

I used to be very think actually because I was doing heroin. I would inject the stuff and then put Trash Humpers on a loop. I would then start yelling MAKE IT MAKE IT DON'T FAKE IT over and over until the neighbors called the cops. I quit shortly after.

>>5771494
No matter how you phrase, it is still inauthenticity, which I cannot sanction.

>> No.5771526

>>5771033
Because he's not a retard that rises his hand when anybody says he has to

>> No.5771532

>>5771194
No no no no no no you faggot. Saying Pynchon is somehow not authentic or pretentious is to not have read him.

You've started a fucking fire in /tv/ but you're simply wrong on this one you useless idiot.

>> No.5771552

>>5771532
He gotta be a very dedicated troll. At least I hope he is. His idea of "authenticity" is based on misconceptions and delusions anyway.

>> No.5771557

>>5771552
He very obviously is. I have no idea how you all keep buying into it.

>> No.5771559

>>5771552
He is. He has some actual good taste in actual film but his conception of autheticity ends in just circular reasoning if talked seriously to.

>> No.5771566

>>5771510
Interesting. I think we have very similar opinions.

Do you like Branded to Kill?

>> No.5771570

>>5771557
>>5771559
Aye, still gonna use the occasion to post a McCarthy quote I found recently and like a lot:
>“The ugly fact is books are made out of books, the novel depends for its life on the novels that have been written.”

>> No.5771574

>>5771532
Pynchon is one hundred percent inauthentic. Pro-Pynchon is Anti-Literature, just as Pro-PTA is Anti-Cinema.

His books are pastiches of pastiches. You are very stubborn in thinking that inauthentic art is great, and furthermore thinking that disliking inauthentic art is somehow wrong.

Millions love his books, which already precludes them from being authentic, because it means that they do not actively antagonize readers. Anything that can be loved by millions cannot be authentic art. This is a fact.

>> No.5771579

>>5771574
>Anything that can be loved by millions cannot be authentic art. This is a fact.
Be careful, you're being to obvious.

>> No.5771582

How is Pynchon inauthentic?

From what I can tell the man just writes involuted, esoteric stories designed to make you think. They are analogous to detective novels, because the reader has to do quite a bit of problem solving and backtracking to figure out the motives behind certain actions.

Truly an intelligent writer.

>> No.5771589

>>5771574
You never offer any real critique. You just reiterate this "inauthentic" nonsense, without ever actually pointing to anything that exemplifies it. This is a poor way to argue a point.

>> No.5771591

>>5771574
You're not even the Korinefag guy. He at least has knowledge of what he talks about. Piss off, subhuman shit.

>> No.5771595

>>5771582
And you are truly a pseudointellectual reader

>> No.5771602

>>5771582
You did forgot what makes Pynchon good and stuff.

>> No.5771627

>tfw pinecone is becoming mainstream and I haven't yet read him

When I read him, he'll already be mainstream.

SHIT

>> No.5771630

my chubby wubby CUM CUM ahahah! who want my chubby wubby CUM CUM!!!! little penis BULGING. babty BULGING waaah waaah need mama to DICK-BURP my little chubby wubby CUM CUM.

MEESA JUSTA JAR-JAR BINKS BABY CRY-CRY FAGGOT SHRIMP DICK WIDDLE BABY with my widdle chubby wubby CUM CUM needsa DICK-BURP from MOMMY!!!

imma justa little SHRIMP DICK BABY CRY-CRY with my widdle piddle chubby wubby CUM CUM bulgin' n' burstin' for a nice mommy mommy DICK-BURP. pwease mommy mommy waah waaaaaah little chubby wubby CUM CUM needa widdle DICK-BURP!!!

>> No.5771635

>>5771557
>>5771552
You presume that just because I don't share your love and adoration for the most pedestrian, inauthentic kind of ''art'' therefore I'm a troll. Which is pretty silly, when you think about it.

>>5771570
Next you'll be quoting Dan Brown on what it means to write great novels.

>>5771566
I have been meaning to watch it some time now. Tarantino loving it isn't a good sign though. But I suspect the tone of the movie is one that mocks inauthenticity and cliches.

>> No.5771660

>>5771635
It very much does. Suzuki had been passed over my his production studio on major projects and this movie was basically a "fuck you" to the executives where he attempts to undermine every genre trope of the Yakuza sub-genre of crime film. He assumes the audience knows the backstory of the characters and tries to spend as little time as possible on exposition. This is the movie that got Suzuki fired and black listed.

Tarantino, as always, enjoys the quirky without the capacity to understand anything beyond quirk itself. He doesn't see that things like Branded to Kill are tied to a time and a situation that make it unique. As a result, all of his references are anachronistic.

>> No.5771666

ITT: Lets argue endlessly over whether or not certain art is "authentic" without actually knowing what the fuck we even mean when we say it.

>> No.5771672
File: 46 KB, 500x200, 200_s.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5771672

>>5771630
>authentic

>> No.5771708

>>5771591
I don't sanction the name ''Korine guy'' or ''Korinefag'', but whatever.

There are many impostors out there, but I am him, and I have been doing battle for a long time now. There are many inauthentic proponents of authenticity. This kind of muddying of my consistency of opinion has been going on for a while now. I have a notion that these are just PTA/IMDB fans who are attempting some kind of character assassination.

I welcome anyone to join me in my war against phony art, but do not dare to step on my own authenticity.

>>5771579
>>5771582

Something that is truly intelligent and authentic cannot be loved by millions. Maybe decades if not hundreds of years after the fact, but not immediately. The masses always initially mock that which is authentic, while embracing simple, fake art. Hence why Korine is so maligned, while Tarantino is so beloved. All true art must so utterly destroy the spirit of the appreciator that afterwards they must rebuild their life. I don't want happy times at the cinema; I want destruction, annihilation, souls getting rent apart like veils. This is authentic art.

As I've said before, art which doesn't aggressively antagonize the masses cannot be truly authentic.

>> No.5771712
File: 1.70 MB, 210x155, ohgod.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5771712

>>5771420

>Michael Bay is perhaps the best flick-maker currently working. It is not great cinema, but it is honest. It doesn't pretend, it simply is. They are, essentially arthouse flicks. The Transformers series is hit or miss, but Mauvais Garcons parts one and two are wonderful, as is The Rock.

>> No.5771732

>>5771708
You just really want something you've said to be placed in quotes on a black and white picture of yourself and posted on someone's Facebook, don't you?

>> No.5771743
File: 156 KB, 500x282, mfw_reading_your_dumbass_posts.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5771743

>>5771482
>Green

>> No.5771750

>>5771342
Holy shit, that guy is a fucking idiot, but you are th king of plebs.

>> No.5771751

>>5771712
I forgot to mention Armageddon. It has its faults, but it is a great flick. (Notice I don't say 'movie' or 'film' or 'kinograph.')

And I also forgot Pain & Gain, which is one of the few American masterpieces of this decade. Bay's style is sui generis. Many have tried to imitate it, but they cannot replicate his authenticity of vision.

I have to admit, however, that I was one of those who thought Age of Extinction to be somewhat weak. There are many delightful scenes in it, but I wish Bay would do something in the vein of Pain & Gain again -- an unabashedly arthouse flick.

>> No.5771766

>>5771743
Henry Green.

The fact that you thought of that Green before Henry Green shows that you're a lover of the inauthentic.

>> No.5771768
File: 36 KB, 640x480, 1410710328922.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5771768

>>5771524
>I am a samurai
>I am a samurai
>I am a samurai
>I am a samurai

>> No.5771771

>>5771708
what do you keep talking about imdb for? do you seriously take the imdb message boards seriously enough that you're going on this crusade against them?

>> No.5771776

>>5771766
:^)

what's your favourite vidya? is 3d mario "inauthentic"? can meaningful, anti-mass art only be made with pixelated sprites? pls respond and make it thourough

>> No.5771783

>>5771660
>Tarantino, as always, enjoys the quirky without the capacity to understand anything beyond quirk itself. He doesn't see that things like Branded to Kill are tied to a time and a situation that make it unique. As a result, all of his references are anachronistic.

Tarantino deserves much more credit, I think. Reservoir Dogs especially owes a lot to David Lynch and Blue Velvet. Lynch's early formula was something like "uncover the perverse in the normal" while Tarantino looked for the normal in perverse. In RD the gang of criminals has the kind of banal conversations you would expect from "normal" folks their age. And there is of course the cut off ear in both films. The questions at the core of the film are moral ones and with all the style and fanfare it's still plain great drama, the film is even set up and shot to suggest a stage production.

Inglorious Bastards is great because it puts the audience in the same position as the Nazi's in the cinema: That is, enjoying the slaughter of people who have become free game in the culture the films come from. There is obviously a joy and indulgence in (stylized) violence but at the same time there is a self-consciousness about the same violence, asking what is says about _us_ when we revel in what is practically an amped up revenge fantasy against what _we_ perceive to be the scum of the earth. The film even reminds Blood Meridian to some extent, a band of ruthless Scalphunters in enemy territory. Landa being a villain in the tradition that the judge also stems from, very obviously evil but at the same time compelling, eloquent and able to express a belief system that accounts for their actions. And much like BM, it is a tale of self-creation by means of violence and retribution.

>> No.5771804

>>5771783
I'm sorry, I'll respond later. I'm watching Le Cercle Rouge.

>> No.5771813

>>5771771
They're a good indicator of the average moviegoer's mentality. IMDB top 250, same thing.

>> No.5771848

>>5771524
seek help

>> No.5771868

>>5771524
Thank you. This is most I've laughed since the towers fell.

>> No.5771870

>>5771804
Good for you.

>>5771783
Tarantino's relationship with Lynch is actually a good example of Tarantino's love of all that is inauthentic. He loves Blue Velvet, and he loves it because of the ''cool'' scenes. On the other hand, Tarantino hated Fire Walk with Me, because that film actively antagonized and infuriated the audience. There weren't any ''cool'' scenes, so Tarantino couldn't connect. Fire Walk with Me was too authentic for him, and for most other people who saw it. Tarantino probably hated Inland Empire too.

Here's my list of Lynch's films:

1. Inland Empire
2. Fire Walk with Me
3. Wild at Heart
4. Eraserhead
5. Lost Highway
6. Dune
7. The Straight Story
8. Mulholland Drive
9. Blue Velvet
10. The Elephant Man

>> No.5771886 [DELETED] 

>>5771870
so your metric for good is "authenticity," and by that you mean the proportion of people confused by a work? dodgy stuff m8

>> No.5771902

You are all getting trolled to death. You realize this is probably a 500 pound troll who posts on /tv/, /v/, and /co/ who's favorite movie is The Dark Knight Rises. On the other hand it might be Pynchon himself as he has a history of posting on this board but probably not. Either way this is subpar bait at best (except the first few) and you should be ashamed for continuing to indulge him.

>> No.5771908

>>5771870
i would have put mulholland and lost highway higher on that list

>> No.5771926

>>5771870
Here's my list of M Night Shamylan movies.

1. Lady in the Water
2. The Happening
3. Unbreakable
4. After Earth
5. Avatar
6. Signs
7. The sixth sense

>> No.5771976

>>5771870
What is your opinion of Withnail & I?

>> No.5771985

>>5771420
>Mauvais Garcons

Merciful mother of god

>> No.5772047

>>5771750

At a certain age you stop trying hard and actually just sit back and enjoy the movies you do without trying to compete with others in how "patrician" you can be.

There was a pretty good guide back where you like Spielberg at the age of 15, you start hate him at age 18, and then go back to enjoying his flicks at age 21 again. That is essentially a pretty good guide to know if you're a try-hard or not.

>> No.5772084

>>5772047
I agree with this. Spielberg is one of if not the finest working director.

>> No.5772140

>>5771926
>the rustle is real

>> No.5772142

>>5772047

You don't understand, he is saying you have bad taste. He is saying the movies that your brain finds enjoyable is typical of a brain that is of lesser quality.

He isn't attacking that you find the movie enjoyable. Do you understand? (I'm not saying you have a lesser brain, I'm trying to translate the word pleb into something you can understand)

>> No.5772158

>>5771870
You thinking Blue Velvet is less authentic is probably because Tarantino liked it. I also wouldn't call anything that David Lynch has done "inauthentic", Elephant Man had some genius moments and just look at the way David talks about all of his films. He wasn't forced into doing Elephant Man, Dune, or The Straight Story, they're as authentic and as Lynch as they possibly can be. You can only feed off other peoples posts by saying stuff like: I don't spoonfeed, using meme words like flicks/kinography, and your ability to have any solid criticism glance off of yourself. Go parade your pleb shit memes elsewhere, you have no clue what you're talking about.

>> No.5772162

>>5772142
The pleb patrician Distinction is the last refuge of the emotionally and intellectually immature.

>> No.5772207

>>5772162
No, you're reading way to much into it. It's a buzzword. He is just using the word 'pleb' as a synonym for 'you have bad taste'.

>> No.5772222

>>5772142

Then I would want to hear why he considers Altman and Cassavetes bad.

>> No.5772277

what a spectacular derailment

for one, I'm excited to see the movie.

>> No.5772530

>>5768407
Is PTA secretly TP? or is TP secretly PTA?

DUND DUN DUN

>> No.5772559

>>5772530
There's a video of PTA in an interview after boogie nights just chowing down on pizza and speaking like he's high on coke. I'd like to think they're one in the same.

>> No.5772564

>>5768706
Josh Brolin did a 30 minute interview with DP/30 (which they uploaded earlier today) and he talks about the book a lot and says he read it.

>> No.5772580

This is perhaps the most magnificently retarded thread we've had in ages.

>> No.5772586
File: 635 KB, 1252x1920, movie tiein.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5772586

Went to B&N and they already have NOW A MAJOR MOTION PICTURE covers
What does /lit/ think?

>> No.5772598
File: 25 KB, 500x375, 1364334053406.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5772598

>>5772586
way better than the original sophmore art college student tier one.

>> No.5772700

>>5771870

If there's one thing wasting my teenagehood debating instead of getting laid has taught me, its definitions. Without defining what you truly mean by "authentic", you have no way of convincing anyone here of your side of the argument. What it also means is that all you're essentially doing is changing with " authentic" means on the fly in order to suit whatever ill thought out response you're currently spewing into existence (since you're the king of pretentiousness, in fallacy terms you are 'shifting the goal post). In doing so, you have essentially become even more of a hack-fraud than the "inauthentic" artisans that you claim to crusade against.

>> No.5772730

>>5768706
>that guy that nearly has a meltdown taking to that one actress at around 6:45

>> No.5772764

>>5771870
Both Lynch and Tarantino are inauthentic because they don't present clear stories that derive their power from subject matter and structure combined with cinematography. They're both filmmakers who imply instead of portray, or fascinate by engaging and disrupting conventional film codes, and they do this using a ton of very apparent cinematography - it's a pure spectacle.

Contrast this to their contemporary director like P.T Anderson, who combined that same sense of spectacle with strong narratives, and you'll see what a real authentic filmaker looks like. There Will Be Blood, Boogie Nights, Punch Drunk Love, these all tell stories about people. Even the Master has an arc most people miss.

>> No.5772810

>>5771420
You do not know Yohji.

Yohji is as true as one can get with regards to keeping his artistic vision intact in a landscape that swings every which way in a short span of time.

He is patient, he stuck to his guns (and is still sticking by them), he's paid the price for it, but he still does it, because he knows that he is right. He knows he has an audience, he knows his audience loves and respects him, and he knows he is creating something real and beautiful.

You on the other hand are just an opinionated dabbler.

>> No.5772817

>>5771388
No, Interstellar was not good.

It wasn't bad, either, but it wasn't even close to being good.

>> No.5772824

>>5768442
You know, no one is forcing you to go see the film. Start reading the book now, and then force yourself NOT TO watch the god-damned movie.

>> No.5772831

>yfw Stephen King accepts it and reveals himself as Pynchon at the event

>> No.5772872

>>5771524
Guys how do you not see the troll in his native habitat????

>> No.5772940

>>5772831
He is thus accented into heaven

>> No.5772943

>>5771388
I can't really comment on the literary value of the film, but the visuals were amazing. I enjoyed it thoroughly, but it probably is just a pleb flick

>> No.5772952

>>5772764
That's a pretty narrow-minded view on the different methods of storytelling, but aside from that you're incredibly fucking vague on how in the shit these supposed qualities of Lynch and Tarantino's techniques makes them "inauthentic" or what the fuck "authentic/inauthentic" even means in this context.

>> No.5772959

Question: Why is authenticity inherently good or superior to the lack of it?

>> No.5772974

>>5772952

Inauthentic films don't risk making statements. They are composed of altered quotes, like Tarantino's films, or are full of intentional frustrations of interpretation, like Lynch's films, or, if you prefer it, since you like them, are mostly ' richly ambiguous' or non-sequitor in their meaning. They are tonally variable, or even dead, to a high degree, often mixing discrepant elements like comedy and drama from scene to scene. They don't have clear character development - usually motivation or caricature more than anything else. They are also often richly visual in order to supplement this lack.

>> No.5772979

>>5772974

You need to work on your worldview, friend. You've got it all wrong. Making 'statements' is the work of children

>> No.5772994

>>5772974
you may be a "film buff" but you're no aesthete. stick to the movie review pages in your local newspaper, buddy.

>> No.5773000

>>5772764
sorry bro there's more to storytelling than painting "realistic portraits", sounds like you don't know dick about art, kill yourself, or at least fuck off back to your netflix blockbusters.

>> No.5773004

>>5772974
Why do you assign these qualities a negative connotation? It seems like you dislike them simply because they are not conventional, and haven't put a whole lot of thought into why straying from convention in this manner is necessarily a bad thing, contenting yourself to placing a vague, undefined, and thus unfalsifiable pejorative like "inauthentic" next to these qualities which, spoken in a different tone, would seem positive.

>> No.5773008

>>5772979

The "statement" is not a philosophical one - though it is partly rational - or a "statement" in the sense of a fashion show, it's a kind of thing only art can say. The word is really being used analogically. It should be rationally intelligible. A lot of these so called art films just create an vague, emotionally fertile slideshow, and then the viewer/reviewer fills everything in for them. It's especially favored by critics, who love to argue viciously over questions with no terminus, or create clever ways of drawing a line from A to B.

>> No.5773011

>>5772974
django unchained made one hell of a statement but you are too crude to realize it

>> No.5773013

>>5771365
>korine

surest sign of a pseud. your pleb is showing if you wanna talk rip offs, then watch even dwarfs started small or john waters early stuff

>> No.5773016

>>5773008
why are you even on a literature board if you have such a childish view of art?

>> No.5773020

>>5773004

I think my position translates into the authentic and inauthentic dichotomy, but I prefer not to use it personally. I think the core problem with films people see as "inauthentic" is that they lack emotional, and intellectual unity because their components, the plot, the dialogue, the cinematography, and so on, fail to generate theme and evaluation of theme. A few of the things I mentioned, by themselves, can be used to great effect, like the tonal mixture of high and low, or comic and tragic, by, say, Shakespeare, but they're not in those filmmakers, who create interesting scenes, elicit great performances, and so on, but make bad movies.

>> No.5773022

>>5773013
>Korine

I thought KIDS was cool when i was a 16 year old skater dropout, watching now as an educated adult, it's fucking awful

>> No.5773024

>>5773016
I take a moral view of art, which has a long and distinguished history. It's not childish at all.

>> No.5773031

>>5773011
I didn't see Django, but I thought Inglorious Basterds was great. I think his classic stuff, Pulp Fiction, etc, are bad with a lot of good parts.

>> No.5773034

>>5773013
Not him, but I liked Trash Humpers. That's pretty much it, though.

>> No.5773036

>>5773020
realism and naturalism has been dead in most art for 100 years, why are you clinging to it? makes you look fucking pleb

>> No.5773040

>>5773022
It seems like you made the mistake of assuming relate-ability is the merit behind a work.

It isn't.

>> No.5773041

>>5773022
That's what I'm saying dumbass

>> No.5773042

>>5773031
basically you like heavy handed crap that spoonfeeds you are moral like a childrens book

>> No.5773043

>>5773040
you made the mistake of thinking heavy handed moralizing and sentimentality is good art, it isn't

>> No.5773049

>>5773042
Movies that are heavy handed are over-reductions of their subject. They're just as bad in the sum.

>>5773036
I've said nothing about realism and naturalism.

>> No.5773056

>>5773049
>I've said nothing about realism and naturalism.

this is what you ask for with your "authenticity" bullshit.

coming back to /lit/ was cool for like a week but now the lightweights with shitty taste and no education are back from playing world of warcraft or whatever and making everyone stupid, i'll check back in another year

>> No.5773060

>>5773043
What?

>> No.5773067

>>5773020
Just because the thematic elements and underlying ideas are more abstract and less concretely definable or displayable and are more subtly and indirectly pushed upon the viewer through an implicit visual and atmospheric aesthetic does not necessarily mean that they aren't there and aren't being communicated. There is more than one valid method of storytelling and any and all should be explored, if you ask me.

>> No.5773073

>>5771335
> some, I think, in categories where it wasn't even nominated
What.

>I'm Pynchon, by the way.
Give us another insane interpretation thread, please.

>> No.5773082

>>5773067
My claim is that they aren't there with these filmmakers. More specifically, in Lynch. Tarantino has made some good movies that work in the way you're describing.

>> No.5773098

>>5773082
I don't know a whole lot about David Lynch's work, so I'd be talking out of my ass to argue with in any depth about him, but I think many would probably argue, as they would with many other directors when one claims that they are vapid, that you are so thoroughly convinced that he isn't communicating anything because you have not tried hard enough to engage with his technique and aesthetic. That's not to say you might not be correct, perhaps Lynch really is just a vacuous shit-show, but I hardly think there would be any acclaim for him if there was absolutely nothing there. So many pretentious before and after artists have tried to seem "deep" by being deliberately strange in their aesthetic and obscure in their message, similar to Lynch, and no one knows their names.

>> No.5773113

>>5773098

I'm pretty familiar with Lynch's work. I've seen all of Twin Peaks, most of his movies, and many more than once, and I've even done some background reading. The popularity can be accounted for by the combination of sensationalist elements like sex and violence, and the appeal of the mystery of thematic semi-coherence for art-house film types.

I'm not reducing these filmakers to the same level as everybody else who's failed at filmaking. If I was doing a detailed critical review, I would point out all the compelling parts of these films, like fine performances, scenes, connections, and so on, that account for their popularity.

>> No.5773240

>>5771345
I've heard lots of valid criticisms of dfw but inauthentic isn't one of them. since he's widely regarded as 'sincere' how do you justify that statement?

>> No.5773777

This "inauthentic vs authentic" guy is a well known shitposter from /tv/. He is severly autistic and lives off autismbux.

Reminder that you are arguin with an actual mentally ill person.

>>5773240
He doesn't read books. He's just being an asshole.

>> No.5773790

>>5773240
DFW - the king of schtick, the master of affectation. ''Aw shucks, guys, I'm like super-sincere and stuff, right?'' Wallace's mastodonic inauthenticity was so intolerable that he actually killed himself. If he hadn't have died, literature may have been ruined irremediably.

Btw, the guy talking about ''statements'' and ''messages'' isn't me. I am unaffiliated with this impostor. Works of art as vessels for this or that political message, this or that social comment - the journalistic generalities we're all familiar with - is idea propagated by the mediocre and dull. This is below inauthentic art, because it's not even art.

>>5772586
That cover is sickening.

>>5772222
Cassavetes is okay. Love Streams is a great film. Altman was a great filmmaker. I really hope, anytime I see some kid praising PTA and other such inauthentic cinema. that they will be led to Altman, Ophuls and other great filmmakers like them.

>>5772047
I am not trying to show how ''patrician'' I am. My mission is to help authentic cinema win against inauthentic cinema, to help true art prevail over fake art. It is a difficult task, but a necessary one, and I am glad that I have been chosen, by Fate or the Gods or whoever, to be a warrior for authenticity.

>> No.5774029

>>5772586
Lovin that cover but Joaquin looks like John Belushi.

>> No.5774083
File: 529 KB, 625x626, 141450107628.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5774083

>>5771420
>Michael Bay is perhaps the best flick-maker currently working

0/10

>> No.5774717

>>5771194
>>5771266
>>5771420
>>5771510
LMAO Korinefag from /tv/ just got BTFO by true /lit/ patricians

>> No.5774751

>>5774717

looks like authenticity-man won though.

another victory for le authenticity :)

>> No.5774753

>>5774751
Korinefag púls

>> No.5774760

>>5774753
pleb pls.

>> No.5774770

>>5771510
>Refn is a lower-tier maker of inauthentic cinema, but nonetheless a maker of it. Drive, which steals elements and whole scenes from (and doesn't do anything interesting with them) Walter Hill's The Driver

Even though I know you're trolling from /tv/ regarding anti-PTA sentiment, I've been saying that about Drive for a while now and I'm glad it's caught on.

>> No.5774782

>inauthenticity
>bad
Subjectivism will find you and you will weep at the altar of subjectivity' patron saint, Kolsti Nguyen.

>> No.5774812

>>5774770
Not the authentic guy, but yeah, it's sad how few people have seen the vastly superior The Driver, which has many subtle touches that make the movie rewatchable. I'm a Hill fan in general, and Southern Comfort, which has such a perfectly realized specific atmosphere (soundtrack, cinematography, acting, dialogue, everything), is one of my favorite films ever.

Drive just sort of... I don't know. It's slick and it has its moments, but it's nowhere near as witty and subtle in its execution as The Driver.

>> No.5774829

>>5771365
>Dostoevsky
>Inauthentic
Holy shit, this guy is too retarded to be a troll

>> No.5774874

>>5771194
>>5771266
>>5771288
>>5771365
>>5771420
>>5771482
>>5771510
>>5771524
God, I've never seen so much mental masturbation in a single thread.

>> No.5774883

Thank you Korine Guy. Fuck these pretentious /lit/ hipsters

>> No.5774889

>>5774829
Ironically, Dostoevsky was the most Western-influenced of all the great Russian writers. His books are full of the Gothic cliches of Richardson, and the cliches of the various detective novels of that time. Cheap sentimentalism pervades all his books.

He would have made a good playwright, perhaps. There is just that amount of detail in his novels that you find in plays (where the window is painted yellow so as to make it seem as if there's sunlight outside). All these details are torrentially introduced whenever a character is first introduced, just as in a play, and then never mentioned again. Everything remains on a very abstract level, the characters are nothing more than a tangle of mannerisms.

His mysticism is taken seriously by no one. The most widely praised aspect of Dostoevsky, his psychological skill, is dubious also, as he deals almost exclusively with the mentally ill and even then in a rather hackneyed, cliche-ridden way. The way how he pairs a murderer and a prostitute in that one Bible-reading scene in C&P, as if they're equal in their sins, is utterly insipid and corny, and a leftover of Gothic ''starkness'' -- a cliche, in short.

Read Tolstoy, Lermontov, Pushkin, Gogol. All of them are better than Dostoevsky, artistically and psychologically. In every way, actually.

>> No.5774934

>>5774889
I'm going to find you and laugh in your face. Please, for your own sakes, nobody listen to this guy.

>> No.5775089

>>5774934
This is the best Dostoevsky fans can manage? Just a little whine?

I don't know what it is about Dostoevsky that is so attractive to westerners. Even Turgenev is better than him. Your knowledge of literature throughout the ages does not have to be vast to see just how mediocre Dostoevsky is.

He's an okay writer for young people.

>> No.5775253

>>5771510
Not sure if you're still around, but Im the guy who quoted all those artists. Please tell me your familiarity with Emerson, Yamamoto, and Godard. No wiki cheating, guy. Even if you did itd be easy to tell because theres a lot that wiki doesnt tell about Yamamoto especially.

>> No.5775283

>>5775089
What's your opinion on Vonnegut?

>> No.5775300

>>5775283
Is this a fucking interview?

>> No.5775335

>>5775300

You're an interesting person or character and I am curious what you think of a favorite writer of mine who is often disregarded as trash by /lit/. So I suppose it is, only one question though.

This is my 2nd post in this thread.

>> No.5775468

>>5774883
Korine Guy is perhaps the most pretentious motherfucker there has ever been. Is there anything more pedantic and ostentatious than calling yourself a fucking "warrior for authenticity" and saying you've been "chosen by Fate or the Gods" to shitpost on /lit/ using a vague dichotomy you refuse to define?

>> No.5775490

>>5771335
shakespeare in love has a better script than any pta movie by far

>> No.5775494

>>5775468
By authentic I think he means cinema with soul, with grit, with originality. He's pretty spot on about Korine, Malick, Herzog etc.

>> No.5775520

>>5775494
>cinema with soul, with grit, with originality
That just sounds like the kind of vague, meaningless accolades you see put in quotes on the DVD cases of every film ever made.

>> No.5775563

>>5775335
Vonnegut is fucking trash.

>> No.5775577

>>5775563
This.

>> No.5775586

>>5774889
I wonder how much that post owes to Nabokov.

Anyway:

>He would have made a good playwright, perhaps. There is just that amount of detail in his novels that you find in plays (where the window is painted yellow so as to make it seem as if there's sunlight outside).

Good observation. That's pretty typical of his way of writing. I personally find that interesting but to each his own.

>> No.5775597

>>5775586
>I wonder how much that post owes to Nabokov.
I can say with confidence that about nine times out of ten if someone is criticizing Dostoevsky and praising Gogol in the same breath, especially on /lit/, then they're most likely just endlessly regurgitating everything Nabokov had to say of the subject.

>> No.5775620

>>5771454
This. I wish I could make a convincing monsieur guy.

>> No.5775628

>>5775597
The hints I picked was the "nobody takes his mysticism seriously", "cheap sentimentalism" and railing against the pairing of a hooker and a murderer. But you're right. His post was a good 90% Nabokov.

>> No.5775640

>>5774889
Absolutely retarded. The Brothers Karamazov is a great work. If you want to distill literature the way you are, I think you'll find that all authors are going to be "inauthentic". What ISN'T hackneyed with "The Death of Ivan Ilych" for example?

Seriously, you just play favorites. There are no works that sprung from the ether, wholly original. Especially not from the Russian writers. You have to go very far back for anything resembling your "authenticity"

>> No.5775641

>>5771365
don

>> No.5775642

>>5771524
Are you really >>5771510 and all the above ? Because that post is much less well-executed than the other, so in this case, I am disappoint.

Nonetheless I'm enjoying your performance a lot.

>> No.5775710

>>5775563
This isn't me. Another character assassin.

Vonnegut certainly had wit, but all too often his writing is polluted with and informed by that kind of ready-made, plastic-wrapped political stance which gets tedious quickly. But he was still more an artist than a politicker, and some of his novels are very enjoyable.

>>5775494
I mean cinema (and art in general) that is unique and thoroughly imbued with the artist's individuality. Novels and cinema deemed ''powerful'' and ''important'' are mostly trash comprised entirely of social commentary, i.e. journalistic generalities we all know. Political pamphleteering in cinematic form. And like yesterday's newspapers, all that is ''culturally relevant'' will be dead. Only art endures.

>>5775468
I wouldn't say I'm pretentious. I am a servant of authentic art. I am simply doing my humble part in the war against inauthentic art.

>>5775597
>>5775628

Disliking, or rather not caring for, Dostoevsky is hardly original. It is only in Europe and the U.S. that Dostoevsky is considered a genius who is beyond criticism. Nabokov perhaps most succinctly and accurately summed up all the faults of Dostoevsky.

People who grow up around that kind of literature (Tolstoy, Turgenev, Chekov, so on) will naturally see that Dostoevsky is one of the lesser writers.

>> No.5775714

>>5771902
The troll has been exposed, but the style is glorious. Let us enjoy our troll flicks, please, and get to seek for "authentic" posts in another thread.

I personally love how the pretentiousness and antagonistic stance of "Korinefag" has spread to half of the posters ITT. Good job.

>>5771194
What do you think of Céline, Miller and Sade ? What do you think of Da Vinci, Raphaël and Michelangelo ?

What do you think of Giotto and Ghirlandaio ? Of John Lyly, Molière and Cervantes ?

>> No.5775802

>>5775714
I'm not a troll. I'm simply authentic, which confuses and angers the flick-core, Generation M (eme) crowd.

Miller, Sade -- Sweaty and anxious sex-maniacs, porno-obsessed spastics. The Rocco Siffredi and Max Hardcore, respectively, of their times.

Celine -- Supporting the Nazis during that time was an evil, if stunningly authentic, thing to do. As a writer, nothing special. All his books are quilts sewn hastily together of cliches. Essentially inauthentic.

Da Vinci -- Great. His genius has been dimmed a bit by how familiar we've become with his works, but undeniably a genius. A being of concentrated authenticity.

Raphael, Michelangelo -- Piety, angels, a scene from the Bible, portrait of guy, piety, more angels, portraits galore, and so on ad malinfinitum.

>> No.5775814

>>5775802
You've made "authenticity" become a meme now, I hope you know. All the plebs on /tv/ are going rabid over it and impersonators are running wild. You've done more damage to your cause than any capeshit watcher could have.

>> No.5775837

>>5775814
Much of it is an attempt at character assassination by PTA/IMDB fans. Others are joining my in my fight against inauthentic cinema, but in the process are stepping on my own authenticity.

There is nothing I can do. Impostors can do whatever they want, but the difference between me and an impostor sent by the Agency of Inauthencity is as obvious as the difference between a rotting piece of meat riddled with maggots and a beautiful steak.

I'll never rest. The warrior of authenticity must be vigilant at all times.

>> No.5775849

>>5775802
>disliking Miller
>calling Céline unauthentic
>calling Da Vinci "a being of concentrated authenticity"
>Michelangelo "ad malinfinnitum"
>forgetting Michelangelo sculptures
>implying Michelangelo is unauthentic

And on top of that
>not commenting on Giotto and Ghirlandaio
>not commenting on Lily

I was throwing easy names to help you figure out the answer.

From your last post I can say for sure that you're not authentic, monsieur. You're a fraud, monsieur, a fraud of malevolent and pervasive perversity. I don't wish you bon soir, monsieur.

>> No.5775868

>>5775837
There's a PTA thread on /tv/ at the moment. Have posted in it?

>> No.5775882

>>5775849
Giotto, Ghirlandaio and Lyly aren't worthy of comment. If you cannot see on which side of the authenticity/inauthenticity dichotomy they fall on, you're a lost cause.

I am a knight of the authentic. I'll fight till my last breath.

>> No.5775890

>>5775868
Yes, I've made my stance known on PTA in that thread. Pearls before swine, for the most part, but perhaps a few can be made to see that PTA is a huckster, a fraud, a vile proponent of inauthentic cinema.

>> No.5775891

If I see the word "authentic" or "inauthentic" in any of their forms one more fucking time, I'm going to set myself on fire. This thread is unbelievably awful.

>> No.5775897

I was an extra on The Master. Good times

>> No.5775908

>>5775837
Are you writing an outrageous character for a story or something and doing some sort of internet method acting performance in order to fine-tune his personality traits and other qualities before you start writing it? Because you're an absolutely fucking outrageous character either way.

>> No.5775911

>>5775891
>>5775897

I spend a lot of time here and I remain consistent in my negative opinion of PTA and others of his ilk. That's all there is to it. I am no "troll", I am not "tricking" anybody. I just dislike your favorite inauthentic artists and apparently that gives you hurt feelings. If you don't like my opinions then you're free to dismiss them. I will however not stop posting them as they are my authentic opinions. If any poster here turns a blind eye to people wrongfully praising an undeserving director or writer and lets the inauthentic discussion go on undisturbed then they are inauthentic about film. It's as simple as that.

If everyone stays out of threads pertaining to media they don't enjoy and only discusses directors their like then this place becomes a circle jerk. If you want to praise PTA or Pynchon in peace then you're on the wrong website. This isn't some "good times cinema talk" forum. This is a battleground. Authentic thought vs inauthentic thought. Art vs entertainment. Neurotypicalism vs Autism. PTA and Pynchon and their disciples are my enemies and I will continue to fight. Call my battle strategies ineffectual, ignorant and misguided if you wish, but you will never take away my right to voice my opinions. You're not downvoting anybody into silence here. Down with the counterfeiters, down with the inauthentic.

>> No.5775918

>>5775911

Authenticity is socially constructed, kiddo.

>> No.5775925

>>5775710
this is pure ideology

>> No.5775927

>>5775911
Do you speak like this aloud or is it just an affected voice for your writing?

>> No.5775931

>>5771194
I actually completely agree with this guy.

>> No.5775946

>>5775927
Nothing about me is an affectation. As I've written somewhere before, I pride myself on my extreme authenticity in all areas of life. I choose every word carefully for maximal authenticity.

>>5775925
When confronted with the Authentic, the inauthentic will meme-out, as evidenced by your post.

>> No.5775951

>>5775911
No one here would find your opinions nearly as controversial if it wasn't for your personality bleeding through, and it's hard not to wonder if that's not intentional.

The way you try to mythologize your dislike of certain writers and directors into some righteous cause holds all the hallmarks of delusional monomania.

Honestly the person you remind me of the most is Abatap.

>> No.5775953

>>5775946
The true authentic never points fingers. Sorry, but you're fake.

>> No.5775957

>>5775946
shut up imposter.

>> No.5775970

Mister Lonely is the best Korine film.

Stroszek is the best Herzog film.

The Tree of Life is the best Malick film.

Cronenberg is a director of ugly shlock.

Tarr's best film is Satantango.

what do you think, Mr Korine? And by the way, have you read Korine's book? It's quite good.

>> No.5775975

>>5775957
Imposture is impossible for me due to my high standards of authenticity.

>>5775953
>>5775951

I don't point fingers. I fight. Perhaps my methods are ineffectual and unconvincing. So be it. But I strive for total authenticity. Memetic, i.e. inauthentic, thought is the enemy I've sworn to battle to the death. This isn't a hugbox. The counterfeiters of authentic cinema and their disciples are the hippies sticking flowers in the barrels of guns; I am the soldier who pulls the trigger.

>> No.5775978

>>5775946
>As I've written somewhere before, I pride myself on my extreme authenticity in all areas of life.
Could you give some examples? I want to be authentic like you but I don't know how.

>> No.5775982

>>5775970
You forgot Haneke. He loves Haneke.

>> No.5775989

>>5771432
Primer is still one of my all time favourite movies.

>> No.5775998

>>5775989
That pretentious piece of gobbledygook? Jesus Christ

>> No.5776000

>>5775982
I'm not familiar enough with Haneke to be honest. I've only seen The White Ribbon and Amour.

>> No.5776006

>>5775970
Trash Humpers is Korine's most ecstatically authentic film. Mister Lonely is very good too.

Herzog hasn't made an inauthentic film in his life. They are all great. My choice would be either Stroszek or Aguirre.

Malick's best film by far is Badlands. Tree of Life is very weak. It comes dangerously close to inauthenticity. Tedious and corny.

Cronenberg, Carpenter, and Hill are great authentic auteurs.

Tarr, along with Haneke, are mountains of tediousness and triteness.

I lost my copy of A Crack Up in a fire before I could get to it. I have re-obtain it.

>> No.5776020

>>5776006
you've been very public about your love for Tarr.

>> No.5776024

>>5776006
>Tarr, along with Haneke, are mountains of tediousness and triteness.

now you fucked up, filthy imposter.

>> No.5776035

>>5776024
Holy shit, the ridiculous hyperbolic personality with a monomania spawned imitators for comedy's sake and became a meme?!?! Who could have seen that coming!

I can't imagine why anyone would do that, it's not like anyone's paying the persona attention on 4chan.

>> No.5776038

>>5776020
>>5776024

Those were impostors. Perhaps they meant well, but I did not sanction their behavior. I've been quite open about my love for Korine, Herzog, Cronenberg, Carpenter, and a few others. But never, never, have I expressed admiration for either Haneke or Tarr, and the assumption that I enjoy them is wrong. They are for the neo-cinephile IMDB top 250 crowd.

>> No.5776048

>>5776038
https://archive.moe/tv/thread/49151781/#49152609
is this not you? What do you really think about The Tree of Life?

>> No.5776050

I'm going to go and eat now, after which I'll appreciate cinema and then meditate on authenticity. When I come back, I'll elucidate further my position on authentic vs. inauthentic.

>> No.5776055

>>5776050
Great, can you teach me mental masturbation?

>> No.5776069

>>5776050
I hope you choke, fucking useless parasite of society, you'e not fighting anyone, you're just a human failure who tries to find a fake purpose in life.

>> No.5776077

This thread is chalk full of the attitude common among pseudo-intellectuals that having an unpopular or controversial opinion or position on something automatically means you have a more critically informed or authentic one. Which in itself is a very disingenuous attitude to have.

>> No.5776081

>>5776069
No purpose in life is fake, though.

His prejudice completely breaks his vision. I hope he sees it soon enough.

>> No.5776086

>>5775911
This is an old /tv/ copypasta
Get out, imposter

>> No.5776092

>>5776038
>Carpenter
Korine fan hates him, he thinks he makes cheap flicks

>> No.5776125

>>5776050
What the fuck are you doing with your life, man? Seriously. What is your job? Do you have any friends? Do you have any fucking hobbies or pursuits outside of what you're doing right now? Do you really take pride in spending two entire fucking days straight repeatedly rewriting and paraphrasing the same long, flamboyant, nebulous diatribe about "authenticity in art" in one single thread on 4chan? What the fuck has brought you to this point that you've spent so many continuous hours making such an outrageously bombastic, self-congratulatory display of yourself?

You're like a fucking John Kennedy Toole character, but even more humorously preposterous.

>> No.5776132

>>5776125
He's jobless and lives of Governemnt's money, he has been doing this for 7 years

>> No.5776136

>>5776125
He has some mental illness, I think.

>> No.5776141
File: 40 KB, 500x375, 1360137310110.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5776141

>>5776132
Are you serious?

>> No.5776149

>>5776141
Yes, he even said he had a gf but abandoned her for his love for cinema

>> No.5776160

>>5776141
http://archive.4plebs.org/tv/thread/50813473/#q50817845

>> No.5776166

>>5776149
>>5776160
Jesus, he is a living parody.

>> No.5776167

>>5775882
>Giotto, Ghirlandaio and Lyly aren't worthy of comment.

They are if I am to know wether you are actually as authentic as you think you are.

>If you cannot see on which side of the authenticity/inauthenticity dichotomy they fall on, you're a lost cause.

I can very well see on which side of the authenticity/inauthenticity dichotomy they fall, I'm trying to know wether *you* can.

Until then I can't be convinced that you are actually a warrior of authenticity and not merely a soldier of jest.

I note how you carefully avoided answering to my question. You are such a courageous knight.

>> No.5777482

>>5776077
it's chock full, bro.