Post dishonest films

Post dishonest films

La La Land
The Artist
Spotlight
Birdman
The Revenant
The Master
Argo
Hail Caesar!
John Wick
Zootopia
The Force Awakens
Whiplash
Independence Day
Guardians of the Galaxy
The Big Short
Before Sunset

Other urls found in this thread:

is.Sup
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

What do you mean by dishonest ?

It's a meme you dip

>John Wick
>Guardians of the Galaxy

These seem like strange inclusions. Then again, I have no idea what this new Dishonest thing actually means, although it seems to be accurate.

Absurdity is such a beautiful reality.

it's too new for anyone to really understand what it means though

which is guess is what makes it

Dishonest Filmmaking: (Tarantino, Alejandro González Iñárritu, Wes Anderson, Christopher Nolan, Alex Garland, Paul Thomas Anderson, Nicholas Refn, Tom Hooper, Tyler Perry, Rian Johnson, Alfonso Cuaron, Noah Baumbach, Andrea Arnold, David Yates, Denis Vilenueve, James Franco, Steve McQueen) are intellectually bankrupt moral whores and charlatans; their films appeal to the modern phenomenon of the 'Pretend Epic' or Pseudo Cinema, often tied to the criticism that "It was a movie that thought it was a film" they have no ideas of their own and are filmed purely to have fancy essays made about them. They obfuscate their lack of insight under a smug impenetrable irony and often contain scenes with disingenuous attempts at depth with characters spouting platitudes that the director takes VERY seriously.
This directly panders to the IMDb reddit sensibility of quote circlejerking since these hacks are masters of the fools wit, "Quipping" (Not to be confused with the marvel co-opting of the word) , it sounds smart, cool and worldly but in reality there's nothing of substance, the Revenant's attempt at spiritualism was cheap and laughable and whilst someone like Malick has considered his philosophy, Inaurritu wears his introspection on his sleeve to give his film a false sense of depth with pathetic sermonising.

THIS is Dishonest Filmmaking.

They leech the greater works that preceded them; like The Enemy being a rip off Eraserhead, but they have nothing else to say.
They act under the guise of deconstruction with surface layer obvious 'social commentary' and a quirky forgettable score praised as 'innovative'. They are all inauthentic sycophants that rely on oscar buzz and post 9/11 detachment for relevance.

These directors are hacks and will be forgotten to time.

Some notably earnest filmmakers include, but are not limited to:
>Mike Leigh
>The Coen Brothers
>Werner Herzog
>James Cameron
>Mel Gibson
>Terrence Malick
>Gaspar Noe
>Clint Eastwood

Add Hacksaw Ridge to that

half these aren't even dishonest
>John Wick
>Zootopia
>The Force Awakens
>Whiplash
>Independence Day
>Guardians of the Galaxy
Are you just stupid or something, OP?

This is the most honest filmmaking I've ever seen in my life. Dishonest means it's either made by a studio or just for Oscars. Neither applies to Hacksaw Ridge you moron.

I disagree with Whiplash

Mulholland Dr.

PTA has never made a dishonest film

>Brutal Biographical WW2 film based on true events
>Actually a comedy

How is this not dishonest?

>Steve McQueen

This. Op seems to be confusing dishonesty with fecal matter

I don't think you know what dishonesty really means. Its patented packaged crap for plebs.

Lynch never addressed anything that needs honesty in the equation apart from Dune and The Straight Story, and only Dune was dishonest out of those two.

YOU ARE ALL FUCKING RETARDS

So fucking sick of all you Reddit retards shitposting about how awful Hacksaw Ridge is because DUDE IT'S CARTOONY LMAO MUH Sup Forums XD

Pleb as fuck psuedo-cinema opinions have no place here. Hacksaw Ridge is the finest piece of filmmaking this decade, it's direction can't be match by anything else in recent memory, and if those facts trigger you so much then shill for your piece of trash cancer flick La La Land instead.

Degenerate faggots

>Birdman
>The Revenant
>The Master
>Whiplash
These are all honest thought. In fact, The Master is the epitome of honest filmaking in Hollywood.

Nice pasta Reddit

Look at the list of film and you should be able to tell.

>The Coen Brothers
What a load of shit. They can't stop beating the dead horse and forcing their Jewish inconsequentialities onto the filmgoing populace. It's sick.
But I agree with the gist of this pasta, just not the conclusion.

shawshank redemption
all star wars films
12 angry men

ENOUGH WITH YOUR DISHONEST MEME

LA LA LAND WILL SWEEP AGAIN AND THERES NOTHING YOU COULD DO TO STOP IT

All of them, even biopics

dishonest reply

The Revenant was literally dishonest. Hugh Glass never had a son that was murdered. Let alone a half native american son.

How would Sup Forums react if La La Land didn't win a single Oscar?

>user doesn't know what pretentious means
>makes tired meme to try to articulate the pretension he senses in films

top

kek

What's this new meme?

Don't expect an argument. It's just a meme

Nothing but exercise in pseudo-psychological interpretations. Only PTA could make something even close to the dishonesty this flick shits out if there were some sort of remake.

>meme
heh, he doesnt understand the criticism

It's the new 'glib facsimile'

It'll die out once the Oscar's are over.

>John Wick
>Whiplash
I don't agree with these ones.

I got a dishonest film for ya.

It wasn't a documentary nor was it serving a specific agenda to its audience. Liberties can be taken - it would be dishonest for an auteur to refrain from doing so and still call one's work as truly their own.

>if I don't like a film it is dishonest

I want Sup Forumseddit to leave

>adapting source material is dishonest

>The Force Awakens
>Guardians of the Galaxy

They can't be dishonest filmmaking because they don't pretend to be anything more than entertainment.

So good movies?

This would make more sense if you removed that Gaspar Noe retard from that list.

top tier dishonesty

Not an argument.

Was hugh glass a real person? I thought the movie was just based on another fictional story

>Called Falling Down
>Standing up on the poster

Wow. Fucking unbelievable

What is this webm from?

That's not cinematic dishonesty.

Cinematic dishonesty is putting a creation onto film that is not purely personal to you.

t. PoC

>if I like a film it is honest because I like it and that is well-reasoned compelling argument
Can you even describe a film you've enjoyed on aspects other than your own inherent emotional response to said film?

No. Dishonest filmmaking is when it wasn't made by a director with a vision. For example, Marvel movies (other than Iron Man) have all been made by studio heads like Kevin Feige. They don't do any of the work just tell the workers what to do. Zootopia, on the other hand, is made by a group of artists who work together and create ideas and then just get it approved by the studio heads rather than the studio heads telling them what to do.

There's also, of course, dishonest filmmaking for Oscars. We see hints of this in La La Land but there's also a lot of honesty in that movie as we know Damiene Chazelle loves jazz. Films like Moonlight, Hidden Figures, and The Revenant and are much more like this type of dishonest filmmaking as they don't appear to have a direct tie in with the director and just are being made for awards. Very different from Hacksaw Ridge or American Sniper that tell stories that the directs love (both Mel and Clint are right wing conservatives so it makes sense they tell war stories).

No one in this thread will give you a good reason to agree

HACKsaw Ridge

is.Sup Forums.org/gif/1484790779248.webm

Marvel's Hacksaw Ridge - A WWII Story

They are lauded heavily, and then just sort of forgotten. I've never seen the artist, but its not brought up much.

>'pseudo'
>namedrops PTA when it's not even remotely related
>falls for the memes

yeah, no, you're retarded

Why does it have to be personal?

completely unrelated to your post or argument with that guy
are you gay

just wondering

If you walked up to some stranger and took their stories then started selling them for money/awards, that'd be pretty dishonest, right? That's what dishonest filmmaking is. They're not your stories to tell.

That's how most Oscar bait movies are. Just look at the history of Best Picture/Best Actor winners and see how many you knew existed, then look at the movies that lost to it/them. The Academy Awards are nothing more than a political circle jerk. If you want a guaranteed Oscar, all you have to do is make a movie about Hollywood.

Stop watching dishonest movies.

Really? Is this why everyone is ripping it to pieces?

anything else for the shitlist?

>Dishonest filmmaking is when it wasn't made by a director with a vision
This is the only definition that isn't autistic.

>There's also, of course, dishonest filmmaking for Oscars
Wouldn't you need a vision for that

What was his/her fucking problem?

I can post the webms if you want

Yes, but what can be done to combat dishonesty in film? We all live in a dishonest society, with dishonest government and corporations pushing the cart for us. Most people simply are unable to perceive the significance of dishonest filmmaking, especially when many value film as face-value entertainment. Consumerism fuels dishonestly; for each dishonest film, there are thousands more dishonest filmgoers. Just look at this board.

define vision

you could almost say that
human beings are inherently dishonest

Please do, m80.

Enjoy your self-made pandering bubble. If you can't handle Sup Forums, you shouldn't even be here.

...

>>There's also, of course, dishonest filmmaking for Oscars
>Wouldn't you need a vision for that
Not necessarily. You can have ideas for it but not really a vision. You see, a vision is completely your own. You make it up and you create it. An idea is more taking from something you know about film and learned about in class and now applying it to your movie. You didn't create it. It's not authentic. You're just hitting the beats and following a formula.

>Films like Moonlight, Hidden Figures, and The Revenant and are much more like this type of dishonest filmmaking as they don't appear to have a direct tie in with the director and just are being made for awards
You're so painfully off base about Moonlight it's not even funny.

your dumb reddit memes aren't Sup Forums

Seems fitting as most of what is commonly taught about WW2 are gross distortions or outright lies.

I don't really know how to put this dishonest shit into words but its no meme. Its real as can be. So many films nowadays just have no heart or "grit" or human touch to them. They're so sterile and manufactured.

Take something like One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest, or The 400 Blows, and compare it to La La Land or Birdman. The difference is startling.

I might be. I haven't seen it and really don't plan on it. Perhaps the director is a gay black man who faced these challenges in life or knew someone who did. However, a film about a gay black man being released the same year the Oscars were ridiculed for being too white certainly sounds dishonest.

>one flew over the KEKoo's nest
>this movie blows
nice meme taste you dumb pleb

Sup Forums isn't Sup Forums and its agreed upon by actual Sup Forums boards and even tumblr garbage like Sup Forums. Star Wars 7 is over, get out of your honeymoon phase

whether or not he actually had a half son isn't what makes the revenant dishonest

it's the empty dream sequences, the focus on Leo's "acting", the uncut takes for the sake of being uncut, and the stupid emphasis on the grittiness of production

this, the dishonest meme was forced after la la land swept the awards.
its just butthurt redditors pushing an agenda

>Dennis Villeneuve
>Damien Chazelle
>Xavier Dolan
>Steve McQueen
>Alejandro G. Iñárritu
>Tom Ford
>Jeff Nichols
>Asghar Farhadi
>Ken Loach
>Cristian Mungiu
Today's most dishonest enemies of cinema and inauthentic frauds, we can all agree, correct? Who else belongs on that list?

How about a list of honest and authentic Sup Forums approved filmmakers?
>J.A. Bayona
>Robert Zemeckis
>Lav Diaz
>Clint Eastwood
>James Gray
>Shane Black
>Claire Denis
>Steven Spielberg
>Werner Herzog
>Mel Gibson
>Emir Kusturica
>Terrence Malick
>Zack 'kino' Snyder
>Sang-ho Yeon
>Paul Verhoeven

Not sure yet, they go both ways depending on film
>Richard Linklater / Everybody Wants Some! is honest
>Jeremy Saulnier
>NW Refn / TND is inauthentic
>Derek Cianfrance
>Martin Scorsese / silence is honest yet inauthentic
>Jim Jarmusch / Paterson is authentic yet dishonest
>David O Russell and PTA / incredibly inauthentic yet deeply honest

It's an indie movie that would have no awards buzz if it wasn't for the OscarsSoWhite nonsense, but that doesn't have anything to do with the film itself. Calling it a film about a gay black man is incredibly reductive. Something like Hidden Figures or Queen of Katwe are cynical cash-ins that play on white guilt, but Moonlight is the real deal.

so your definition is still autistic then

>not putting Scorsese in honest
>the man who's been black balled by Hollywood for 60 years because he doesn't play their shitty game of politics and makes films for himself
>spends his downtime restoring old films so they won't be lost, destroyed or forgotten in this millennial age

>honest and authentic
>Robert Zemeckis
>Steven Spielberg
>Zack 'kino' Snyder
>Sang-ho Yeon
Do not talk about cinema ever again, Sup Forums

Man, I actually get that. Here I thought everyone on this board was retarded.

It's weird how Linklater can make such a fantastic honest film like Everybody Wants Some!! yet also make the most dishonest film ever made with Boyhood. NWR I'll say is honest because all his movies have the same style and they seem personal to him even if they are really odd at times. Scorsese, while I'll admit I'm not big on, definitely makes movies that are personal to him so he's 100% honest.

>the actual dictionary definition is autistic
really braises my beef...

See
Also

Where are the Hacksaw Ridge webms?

>Martin Scorsese / silence is honest yet inauthentic
You think you are a patrician but you're the biggest pleb of all.

reddit

For what reason would you make a film if it wasn't intensely personal and important to yourself?

The only other answer is money, fame, or power. Making films for these reasons are dishonest.

Film is sharing an experience with the audience. If you're doing it for money or fame you are being inauthentic and lying about your intentions to the audience.

Link?

>implying I'm spewing meme poster myself
The fact is, hiding the state of Sup Forums will not fix the board, nor does it make you better than the posters you're hiding if you just sit and wallow in your tumblr-tier bubble.

reddit.com

The post above you ya mong

if you can't even explain what you meant be the word vision in that guy's definition then how is it any less autistic than any of the others posted in this thread