So we can all admit he's the greatest director of the 2000s right?

So we can all admit he's the greatest director of the 2000s right?
>not a single bad film
>mastered multiple genres
Literally a GOAT.

Other urls found in this thread:

twitter.com/ScottMendelson/status/929905222771646464
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Following
m.youtube.com/watch?v=g4BuFDkRtHU
boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=chrisnolan2017.htm
theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2011/sep/30/lars-von-trier-melancholia-hollywood
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

*Blocks ur path*

wrong pic

Villeneuve's worst movie is on par with Nolan's best

I don't rate nolan above villeneuve
You realize there was like no chance a Blade Runner sequel would be good in 2017, and this man just went ahead and did it

Uh... Yeah, no thanks. I don't want to support a figure deeply symptomatic of systematic racism

...

please tell me everyone here is only pretending to like these dishonest flick-makers

This isn't real right?

Hold on, hold on, hold on...
I agree that Denis is a genius, but can we take a moment to appreciate this guy's craft?

t. enjoys the films of wes anderson

twitter.com/ScottMendelson/status/929905222771646464

But Villeneuve has way more range than Nolan. You'd never see Nolan pull off an ambient, minimalistic thriller like Prisoners.

Sooo, Villeneuve's sexist because he's making Dune before the next Bond?

Basically this. Inception completely changed how Hollywood made movies.
for the worse unfortunately

Same can be said about many other directors tho

When did Sup Forums start riding Denis' jock? I remember a bunch of losers trying to pretend Sicario and Arrival were mediocre at best at the times of their releases. Did the prevailing opinion in this shithole swing the other way at the precise moment 2049 was labeled as a box office bomb and thus eligible as "cult kino"?

A decade later and you dweebs are more insufferably enslaved to defy public opinion than ever.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Following
*BLOCKS UR PATH WITH A $6000 BUDGETED CLASSIC*

How so? By filling them with that godawful foghorn noise?

Christ could you sound any more pretentious?

prisoners was emotinally manipulative garbage
arrival and sicaro where average to good
the only masterpiece under his belt is br2049

didn't know this existed. Is it worth a watch?

Incendies is pretty much hot garbage.

/r/iamverysmart

...

> emotionally manipulative

This is literally what the medium is all about, how the hell can that be a criticism.

why the fuck is he doing a world war z sequel goddamnit
More like TGWTDT and Se7en

>Emotionally manipulative
Uhh, what?

Definitely.
Pic is of the average shitposting contrarian who tried to discredit Denis when he broke into the mainstream, correct?

Last night he was sighted chasing Saoirse, what kind of kino can we expect from such collaboration?

It's not on for very long (1hr 10 mins) so you may as well. Definitely an interesting look at the limitations of a tiny budget on a very good director. It's on youtube:
m.youtube.com/watch?v=g4BuFDkRtHU

Greatest since 2000
1. Nolan
2. Coens
3. Haneke
4. PTA
5. Fincher
6. Villeneuve
7. Von Trier
8. Aronofsky
9. Inarritu
10. Tarantino
.
.
90000001. Wes Anderson

cool, thanks

Prisoners is his best movie.

Just because a film is about child rape doesn't mean it's emotionally manipulative. Really you should save that term for a when a film lies to you with the narrative or has cheap twists to make you feel something. Prisoners doesn't do that shit, it's pretty much fair in all of the twists and the ways the characters act.

>Nolan

> No Refn
> Trier there even though all his best stuff was made in the 80's and 90's

DROPPED

You faggots don't even try to hide it anymore. This board is truly done for.

...

What's his next film?

...

>one foreign director, and he's only included because he's been around for a while and you've managed to remember his name
You have a lowbrow stink to you and I'm not sure it'll ever wash off.

Sucker Punch was weird. But I enjoyed all his other movies.

Post more, bitch. I'm saving them all in my newly created "Denis is dishonest filmmaking" folder.

I forgot to rate Refn, he's in the top 15 but von Trier deserves that spot for Melancholia, Antichrist, Dancer in the Dark and Dogville

Alright....
Denis makes great films but relies too heavily on Roger deakins' cinematography. But he's a master at letting scenes run for the audience to sympathize and think with the characters

Nolan is pure at working on what he believes is a masterpiece, sometimes it works out, other times we get a pretentious piece of work that think's it's too smart for everyone's sake.

Directors aren't perfect. Nor are there better directors than others. It's about taste and creativity in the craft. Not about, "This guy is better than this guy because he did this movie! And tThat OThers GuyY DId That SHIT movie!"

I've been on Sup Forums too long tonight.

Wide appeal is part of being a great director you pseud
>wtf they're all popular??
Brainlet tb.h

> One foreign director
> Haneke, Trier, Villeneuve, Inarittu

Low quality bait

You'd never see Villnueve film break past $500million while still being artistic

Nolan has mastered the art of making money while keeping his artistic integrity

Dune

>not a single bad movie
The majority of his films are mediocre. Sicario is legitimately the only good thing he's done and even that isn't anything special.

...

1. Nolan
2. Fincher
3. Malick
4. PTA
5. Snyder
6. Refn

the only Nolan film to break 500m$ is The Dark Knight. If you think that film can be considered artistry, you seriously need to go back.

As expected of your species, you've managed to miss the point entirely. There are many well-known, respected, inarguably great foreign filmmakers who you've completely failed to mention because you were marked as a pleb by greater forces as soon as you came into being.

Only one of them still counts as foreign. The others are Hollywood through and through (that's not inherently a bad thing)

1. Snyder
2. obama
3. ur mom gay lol
4. Pickle Rick LOL
5. Nolan

> Whom you've completely failed to mention

If you want to sound pretentious, you still have a lot left to go :)

You people don't actually think Nolan is the best director working today...right?

Neither Haneke nor Trier are Hollywood.

you are my type'a guy

>the only Nolan film to break 500m$ is The Dark Knight. If you think that film can be considered artistry, you seriously need to go back.
>boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=chrisnolan2017.htm
Kill yourself

I'll take missing a letter over missing many names that anyone who holds a substantial opinion wouldn't.

I was about to post that the only Nolan movie to make that much, made that money off of brand recognition rather than on its own merit. But this doesn't negate the fact that Nolan's been able to make box office #1's while keeping artistic integrity with other movies, just not 500M

Didn’t know Nolan was such a Chad

Name some that crack the top ten, there's a reason they're not on the list.

The days of Dogme95 are over, lad.

yo, do Canadians count???

Bait

I'll pass. As we've established, your standards don't hold merit.

Are you seriously implying that Trier is Hollywood? The man has a fear of flying, he's never even been to America.

He did make 500 mil with Dunkirk though:

> Money earned is a benchmark of quality

Americans, everyone.

theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2011/sep/30/lars-von-trier-melancholia-hollywood

Take it from the man himself. He's been touched by the Harv (probably not literally).

Just watched handmaiden and his other kinos, Park Chan wook is looks more promising

His last film was a six hour reflection on his own perverted sex life featuring explicit intercourse.

It's not the only thing to consider but almost all great filmmaker's have had wide appeal.

Is there anyone in this thread who's a big enough asshole to disagree with Heath having given a GOAT performance in The Dark Knight? Say what you will about Nolan's flaws, but Ledger's transformation into The Joker was a tour de force.

Y'all know Trier is trash right?
Cool! he made Anti Christ and dogville! Fantastic film...
but like his other film are pretty shit...
If only he would make something

Leto was better

It was also apparently his first film made under a new life of sobriety.

I saw the first part and thought it was superficial wank (again, I don't mean it literally but it does apply that way as well); didn't bother to watch the second. What'd you think?

I like Vinterberg more, personally, but Pusher, Dancer in the Dark, Dogville, and Melancholia are all very good IMO.

Consistently fawning over Heath Ledger's joker is the ultimate watermark of a true pleb. Having been weaned on nothing but capeshit and Adam Sandler flicks all their lives, they naturally consider the one decent-if-overacted performance they've seen to be the hallmark of cinema.

I'm English and so is Nolan so he is literally /MyGuy/

I watched Koriostami, Bergman, and Ozu this weekend. Heath still delivered a performance for the ages.

Your mom's gonna FREAK when she finds out she raised such a basic bitch.

OH NO NO NO

You've clearly missed out on his best stuff (Riget, Breaking the Waves and The Idiots)
I don't think it's superficial, self-indulgent is more like it. I think it reflects really interestingly and painfully honestly on the life of an aging pervert trying to maintain a facade of sanity. It's a very personal film, and I think the pain Trier is living in and his difficulty with women shines through in an uncomfortably brilliant way. Pusher is Refn, btw.

Alright, that makes sense. IMO melancholia was a little pretentious, but I really do understand how people can like it.

a l l m e

>only 21 people on Sup Forums care about movie discussion
based board

> Watched

Any pleb can watch. The fact that you think this is somehow impressive only further demonstrates your plebian nature.

NO SHES NOT! MY MOM AGREES AND YOUR STUPID AND ILLM HACK YOUR FREAKING MINECRAFT ACCOUNT AND STEAL ALL OF YOUR DIAMONDS YOU FRICKING RETARD!

more like auteur privilege

Oh shit, still gotta see breaking the waves.
Personally, he's not my taste. I think he's trash. but other peeps can like him. Just voicing it out to see who agrees

I've only seen the first part so I'll defer to your judgement, but I'd argue a movie can theoretically be both self-indulgent and superficial (e.g. Bay). I'm not sure I consider Von Trier intelligent enough to convey the sufferings of his psyche in a meaningful manner, though Part 1 did shed lights on voyeurism, social anxiety, alienation, and, of course, nymphomania. Would you recommend rewatching the entire piece?

And thanks for the correction. Good call.

Enlighten me, Oh Kino Guardian!

well it depends on whether you think a painfully honest reflection on male perversion bordering on a cry for help is interesting. The second piece carries many of the same themes, with the shock values mercilessly dialed up, adding themes of sadomasochism and hopelessness.

it's too late for you. maybe /r/movies can help.

If it wasn't for the one scene that shitted on antichrist tho....Fuck that scene

They denied me membership. Wat do now?

I still can't believe this scene exists. 5 guys with assault rifles and SMGs could clear all those fucking cops.

Not even gonna mention the batmobiles.