How does it feel knowing your 'artform' is a brain killer when compared to books, which intellectually stimulate...

How does it feel knowing your 'artform' is a brain killer when compared to books, which intellectually stimulate? Studies have proven the brain automatically shuts off when watching television, be it The Sopranos or keeping up with the kardashians

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_lapidem
care2.com/greenliving/what-does-watching-tv-vs-reading-a-good-book-do-to-your-brain.html
twitter.com/AnonBabble

You are spooking me

/lit/ pls go

Cite sources or GTFO.

Whenever I remember about the inferiority of movies, I always cheer myself up by laughing at someone who likes video games.

there are also studies that show a correlation between literacy rates and homosexuality in societal populations

it is easier to ingest a good movie than a good book, at the same time it takes a lot more genius to direct a good movie than to write a good book.

This triggers the Sup Forums.

Although I, myself in my youth, did feel pretty smug after reading The Ego and its Own for the first time.

Phases are the signs of growth, I suppose.

wtf i hate films now

You are an idiot.

Plain and simple.

I play videogames when I want to be intellectually stimulated. Since they're interactive you can't just shut down your brain and stare at it like you do with movies.

I would love to see some evidence for that.

/lit/ used to have better film threads than Sup Forums

I miss those days, before Sup Forums took over.

Your average Sup Forums user, ladies and gentlemen.

Vidya=Film>Books

Video games are inherently more immersive and so are objectively better than movies for genres that rely on immersion: Action, Adventure, Horror etc. However, in telling a story through games, the storyteller's pace is at the mercy of the individual gamer, so movies are more appropriate for dramatic storytelling where control of pacing is essential.

As far as fiction goes, books are practically obsolete. Books might equal (or even surpass) other fiction media for very specific subgenres like dry comedy, metafiction or fantasy horror but their usefulness is mostly in non-fiction and reference books for people without access to the internet, and generally for people without access to electricity.

There is definitely something to be said for the external experience of reading books (physically handling the book, the smell, historical significance etc.), but that usually has no bearing whatsoever on the content.

tl;dr: The only reason to think Books>Film>Vidya is pure pretentiousness. Pic related.

Except you're wrong.

Very wrong indeed but alas one must keep oneself deluded if ones to ever escape their excruciating, unchecked and unbettering idiocy. Perhaps one day whilst playing your "Call of Duty" you'll have a epiphany in which you will finally understand that you need to overcome these severe mental shortcomings and pick up a book. Cut the cord my friend, and be a better human being in the process.

T. Someone who's never written more than a thousand words

Your below-average Sup Forums user, ladies and gentlemen.

>I love reading! George RR Martin, Stephen King, the list goes on...

If this isn't top quality bait, then fuck me with a rake, we are doomed.

Clever.
I suppose you can read after all,

If you can't refute any of my points then I'll assume you have no argument and have conceded.

>I only read Joyce, Fitzgerald, Nabokov
Fuckwits like you are the reason the idiots in this thread think reading is 'pretentious'.

Sorry, /lit, reading Sparknotes for Shakespeare doesn't make you into an intellectual.

It's true, when I watch the Godfather movies I just automatically tune out and start thinking of other things and eventually wind up falling asleep. But I read the entire Hunger Games trilogy in a week without getting bored and felt much more stimulated intellectually.

>A picture = a thousand words
>Average number of frames in a movie = 144,000
>144,000 frames = 144,000,000 words
>Average number of words in a novel = 100,000

So one movie is the equivalent of 1440 novels. Try again you faggot

Do you need to refute the arguments of a doomsayer standing in the streets, screaming into the heavens about how the world is ending tomorrow to prove you're right and he's wrong? No, you understand what he's saying is nonsense and move on. Not everyone is deserving of an argument simply because they're confrontational about their deluded ideas.

Holy shit my OC! I made this about a year ago.

Thanks for saving and reposting this user, you made my day.

Has anyone read Ready Player One? I'm reading it now and literally every paragraph in this book has to namedrop a random classic movie (usually 80's) for no fucking reason at all and has nothing to do with the plot. It's extremely fucking annoying.

Kek

But godfather is actually boring

nice spooks my property

I presented my ideas, you denied them without refuting them, relying purely on the assertion that you are right to make your argument (as you still do).

I believe this logical fallacy is called argumentum ad lapidem, or Argument of the Stone.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_lapidem

This kind of lazy anti-intellectualism is why we have things like religious dogma and Hillary vs Trump. It's on a par with intimidation and bribery as far as convincing arguments go.

Even Sup Forums laughs at your level of reasoning.

pathetic

movies have another layer of interpretation before they are given to the audience to absorb. they are not delivered raw the way books are, where the audience just interprets it on a personal level. film is a canned interpretation of a story, and that story needs to be worked by the director, thus the added difficulty to create a good movie.

yeah sure

I don't waste my time with trash

You're just too dumb to bother arguing with, I'm sorry.

>vidya
One word which tells me not to continue reading because the poster has a sub 80 IQ

care2.com/greenliving/what-does-watching-tv-vs-reading-a-good-book-do-to-your-brain.html

>A Japanese study earlier this year found that TV watching actually can alter the composition of your brain. Studying 276 children and teens led to the discovery that higher amounts of time in front of the tube increased frontal lobe grey matter, yet lowered verbal IQ.

>Another study, however, discovered lasting positive results from reading a novel. They performed MRIs to college students before, during and after reading a novel and found increased connectivity in the parts of the brain responsible for language receptivity—so much so that the heightened connectivity was retained days later, much like “muscle memory.”

>What else can reading do for the mind? A study at the University of Sussex found that participants who were stressed needed only six minutes of reading for their heart rates and muscle tension to subside. Six minutes! Overall, reading reduced stress levels by 68 percent, closely followed by listening to music (61 percent), drinking coffee (54 percent) and taking a walk (42 percent).

Further sources are in the linked article.

>A Japanese study

Stopped reading there. They probably think watching anime for 12 hours a day will make you smart.

Nice argument, dicklips.

So my stress is reducing as I read your post?
ty user

I'm not arguing with you. I gave you the opportunity to make a reasonable argument and you turned it down in favour of spouting the most childish playground fallacies.

So now I'm just laughing at you for being intellectually lower than the alt-right kids on Sup Forums.

>Studies have proven

i listened to joss whedon read it to me
it was the full experience, so to speak

It's an extremely common internet slang term. We're on the internet. You might as well base your assumption of intellectual superiority on dubs.

tl;dr: check 'em

Pray tell, how well read are you?
It seems to me that you haven't read anything beyond high school summer requirements.
Would you like to continue trying to argue with me?

A friend recently lent that to me along with a glowing review. If I think I can breeze through it in a couple of days I might pick it up because I hear Spielberg's making a movie adaptation.

"I don't waste my time with trash," user posted, on Sup Forums's Sup Forums imageboard.

>not delivered raw the way books are

How do you figure?
Think hard about this one.

Not that user but I think it's pretty clear.

In literature, the reader's experience is delivered much more directly from the storyteller's mind. The exact words chosen by the author are the exact words read by the audience, barring some editing by a publisher. In making a film there are many different factors that affect the final product, many of them out of the storyteller's control.

Books are practically a mind-meld compared to the number of different filters and obstacles between a writer-director and his audience.

this bro summarizes it quite well
books are a direct conversation between the artist and the audience
films are an interpretation of an interpretation of an interpretation. the work the audience has interpreting a book has already been done by the director, who films his own interpretation of the acting of the actors, which in turn is another interpretation of the words of the scriptwriter, which in turn is a structured narrative of what was once an original idea. it's filters upon filters, it's not delivered the same way a book is.
the same rule applies to theater. it's no wonder film's first reference was the theater standard.

You're all ( Sup Forums, /lit/ and Sup Forums ) virgins, so who fucking cares?
You might be (but of course you are not) somewhat inteligent and able to write a little bit, but you will never have a following.
You will all die alone and broken, wondering why Chad (whom you view as your inferior) is better than you.

...

I knew I was watching a girl getting btfo earlier ITT.

That's my only post itt. Not my problem you pathetic NEETs are inferior to the dumbest of normies.
I guess being cut off from the world helps you inflate your ego.

Wow, someone's got the painters in.

>Not my problem
It is if it makes you cry and throw a tantrum on an okinawan sandwich recipe forum.

>You will all die alone and broken, wondering why Chad (whom you view as your inferior) is better than you.

>not being born with god tier genetics
o i am laffin

I disagree, but that is an interesting view.

You good?

Books are the refuge of lonely narcicistic people. Unlike film which has some objective standards, with a book the autist can say "in my mind it was good!" that's why bookfags are never supportive of film adaptions "b-but the character didn't look that way in my mind! trash!"

Reading a book is like looking at a random splatter painting or just day-dreaming. It's good for the self esteem because you can pretend you're so much deeper than everyone else for enjoying it, but it's just primitive escapism.

...

>2016
>reading books

lmao, fucking losers. Stop acting like a High School girl.

I want to lead not read

>judging art by the medium rather than the content

Raging Bull > Fifty Shades of Grey
HOWEVER
The Naked and the Dead > Sex Lives of the Potato Men