/film/ can be achieved. Not as a board, but as an approach

/film/ can be achieved. Not as a board, but as an approach.

The threads won't be moderated and there will be shitposters.

Ignore them. Utterly. Swallow your clever ripostes.

If you want to discuss film, only reply to worthwhile comments.

If you can't tell whether a comment is worthwhile or not, err on the side of caution for the sake of the cause. Ignore it. Only reply if you're certain. If you mistakenly reply to shitpost, pick yourself up, take a deep breath, and reply to a real comment. I forgive you.

These threads will be ugly. It doesn't matter.

It will take a while for these threads to get into shape and take off. Be persistent.

It will be important to give the threads some specific points of departure. It won't work to just do a "real patrician kino" thread.

I'll post again when the thread inevitably gets buried.

Pick something specific, and try to allow the thread to develop from there.

If you think you can improve upon this model, do so. Please.

Today's choices are as follows:

1. What does Sup Forums think of Abbas Kiarostami? And is the term "quiet realism" a meaningful way to capture the heart of his films?

2. After watching Nuri Bigle Ceylan's Winter Sleep, I watched the making of documentary. Ceylan really micromanages his actors. I was surprised. What does Sup Forums think of a director taking such a hands on approach with actors?
Here's a reference point. The entire making of is available online:
youtube.com/watch?v=ZYMiR1VC-XU

3. Does Robert Altman's Short Cuts adequately capture the type of characters that fill Carver's short stories? Or do they become Altman's characters?

I will respond to any genuine non-shitpost response to these questions. I am also happy to follow the thread if it strays from the OP, so long as it stays in non-shitpost territory.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=p23ExjSZUHY
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

shut the fuck up you faggot effortposter

nobody gives a fuck, post blacked threads or go back to redd*t

Ahhh I miss elitist Sup Forums

Yes, it existed. Especially elitist /lit/. Oh well, everything dies.

I really enjoyed Woman in the Dunes. I watched it two days ago and it's exactly what I wanted--unsettling, beautiful cinematography (the shots of sand were unbelievable) and a faster pace than most art house. Big fan. Recommend to anyone. For japenese directors, I've delved into teshigahara, ozu, Kurosawa, and Suzuki. Who am I missing m8s?

Also I saw Spirit of the Beehive. I wasn't as crazy about this one but it was enjoyable. I think I wasn't in the mood.

I just got The Face of Another. I think Woman in the Dunes is his most acclaimed. Should I watch that before I watch tfoa?

Coincidentally I just got Spirit of the beehive too. Yet to watch it.

In the spirit of the thread, do you have any response to any of the three thread topics I put in the OP?

I have watched NONE of those directors. Nada. I like Carver's shorts though so perhaps I'll give Altman a shot.

I couldn't say for Teshigahara, but im thrilled with what I watched--im excited to go through the rest of his works.

Perhaps for these threads there could be a more general approach? Three specific questions may make it a bit inaccessible. Perhaps im wrong

Only the Face of Another is another decent film by him, the rest is pretty meh. Teshigahara was pretty much a one hit wonder.

That fucking blows. I heard he ended up taking over his father's flower arranging school.

Any other films with a similar feel to WitD?

>WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

One for Da Land

Woman in the Dunes is a masterpiece but it's based on a popular book so you can't really give him much credit either.

Do. I think the film does them some justice. If you know the stories it's fun to see where Altman diverges from them.

That's encouraging. I'll watch soon.

I think you might be right. My plan was to tweek the OP until it felt right. The problem with generals is everyone moans about Sup Forums being full of idiots, which is boring. Also, people who want to discuss film properly are filled with resentment and end up spewing crap that might be interesting, but no-one will respond to.

Something between a /general/ and a specific thread seems necessary. As I said in the OP, I'm willing to respond to anything worthwhile.

MOOOOOOO

it's cow. hello, cow, give milkz

I would love for these threads to work, but here's the exact problem; the video you have posted, luckily isn't very long, but if someone posted something more lengthy (like kiarostamy 10 on ten documentary), it would take a while for someone to watch it, and then when they come back, the thread would be archived. But anyways, let's try to make the best out of this.

1. I truly think Kiarostami is one of the greatest. First heard about him when M. Haneke praised him, then it took me a while to get into him. I don't know how I feel about the term "quiet realism", especially for his later film. But my favorite film of his(through the olive trees) can certainly be defined by "quiet realism".
I think it's also interesting to discuss his career in a non linear way. Like for example I always seem to place Close up as one of his "later career" movies, and The wind will carry us as his early film. Although that obviously isn't true, to me they just feel like that.

let's leave it at that for now

I'd commit to a weekly movie thread. Just decide the movie in advance and we'll discuss it. I watch a movie a day most days.

That's all cool and dandy, friendos, but for success- and make no mistake, hundreds upon hundreds of similar 'let's get serious now' projects on Sup Forums died fast deaths over time-, you have to help it happen. The more confrontational the OP is the more it will attract shitposting. Make it nice, inviting and real and it will doubtless fare better.
Or not, and then enjoy the cemetery, there's plenty of company there.

I agree in principle with OPs premise but alas have seen none of the films mentioned. Bump?

What the fug happened to 3x3 threads??

Mood and cinematography wise I'd say Grandrieux: Un Lac, Sombre, and La Vie Nouvelle.

>leave it at that
why?

I'm interested in what you have to say. Quiet realism is just a term I read on some throwaway article that attempted to break down different forms of realism. Kiarostami and Makhmalbaf both got placed under quiet realism. I'll try and find the article and quote from it.
I love close-up. It was equal parts natural and sophisticated. Kiarostami crafted every artificiality in the film into an aperture of the truth.
Where was it that you read Haneke's praise? Scorcese wrote a nice short piece on him soon after his death.

This is a pretty good idea, but how do we pick, and how do we assemble?

I agree. I'm committed if you are. I'm going to spam one of these a day. I hope eventually they start to regulate themselves without my help or others copy it.

thanks for the bump. I'll tailor the thread to make it more accessible. I did say this "I will respond to any genuine non-shitpost response to these questions. I am also happy to follow the thread if it strays from the OP, so long as it stays in non-shitpost territory."
and I meant it. What would you like to talk about?

the article is from Tony McKibbon's film course.
"Tony McKibbon realism" should get it first result.

an excerpt: "Quiet Realism

Around the same time the Danes and others were looking for a more realistic aesthetic, Iranian film was doing likewise, though less bombastically. This is a quiet realism, a loosely realist movement that unlike neo-realism, the nouvelle vague (the French New Wave of the late fifties), or Dogme didn’t really announce itself, but just worked steadily on capturing the minutiae of life.Though many of the films did in fact offer a profound questioning of the realism presented (especially the work of the great Abbas Kiarostami whose Close-Up and Taste of Cherry push into asking philosophical questions), the emphasis lay in a quiet observational approach that would not call attention to the aesthetic presentation, unless for the purposes of a greater realism."

here's what Scorsese had to say:
shit, Sup Forums thinks its spam, just google Scorsese on Kiarostami if you want it

It's cute, if nothing else.

Can you elaborate on the non-linear approach to his career? Sounds interesting but I don't follow.

I don't have a KG account and I can't see (good quality) art house. Rutracker only goes so far.

Anyone want to share invite?

I could listen to Scorsese talk about film all day, his breakdown of Psycho in the Hitchcock/Truffaut doc was great

I still can't get over the fact that kiarostami is dead. I mean it seemed that he has so much more to give after Like someone in love. The movie felt like it was made by an upcoming director in a good way. Fucking cancer.
As for haneke, I think I watched him in an interview for austria's national television, where he said that kiarostami is undoubtedly the best living director today and that he could never reach his heights.
but let's stop praising his already, everybody should fucking watch at least one his movies.

But we can talk about N.B Ceylan in reference with A. Kiarostami.
They're obviously very similar and both good directors, but what differentiates them? Or more precisely, what would make NBC one of the great ones. My opinion is that Kiarostami is more "bold" in his approach. the dude has a certain effortlessness in his movies that is achieved by only being a badass.
Ceylan still sort of hides behind his scenes, mostly through his cinematography. It's very refined and processed, I guess he forces that cause he was a photographer before he became a film director. I would love to see one his movies from 10 years from now, just to see how he developed.

Checked out Kiyoshi Kurosawa yet, Pulse, Cure and Tokyo Sonata

>This is a pretty good idea, but how do we pick, and how do we assemble?

We can create a thread where people post what film they want to watch for the weekly discussion. We then put the most replied to choices in a strawpoll and vote on which film to watch for the week. After a day we can then choose the highest picked movie to watch and then discuss it the following day. We should start out with some entry level "patrician" films first and then move on from there.

I haven't seen it. Any good clips you could link?

There certainly is a difference between Kiarostami and Ceylan. Kiarostami, if we're to accept what he tells us in ten on 10, has an intentionally hands-off approach with his actors.

Ceylan can literally be seen telling his actors how how to say every word of every line in the making of Winter Sleep. It's remarkable. It worked, in my opinion. I liked the film. But I have a hard time imagining that Ceylan got away with directing like that before his successes.

What have you watched and enjoyed recently, user? This thread doesn't have to stick to the questions I posed. I was just trying to get the ball rolling.

The other Kurosawa. He did some pink films did he not? I took an interest in those a few weeks back. Gas stuff.

Make that thread and link it here. I'll participate.

That was a pretty big ball you tried to make roll then

>an you elaborate on the non-linear approach to his career? Sounds interesting but I don't follow.
it's nothing spectacular, there just seems to be two streams in his movie career. One stream of his movies have almost a sort of a reality braking twist to them, while other have this silent but potent ending to them It's almost as they're made by different directors to me.

No doubt. Thread seems alright so far though.

I see. Can you give me the two lists so i an have a think about it?

Also, the idea was that anyone could respond to one, two, all three or none of the questions so long as they participated reasonably.
The questions were just prompts. Do you think they're unnecessary? I'm starting to think so.

Can't find it but he has a great bit about how perfect the camera angle of Janet Leigh driving in the car is, how moving it to a higher or lower angle would've weakened the tension and paranoia.

It's a great doc, interviews Wes Anderson, Fincher, a lot of heavy hitters.

>What have you watched and enjoyed recently, user?
I've been going through Resnais and Murnau, so far really love everything I've seen from them.

I related heavily to the weakness/infallibility of the memory and identity that was in the Resnais films I saw. Muriel captured the horror of looking back to your history and not recognizing one's self, did it better than Last Year at Marienbad imho.

Still got a lot of Resnais to go through and there's like 1-2 Murnau's in public trackers that I haven't seen (Tabu and some other film)

SOMEONE SEED THIS ON PUBLIC TRACKERS IT'S STUCK AT 63% FUCK

Did you get to Faust yet?

More like we should build a real community and share films through ddl here. Now that would serve my purposes and A LOT of other people too.

in films like ;like someone in love (when the old dude talks to that lady in the window) , certified copy (when we figure out that they're actually an old couple trying to rekindle their love) or close up (when that director dude shows up to meet the protagonist), you have a point in the movie where logic stops for a moment. It's not breaking the 4th wall, it's not deus ex machina, there is just some cathartic presence that appears in the movie that completely turns the movie around.
the other movies on the other hand, have a complete different meaning to them. In movies like "through the olive trees", "the wind will carry us" and to some extent "taste of cherry", the emphasis is on how life continues after the movie, how everything is completely irrelevant and that we're just passing through life. not just passing through the lives of others, but through our own lives. there is no catharsis, there is no conflict, there is nothing divine to it.

maybe I'm looking too deep into it, but to me those are in their core very different movies/philosophies.

I'll check it out.

I'm a pleb and have never seen a Resnais OR Murnau. Lift me from my shame and recommend me a film from each of them.

I enjoyed this thread. Have to go for now. Knowing Sup Forums the thread will 404 soon. But I will improve the OP and make this thread again soon.

this is like 6GB though. It desperately needs seeds.

The opening of Faust is my favorite thing Muranu's done. The visuals are out of this world. It gets kind of slow in the middle though.

Seen Nosferatu, Sunrise, Faust, City Girl. I like Sunrise and Faust the most so far.

Faust was really playful and adventurous at start, but it gets really dark towards the end. The images in Faust were beautiful, dark, terror, happy, iconic and everything. It felt more strict than Sunrise which felt really 'free' in way it was directed, but I don't mind.

This scene was just heartbreaking.

Start with earliest films you can find from them. For me it was Night & Fog and I believe Nosferatu.

Yeah, the visuals were breath taking at the beginning. Feel so fresh and its nearly 90 years old film. Beautiful compositions, memorable compositions.

Scariest film devils I've seen. Just something about it.

Just make separate threads about films if you want. Limiting yourself to one thread just makes it a hugbox / circlejerk.

>But I have a hard time imagining that Ceylan got away with directing like that before his successes.
I would love to see Ceylans first movies, but can't seem to find them anywhere. And I agree, winters sleep is an exceptional movie, mostly because of the good acting in it.
What have you watched and enjoyed recently, user?
yesterday I watched the first episode of kieslowskis dekalog. I liked the first episode. Have any of you guys watched it?

I totally agree. Please post your own serious film threads. Persistence is key. Some will fail, some will succeed, but incrementally we can balance out Sup Forums.

That is a nice analysis. Seriously. I think it's apt.
Sorry to bail when things are getting interesting. I'll leave the Kiarostami question there when i post this thread again so we can pick up on this again.

we should also post daily "/film/ when" threads on tv. I hope they don't ban us, but we need to be visible constantly, not just once in a while.

Why not just go to 8 chan's /film/

There are film sharing and film request threads up in there

If we could rally up the rest of the /film/ people here and get them to 8 chan that would be great. But if we infected 8 chan with the shitposters, what a disaster that would be. What's moderation over there like?

8 chan looks decent, but it's even slower than /trv/

I don't really mind missing on memespeak and shitposts. Slow board = good board.

why not ask for a board on Sup Forums? what good has ever come from 8 chan?

the film board is good though. just slow because it doesn't have memesters and shitposters.

Can be a good thing sometimes, the slowness I mean.
I do like the idea of fast paced Sup Forums threads that are serious and follow what the OP outlined. If you ignore the memes, chit chatting back and forth quickly is fun.

It is good, but I really think Sup Forums could have the best of both worlds with some persistence.

Things are just out of balance at the moment.

It's not even slow really, it's pretty much dead. Oldest thread in the catalog is from 20 September.

Quality is important, sure, but slow boards are just no fun.

Still better than post-LOST Sup Forums.

yeah, when I look at the catalog it seems fun and has nice threads, but it's so slow that I feel scared to post there as a newfag. I feel like I would be outed in a second and that everybody knows each other there.

Chill with the psychosis.

ok seriously how did you get this there are still no public seeds.

Why do you care what other people think of you? Besides, the people there are not really that well versed in film, no reason to be intimidated.

self moderation isn't satisfying, not calling out a shithead takes so much willpower and it's just not worth it. you don't feel like the bigger man. they got to say their dumb shit and they get that nice feeling of speaking their mind, why should you be the only one trying to stick to the standard?

We had fast moving proper film threads on here with barely any shitposting. You must be new here. More posts in 2 hours than 1 week on that 8ch /film/ board/

I enjoy having an actual conversation with people, slow boards do not have that.

it's just not welcoming to newcomers.
and Sup Forums is depressing enough, 8 chan is fucking purgatory

Search the filename in public trackers ya goof.

Maybe once a week in a one thread ever since TDKR. Even the /lbg/ threads have turned to pure shitposting.

We need a board for /cel/ebrity discussion, or they just need to make a /film/ board, otherwise they need to stop deleting celebrity discussion threads

if people didnt want to talk about X there wouldn't be a thrread about X, so don't delete X

The people there are barely patrician. Just drop some patrician bombs on them, and they will welcome you with open arms.

You're wrong. Shitposters think they enjoy shitposting, but what they enjoy is the response.

If it takes all your willpower to ignore them, if you truly have more of an urge to respond to a shitpost then you do to reply to a seriosu comment, you're just an inverted shitposter yourself. Self-moderation is key in most successful approaches to anything, never mind good film threads (a cakewalk in comparison).

Try it now. Find a comment in this thread that asks a good question, or makes a good comment, and respond to it. It's only marginally more difficult then shitposting.

You stick to a standard because you're life isn't dictated by other idiots, it's dictated by you.

Ignoring them IS response. It's the best response.

Agreed. What film(s) have you enjoyed lately user, and what did you enjoy about it/them?

oh man, remember when I told you about a screening of this (assuming it is you) that happened in London not too long ago?

good times...

I count 4 shitposts in this thread. Shit that's actually pretty good.

Think I'll rewatch Tarkovsky soon, just got a sudden urge to watch his films for some reason.

Also rate my fathers favorite directors
>Tarkovsky
>Eisenstein

Just go to a subreddit if you want discussion

Sup Forums is the designated shitpost place

did anyone really understood thise movie

Say something about them and I'll respond. If they're your favourite, you must have some opinions as to why.

Are there other good film subreddits than truefilm?

Criterion forums probably.

>What does Sup Forums think of Abbas Kiarostami? And is the term "quiet realism" a meaningful way to capture the heart of his films?
Overrated. People talk about him like the be all and end all of Iranian cinema while I've never seen his work as going beyond stiflingly boring representation of his culture that is gobbled up by critics because there is still an air of mystique about it. "Quiet realism"? More like repressed monotony clad in smug metanarratives to offer a shifted perspective instead of focusing on the film as it is. Though I do admire his almost fetishization of the silent microcosms that fill our daily lives; perhaps that's why I enjoyed The Wind Will Carry Us just for the pointless repetitive scenes of the scenes of trying to get a satellite signal. It cleverly points to urban ennui despite being set in an equally alienating village.

>What does Sup Forums think of a director taking such a hands on approach with actors?
A good director will always micromanage his actors. There's a reason why Bresson called his actors "models" because he knew they were simply another component of his cinematic vision. A good actor is a whore and a good director is a strong pimp.

Yes, it's me. Still jelly of you having seen that flick on the big screen.

Reddit has trash tier "film" discussion. Those people are still stuck in the IMDB top 250.

It's associative "logic". Thinking about it afterwards is not dissimilar to trying to remember a dream you woke up from.

If you liked it a lot, I recommend Tropical Malady.

If you're not sure how you felt, but want more, I suggest Cemetery of Splendor.

truefilm is way better than this board

Mubi Forums had the best film discussion on the internet for a couple of years. Too bad it got killed off. Criterion forums is probably the last place left, although Criterion fanboys are absolutely disgusting to hang out with.

t. 19 yearold edgelord

Yeah MUBI went full retard when they removed the forum section.

Great post, aritap

What do you think about singaporean new wave?

I still preferred Criterion over old mubi (which actually predated mubi anyway)

the director's cup or whatever seemed like a fun way to share and discuss really obscure films. Never participated though.

the blu-ray.com forums are really great if you like technical discussions and bleeding edge news on the newest transfers..

Yeah I'm registered to bluray forums too, good threads there.

They willingly destroyed a top tier film discussion database. The entire forum was completely removed. I had so many great topics sitting in my bookmarks still left unread. Fucking money grabbing idiots.

This is what /film/ discussion will be. Any opinion that goes against the smug arthouse consensus will be called "edgelord" instead of reddit. Let's just face the fact that this site is the last place you want to have serious art discussion on.

I'm not aritap.

what are your mubi/letterboxd accounts, you seem like a nice bunch

Mubi had the most patrician people on the internet all in one place. Criterion people always stick to what they know, you won't find a lot of hidden masterpieces discussed on their forum. Mubi was truly godlike.

Good critique. I don't have any hate for Kiarostami, but I can follow your perspective.
I think that the critics who praise Kiarostami are more boring than his films are.
Close up is extraordinary in my opinion. I think trying to push the idea of metanaratives is over-intellectualizing Kiarostami's approach. I think his more sophisticated films can easily be seen as an extension of his more modest projects from the time he worked as a director of children's educational films.
My reference point could be this:
youtube.com/watch?v=p23ExjSZUHY

I don't actually believe his films get more serious than this. They become more dramatic, but at the core of his drama is a breeziness that critics mistake for mystique.

As for your comment on directing actors
I don't think it always has to be the case, but I am irritated at an imbalance in the favour of directors who supposedly "let their cast be". If not done with tacit craft and care(pretty ironic) it becomes a: laziness, and b: an excuse for actors to be up their own holes.

>A good actor is a whore and a good director is a strong pimp.

Sorry for hugbox/dick suck, but that's pretty good.

I've gone back to mubi and found a lot of new films to check out. Somehow a screenshot of a film is more inviting than small poster of it.

The shitposts have begun. And those who responded to the shitposters are the true villains. You know who you are. Stop insisting on failure. It's lazy and boring. Don't reply.

read: "If you can't tell whether a comment is worthwhile or not, err on the side of caution for the sake of the cause. Ignore it. Only reply if you're certain. If you mistakenly reply to shitpost, pick yourself up, take a deep breath, and reply to a real comment. I forgive you."

>I'm not aritap.
Do you think I can't see what you're posting, Aritap?

Now answer you mongrel
What do you think about singaporean new wave?

But it's gone now. Why did it go?

TL;DR

well you post porn alongside your post, that alone is enough to be called an edgelord. so what's the problem exactly?

Who the fuck knows what sort of mental gymnastics makes a film review-blog site to delete a forum that discusses films and directors more in depth than their review section allowed.

please see both the OP:andOtherwise, you're a shitposter and I am wrong to give you the benefit of the doubt.


That reflects badly on you, not me.

oh man I saw that in cinemas and couldn't shake how green it was. Apparently this release is also unnaturally green: Supposedly a restoration lab in France has been putting out uncalibrated scans these past few years.

their business pivoted. forum and garage were chopped to free up resources.