Polarizing directors are the best. Films are meant to make you think, and they're meant to be discussed...

Polarizing directors are the best. Films are meant to make you think, and they're meant to be discussed. When two sides keep on arguing about your movie, you know you're a great director

>Polarizing directors
>70% think hes shit
>25% have never heard of him
>5% other

KEK

Literally who?

Please delete this comment, thanks.

-Nic

>When two sides keep on arguing about your movie, you know you're a great director
In this case it means they have an underage fanbase with low cine-IQ. The kind that want to move on from videogames and comic book movies but they're still manchildren at heart like Refn.

I don't think you realise how easy it is (for an established director with a budget) to create a bunch of flashy imagery with cool synth music interconnected by shallow and ultimately meaningless observations of a chosen theme.

And often people who swallow that don't hear the argument of the other side -- that there are better movies out there who do all that with more grace and substance -- and prefer to pretend "they just don't get it"

Hi Nic very nice of you to join us tonight.

Fear X is my personal favorite but Pusher is your best.

Hmm really makes you think

Fuck off Korinefag you buzzword spouting fucktard

I agree.

I like when directors have free reign, except for the fact they need a producer to keep them to budget.

Inoffensive directors like Spielberg are miles better than this pretentious hack

>le films are made to think maymay
>le this film is good because it's polarizing maymay
Why can't films just be entertainment? Because films are what YOU say they are? How small is your dick that you have to be this butthurt?

Could you be more of a condescending prick Lmao

>ultimately meaningless observations

You just don't get it.

Go home Refn you are drunk.

But normies are so used to seeing flat boring cinematography/set design/lighting that when they see a film that looks like an extended perfume advertisement it's very stimulating for them.

Pick your fights. Drive is irritating in the way that all crossover successes are. They straddle boundaries which most people don't want touched. It's hollow compared to something more artistic and substantive (whatever that might mean), but it's rich and meaningful compared to hollywood conveyor belt sludge.

Get over it.

I actually think it's a dangerous trend for any kind of art form that scores on sites like Metacritic or Rotten Tomatoes are held in such high regard. The classics usually are classics for a reason, often because they did something exceptionally well, or because they were controversial for their time. Directors made movies they wanted to create. Nowadays everything gets focus tested to death in an attempt to please everyone and reach max appeal.

I'd gladly take 10 Refns over being dished another fucking capeshit movie.

So only films that don't get discussed are worthwhile in terms of artistic merit? I've made plenty of threads on Edward Yang's films, yet they've never broken 10 replies. I supposes he's the best director there ever was, huh?

>a film that looks like an extended perfume advertisement
that's exactly what's wrong with it. If you use such colorful, entropic and stimulating mise en scène for the whole film it becomes flat again for lack of variation, while a good film will oscillate between more expressive scenes and more conventional ones, as to make the more expressive scenes more powerful in contrast to the conventional ones.
>not knowing filmmaking 101
>being this autistic

It's not rich or meaningful not matter what you compare it to. It's better shot and staged that some Scott Cooper movie or a Marvel flick for sure, but it's still a simple action flick at heart.

I don't have anything against Drive really, we should talk about that Gosling-directed movie or OGF instead.

I got over it as soon as I finished watching it.

Nice false dichotomy

Not him, but there's nothing wrong with taking it that far. It's a distinctive stylistic choice and empasizes on the fact those people on the screen are not supposed to be taken as real people. The silent loner who's secretly badass, the innocent and cute love interest - we're watching clichés, we're watching stereotypes and the style only highlights on the artificiality of everything. In the end, art is always artificial to some extent (it's even part of the word) and Refn cranks it up to the max. And that's totally okay.

Holy shit you totally don't get what I'm saying at all.
You can argue how a film could be better, but there are limits in terms of what you should expect given the context and target audience, etc, etc. This is why I said Drive's controversy is not because it polarizes critics, it's because critics that normally exist is distinct and separate realms merged on it. It's a crossover success. Do you understand? It;'s a Cannes film that Marvel fans could get on board with, and ended up being marketed as such.

You sound like someone who is so wrapped up in elitist paranoia that you can't understand how people who really think broadly about film learn to expect different things from different films.

To be knowledgeable about cinema is not being judgemental, its about knowing how to apply judgements with prudence.

One immaculate standard is the sign of a narrow mind. If you can't live with some uncertainty as to what counts as good you're living wrong buddy. Plus you just deflate all the fun out of it.

What false dichotomy? Did you even read the post?

I could have named any other recent blockbuster phenomonon in recent years, but capeshit embodies the absolute worst of them.

Who argues about Refn? Everyone knows he's shit.

You missed my whole point.. It gets "cranked to the max" by not being used all the time and generating contrast. Otherwise it loses it's power and becomes boring and gimmicky.

I rather think you missed my point.

There's a lot of actually good movies coming out every year that are neither of Refn brand nor focus-tested blockbusters

Name five not older than two years.

>just better shot and staged
>there's nothing rich or meaningful in colours and staging.
The elements you pointed out can be hollow, but christ at least its different. Different is rich and meaningful in the world of conveyor belt trash hollywood flicks.

It's not rich and meaningful in a philosophical sense, I'll give you that. You're being pedantic though, the point of my argument is that a lot of the people who criticize the film aren't taking account of the wider phenomenon of the film itself. If it didn't go to Cannes people would feel differently about it.

I'm not even saying its a great film. It's fine. I gave myself over to its self-indulgent knucklehead premise and feel, and got a kick out of it. Probably similar to yourself.

Panahi's Taxi
Force Majeure
Black Coal Thin Ice
Everybody Wants Some
Wild Tales

>Films are meant to make you think

Pic unrelated, then.

>entropic

What the fugg are you talking about?
What could entropy possibly have to do with anything in this context?

You could at least try.

I agree, Zack Snyder is a genius

I get what you're saying. But my initial post was about how "two sides arguing over Refn" is actually a one-sided argument.

There are people who can dissect it on the first viewing, and people who don't. Most of the discussion comes from the second group with "you don't get it", "best movie since forever" etc.

I said it already and I'll said it again - I've got nothing against Drive and have enjoyed both times I've seen it. But it IS just an action movie with good cinematography.

What's wrong?

leave this board forever you absolute faggot. i dont know when you people started thinking you were welcome here but i promise you're not lmao.

Wait, you were actually serious?

>Why can't films just be entertainment?
Maybe some people are entertained by thinking. Also, why is flying, cgi, sky-fighting men considered entertaining?

my nigga

The user you were responding to is a sperg.

Son of Saul
Embrace the Serpent
The Tribe
Clouds of Sils Maria
The Wolfpack

>hasn't seen them
Way to out yourself as an utter pleb. I've only seen two, Force Majeure, and Black Coal Thin Ice, but they're heads above the likes of Refn. Yet you're saying there's only him and Hollywood flicks. You're not "dished" another capeshit movie, you choose to consume it yourself while ignoring other options. Fuck off and watch more film.

What's wrong?

>But it IS just an action movie with good cinematography.

Totally agreed. Sorry I wasn't following your initial posts.

I have to say that I have more time for normies who think Drive is more than it is, than snobs who think they're above it. I'm not saying anyone has to like it. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But the way some people try to measure every film they see against this gold metric of "what cinema is supposed to be" makes me nauseous.

Fuck off you Dumb poser

what are your favorite movies, im curious

>why is this film which millions of people pay to get entertained by considered entertainment?
kys

This opinion is completely acceptable so long as the person holding the opinion has absolute respect for others who think film is supposed to be a thoughtful exercise with artistic merit.

Basically,it's not an argument. It's a agree to disagree non-argument. Which is fine! So long as you know that's what it is.

>When two sides keep on arguing about your movie, you know you're a great director
No, what you do is that the internet will argue over literally anything. Semen Demon is shit.

I was only asking because the list screamed "self-proclaimed cinemaphile hungry for meaning in his motion pictures thinking he's better than everyone". Just looking at gimmicky flicks like Panahi's Taxi told me everything I needed to know. You probably watched it because of the underlying political significance of watching a movie made by an Iranian director, felt really good about yourself when you left the theater, about how open-minded you are - especially compared to all the "plebs". The actual quality of the movie is irrelevant. What's important is that you have seen it and that you sing the gospel, parroting what everyone else does. Truth is: The movie wasn't anything special. You're only using it as a means of social distinction. I've met your kind. You're not fooling anyone.

The Pusher trilogy is great, Valhalla Rising was surprisingly mesmerizing and so was OGF, albeit it didn't captivate me quite as much, Bronson is a fun popcorn movie and Drive is a perfect mixture of the last two. I haven't seen the rest of his filmography yet but from this I can say he's a great director if you don't search for a deeper meaning in everything you watch

>i pay to see men in tights beat each other up because im a literal manchild
thanks for letting us know user

The people who are the most argumentative are children and retards, though

are you on here often user? genuinely asking, most of the discussions on this board circa 2016 arent this thoughtful or conveying of a genuine interest in film.

I'm not so good at these lists. I go more on director binges. I like Zhangke, Weerasethakul, Erice, Rivette, Imamura. But they're just some I have watched recently.

I love Kiarostami, and often think Close-Up is my favourite film of all time.

I also love Night and Fog.

As for American Cinema, I'm a big fan of practically all of Altman's films. Short cuts is amazing.

I dunno man. I'm never able to compile lists of favourites. My mind changes constantly.

Oh! I think Reygadas might have something but I need some more time to think on it. And I have a soft spot for Malick. Guilty pleasure.

Yeah, pretty often. Been in a bit of an indoor depression phase and started posting here.

Been having lots and lots of arguments. Sup Forums can be good, at times.

>mfw i realize you're completely right
it makes me feel sick sometimes thinking of this fucking industry and how it handles what's supposed to be artistic endeavors

>malick
>guilty pleasure
why

This. They might as well be watching WWE.

>I'd gladly take 10 Refns over being dished another fucking capeshit movie.

You say that, until you get 10 Refns and are tired of the same shit being churned out, i.e. lipstick on a pig.

>Altman
ever seen this little gem? definitely lesser-known Altman but it's my favorite of his entire filmography.

Slightly related, I was reading Wikipedia and saw that Lost River is now apparently already being considered a cult classic.
This is good news for me, I liked it a lot.

Erice?

havent seen it yet but it looks great. any idea on where i can see it? preferably in HD.

putlocker nigger

It really wasn't bad. I need to rewatch it. I was really surprised by Gosling's effort.

That's just how I feel about him senpai. He's an anomaly for me. I turn over my opinions on his films constantly. Well, his post hiatus films anyway.

NO. I but I will very soon. Thanks.

Spanish director. He hasn't made many feature films. Quite a few shorts and documentaries. I haven't seen much, but what I have seen was great. Try Spirit of the Beehive if you're interested. It's lauded as the best Spanish film ever made quite often.

nah snyder and refn are just shit, bye

man....don't remind me of Kiarostami
it hurts because i was actually hyped for a new film, and then... ;_;

Jesus, stop being so insecure. I just listed what I remembered first (and because I've seen three and a half movies actually released in 2015&6). Would I pass your cool-guy test if I listed Nightcrawler instead?

My nigga! This might be my favorite movie of all time

Actually, yes.

its amazing isnt it? ive been meaning to rewatch it for a while now. criminally underrated.

Is it even a year old? How can it be a cult classic?

Yeah I never understood the absolute vitriol it elicited from so many people. Most of the negative reviews consisted only of comparing his visual style to Lynch, Refn, Argento, Malick etc. and then saying it was trash when while actually watching the movie itself, especially during the ending, I was reminded more of a Bunuel kind of dream logic. I'll concede that the nightclub scenes WERE very Refn-ish but you can't really blame Goose for taking inspiration from his friend for his directorial debut, especially since he was also partly responsible and actively involved in making those two Refn films.
It seemed like people just couldn't get their heads around the fact of Ryan Gosling, Hollywood pretty boy tumblr and Sup Forums meme actor Ryan Gosling of all people, could make a surreal art movie.
It's sad that the bad reception has probably ended his filmmaking career for now and he's back doing acting roles. I was genuinely looking forward to what else he might have made with such a strong debut.

Scorsese did a lovely tribute.

I don't think we'll see someone making films like Kiarostami's ever again. It's a gaping void.

mfw my dream is to fill his shoes[/spoiler/]

It's really great. Also as someone who used to gamble, it's the only movie that gives me the feeling of actually placing a bet and winning/losing. So many Hollywood movies about gambling just never seem to get it right, but watching California Split I get that excited and nervous feeling I used to get placing bets.

Here's Scorsese's tribute:

“I was deeply shocked and saddened when I heard the news of Abbas Kiarostami’s death. He was one of those rare artists with a special knowledge of the world, put into words by the great Jean Renoir: ‘Reality is always magic.’ For me, that statement sums up Kiarostami’s extraordinary body of work. Some refer to his pictures as ‘minimal’ or ‘minimalist,’ but it’s actually the opposite: every scene in Taste of Cherry or Where Is the Friend’s House? is overflowing with beauty and surprise, patiently and exquisitely captured. I got to know Abbas over the last 10 or 15 years. He was a very special human being: quiet, elegant, modest, articulate, and quite observant – I don’t think he missed anything. Our paths crossed too seldom, and I was always glad when they did. He was a true gentleman, and, truly, one of our great artists.”

I hope you don't consider a movie being called a "cult classic" means it's good.

All I was trying to say that it's only been two years and already there seems to be a reappraisal going on
And no, not the "so bad it's good" kind