Thread for those of us who've been watching cinema seriously for 5+ years and have advanced past capeshit, mainstream movies and the same old flicks.
Don't be offended, this is not meant to be pretentious, its just some of us have moved past IMDb-core, indie flicks and the latest hyped blockbuster and have more developed tastes. Do not troll or derail the thread with off-topic discussion.
>What good films have you been enjoying lately?
shut up faggot and post more of the girl
This. More tumblr looking cunts pls.
delete this thread and pick a less dumb picture
who bitch this is
Very simple: Kill yourself, aeltbx
Is she still aping her taste from SOLOTH?
this is a thread for movie discussion
control your spaghetti
We can only control it after you sattisfy it with a name
I've been watching since the 1970s and have around 10k movies under my belt! All it has done is made me bitter. Everything seems more amateurish now. Time is a good filter of course and there was lots of shit I waded through in each decade to find gems. I'm just more harsh towards the shit and social propaganda now. Hollywood needs an enema.
The last film I saw that made me sit up and pay attention was "
კაცი, რომელსაც ცოლი სძინავს სხვა მამაკაცი" in original language without subtitles. I don't even speak Georgian and even without knowing the language I was still on the edge of my seat. It was shot well enough that everything going on could be inferred even without sound.
that movie is whack senpai go watch doctor strange
control your pseud cancer
post source faggot
The same people that hangs out lbg is the one that's gonna be in here you imbecile, I'm mean look at your picture for christ sake, what else do you expect
they speak english in georiga though..
He expects nothing, genius. This is just dumb spam
Source faggot. No one comes to Sup Forums to discuss Sup Forums
I know this is bait but still, WEW LAD
don't you mean lavdiazepam
is this chart any good?
>lavdiazepam
she's literally perfect
honestly, I don't think there are many other pictures of Amaranth.
I watched La Roue yesterday. It was long. Today I watched Luc Besson's first movie, The Last Battle and it fucking ruled.
No idea who that is sorry friend
4.5 stars to manoel and the island of dreams this guy gets it
not really
What do you mean by that? No, really, do you think it's full of bad films to trick retards?
This guy for example, why is it 'bad'?
I watched 12 Angry Men for the first time last night. It lived up to the hype. Sidney Lumet was a genius, he did so much with so little.
Kinda misses the point of arthouse. Just because a film is non-english or in black & white doesn't make it inherently deep. Not a single bad film on there though.
DOES SOMEONE STILL HAVE THE PICTURE WITH AMARANTH'S HAND? PLSSS
That's Reginald Rose's work.
Stop devaluing the writer.
I said it's 'not really' good, not bad
the entry level one is decent, the mid level is pretty bad. why? because I don't like those movies
Shut up.
I don't get the hype for this movie. It's good, yeah, but some of the characters are so one-dimensional and strawman-y. This is far from a perfect movie
Why don't you START devaluing the writer?
Requesting essential Greenaway that's not the cook the thief his wife and her lover.
even more of a hipster than amy
ok I will
on OPPOSITE DAY
You're trying too hard if you can't appreciate IMDb-core, oscarbait, and hyped blockbusters once in a while. I'd shoot myself if it was all I was able to watch but making those types of films well is an art in itself.
Directors rule. A screenplay is just dead matter
next you'll be praising fuckin' James Foley for Glengarry
writers > directors
the falls best Greenaway
Doing both should be mandatory.
12 Angry Men is basically a stage play.
any hack can direct a good play and it would still come out good
Why don't you do this by yourself?
The entry-level aren't even really art house, they're just foreign films.
belly of an architect
>>What good films have you been enjoying lately?
Hunt for the Wilderpeople
Can't remember when a movie made me laugh that much like this one did.
Because I could tackle the guy chronologically like everything else and share nothing and there's no reason to have this website open instead of a fucking wikipedia article
I just want to talk to other human beings.
Drowning by Numbers is pretty good.
Those are actually the only two Greenaway movies I've seen, but I liked both.
the russian woodpecker is an amazing film. i am convinced that documentaries filmed in a subjective way is the only way for film to remain relevant to human existence in this post industrial global world.
>I just want to talk to other human beings
I know that feel :(
>I just want to talk to other human beings.
Internet discussion isn't the same as talking to human being
> i am convinced that documentaries filmed in a subjective way is the only way for film to remain relevant to human existence in this post industrial global world.
*zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz*
hello, what's a film where a character goes on and on about philosophical/existentialist ramblings?
No, you just have the Hilary Shill attitude.
must be nice to perceive the world through hand-me-down buzzwords and not critical thought.
Permanent Vacation
Seventh Seal
The Trial
8 1/2
what do you mean by requesting? do you mean recommendations? dude, watch everything he has done. i'd suggest starting at the beginning so you can see his progression as an artist. nearly all of his films are on youtube. if you're too lazy to do that, i'd recommend two of my favorites: Nightwatching and Goltzius and the Pelican Company. they're quite different but equally captivating.
Nightwatching was fine (if you pair it with j'accuse), but I thought Goltzius and the Pelican Company was dogshit.
It's not just that he's making ludicrous speculation over what Hendrik Goltzius's motive was for making erotic imagery, no, he has to make him the Mr. Humphries of the golden age.
Ridiculous...I don't even remember Greenaway even depicting him working on a plate or drawing.
Says the one faggot throwing his hands up about Benghazi terrorist attack when everyone but Hill's shills (even after they caught Clinton about lying) deny it.
You will fall in the war like a fly, faggot.
>Mr. Humphries
really showing your age there, chum.
>doesn't mention Hillary or politics even once
>gets a schizo-paranoiac rant about false flags that resorts to "faggot" twice.
lol. triggering Sup Forums really doesn't take much these days.
Nightwatching is a minor masterpiece, violently underrated. For comparison, easily better than Greenaway's biggest mainstream work in Cook... (which is pretty good)
i've seen them already except for the jarmush one but i don't like him
>speculation over what Hendrik Goltzius's motive was for making erotic imagery
it's cause he liked em thicc
He didnt mention it but no doubt he had Normienormalization in his mind writing his subjective truth shitpost
are you dismissive of the entire endeavor because his depiction of Goltzius was not to your liking? that's a rather juvenile way of going about things, mate.
within the context of the film, it's evident why he wasn't depicted doing actual etchings. hell, i'd go as far as to say the film isn't even about Goltzius himself but about the representation of taboos and such. not only is the film visual rich, it also delves into biblical stories that still resonate today.
T.pleb
I agree, but would he have to do so over the back of an actual historical figure?
This isn't Greenaway's first time bending historical fact to his own ideas.
Nightwatching, if you go by what is known about Rembrandt, was a widly speculative conspiracy theory with no basis in reality and he's presenting it (with the documentary) as if this is some kind of fact surrounding Rembrandt.
He does so completely with Goltzius by depicting him as some sort of sordid epicurian...this is Greenaway, this is not even a depiction of the artist.
The entire movie would have been the same as if it was a fictional golden age artist.
He's was planning to do a movie on Bosch of which is almost nothing known...am I to expect a Greenaway version of a lecherous harbinger of the apocalypse?
My point is, Jarman's Caravaggio, Shengelaia's Pirosmani...mostly based on what is known of the artists...is respectful.
ok, i hear you and sort of agree with your issue about Greenaway straying from what would be equally as fascinating depictions of the artists. yet, i don't think Greenaway is asserting his films are biographies. the sources are merely the seeds for his imagination run amok. given that conceit, i find his movies captivating in every sense, scene, or setting.
yeah, i also haven't heard a peep about his Bosch film. i've been rather impatiently waiting for more news about Walking to Paris.
Are you the guy that keeps posting that oversized brain meme?
GASP
cc: Eisenstein in Guanajuato
I also wish he'd either go all the way with his artistic confabulations (a la Sokurov) or at least cling to some exploration of fact. But he's never been interested in anything but theatric grotesquerie. I'm not a big fan either.
yes I too agree that Jarman's Caravagio is vastly superior to Greenaway. any Greenaway.
ay someone on lbg also watched Pirosmani not too long ago. are you he?
...
The Guest
>georgian
Pretty sure they speak English in the state of Georgia, just like the rest of America.
>Eisenstein in Guanajuato
I am not, I watched it years ago and I've always loved it....but I really do enjoy early Greenaway.
I find movies about painters interesting, I recommend Van Gogh (1991) and I still have to see Jos Stelling's Rembrandt Fecit 1669...which is less of a movie and almost more of a study on how to film as if it were Rembrandt's reality.
>I find movies about painters interesting
check Edvard Munch (Watkins, 1974)
whoa didn't know this came to bluray. Watkins is based.