Is this kino?

is this kino?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Nbue2Pi2tNY
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Nope

fodder for plebs who actually think things like "movies are dying, I miss the golden age"

Its reddit

you never saw it. end of discussion.

not an argument.

I have seen it

It sucks mate

you like The Artist too?

It's the only musical I ever liked. Most of the shots stand out on their own and it captured a magical feeling the critics are right on this one.

>It's the only musical I ever liked.

the fuck

If it wins big at the Oscars, then we can
at the very least
hope for more musicals in the coming years.

I'm not the cheery type usually.

I don't get it though.

La La Land is so thoroughly mediocre to bad. Which musicals have you seen that you didn't like?

A couple of old ones and les miserables (though one or two of the songs from les miserables I liked). I just didn't like it as a movie.

Well Les Miserables is horrible

Watch Singing' in the Rain and Meet Me in St. Louis

I couldn't like Singing in the Rain, it was too out dated.

hopefully original musicals and not the disney/broadway shit we usually get

We may have to compromise with remakes of old musicals, since remakes are all that can be produced nowadays, but if "La La Land" proves anything it's that original musicals are still a thing.

Goose is literally Sup Forums.

Dude what the fuck

And Sup Forums isn't reddit?

not literally

making that comparison proves you haven't seen it.

Its always irked me that there's millions of Indian movie fans that get shown classic American or British kino and at the end go 'eh, this could really use some songs and dancing"

The two movies are incredibly similar.

Both simply adopt the style of a period in film that is no longer contemporary. They are both in love with film, constantly making winking references (see: Stone's bedroom and her hilarious name dropping of movies plus their trip to see Rebel Without a Cause), and they both inhabit a style for seemingly no reason. They communicate nothing new, they are both completely vacuous and without any genuine feeling.

La La Land has the aesthetic of a gap advertisement which is fitting as it has about as much going on upstairs as a gap ad

it isn't

where is the screener

it is now very, very clear you haven't seen it.

...

It doesn't sound like you've seen it.

Anyway, keep enjoying your soulless Oscar bait man.

Did you love that dinner table argument that lasted an agonizing 10-15 minutes? What a great scene.

There has been about 60 years since then, of course movies from the 50's will be out dated. Though I appreciate it for the progress it made it is not enjoyable today as I have been spoiled by new levels of kino.

Singin' in the Rain is my favorite movie. I really enjoyed La La Land.

This is good.

You guys hate La La Land, tumblr hates La La Land, I think you two could stand to get to know each other. Black power!

Yes, but it requires too many areas of study to get, something few manage. Sad really, as it leaves plebs like Armond White to flounder looking for things to hate.

desperately hoping this is revealed as bait soon

oh god I legitimately can't tell

Sorry, but imho Golden Age of Hollywood >>>>>>> Modern Hollywood

Don't care if it makes me sound like an old man.

None of what I say has had anything to do with race. Plenty of people hate La La Land. Basically any critic worth their salt hates it in fact. See: Richard Brody in The New Yorker.

Some people like good movies.

>original cinema can still make it in today's Disneyfied Hollywood

Maybe there is hope after all...

I mean that's true of course but most of the great movies out these days are not out of Hollywood. There are still amazing movies out every year. It's only plebs who think things like "movies are dying!"

How is LLL original at all? The only way to think that is if you haven't seen many musicals. The whole ending is ripped from Umbrellas of Cherbourg even.

Chi Raq from last year was far, far more original.

What should I think of LALALAND? I'm not going to waste my hard-earned dollarydoos unless this is the next Kung Pow.

Say why I'm wrong instead of saying blatant statements.

But honestly they are.

I mean sure movies might be around, but soon there'll be nothing left but mindless popcorn flicks like capeshit, Disneyshit, etc. and tiny little arthouse films that, for the most part, pander to the liberal hipster crowd.

Of course some solid indie films will still exist, but the era of the mainstream big-budget epics, mainstream dramas, and original mid-budget projects are dying. As long as people ignore originality in favor of the latest superhero movie or franchise film the above will happen.

Like La La Land or not, it at least provides a spark of hope that there can be mainstream original projects that succeed in winning over most critics and audiences.

Though it might be too late...

>blatant statements

alright this is confirmed bait

you did have me going there for a while

>gf's parents loved it, my parents hated it.
>my parents "not good voices. meh story. not a musical even."
Mothra is an opera singer nee Oberlin and my dad has sat through every musical and opera known to sexual orientation mans.

I'm now very sure you saying its b8 is b8. Well crafted though.

The best "mainstream" americlap film released this year.

Its original in that it isn't directly based on a book, franchise, stage musical, etc.

It might not be the most 'original' but it still is an original property.

...

Hollywood is bad

The independent scene produces amazing stuff and will continue to do so

La La Land is not a savior. It's not even good. It's just continuing a trend of easily palatable Oscar favourites that win audiences over with in-your-face techniques that offer nothing substantial.

which picture there is LLL?

>It's just continuing a trend of easily palatable Oscar favourites that win audiences over with in-your-face techniques that offer nothing substantial.


Honestly, I'm just happy to see one relatively mainstream film put effort into its techniques and technicals like cinematography, art direction, music, etc.

Feels like that's lacking too.

That is a very low standard for originality. If something like LLL, which is just stitched together from previous, actually good, musicals, is praised for being "original" then I'm not sure what the compliment even means.

How much you wanna bet the next few months will be nothing but the internet, film critics, etc. bitching that this film will win over their precious Moonlight?

See to me the technical aspects are just as bad as the ones in movies like The Revenant, Birdman, and The Artist. Just in-your-face stylistic pyrotechnics that gloss over anything significant. They're used for no purpose. It's just gratuitous, self-aggrandizing silliness.

La La Land is this year's The Artist.

FAGGOT MUSICAL FOR HOMOSEXUAL FAGGOTS

If you're a male and you like this movie then you are a HUGE faget.

In my opinion the best films have great visuals and a solid story (even if it isn't overly original I can live with it).

I just feel like films are becoming visually more bland as time goes on. I like a good story, but for me to really get into a movie there has to be something interesting with the visual style otherwise it'll feel like its just there.

None

Yeah but I think the visuals have to be in there for a specific purpose. It's very easy to throw a bunch of tracking shots and whip pans in there to look impressive. That to me doesn't mean the movie has great visuals. The visuals need to be used to communicate something, not just as "neat" ways to film action.

opinions are opinions but that doesn't mean you aren't a 12 year old redditlord who exclusively watches capeshit

I haven't watched capeshit in 2 years, I just don't like things pre 60's. It doesn't automatically make me a commercial capeshit watching pleb. Movies have completely evolved since the 50's and its absurd to say they haven't. They've evolved in aesthetics, they've evolved in technology, evolved in editing, involved in sound, involved in writing, etc. etc.

youtube.com/watch?v=Nbue2Pi2tNY

not it sucked

Something is the matter with you.

And this is b8, serves me right for trying to have an actual discussion on Sup Forums.

...

I have.

it was like 5 minutes, stupid millennial scum.

Look at it this way: "La La Land" is comprised of songs never heard before. "Singin' In The Rain" is comprised of music previously composed by the film's producer and used in previous MGM musicals.

"La La Land" is conceptually stitched together from other musicals. "Singin' In The Rain" is literally stitched together from other musicals. Both may be derived from other sources and inspirations, but both are still considerably original works in their own rights.

>comparing this to The Artist
but the artist was good?

Except Singin' in the Rain came out 70 years ago. La La Land came out a month ago yet it wants desperately to feel as though it is in line with the movies that came out 70 years ago.

It's hearkening back to a previous age. It brings nothing new to the table.

Compare it to a movie like Chi Raq from last year. That is an original, utterly contemporary musical.

There's nothing wrong with nostalgia, user.

More than any other movie.

How much hollywood dicksucking is in this movie compared to Hugo? Hugo was an awful fucking film.

Lolwat

Hugo is a million times better than La La Land.

La La Land sucks the dick of Hollywood very, very hard though. It's a lock for Best Picture.

no

did a screener already leak?

>Hugo is a million times better than La La Land

Absolutely

Bump. Need to know

>preferring King Oscar bait Chazelle to Scorsese

disgusting

no it hasn't leaked

Pretty sure it's a trailer shot

ONLY IN THAT THE ARTIST IS ACTUALLY A HALF DECENT FELLATING MUSICAL

WHILE LALA LAND IS TOTAL FAGGOT SHIT

aight, just asking
i've already seen the movie in theaters, but i wanted to try an editing job as an experiment

>Outdated

I guess you consider the music for "old timers".

Chazelle doesnt phone it in like Martin.

Nice post, Sup Forums.

I don't watch movies for music I watch them for a cinematic experience. If the only reason you watch it is the songs just download the music instead of watching the movie.

LOL

Chazelle wishes he could make a movie approaching half the quality of something like Silence. I wonder how he feels to be in his 30s, already churning out nostalgic garbage without a hint of innovation, while Scorsese nears the graves and still makes incredibly powerful, serious films that deviate from his own after decades of filmmaking.

Poor Chazelle.

Hugo is terrible my man.

Get some taste.

Fucking lol

you're delusional.

>Please fuck my gf Tyrone, she NEEDS the BBC!
What did Ryan mean by this?

A white women's La La Land is getting an endless supply of BBC fåm

The fact that loving Oscar bait counts as taste on this board. You guys are awful. Yuck.

La La Land was not a oscar bait.

LOL

neither was The Artist right?

not an argument.

The Artist was a silent film.

La La Land does it's own thing.

Also, comparing them shows how truly ignorant you are about film.

Nah man the Oscar bait this year is Moonlight

>year after Oscar so White
>some even said "oscars so straight"
>film centers on coming age of a poor, gay, black man -- the Holy liberal trifecta

The fact that you can't see the similarities between them suggests willful blindness. Both adopt an outdated style for the purpose of making a "love letter" to Hollywood.