Why the fuck isn't Paterson your MOTY?
>Pushes traditional gender roles
>has a comfortable admiration for Eisenhower-era America
>glorifies no degenerate behavior. the one character who comes close is instantly squashed
>portrays the virtues of being working class
because linklater made philosophical animal house
paterson is batter up tho
Because I actually watch more than a dozen films a year
Touche.
because im a racist and i find the mostly brown cast offensive
um, you do know it's directed by Jim Jarmusch, right? just because it praises the working class doesn't mean it's right wing.
>doesn't mean it's right wing.
So what? Nothing is politicized in this movie.
the OP is a thinly veiled conservative/conformity post. all I'm saying is it's not that.
>that method man cameo
>it's another jim jarmusch shows off his cool friends movie
Politics aren't black and white you utter retard. Jarmusch obviously values domestic norms even if he is left leaning.
I fucking loved this movie. So simple, so authentic, whimsical and strange in all the right places. It portrayed life as mundane as it really is, but nonetheless was enchanting in a way that few movies can be. I loved how Paterson moved from quiet desperation to simple joy throughout the movie, swinging back and forth as the wind changes. That balance of happiness and sadness is what made it for me.
It stuck with me more than almost any movie this year.
>Jarmusch obviously values domestic norms even if he is left leaning.
If you think this movie is the presentation of some ideal I think you're confused. It's all very apolitical, I think more than anything he's going for the "everyman"
you forgot to mention that Golshifteh is so adorable she makes you want to kill yourself
The "everyman" is fast becoming a political issue. Literally every review I've read slams the movie for the wife character because she behaves, get this, too much like a woman.
this was true when i saw the trailer but then i saw the movie and i wanted to throttle her stupid ass
this movie made me a misogynist
Any hairy chicks in this?
that's the politics of criticism. As a genuine artist it's something Jarmusch is beyond. You could call that a political choice if you want, but I don't think Jarmusch is making any case for the conservative family structure, he's just creating the kind of relationship he sees in the world
that's not what they're criticising. They're saying she's too one dimensional and artificially chirpy. You saying that's what "a woman" is is similarly short-sighted.
Toni Erdmann > Manchester by the Sea = Paterson
good movie tho
>They're saying she's too one dimensional and artificially chirpy. You saying that's what "a woman" is is similarly short-sighted.
Except she wasn't. There were subtle layers to her character and what she offered Paterson as a partner. She behaved like a wife, not Hollywood's version of a wife who sees domesticity as a burden and stifling.
I'm not saying I agree with them, just that the criticism wasn't that she was "too much like a woman." It was her characterisation as someone who was something like a manic pixie dream girl.
and
>She behaved like a wife, not Hollywood's version of a wife who sees domesticity as a burden and stifling.
is completely based on your own interpretation of what a wife is, not the film's. It's not just Hollywood that sees domesticity as stifling. The greatest feminist work about domesticity was made in 1975 by a French woman who had never directed anything before.
>Why the fuck isn't Paterson your MOTY?
>list of attributes that have nothing to do with film quality
>The greatest feminist work
Doesn't exist because feminism is cancer. There's a reason why so many women don't identify as feminist.
>Faggot
>Nigger
>Kyke
OH GOD YES
>feminism is cancer
aaaaand this just goes to prove my first post OP was thinly veiled conservative propaganda. and conservatives just can't talk about art because they're too childish.
good choices
I'd personally say Paterson is slight better than MbtS, but to each their own
Yeah modern art isn't childish at all
Paterson isn't modern art, conservacuck.
why is Jarmusch so based
I hope he made a good paycheck on that Stookes biopic.
I wanna see that so bad
>Says while posting King Cuck
Jarmusch is a modern artist though. He just accidentally made a conservative film. The author is dead as they say.
Nothing in Paterson is conservative. It just isn't non-conservative, which is about as much justification the right needs to claim it as their own for no real reason. It's about poetry for god's sake. #LeavePatersonAlone
>It just isn't non-conservative
And that's more than I could say for literally anything Hollywood that came out this year besides Linklater's Everybody Wants Some!! Sorry pal, this movie belongs to me.
>tfw no qt iranian gf
>talking about "modern art" like it's some unified movement
>seeing only negative examples
you would have been the alpha male in another time it's just these cucks with their modern art to blame
>Not understanding that she loved Patterson and he loved her, even though their marriage had difficulties
Sure, she took over his house for her art, made him bad quiche, and bought that guitar. But she also unconditionally supported him and his art, gave him a space all his own to work in that she never invaded, let him go out to the bar and have his alone time every night, rarely complained he didn't have a phone, and clearly loved and cared for him. Paterson clearly loved her, too, and I think she understood him better than almost anyone.
If she's guilty of anything, it's just that she had too much free time and was bored.
By "French woman" you mean the lesbian Jew Akerman? As French as Hollywood is WASP.
like this?
Jeanne Dielman was not Chantal Akerman's first film and she was Belgian not French, so one of you two is confused.
Because it was a crock of shit.
This movie tries to convince white people to quietly accept their marginalised status in a multicultural society