Are we still talking about dishonest movies? What about this shit?

Are we still talking about dishonest movies? What about this shit?

What was dishonest about it?

It was a fucking trip for me, if I recall. Really some weird fascinating filmmaking.

I think the general consensus is that it's pretentious as shit though.

I quite liked it.

I really liked it

what are it's criticisms?

It's shit

what was pretentious about it?

Really liked it too, the ending was just perfect

heh

seems like plebs all think alike. i was talking to my dad about it and he thought it wasn't good so I asked him why he didn't like it.

>just not good

bloody brainlets

Dishonest how? Like the trailer outright lying?
If so then I guess I'd say the most recent Godzilla
>trailers made it look like an action film with Navy SEALs going to go fight GZ in a city
>got a very slow drama that had 1 minute total of Godzilla
Not to mention there was shit in the trailers that weren't even in the film

Someone post the picture of the director saying all men should be pegged

I believe it's a reference to ulterior contrivance. Like an offshoot of pretension, only the film-maker is fully aware and specifically tailoring. So behaviour, events, plot and dialogue don't feel "natural", but very directed.

Of course there's a huge difference between having an agenda'd film and having an agenda'd film but disguising it in order to reach a larger audience.

The original meme was for La La Land, where it's clearly taking influence from classic movie musicals and the glitz and glamor of Old Hollywood but not having a fucking clue what makes those things work. You'll see parts like the Planetarium scene (gorgeous scene btw) and think "Oh so that's what they're doing, they're doing sort of a Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers thing", but aside from that it doesn't really have any flair of its own. It's taking the good parts and tossing them together, so people remember better movies and equate them with the one they're watching.

I loved La La Land, but the "dishonest" meme actually applied there.

The plot structure and how it reveals shit was considered to be "We're so fucking smart you just don't get our unconventional genius". Even though I dug that, since it worked with the characters being artsy fuckheads, it was a bit overly complex. Better defining what was a flashback and what wasn't would have helped, I think.

The film is rhythmic with its trauma. All those shots of Adams taking a bath, a pause between the horror, is incredibly cathartic. A lot of this movie is intricately planned and put together.

I really fucking like what he did with this film, and am really excited about what's next.

It was a little pretentious I guess, but that was clearly very intentional, considering the main character.

I loved how subtle it was

I found LaLa Land dishonest because it took those elements you mentioned and tried to apply them neatly to today's disillusioned and dispassionate, (or at the very least, skeptical), audience when its message simply isn't true. They tried to convey that "lol this is Hollywood guys, it's just artistic drive versus business drive, but it all resolves neatly in the end and everyone is better from it!"

When intrinsically the audience knows that's not true, it's just being sold in a package that you can't outright deny has an "appeal". But there's no inherent truth to it's message, or even a clear tone at that. The battle between artistic integrity and capitalistic method isn't cute, romantic, resolved, or flashy. But the movie (understandably, as it's purely capitalist) makes it seem all of those things. For no gain.

That's why it seemed dishonest. None of it was very plasuible but it insisted upon itself very hard, yet I couldn't suspend my disbelief. It tried to lie about the world.

Moonlight had none of those flaws.

like every tarantino film

Same. Unfortunately most of this board is too young and immature to actually appreciate films

Yeah I didn't really think La La Land was meant to resolve the issues of artistic drive vs business drive. I mean obviously it brings up the ideas of authentic and inauthentic art, but I'm pretty sure the point of that was to make clear why nostalgia is at such a cultural peak. Newer stuff IS (largely) inauthentic and it makes people feel cynical and search for meaning in the past. But the film makes it clear that nostalgia can and should only be a limited motivator, and that real meaning has to be found in the present.

listen brainlet tourist, that's not what the term means. Please don't post again.

I liked how the "real" story came off as more fucked up than the fictional one despite it merely being about a brake up and an abortion