So can someone now explain David Bordwell's neoformalism? inb4 Zizek

So can someone now explain David Bordwell's neoformalism? inb4 Zizek

Huh?

you forgot this thread which is confirmed spam haha

You are probably better off asking /lit/ for this question

Also maybe this can help you.
fmls.oxfordjournals.org/content/XXXI/1/8.extract

Sorry, I was only looking at the most replied to threads

>tfw no longer have university account

>bitching about Doug threads
They've been a Sup Forums staple for over five years.

if you'd just posted more of eva's underrated butt and feet this wouldn't have happened

Who's the janitor tonight? He (or she) is doing a great job of getting rid of the Sup Forums shit. Thanks, Janny!

YouTube "nerd" reviewers are all cancer no matter when they started being posted

I don't see why you're bitching about something that stays pretty well contained. You never see more than 2 Doug threads in the catalog. Sup Forums threads, capeshit threads and Star Wars threads are what really clogs up the catalog.

They should be contained on Sup Forums where they belong

>Sup Forums threads
They would be contained to one thread too if the mods didn't delete them even if they're actually on-topic unlike your Sup Forums shit

So should you.

I'm not the one defending e-celeb garbage.

Sup Forums is shit. Anyway, Doug threads have been around forever and they've never gotten out of control. You're complaining about a small corner of Sup Forums that has never fucked shit up.

Fuck off with your YouTube "celebrity" worship.

Sup Forums shit is not on-topic. And they wouldn't be contained to just one thread because the goal of the assholes spamming them isn't to have a productive, civilized discussion. It's to aggravate and annoy anyone who disagrees with them.

>actually on topic
Pfft, those threads always devolve into political shitflinging that has nothing to do with film or television. They're no better than internet reviewer threads. Hell, they're actually worse since they get relentlessly spammed whereas internet reviewer threads always stay contained.

How are news threads that air on television not on-topic, but your eceleb life discussion(which isn't allowed for actual actresses or actors for some reason) is?

but you still belong there.

>worship
You sound like a retard who has been on Sup Forums for less than a month. Doug threads are always full of mockery and hatred. Go look at the latest one, you won't find any worship in it.

I've been on Sup Forums for almost 7 years and I've never been in one of those threads because they are fucking cancer.

You've been on Sup Forums for nearly 7 years and you don't know that Doug/TGWTG threads are the exact opposite of worship? Christ, you must have autism or some other mental illness.

Like I said I was never pathetic enough to browse YouTube celeb shit threads.

>no answer
Typical Sup Forumsedditors

I like how both the threads had discussion related to OP's question.

You're on Sup Forums, you can't use the "I'm not pathetic enough" excuse. You must have a really severe case of autism.

That just goes to show how shit those threads are when I'd prefer pedoshit and waifu wars over waiting for the next "review" to drop.

It shows you're more pathetic than the TGWTG posters.
>mfw reviewers upset you more than pedos

>defending e-celebs and their shill threads this hard
These friend simulators aren't healthy, user.

This. Listen to the Sup Forums cancer thats probably behind one of the threads you're crying about and has been spamming this shit for a few days straight!!
hes totally Sup Forums!!

Can either of you answer OP's question?

>shill threads
>friend simulators
Go into the current Doug thread right now. Seriously, do it. You'll see that no one likes Doug or his crew of misfits.

>Seriously, do it.
Nah, I'm good but thanks for shilling.

Literal autism. There's irrefutable evidence that TGWTG threads are the opposite of shilling but you refuse to look at them because they upset you for some unknown reason. You're fine with seeing CP spammed but reviewers anger you so much you refuse to even peek at their threads.

>there's no such thing as bad publicity

>CP spammed

Instagram photos of child actresses is not CP. Words have meanings, user. You don't get to make up your own definitions.

>Sup Forums cancer
Nope, Sup Forums was where I started out and I've been coming to Sup Forums for years. I don't play video games.
>spamming
One thread a day isn't spamming.

He made a new thread! Totally Sup Forums related too my dude!

Yeah, that really worked out for Ghostbusters 2016. Oh wait...

If you're not a shill then why are you so upset over actual Sup Forums not wanting you here?

You've been at it for 30 minutes straight

I didn't make the James Rolfe thread. I don't really care about him, he hasn't had any interesting drama in years.

>actual Sup Forums not wanting you here
You and less than two dozen other people get upset over Doug theards. No one else cares about our one thread.

From what I understand Bordwell despises postmodernist and psychoanalyrical approach to art and focuses more on the technical and traditional visual analysis side of things. It's why he rated Fury Road so highly while not delving deeply into the feminist themes because he admired it for its production values and cinematography.

The answer is read Zizek.

>he hasn't had any interesting drama in years.
And again the Sup Forums cancer shows his true nature. This confirms that all these e-celeb threads come from 20 or so cross posters

Does he insert sniffs and "sho on and sho forthsh" in his writing as well?