Movies are the lowest form of art

Movies are the lowest form of art.

you are the lowest form of human

#rekt

True

>Implying that every movie is MCU

yes, even poop sculptures are more expressive.

...

>implying Captain America: Civil War (2016) is not the Citizen Kane of the modern era

No, video games are

Music is obviously the lowest form. All """art""" is for children, anyways. When you eventually become an adult you'll understand. The life of a man is to spend his day providing for his family, his evening teaching his sons life lessons, and his nights spreading his seed in his wife so that she may bear him more sons.

video games are not art

>spreading his seed in his wife
What if she refuses her sacred duty one evening? Should the defective property be destroyed, or merely beaten?

I don't care how movies "rank" I like them and it makes me happy to watch lots of them.

A video game can be atmospheric and nice, but they're not art.

define art

Define video game

People are starting to consider videogames as "art" so I guess videogames are the lowest form of art.

Why not? Isn't everything you make to express yourself, and that someone might find beautiful or get an emotion triggered from it, art?
Btw I don't think calling something "art" needs to be a compliment.

a medium in which the user experiences a story, either written or spoken and observes visual creations. essentially, if you consider books, poems, plays, paintings, or films to be art then video games are art.

They'd have to be in some shit tier all by themselves. TV and movies would be in the second shittiest tier and the two shit tiers are likely to swap if the capeshit epidemic continues for much longer.

>a medium in which the user experiences a story
>story
>tetris

I hate how everyone thinks videogames are about stories nowadays. Fuck story videogames, they are cancer. Actually gamers are the cancer.

>cherrypicking

okay, SOME video games are art you complete retard

no, YOU are the complete retard if you think some videogames are art and if you think specifically games with some vague excuse for a story are art.

You're literally retarded

t. summerfag 15 year old

>muh high art

you can't even define art

what an embarrassing post

After hearing your idiotic definition of videogames as art I don't think you'd understand.

>Define art
>no you define video games
>Gives a narrow argument but tries
>heh, you're a fuckin retard
>Well define art then
>W-Well I would but you wouldn't understand
He gave a bad point but you don't even have a leg to stand on

art is an amorphous buzzword and means whatever you want.
>dude my dookie in a can is real art

What's YOUR point? trying to mediate in some Sup Forums anonymous argument thing.
I already defined art. I don't think a game with a hamfisted story is an expression of the artist meant to create those feelings and more on the player. Maybe some free indie game might be closer to art. But in those cases they usually stop being videogames.
I think the only game I would call art is UTE by Lea Schönfelder.

I think you are also quoting like 3 different people there.

I always thought movies were the highest form of art; they are to me anyway. There is such great potential there for expression! Cinema combines all the great mediums together: photography, corporate theory, poetry, story telling, music. But like all great art forms, there is a golden age and a decline. We are seeing the decline.
You know you're seeing the end of an Era in art, when the art is only made for the elite class that was propped up by that medium in the first place.
The only people who give a fuck about the Oscar's are the attendees. Case in point.

I seriously hope you guys don't ACTUALLY think movies are art.

>There has to be a story for it to be a "real" video game
No

Are you a nigger by chance?

>not pathologic as well
Closest to the Gesamtkunstwerk ideal of Wagner in the 21st century my patrician friend.

welcome to Sup Forums

when these cucks aren't posting 4u xDD, BLACKED, or other shitposts, they become even more pretentious than the average /lit/fag. they're just mad because people enjoy other things than watching the same sitcom they downloaded to their harddrive to watch for the 15th time this year.

>he tried to post genre fiction on /lit/
There is nothing wrong with exclusively discussing literature on a board made for literature and dubbed "Literature". It isn't called /pulp/ for Christ's sake.
However, I agree with you on people having no right to be pissed at what others post on here. This board is for all manners of film and television.