Is he, dare I say it, the greatest living American autheur?

is he, dare I say it, the greatest living American autheur?

Jarmusch is better. Has been for 30 years.

No. He is pretenxioux, the very definition of, *

Not just American, just the greatest living auteur

t. capeshit fan

lol

no

Truth hurts donut?

kill yourself

No. He's been pointing his camera at things he thinks look pretty for a long time now and he's become very good at it but his movies are still an insubstantial affair.

>drawing conclusions
lierally kindergarten level

>autheur
it's spelled author, and he is a director, ameridumb

That's James Cameron

>malick
>jarmusch
>lynch
relevant directors you should be familiar with whose movies are essentially literally and unironically shit, especially this decade

James Grey is a superior American auteur.

It's spelled auteur, newfriend.
Stop watching trash, Malick's films are full of substance.

not if he's making authorial cinema

He was in an episode of zombie Simpsons
He was a recurring character on the Cleveland Show
Instantly disqualification for both of them

he is still a director even if he does make authorial cinema (but also an author)
>It's spelled auteur, newfriend.
go to , lurk there a bit and then tell me it's called an auteur and not an author again

>He was in an episode of zombie Simpsons
so was Robby Kreiger. Do you hate The Doors now? Fuck yourself.

>auteur_theory.pdf
Check it out, newfriend!

Wesley Anderson is

>auteur_theory.pdf
are americans these dumb? you forgot to link the pdf, writing its name isn't enough.

>he was serious

lol

Good one, newfriend.

>still not linking it
seems like you're out of ideas how to defend your idiocy and ignorance

Far and away, yes. He's on a whole nuther level.

PTA, Wes, Jarmusch and others are kino to be certain, but Malick has transcended the medium to provide ethereal, poetic, existential, religious, deeply felt and beautifully rendered art.

He's also created a wholly new form of cinematic storytelling with his recent few films.

I completely agree. I feel like TM makes his films as a genuine gift to the gods as a sign of gratitude and humbleness, rather than as a way to prove himself as a good artist.
They're just so detached from a human ego, it's impossible not to like them.

>They're just so detached from a human ego
Absolutely, and detached from popular culture as well.

he's good, but he's no Korine.

I loved The Thin Red Line. That scene when they assault bunkers, holy shit, few captured war that well.

this guy for me is the most interesting american director alive right now...

>le can't write characters for shit and instead write soulless cardboard cutouts to bounce convoluted plots off of directorman

This His head is so far up his own ass it's ridiculous

You two faggots don't know shit about cinema...
He literally makes masterpieces on a penny budget man and is completely anti-Hollywood in all regards.
What more do you want?

>is completely anti-Hollywood in all regards

nope, sorry
his stuff might not be as approachable, but it's definitely Hollywoodistic in nature. once you build the blueprint for his convoluted plots there's nothing else worth salvaging from his movies. he knows nothing about characters or what makes a story worthwhile and rich.
you need to watch more films

No. Lynch & Scorsese are still alive, for one thing. And he's not even at the top of his own generation, Joel & Ethan Coen are better.

>that time poor t malick got bullied by keanu
:-(