/philosophycore/

is there a Sup Forums essential philosophy core chart?
if not, what are some essential films based largely around philosophical ideologies?

>breathless

dropped

i only used this chart to show that im talking about a chart. answer my question you fucking plen

If there is it may be long lost. I'm afraid you've come to the wrong place to get thoughtful film recs, I will try though. By philosophical, do you just mean dense and thought provoking films, or ones that actually follow a specific philosophy?

ones that actually follow a specific philosophy, for example (ik its not film) Waiting for Godot being absurdist.
dense and thought provoking films i guess do count so long as they stick to a constant logic.

Oh I thought you meant philosophical in the sense of followed the philosophy of certain philosophers. The chart you posted already has some good ones, Malick, Bergman, Tarkovsky, Dreyer, Kalatozov, Erice, Kieslowski, Lopushansky, Grandrieux.

Also check out Piavoli, Bresson, Ruiz, Angelopoulos, Kiarostami, Costa, Reygadas, Weerasethakul, Tarr, Straub-Huillet, Syberberg, and Duras

Are any of these names new to you or are you looking for even more?

quite a few of those names are new, so who you have listed is certainly suffice.
thankyou very much as well, im still making my way through art house so i will, in time, check out these directors.

No problem, admittedly even I have not gotten through all of them yet either. Where are you at right now? Do you generally approach by filmographies or a different way?

i tend to watch what most interests me first, i've never seem to tie myself down to a director as they seem to either be a swing or a miss, im browse Sup Forums a whole lot more so i tend to spend more time listening to music then i do watching films, only recently have i started gaining interest in non-Sup Forumscore films.
i got really into no-wave films quite a while back and really enjoyed alot of those films, but now im trying to find my own niche so i tend to watch a film and then films considered similar to said film if i enjoy it.
sorry about the late reply im currently watching Daisies (1966)

check out James Benning as well.

seconding
I see, I find that interesting because usually if I like a director then I like most of their films, same of I don't like them. Its rare that there is a director that makes both bad and great films. I prefer the director approach because it allows me to see their progress overtime and view their films in a greater context. Also some directors groovier more inaccessible overtime so starting at the beginning can help you ease into their style. That being said I don't just pick one director and tie myself down to them, I'm always going back and forth between several. Daises was a fun film though, enjoy

for me to thoroughly enjoy a film it has to have that "je n'ais se quoi" about it, and while a director's oeuvre may be consistently good, for there to be multiple great films is often rare. Also i dont think i have the attention span to stick to a set of films, i enjoy going into films blind so as to not have any expectations or biases towards them. most of the time i tend to not worry about directors because i stick to the notion of "the death of the author", being that i do not care for who made the art as what they intended me to take i may not be what i get from it

That's definitely a valid approach as well. What are some films that fit your standard of je n'ais se quoi and greatness then?

La Haine is definetly my number one, Fallen Angels, Perfect Blue, Stranger than Paradise, and taxi driver
after listing these i guess its the atmosphere that happens to be it, all of these films happen to have incredible atmosphere

DW Griffith is the only philosopher that matters.

>Piavoli, Bresson, Ruiz, Angelopoulos, Kiarostami, Costa, Reygadas, Weerasethakul, Tarr, Straub-Huillet, Syberberg, and Duras the list goes on!
This has transcended parody to the point of not being funny.

Tsai Ming-Liang, Oshii

Don't forget Kubrick and Lynch

Thanks

How is Aelita: Queen of Mars Art House? Because its in black and white?

It was made by a Soviet studio and based on a novel. And its also ends up being Communist propaganda.

Because it has goofy faces and is European

You lack self-awareness. Suicide and homicide are the only options

Of course it took a God to answer life's greatest questions

Griffith is one of the scant few to achieve simultaneous directness and indirectness. In doing so, he creates overlapping layers that under careful examination elicit independent meanings

Griffith is the only one to TRULY have probed man's folly in the conquest of truth. In his works, he imparts the futility of man's virtue, the hypocrisy of mankind.
If you don't believe, just look at the parallels between Birth of a Nation, and the Obama administration.

Griffith mastered facets of form and content then stripped them away to distill essence. He mastered the psychology of the screen then found it was superficial for getting to the core for the photographic image itself belied innumerable meanings. He bared humanity to ideology and motivation.

Capturing the construct and essence of a layered reality stripped of artifice; juxtaposition reaching wider sum

Where should I start with Griffith?

Adventures of Dollie 1908. You should acquaint yourself with historical accounts of the Victorian era and the early 20th century. Because without doing so, distorts the meaning.

Griffith, the mark of any true intellectual, equally maximalizes and inhibits. So one has to contextualize themselves before engagement.

Being a diligent observer of history, he also knows ideas are born before they are conceived. The same can be said of taste.

Thanks. Can I move to any other of his films from there or is there a specific viewing order recommended?

You should be asking your parents that question

instructions for a light and sound machine was pretentious garbage

...

...

>Mekas

>Marker

why is it always insecure nerds from Sup Forums asking for gay shit like this?

>Vertov
Editing is antithetical to truth. Capturing is creation.

>Straub-Huillet

>people enjoy it in a later century
>this means the director is shit

>"slow" cinema
How does Griffith create the illusion of lack of narrative momentum when he clearly employs a high number of edits

How do people find Griffith boring if he clearly employs a high number of edits

>has bullshit like valerie and her week of wonders but not cinema like Young Torless

dropped

>enjoyment
This is a thread for asking for intellectual pursuit.

Your self-insert fantasies aren't art, criterionfaggot

Your self-insert fantasies aren't art, criterionfaggot

I see, so watching film for enjoyment is all a farce

No Balthasar
niggas dont know about Au Hasard Balthazar the if you havent seen it watch it.

>blissfully yours
>johnny guitar
>love streams
>peeping tom
mah nigga

>film
You just made the distinction. Film isn't art, so enjoy all the candy you want.

lmaoing my ass off dude

>Bresson

No Waking Life?

Go back to listening to jungle jibes, porchmonkey.

oh please explain to me how valerie is a "good" movie

>muh 12 years
kill yourself, gen x babby

why is it always the insecure Sup Forums nerds responding like gay shit to this

...

I have never seen this board ever discuss Cleo From 5 to 7. I've tried before, its one of my favorite films.

Good job to whoever made this image.

that pic has been around longer than you've been alive boy

The only good nigger is a slave, the only great nigger is dead

>can't actually give substance to defend movie
cute, go back to rebbit faggot

t. brainlet

t. brainlet

are you the same eternally assblasted poster who only brings up valerie to shit on it because it had a nude scene that made you uncomfortable? give it a rest kid, sorry you can't handle kino

t. brainlet

I'm 30 years old and been posting on Sup Forums since I was 19. Shit, you can check the image file alone if you need "proof".

t. brainlet

BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

that pic was made in '09
look it up in the archive you dumb senile stinky cunt

>Griffith is best remembered for The Birth of a Nation (1915) and Intolerance (1916).The Birth of a Nation made use of advanced camera and narrative techniques, and its popularity set the stage for the dominance of the feature-length film in the United States. Since its release, the film has sparked significant controversy surrounding race in the United States, focusing on its negative depiction of black people and the glorification of the Ku Klux Klan. Today, it is both acclaimed for its radical technique and condemned for its inherently racist philosophy.

Shit like this is exactly why we need /film/, as slow as it'd be.

>racist philosophy
t. brainlet

>mfw nobody can actually articulate why some boring movie with 70s porno aesthetics is worthy to be in the same collection as Tarkovsky

>porno
t. brainlet
>tarkovsky
t. mega brainlet

t. brainlet

t. brainlet