Meet a girl at a uni social event

>Meet a girl at a uni social event
>She says she's the biggest movie buff out of anyone she knows
>Get excited because all my friends are massive plebs and it'd be cool to chat about films with someone actually knowledgeable
>I ask her what her favourite D.W. Griffith film is
>She has never even heard of him
>I say that if she has never heard of Griffith then she knows nothing about film
>She then calls me a 'misogynist gatekeeping loser' and walks off to talk to a group of chads

Why are roasties such plebs?

Honestly I didn't know who he was until a few days ago.

>Driving away women through the power of sheer autism

yep it's Sup Forums alright

>Muh old patrician movies
Go read a books, pleb.

>go on anime website
>make up a story that didnt happen
>namedrop some autism-tier director no normal person has ever heard of or cares about
>end up blaming women for being stupid
>realize the thread was on the wrong board

i think you meant to click on r9k

>The Artless returns
sad

Roastie detected.

>thinks that he isn't a gatekeeper
A non retard would recommend some films of his, then follow up with a "maybe I can show you one sometime". Pathetic

>admitting your own idiocy

I don't like griffithfag but if you're never heard of DW Griffith you're actually a moron and don't deserve to watch movies

it's called negging, women love that stuff

yeah it worked really well for OP in his fake story

its not like he's important anymore

Anyone with half a brain would know that bringing up Emily Jean is the key to everyone's heart since everyone loves her.

>meet a distinguished young woman at a compulsory institution gala
>the equine darling intimates on certain forbidden doings in the southwest
>become flustered and nearly faint because all of my friends are lowtest deep ones
>she blasphemes against all that is good with hideous abandon
>abnormal utterings cloud my ears and I bleat in unparalleled anguish at her nameless speech
>She calls me a racist gaunt auntfucker and kicks niggerman right in the litterbox

who?

>Discover chick is into films
>Thinks D.W. Griffith is the best place to start for conversation

Unironically this. You can't be a "patrician" when it comes to film knowledge, OP. It's too simplistic a field - one that essentially amounts to trivia. If you want to be part of an intellectual silo, go and become well-read in a sufficiently complex topic.

not really, but you would need a deep understanding of film which mostmovie fans don't have

whats a complex topic for you?

>not really, but you would need a deep understanding of film which mostmovie fans don't have

who the fuck wants to hang out with someone who talks about complex topics ? Go do a PhD for that.

what the fuck does gatekeeping mean as an insult, is the implication that you're discouraging her from seeking out new films?

including me, I mean people like martin scorsese or coppola

>Go do a PhD for that.
That's the idea, hence my use of the word "silo." Presumably, OP would get to inhabit this much sought after rarified atmosphere where all these intellectuals hang out and try to one-up one another. Judging from his post, that's what he really craves. Being a "film buff" isn't an intellectual pursuit: there are no real rules or parameters of judgement, just suppositions and opinions, so OP essentially lost a potential friend through sheer autism.

Cinema is unironically the greatest artistic medium humanity has ever produced. To be patrician in film is to know the apex of human creative achievement.

>To be patrician in film is to know the apex of human creative achievement.
Baseless assertion - I mean, cling to it if you want to, but that won't make real intellectual heavyweights take "film studies" seriously.

film studies is a joke, but film is still the epitome of art.

you're a tremendous faggot, even more than OP

>you're a tremendous faggot

Cinema is the expression of pure visual poetry, literature is merely an imperfect vehicle of information delivery. The act of reading itself is merely interpreting information being given on the page, whereas to watch a film is a pure sensory experience. Disregarding Cinema because it is not so easily de-constructed by failed novelists and career students is a clear sign that you lack even the most basic critical thinking skills and that you see intellectual pursuit as a means to social prestige rather than something with inherent value. Fuck off back to r/books you plebeian faggot.

pretentious twat

music is better tho

>Meet a roastie at a uni social event
>She says she's a massive cinema fan
>Roll my eyes because all my friends are massive plebs and she doesn't seem anymore astute
>I ask her what her favourite D.W. Griffith film is
>She says Birth of A Nation due to its historical importance, but that she's not really a fan of him and disliked his historic revisionism
>I get upset and mutter that she probably didn't get it, as if some roastie could ever appreciate Griffith
>She says she's a major fan of French new wave and asks me if I've seen any films from it
>I scoff at her and leave, why would I waste my time watching some French pricks eat baguettes?
>Go home content that some succubus didn't manage to steal my cummies for another night

>uni

Oh, you Brits.

Good.

Read books and watch films. It's not hard, retard. You think people watching Nolan films are then going to the library to check out classic literature? Whenever a film thread has popped up on /lit/, the board demonstrates superior taste to Sup Forums - preferring French or German New Wave or Golden Era Hollywood. If someone likes shitty movies it's because they're shit and saying hurrrr movies are dumb anyway!!! read a book!!! doesn't dodge the issue.

That's one opinion.
Where did I say I disregard film as a whole? I'm disregarding the idea that someone who has watched the films of Griffith is somehow more valuable than someone who hasn't. OP is a moron for thinking he's superior simply because he's familiar with Griffith. He might as well be a film studies loser because they think along very similar lines.

The sweet spot is non-mainstream but nonetheless well know films, like Possession, Wake in Fright, The Spirit of The Beehive, or even a popular director's lesser-known, like Barry Lyndon. You seem knowledgeable while also not coming off as a pretentious pseud. Mention Criterion and how they improved on a previous transfer/release. Wa la, that's it.

>Read books and watch films.
Yeah, no shit. Nobody is saying you shouldn't do that. Who are you arguing with? Yourself?

Unironically this , I say that as an avid reader. There is no other medium that comes close.

...

If someone praises old movies and the response is, "go read a book!" are you too stupid to deduce the line of thought implicit, retard? Needing everything to be explicit is a symptom of autism.

la haine, itll get you some bonus patrician points for black and white and french

>"go read a book!"
Except I didn't say that, dipshit. Your comprehension skills are garbage.

>I'm Anonymous
>I hate women
>Women are inferior to men in every single possible way
>Women are more likely to cheat, cause violence, do everything negative while nothing postive
>I am going to post everything I got off r9k & pol when someone disagrees with me
>Also beta, cuck, soyboy, roastie, never had a girlfriend, ect ect ect

there, thread done

>modern day b&w
>france, but characters aren't french but brown
No, it won't. Complete trash. I'd rather say Godard.

See >"Go read a books, pleb."

Do you have brain damage?

You lot are insufferable, bunch of pretentious twats.

>intellectual heavyweights
kill yourself

Written by two different people, making two different arguments, you utter mong.

>intellectual heavyweights
Why does this phrase trigger you so much? Don't try and deny it.

You asked who I was arguing with, to which I responded I was responding to the line of reading I explained. It's you who made the mistake. Of course you're too much of an immature posturing jack ass to recognise your mistake and apologize. Someone who obviously didn't have a very good father to teach him good manners. Sad.

you're gonna post this on every thread aren't you

S E E T H I N G

>talk to hippie Staceys studying sociology about movies
>they like french stuff, one kept listing off favorite new czech wave flicks etc
>talk to students who are taking the course on mathematical logic
>cape shit and maybe nolan

The Staceys were literal brainlets

You're a lazy ego-hurt baby if you try to profile yourself through movies
>i have no self worth!! and am too stupid/lazy to compensate for it!! i know i'll watch movies

baka

Because you assume you are anything but trash who shitpost on Sup Forums

>D.W. Griffith
lol pathetic

>to which I responded I was responding to the line of reading I explained.
Nah - you continued to act as if you were responding to both of us, levelling the same accusations. Anyway, you'll no doubt keep responding with semantic bullshit in an attempt to have the last word, so go ahead and have it, dweeb.

ah-bloo-bloo

All types post here, mate. Just because your societal afterbirth doesn't automatically mean the rest of us are.

I would love to have a group of people with whom I could discuss complex topics. My girlfriend is pretty well informed, and so are a few of my friends, but for the most part everyone's just so dull and unimaginative when it comes to expressing ideas. You're retarded if your idea of fun is discussing events and other people 24/7.

Someone posts.
>Go read a books, pleb.

You respond.
>Unironically this.

HURRRRR WHY DID YOU INCLUDE ME IN YOUR RESPONSE???? HURRR WHO ARE YOU EVEN ARGUE WITH???? HURRRR OH YOU ARGUE WITH THE POST I WAS IN AGREEMENT WITH HURRRRRRR???? OK BUT DAT NOT ME!!!!! HURRRR

Neck yourself.

You call us Hipsters, but we all know you wish you could be one of us. You wish you could understand Godard, appreciate the art of a Khavn De La Cruz film, sit through Satantango able to see it's true beauty.
You can't expect me to believe that having a top 10 that inclues Pulp Fiction, Fight Club, Inception, Dark Knight, Se7en, Boondock Saints and Blade Runner 2049is as far you want to as a movie lover. And that is because you know what you look like. A manchild, filled with acne and dirty thoughts about 37 year old actors. Who loves super heroes and never reads books because they are "boring" and "pretentious".

The whole "hipster" thing is a self-defense. You face someone who is a gentleman, a scholar, an erudite and your little brain can't thing of nothing else to make you feel better. Because you're a pleb. You're an american pleb.

>tfw when somebody tells you they're "into movies" and they only care about Star Wars, superheroes and Tarantino.

Go shave that obvious five o'clock shadow, tranny.

yeah that description fits most people sadly

Except your argument revolves around me insinuating that books are somehow superior to film - which I never did. You would have to be an idiot or at least someone who takes things very literally, to make that assumption.

Re-read Retard.

So your argument relies on something implicit only to you? Congratulations, you're arguing with yourself, you schizoid fuck.

>French new wave
you're a pleb. french films are garbage, degenerate and superficial shit. i thought it was a meme, but so many french films have themes of cuckolding and similar sexual depravity. the french were a mistake

Implications aren't subjective, retard. Try again.

>Implications aren't subjective, retard
Bullshit. You didn't properly define your terms and went on to spout a load of ad hominem bullshit. There isn't a court in the land that would take your side.

I'm sure you're an intellectual heavyweight bud

Great argument. Very persuasive.

There's no reason to bring up books when someone is talking about taste in film unless you're trying to make some kind of faggot point which you and that other point were, retard. Never mind you didn't even pay close enough attention to realise what I was responding to in the beginning. Try to put your thoughts into coherent order, pay attention and think things through next time you want to share your terrible opinions, you scatterbrained, bad mannered child.

>I'm going to finetune my taste in a way that makes it as innocuous as possible
why are you such a faggot m8

ITT: middlebrow hordes lashing out

>There's no reason to bring up books when someone is talking about taste in film unless you're trying to make some kind of faggot point which you and that other point were, retard.
Basless assumption. All you have are these assumptions. Your argument is shite and you know it. Stop getting your nickers in such a twist.

Looks more like an autism spectrum

So you aren't even going to try to engage what I'm saying, recognise your mistake. You're going to wave your hand, go "baseless assumptions!" (what isn't on the Internet? Have you got a citation for that opinion, hmmmm?), use pseud crap like "ad hominem" and just generally act like a faggot. Yeah, I'm sure you're a true cinema and literary patrician and not some gawky seventeen year old dork sitting in his mom's house shitposting bad tempered nonsense at all. Whatever, kid.

Movies WERE the greatest form of human expression. They told a story, used music to emphasize emotional moments and could express true visual art in ways paintings and sculptures never could. However, now that video games can do everything that a movie can but also have you the player shape the story itself, they have overtaken film as the greatest art form.

>spouting anti-intellectualism
>anti-art
You're trash.

>you're a true cinema and literary patrician and not some gawky seventeen year old dork sitting in his mom's house shitposting bad tempered nonsense at all. Whatever, kid.
This level of projection is just embarrassing. You sound disgusting.

How come when someone uses the phrase ad hominem the phrase projection is never far behind it? Are you faggots trained at faggot school where they give you instructions on how to act like the biggest bunch of faggots imaginable?

MOVIE GOES AGAINST MY IDEALS SO IT'S SHIT

it's shit. goddard is a hack

130+ here

>on a film imageboard
>doesn't know fucking griffith

just fucking kill yourself

>goddard
How can you call someone a hack if you can't even spell their name correctly?

Pictures are worth a thousand words user. As far as fiction is concerned, film is a better medium because the details are all present and acutely digestible. It's not my fault the majority of popular movies don't make use of film properly, but then again books aren't all classic literature either.

>I'm so smart because I watch old films
you convinced me

at least post the Pierrot le fou screencap so we can identify you immediately

i didn't uppercase it either. perhaps i was being a bit too meta for you

I doubt you could identify taste even if you saw it.

Also film has room for more nuance AND subtlety than film. It's difficult to gloss over themes or motiffs repetitiously in a book when you HAVE to read each word. But in film, it's a vast array of sensory devices approaching you at the same time. I think film has a much greater ceiling in providing an experience where you can show off your ideas in dynamic ways that may stay fresh or go unappreciated for so long. There are just so many pros to film.

how come every single self-proclaimed "movie buff" turns out to be an IMDbcore drone?
is this the state of cinephilia in current year?

Yes yes user back to the same ol' tricks we've heard it all before.

also using taste and Godard in the same sentence sure is contradictory in it's nature.

but at least you always make yourself known with your "taste"

Great. You've provided me with your opinions and personal experiences. So what?

I think the best argument for this is the biological fact that vision is the sense we rely on the most and the sense from which we gather the most information. No other argument is necessary. Of course, that doesn't mean music and books are worthless -- they have their place -- but film is the pinnacle, what everything has been leading up to.

ask him