How many films before 1970 have you seen?

How many films before 1970 have you seen?

12

like plenty

Most films I watch are from before 1970

around 640

>inb4 Gen-Z Redditors calling old movies boring/trash

ZERO (0).

I wasn't even born yet

Many

all of them

All of them. Ask me anything

Gen Z here and they're not, don't act as if gen z has less respect for really old films than any other people born between 1970 - now. Most don't give a shit about them.

nice looking frog
desu

Did you grow up with old films?

17

I didn't, but I saw some occasionally, mostly old DVDs from my grandparents and stuff. I do watch older films more often now, I've got to for this filmschool I go to. It's interesting though, they're not boring at all compared to most films coming out today.

I only watch films the year they are released

over 30 but i'm not counting

Bullitt. Fucking boring ass movie. The chase scene wasn't worth it.

Boredom is a symptom of low attention span, low attention span is a symptom of infantilism, infantilism is a symptom of bad genes, bad genes are a symptom of delayed evolution.

Thank :^)

some, not sure how many
over 10, under 100

movies realeased post 1990 are mostly better though

:)

I watch Metropolis at least once a week.

No idea.

off the top of my head it's all Cary Grant, Hitchcock and Wilder stuff. Want to say 15.

sounds really cool user
is it good and trippy movie, not boring? I never seen it

Around 100 I think, but I'm into war movies so that's already alot + Fritz Lang, old bonds, classics like Ben Hur, Hitchcock.
I really need to start watching the hight of japanese cinema, haven't seen any of those classics

Fuck yeah Billy Wilder.

One, two three is still the best political comedy of all times.

I'm guessing I've seen a few thousand films in my lifetime, out of which maybe 10% where made before 1970. So a few hundred.

This unironically. See: Lav Diaz, Apichatpong Weersakathul, Mohammed Rasoulof, Hou Hsiao Hsien, Bela Tarr, Pedro Costa, Eugene Green, James Benning, Franco Piavoli, Albert Serra, Hirozaku Koreeda, Hong Sang-Soo, Lee Chang-Dong, Kim Ki-Duk, Nuri Bilge Ceylan, Wong Kar-Wai, the list goes on.

holy banans user. i'd argue you wasted your life thats like way too much movies

Entertaining movie with great production value.

>Most films I watch are from before 1970

>t. embryo

BS. One movie every other day since I was a teenager. That's what it amounts to.

Dumb frogposter.
Dumb frogposter.
Dumb frogposter.

Dumb "Dumb frogposter" poster.

hey, thats one good looking frog

Have another

Only the ones that I had to watch for school. Maltese Falcon, Yellow Submarine, To Kill A Mockingbird, Romeo and Juliet. That's it. I've never watched a pre-70s movie of my own volition.

dont sexualize emly

were not allowd to see her nipples

A few hundred. They're all shit. People pretend to like them to feel special.

Damn, I didn't know she could look proper hot in photos.

Nice self-portrait

like 1000
>movies realeased post 1990 are mostly better though
kek

Just appreciating natural beauty. Emily Jean is pure

>I don't like something, people who say they like it must be pretending.

there's a quick way to see this on imdb?

>Wong Kar-Wai
>literally only one I know or have ever heard of
kek

thanks for the list though

Back to your shithole soyboy. Eisenstein already said film was a medium with a duration and an end. Cinema's dead. Arguably already entered its post-mortem phase in the 60's.

pleb

diff annon. They are good, its just they feel held back, less effects, grainy, and things being to classy and restrained, nothing risque. that gets kind of annoying

Yeah because there were no great succesful movies after the 60's..
Fucking mong

Apparently exactly 100

Sup Forums: Griffith, Flaherty, Eisenstein, Stroheim

reddit: Lav Diaz, Apichatpong Weersakathul, Mohammed Rasoulof, Hou Hsiao Hsien, Bela Tarr, Pedro Costa, Eugene Green, James Benning, Franco Piavoli, Albert Serra, Hirozaku Koreeda, Hong Sang-Soo, Lee Chang-Dong, Kim Ki-Duk, Nuri Bilge Ceylan, Wong Kar-Wai, the list goes on.

Cactus Flower is the greatest work of art ever made, with great use of the entire toolbox of artistic techniques. Plenty of peak-ins, clever uses of irises, soft focus, and depth for profundity to play out. And it executes flawlessly one of the hallmarks of immaculate art, unpredictability under the guise of believability. It's a culmination of the entire history of humanity.

...

look at those fuckin eye lid flaps
WEW

I've also seen Winter Sleep by Ceylan
Thought it was a bit too long
But yeah

i thought you hate eisenstein

Go back to your confinement thread

he changes opinions with every new director he discovers, he had murnau in that list but replaced it with eisenstein

I love her special eyes

what about Murnau, Wiene and Pabst?

Tolstoykafkaevsky?

ooof thats too much
wew
might have to bust a nut full disclosure

Take the frog pill. Become enamored with Emily Jean.

nah fa m
Em Roberts is my gal

>Roberts
>gal
pick one

That's ok user. Roberts is Best Emma, but I still love my Emily

Is that pic a meme? I fucking hope so.

Only unity in this thread

>Wiene
Speaking of the Cabinet of Caligari:

"The controversy of Caligari was that the director did nothing to the quality of that film. It was 3 art directors and screenwriters.They did everything and he did nothing. Now I say the director was a good director in how he could integrate the actors into those sets, but he did not contribute the most to the final outcome"

-Editor, Jean Oser

Ergo, get a fucking education, you piece of shit.

i wasn't even born until 1978

Eisenstein is largely TRASH, certainly no Griffith as his emphasis on the complementary for his "intellectual montage" suggests, but October has always remained in the canon. Spectacle as anti-spectacle. Abstraction of context. October is Eisenstein finally beginning to understand Griffith. Eisenstein didn't invent montage. Griffith and Stroheim exploited all elements of montage before Eisenstein even made his first film. Intolerance was studied in the first Soviet film schools. Eisenstein worshipped Griffith and wanted to thank him in person for showing him everything. Griffith also acknowledged the divergent limitations of psychology for photographic representation. When he mastered it, he rejected it in favor of distilling essence to ideology and motivation, what Eisenstein learned and contracted. Eisenstein wouldn't have existed without Griffth.

1969

>Murnau
There is one major problem that persists in Murnau's work, a prolem that has carried its influence decades later into the garbage that pigs are exposed to today. The tradition Murnau represents is that of the director who decides how much of the world will be revealed to his audience. The aesthetic of camera movement over montage implies the continuousness of a visual field outside the frame of a film. What we see on the screen is what the director has chosen to show us. He could have shown us more or less or something else, but he chose to show us what he has shown us for a specific purpose. These whimsically emotive camera movements can most often be as overexplanatory as a heady intertitle. Griffith was wise enough to abstract from such flauntingly overexpressive technique, and opted instead for the functional and the thought-provoking unmotivated

0 i hate black and white shit, looks trash

>Pabst
No significance. Noted for Louise Brooks acting direction after 70's silent revival, but falls extremely short compared to the range exhibited by all those names mentioned before you.

>great successful
You're conditioned by trash

82

1969

58

Bout tree fiddy

This has to be one of the most important and groundbreaking movies of all time

about 4

>This has to be one of the most important and groundbreaking movies of all time
>schufftan bullshit
No it isn't.

none, I was born in the 90s, so it is physically impossible to do that

50+ I'd guess.

meow