What was the great beauty?

What was the great beauty?

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=ukjJDM07edE
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

me naked

What was the great beauty to him? He was looking for it and then he found at the end. If I'm not wrong I think it's him realizing that he was looking for his old great beauty (his girlfriend) which he would never find again but finds the great beauty again in the little sporadic things in life.

The only thing I don't understand is what he means by "it's just a trick"

gay

The quote at the beginning of the film is key to understanding "It's just a trick."
>To travel is very useful, it makes the imagination work, the rest is just delusion and pain. Our journey is entirely imaginary, which is its strength.
Also, think about the scene with the giraffe and the magician. I believe the magician says "It's just a trick" when Jep asks how he made the giraffe disappear.

Based

based

I'm not smart. So he is saying life is meaningless or we are living in a simulation?

Or we all looking for that imaginary happiness which we will never find.

Think about how Rome is presented in the film. The opening sequence shows a group of tourists admiring all of the beautiful architecture and artwork etc. Rome is obviously a very "beautiful" place. Now, one of the most telling quotes of the film is when Jep says that the conga lines at the parties he goes to are the best in Rome because "they don't go anywhere." He's poking fun at how he essentially wasted most of his adult life in the same city doing nothing but party and socialize with people he thinks he's better than. It's only when he finally leaves Rome and visits the lighthouse where he had that life-changing experience with that girl that he decides to start writing again. Think about how many times he imagines seeing the ocean on his ceiling. He calls it the "whirlpool of high society" for a reason: it sucked him away from that beautiful ocean/lighthouse for the majority of his life.

Thanks for this kinda turned it all around. So he doesn't find a new great beauty. He just brings back the feeling of his past one? I'm guessing his girlfriend left him because of him wasting his time with the "high life" after writing his novel.

So the whole movie is just us waiting for Jep to go back to those steps? What was the purpose of all those scenes in daily life where Jep finds beauty?

Also at the end of the movie he decides to start writing again and with old age he realized he wasted his life. Does he come out with any other new line of thinking or is it only those two things?

Also what did he mean at the very end when he said it's just a trick?

read the post you dingleberry

Bump

Almost everything beautiful he sees is old and antiquated, which contrasts with the abortion-tier modern art he’s exposed to like the vibration lady who runs straight into walls, or the girl who’s essentially subjected to child abuse so her dad can make money off Pollock knockoffs. The most genuine, authentic and sincere work of art in the entire film is Jep’s friend’s shitty stage play that fills like half of the auditorium. There’s a quote where he basically defends the idea of nostalgia by saying it’s the only thing people who have no faith in the future can hold on to. And after following Jep around these excessively degenerate events, I think the viewer tends to agree with that quote. I also think it’s worth noting that a lot of the beauty Jep sees isn’t even art: it’s nature (the giraffe and flamingos) and humanity (the nuns running with kids in the courtyard, etc). There’s a purity to these things that’s completely lacking in the modern art he’s exposed to, which seem contrived in comparison.

Rome is often called 'The Great Beauty'

The entire movie is masturbating to itself masquerading as a coming of age of a senior citizen.

When the credits rolled.

You obviously aren't the same guy but I think you're wrong. It shows the little girl's modern art as beautiful and the music that plays each time something actually beautiful happens plays in that scene.

I think it’s also critiquing Rome as well. The only beautiful parts of the city are ancient, and anything new is completely devoid of soul and creativity so everyone just indulges in degeneracy. When the lady with the communist flag runs directly into the ancient aqueduct, it’s showing how (((Modern Art))) just completely shits on tradition and craftsmanship for the sake of provocation and controversy. Jep says that the best people in Rome are the tourists.

Please fuck off Sup Forums. You obviously don't understand the movie. He shows the modern art as beautiful.

Le running headfirst into a wall is beautiful art

you are either trolling, autistic, or 12. which is it?

The girl wants to be a fucking veterinarian and she’s forced by her father into screaming and yelling at a canvas with buckets of paint. It might look nice, sure, but it’s kind of disturbing how it was made don’t you think?

I agree but it doesn't change the fact that Sorrentino was showing the final product as beautiful.

LA GRANDE BELLEZZA
A

G
R
A
N
D
E

B
E
L
L
E
Z
Z
A

m.youtube.com/watch?v=ukjJDM07edE
Is this the song? Because I don’t remember it playing when the girl’s painting is completed, but I do remember hearing it shortly afterwards when Jep gives his girlfriend the tour of the antique building with the old ladies playing cards.

Yeah you are right. It doesn't play. The scene does imply that modern art isn't bad. Jep leaves when she starts because it looks likes its modern art garbage but he misses out when she actually makes the painting beautiful.

This movie was pretentious I couldn't stand it

Youth.

ur mum's gash

See I think this is one aspect of the film that might divide a lot of people. This is one of those instances where you have to ask yourself if the end is justified by the means, and in this case I just can’t accept the girl’s painting as beautiful because, in my mind, the artist’s intent is just as important as the final product. Maybe the painting is an expression of the girl’s desire for freedom from her abusive father in some kind of weird meta performance art spectacle, but frankly I just don’t think it’s morally or ethically right to call it beautiful given the contrived circumstances. It’s essentially slave labor.

Just because some 12 year old african boy made my shoes doesn't mean my nikes aren't fly as fuck.

If you force Ingmar Bergman to make a movie at gunpoint and it comes out that he was forced to make The Seventh Seal it doesn't make the film any less beautiful. Right?

False equivalency.
You buy shoes from Nike made by a little African boy. Your shoes are cool (and have more value) because they’re Nikes, not because they’re made by a little African boy.
You buy painting from abusive father made by tantrum girl. Your painting’s value comes from tantrum girl’s “performance” as opposed to her abusive father.

Ingmar Bergman isn’t a little girl

Can you differentiate the actual beauty in the painting and the intent in making it? If someone showed you it without telling you the intent and then they did would it make the actual painting less beautiful?

So let's say The Seventh Seal turned out to bet the work of Ingmar Bergman's daughter that he forced her to make.

death of the author etc.
this post is just dumb moralising

Do you think he would really do that? It’s honestly a pretty dumb hypothetical scenario because he would have been put in jail where he probably would have been killed by other inmates if he actually did that. Would you force your daughter to do anything at gunpoint?

i don't fall for bait.

Honestly, if somebody showed me this, I’d probably just dismiss it as another pretentious abstract postmodernist painter who thinks they’re gonna be the next Pollock or Rothko. You can call me ignorant, but I don’t think any sort of explanation or justification would be able to persuade me into thinking that it’s a more technically competent painting with more meaning than anything that isn’t considered postmodern. If I found out a girl was forced to paint it against her will, I’d probably hate the painting even more.

It's a 5 year old girl.

What you think about the painting doesn't matter. That's not what were arguing.

Would you subject your daughter to that sort of thing?

Nostalgia

Sorrentino is a poor man's Fellini

I know who the great beauty was for me

Fellini is a poor man's Fellini

why you pick the plastic whore. there were literal 10/10's in the first party scene

Back to Sup Forums you faggot

I think, at the very least, the intent should at least be discernible if you pay close enough attention to all the details. In my mind, this is a much more profound painting than the girl’s painting in the film. You can kind of piece together your own story without actually having to know any of the historical background behind the painting because it’s so humanistic. With this you can actually roughly see what the artist was trying to do without dealing in abstractions or supplementary background information.

Now if this was created by a forced 5 year old girl would it make it any less beautiful? Also I know I'm taking the bait.

Dishonesty

See, again this is a dumb hypothetical scenario. As far as I’m concerned, there hasn’t been a single 5 year old girl in history with the technical competence to achieve something like that (which is precisely why the girl in the film paints in a postmodern style - it requires virtually no technical competence). Secondly, a 5 year old girl just simply wouldn’t have enough life experience to visually convey such a strong sense of melancholy. Most of her memories thus far are probably happy ones (with the obvious exception of being forced by her father to scream and throw paint at a blank canvas). She hasn’t experienced true loss yet.

Parts of this film really seemed like an extended travel ad for Italy.

That being said, I really enjoyed it and have recommended it to several people since originally watching it.

if she could though

Postmodern art is so fucking awful that a 5 year old girl can do it, but anything beyond that is impossible. There’s no “if she could.”

Please recreate what she made and post it

>What was the great beauty?
Life