What is the literary equivalent of this informative chart?
>>7957518
What are all of these
>>7957527
motion pictures
Go back to /tv/ and die
>>7957539
yes, this is the one.
This is the /his/ equivalent.
>>7957518
Pulp at the bottom
Literary Fiction above
maybe Classic on top (but how to define it)
maybe something in between
>>7957539
false those are all the same silly
>>7957565
MIND = BLOWN
>>7957518
What is the "film" ?
>>7957574
Problem Child 2, someone just made it black and white in photoshop.
>>7957565
Dear me I seem to have erred, here it is.
>>7957593
those Vietnam fucking shits are all the same though silly
>>7957587
for real tho I want to know
>>7957527
first is paris texas, and the last one is tree of life. third one is probably days of heaven, and the second one is the world of apu(¿?)
>>7957527
The first is RR by Benning. That's enough for you to discard the rest of the image
>>7957557
Never heard the term psychosophism, but it beautifully covers him
>>7957741
Inconsistent.
>>7957741
swap the first two.
philosophy is more about mending a broken heart and literature is about stimulating the brain.
>>7957761
Are you clinically retarded?
>>7957761
eric, simply eric. Dumbest thing I've read on this board in months.
>>7957518
What the bottom left movie?
>>7957527
the 'movie' might be stalker? not that knowledgeable on film though im not sure
>>7957832
i think you are right. started, never finished. its a big movie worth checking out. /tv/ goes nuts over it, for the few on the board that did watch it.
>>7957854
>started, never finished
patricians of /lit/ everyone
>>7957763
>no its not you fucking tard
i think im at least correct with half of those.
>>7957886
you got flick thats it
>>7957741
I'd rather read something that is entertaining, thought provoking and has emotion
>>7957518
The Tree of Life is pure kinography
>>7957920
for plebs
>>7957927
It's pleb bait, but some of us patricians are able to grasp its nuances
>>7957920
Are any of ya'll fans of Terry M?
I introduced my gf to his films with Knight of Cups, and so far that's her favorite
What'd you think of Knight of Cups?
My personal ranking (I'm excluding badlands because I've yet to see it)
>Days of Heaven
>The New World
>To The Wonder
>Tree of Life
>The Thin Red Line
>Knight of Cups
>>7957991
The Tree of Life >>>>>>>>>> Days of Heaven > To The Wonder > The New World > Knight of Cups > The Thin Red Like > Badlands
>>7957973
even fewer patricians can see past its cheap sentiment and weak experimentation. total non-event, easily one of his worst
>>7958003
what do you think was the misstep in TTRL?
>>7957741
I liked it.
>>7958007
The experimental elements of the film, including all of the digressions and its disregard for narrative structure, exist in nearly every other Malick film. I don't see how you can consider it "one of his worst." Either you like Malick's style or you find it insufferable, but if you like it TTOL is one of the best examples of it.
>>7958009
It's an early example of the style he's cultivated since he came back, and because it's so early it doesn't feel like Malick quite found his footing yet. It's the only film of his where the voiceovers feel unbearably pretentious.
>>7958021
i find it very conventional but in no film was it ever used as some grand statement about all of existence so some rich white architect could find some sort of closure about his brother's suicide. if you didn't walk out of the theatre asking yourself "why should i give any fucks about this dude and consequently this entire film" then you fell for the meme. i'm sorry but piano music isn't going to evoke in me any emotions even if i'm looking at jessica chastain
>>7958033
Yeah, the VO certainly feel out of place.
Why'd you put Badlands so low?
>>7958036
Sean Penn's character isn't supposed to be the subject of your empathy; he's basically just a stand-in for Malick himself. The substance of the movie was the family dynamic, and how Malick portrays God's answer to Job concerning human suffering. If you weren't able to relate to the family dynamics, fine, but to knock a film for not being able to elicit an emotional response from you towards a character who has a total of about 4 minutes of screen time is absurd. That's not what the movie's about.
>rich white
This isn't a pejorative.
Test
>>7958036
>white
Stopped reading here.
>>7958066
Badlands was his most conventional movie. It doesn't have the aesthetic he's been cultivating since Days of Heaven.
>>7957518
Film>literature
Prove me wrong
>>7958143
You didn't think it would be this easy did you.
>>7958100
the character is present throughout the entire film. it is about him. i'm not sure how seeing a character's early life play out in some surrealist way isn't supposed to influence an empathetic response, especially with the use of conventional sentimental devices.
i'm knocking the film for trying to have something to say but not coming up with anything. i feel like that was actually the point, it's pointlessness. i just think it could be done more consistently, or more bravely, or more thoughtfully -- just anything to make it memorable.
>>7958108
i'm highlighting how much an unremarkable dude the character was. i'd like to offer a sincere apology if i offended you in any way
>>7958181
The film had plenty of things to say. About man's place in God's design, about the nature of suffering, about the philosophical distinction between materialism and gnosticism. I can try to explain all of the Job parallels, the Heideggerean underpinnings, the Christian symbolism, but that shit does not matter at all. The Tree of Life isn't a movie like Donnie Darko; it's not a movie intended to be solved by smart people, it's intended to be felt. If the images don't evoke memories from your own childhood; if the pairing of those images with the music doesn't elicit an emotional response, then the movie failed for you no matter how much you understood what was being said. Malick isn't Godard, he's not the type of director who tries to convey a relatively simple philosophical idea in the most obtuse way possible, he's just trying to elicit awe the same way great musicians do. The first time I saw To the Wonder I didn't understand it; none of the themes were all that clear, and the ideas being presented felt vague. Yet I wasn't thinking about that because the vignettes were so beautiful that it kept me in a sort of reverie. I know it sounds really pretentious, but if most movies are prose, Malick is poetry. Sometimes unclear, but often beautiful.
>>7958150
Literaturefags will never know the feel of seeing a crowd of people leaving a screening of your years final films completely crushed because of how redpilled all the films were when taken together collectively. They will never know the feel of seeing a professor leaving the auditorium in tears because he understood the hidden messages you snuck into your animation. Being an art student is awesome.
>>7958222
this is why i say it's pure kinography 'for plebs' -- the kind of people for which film conventions elicit responses, the kind of people who aren't asking for more. it's too inconsistent to be a masterpiece, too non-linear to be a successful narrative, too conventional to be an experimental achievement. it sits nowhere. it's the same kind of poetry that you hear at an open mic night that sounds like it could be good poetry, or maybe you just think it is because you want something to be good at this event so you can't say you wasted your time. in any case, you leave the venue without remembering the poet's name.
>>7957518
библиoтeкa = кинo
Bibliothek = Kino
Canon = Cinema
Title = Film
Book = Movie
Page-Turner = Flick
Genreshit = capeshit
>>7958248
>too conventional to be an experimental achievement.
Name a non-Malick film thematically, aesthetically, and tonally similar to The Tree of Life. That's irrelevant, though. A film's quality isn't determined by how closely it follows popular conceptions of narrative, or art-film notions of experimentation. The criteria by which you judge a movie should be far more complex than whether or not it fits into pre-conceived boxes of "experimental" or "conventional." If you want to criticize the movie come up with something better.
>>7958440
i don't think you understand the point i am making
>>7958440
Not the anon you responded to, but although I like Malick generally I found TToL to be his weakest by far. It is also no accident that plebs gobble it up and proclaim it his best.
I am completely uninterested in Christianity in general but I'm especially uninterested in Malick's brand of wanky brooding Kierkegaardianism, so all Malick really has to offer me is his aesthetic vision. I suspect it wasn't compelling in TToL because it's the film in which he becomes too on-the-nose with his Christfag shit. KoC was borderline.
There's no denying that Malick has talent; TTW and TTRL are both great. But his incessant existential foray into the Knight of Faith meme is boring at best and repulsive at worst, and your ability to appreciate a Malick film hinges heavily on how much he forces that shit into the particular film you're watching.
novel
tome
page-turner
book
>>7958585
ew, no.
stop this meme
>>7957763
What are they then?
>>7958559
It's one of his lowest rated films on every site where users are able to rate movies. The notion that "plebs gobble up" a film as loathed by the general populace as The Tree of Life is ridiculous.
>TTW
>great
To the Wonder is basically part of a thematic trilogy with TToL and KoC. You find the slightly more subdued Christian themes of the former obnoxious but enjoy To the Wonder, about a third of which consists of a priest's prayer to God? Either you're having trouble discerning the themes all Malick films share in common, or you're utterly inconsistent.
>>7958592
BNSF
Gaav
Reminiscences of a Journey to Lithuania
Tree of Life
>>7957741
Stephen King FTW bb. Such fun. Can't wait for 3rd in Bill Hodges trilogy.
>>7958556
You're entire criticism consists of labeling. The film isn't experimental enough; it's for 'plebs;' it's too conventional to be avant-garde and too avant-garde to be conventional; it's like amateur poetry. This is all tertiary bullshit. These are the worst criteria by which to judge a film.
>>7958607
>It's one of his lowest rated films on every site where users are able to rate movies.
Except it's not.
>To the Wonder is basically part of a thematic trilogy with TToL and KoC.
And it's the least Christfaggy of the bunch. TToL beats you over the head with it and KoC, while not too overt, is still obvious to anyone paying attention.
>>7958627
People can shit on king all they want but the man has basically mastered writing the entertaining story.
>>7958708
>Except it's not.
Up until recently it was. To the Wonder and Knight of Cups are now lower rated.
>And it's the least Christfaggy of the bunch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vqc20CO4zqs
It's not. The entire movie is about the Christian conception of love. It's actually his most overtly Christian film to date.
>>7959730
kek
>>7958143
Literature>film
Rekt.
>>7958708
Its fine dude, you can just admit you didn't understand the movie
>>7957527
Clockwise top left:
Paris Texas,
Battle of Algiers/World of Apu (?)
Stalker,
Tree of Life
>>7959862
i cant tell if this is a joke since you have at least on serious answer
>>7959887
3. is the only one i'm not certain.
The Paris Texas is the introduction part.
The Stalker pic is from where the author walks towards the house.
The last one is from one of those artsy ToL clips they inserted into the film to appeal to hipsters.
>>7958708
you lost this one anon
there's grace and dignity in admitting defeat.
>>7958613
Thanks
>>7960219
kek'd
>>7959730
>a self-cucking linkin park christfag on the top left and the guy who turned philosophy into a fedora tipping secular neo-christfag wankfest and ruined it forever on the top right
hitchens looks like socrates next to those clowns
>>7959924
>The last one is from one of those artsy ToL clips they inserted into the film to appeal to hipsters.
Literally every image in the movie means something you fucking pleb shit
>>7957991
I'm a rather big Malick fanatic... Did you know that he translated a work of Heidegger's and actually met him. Totally crazy.
Anyway. I loved "Knight of Cups". It was fantastic and I think his new films are actually better than his old ones. With each film he gets more poetic, more lyrical, more radical in his approach to the medium of film.
You should check out Badlands though, it is really good.
>>7960815
Nah
>>7960813
People don't realize that Malick is the closest thing mainstream film has gotten to a legit intellectual. Not only did he translate Heidegger, he taught philosophy, worked at MIT, was a Rhodes Scholar, graduated from Harvard with highest honors. He's not an intellectual fraud.
>>7960881
Yah
>>7959738
Terrible. If you think faust is the protestant equivalent of the first two, you should just give up.
/tv/ please keep your AIDS on your designated containment board.
>>7960712
hahahaha
>>7960903
>7960903
there's no reason for mainstream film to have intellectuals in it
>>7958225
>s-see g-guys? I didn't w-waste my muh-money getting this degree-re. Honest-st.
>>7961273
I prefer this version.
>>7960903
>Malick is the closest thing mainstream film has gotten to a legit intellectual
I would say Kubrick qualifies too.
>>7961699
Be careful, tryhards will shit on you with this choice (despite being correct).
>>7959738
>Protestantism
>not Paradise Lost
>>7961699
>Kubrick
eh, i'd say he's great at aesthetic choices in movies, but an actual writer. That's why he only did adaptations of books, and his best movies where done with the help of the original writers.
>>7962154
>but an actual writer
*but not a great writer. what the hell happened
Classic Book = a pic of a book
Serious Books = a pic of a book
Art Book = a picture of a book
Traditional Book = a pic of a book
Popular Book = a pic of a book
Pop Book = a pic of a book
>>7961620
I cannot believe you'd put the brothers karamazov as a canonical work of orthodoxy
>>7957527
some joints and then Tree of Life
>>7961675
Well, atleast one person understands
>>7961675
This is nice chart
>>7962174
>I cannot believe you'd put the brothers karamazov as a canonical work of orthodoxy
I didn't make the first two choices, only the last two. Feel free to change them.
saved ;)
>>7965130
This was at page 10 why the fuck did you bump this?
