What the fuck?
I can't stop laughing.
But Jesus, man.
Lotta chatter on this movie nowadays. It's ok. I like it.
The most fascinating thing about this movie is that it was retro, of its time, and ahead of its time all at the same time.
Life during wartime was good too. Solondz is gifted I hope he hasn't lost his touch.
PSH's character resonated with me.
The worst part is that no one gets a happy ending. Even the people who get what they want.
>Laura Flynn Boyle finally gets a chance to do something authentically out of the cliched persona she has built as a writer, by fucking a weirdo, but can't bring herself to.
>PSH and the fatty end up together, but still are distant
>the pedo gets his boys, lives out his fantasies, and still feels empty afterward. Even though he is honest with his son, his confession does not change his lusts.
>the parents get their separation and realize there's no such thing as a fresh start
>the one chick has her ideals crushed and trust by a shithead Russian cabby
Nothing in this movie feels triumphant. Fuck.
DUDE INCEST AND PEDOPHILIA LMAO
>>66657595
never change /tv/
I liked Jane Adams' little boobies
>>66657012
For some reason I thought Paul Thomas Anderson directed this.
>>66657683
Weird. Happiness is actually good so I don't know how you could have thought that.
PTA is one of the most "video game" hack frauds working today.
>>66657939
>PTA
>makes movies akin to vidya
nigga, what? that criticism is way off-base
>>66657595
>white ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''people''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
>>66658074
>Boogie Nights
>There WIll Be Blood
Two of the most video game inflected movies ever made. Flashy quip driven ADHD meme time spectacle. Capeshit pornography.
>>66657570
That kid came though.
>>66657211
ARE YOU WET
IS YOUR PUSSY ALL WET
>>66658151
Please tell me you're trolling.
Like, you don't actually hold that opinion and you're just doing it to post a controversial opinion on /tv/, right?
>>66658229
Nothing controversial about that opinion at all once you move outside of the imdb "movie buff" bubble. PTA is Tarantino for teenagers who decide they've grown out of Tarantino. The two are the biggest pornographers working today.
>>66658331
I've seen a lot of movies, m8. And while I enjoy the films of Paul Thomas Anderson (and Tarantino to some effect) and you may not, it's simply wrong to compare them to video games. They're very cinematic in traditional ways. Oddly enough given Boogie Nights, PTA's films are far from pornographic too (Tarantino is another story). Regardless of whichever demographic you think has bad taste in film despite being marketed PTA's work, your criticism is plain wrong.
>>66658441
>it's simply wrong to compare them to video games
The flashy camera work with the epin long takes and so detailed and authentic set design are all but indistinguisable from the pornographic virtual explosions that send people the world over into an drooling infantilized stupor.
You see DDL screaming focus grouped pre-prepped for "iconic" status meme dialogue like "drink the milkshake" or PSH shouting pig fuck while americans are whooping at the screen and shoving popcorn into their fat faces and you tell me that's any different to a capeshit video game?
Pro-enjoyment sensibility is VIDEO GAMER. Pro-enjoyment is pornography. Art is suffering. No different between photographing some flashy scene intended to be pleasing to the eye and shoving a huge pair of tits in the face of the audience. It is pro-enjoyment sensibility capeshit garbage intended to keep plebes complacent while the powers that be strip them of all civil liberties.
The jew puts DDL onscreen gurning his acting memes of "legitimacy" to keep you distracted as he puts his hand in your pocket. He is a con artist. A societal degenerate.
The mastubation "masterpiece" maker. I'd cut his fucking throat.
>>66657012
Damn, white people all kind of fucked up!
Old couple ruined the flick
>>66658153
I think that was the whole purpose of him cumming, being the only triumphant one on the movie.
Poetry at its best
>>66658696
lol
>>66657012
Is there an HDrip of this?
>>66657012
I loathe, LOATHE Todd Solondz. His movies are the opposite of art. They are trash.
>>66660589
this tbf
>>66658921
that's why they kill their parents and shoot schools.
>>66660589
Explain. I love his movies.
What don't you like about them, anon? I'm listening.
>>66661261
Art should be about elevating the human spirit. It should strive to show the best of humanity. Solondz purposefully brings us down into the gutter of his mind. His movies are disgusting and in poor taste.
>>66661591
That's a very narrow view of art. Is Camus not art? Is Burroughs not art? Is Francis Bacon not art? Was Kubrick not an artist because he saw fear and hypocrisy at the base of human interaction?
All of those guys sought to show human origin in the gutter.
Some art should reflect on where and who we are as a people, and remind us of how little distance we've traveled, rather than reassuring us of a higher calling.
>>66658696
do you make anything?
>>66661591
>art should be about
lol
>>66658696
So...you think movies should only make us miserable. What the hell are you even trying to say?
You sound like you could use a vacation from this website, desu m8
>mfw the cunt sister starts kissing the dog
>>66662019
You deserve to be miserable. If you think differently then you are part of the degeneracy.
>>66661775
But Solondz's movies are filled with cheap cliches of human debasement. The pederast, the pervert, the self-loathing black man. Why are there no heroes in Solondz's works? Why must everyone be so pathetic? To Solondz, we are all monsters.
Kubrick at least recognized humanity was capable of greater things, even things beyond the self.
>>66662209
>To Solondz, we are all monsters
And why is that a problem?
Or are you one of those people that only think something is art if it falls within your own definitions of what it has to be?
And art isn't about elevating the human spirit, you liberal fuck. Something is only art when someone perceives it as such, at which point literally anything can be considered art.
>>66662322
>at which point literally anything can be considered art.
Yeah, you are why art is in such sorry shape today
>>66662365
>art is in such sorry shape today
Meme opinion. Back to /v/eddit.
>>66662365
>All the psuedo-intellectual posturing ITT
Wew lads
>>66657012
Todd Solondz is one of the worst things to happen to the image of American independent filmmaking in the last 20 years
a complete hack with almost zero redeeming qualities
>>66662446
>Woman takes a shit on stage
>Anon: "It's art!"
>Butterdance.gif
>Anon: "It's art!"
>>66662209
How are those cliches?
How often are honest stories of sexual perversion told through film?
>>66662739
>Genuinely upset that art isn't just muh pretty pictures
>Genuinely upset that ill-defined "rules" are being broken
>Cannot grasp interplay of form and format
>Cannot grasp rejection of formalism
You may have autism
>>66657012
PSH greatest performance
>>66662151
>being happy makes you degenerate
kek, whatever you say you miserable faggot
>>66658696
I've seen you post this shit all over /tv/ and it has to stop. Do you even make art? Art is not suffering - it can be, at turns, but to say it's either total suffering or total enjoyment is reductive. How can a practice so concerned with aesthetics drive inherently toward a repulsive end? The highest art is concerned often with beauty - true beauty, divorced from the simple.
This stupid fucking 'the artist is miserable!' trope is cliche high-school grade rubbish. People look at Van Gogh for instance and build him up as a 'troubled artist' whose life was miserable - and he was miserable, he had mental issues. However his art gave him what little joy his life contained - otherwise, why would he do it?
Happiness is hollow, yes. But art in its ideal moments inspires joy in the artist and its viewer - and before you get on me about 'degeneracy,' here's a definition of joy, I searched through my copy of Rilke's letters and transcribed this just for you:
>The reality of joy in the world is indescribable; only in joy does creation take place (happiness, on the contrary, is only a promising, intelligible constellation of things already there); joy is a marvelous increasing of what exists, a pure addition out of nothingness. How superficially must happiness engage us, after all, if it can leave us time to think and worry about how long it will last. Joy is a moment, unobligated, timeless from the beginning, not to be held but also not to be truly lost again, since under its impact our being is changed chemically, so to speak, and does not only, as may be the case with happiness, savor and enjoy itself in a new mixture.
>>66662151
Being miserable is degenerate. The tendency toward being miserable is used to excuse by many people a myriad of poor behavior. It's literally and demonstrably the result of a botched mental balance. How can you believe for a second that 'being miserable' is some pious moral good after looking at all the tumblrs that exist of teens going UGH I'M SO DEPRESSED ALL THE TIME who, in your own words, '[are kept] complacent while the powers that be strip them of all civil liberties ... [kept] distracted as he puts his hand in your pocket.'
I can't fathom why you would think simple happiness automatically means degeneracy when it's so clear simple sadness also does. Perhaps because you have depression and somehow as a result have a moral chip on your shoulder?
>>66657012
>But Jesus
>ButtJesus
lmao
