It's Friday, are you watching anything tonight?
>>63313033
Probably not, at best might netflix and chill but won't watch enough of it to morally justify logging.
Re-watched this last night, first time since seeing it at TIFF in '09.
Anyone here watched Story of My Death? Reviews seem to be amazingly mixed. I've heard it's absolute shit and absolute gold with little range in between.
Thoughts on it?4444
>>63313033
It's 3am Sat morn and I'm going to bed tbqh.
But not before I mention Scorsese a shit.
>>63314444
Holy shit checked
epic win my friend
>>63313033
>op gets dubs
>>63314444
>quads four posts in
This is me, live from New York, getting singles
One of these excluding Mad Max since it premieres on HBO in January so there's no reason to torrent it.
>>63315290
Oh man, watch Calvary.
>>63315290
Choose the best one :^)
Gonna finally try and get around to watching late spring.
Then maybe get back to some holes to fill in 2015 releases
>>>/lbgt/
Lesbian Bi Gay Transexual?
>>63316035
More like 'Lad Bullies Get Together'
>>63316124
You mean "Lady Boys Get Turnt"; anyway what are some essential Thai films?
>>63316035
It actually stands for Lads, Banter, Giggling and tittering
>>63316301
Lads,Blowing, Gagging, and Tugging
Y I K E S
>>63315290
>Stoker
>The Gift
>Birdman
Are my suggestions.
>>63316442
This lad is mad. Must be good, then.
On a sidenote, why do so many people get choleric with Iñárritu?
>>63314444
first >>63304324, now this.
what the fuck is happening on /tv/ today.
also yes I have seen it and it's amazing. It's putrid, languorous and completely strange. Just Casanova wandering around his estate and the woods in a wistful daze. Nothing happens. I loved it.
>>63316035
lets be great toys (sexual ones of course)
>>63315290
Waitress and Palo Alto are the best films on that list
>>63317798
'no'
>>63317829
'no' what
>>63316442
Y I K E S
I
K
E
S
>>63317889
'no' as in 'you're wrong'
>>63317468
You should've seen these last night
>>63305444
>>63305488
>>63305777
>>63305888
>>63318042
which films are better?
>>63318209
Mistress America, Mad Max Fury Road, Birdman..., Her, Blood Diamond, Calvary and The Walk
You picked at the bottom
>>63318397
actually none of those films are better than waitress or palo alto
>>63318397
shit taste
>>63318814
>>63318901
I'm slightly sorry for your plebness, but not much.
>>63319031
'no'
>>63316035
Letterboxed bRYM gCinemos Trakt
>>63316442
>Please go see Joy on Christmas
I ain't giving any of my hard earned money to Discount Scorsese, thank you very much
I'm going to watch either La Chienne, Threads or Touch of evil.
>>63319308
Watch Touch of Evil
>>63319308
Watch La Chienne
>>63319308
Watch Threads
>>63319308
Watchyour mom's sex tape :^)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLLhOWbG01g
opinions?
>>63319423
Watchmen
>>63319567
I like the Kubrick version more
>>63317342
Because he isn't a good filmmaker and to counter the frothing at the mouth praise coming from his first-year movie buff /v/eddit fanbase
>>63320203
Hi, Pat!
>>63320203
>he isn't a good filmmaker
lel
>>63319649
why?
>>63320302
he isnt. new to cinema bud?
>>63320464
Not new, I just can recognize quality filmmaking.
>50 posts, 18 posters
Only the best can endure it here, clearly
>>63320302
>>63320497
I wish there was an r/movies general for people like you to stay in
>>63320529
Well, you can always go to the original. Deluded clowns are welcome there >>reddit.com/r/movies
>>63320526
The good users have all moved on. All we have now are the typical zero-self-awareness Iñárritu fans and the masochists who entertain them.
>>63318082
>>63320871
swaglord pls tell hiro to make /film/
>>63320988
For those dubs I will.
can u letterkuks say the same?
>>63321012
I'm admired for my impeccable gets. Can your singles say the same?
>>63320988
Ignore impostors, I'm the only 1.
/film/ is on the way.
>>63321112
>the city of you
>>63316442
He's probably right though. Inarritu is juvenile /v/eddit trash
It's hilarious how far this general has gone down the shitter. It was always kind of bad but we never had people unironically praising Villeneuve and Innaritu
>>63318814
Palo Alto is profoundly pleb but none of those movies he picked are much better
follow the dropout
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbjJLaw0338
>inarritu is shit
stop this meme
its such an easy argument to shit on birdman because its "self-gratifying" and criticizes mainstream "non-art" movies, but why is that such an offense to everyone? can't a filmmaker be concerned with that topic? i feel like it's too much of a + - movie. no, its not the best movie of the decade, but neither is the worst.
>>63322327
Palo Alto is great, almost as good as the book
>>63323737
Who the fuck read the book? Why?
>>63323784
I read it; I was curious; it was great
>>63323784
You don't read a book when you really like the movie it's based on?
What's the movie equivalent of Diners, Drive-ins and Dives
>>63323954
The Fast and the Furious
>>63323836
That's really surprising. Maybe I'll check it out.
>>63323928
Yeah, I guess, but it's a fucking James Franco book, and, face it, how much could it add to the movie? I also doubt anyone here really liked Palo Alto (like, enough to think "wow, I need more of this world!")
>>63324245
I did, Palo Alto was top 10 last year
>>63325568
post profile
>>63325568
age?
>>63325568http://letterboxd.com/evan_d/
>>63325764
25
>>63325824
really odd because it's not even your generation and i thought the teens were pricks and your taste isnt terrible so ok
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpmlsIvez9U
Having big problems logging this. Can someone check if this is on Karagarga? I want to know if it was first released as a stand-alone documentary, or it was always part of a series of extras on a DVD set.
>>63320305
it's funnier
>>63326072
nvm
>>63325824
>albert brooks
>don siegel
>mm xxli love you
>>63326336
What's the answer? And why there would be a problem logging something that was video-produced?
>>63326410
The answer I'm not that sure about, but I think it's a documentary first produced for a French release of the film on DVD in 2002.
I'm still trying to figure how to log special features. My rule so far for everything has been whether the film is independent enough or not (resulting in nothing being logged). For example, the Foxcatcher Blu-ray included a 16 min. feature called "The Story of Foxcatcher" that was just interviews with the cast and a little bit of backstage peak-in. Should that be loggeable? I don't think so, it's just a special feature, always existing in relation to the Blu-Ray set. Now this one is slightly more complicated because it's longer and more elaborate. Now we're approaching "Documentary" levels of classification, even though it exists -apparently- only as part of a 2002 (and later 2008) DVD set.
So now I wonder how to proceed. Should I dismiss it because it's part of a set, or keep judging every special feature on whether they are "complete" enough to be considered independent, and log it, or not? But then, what if the Foxcatcher special had been 3 hours long, but it was, again, 3 hours of backstage and a sort of "hanging-out with the crew" thing? It's 3-hours long, isn't that complete enough?
Another example. Curb Your Enthusiasm, as a series, started with an HBO special called Larry David: Curb Your Enthusiasm. It's not exactly the pilot of the show in the sense of being the first episode, that would come a year later. It's not really considered part of the series neither, many characters are different even. How do I log that? Episode of a series? A short (almost 60 min) film? IMDB classifies it as a TV Movie.
>>63326622
>>63326817
This is a real debate for me constantly. I consume extras at big amounts, but many times it's just a pr product, pretty much soulless advertising; I don't log that even if reaches a somewhat long time. But I suppose if I encountered one that goes feature-length a reconsideration would be necessary.
Even if they are somewhat similar to the category of publicity said above that I don't rate, the collection of interviews that are the films of Laurent Bouzereau, included in so many films, are for example, something that I do consider valid. The guy has auteur characteristics and that's an answer.
Recently, I started to consider video essays, like the ones that Criterion put out, and that was a huge relief, finding a solid categorization.
On the CYE situation, I think the imdb decision is correct, it's a tv movie. The Pasolini doc would go as a short.
On a funny note, when I started watching things and making a register of it- on notebooks-, I didn't consider shorts acceptable experiences, and so never logged them for years.
Probably just have a wank to be honest.
And then suddenly appears a guy having walltexts conversations with himself. This place is rich.
edit: found Jesus. Carol was better xD
This place is getting more and more anti-intellectual by the day. Just look at >>63327209
>>63327044
I'm glad I'm not the only one trapped in this logging-hell. I started logging special features and audio commentaries a couple of months ago, so I haven't had too much to worry about so far, but I agree, some considerations must be done for those that stand out. I didn't have the Curb special logged, and now I do.
I didn't log shorts either! Now I divide between many categories and do include them.
By the way, what would you log Vice? All of their departments fit under series, but the way their content is distributed, and the independent nature of the episodes, makes it really complicated to catalog under my classification of series, since I log by season.
>>63327849
ehrlich is still enemy of cinema, but carol is amazing
I'm pretty sure that with the awards success that Carol will have, /tv/ will happily give Haynes the treatment Linklater got since last year.
>>63329512
The anti-Boyhood spam was only because of RedditLetterMemeia. That shit webseries is frowned upon here.
>>63318814
>>63323737
>>63323784
>>63323836
>>63323928
>>63324245
>>63325568
are you all teenage girls?
inching closer to 30 followers familia
>>63329926
>he has less than 100 followers
YIKES
I
K
E
S
>>63329883
I wish
>>63329926
Damn it felt like it was just yesterday when you asked who would be your 20th follower. It's a blessing to be part of that exclusive 15 club.
>>63329734
>people only hated boyhood because of redditletter media, not because the movie was maudlin le 90s generation nostalgia trash
literally how new
>>63330387
>the movie was maudlin le 90s generation nostalgia trash
You're not welcome. Here we recognize the excellence of Richard Linklater's longest project. Better place for you is >>>reddit
>>63330549
But reddit loves Boyhood
>>63331232
Well, as with most acclaimed movies, everybody likes or love them. But in shitholes like 4chan's /tv/, contrarianism is law of the land.
>>63331537
>if somebody doesn't like my reddit tier flick they're just a contrarian
What you could do with is a safe space f a m
Maybe you'd be more at home on >>>/reddit/
>>63331633
Actually, it's a film. I'm sorry for embarrassing you.
I know of a place where this kind of thing doesn't happen. There, your ignorance is forgiven, and niceness is all around. I think you would like it there >>>reddit.com
>>63331736
>he thinks boyhood is a film
>>63331841
holy shit fuck off back to reddit already
>>63326385
u 2 bb
>>63329883
no i am a 25 year old man
>>63332752
Jizzus, what a horrifying picture. So that's the influence of Redditors on this poor site. Fuck.
>>63332752
Why are reddithood lovers so asshurt
ITT: One newfriend who is weirdly obsesssed with a handful of comments on a meme review show subreddit forces the idea that Reddit didn't love Boyhood and tries to convince everyone here that Boyhood isn't Reddit: The Movie
>>63333058
>le le le le le le
>>>reddit awaits, partner
>>63332752
But you're the one defending Boyhood, reddit
ITT: Mad redditors falseflagging to try to convince naive /tv/ to hate the great cinema of Linklater, and in special, Boyhood
>>63332796
sorry i was confused because you were fawning over a flick made for teenage girls
>>63316322
Fuckin' lewd mate!
where dat 1001 list at fammm
hanh!
