This was the first "arthouse" film I've ever watched. I could barely sit through it, and the smartest criticism I could come up with was that it was a self-masturbatory mess. Am I a pleb?
>>63917465
Start with la dolce vita
>>63917465
>the smartest criticism I could come up with was that it was a self-masturbatory mess
that sums them all up pretty nicely
>Am I a pleb?
no, you probably just have taste
Star Wars is the pinnacle of artistic achievement in film.
Well you started with the most self-masturbatory film ever created
>>63917465
No, this isn't a good movie.
what the fuck does "art house" even mean? I never care about genres or budgets, I just download movies that seem interesting
>>63918373
Well, The Empire Strikes Back is certainly up there.
>>63918464
lmao
>>/imdb/
>>63918460
Art house means anything that has no coherent plot
>>63917465
I didn't like it either. Came off as pretentious to me but it could be because I didn't really understand it.
>>63917498
La Dolce Vita was a lot better
>>63918460
>An art film (also known as an art movie, specialty film, art-house film/arthouse film, or, in the collective sense, as art cinema) is typically a serious, independent film aimed at a niche market rather than a mass market audience.[1] An art film is "intended to be a serious artistic work, often experimental and not designed for mass appeal";[2] they are "made primarily for aesthetic reasons rather than commercial profit",[3] and they contain "unconventional or highly symbolic content".[4]
t. wikipedia
>>63919164
>I didn't really understand it
a guy with writer's block and messy private life retreats into his fantasies and memories
what was hard to get?
>>63919290
The point
>>63919330
That kind of thing isn't really necessary.
>>63917465
well 8 1/2 IS actually a self masturbatory mess
also dont believe in the "arthouse" vs "commercial" meme. neither label has any meaning during the making of a film. I don't even really believe that arthouse as a term should even exist. movies are movies. there are surreal childrens movies. are they arthouse? is dumbo arthouse? Taxi Driver is a critical and commercial success. Is it not arthouse anymore? Fucking stupid term. They're all movies. This labeling nonsense is beyond retarded
Yes you're a pleb.
The film is about kicking back and seeing an artist quickly lose touch with reality after years of mistakes and fame.
You're probably American or britbong, so you can't understand the human aspects of Italian films.
>>63919393
I can understand some labelling but arthouse is the most stupid. These days, it's like everything that isn't a 200 million dollars blockbuster is arthouse. Everything non-American is arthouse, no matter how easy it is to get the point of the film.
>art house
>AKA post-modernism movies
>actually watching pure human garbage created by talentless morons who never put any effort into anything but call it art anyway because le post-modernism meme
>>63919499
Yeah, it's kind of funny watching some of the critics wank off over shit like Black Coal, Thin Ice. An enjoyable and well-shot crime movie, but nothing that we haven't seen a million times before.
>>63917465
Acquired taste. Go dig up the /tv/ recommeded arthouse chart and watch everything in it.
Then come back to this.
>>63919499
Yeah it kind of blows my mind. I remember reading the wikipedia article for Stalker saying it's an arthouse film. It's a sci fi film made with fucking Soviet money. I don't understand anything anymore
and you're right. If it's not capeshit, lowest common denominator comedy bullshit, or a part of any mega franchise with special effects, then people call it arthouse and say that they dont lik arthouse
so do these people intentionally only watch bad movies? Like anything that can stir emotion even a fraction is upsetting? Anything that does something other than escapism is too much for you? How shitty of a person do you have to be to think this?
>>63919517
>all art cinema is post-modern
wow a complete misunderstanding of film history AND art history
>>63919697
I bet you enjoy the works of Andy Warhol
>>63919642
there's very little conventional re: Stalker though
>film aimed at a niche market rather than a mass market audience... not designed for mass appeal
i think by far the most relevant distinguishing feature of "art film," greater than any consideration of aesthtics for better or worse, is its limited commercial viability. it's in it's name even, these films aren't going to be found in multiplexes but "art houses" or even art museums
>>63919290
I got that. So what though?
>>63920061
>So What?
what do you mean by this? You can say that for any movie/ In Jurassic Park the dinosaurs escape. So What? In Star Wars they fight the Empire. So What? In the Avengers all the superheroes fight together. So What?
It's a movie shithead. The purpose is in the form. It's about how it's done.
>>63919713
is the most popular artist of the 20th century the only one you could think of?somewhat. i like his filmed portraits he called "screen tests," haven't seen most of his other cinematic works, but I detest his Factory approach and cult of personality (which are a couple of the major points of his Art in toto, but still)
>>63920155
Why are you bringing up pleb shit? Just because I didn't like 8 1/2 doesn't mean I love The Avengers, fuckhead. Explain to me what was Fellini's intent besides masturbating over how great of a director he is. There is no wider worldview, no comment on cinema as a whole, just an ode to himself.
>>63920423
The Vanishing
Certified Copy
>>63920612
>how great of a director he is
lolwut
Guido was a fucking mess in that movie, completely emotionally and creatively drained.
I am surprised people don't see 8 1/2 as a great dark comedy.
You have the most whipped loser directing a shitty sci-fi film being constantly heckled by producers. All the while fantasizing that he's a lady's man and a dominator of women while his social life goes up in flames.
I mean, I found it a hilarious movie (though peppered with a lot of somber scenes) - Marcello is great as a complete and total loser whose fantasies about being important and respected are the only things keeping him going.
>>63917465
>>63917560
>>63918373
>>63918406
>>63918422
>>63918464
>>63919059
>>63919164
>>63919330
and this is why none of you will ever be filmmakers of any merit. Even pleb directors like Scorsese were heavily inspired by entry level European art house a la Fellini, Antonioni, Godard, et al. You're a lot of lowbrow autists and underage redditors who would rather watch mindless entertainment like capeshit or star wars. It's embarrassing.
>>63919713
If you don't like the velvet underground you're a mondo pleb
>>63920866
>look how smart I am mom, I can use a la and et al in a sentence
>>63917465
art house is fucking garbage.
LELE RANDOM SUNDANCE BAIT WITH MAYBE SOME SYMBOLISM AND NO COHERENT STORY OR MEANING OR VALUE
>>63920688
Guido was a mess, but his memories and fantasies were beautiful, surreal sequences that are obviously why the film is so celebrated.
>>63920918
holy shit you are retarded if those common phrases upset you (read a fucking book some time)
>>63920918
i spent seven years studying Latin, I think I'm authorized to use et al.
>>63920952
Yeah, I was refuting that guy's assertion that 8 1/2 is about Fellini celebrating himself since Guido is commonly accepted to be a Fellini-surrogate
>>63920961
It's just banter, friend
>>63920866
consider this: art house has no inherent value. i think the filmmaker that i would most like to learn from would be fincher, and maybe some parts scorcese and spielberg. what they make has value. art-house and post-modern stuff has no inherent value whatsoever. you're not ever in a million years gonna say that andy warhol was more talented than michelangelo, for example.
>>63921029
I see that Guido's character is impotent and basically a hack by the time his spaceship movie begins, but I still think putting so much effort into the scenes of his memories and fantasies is what makes it the movie so self-masturbatory.
>>63921225
>The Game
>Fight Club
>Panic Room
>Zodiac
>Gone Girl
>not post-modern
think again
People need to learn not to just jump in to these movies.
You need to understand context of many of the most important films ever made. You can't just come into them with commercial sensibilities about film and come out with a balanced opinion of what they do.
Fellini is a filmmaker that is much more playful than most. His films are generally not literal, focus on spectacle and are in some instances self referential. Thinking that calling a Fellini film "masturbation" is a valid criticism is to complete fail to understand who and what Fellini stands for. He would agree with you that it is masturbation but then state that all film is masturbation.
Start with more intermediate figures next time. Kurosawa, Kubrick, Friedkin. All are more commercial than Fellini or any of the vanguard of European art house. Don't just jump in.
>>63921388
it's all nihilistic and has some post modernist undertones (not all of it), but the fact is it has value. just to take 1 for example, Gone Girl is fantastically directed because Fincher is talented. the movie has an entire story around it. Basically nobody else can do what he does. But Warhol's most famous works can be done by any chump off the street because they don't have TRUE ARTISTIC value
I bet OP would have liked the movie if it were directed by Christopher Nolan and starred Aidan Gillen.
>>63921484
Lmao faggot Hollywood isn't authentic so they're automatically disqualified gone girl was a legit 0/10
![[Frostii]_K-On!_B-Side_Theater_-_Uraon_06_[BD][3BA770E1].mkv_snapshot_01.03_[2014.07.28_19.34.19].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/90MrXBV.jpg "[Frostii]_K-On!_B-Side_Theater_-_Uraon_06_[BD][3BA770E1].mkv_snapshot_01.03_[2014.07.28_19.34.19].jpg")
>>63921416
>don't just jump into entry level flicks
>>63921484
You really seem to be amazed by softbox lighting and efficient direction.
I don't hate fincher but he's just a very efficient director and not much else. He focuses almost entirely on form and sometimes there's some minor subtext but essentially all of his appeal is readily apparent because he is so thoroughly focused on all the technical stuff.
Fellini has a very interesting worldview and presents some if the best films on hedonism that exist. They feel very human.
>>63921794
Art house isn't entry level. There are filmmakers you should watch prior to watching any art house films.
>>63917465
>This was the first "arthouse" film I've ever watched. I could barely sit through it, and the smartest criticism I could come up with was that it was a self-masturbatory mess. Am I a pleb?
id say, by your own words, you did understand the film, you unconsciously described the main themes of the movie.
'self masturbatory mess'' - the protagonist
>>63917465
>I could barely sit through it
I have no patience and can't even pay attention to moving images accompanied by sound for 136mins.
>The smartest criticism I could come up with
You don't even need to worry about coming up with your own anon, the film does that for you with the character of Guido's imaginary critic that vocalizes al the most glaring flaws not only with the fictional film Guido is producing but with 8.5 also. The self masturbation is addressed directly from within the movie, so saying you came up with that as a criticism is like saying "I knew there were robots" about terminator.
>>63921903
>>63921794
i don't think you have to work up to "art house films" by watching other films first. all you really need is the same when apporaching any creative work in any medium: an open mind and the willingness to engage intellectually and emotionally.
not totally necessary, but a big plus, is at least some familiarity with the mechanics of the medium so you can see the craft and how it shapes and creates meaning, emotions, characterization, etc., which i concede would come with watching "easier" films, but again, not totally necessary
This thread is a welcome change,as I have been avoiding this board like the plague the past three days due to the incessant manchild shitposting over a two hour corporate toy commercial.I have however been saved by the recent viewing of sophisticated adult cinema like Hateful Eight,Sicario and the Revenant
>>63918464
Only Hive mind bandwagoners say this, RotJ is better.
>>63922099
So tell me, why is it so good?
>>63922169
I think it's clear that OP came to the movie with commercial sensibilities expecting something with a tight plot, characters etc. He needs a better understanding of what most art house films are interested in doing which is much more about experimenting with form and deviating or subverting standard notions about film.
>>63919290
So this movie is similar to Tarkovsky's mirror right?
I don't see the point of getting mad at these type of movies, they're both beautifully shot and thought provoking.
>>63921860
yes, i like fincher being efficient. i've ALWAYS hated shaky cam etc etc and completely pointless pauses in dialogue or a shot etc. in Fincher's movies, the camera is smooth, the dialogue isn't theatrical, and the visuals are always great. The lighting and palette are always impressive of course, but the way he frames the shot, pans, zooms, it's all top notch. Gives you more focus on the story and themes, and basically he makes the best drama-thriller type movies that I've ever seen.
Not saying I only like Fincher, of course, but I'm so glad he exists.
tbqhwyfamilia i never openly went like "hmm I wanna watch this sundance bait movie now" but just caught a bunch of movies that were that type and i hate it. it's like going to a museum of like, just post-modern works. I get what they were trying to do, but it just becomes too much and boring and like I said, has no real value. If I went to a museum that has renaissance art, it's like, WOW. You can look at the paintings and sculptures all day because they're impressive. I'm also glad post modernism exists, but in the end it's just kinda the artist jacking off, and real art is 1000x more worthy than any post-modernist art
Art is impressive
Fincher is impressive
Warhol is NOT impressive
>>63920918
Anyone who uses "a la" or "whilst" is pretentious.
>>63917465
art house is boring over rated bullshit for the most part. People pretend to like it in order to seem smart and/or impress people
>>63922378
I'm not retarded. I didn't come in expecting explosions or even a plot. I knew what I was getting into, and I, for example, liked Man With a Movie Camera more than I liked this.
>>63922455
No one thinks Warhol is impressive in the film realm.
The fact that you seem to think you should never have a handheld camera shows your naivete. Not every film should look or be directed like a fincher film and his "perfection" is nothing but Illusion.
>>63922346
Did you even watch the film? I mean did you look at it, really look. Many of the compositions and ideas presented on screen were exquisitely beautiful. It's a gorgeous looking film with top tier mise en scene, aided by expert lighting and real locations. The acting performances are good and Felinni chose really interesting faces for his crowd scenes. The scenes with the crowds like the baths and the final dancing scene showcase an anthropological element common to most great works of the cinema that captures a group of people who belong to a time and a place.
>>63922564
I hate that specific style, how am I naive or unknowledgeable? I've never seen it used well except for if it's a film where they're doing the whole meta thing of a character holding the camera. I HATE SHAKY CAM. IT RUINS THE COMPOSITION OF THE SHOT.
I clearly said not everything should be like Fincher but that I'm so glad that he exists, and his 'perfection' is a whole lot more perfect than the 'Kubrick perfectionist' meme
>>63922455
Tarkovsky, Bela Tar, Terence Malick all have some form of technical mastery but they're all considered art-house right?
>>63920061
Fantasies and memories are more more meaningful than most popcorn flicks. Arthouse films connect with the soul, a thing most anons are adverse to speak to.
>>63922440
>thought provoking
Not if you don't have any thoughts of your own.
>>63917465
>Am I a pleb?
No but I would suggest to start with something more lite and then start watching this type of shit.
You might like The Passion of Joan of Arc, but I could definitely see someone reducing as :
>Lel Dumb Ugly Chick staring at camera for the whole movie. Pomo trash that is.
I think Fellini was aiming for this. THIS THREAD, albeit probably a bunch of italian and french cine-fags smoking cigarettes in a coffee house arguing for hours.
Congratulations guys, you are the movie.
>>63922780
But it's not meaningful to the audience, it's meaningful to the author, self masturbatory.
La Dolce Vita was based on the authors personal experiences as well,yet that was a structured movie anyone could connect with
>It's a /tv/ gets triggered by a film about art and artists in general
>>63922723
i can't answer because I don't know anything about them. but I hear most Malick movies are boring. I'm thinking of watching The Tree of Life and judging for myself.
All truly grandiose works of art had some kind of technical feat, not behind, but in FRONT of them, be it Dante's Divine Comedy, Homer's epics, Tolkien's works, da Vinci's paintings, Michelangelo's sculptures, or Fincher's films which will be remembered for generations to come.
Which brings me to my original point that Real Art > Post-Modern Art
>>63922780
Look at this pretentious asshole. I watch movies to have a good time and fuck asian ladyboy asshole after.
Star Wars Episode Seven: The Force Awakens> B8 1/2
>>63922998
>But it's not meaningful to the audience
It was meaningful to me, it made me think about my childhood and the choices and relationships that lead to where i am now. I hate to say this but it sounds like you didn't get it, which is weird because it's very straightfoward
>>63923045
If it make you feel better Anon, Malick also pissed off Sean Penn by editing out 90% of his scripted dialogue in ToL.
>>63923089
How the fuck is his circus fetish or some inside joke he made with a director meaningful to me?
It's not at all
>>63923153
Not everything needs to pander to the audience, the circus stuff is autobiographical, but not the whole movie. It's about a struggling artist. I can't believe Fellini is 2deep4tv, this is reddir-tier
>>63923064
I pride myself in having the capacity to enjoy anything from the 5hr cut of Fanny and Alexander to a Kung-Pow marathon loop. As long as the director has integrity to make what they want, without compromise.
>>63923045
Tree of Life is a technical marvel, almost each shot is pottery.
But can you really connect with christian philosophy, or 50s america suburban life?
>>63923045
>Tolkien
Nah, Thomas Pynchon and Vladimir Nabokov have created vastly superior works. And they are so-called, post-modernists.
Also you seem to think the term, art, is of inherent great value. To say "The Birth of Venus is art" is a statement, not a complement or valid criticism.
And this is the /tv/ after our new batch of imbeciles just arrived. Enjoy, it's only beginning :)
>>63922705
in terms of photography and composition kubrick pisses over fincher,
kubrick has actual iconic images that people love and have gone into cultural library consciousness. im sorry to say that fincher has none of that going for him.
kubrick is literally the greatest d.o.p
>>63923267
I love it when the kid jizzes on the neighbor's underwear. Best pottery.
>>63923045
>Which brings me to my original point that Real Art > Post-Modern Art
Nice No True Scotsman.
You need to do away with the hilariously-wrong thinking of "If I like it, it's art; if I dislike it, it's not-art."
PoMo Art is art; bad art is art; good art is art; mediocre art is art; art you dislike is art; etc.
Art isn't inherently-good/bad. Stop thinking as such.
>>63923276
>Be 14
>Mostly watch popular flicks and commercial entertainment
>Check out this so-called "art-house" film about a italian director
>Lmao it's so self-masturbatory, why is this considered great?
>Must be a bunch of pretentious fucks thinking they're smart for liking shit that they can't possibly fully understand
>Don't read any reviews or articles about the film to have further insight and maybe look at it under a different light
>Shitpost about it on /tv/
>A bunch of like-minded ignorant plebs agree
;)
>>63923361
The sad thing about post modern shit is that it apparently attracts the most unwanted people on earth aka pretentious idiots with no sense of humility and understanding.
If you like art, but aren't a decent human being, might as well kill yourself.
>>63923361
Good art > Mediocre art
Real Art > Post-Modern Art
good art pushes the medium forward. post-modern art just ponders on the medium and goes 'lel meta'
the whole point of post-modernism is that you can't even be sure if it's art at all, so how can it be truly influential or meaningful?
PS: just started watching ToL. 10 mins in. could they, like, use boom mics or something? and not whisper during voice-overs? fucking can't tell what they're saying half the time
You're mind is not ready for kinography. Start with the greeks.
>>63923603
>posting on /tv/ while watching movies
>preaching to everyone what good art is or isn't
can you like fuck off
>>63923657
>Post modernism
>Ever good
If you like it, keep it to yourself. Don't push your shit taste on others.
>>63923603
>ToL
? Is it so hard to type the fucking name?
>>63923614
Basically this, when Fellini is too high-brow for you you need to start at the beginning, watch the Lumière brothers stuff
>>63923548
Beautifully designed post
>this thread isn't even bait
we /normal/ now
someone just fucking shoot me
>>63923736
Do you know what modernism is ?
>>63923603
>abbreviating a three-syllable title
>posting on /tv/ during the movie
Kill yourself before you breed
>>63923891
Shoot me too. You're not alone in despair, friend. I mean, how low can /tv/ go?
>>63923548
>needing to read analyses and reviews to appreciate a movie
If you need other people explain to you why something is good, you're a pleb too. They may enhance appreciation, but shouldn't be the baseline for it.
>>63923603
>could they, like, use boom mics or something? and not whisper during voice-overs? fucking can't tell what they're saying half the time
>posting on /tv/ during a movie
i hope you die a painful death
>>63924013
Reasonable point, but if the person is at that state, he shouldn't be seeing it in the first place.
>>63923993
pick 3 art movies to watch before killing yourself, go
think i would go..
Mirror
To The Wonder
Blade Runner (inb4 that's not art house!!!!11)
>>63923949
>>63924072
>abbreviating it because the first time I said Tree of Life, the first reply I got said ToL. it's pretty understandable what ToL means
>having to distract myself from the movie on purpose to keep going
yeah it's garbage so far. why are you triggered? imagine i get to the end and i get all the themes, all the POTTERY and etc but i still think it's just bad? what then, faggot?
most of you faggots seem to think if somebody doesn't like it, that means they're a pleb and don't get it, as opposed to just not liking the movie.
>>63924131
Kill yourself. If it's hard to get the idea, we can make a drawing. Kill yourself.
>>63924131
you're not even paying any fucking attention to it; how can you have any opinion worth seriously considering?
>>63924131
If you can't even last 10 minutes through any movie without posting on /tv/, you are utterly hopeless. Maybe the new Alvin flick is more up your alley, even Nolan might be too inaccessible for you
>>63924105
Welp, looks like I'll just have to pretend I liked 8 1/2 if it ever comes up in conversation, so people don't call me a pleb.
>>63923603
Again, you're just playing No True Scotsman.
As tautological as it is: all art is "real" art.
ART IS ART IS ART IS ART; IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT IT.
Good art? Art. Bad art? Art. PoMo art? Art. Classical art? Art.
Art will always be art. Your definition of "good" art is subjective -- as good/bad tends to be.
Art doesn't need to be insightful; art doesn't need to be meaningful; art doesn't need to be beautiful; art doesn't need to be many things to still be art.
If you want art to be meaningful/insightful, fine; but, works of art that contain neither don't make them not-art just because of your criteria.
Pizza is still pizza even if I think it tastes like shit; art is still art even without the frill you crave.
Again: get over your mentality of art needing to satiate YOU in order to be art. Doesn't work like that.
The first I saw was the Dreamers and I got really drunk and don't remember anything but Eva Green's boobies.
>>63924275
You won't sound like a pleb if you are coherent and articulate expressing your opinion.
>>63924384
Thanks. I've posted my opinion throughout this thread. I'm just afraid I'm literally too stupid to understand movies like this and am doomed to being a filthy peasant. I didn't "get" Le Doble Vie de Veronique either. My top 10 movies, which i can barely even conjure, are atrociously shameful
Sometimes there's complaints and all, but as far as I can understand 95% of /tv/ is plebs since at least 2010. I feel it's pointless to expect something better.
>>63924461
>Le Doble Vie de Veronique
I'm with you, i actually "got" the movie but i find Kielslowski in general unaffecting. It's good, but it didn't evoke the feelings it was aiming to, at least not on me, because critics love it. I think some films just don't resonate with you, but that doesn't mean it's the film's fault.
>>63924293
Real Art > Post-Modern Art
both are art, i said as much
i'm personally more appreciative of real art, but the thing is that it's OBJECTIVELY better because it moves the medium forward. In Post-Modernism there's nowhere to go from that. it's just an encapsulated thing.
think of real art as a movie and PoMo as a movie review (that is the point of PoMo after all, to provide some form of social commentary of the current state of the medium, it's a deconstruction). now, the movie can do some cool new things and move the medium forward. the review is just the review. you can like the review and think it's insightful or funny, but there's nowhere to go after that.
how am i playing no true scotsman if i'm being objective about it?
a movie with good technical feats (direction, acting, etc)+good overall story+good integration of themes and a message IS ALWAYS BETTER than just average presentation+POTTERY & symbolism
also there's the issue of post modernism not even being considered art at all (which i have considered art up until this point). imagine if I think The Room is a post-modern masterpiece, a beautiful black comedy and a critique of a specific genre or even cinematography itself. the reality is, The Room is garbage. it's not "good", it's "so bad, it's good". you're not gonna say The Room is equal to any other movie ever because they're all art. thus, some art is superior to other art.
>>63924617
Yeah, it's my fault.
This thread is full of farthouse pseuds that clearly have no idea of what they're talking about
Farthouse is a stupid term for a stupid movement
Can't wait until mumblecore is memorialized 30 years from now, how dreadful will that shit be
>>63924798
Not that guy, but did you even bother looking up "no true Scotsman"?
>>63924895
Don't act so insecure, peabrain. Your kind far outnumbers any of the others. Keep euphoric.
>>63925029
i know what it means. it's this selective behavior, ie "no true scotsman would drink that brand of beer!" or w/e. he thinks i'm saying "i like this better so it's objectively better", when in reality i'm trying to be as objective as i can, and The Room example is probably the best i'll be able to express it. no matter what way you look at it, The Room is OBJECTIVELY AWFUL. i'm also saying that proper art that takes technical skill is superior to post-modern art. is that so hard to understand? what is OBJECTIVELY better, a work that has meaning AND needed years of technical skill honing to achieve, or just something that some faggot put together without real skill but has some kind of 'message'?
if you REALLY want, you can argue both are art and meaningful, but what I'm saying is that the former example is much more impressive and PART of the medium.
i'm saying that not everybody can be an artist, as hard as a hipster painter from new york who organizes 'expos' with his beatnik-reject friends can try to tell you otherwise.
>>63919550
It's marketing strategy by rallying a feeling of "we who watch Chinese movies and they who don't"
Normies will never understand art
>>63925376
Did I trigger you little insecure nitwit?
>Your kind far outnumbers an of the others
The fuck are you even talking about you stupid shithead?
>>63917465
>not enjoying movies just cause based Marcello Mastroianni is in them
come on m8.
>>63924798
define "real art"
define "post-modern art"
It's like you have no clue what the fuck you are talking about.
>that is the point of PoMo after all, to provide some form of social commentary of the current state of the medium, it's a deconstruction
No, that's really not what postmodernism is about.
>>63925465
>The Room is OBJECTIVELY AWFUL
This is an objectively wrong statement, if you don't see why, you must be a genuine idiot.
>proper art
define "proper"
>art that takes technical skill is superior to post-modern art
Why are you implying that post-modernist art is not skillful?
>what is OBJECTIVELY better, a work that has meaning AND needed years of technical skill honing to achieve, or just something that some faggot put together without real skill but has some kind of 'message'?
define "better"
Also, please explain why something difficult MUST be better than something simple.
>i'm saying that not everybody can be an artist
Everyone can be an artist.
You, as much as I loathe the fact, are an artist.
You don't seem to understand what art is.
>>63925930
Don't strain that tiny mass above your eyes too hard trying to understand. There's no need to have a stroke. You're already an elite retard just the way you are.
>>63925992
why don't YOU try to define anything that you mention without asking for my definition?
your entire argument seems to be based on treating all art and art movements equally, which TO ME is wrong. they all have a "message" (which to me, is the definition of art), but some are inherently better than others.
everyone can TRY to be an artist
not many people can be GOOD artists
there's nothing i can say that can convince you otherwise, but this is what it is to me, not all art is equal
>>63923045
When judging Malick, don't just watch Tree of Life. It probably the epitome of what he's been doing lately, but watch some of his older stuff to like Thin Red Line and Days of Heaven, but especially Badlands it's possibly his best
>>63926514
>why don't YOU try to define anything that you mention without asking for my definition?
I don't want to do that.
Because then you're gonna something like "but that's not what I mean".
>some are inherently better than others
You have not explained why that is.
>>63926669
I've already tried to explain what I mean.
You haven't.
Not all art is equal, like not all people are equal. A rich young good-looking smart accomplished businessman is BETTER as a person than some dude with no legs in subsaharan africa, even if they have very similar moral views.
In fact I'd like you to explain to me any case in life where something is equal to something else. this is why i often don't judge things equally, because there's no comparison. How can you compare the Pietà to Campbell's Soup Cans? You can, if you're stupid. If you say they're both on the same level, you're even more stupid.
You can call them both "art", but they're not equal.
>>63917465
Nah, Fellini is a pretty big hack. Antonioni is a much better Italian director and makes a lot more relateable films that are actually carefully constructed and aren't just dude hot women lmao
>>63927043
>BETTER
depends on the criteria of what makes one better. If dude lost his legs trying to save his children, continues to provide for them, while the businessman fucked over a colleague to gain an advantage and lives mostly for himself, is the latter still better? It depends.
Thus, in any case, you two seem fundamentally irreconcilable. what is the point in furthering this on/tv/?
>>63927043
>You haven't.
Yeah, that's because I am not the same person, check the IP counter.
>>63927835
You don't understand what criteria you should use to judge a film. Stop posting your garbage opinions until you educate yourself.
>>63928545
A big aspect of cinema is being able to reflect or at least show life and the human condition and being able to relate with characters or certain aspects of characters is a part of that. In my opinion that is the main criteria one should use to judge a film.
>>63928843
That's a sound and relevant criteria, realism and 'thermometering' of the moods of a time and society. But to give it- or any other criteria- too much weight, shuts off many chunks of cinema appreciation.
Back to the first post, a statement like "Fellini is a pretty big hack" is insanity and garbage 'analysis'. Like many others, you just seem interested in give hot and contundent opinions on /tv/, and doesn't even matter if you believe it or not, it's all the law of the land: shitposting.
>>63929140
Seconded. Niggas are crazy here.
Ugh, Italian arthouse cinema. Watch something by Mario Bava instead
>>63928843
Wait, are you saying 8 1/2 is lacking this aspect?
Most "art" when people have to claim they're "true artist" are garbage. Classic "art" ended by the end of WW2. Everything after WW2 is literal garbage.
>>63929420
Cool
>>63929140
To me Fellini comes across as overly superficial, and whilst I haven't seen his whole filmography, most of his films seem to centre around his idea of beauty. They're well shot a lot of the time, but most of his central characters all seem two dimensional and their only motivation to do anything is sex. I don't find the underlying meaning in the surface level superficiality of his films like I do with Antonioni's. Antonioni I often view as someone who basically took the neorealist concept and applied it to the bourgeoisie and showed that even if you're rich, good looking etc, there's another level of suffering which includes boredom, the inability to genuinely love people etc. The suffering of the character's in Fellini's films all feels shoehorned in so he has excuses to show the audience as many pretty girls as possible without really having anything useful to say. I guess he could be trying to make a point that at the end of the day all our intelligence is meaningless and we all just want to be hedonistic animals, but to me that just seems lazy and it's been done millions of times before.
>>63929140
I agree with you that realism and the ability to feel the emotional weight of a scene, in some sense to live through it oneself, is an essential part of what makes cinema a valid and interesting art from. But it is also a visual medium so it can always also be examined from the purely graphic point perspective. I think something like 8 1/2 deserves to be considered from both angles, which is why it is still being talked about today. It has emotional as well as technical merits. Unfortunately it seems that people ITT can't actually say what those merits are and debate their relative strengths and weaknesses without resorting to name calling or off topic arguments about semantics.
Such a painful thread to read through. But this place is for kids, after all.
OP, my advice is to keep trying. Watch more. Challenge yourself. Eventually you'll return to 8 1/2 and realize it's a pretty light, funny movie.
>>63928843
>>63929140
>>63929610
>>63929651
Good to have people at least trying to talk things outside of the meme life.
>>63923603
Holy shit dude you clearly have no grasp on what post-modernism is.
Also get the fuck off /tv/ and actually watch the movie if you're gonna watch it instead of sitting on your computer the whole time trying to think up criticisms
Fellini's staple films are relatively easy to watch. You shouldn't need to intellectualize them to be entertained, and in fact, his films aren't really all that intellectual. I think the case is here that you're young and have a narrow appreciation of film. At this juncture, you shouldn't be so hung up on your opinions of famous films, because if you keep at it and learn to appreciate more, you'll find your opinions will change a lot.
When I first saw 8 1/2 for the first time as a teenager, it put me into a deep sleep that only black and white foreign films could. I watch it now and I have no idea how it could have bored me so much. Even if you don't like the movie, it's very accessible.
>>63930497
This guy is very calm and you should listen to him, op. Of course, many of the ones that aren't very calm would have great value in their words to you, but they might come as too asshole-ish for your consideration.
>>63929836
*tips fedora*
stop talking, idiot. this art house shit is always one dimensional garbage made by people who don't grasp the concept of what film is. it's essentially autistic.
>>63930357
meant to also quote
>>63924798
>>63925465
>>63926514
and also meant to add that you also have a very poor grasp of art.
Do you think somebody who paints photo-realistic paintings is a better artist than picasso because they have more technical skill at making what they paint look like reality?
>>63930633
At this point, I can only laugh at your desperate attempts. Keep being cute.
>>63930753
keep being a fucking faggot, redditor. nobody takes you seriously. people watch film to be entertained, not to be subjected to the masturbatory works of pretentious hacks who aren't talented enough to cut it in the world of literature or classical music which is actually art by the way. film isn't art. it can never be art and the ones who try and turn it into art are the always the least talented hacks out there that hide behind "art" as way to make an excuse for their mediocre bullshit.
>>63930891
here's ur reply
>>63930891
>>>/starwars/
Oh, wait...
>>63930891
Fucking philistines don't stop popping out everywhere. Why are you even here if you hate cinema?
>>63930891
>>63923603
I feel bad for you because you obviously want to be a patrician but the road ahead is long as evidenced by you posting on /tv/ and not watching the fucking movie you have on.
>>63929420
Art as lifelike depiction of reality became worthless with the invention and popularization of photography.
>>63919179
So basically, the more boring it is, the greater it is. This is like some religious bullshit. The more you suffer, the more moral you are.
>>63932252
Upvoted!
>>63932252
>the more boring it is the better
Where in the hell in the definition does it say anything about a film being boring? Because it eschews a desire for broad commercial appeal? Guess what, films that don't try to be commercial can still be entertaining.
Some films do try to make the audience suffer though. Hard to Be a God with it's gross mise en scene or the lengthy works of Bela Tarr, or the glacial pace of Tsai Ming Liang's films all play with different ways of causing discomfort for the audience as a way to deepening the films.
You have a right to be bored by a film that is essentially a staring contest, but that by no means makes the film itself boring. It is on you to remain actively engaged with material you find difficult.
>>63917465
no. Roma is his GOAT, also Satyricon, la dolce vita, and juliet of the spirits
i love felini and i dont really like 81/2.
>>63920866
Lol shut up
>>63926104
23/30
not bad
>>63917465
8 1/2 is actually entertaining as fuck, you have seen very very little cinema if you think otherwise
>>63936030
Some big disappointment in these 23?
>>63936142
>>63917465
Nine is so much better.
It has one of the greatest actors in history in it.
>>63921518
>8 1/6
>>63922564
>No one thinks Warhol is impressive in the film realm.
what the hell are you talking about
he's on the sight & sound poll ffs
I was just reading an interview with James benning where he goes on about his screen tests
>>63919059
Is Pulp Fiction arthouse?
