>doesn't bother learning about lenses
>blames men
>men love and understand technology
>women don't
>this is a conspiracy created by the patriarchy
Women are retarded.
>>62908456
She can feel whatever she wants but she is technically right that the director does not need to know lenses.
The problem of course is that to different people, different focal lengths mean different things and not knowing them means trusting someone else to deliver the look that is only in your mind.
There are plenty of directors that don't know the lenses though.
>>62908456
not learning lenses
same as kevin smith.
I will accomplish it through superior womyn emotion power!
If you don't know your lenses, you're relying on someone who does know their lenses to interpret what you're asking for and to use their judgement on how it should be shot.
Their doing a key part of the work and you're taking credit for it.
This is why women are taking over cinema. Male directors only care about lenses, and this leads to heartless movies with no emotion. Women do movies better.
>>62908606
I don't get the whole "I'm going to replace the 'e' in 'women' with a 'y'" meme.
Are you illiterate and misogynistic anon.
That's like Beefheart who told his musicians to play like a ''drowning bat'' and then took all the credit for the compositions.
>>62908456
>I didn't go to lenses school, I went to glass factories!
>>62908621
Nolan sucks for this very reason desu.
>what you need to do this job
"this job" obviously not being cinematography, because the man who was doing that had to use the skills he developed
>i could explain in purely emotional terms
and then the professional translated it from woman to human before any work got done
>>62908671
>using the patriarchy's construct of "correct" vocabulary
you probably also adhere to syntax don't you. fucking mras m^ng
>>62908671
It's a feminist thing, you wouldn't get it anyway anon.
>"Womyn" is one of several alternative spellings of the English word "women" used by some feminists.[1] There are many alternative spellings, including "womban" and "womon" (singular), and "wimmin" (plural). Some writers who use alternative spellings see them as an expression of female independence and a repudiation of traditions that define females by reference to a male norm.[2]
It's really not that hard to "learn lenses". You figure out what they do pretty quick. Like just play with a few for a day and you got it.
>>62908671
>patriarchy detected
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Womyn
>>62908456
>The Diary of a Teenage Girl
>A teen artist living in 1970s San Francisco enters into an affair with her mother's boyfriend.
>>62908456
>muh feelings
Is this literally the only thing a woman can do?
>>62908671
They don't like "men" being in the spelling
>>62908559
>She can feel whatever she wants but she is technically right that the director does not need to know lenses.
They don't need to know lenses, but they do need to know how to describe their vision in constructing mise-en-scene in technical terms so that it can be realized.
If you're not doing that, then you're really just expecting everyone else to read your mind, which is hypocritical coming from someone that doesn't want to perpetuate some secret language.
>>62908807
I don't think it needs to be described in technical terms. She's just relying solely on the skill of her cinematographer.
There are plenty of great female DPs though.
>>62908807
They don't need to describe in technical terms at all. Only emotional.
>>62908904
This but without the sarcasm.
Literally as long as the DP is good and they trust them, they don't need to worry about the lenses.
>>62908456
>convinced it's more about technology than being human, but that's just not true
>what you need to do this job, women are really good at
So, yeah, fuck technical aspects and knowing your craft, women have the natural ability get any old fuck who knows how to fix a car, or in this case work a camera and set up a shot, and then claim they are capable and independent because they got it done by not preparing and getting someone who did to do the deed. And then, they feel proud about it! Proud about their ignorance, like their emotions got the job done anyways.
i unironically think women should go back to kitchen and raising children and never again pretend to create culture or art.
>>62908956
same here, but ironically
>>62908947
>says the "man" that doesn't know lenses nod how to fix his car
>still think "he's" independent
kek
Ideally the director should have base knowledge of all aspects of filmmaking, so yes you should know at least the bare minimum about lenses. Who would this hack blame if she were a man?
>>62909002
How do you know that person can't fix a car? It's not fucking brain surgery, lots of people do it.
to think you can watch Kubriks b&w photographs and they are fucking sweet. the man was a well rounded artist. what will this cumpdumpster leave behind, his fucking blog with her emotions? fuck this shit.
>>62908946
But does the Hegemonic Structure prevent her from directing because of lack of knowledge? How fucking hard is it to learn about lenses? If it's pertinent to your job.
Understanding emotions is how you interact with actors but cinematography involves technology.
When you think about it this isn't so much about fighting the patriarchy as taking pride in your ignorance, what a fucking moron.
>>62908613
Nope. Thats the DP work and he's credited for it.
In indie filmmaking the director sometimes take on the cinematography work but in the real world the director sticks to the actor except some cases like Fukunaga in BONN
>>62908456
I dont get the last line
>when the truth of the matter is,what you need to do this job,women are really good at.
is she saying women are good at it by default.
>purely emotional terms
or you could learn shit and get it done fast. purely emotional terms is how a client explains shit to a web/graphic designer and why it takes forever/ does not turn out right. will she blame the cinematographer for not getting her purely emotional terms right (in an existence when one can never truly know another). this reminds me of that idiot guy who jumped from live action into animation and tried to do reshoots
>>62908559
>director does not need to know lenses.
director needs to know a little of everything. also its should be a job people work up to, instead of jumping right in.
>>62909223
Brad Bird
>>62908456
>purely emotional terms
People like this make me think Plato was right when he took a giant shit on the arts.
There's so much more to the human experience than emotional conflict, but most film makers are afraid to explore the depths of reason.
>>62908621
women can't do totalitarianism in a cool way.
>>62909261
>Brad Bird
I think he's talking about Andrew Stanton who directed John Carter of Mars and cost the production a staggering amount because he did a lot of reshoots. He was from Pixar like Bird, don't know if Bird did a lot of reshoots on Ghost Protocol or Tomorrowland but I know that Stanton did.
>>62908456
Women prove their own inferiority every time they open their mouths.
They are their own worst enemies.
>>62908671
>misogynistic
he simply does as women asked https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Womyn
some feminists feel like words that have male stuff in it like woMEN HIStory,etc make it as if the world is all about men and others are just NPCs in it. its 2015 anon , where is your womens studies degree?
>can't be bothered to study for a few hours for her job
Jesus man
Have feminists already come full circle and started advocating patriarch?
In this scenario, a man has all the technical knowledge, keeping the woman structurally dependent on his help. She could liberate herself of the man if she would just fucking learn her craft, but she somehow thinks it represents feminist ideals to be dependent on someone else's knowledge.
>>62909312
they're dumb. what do you expect?
>>62908946
Yes, but then it is the DP doing her job and as a result she has less direct control over the vision of her project. She won't go very far because her projects will live and die on other people's skills and work, and then she will blame the patriarchy. Directors with consistently good filmography know what they are doing and don't trust other people to do it for them.
>>62908740
JJ is that you?
>>62909301
Maybe I'm thinking about how Bird's second unit does all the work?
Where the fuck is this type of discussion any other time on /tv/? I'm proud of the posts ITT tbqh.
>>62909448
That is a possibility. I don't know much about that side of things, I just knew that John Carter of Mars really blew through the budget on reshoots and other areas because the director was used to animation.
>>62908456
>I'm proud of my ignorance because fuck men with their technical bullshit that helps a director tell a story the way he or she wants
>>62908456
that just seems like a long way to say "I couldn't be arsed to learn about cinematography"
Every single job has technical jargon and unique knowledge
This woman is the worst example of man hating idiocy I've ever seen
A complete fuckwit
>>62909482
Yeah, that sucks because "I kinda liked it"
>>62909348
>Directors with consistently good filmography know what they are doing
usually true to some extent
>and don't trust other people to do it for them.
bullshit
>>62909348
>She won't go very far because her projects will live and die on other people's skills and work
>Directors with consistently good filmography know what they are doing and don't trust other people to do it for them.
Thats just silly.
Its simply impossible to have so much knowledge about every single aspect of filmmaking so that you dont need other people.
The "I can do everything myself " attitude is a trade mark of every obnoxious asshole.
Anycunt in here could direct a movie by proxy
Blaming men for her being a lazy imbecile is fucking outstanding man hating autism
>>62908456
This reminds me that nigger in the newspaper who said computers are racist because they are for white man... And later arrested for rape.
But you dont need to. Its the cinematographers job.
If you tell them the lenses and focal point and lighting set up and everything else you are doing their job and they're just yes men
Now thats perfectly fine if you have a vision to be carried out, or are very controlling
But if you're happy to work in a collaborative process with experienced professionals who know their job then you should be able to leave them to do their thing
>>62908456
The first part of what she said is pretty interesting, but the second part is pretty sexist.
But what she fails to realise is that even though the cinematographer could translate what she describes into imagery pretty well, it can never fully be her vision unless she learns about lenses. But this goes for literally any job in movie production - this is the issue with the "auteur" idea.
Also, Diary of a Teenage Girl was decent desu
>>62909690
Obviously
It's the moronic blaming of the patriarchy that is retarded
>>62908456
I guess we know why she has not directed anything worth shit
>>62909690
>collaborative process
thats how you end up making shit product and 0 name.
Fuck those guys for studying hard and learning basic knowledge about filmmaking TO MAKE ME FEEL STUPID!
Typical inferiority complex and paranoia. Making her lack of knowledge a conspiracy of men to make her feel inadequate.
She clearly DOES feel inadequate but cannot accept any blame herself.
>>62909753
Filmmaking is always a collaborative process unless you're a one man band like Steven Soderbergh
Could someone translate what this twat is saying? Is she saying she doesn't know how lenses work because of the patriarchy? And that she doesn't need to know how they work because someone else (presumably a man) will always know how they work?
>>62909876
It's just gobbledygook. Sounds like she likes to hear herself talk.
>>62908456
>I'm so amazing I have a VISION!
>everyone else does the actual work
Fucking patriarchy keeping the women of the world down.
>>62909876
She's saying that as long as she knows the cinematographer she's working with and has a good working relationship with him then she just has to explain the mood she wants in a scene/shot and he can make it happen with his lenses and technology.
She then says that men keep all the technical aspects secret amongst ourselves and we could just use more flowery language to describe lenses instead of the very precise and specific terms used to ensure consistency and quality.
Basically she said that having a good working relationship with your crew is important because it means you can tell them the vibe that you want and they'll understand it. But then goes on to say that if they didn't use such technical language then it wouldn't be so hard for girls.
Also she has cat faces on her knees?
>>62909977
she does have cat faces on her knees
I hadn't noticed that but it's a very interesting observation
This retard probably has cat faeces on her knees.
Hey! I'm gonna be a surgeon!
I can describe the procedures to someone who studied that shit!
>>62908754
>wimmin
So she's as qualified as anyone who's ever said "I have a great idea for a movie".
>>62908456
>I describe my fee-fees and someone who's competent actually does the work for me
>the Patriarchy is keeping womyn down
>>62909977
>She then says that men keep all the technical aspects secret amongst ourselves and we could just use more flowery language to describe lenses instead of the very precise and specific terms used to ensure consistency and quality.
Oh boy someone wittier than me needs to apply this to mechanics talking about cars.
>>62909762
I've seen this "technical words make it an exclusive boys club" thing before.
Technical and precise terms aren't done for shits and giggles. Things needs to be precise and unambiguous. If you use common words, you risk people making bad assumptions about the meaning. If you use terms with a loose meaning, you're leaving things up to guess work.
Learn your fucking terms and naming standards.
>>62908456
Why are boys so easy to trigger, bros?
>>62908456
That's an incredibly naive view on a career as a filmmaker in general. She's right in the sense that she is a working director so those things don't apply to her, but i'm willing to bet 99% of directors today had to learn how film works through either operating a camera themselves at one point on set or working in post-production. Fuck, i'm an editor and even I was forced to really understand lenses, f-stops and all that shit just to be able to slate shots appropriately.
What this tells me is that she has obviously found a way to bypass all the rites of passage of becoming a filmmaker, so to speak, and somehow landed herself in a director's chair despite not knowing and not caring about anything and everything technical.
This actually says much less about men in film than it does about women in film, and most notably, nepotism. If she's really made a career as a director without even bothering to pay attention to the job of the 'secret language', then she doesn't truly know what the struggle of being an aspiring filmmaker is. Hint hint, there is a secret language, its how your fucking movies get made in the editing room after you've shot it and you're partying with all the actors like it's finished.
The only reason she believes this is because she is spoiled. She's hardly had to struggle at all.
>>62910329
and yes i'm mad.
YUP THIS IS THE ONLY DIRECTOR WHO DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE CINEMATOGRAPHER'S JOB AND RELIES ON THEM TO CONVEY THE EMOTION THEY WANT IN A SCENE
HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD /tv/
THE DIRECTOR UNDERSTANDS HOW TO DO EVERYONE'S JOB ON SET
>>62910329
The best directors and gear geeks first, artists second.
>>62908456
Let's ignore whether or not the patriarchy is indeed creating a monopoly by using big words.
How does she expect aspiring directors with no connections or daddy's money to make it as a filmmaker if they cant even make a film on their own?
Does she just expect people to sit around and wait for some cinematographer to come along and offer to film your poorly directed first project for free?
Or is she some entitled cunt that's had a pretty straight path into film that can't even conceive that some people need actual talent before they can get to a decent position?(and sucking cock isn't the talent im talking about)
>>62910375
>I didn't read the thread: a thesis by anon
>>62910269
Triggering means that you basically shut down and relive the experiences of the situation which caused you trauma in the first place.
It is not the same as making someone mad about something.
Hey maybe there are fewer female directors for this exact fucking reason?
Men and women should get equal opportunities - fact.
So stop playing the fucking victim and put the same work in you stupid bitch.
>>62908456
Typical whore logic.
"You are incorrect because my feelings"
With lenses, what is the rule when going from a wide to a closeup? I remember there being some kind of rule.
>I think the male power structure neded to perpetuate the idea that there's some secret language that we don't know
>literally prefaces this statement with "There's a key component of the filmmaking process that I don't understand"
>>62910426
Well, according to /tv/, women get triggered over everything but guys only get mad.
When you make thread after thread about how "mad" you get when a woman has the nerve to say hey maybe women are treated like shit, I'd call it being triggered.
Just me though.
>>62910603
>women are treated like shit
>woman gets to the position of director without having a working knowledge of the fundamental technique of making a film, knowledge which is crucial in effectively arranging a directorial vision to mise en scene, preferring instead to just palm it off on the cinematographer
>>62908456
But... she got the cinematographer to do it for her. She still needs someone to know all the technical aspects.
I'm so confused.
>>62910725
She's a woman. I hope this clarifies matters.
>>62910603
Nah that's just your persecution complex talking.
>>62910603
>When you make thread after thread about how "mad" you get when a woman has the nerve to say hey maybe women are treated like shit, I'd call it being triggered.
But you see you're still fucking wrong because that's just not what the word triggered means. When a veteran with PTSD gets a panic attack because a car backfires within earshot that's being triggered, it's not just having a little grumble it's a visceral and extremely unpleasant response that people would really much rather not have. What you're saying is actually kind of offensive to people with real mental illnesses who have to deal with this shit in the real world and not just in their ridiculous little cyber battles. Check your privilege you ableist shitlord scum.
this is a great thread but there are two totally different discussions happening at the same time:
>does a director NEED technical knowledge?
>women
it'd be cool if we could just discuss the first one in some thread seeing that the second topic has replaced baneposting as 80% of the content in this board.
>>62911579
forgot to give my tbqh familia:
knowledge never hurts, knowledge is always better. should anyone who doesn't know about lenses be disqualified for directing movies? don't think so. but someone who does know has an advantage over the one who doesn't, although that doesn't mean shit if the less knowledgable ends up with a "better" movie.
>>62911579
the subject is NOT "does a director NEED technical knowledge?"
The subject is this fuckwit saying that technical details are a male conspiracy against women which is obviously not true unless you are an insecure paranoid individual
To make it even more retarded her film still needs a knowledgable man (in this case) behind the camera so that the film looks professional
lastly, she would not be saying ANY of this if her cinematographer was a qualified woman fully knowledagble in the necessary jargon she claims is a male conspiracy
Paranoid delusions. Victim mentality. Lazy. Insecure because she knows she has not learned the jargon that anyone could learn if they made the effort
>>62908456
>I'm an ideas guy
Worst part is she is probably not even smart enough or deep enough to actually feel complex shit and in succession unable to even make her stupid thoughts known.
>>62911579
it'd be great if we lived in a world where just anyone could become a director because of their parent's money/nepotism or by sucking a fat cock, but they can't
A lot of people have to break their back and work and know all aspects of film production
The filmmaking world is not equal. It's not a feminist issue, it's a fucking class issue. Luckily, it's also the case that the people that don't have everything handed to them that go on to become directors tend to better than the DUDE NOLAN LMAO film school dipshits
So no, a director doesn't need technical knowledge, but if they want to be taken seriously and have ANY dedication to their craft they really should
I couldn't understand why OP's pic made me rage so hard I went out took a walk and came back to post this.
I'm still not sure exactly why, but this is how I dissect it.
You don't need to know about things, but you need to have someone who can. And you need to be able to communicate it to them. Sure. I agree.
Emotional: so womanly. Technology: Muh male patriarchy sekret language. This is where I started feeling dirty about sharing a gender with this fine womyn.
Also,
Sgt Colbert actor plays a cheating Pedophile. b-but it's not wrong guise, just a feminist movie about a teenager exploring her sexuality. Girl Power. It's 2015. SanFrancisco: so tolerant
Personally, I prefer knowing about lenses and think directing is about more than saying muh emotions should be so and so and letting the cinematographer do the actual directing. But maybe the quack in OP's pic is given more focus especially because of the pedo is cool guise and Strong Womyn (but secretly DID) vibe her quotes have.
>>62913349
I get what you're saying, and if I could add my 2 cents, I would go further to compare her outlook on the way ghetto culture views grammar.
"We belong to Y group, this valuable skill belongs to X group, from whom we want to distance ourselves, so we will show willful ignorance towards it."
It accomplishes nothing and Y group is worse for it.
>>62908456
>mfw I don't even understand what she's bitching about
>mfw I don't think she understands either
>>62914439
She's complaining about having to know technical terms and how explain what she wants using precise terms.
An anon mentioned an analogy where the director is a mechanic and has similar sentiments, he wants a certain outcome but doesn't know how to describe the process that is required to get that outcome in standard industry terms.
So this mechanic is giving to a direction to a technician fixing a car.
>M: This car is making a sound like "rumblerumblerumble." It needs to go "vroomvroomvroom." Also something in the vent is going tickticktick and I don't want it to do that
Now, if the information was being given by a layman it would be excusable. Also, in most cases a skilled technician would be able interpret this and explore several options until the desired outcome is achieved.
Tldr; Any professional should be able to communicate what they want in no uncertain terms. Her statement is offensive to women, because she's basically saying "I can't possibly learn all those big, fancy words. I'm just a little gerl."
>>62914410
>It accomplishes nothing and Y group is worse for it.
And people of the Y group who actually like grammar and don't mind taking the extra effort to be better at communicating their vision, emotion, thoughts and ideas are considered 'different' or stereotyped as non-existent
Not that the unskilled neptotistism hack in OP's pic could ever make an impact.
We gotta just stop giving nobodies attention. Don't make another useless disgusing ZQ
>>62911579
she made it about gender in the first place. are you serious?
>>62908456
And this is why she'll never e as good as David Fincher.
Guy knows his shit and controls every aspect for good reason.
>>62908456
I'll translate, I'm fluent in women:
>I have no idea what to do, I just know how I feel and how I want a scene to make me feel
>I tell this to someone who both know the technology and the art required to create emotions
>he does all the work
>as a result, I feel what I wanted to feel
>I am awesome!
>>62910725
>she got the cinematographer to do it for her.
This is how women do most things: get the man to do it for her. She feels like she did it herself. Men are just tools to women who can use them.
A ex-workmate was in French cinema (she even appears in some movies as an extra, though she was a techie) and she told me that basically, if the director doesn't know shit, it won't matter, the tech team will make the movie for him/her. It won't be great or anything, but it's entirely possible.
Exworkmate was the waitress in the Last Metro. I never found a still of it, but I know she's in it. A petite woman.
>>62908456
>"I could explain in purely emotional terms...."
This is what women actually believe.
This is why you're a fucking idiot if you ever elect a female to ANY leadership position.
