Watching this film right now. Has anyone else seen it? Was he really planning to steal from them, or did he genuinely was only enjoying to pretend he is cinematographer?
>>70561084
hmmm maybe you should pay attention to the movie and find out
The latter, also watch the Koker trilogy my man XD
>>70561768
It is based on real story, and actors are not actors but people actually involved in real story. In film he's saying his motivations were never to steal, but was it the same in reality? It looks so much as a lie.
watched it, thought it was complete shit
razor thin plot
Isn't that the point of the movie? The penultimate scene of the motorcycle ride back to the family's home amplifies this. Did the audio really go bad or is Kiarostami just sayingIT WAS JUST A PRANK BRO?
This film has no script and no soundtrack whatsoever. No professional actors are involved. Honestly it looks more like a video. Yet it is in the Sight & Sound list of all time best films. Does it mean S&S has no credibility?
>>70563113
>This film has no script
What?
>Watching this film right now.
FINISH THE FUCKING FILM BEFORE YOU START ASKING QUESTIONS!
>>70564831
Have you seen it? Do you know what it's about? Basically it's almost unedited documentary.
>>70563113
The film examines the fine line between fiction and reality, and how the two are irrevocably intertwined. It is, literally, the perfect examination of metafiction. It is an existentialist analysis on perception, truth, lies, and art.
>>70565823
It's the opposite of a documentary. If anything, it's a re-enactment, but thanks to the subject matter, the surface concept pales in comparison to the theme at its core thanks to the synergy between subject and subjectivity and also object and objectivity.
>>70561084
just finished watching this. did i like it?
>>70566265
wat?
>>70565823
Have you seen it? Much of it is reënactment. And there is a soundtrack- try watching it all the way through next time.
>>70566893
This is the story of a liar. An earnest man who lies for the sake of art. A fabricator of reality, in order to control the immediate, the susceptible, the observers. One man who takes a situation he is presented with, twists the facts, and presents them as truth. He manufactures a role, and draws others into the world he is creating; taking normal people and turning them into participants in a thought experiment to see how much they will believe, how far can he take it before it all falls apart. Suspicions arise, but he has a gift for soothing the wary. He creates a back-story, seemingly on a whim, and strengthens his argument for his created truth with every word spoken. He is eventually caught, but the observers realize that he has been speaking in his own defense this whole time. The man has been defending his reality since he first met his gullible audience.
Of course, that liar is not Hossain Sabzian, but Abbas Kiarostami.
It's Michael Cera approved
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CODR5TU8RM
>>70566265
>>70567440
this guy gets it
>>70567440
>taking normal people and turning them into patricians
that's how I read it
pomo garbage for the IQ range of 105-115
>>70566966
soundtrack is only in the very ending, right after completely screwed sound
If you're posting, browsing, reading, as you're "watching," Please shut it off. It's not for you.
It's an incredible film, one of the best really, but it doesnt sound like you can appreciate it.
>>70570084
>hurr durr 2deep4u
yeah, no
Sabzian wanted to transform his life by masquerading as a director for a wealthy family and instead ended up transforming his life masquerading as an actor for Kiarostami
>>70570522
>>70569460
>>70567440
Any of you actual fans/bros see that follow up documentary on Sabzian? Heartbreaking. He had a hard life.
>>70562426
>Razor thin plot
That embryo mentality
>>70570601
I wasn't aware that documentary was ever released. Are you a fan of any other Kiarostami? I enjoy his Iranian films but I think the films he's released since he left Iran have been equally as interesting
>>70571231
not him, I've only seen Close-Up and The Taste of Cherry. I still have to watch the Koker trilogy and Mashgh-e Shab I guess. Really a fascinating lad
lol who watches this shit. If I had to guess film, sociology, cultural studies, and other useless trash majors for future baristas.
>>70571828
people smarter than you :^)
>>70572035
if being smart means that I waste my time watching pseudo intellectual trash then I choose to be dumb
>>70561084
what the fuck is the former Iranian president doing in a movie?
>>70572184
What are some examples of sincerely intellectual cinema? Enlighten us
It's a sorry thing that films like that are seen by creatures like OP or the other retards in the threads
>>70562426
>razor thin plot
can you spare a few chromosomes?
>>70572301
Did you come up with this one by yourself? Quality humour, very original, rabbit
>>70571828
people that transcended capeshit
you'll probably never get there
>>70572333
>insincerely asks me to list some examples of sincerity in cinema
pls, I will say that my sense of sincerity starts from the bottom up and is epistemologically grounded in empiricism.
>>70572497
moving from entertainment to pseudo wisdom is a decent unworthy of praise
>>70572701
>a.jpg
>cover of a book that you suppose ratifies your point, and yet would prove an untransposable wall if you tried to actually read it
>"is a decent unworthy of praise"
lmao
>>70572701
>posts completely unrelated book
great job, proud of you
>>70573011
>>70572952
It's actually a clever argument for this thread: he's pretending he a person who knows what he's talking about.
>>70573053
shit just got meta
>>70572609
name 5 movies though
are you ashamed of your taste?
>>70572952
>>70573011
>not knowing who Alan Sokal is
>not being able to identify the epistemological position of a fraud like Kiarostami
>>70573053
Only if by accident. Nobody ever would lose a dime betting on the stupidity of a /tv/ user
But of course, to double down when you got so violently btfo is an alternative >>70573155
>>70573145
I am fine with my taste, I don't feel like going through your ridiculous exercise.
>>70573218
>BTFO
Fail to see how I was blown out, I simply stated that cape shit is superior the tedious and childish works of Kiarostami. You literary types sure do get uppity when people treat your vapid 'art' with irreverence.
>>70573238
Embryo detected
Op if you like this film, watch Makmahlbaf, especially Salaam Cinema
>>70573453
Whatever, shitposter. Away
>>70573773
great argument, fag
>>70573856
>'argumenting' with an exposed and possibly not ironic shitposter
Na, I'm good.
Also, I recommend to not bite for anyone else
>>70573155
Could you please explain "the epistemological position of a fraud like Kiarostami"?
This is going to be hilarious
>>70571231
>I wasn't aware that documentary was ever released.
It's in the Criterion bonus/extras. It's not by Kiarostami, Sabzian died right before they were to catch up on another project. It's about his life after the film, and it's just really rough. He's a bright, lucid dreamer who has terrible tales of woe.
Yes, I really like Where is the Friend's House, Ten and A Taste of Cherry. All excellent films. Didnt love The Wind Will Carry Us.
You're right, Certified Copy is masterful, and Like Someone In Love is very good, I need another viewing to fully gauge it though.
>>70561084
ITT The "My first Persian film was A Separation" starter pack
>>70574011
>exposed and ironic
Was never being ironic and I am not exposed since I was never posturing.
Sometimes there are comfy, insightful Kiarostami threads, where anons share their enthusiasm and recommendations. This is not one of those threads. This is pathetic.
>>70567654
>>70567654
Based Cera
>watching films while browsing /tv/ or doing anything else apart from breathing
pleb as fuck
>Watching this film right now.
>posting on 4chan
>>70574185
ITP The "I say Persian instead of Iranian because I have seen Tcherike-ye Tara and the entire oeuvre of Makhmalbaf and know so much more than you about Iranian Kinè" starter pack
The horrifying trend of tourist plebs coming to the board and blogging about ''''watching''' a film on /tv/ is growing. Reminder to scorn and bully these animals whenever you find them.
Do this with any other tourists too, and be sure to feel good about yourself.
>>70561084
>4chan plebs trying to insult this kino while praising complete garbage like BVS
Fuck this board.
>>70574045
Close-up tries to undermine a common-sense (Paine style of the word) approach to reality by distorting facts and supplying unreliable threads over the course of is narrative. In the beginning, the fraud, a fact, is depicted through reenactment. Thus, the crime is fictionalized. Although, clapboard may mark non-fictional footage for synchronizing sound with picture, it most usually establishes the footage as fiction where the characters are acting. The filming of Sabzian’s actual trial is initiated with a clapboard that we have not seen used prior to the re-enactments. This reaffirms the fictional role of the film’s cast. Reality is infected by fantasy. Facts become disputable statements by Kiarostami's obvious manipulations. The encounter between Ms. Ahankhah and Sabzian in the bus treats the victim and the impostor on equal levels. Meaning changes with time and place as the film’s subject varies. Pretty much bog standard radical skepticism. Pomo is shit.
>>70574475
Persian and Iranian are two different things
I can't watch this because a girl i fell in love with who broke my heart told me it was her favorite movie. Should i watch it anyways?
>>70574734
ok, we get it, you can copy and paste text
now could you explain "the epistemological position of a fraud like Kiarostami"?
>>70574734
not that anon but this is silly and pretentious, it doesnt "try" to do anything, it does it. It's an examination of all of these things infused with genuine sentiment and at its heart a love of cinema. Congrats, you get how the film works, but you make no case for his being a fraud, or anything else.
Also the family was in some ways complicit anyway. Like Sabzian they were intoxicated by the allure of the silver screen.
>Pomo
s m h
>>70574768
Do you say "castillian cinema" when you talk about Almodóvar too?
>>70574784
If you love the medium, absolutely. It's a magnificent film. Starts unassuming enough but by the end it will have engaged your intellect and emotions.
>>70574734
Great job you summarized a "behind the scenes" featurette on how the film was made
>>70574976
I've never talked about him so no
>>70574734
>H-he can't get one over on me!
>>70575035
do specify the ethnicity of the filmmakers you discuss?
>>70575039
>>70574993
>>70574925
>>70574862
Did you read what I wrote at all? Kiarostami's radical skepticism is embedded right into Close Up. Once one rejects empiricism and common sense one always falls into mysticism and idealism.
>>70574925
it tried and failed
>>70575039
only a pleb would allow such a thing
>>70575167
ssshhh
>>70575252
>what I wrote
Azadeh?
Welles did it better
>>70575252
Impressive showing today anon, really. In this moment you should be euphoric.
>>70575359
he was much more superficial
>this mite b true or it mite not
>hehe tricked u last 15 minutes were not true
ok, man, great job
>>70575471
can you interact with people without using google?
>>70575386
>implies I am euphoric
>leaves snarky and ironic comment implying his superior position
>>70575126
Yes, because cultural background had a tremendous effect on art.
>>70575613
Sure, but it makes the leg work easier. Also it is not like anyone else here is positing original positions, all I see is the regurgitating of previously held critical positions. I at least took the effort to subvert what I cribbed.
>>70575433
I would say more obvious, but with a better execution
>>70575838
>arguments are only acceptable, or hold value and truth, if they are original
At least, no doubt, you put more effort than most baiters
>>70575838
hehe you sure trolled 'em
>>70575746
so is Amodóvar Spanish or Castillian?
is John Ford an example of Irish-American cinema?
>>70576054
>is Amodóvar Spanish or Castillian
He's both
>is John Ford an example of Irish-American cinema?
Possibly, but I'd personally say no.
>>70576136
are Almodovar's films an example of Castillian cinema then?
>>70576242
Like I said, I haven't seen any of his films, so asking me isn't going to get you an answer.
>>70576010
you do realize what I was replying to?
>>70576022
>le ironic snark
not just looking to troll. I want to see if anyone here would challenge my evaluation of Kiarostami's worth on a foundational level, nothing yet but the usual ironic snark and you don't get it arguments.
>>70576286
well, he certainly is castillian, his movies are in castillian and they are usually placed in Castille
is he an example of castillian cinema?
>>70576337
>my evaluation
copying and pasting text is not an "evaluation"
>>70576383
did you read the original text? If you did you would realize that it posits the opposite of my position.
>>70576340
I haven't watched anything from him in last 4 minutes so I still don't know.
>>70576503
you claim that if an Iranian director happens to be Persian he makes Persian cinema
then, taking into account that Almodóvar is a Spanish director that happens to be Castillian, he makes Castillian cinema, right?
>>70576595
>you claim that if an Iranian director happens to be Persian he makes Persian cinema
I never claimed that.
>>70576638
fuck off man
>>70576751
Show me the post where I claimed that.
>>70561084
>>70570601
is that close up long shot? need to see it, gonna pick up the crit disc next sale for that and the traveler
>>70571231
for me close-up>where is my friends home?>the wind will carry us>taste of cherry>certefied copy>like someone in love, I liked all of them (especially love the Iranian ones) but was more indifferent towards LSiL. really need to find good copies of the rest of the Koker trilogy
>>70576878
>is that close up long shot? need to see it, gonna pick up the crit disc next sale for that and the traveler
Yep, well worth it. The Traveler is interesting and easy to see how it informs the rest of his work, and the little feature "A Walk with Kiarostami" is crazy comfy, as the title implies, it's just like taking a sunset stroll with the man himself.
Check out Ten if you haven't already as well.
>>70577036
I think I'm gonna watch Ten next since its readily available. generally need to brush up on Iranian cinema. just left a university at which the west's foremost Iranian cinema expert teaches at, who I only realized existed in the last couple weeks.
>>70576595
Persian and Iranian are interchangeable really. Iran's official name until the fall of the shah was Persia.
If anything, Iranian is the term you would use for ethnicity because there are Iranians outside Iran (Tajiks, Kurds, etc.). Persian denotes belonging to Persia, or today's state of Iran.
>>70577094
Huh, that is interesting.
>>70577253
This is false. Iran was called Iran within the country for centuries. Only other countries called officially called it Persia. Iran includes Persian Iranians, Azeri Iranians, various Turkic peoples, Arab Iranians, Armenian Iranians, etc.
>>70570084
It's a story of a lying thief, made into a poorly edited documentary, that's what I think
>>70574318
>>70574324
When I watch films I always take a break every 5-10 min to browse some 4chan and post some replies otherwise I get bored and lose my attention. Otherwise I will fall in a mild nap and will wake up realizing I don't remember the last 10 min I saw. The only drawback is that 2 hours film take 4-6 hours to watch like that, but I got used.
>>70579678
lol r u me
