whats the verdict
- Home
- Board: /tv/ - Television & Film
- Reading: whats the verdict
whats the verdict
>>71572148
I wish she was my girlfriend
The Neon Demon is seductively stylish, but Nicolas Winding Refn's assured eye can't quite compensate for an underdeveloped plot and thinly written characters.
>>71572221
>elle and jena sharing a look and smiling
HNNNNNNNGH
>>71572221
now i need one of those dogs that can smell seizures
>>71572148
i've seen it twice and I want to see it again. Elle Fanning is a bit annoying with her innocence but Abbey Lee is fantastic and the cinematography is so aesthetically pleasing.
Also the soundtrack is great.
Characters are a bit bland, but if you get the underlying theme is makes up for it.
>>71572148
i thought that was the new crystal castles singer for a second aka alice glass 1.5
>>71572342
on another note, the foreshadowing in the beginning of the movie is amazing.
"Are you sex or are you food?"
Jesse being covered in blood at the beginning
The art guy holding the scissors.
Fantastic
>>71572221
REFN HAS DONE IT AGAIN.
>>71572148
Abbey Lee is so hot god damn.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9PCxz3KyFc
>>71572221
this webm gave me epilepsy
>For Liv <3
what an adorable little autist
>>71572673
>comparing a children's movie to a movie with with necrophilia and adult themes.
It was absolutely beautiful.
>>71572250
>assured eye
>thinly written characters.
nice
>>71572673
>never seen any of the pusher films
>>71572914
I wasn't comparing them, I just had seen both.
>who are you quoting
>>71572221
K I N O
I
N
O
Is this on torrent websites yet?
>>71573097
>promoting your shitty review on 4chan.
>>71573045
I know :/ they don't have it anywhere I can get it besides putlocker or torrenting, so I've put it off. I'm in the David Lynch camp of feeling I don't get the full experience if it's not on a big ass screen with speakers
>>71573200
I don't know, why don't you check?
>>71573228
>what you gonna do faggot
>>71573265
im gunna... DISLIKE your video. Thats right bitch. I have all the power now.
>>71573200
Not on PtP yet
>>71573200
Considering how bad its doing you should see a webdl in 2 weeks
>>71572148
certified kino.
I saw it four times and only one of the viewings there was one other person in the theater which I assumed was a /tv/ poster.
I loved it, now it's gone from my local theater which pissed me the fuck off but I'll be a proud owner of the blu ray in Sept.
not sure if it's better than Drive, but this film haunts my mind. and for that, I love it. it's so depraved yet visually captivating it just works, plus the score. holy shit, Cliff Martinez really outdid himself on this one.
>>71572148
-hands not on belt-
-not actually wearing a belt-
A U T I S T I C
U
T
I
S
T
I
C
>>71573410
Im in the same boat. It's haunting my mind, I wanna see it again.
and I've been listening to the soundtrack on repeat since it came out.
>>71573295
look at my other videos (not shilling, just pause and look at the dislike bar) and then ask yourself
DO YOU FEEL IN CHARGE
>>71573500
all 81 likes are hard to compete with.
>>71573601
I meant 81 Views
Truly the finest kino of the year, along with the witch.
>>71573654
the point you dip is that your anger fuels me.
everyone of my videos has a shit ton of dislikes
depends
if you're an autistic edgy pleb, you're bound to like it
if you're actually cultured and understand the complexities of the medium, you'll agree with the new york times in that its shit
The only theater showing this in my area is 40 minutes away from me, is it worth driving 40 minutes there and back to watch it alone? I'm a big Refn fan (4u)
>>71573989
Yes, it definitely is. I drove 40 min too m8
>>71573919
well i missed the point because i didn't go back to see how many dislikes your shit-tier review had.
SO, you can go ahead and lick the underside of my scrotum
>>71574159
Should I watch anons review? It sounds hilarious but I'm not sure I could handle the cringe
what did the triangles represent
>>71574903
don't give him the views
how do i get a gfs that wears her hair like that at all times
a white one btw
>>71573989
I drove 30ish, it was absolutely worth it
My favourite film of his
>>71574953
I thought it was like some kind of inverted holy trinity
The one lady did say "I'm a ghost" at one point, too, and the movie has "demon" in its title. That plus the religious symbolism from Only God Forgives made me think it's something like that
>>71575030
i interpreted it in a similar way. i kept thinking that she kept getting promoted/good things happened to her because of some act of god. no one is THAT good.
I assumed the triangle was her god
Everyone talking about how the characters are bland and underdeveloped really missed reading between the lines.
Jesse is really great if you read into the theme that she represents the moon. It's not too in your face but evident enough.
The mountain lion was also great insight/foreshadowing into Hank's plan to rape/murder Jesse. Again, not too obvious, not confirmed when you learn that he was able to break into the Lolita girl's room on a night she was in. That whole part of the money also delved into Jesse's possible psychic abilities.
The theory about Ruby being an aging witch that feasts off of young girls blood also seems more and more true as I read into it.
Nothing is too in your face, but that doesn't mean there's no substance to the characters.
>>71572148
She looks like a discount Jamie Presley
It was great. I didn't have a problem with the acting or the script, I'm surprised people took issue with it. Same with the 'no plot'. Not only was this film more plotful than tons of films out there, it wasn't even Refn's least plot-oriented movie. I thought it did a very good job of capturing that "nightcore" feel; comfy yet brooding. It really stuck with me and did well at getting across the idea of evil, similar to how Suspiria made me feel. Obviously the visuals were amazing, as was the soundtrack, but everything from the symbolism scene-to-scene to the overall critique yet glamorization of shallow lifestyle, really worked for me. It was a fun movie, a disturbing movie, and it was fresh. The loss of virginal beauty isn't a new concept, but The Neon Demon looked at it through Refn's unique perspective, and added the element of personal as well as industrial standards of beauty and the "death" that comes with it
>>71572250
You don't watch Refn's movies for the plot nerd
>>71575247
Not even close without the glasses
>>71572221
Good grief, how many people probably had seizures at the movie theater when this scene aired?
>>71575180
I agree wholeheartedly with you.
I don't think the characters were bland at all. They all had great levels of depth that added to the story in their own way.
>Bionic woman with wanting to be beautiful but at the end of the day NEVER being able to achieve that
>Ruby facading as a good friend but in the end only looking out for herself
> the other model girl being beautiful from the start and being the only one who is able to absorb the "perfectness"
they all have depth and i'm a lil too drunk to put it out in full detail. but ye
>>71572221
pure kino
i've never watched a Refn film, where do i start?
>>71575509
in order of release
>>71575509
you can start at the beginning with the Pusher trilogy, but there's a noticeable shift in his style at Bronson, so it's feasible just to start there and watch his most recent 5, though his first 5 are also quite worthwhile
basically what i'm saying is watch chronologically but it's okay if you start with Bronson
>>71572221
refn did it again. haters and plebs BTFO
>>71575509
dont
>>71575509
Drive is his most accessible. His latest two plus Valhalla Rising are his most "Refn". Either go chronologically (which is what you should do with any director because seeing their progression is very rewarding), or start with Drive, then pick a less accessible one, and based on your preference, go from there
>>71573410
>it's so depraved yet visually captivating it just works, plus the score. holy shit, Cliff Martinez really outdid himself on this one.
literally this, absolutely amazingf.
>>71575441
pleb
>>71573200
just go to the theatre you poor fucking faggot. Do you really think you will have the same experience watching the movie on your laptop filmed off a phone, rather than going to see it on a huge fucking screen? You are a fucking abortion
>>71573231
I generally agree with that sentiment, but the pusher movies are not as stylized as his other films. Even watching it on a laptop wouldn't really take anything away from those movies. Neon demon on the other hand is one that needs to be seen at the cinemas
is this movie for da download
>>71576299
no it's for da downs
>>71572221
This really comes off as random bullshit to me, which takes me out of the experience. If I just dont get it then fine, I like Only God Forgives but if thats the impression the movie leaves on me then I consider it bad. Music and tone of it is incredible though.
>>71576613
Wait until you see jesse's transformation scene
>>71574903
give me the views
Refn outdid himself.
>>71576752
I have seen the movie and really disliked that part.
One of the worst films I've ever seen in my life.
No substance, all style, no story. It wallows in it's own depravity. It deserves to be remembered among films like Salo and Cannibal Holocaust.
>>71577000
What is that weird lens they use for?
>>71575372
All of these characters are extremely shallow and cliche.
Also, according to Jena Malone, Ruby was a "300 year old witch" who killed women to absorb their youth
>>71575734
yee I know. I see they are on putlocker, so I'll probably watch them sometime soon enough.
I'd get the blu ray 3pack but baka it's europoors only. I know most everyone who's seen thinks the pusher trilogy is GOAT, but what about Bleeder? Nobody ever says anything about that besides "hurr based Mads"
This movie is so bad it will end more than a few careers. When I saw it in the theater there were five people in the audience, myself included. By the end of the film there were only 3 people left in the theater.
>>71577101
That is the Canon t8i qt scoper if I'm not mistaken. Perfect for scoping out cuties from a short distance.
>>71577041
>No substance, all style
But style is substance.
>>71577168
No it's not, pleb
>>71577041
Haha, you were on here saying the same thing yesterday, you autist.
Oh no! Depravity! Style over substance!!
Best film of the year. They really didn't even need dialogue but it did help make the movie feel more dead and sad.
It's an experience to watch in theaters. Last minutes are a bit much. Refn was definitely trolling people with the last scene.
>>71577463
Autism triggered.
The single worst reviewed and received movie of the year. People really hate it.
>>71572221
Won't be the fuckin same at home.
No way my inferior white boiclitty television can compete with superior black dick theatre screens and sound system.
>>71577542
People generally liked it, it's just not a lot of people have seen it yet.
Sure, some squares, autists, and feminists were put off, but that's to its credit.
>>71574953
https://books.google.com/books?id=SsolrTciALUC&pg=PA237&lpg=PA237&dq=hermetic+triangle+womb&source=bl&ots=gZrd0Fj_Px&sig=lrdMXWYxZZcv8KHDmDYqHz5OVo4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjwkZHhx9bNAhVFyoMKHVmmBKQQ6AEIUDAP#v=onepage&q=hermetic%20triangle%20womb&f=false
>>71577586
>People generally liked it,
No they didn't. Reviews are terrible, user reviews are terrible, only a handful of fucktard autists are defending it.
This film is a critical and financial disaster that will end careers.
This movie is not "crazy" or "dark". Every "surreal" moment is predictable and cliché. Watch Un Chien Andalou and then go to Burning Man festival and you'll have all the inspiration you will need for a sequel. Claire Denis' Trouble Every Day makes use of the same clichés but the difference is that NWR thinks he is the first one to think of them.
>>71577168
This. It's a false dichotomy. One cannot be without the other
This movie is not a "critique". This doesn't reveal the truth of anything except a made- up idea of the fashion world. Who told NWR that modeling make-up always involves putting a bunch of junk on the girls faces? Who told him that the center of the modeling world is LA and not New York? That Elle Fanning, who is short and pudgy, is somehow meant to be believable as a more desirable model than Abbey Lee Kershaw? If she is so good why does the camera cut away every time she is meant to strike a pose or walk a catwalk? Abbey Lee says at one point that by the time you are 20 your past your expiry date. She is 29 and had a major Calvin Klein campaign earlier this year.
>>71572221
https://soundcloud.com/milanrecords/03-the-demon-dance-julian-winding-the-neon-demon
This movie is visually very weak. Don't get me wrong, I understand this aesthetic. But that is because it is totally played out. I heard NWR say that he got the idea for Only God Forgives from the mental image of a clenched fist. I would say for this one he got the idea from old Maybelline commercials, the 2006 Daft Punk alive tour and some old Mert & Marcus editorials. It looks cheap, dated and badly executed. The soundtrack is the same. It worked for Drive because that electro revival of Moroder in 2001 is the perfect driving music, but now it just feels tacky. Save your money and just walk into any Sephora store.
>>71572148
who's this semen demon
>>71577659
Yeah but it has the meme visuals that tumblr teens can spam on their pages in gif/cinegrid form
>>71577659
Recommendations?
The story sucks (because NWR "wrote" it, unlike Drive). The story is basically Black Swan. Think pseudo-lesbian jealousy corrupting a young hopeful in a competitive industry. But then add a few dozen plot holes. This girl is the modeling worlds' new It Girl and yet she can't afford a motel that isn't rape-infested? Or ever go to a hospital?
[spoler]You can successfully bury a girl in a six inch grave in a perfectly manicured garden in a house that isn't yours?[/spoiler]
And why are there only about 6 people in the whole movie? Parties, nightclub toilets, restaurants photo shoots and the backstage of runway shows usually have dozens of people around, not three. Especially not the same three every time.
>>71577692
This is a joke right? What's wrong with the film existing in a "made up idea of the fashion world"?
You say the movie is not a critique. Guess what? SO DOES REFN. It's not doing so much to expose anything as it is glamorizing it.
>>71577692
>That Elle Fanning, who is short and pudgy
WEW
E
W
The acting in this film is terrible.
I'm sure most fans will think that dislike for this film comes from its dark, confronting, disturbing portrayal of our superficial society. It doesn't. It comes from wanting to watch something other than a pretentious idiot jerk himself off for 2 hours to a 2001 copy of Vogue magazine.
>>71577756
What the fuck? You're disliking an allegorical fiction movie because it's not realistic? The small cast was an effect. It creates a sense of claustrophobia. And NOTHING past the death scene is very real. The grave is what you pick out? It's a horror movie. Called the Neon Demon. Is this bait, or are you retarded?
Easily the biggest flop of the year.
NWR is finished as a director. He burned out quickly.
>>71577895
>le strawman
Who is saying people didn't like it because they "couldn't handle the societal truth it revealed"? Jena was great, Elle was pretty good, but ya, elsewhere was stiff at times. Sometimes, like with the head model agency guy, it worked and added to the atmosphere. Other times, it was off putting. It's fine if the movie didn't work for you, but people need to stop pretending it was awful and couldn't possibly be enjoyed by anybody. Stop being so hyperbolic
>>71577897
>The small cast was an effect. It creates a sense of claustrophobia.
No it doesn't. It just feels cheap.
watching the movie with a female is even better
watched it with my sister ;)
>>71577978
>Jena was great
No she wasn't. She's the one actress everyone dislikes, even people who like this film agree she's the weakest part.
Her career is basically over now.
Your opinions are shit. They aren't backed by any logical, fact based argument. It's all just knee-jerk emotion and autism.
>>71577777
Nicolas Bane Refn
>On an April morning last year in Los Angeles, Nicolas Winding Refn dropped his daughter at school and walked into a parking lot. He was shooting a new film, but still scouting locations. The lot stood behind Musso and Frank, the Hollywood steakhouse whose regulars once included Steve McQueen. There, he found a young man on the asphalt, bleeding nightmarishly; another man was hunched over him, trying to staunch the blood. With no one else in sight, Refn attempted to help. It was no good. The man died. Soon the LAPD arrived. He had never seen anyone die before.
He told me this story a few weeks later, still in LA. I asked if he had felt emotional. “No,” he said. Nothing? “Strangely nothing.” The next morning? “Nuh-uh.” He sipped juice through a straw. “But later,” he said, “I was happy. Because I got a fucking great idea for a scene.”
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/jul/01/nicolas-winding-refn-neon-demon-interview
Was this movie supposed to be unintentionally funny? Because there are a lot of bad laughs in it.
>>71577979
And that's fine that you felt that way. But keep in mind that was your perception of it. I very much think that films can be objectively evaluated, but things like that really do depend on the viewer. To me it was effective, to you it wasn't. Great how taste works, huh?
>>71578052
Hey everyone. I actually live in Hollywood, not too far from where this tragic crime occurred. It was really upsetting for a lot of people here in the neighborhood
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/parking-658993-stabbed-death.html
After reading your link I and seeing TND I can say without a doubt that Refn is some kind of mentally ill psychopath.
I guess it's karmic justice that his film has bombed hard and he'll probably never work again.
>>71578057
Taste? More like your imagination. You didn't even consider the small cast until it was mentioned to you now. You're just making excuses now.
>>71578023
>everyone
What? I won't even pretend to speak for everyone, but most of the reviews I've seen, even the negative ones, feel Jena stole the show.
>your opinions are shit. They aren't backed by any logical, fact based argument. It's all just knee-jerk emotion and autism
Says the retard who said "other than a pretentious idiot jerk himself off for 2 hours to a 2001 copy of Vogue magazine."
My opinions were based on how the movie effected me. Yours were nothing but buzzword filled accusations
>>71578052
>felt nothing
>but its good because I got an idea for a scene
He is literally one of us
>>71578053
>check out room 214, some real lolita shit
look at all these butthurt autists that don't like Refn.
He's already bankrupted himself like 2 times in the past and that was before Drive and Only God Forgives, which both made over twice their budget.
Neon Demon already will have $1mil domestic, which is more than OGF, and it will make it's money back in Europe.
>>71578156
>2001 vogue
You mean 2015 purple right?
>>71578156
>but most of the reviews I've seen, even the negative ones, feel Jena stole the show.
Literally lying now. Pathetic.
>>71578191
Budget: $7,000,000 (estimated)
Opening Weekend: $589,014 (USA) (24 June 2016)
Gross: $589,014 (USA) (24 June 2016)
And it's already out overseas you autistic fucktard.
>>71578234
>Opening Weekend: $589,014 (USA) (24 June 2016)
Pulled from theaters just two days later.
>>71578191
This. I wasn't the biggest fan of the film, but it had some good things going for it. All these posters claiming it was the worst film ever with no redeeming value can do nothing but spout memes and shitpost with rage. At least Refnfags are doing some analysis and coherent discussion
>>71578191
>>71578276
Not an argument, same fag.
>>71577756
The movie is nothing like Black Swan. You're either an idiot or haven't seen it.
Black Swan played like a tragedy. It was supposed to make you feel for the main character.
This movie plays like a nightmare. It's supposed to make you feel sick and detached from reality. It's also not connected to real modeling. It's connected to sexual fetishism.
This movie is about depravity and sexual fetishism being shot beautifully to add to the affect and lull us into enjoying it before the nightmarish ending.
You also think the movie is about modeling and the business as a whole. You completely missed the point.
If anything, the movie is like Mulholland Drive mixed with Eyes Wide Shut.
>>71578294
Retard. You want an argument? Read the thread, there are plenty
>>71578303
You completely missed the point of both films.
You seem to have a hard time understanding deeper subjects, which is probably why shallow, flashy trash like this appeals to you.
>This movie plays like a nightmare. It's supposed to make you feel sick and detached from reality. It's also not connected to real modeling. It's connected to sexual fetishism.
This is edgy /b/tard level shit right here. And to think, you actually spent time writing that post.
>>71578326
>Posts a screencap from his phone
>Actually thinks screen caps mean anything
>Phone screen caps are even more suspicious and autistic
>Goes into an autism based tantrum because someone called him a same fag
>>71578339
>other anon says you missed the point
>explains what he thinks the point was logically
>you say he missed the point
>offer no thoughts of your own and back up your statement with implications
Your post is more hollow and dumb than the movie you hate
>>71577615
I recognize you, because you keep making the same arguments:
"Autists defend it" (autists would be triggered by the strobe effects and lack of 'rational', clear plot)
"User reviews are terrible" (users rated it decently)
"It will end careers" (holy shit you are clueless. actors WANT to be part of movies like this, it gives them 'credibility'.
You seem to have some obsession with wishing this film will end careers, because 'style over substance', as you describe it, offends your STEM dork sensibilities so much.
>>71578371
>"other anon"
>>71578359
>autism based tantrum
>telling you you're wrong
>not the meme spouting, hyperbole clinging posters vehemently hating the movie
>>71578405
Not an argument. I'm not the same anon, but even if I was, it doesn't matter. It doesn't change the fact that you've offered no thoughts of your, because you're shitposting for the sake of it, and either have no real thoughts about the movie, or are too stupid to defend them
>>71578400
Metacritic score is currently 7.7 / 51 you laughable idiot.
IMDB is 7.0. User reviews are very scathing with a few obvious fanboys praising it.
You have no argument, only impotent rage. It's fun to watch.
>>71578191
It has already passed 1mil domestic. The movie is doing fine, as you say.
>>71572200
Ow my eyes
Why did they eat her? Why did all that blood come out of the lady's vagina?
>>71578478
>It has already passed 1mil domestic
No it hasn't.
>>71578478
See Also >>71578234
Your name is Bean?
>>71578454
>7/10 bad
>IMDb is ever anything but fanboys and 0/10s
You have less an argument here than anyone else, as evidenced by your complete lack of original thought
>>71578443
>>71578454
>metacritic
>imdb
Nu/tv/ everyone
>>71578507
>"buh buh buh duh reviews are good!"
>prove that they're not.
>"Well that shit doesn't matter anyway faggot!"
My god, you really are an ignorant, angry little child.
>>71577700
neon demon, messenger walks among us, jesse sneaks and are we having a party are the only good tracks on the whole album
runway and demon dance only work well with their scenes
Some people like this movie, not many, but some do.
Many people do not like this movie, and that's their opinion.
Someone disagreed with your opinion about this film? Aww, poor you! Cry harder about it you fucking /tv/ faggots. This is why everyone shits all over your idiot filled board. You're a bunch of tantrum throwing autists. Literally the worst board on 4chan.
>>71572673
I can't watch this. Your mic is too sibilant, and I don't want to listen to your spit sloshing around in your disgusting mouth for two minutes. If you're going to make web content, at least invest in a decent microphone. Take some fucking pride in your work.
>>71578234
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=main&id=theneondemon.htm
it's made 1mil domestic you fucking nigger.
no reliable figure has been given for overseas gross, but it'll easily be enough to make back it's budget and then some.
nice try posting June statistics on the 3rd of fucking July too LOLLLLLL
>>71578454
You hate aesthetics because they reveal the savage, ineffable truth that your STEM dweeb mind can't account for. The movie is literally raping your worldview, and all you can do is helplessly make false accusations about 'samefagging' on a Taiwanese flipbook discussion interface.
What kind of disorder do you even have, exactly? It's weird. I wonder what you look like, haha.
People who say it's about the modeling industry are plebs.
The movie is about pedophillia.
>That's some real lolita shit
>lies about her age
>she's a virgin(also a horror movie element)
>There's nothing too appealing about her other than her youth
>the fashion guy has a pedo mustache
It's about kids from poor upbringings getting taken advantage of. Most kids with poor upbringings are the easiest to devour.
>>71578294
I'm the guy arguing about boxoffice and I posted the video review come at me motherfucker
>>71578592
>but it'll easily be enough to make back it's budget and then some.
Nah, definitely not phamilia.
>>71578484
be prepared to be BTFO, yet again
http://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Neon-Demon-The#tab=summary
>>71572221
Saw this in theaters twice. Fucking pity all you poorfag NEETs who couldn't see this in theaters. It's being pulled fast and is probably only in 50 or so theaters nationwide. Good fucking luck seeing this kino (Not ironically saying that either) now.
>>71578600
Nah. It's just a poorly made film championed by the mentally ill, edgy b-tard autists, and other mindless drones following a hack film maker because of his cult status.
There's nothing shocking about this film. Nothing scathing. nothing we haven't see a million times before.
>>71578578
Patton Oswalt, is that you?
So first Refn ripped of The Drive with Drive.
Now he's ripping off Mulholland Drive and name dropping Kubrick in his new movie? Fucking shameful. What a hack.
>>71573982
>throws out buzzwords
>references the New York Times
This is how you spot a shitposting NEET who hasn't seen the movie yet.
>>71578644
>hes a sonygger too
Back to neofag
I generally have a low opinion of Refn fanboys. They seem to be uninformed and have shallow, shit taste in just about everything.
>>71578644
May I ask what you think of the film Prisoners?
>>71572673
Can I ask you an honest question? Why should anyone listen to this as opposed to the countless other movie review shows on youtube? Shows that are actually produced by someone who gives half a shit about what they are doing. You don't have a script, or anything particularly insightful to say, evidently you are browsing the web in the background given all the mouse clicks and typing in the background, and you're recording on a potato. In a world with millions of hours of quality entertainment to be found on the Internet, how can you possibly ask someone to watch this thing you have put so little effort into?
>>71578483
The scene with Jena Malone lying on the floor with the moon overhead was a depiction of her menstruating after eating Jesse (shedding her old coat to grow anew)
The whole eating thing / bathing in virgin blood is an allegory to the Countess Elizabeth Bathory of Hungary, an aristocratic serial killer who was rumored to bathe in the blood of virgins to gain their youth and beauty
>>71578692
You don't have to be retarded to like NWR but it helps.
>>71578644
Autists literally get set off by high stimulation like this film provides. Which is (surely) why you're so put off by it.
Visually and sonically sophisticated creative types are the ones who are responding well to the film. STEM autists who need muh explainable plot feel left out. Psh, nothin personal kid.
He should direct some capeshit for DC. He wants to. It would be pure kino, not the fake kino Snyder makes.
>>71578715
>The whole eating thing / bathing in virgin blood is an allegory to the Countess Elizabeth Bathory of Hungary, an aristocratic serial killer who was rumored to bathe in the blood of virgins to gain their youth and beauty
That scene was so cliche and played out. It was like Refn was beating us over the head with the overused imagery.
>>71578692
You're not wrong
The biggest fan of this director here is(or was unless hes still posting) that pleb Motoko
I really enjoyed it but felt physically sick after that last scene. I was squirming in my seat with the corpse scene but that last part really fucked with me. I thought I was desensitized to this kind of shit too.
>>71578578
>I don't want to listen to your spit sloshing around in your disgusting mouth
Fucking this so much.
People "retards" go out and buy these 200$ microphones thinking it will make their videos more professional but they lack any knowledge on how to make actual good content.
There are no original or interesting ideas in The Neon Demon. That's it's biggest crime. It's boring, shallow, and no point and no real story. It's just a bunch of increasingly shocking scenes strung together to keep you watching until the end.
Went to see this with a bunch of friends from my UCLA film classes. We pretty much all agreed that it's shit.
>>71578784
>no point
what a pleb!
>>71578782
nostalgia critic does it and he gets 200k
Refn fanboys getting their tender bottoms reamed in this thread. Hilarious!
Definitely archive worthy.
>>71578714
People who try to put visual flare in their reviews are the worst kind of cancer. Just sum up the review in 5 or 10 minutes and try not to make it about you.
Attention whores like RLM are what killing movie criticism. They are in it for themselves. They're just a bunch of attention whores trying make a living off other people's hard work.
>>71578715
>bathe in the blood of virgins to gain their youth and beauty
Does it work?
>>71578858
No. Human or animal blood is loaded with iron, which would be incredibly damaging to your skin.
>>71578784
Most of the criticism ITT are coming from people who are not giving thorough criticism of the movie, which has me believing that they are shitposting and have not seen it yet.
>>71578784
The reason I asked the anon earlier about Prisoners is because this is exactly how I felt about it. I say no original or interesting ideas, fans say not necessary. I say it's boring and poorly paced, they say that's a pleb argument. I say no point and hamfisted scenes strung together to keep it going until the end.
At least The Neon Demon's symbolism, while not very deep, and very obvious, served to progress the story and reveal some of its points. In Prisoners it did nothing but bog the story down and serve to appear deep.
And at least TND had nice music and visuals.
Sorry, that's off topic, and I'm not offering it as a defense of The Neon Demon, it's just something I noted, and fans of one film tend not to be fans of the other
>>71578903
>"Wah wah wah people disagree with my opinion!"
We really need new mods on /tv/. This is getting out of hand.
>>71578835
The one /tv/ poster who actually doesn't like Refn pretends, once again, that anyone else here shares his lame views.
You're on the wrong side of history, champ.
>>71578919
Also attacking the posters instead of the movie is a definite sign someone has not watched the movie.
>>71578923
>Baiting, memes, opinions
>Impying that everyone who disagrees with you is just one person
You're mentally ill and you need help now. You spend all your time posting on the internet desperately hoping for a fleeting moment when you feel superior to all the people who hate you.
>>71578945
But people are mentioning specific scenes in the movies, some of which have not been mentioned in reviews. So clearly, once again, you have mental issues that need to be resolved. Get some priorities in your sad life Anon. Please.
I loved Abbey's acting during the bathroom scene. She earnestly looks like she wants to devour Elle to get her powers. She looked so desperate.
>>71572148
It's kino.
>>71578919
We do need mods, but to delete all the off topic shit. What the fuck do they have to do with dissenting views on a film?
>>71578835
Kek, keep telling yourself that buddy. I see earnest defense and a willingness to share personal thoughts amongst the fans, yet nothing but shitposting and non-arguments from many of the haters.
That's not to say there aren't valid criticisms of the film, but this thread is hardly an example of refnfans being BTFO. If anything it shows the incredibly low ability of anyone, on either opinion of the film, to discuss. At least one side is trying
>>71577157
underrated post
>>71578714
>>71578845
yea what this guy said. Although I usually like RLM because they don't just lie about their opinion for money, and they understand the point of the review, or any review, is the opinion, and like me they know a shit ton about movies to clearly back up what they say. I'm not screaming my ass off for 40 minutes like every faggot from Nostalgia Critic or doing unfunny skits.
How to spot a pleb 101
"Muh plot"
>>71578845
I didn't say anything about "visual flair." It could be 100% audio only and still be decently produced. But that involves having an actual plan, decent recording equipment, the technical know-how to use that equipment properly, and something interesting to fucking say. But if you think listlessly speaking your half baked thoughts on Finding Dory into an iPhone while you browse the Internet is something people would ever be interested in hearing, then by all means stay the course.
>>71578979
This thread is a hilarious example of the low intelligence and high autism levels of the average Refn fan. Yourself included. You haven't said anything relevant or meaningful in this entire thread. You're basically an idiot throwing a tantrum in front of a keyboard. And I don't mean that as an insult, I mean it as an accurate assessment of your mental state and level of intelligence.
Saw it in theatres twice, haven't done that since Fury Road.
It demands a big screen and surround sound. Say what you want about substance, but the movie is an audiovisual masterpiece
>>71578998
Easy
>refn fan
>uses kino
>>71579033
No it's not. The visuals are boring and plain.
>>71578952
>the irony of this post
Wow.... WOW. You really need to stop. You're only embarrassing yourself now, and SERIOUSLY wrecking your karma with all this reaching. Get it together, mate.
>>71579016
I agree most Refn fans come across as dumb, and "muh plot teehee" meme posters, but know that when it comes to autistic rage and utter stupidity, you don't come across any differently. That's not an insult or an argument, just an accurate assessment of everything you've posted itt
>>71579057
>The irony of this post.
Followed by a lengthy, mentally ill diatribe.
>>71572148
If nothing else, it's a movie worth checking out for yourself, in the nicest quality and biggest screen possible.
>>71578966
>>71577692
>>71577756
These are the only two critiques on the film where you can actually tell they watched the movie, and I already responded to them. The answer I got back was bascially "you're a pleb"
But hey, at least they referenced the movie.
>>71579062
>That's not an insult or an argument, just an accurate assessment
Your intelligence is so low, your ability to argue and debate so lacking, that you simply copied something and reused it in your own post.
There is not greater admission of defeat or triggered autism than what you have done.
You really lost now.
>that freebleeding scene
>>71579047
Youre opinion is stupid and wrong!
>>71573442
Why the fuck we all standing like this???
Freud would have so much fun watching this movie
Poor based jew is dead ;(
>>71579123
Ah, but on the contrary! Your intelligence is so low, you didn't realize my copying of your format was to point out its stupidity. Except I added it wasn't an argument. But you say it shows my ability not to present one. How? I wasn't presenting one. Just as you believe I'm a raging autist, so do I believe the same of you. Not all you've done is show your own stupidity to further prove my point
>>71579013
was watching my video part of your plan?
you responded to a different anon btw
>>71579108
Most likely the NEETs who download this movie will easily rip into it because they didn't see it on the big screen.
Movies like this and Interstellar must be seen in the theaters. They're not effective in a different format.
>>71575028
go to a black dude's house and find her there, then find a way to subtly communicate you have more $$$ and less spine (she can still fuck the black dude as long as she's always good to/with you. just make sure you also "get away with something" so it seems like a fair trade) and then voila!
if she thinks you'll provide and not get in her way of doing whatever/whoever she wants then she'll at least use you for commitment-boy status. but yeah if you can convince her that you have a drug problem or some other vice that "you get away with" she'll prolly respect you for not tripping on her fucking other ppl cuz you got your own shit that is > her. just dont ever try to get her to formally admit that she's fucking other dudes. plz refer to this song for why >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gti6m2qVuSM
but yeah dude, i know it's hard to explain properly and ppl just wanna yell KEK!!!! nowadays.... but as long as the chick respects you and doesnt treat you like a fucking idiot/moron re: her fucking other ppl (like she's gotta rub it in and shit) cuz she knows she aint the #1 thing in your universe.... yeah you're all good.
whatever you do just dont let her think that you 100% totally love her more than life itself and over 9000% totally don't let her think that fucking her is the be-all/end-all of life.... most chicks gotta go around fucking as many ppl as they can cuz of the existential void in the pit of their soul. transcending that = respect = you get the pussy working for you
>>71572221
Fucking shit I need to see this goddamn movie.
>>71572148
>tfw 20 minute drive to nearest theater playing it
>tfw probably not gonna see it now
>>71579336
pussy some people have to drive over an hour
go fucking see it
>>71579071
>I'm an internet stalker and I think my views have any legitimacy at this point
*spirals deeper into suicidal thoughts and alcoholism*
>>71579336
Fuck you.
>>71579366
But I have a 100 page essay due tomorrow.
>>71579418
unless you have a 2 multiple choice test due in 2 weeks, I'd say you can fit it into your schedule
>>71579230
Well, I had to watch it to know that it was terrible, didn't I? Now I'm sorry, but if you want return viewers you are going to have to put a little bit of effort into your videos. Whether or not you like the RLM guys or Nostalgia critic, it is an undeniable fact that they have a fuck-ton of viewers, while you do not, and that is solely because they are putting a lot more effort into content.
Personally I hate Nostalgia Critic, and I think the RLM guys are fine when they're actually discussing movies, but they are doing something that resonates with people. I'm not saying do the same thing as them, everyone has their own voice and you can certainly find yours, but you have to put the effort in. It's just unavoidable. You shouldn't be willing to put your name on anything less.
Jena Malone was the most seductive in the movie which is odd because she was the most disturbing one.
She was so alluring. The others were just figurings in comparison.
>>71577463
>impying Refnfans aren't all autists
>>71579470
I'm acutely aware of how not good they are on a production value level, but I don't care because I'm 100% right about the movies. my points are unrefutable
>>71579503
The hottest scene was her in the bathtub. She nailed that look.
>>71579298
>>71579298
also plz note that this chick IS NOT your girlfriend/commitment-girl, even tho you'll prolly have to formally agree to it with her and let her think that she is.
btw all of this knowledge was accrued from a long distance relationship (chicago to long island) where the relationship was her idea and thus being 1000 miles away i didnt take it personally that she needed the cock when i wasnt around.
best part = when someone thinks that they cucked you and they scoff at you but you turn the tables like "au contraire mon frere, i was 1000+ miles away and while you were fucking her @ work she was earning $$$ to come back out here ASAP and spend that $2500+ to fuck me as much as she could til she ran out of $$$. she literally had you for free every day of the week but she still came out here to spend all her $$$ on (fucking) me. what does that say about YOU? lol
>not your blog yadda yadda yadda
sorry but hey it's prolly the end of a circlejerky thread and i was storyrelling.
--------------on topic----------------
elle fanning is hot and she could get it, and even tho i think winding refn is a but pretentious and tryhard i suppose you could do much worse than this movie, right? ALSO, ELLE and uhhhh yeah. "works for me" - hunter
movie looks pretty gud if you go in there expecting style over substance fare that's just a formality cuz you just wanna stare at elle and imagine a foursome with elle and the 2 other chicks.
i'd hate to clean the bathrooms at the theatree after a showing of this movie cuz you know some NEET somewhere couldnt make it home b4 rubbing one out to elle
>R
>>71579506
So a few guys where the scorpion jacket from Drive and now every Refn fan is an autist?
That's not fair.
>>71579522
>my points are unrefutable
If they're half as good as your spelling, I'm afraid I disagree.
>>71579564
>grammar nazi
>on 4chan
freshly danked m'nigger
Will I look like a creep if I see this alone? Friends are total plebs who refuse to see anything other than The Purge or capeshit right now.
This movie has 10/10 girls Abbey Lee and Bella Heathcote naked in a shower together, Jena Malone looking hotter than ever, and Elle fanning looking nearly perfect in every scene and people loathe the movie? The movie was a delight to my eyes. How can someone despise it?
They must be women.
>>71579506
I have an aunt who works with autistic kids. She says that intense sensory input sends them into a freakout or rage. Their narrow, math-y brains can't deal with the mystery of aesthetics.
Sounds like a certain someone in this thread railing against our boy Refn.
>>71579626
These showings are almost all people there alone. Go.
>>71579626
You'll be the only one in the theater most likely so don't worry about it.
I was the only one in the theater when I watched it. It felt like a victimless crime.
>>71579336
>>71573989
Just take the subway
>>71579481
Is it some sort of secret cowpolk stance?
>>71579726
Was CIA actually a Rancher by day?
>>71579626
drop them. My friends are autist as shit and they don't even see shit like the Purge
>>71578052
Sounds like a psychopath or autist. Must be why his films are so superficial, vapid, and shallow. He's hollow inside.
>>71579755
>Or perhaps he's wondering why someone would hang a man, before throwing him off of a horse?
>>71578191
You're like those sports fans who think if their team wins, YOU win too.
Are you one of Refn's investors? If not, why the fuck would you care how much money his movies made?
Is that you logic? If it makes money, then it's good?
I laughed almost every time Jena Malone was on the screen. Bitch can't act at all.
>>71573265
you sound like an autist and a cuck
>>71579885
>Director is a psychopath autist
>Fans of director are also psychopath autists
>>71579954
you and the others are the ones crying that it will make no money and his career as well as the actors will be over. I'm merely reporting statistics that prove you wrong you pathetic loser. and now you are trying to project your hick sports fanboyism mentality on me LMAO.
>>71579974
>calling someone autist
>on /tv/
>>71575372
Ruby and Plastic Surgeon Addicted bitch both had a concious by the end of the movie and thus couldn't stomach the perfectness.
That's why they asked the question: Are You Sex or Are You Food?
If she answered sex and made out with Ruby she would have survived.
During the bath scene you can see that Ruby is already regretting the decision to consume her since she was in love and thought that Jesse really had the it factor to make it big.
>>71575180
Hank was sleazy, but wasn't rape sleazy. He was telling other people about the lolita.
Could have also been part of that witch theory that the three were messing with Jesse.
>>71573410
Did you notice the upside down triangle necklace that one of the three is wearing,,?
And 46% of critics gave it positive reviews on RT. And it has an average score of 5.4.
Did Armond White be his contrarian self and love it?
Is there a reason I should watch this if I don't jerk off to Bret Easton Ellis?
>>71578565
Oh wow! What a quality post! Some people like a movie, and some people don't. What a revelation!
Is /a/ the best board you weaboo? /v/ perhaps?
>Children and Teens with Autism More Likely to Become Preoccupied with Video Games
>>71580079
>Hank was sleazy, but wasn't rape sleazy.
Then why was he raping/killing the Lolita girl? Also, he obvious broke into Jesse's room while she wasn't there. Jesse had a premonition about it. Plus, he would have left the back door open for the cat to pop in.
He had done it once, why not again?
>>71578600
Aesthetics?
Next are you going to say how Kim Kardashian with a champagne bottle on the cover of PAPER magazine was some penetrating insight into the psychology of mass media?
Is Michael Bay your 2nd favorite director? You just like to turn your brain off and look at the pretty pictures passing by?
>>71578613
Oh so it's about Jean Luc Brunel, Patrick Gilles, and Varsano.
>>71578717
>Visually and sonically sophisticated creative types are the ones who are responding well to the film
You mean self-important film majors whose main board is /mu/?
Next are you going to mention the indie horror found footage script you wrote?
>>71578730
Oh sure. Let Refn direct Paste-Pot Pete. It'll surely be a masterpiece of cinemakino, with a neon darkwave 80s soundtrack.
I liked it. That's about all I'm gonna say. Seems like this thread is nothing but a bunch of shitposts from people that don't like Refn and have an overwhelming autistic impulse to let everyone know their opinion.
>>71572221
What is even happening in this webm?
>>71580409
it wouldn't be /tv/ if we didn't have these niggers, so what do :/
>>71578858
Only if you inject it.
>young blood reverses the effects of aging when put into older mice
>>71578923
>You're on the wrong side of history, champ.
Oh, you're an SJW and/or mentally ill faggot. That explains why you like Refn films.
>>71578998
Let me guess. At least half of your top 10 movies are either videogame movies or Uwe Boll movies.
>>71580517
It's kind of hard to insult someone for being mentally ill when you are in this thread whining because people like a movie you didn't.
>>71579557
I actually forgot about that, but now that you mention it, it makes perfect sense to picture Refn fans sitting in their scorpion jackets in their fedoras playing Hotline Miami and Hotline Miami 2: Wrong Number, next to their paperback copies of American Psycho that won't open anymore because the semen on the pages has formed a kind of superglue.
>>71580762
he says you like refn movies cuz ur a sjw?
the movie is about fat shaming basically
>>71579643
Maybe if they're a super autist like that kid in Mercury Rising.
But if they don't like intense sensory input, then how do you explain:
>Children and Teens with Autism More Likely to Become Preoccupied with Video Games
Although, if intense sensory input sends them into rage, that would explain most online gamers, and every single game of Dota2.
>>71572148
Pure kino
>>71579972
You just reminded me of so many bad Jena Malone performances over the years.
Sucker Punch
The Messenger
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 1
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 2
Maybe Jena Malone starring in Bastard Out of Carolina made her unable to act.
>>71580269
Pain and Gain was a pretty good flick, desu
And I'm all about dat shiny stimuli. This is a new age, faggot.
>>71580039
No, unlike you, I don't care how much money a movie makes, and it's no reflection on a movie's actual quality or artistic merit.
>>71580517
>not discerning yet that history has long since superseded the 'left'
next!
>>71580409
I haven't seen it, but I will eventually, and I'll probably like it for what it is.
I just don't like fans of Refn, who overrate most of his stuff.
>>71580975
yes you do, because you and your friends were the ones who brought up the box office gross as a negative, which I refuted as being pointless.
I am the one who understands that it's not a reflection on the movie's quality, and the movie had much quality. You are just arguing in circles scrub
Those who don't like this film are STUPDI RETARDS
dey DUN GOOFED!
>>71572221
what is this, a techno/cyberpunk version of The Witch?
>>71580574
No they arent but almost good guess
What do you want me to say, Godfather trilogy and Piedone goes to Africa?
>>71579954
Cause if he bombs he won't get to make films again? At least not at the same level.
>>71581213
he's already bombed like 10 years ago with Fear X
and since then there's been Drive, Valhalla Rising, Bronson, 2/3 of the pusher trilogy, Only god Forgives, and Neon Demon.
>>71581295
HALF A PRESS
>>71581078
Me and my friends? There are 73 people in this thread and I don't know any of them.
Not that guy, I didn't bring up box office grosses.
>>71581317
Oh no my autism has been exposed
>>71572148
Armond White had something interesting to say about The Neon Demon:
>One has but to consider the phenomenon of fashion, which has never been satisfactorily explained. Fashion is the despair of sociology and aesthetics: a prodigious contagion of forms in which chain reactions struggle for supremacy over the logic of distinctions. The pleasure of fashion is undeniably cultural in origin, but does it not stem even more clearly from a flaring, unmediated consensus generated by the interplay of signs? Moreover, fashions fade away like epidemics once they have ravaged the imagination, once the virus has run its course. The price to be paid in terms of waste is always exorbitant, yet everyone consents. The marvellous in our societies resides in this ultra-rapid circulation of signs at a surface level (as opposed to the ultra-slow circulation of meanings). We love being contaminated by this process, and not having to think about it. This is a viral onslaught as noxious as the plague, yet no moral sociology, no philosophical reason, will ever extirpate it. Fashion is an irreducible phenomenon because it partakes of a crazy, viral, mediationless form of communication which operates so fast for the sole reason that it never passes via the mediation of meaning.
Anything that bypasses mediation is a source of pleasure. In seduction there is a movement from the one to the other which does not pass via the same.
>>71581332
>he thinks we think he didn't get to bring friends
suuuuure you didn't. Yet you try to be a nignog at me when I'm replying to the guy who "wasn't you" that did bring that up like I'm responsible?
>>71581355
dam he's right fashion IS meaningless bs
>>71572148
So the modeling industry ate her alive?
B R A V O
R
A
V
O
R E F N
E
F
N
>>71581400
That's also not Armond White btw.
>>71581355
>Moreover, fashions fade away like epidemics
Such a deep insightful analogy
>>71572673
>... it's good as fuck... huuummm...
Dropped.
>>71581470
Who is it?
>>71580079
Ruby had no conscience. You're completely wrong. She is joyful when she's laying in Jessie's grave, she's Ina state of bliss when she's bathing in her blood.
Both Jena Malone and NWR said that Ruby was a "300 year old witch" who killed young women to absorb their youthful beauty.
You couldn't be any more wrong
>>71572221
What are they watching? Is it a person in bondage or a hand moving around?
>>71579144
>>71579726
americans are always concerned about what others might think of them.
they need to put on a show and act as if they're cool as fuck to feel kind of comfortable.
This movie bombed
It was pulled from theaters in just a few days
It won't recoup its production costs, and it definitely won't break even
It's so ugly and unlikable that it will get the careers of many of the people involved with this film
Refn might never work again
>>71581708
I'd like to imagine film classes 20 years from now
>The Neon Demon (2016) didnt make enough money so it was shit
Amazing
You guys only like it because Jay said he liked it
>>71581742
>Impkying people will remember TWD 20 years from now
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!
>>71581767
>Oh man I loved it
>It was a piece of shit, Jay
>Yeah, it was pretty bad
>>71572148
i want to fuck the girls
>>71555555
>>71581889
I want to fuck girls
>>71578971
the best movies of year all have qts.
really makes you think
Just got back from seeing it at the arclight in hollywood. I give it a 8/10.
Some good stuff in here. Wasnt expecting the ending.what happaned to kaunu? Who was that walking in the desert at the end? What does the triangle mean? Bean? Also i cant believe jesse really died, thought caught me by surprise, thought she would come back in some weird way.
Jean Baudrillard, who died years ago (and also wrote about quite a few films).
>It is often said that the West's great undertaking is the commercialization of the whole world, the hitching of the fate of everything to the fate of the commodity. That great undertaking will turn out rather to have been the aestheticization of the whole world — its cosmopolitan spectacularization, its transformation into images, its semiological organization.
>If vampirism is a perverse re-imagining of the astral, then the cannibalism of zombies is the de-sublimated real of hyper-capitalism. The dead rise when history ends. An ironic objectification—only our appetite is immortal, not our intelligence, not our souls.
>Like violence, all forms of seduction and narcissism are laid down in advance by models produced industrially by the mass media and composed of identifiable signs.
>Seduction is stronger than production. …It is a circular and reversible process of challenge, one-upmanship, and death. ...production everywhere and always seeks to eliminate seduction in order to establish itself over the single economy of governing force relations...
>Challenge, and not desire, lies at the heart of seduction.
>Seduction is the world’s elementary dynamic… All this has changed significantly for us, at least in appearance. For what has happened to good and evil? Seduction hurls them against one another, and unites them beyond meaning, in a paroxysm [sudden outbreak of emotion] of intensity and charm.
>>71581708
There you go again.
Why are you so intent on setting yourself against history? Don't you know that that is how one destroys oneself.
I mean, just WOW.
>>71581708
You forgot it was also booed at Cannes.
10/10 bait
>>71582093
Baudrillard was one of the bad guys. He's outmoded at this point.
Figures that a hater of this film would defer to him. What a faggot.
Also, this weak 'end of history' argument. You really should at least TRY to hide your identity.
>>71582146
I don't hate the film. I haven't even seen it. There's more than one person in this thread.
But his quotes on aesthetics, fashion, seduction, violence, and cannibalism apply to this film I think.
>>71582193
I can see how you would map that onto it, but I think he's coming from the wrong frame or priorities.
And there IS still production, and things are not solely determined by industry, not everything is grounded completely in commercialism, even if it at some stage passes through it. And I disagree that so many of these images are already completely predefined.
We're past postmodernism at this point. We have moved into an aesthetic epoch, for sure, but it's not about signifiers signifying. The Linguistic / conceptual whole post-war stage is done.
>>71582217
No, he's basically a prophet. His writings foreshadow reality TV, foreshadow 9/11, foreshadow global terrorism, foreshadow transgenderism, his writings on seduction and challenge and reversibility are full of insights, and he even wrote about cinema from time to time.
>The cinema in its current efforts is getting closer and closer, and with greater and greater perfection, to the absolute real, in its banality, its veracity, in its naked obviousness, in its boredom, and at the same time in its presumption, in its pretension to being the real, the immediate, the unsignified, which is the craziest of undertakings...
>Cool, cold pleasure, not even aesthetic in the strict sense: functional pleasure, equational pleasure, pleasure of machination. One only has to dream of Visconti (Guepard, Senso, etc., which in certain respects make one think of Barry Lyndon) to grasp the difference, not only in style, but in the cinematographic act. In Visconti, there is meaning, history, a sensual rhetoric, dead time, a passionate game, not only in the historical content, but in the mise-en-scène. None of that in Kubrick, who manipulates his film like a chess player, who makes an operational scenario of history. And this does not return to the old opposition between the spirit of finesse and the spirit of geometry: that opposition still comes from the game and the stakes of meaning, whereas we are entering an era of films that in themselves no longer have meaning strictly speaking, an era of great synthesizing machines of varying geometry.
>>71572673
you are the best YouTuber, don't listen to haters, there will always be an loud minority, we like what you did, also this old school approach is actually quite refreshing.
Just do what you like and post here your work, majority of us will support you.
>>71582093
Why would you use Baudrillard to critique the film...tell me how you would apply those ideas in critiquing the film.
I'm just so utterly bored of talk of The End of History, of Fukuyama and Jameson and Baudrillard and Zizek.
I'm tired of Foucault and Butler and Derrida.
I'm bored of tedious, postmodernist, Marxism-informed Gen X cranks reducing everything to spot-the-reference and zombie-capitalism.
That whole worldview is one unable to see what's even going on now, it just bitterly continues trying to pull things back to that circa-2002 conclusion that everything is over. It's almost as if such people were so invested in some Marxist Modernism that if that narrative/future doesn't happen, then there can be no life or history (essentially their argument), so they want to piss on all the developments since (of which there are many), try to force them into these pessimistic Marxist terms that render (in their view) void because the revolutionary capacity is gone.
I'm done with it (and I really gave it a shot). The world has moved on.
>>71582348
>to the absolute real
>its banality, its veracity, in its naked obviousness, in its boredom
>its pretension to being the real
How is it the absolutely real if its presuming to be real? this is why I don't have that much respect for post-modern philosophers. If you define a word then totally overturn that definition in the next few phrases it makes your whole sentence meaningless, but that's precisely what they're trying to do I think.
>>71582387
Such people want to measure everything against whether it can further some Marxist revolutionary trajectory away from Capitalism. Failing that, it becomes some dreary zombie exercise to them because they can't imagine agency in any other capacity or terms.
>>71572716
God damn, i was closed in a room like this for 14 hours and more, really too loud music and smoke.
And I was so drugged that i actually believed i enjoy myself. Fucking puberty.
>>71582312
Baudrillard is probably more post-structuralist.
He held that the opposite of production is seduction. And that all modes of expression have been absorbed into advertising.
>All current forms of activity tend toward advertising and most exhaust themselves therein. Not necessarily advertising itself, the kind that is produced as such - but the form of advertising, that of a simplified operational mode, vaguely seductive, vaguely consensual..
>because it has no depth, it is instantaneous and instantaneously forgotten.
>Already most non-material goods are meeting the same fate as material goods: forced production, forced advertising, accelerated recycling, built-in obsolescence. Art becomes ephemeral, not so as to express the ephemeral nature of life, but to adapt to the transience of the market.
He writes of the "Evil Demon of Images", where the world of images around us are not sites of the "production of meaning" but rather "sites of the disappearance of meaning and representation."
>Cold collage, cool promiscuity, asexual engagement of two cold media which evolve in asymptotic line towards one another: cinema attempting to abolish itself in the absolute of reality, the real already long absorbed in cinematographic (or televised) hyperreality.
Writing about art, which he says has lost all boundaries ("transaesthetics"), he said there is no longer any meaning in art because life itself has lost the meaning that art used to reference.
>through the bluff of nullity, to force people a contrario to give (art) some importance and credit under the pretext that there is no way it could be so null, that it must be hiding something
>Therein lies the conspiracy of art at its primal scene, transmitted by all of the openings, hangings, exhibitions, restorations, collections, donations and speculations, and that cannot be undone in any known universe, since it has hidden itself from thought behind the mystification of images
>>71582870
Post-modernists have mangled the philosophical language and sophistically assume that in their doing so they're talking about something more substantive than our language can comprehend. It's silly, you're trying to do metaphysics without using language, and you're precisely what Kant advised against, you're just doing it with language; in giving up the a priori character of language you actually end up talking about complete non-sense and blatherskite.
>>71582870
Just cold assertions left and right, with no substantiation. Post-modernists think that the more something happens or the more copies there are of something the less real it becomes. That my exercising outside is not as real as the real exercise done by primitive ancients or some applesauce like that. That is, that in buying exercising gear or paraphernalia, I reduce the reality of the activity of exercising.
Use some real argumentation, and stop quoting meaningless sentences from such an empty philosopher, let's hear your side and not his. Emptily throwing around jumbled sentences and then asserting that all of human activity has somehow lost its meaning without proving adequate justification, but on the contrary, using post-modern jargon in an attempt to sound profound to compensate for the lack of thought is terribly and depressingly anti-philosophical. If you're a philosophy student, you should be ashamed. You're throwing away the spirit of philosophy itself and bromidically categorizing it with your useless definitions. Indeed, Socrates would be absolutely ashamed.
Seriously it's embarrassing. This is why philosophy isn't as respected anymore and I'm rankled to know that I'm lumped with the likes of you "philosophers."
Yours is a heritage of Nietzsche, he himself exhorted for the sophistical method. He congratulated himself for being a sophist. A deep tragedy for philosophy sadly.
>>71582387
I haven't seen it, but I read TND deals with fashion, modeling, seduction, violence, and cannibalism. Many have praised the aesthetics of the film, some say it's superficial and has a thin plot, some don't care about plot, others mentioned fetishism. Baudrillard spent most of his life writing about commodity fetishism and images and simulacra, so the film sounds right up his alley for analysis.
You can relate Baudrillard's ideas on the commodification of everything to fashion models; his ideas about fashion being a "contagion of forms" which struggle for supremacy to the fashion industry in the film, or fashion models (and even compare that to his ideas of each commodity presenting itself as the sole commodity, seeking to erase all other commodities); his ideas on endless appetite and capitalism (or consumption) to cannibalism; his ideas on seduction as challenge and one-upmanship (leading to death) to the film, or even his ideas on potlatch and suicidal "gifts" to the film; or his idea that seduction hurls good and evil at each other leading to a strange charm.
He believed that "Good and Evil rise simultaneously", that neither can defeat the other.
Also:
>On the one hand: political economy, production, the code, the system, simulation. On the other hand: potlatch, expenditure, sacrifice, death, the feminine, seduction
For those who feel the film is shallow:
>What people deeply desire is a spectacle of banality. This spectacle of banality is today's true pornography and obscenity. It is the obscene spectacle of nullity (nullité), insignificance, and platitude.
>the great stars or seductresses never dazzle because of their talent or intelligence, but because of their absence. They are dazzling in their nullity, and in their coldness – the coldness of makeup and ritual hieraticism
He wrote of people in the art market as:
>the snobs of nullity, of all those who prostitute Nothingness to value, who prostitute Evil for useful ends
>>71583453
A philosophy of resentment.
What poisonous words. I'm so glad I'm not beholden to this way of thinking anymore.
>>71582469
Baudrillard wrote about the proliferation of images (and trans-everything). He wrote about the world we are living in now, years ago. With people accusing TND of being "style over substance" and "shallow", what he wrote totally applies.
He rejected ideas of the "end of history", it was about all things being swallowed into "real time."
>Today, with all the forms of the reality show and virtual reality, they want us to enter the image, the screen, the three dimensional artifact -- real-life good to go --, thus destroying any generic illusion of the image. The temporal equivalent is that of real-time, that purports at the speed of light -- which is that of information -- to install us in an absolute present, abolishing all illusion of past and future.
>History will not come to an end – since the leftovers, all the leftovers – the Church, communism, ethnic groups, conflicts, ideologies – are indefinitely recyclable. ...History has only wrenched itself from cyclical time to fall into the order of the recyclable.
And he wrote of history as a myth resurrected in cinema.
>Baudrillard’s thought increases our awareness that fictions (television shows, film, novels etc.) are vital to how the vast majority of people come to know and understand the past today. Ours is a time when history too has entered into simulation – including major events such as the Holocaust.
>By virtue of its technical proficiency, the remake obliterates its original, and in this way the new film becomes a simulacrum, a copy without original. This can work for real events, too: Baudrillard criticized Spielberg’s 1993 Schindler’s List and NBC’s 1978 dramatization Holocaust for semiotically exterminating the real Holocaust (Merrin, 2005: 66).
>One no longer makes the Jews pass through the crematorium or the gas chamber, but through the sound track and image track, through the universal screen and the microprocessor.
>>71572148
Very enjoyable movie.
>>71572342
Elle Fanning was still the perfect casting choice. I couldn't think of another actress of her age who could've pulled off such a role.
This is his quote:
>The cinema in its current efforts is getting closer and closer, and with greater and greater perfection, to the absolute real, in its banality, its veracity, in its naked obviousness, in its boredom, and at the same time in its presumption, in its pretension to being the real, the immediate, the unsignified, which is the craziest of undertakings..
He wrote that cinema is getting closer to "the absolute real", all while pretending to be real.
He wrote:
>The cinema and its trajectory: from the most fantastic or mythical to the realistic and the hyperrealistic.
>All, but not only, those historical films whose very perfection is disquieting: Chinatown, Three Days of the Condor, Barry Lyndon, 1900, All the President's Men, etc...Take The Last Picture Show: like me, you would have had to be sufficiently distracted to have thought it to be an original production from the 1950s: a very good film about the customs in and the atmosphere of the American small town. Just a slight suspicion: it was a little too good, more in tune, better than the others, without the psychological, moral, and sentimental blotches of the films of that era. Stupefaction when one discovers that it is a 1970s film, perfect retro, purged, pure, the hyperrealist restitution of 1950s cinema. One talks of remaking silent films, those will also doubtlessly be better than those of the period. A whole generation of films is emerging that will be to those one knew what the android is to man: marvelous artifacts, without weakness, pleasing simulacra that lack only the imaginary, and the hallucination inherent to cinema.
>>71582497
Commodity fetishism is real (as any console war discussion online, or even arguments about Blurays on /tv/ demonstrate).
Now consider the following:
>Lukács studied under Simmel (indeed was Simmel’s ‘favourite pupil’) and in ‘Reification and the Consciousness of the Proletariat’, declared that “the problem of commodities must not be considered in isolation or even regarded as the central problem in economics, but as the central, structural problem of capitalist society in all its aspects” (Lukács 1971: 83). Elaborating and expanding upon Marx’s notion of commodity fetishism whereby social relations between men assume “the fantastic form of a relation between things” (Marx 1990: 165), Lukács developed the concept of reification - thingification. Man is turned into a thing, subjects become objects. In terms of commodity exchange the theory can be summarised as follows: “the subject of the exchange is just as abstract, formal and reified as its object” (Lukács 1971: 105). In Alain Badiou’s reading, what Marx regarded as the principle alienation of capitalism is “the primacy of things over existence, of commodities over life” (Badiou 2012: 20). By exchanging commodities in one-off transactions, man’s social relations become more object-like, thing-like, and abstract. As Charles Levin puts it in Heideggerian terms, this is a “nihilistic reduction of Being to exchange value” (Levin 1996: 7).
Compare the "thingification" of everything, where man is turned into a thing, just another commodity, to the way fashion models are treated in the modeling and fashion industry.
Now consider the question in the film:
>"Are you sex or are you food?"
Cannibalism is objectification taken to the Nth power.
>Pomos are touching my sweet Heidegger
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
I bet you anything Baud would castigate Malick's (a devout Heideggerian) films as a commodification of the metaphysical, of Being-in-the-world, of being itself.
>>71582992
Baudrillard rejects the label "post-modernist."
>I am a terrorist and a nihilist in theory as the others are in weapons. Theoretical violence, not truth, is the only resource we have left us.
>It is a process of pushing a system or a concept or an argument to the extreme points where one pushes them over... Yes it’s all a type of artifice using irony and humour. ...it is a fatal strategy. When you push the systems to the extreme you see that there is nothing more to say. So there is destabilization. Maybe there is a certain provocation. But among all those disciplines that one traverses or ironizes or whatever, no one of them is privileged. That goes for myself too. I don’t have any doctrines to defend. I have one strategy, that’s all.
As for "Fashionable Nonsense"
>The key question here is why modernists like Sokal think the success of the simulation is damaging to post-modernism.
>Sokal’s reasoning commits the intentional fallacy of supposing that a text means just what its author intended it to mean. Even analytic philosophers tend to accept that works of fiction can and do differ in meaning from that intended by the author, and the more post-modern you are, the less distinction you see between fiction and non-fiction. Indeed, post-modernists tend to reject the notion of a privileged interpretation, holding that if a text can be read a certain way, then that’s one of its many meanings.
>The problem with Sokal and Bricmont’s treatment of Baudrillard is that they completely fail to read his work in terms of what it actually is – a statement of social theory and metaphysical philosophy. Moreover terms like black hole, nebula, particles, and such, are not the exclusive province of science. They belong to language, which properly speaking belongs to no one. The term “black hole” does not belong to cosmology any more than “weather” belongs to meteorology or “sea” to that of oceanography.
>>71584236
>Baudrillard rejects the label "post-modernist."
Of course he does, that's because post-modernists reject everything. Post-modernists revel in not being labeled, they abhor being categorized.
>>71583202
You don't seem familiar with his ideas. Baudrillard writes about simulation.
>Throughout his work, Baudrillard claims that meaning has become lost because of simulacra – “representations” that no longer reference any original idea, concept, object, or so forth – pure simulation.
He wrote of three orders of simulacra: counterfeit (where the "purity" of the original is not lost), mass production (where things are made to be exact copies), and simulation (where representations and have copies have no original).
He wrote:
>Most present-day images—be they video images, paintings, products of the plastic arts, or audiovisual or synthesized images—are literally images in which there is nothing to see
>The universe, and all of us, have entered live into simulation, into the malefic, not even malefic, indifferent, sphere of deterrence: in a bizarre fashion, nihilism has been entirely realized no longer through destruction, but through simulation and deterrence.
I'm not a philosophy student, but I have read The Passion of the Western Mind, which discusses about 2,000 years of Western philosophy.
Nietzche said "One must push what is collapsing." In a sense, Baudrillard follows that strategy using hyperbole:
>It is a process of pushing a system or a concept or an argument to the extreme points where one pushes them over...
![large[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/jm6naUn.jpg "large[1]")
