/lit/ - Literature

You realize there's a movie board, right?

Also, did you literally just find out movies were made before the 1990's yesterday? Those directors are great, but if those are GENUINELY your all time favorites, and not just supposed to "impress" us with your Intro to Film History knowledge, then your taste is incredibly limited.

Ozu is objectively the greatest film director of all time.

You listed some decent ones but most did little more than "filmed theatre." If you're going to make a movie, make a movie.

jia zhangke
bong joon ho
juzo itami
john carpenter

shitton of others, also not /lit/

>>6366763
If you like extremes like Tarkovsky and Fellini, or Melville and Antonioni, I wouldn't call it limited. Eclectic and all over the place, yes, without any depth in your interests or personality too, but not limited.

>>6366765
>Godard
>Filmed theatre
Nigga, wut?

>>6366751
Harmony Korine
Lars Von Trier
Shinya Tsukamoto
Yoshihiro Nishimura
Gaspar Noe

Sometimes others. Is your list true or "lel so patrician am i rite"? Good way to start a thread though.

>>6366773
There's a difference between eclectic and just listing a bunch of directors you know are important and saw one movie from once.

Sure, they're great, but calling them all your favorites and mentioning no one else just outs someone as being inexperienced with film.

>>6366780
Filmed Film Criticism Essays is just as bad as Filmed Theater.

Godard and the film critics jerk each other off to make sure they both stay gainfully employed.

>>6366789
>Is your list true or "lel so patrician am i rite"? Good way to start a thread though.
It's a copy/paste post that is several years old, it usually gives better discussions than /tv/ has ever managed.

You know, for a literature board there sure isn't much literature discussion

>>6366801
I agree completely, and I find Godard to be a pretentious cunt who did nothing that others didn't do much better and more subtly, but filmed theater he wasn't. That's all I was saying.

>>6366804
Fair enough, you're right.

Did you guys go see the latest Godard movie? I really liked the things he did with the 3D but it was just too little, I hope Noe does something in that same line so it really gets exploited. In conceptual terms it seemed just like Godard complaining that he's old and too mature for a world that just didn't end when they all thought it would. I couldn't particularly care for his poignant critic
>whenever you talk of politics I get the shits
really shows hos pathetic his own understanding of it was from the get go.

>>6366812
True, but this is still more interesting than twenty consecutive Freshman Philosophy Major Navel Gazing threads.

Currently my favourite directors are:
Robert Bresson
Sion Sono
Masaki Kobayashi
Ingmar Bergman
Woody Allen
David Lean
Thomas Vinterberg
Nuri Bilge Ceylan

Some of them have made movies I don't like, but I enjoy their style, and all of them have made masterpieces.

>>6366817
He did it first and he did influence others greatly, you can't just ignore that. It shouldn't mean taking him as the end all of cinema, and anyone who does that is either barely getting into it or too fixated with discourse to look around a bit more.

>>6366832
"Cinema begins with Griffith and ends with Kiarostami" John Luc Godard

>>6366827
I really liked some of Siono's work. Love Exposure and Noriko's Dinner Table were amazing. But from Coldfish onwards I didn't get the same feeling, the same catharsis and self-disgust. Even Coldfish felt a little evident in things, as if some producer had called him to do that knowing it's his "thing". Land of Hope was cool with the idea that no one was right or wrong in the end, but it felt like a tv drama. I haven't been interested in anything since from him since watching that, although I have Himizu already downloaded.
How do you feel about him? Any recs?

>>/lit/?task=search2&ghost=&search_text=my+favorite+directors&search_op=op&search_res=thread

>>6366832
>He did it first and he did influence others greatly
As much as his pseudointellectual browbeating makes me groan, you're right. Hell, Breathless alone earned him a top spot. I just don't like him all that much, personally.

Maybe I'm just salty because he got to fuck Karina.

>>6366812
start a thread on the subject you want then.

Tarkovsky, Renoir, Fellini, Bergman, and Bunuel.

Anyone else here is fan of Renoirs color films? I love French CanCan.

Since we're all blabbering on about cinema, what movie do you think encapsulates best the feeling of the Other, of the eruption of Else-ness in everyday life? I say The Blair Witch Project, in a way, but it may be because it's really similar ot something I'm writing.

Might be a bit entry level, but Le Samourai is still an all time favorite, and will forever endear Melville's ass to me.

>>6366860
I'm having trouble conceptualizing what you mean by "the Other".
Could you go into a tad bit more detail?

>>6366751
Godard is just awful.

Anyway:

Tarkovsky, Bergman, Koreeda, Kieslowski, Ozu, Bresson, Kar Wai Wong, Scorsese, Haneke, Zvyagintsev, Farhadi, Chaplin, Mehrjui, Coppola, Akin, Miyazaki, Kurosawa , and many more Japanese directors.

>>6366845
Not just Breathless, the nouvelle vague was born first as a film cricisism group and they basically made critical analysis something that was okay to publicly do. It started the idea that you could do something artistic with film and get some public recognition. They even brough attention back to Hitchcock when he wasn't even getting tv work in the states, all the respect he gets now is thanks to those french guys kissing his ass in the late 60's.
He also made it possible for Truffaut to get funding for his real movies, so at least you have to be a bit thankful of the guy.

>>6366860
I mentioned it before, but you might really like Noriko's Dinner Table. If you find out you like japan stuff consider Love & Pop too, but it's a very local take on the "else-ness in everyday life" so it might not be your thing.

>>6366866
Melville was a genre genius. Did you watch Ghost Dog The Way of the Samurai? It's heavily inspired in Le Samourai while still being its own thing, very chill movie too.

>>6366842
>Love Exposure and Noriko's Dinner Table were amazing
I agree. Love Exposure is completely unique and over the top in every single way - it's one of the few films where the word Tour de Force is appropriate.
I agree that he is a hit and miss director, especially in his newer works. Cold Fish was great though, the repeated use of Mahler worked surprisingly well with the protagonist's inner rage.
I'd recommend Why Don't You Play In Hell, which is similar in style to Love Exposure, but is more of a straight forward comedy. It's very 'meta' compared to his other works, and VERY over-the-top.

I should really watch more Seijun Suzuki.

>>6366867
To be fair, I don't even know if I'm using the concept properly. I'm thinking about the Lovecraftian reality warper, the radically inhuman, the glitch (as in, a graphical glitch in an image, none of that Matrix bollocks) that pierces the veil of reality and "enters" the world from dimensions unknown. If you're familiar with /x/ memery, think Skinwalkers when they appear as humans.

>>6366880
Why spoiler Miyazaki?

>>6366891
If you're open to more subtle interpretations, Tarkovsky is your man on that front.
Or David Lynch, although I've never been huge into him.

>>6366900
Cause he's shit and anime was a mistake.

> implying Zizek's analyses of David Lynch films aren't 100% on the money
> implying Lynch is anything other than Lacan filmed (aka surrealist Freud aka surrealist Hitchcock)

>mfw /lit/ can express their opinions on film far more intelligently and civilly than their opinions on literature.

This is what years of fucking memes gets you.

>>6366904
The only thing that gave me that sensation was actually a fanedit of something Lynch's Twin Peaks- Northwest Passage.

>>6366907
oh. I mistook his name for Mizoguchi, and couldn't understand shit.

>>6366904
Lynch is great, I've seen a lot of his stuff; gotta rewatch Eraserhead. Tarkovsky's on my list, I'm actually reading a book of his. Pretty good, if dogmatic.

>>6366920
Link?

>>6366885
I'll consider checking that, thanks for the rec.

>>6366886
Not really. If you can find Pistol Opera it's good, but I really tried watching Fighting Elegy (the synopsis sounded great, christian teens letting his repressed sexual desire steam off in a sort of fight club) and he just can't direct actors. It's worse than community theater.

>>6366904
Seconding Lynch. Blue Velvet if you haven't seen that, Lost Highway and Imperio; those three deal a lot with that otherness.

>>6366914
>Implying Lynch is some sort of director to analyze and not pure gut level direct symbolism.

>>6366919
No, it's just that film threads get some good posters to the light. Its a good excercise to express what you think about something without things like "like/dislike" or "good/bad". Give us a few more posts and it will turn into ugly cheap mindless discussions like always.

>>6366927
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:3075a5dddd59501837d50e35f05a670348f98053&dn=Northwest+Passage%3A+A+Twin+Peaks+Fanedit+720p&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fopen.demonii.com%3A1337&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.coppersurfer.tk%3A6969&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.leechers-paradise.org%3A6969&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fexodus.desync.com%3A6969

>>6366929
>>Implying Lynch is some sort of director to analyze and not pure gut level direct symbolism.

So just rip bongs and be like "waaaaaat?!?"

So the dyke sex scenes in Mulholland Dr. don't reflect Lacan's notions of feminine sexuality and identity? Please.

On the more modern front, I really enjoy Haneke.
He's bleak and staccato without being too committed to that atmosphere to tell an interesting story.

And Funny Games was enjoyable as all hell, and even fairly clever for what it was. Shit, even the remake wasn't bad.

>>6366751
I am going to bite. I really like Ingmar Bergman, David Lynch, Scorsese, Kubrick and Francis Coppola. I am a total pleb and I don't give a shit about it, what you gonna do?

>>6366988
If you're going to be a pleb, you're doing it right.
Bergman is the most consistently outstanding director I've ever seen, and as far as Coppola goes, Apocalypse Now will always be my personal favorite (not objectively best, but favorite) film.

>>6366993
I was blown away by what Bergman did in The Seventh Seal, the whole setting and the way he portrays it is, as you say, simply outstanding. I am with you with Apoycalypse Now, such a great movie. Have you seen Lost In translation by his daughter?

>>6366993
>>6366988
Bergman is GOAT. His ensemble of actors really help bring his wonderful, transcendent, stories to life.

>>6367040
Exactly, never seen death handled as gracefully as in The Seventh Seal. And yeah, but I'm not a huge fan. Sophia is good at appealing to the audience she aims to, but her stuff never really resonated with me like her old man did.

>>6367072
>>6367065
>>6367040
>>6366993
>>6366988
Fucking plebs.

Bresson
Tarkovsky
Bergman

In that order.
Paul Thomas Anderson gets an honorable mention, because he was the one that got me interested in film.

>>6367065
>His ensemble of actors really help bring his wonderful, transcendent, stories to life.

Goddamn right. Gunnar Bjornstrand, Max Von Sydow, and Bibi Anderson were the shit.

>>6367083
"/lit/'s endemic shitposters haven't been told by other, more seasoned assholes what to hate yet, so this is all they can manage in these unfamiliar surroundings"

-David Attenborough

>>6366929
You have not watched the right Suzuki.

>>6366866
You seen Le Cercle Rouge and Le Deuxieme Souffle?

>>6366789
Why Korine and von Trier first? Are they you favorites? If so... damn, that sucks, man. You should watch more movies.

>>6367040
I've seen lost in translation. It was a nice film about genuine human connection between too highly alienated people. I think it's a shame though that Sofia ended up focusing more on that alienation (which she doesn't have anything meaningful to say about) rather than the genuine human connection.


So how long does everyone think this thread will be alive before the mods delete it.

>>6367102
Shut your mouth, squire. Do not mistake the outrightness of my statement for plebhood; after all, who in his right mind would not cringe at the sight of these petty philistines praising babby-tier, entry-level arthouse cinema as the Fourth Revelation? Plebians never fail to amuse me!

>>6367199
>babby-tier, entry-level arthouse cinema as the Fourth Revelation

U havin a jiggle m8?

>>6367199
I mean, you can't really say Bergman isn't a talented director. I realize it's fun to shitpost but at least do it in a way that makes sense.

Kurosawa, Tarkovsky, Kubrick, Tarr, Leone, Herzog, Bresson, Haneke, Cronenberg, Svankmajer, Noé.

Pretty basic, but they have so much great films that you'd be a retard to not to like them.

>most did little more than "filmed theatre."
You have no idea what you're talking about, none of those were theatrical in the slightest.

>>6367199
>Entry-level = bad
Why do plebeians always think this? They're entry-level, because they're so good and influential that you should watch them first to get some perspective. Entry-level doesn't mean the most accessible, because Bergman's certainly not that (you haven't even seen Persona, have you?)

Cassavetes, Dreyer, Kobayashi.

>>6366943
I really doubt Lynch was doing a direct reference to Lacan, rather, you could apply Lacan to his work just as you would to anyone's. A lot of people assume there are intended layers upon layers in Lynch works when actually it's a much more emotional connection.
Being "like 'waaaaaaah'" is just being surprised and/or demanding the film to be what you wanted it to be. It's not an emotional response, just a very stupid intellectual one.

>>6367102
it's better if you ignore the people who are trying to get a reaction out of you. we used to say "don't feed the trolls" but I guess that could be a very old concept for some people.

>>6367040
>have you seen lost in translation
w-what? has that become one of those films you have to ask people if they saw them? everyone and their mothers were talking about sub par Broken Flowers, and there wasn't even that much to tal about.

>>6367157
Just leaving things like that makes you look like an ass. What would be the right suzuki?
Youth of the Beast? Branded to Kill? That's just generic gangster stuff, Nikatsu crapped a dozen of those per year. Prisioner 701 1 to 3, and even 4, are immensely superior. They try to be more complex AND more exploitative, and succeed with honors.

I just watched Au Hasard Balthazar - it felt rigid. I understood the Christian imagery, as if calling him a Saint out of nowhere and having him die among a flock of sheep wasn't enough, but it just felt so rigid. The acting and the pace especially. I'm sorry.

>>6367272
Nothing to apologize for. Movies can be famous and important without appealing to everyone, or even being all that good (if they do something important and pave the way for better attempts).

>>6367242
>tryhard plebbies namedropping The Seventh Seal and Persona as Bergman's masterworks
>implying Persona isn't accessible, captivating to the eye of most

Plebeians are so easy to spot these days. You achieve nothing but expose yourselves in your pathetic attempts to resemble cultured. I would suggest to refrain from this discussion unless you want to be acutely decimated.

>>6367300
how being captivating to the common eye is a bad thing in a work? are you implying that obscurity and difficulty are the things that make something good? are you such a hipster, Glaucon?

objective most untouchable favorite directors to namedrop at parties:

bresson
hawks
tarkovsky
ray
hitchcock
ozu
ford
welles
nolan

>>6367311
ray? man ray?
I really like his work as a photographer, but with film he can only count as the first one to do dumb shit

>>6367267
You really don't know what you're talking about if you think he was making "generic gangster stuff".

Nikkatsu indeed crapped out 10 or more per year but some of them were actually good. What makes Suzuki stand out is his inventive use of the camera, use of other unique techniques and subversion of genre tropes. Have you actually seen Branded to Kill? Calling that a generic gangster movie is just plainly ridiculous.

His movies are a little campy, and maybe that irks you. If that's the case watch The Story of a Prostitute or Zigeunerweisen.

If you watched Youth of the Beast, Tokyo Drifter, Braded to Kill, and Detective Agency 2-3 without having fun, you must have an intolerably bad sense of humor.

tarkovsky antonioni kubrick

>>6367309
>I would suggest to refrain from this discussion unless you want to be acutely decimated.
How can you seriously respond to this transparent of a troll?

>mfw reporting 2 threads in 1 day

>>6367320
not man ray

btw my actual favorite directors are antonioni godard mann argento and vontrier + welles again

>>6367320
Probably Satyajit Ray, the Indian director.

It's interesting how people in these threads never namedrop John Ford. He is arguably one of the greatest directors of all time, and certainly on the same level as many of the European and Japanese directors of his time.

>>6367309
Persona is a film birthed from elemental trickery, a brilliantly shot clusterfuck with metaphysical resonances, yet not nearly as deep as other features in his filmography; if you fail to acknowledge this fact, then, congratulations, you are a full-blown plebeian: and what is more sad than that pleb who tries desperately to feign purpose in erudition, who refuses to acknowledge his own nature?

>>6367351
Dude hated analysis of his films. Basically made movies for shits and gigs. An excellent and prolific filmmaker, but not really good for discussion, and by extension not great for name dropping.

>>6367337
It may be Nicholas Ray too

>>6367328
I did have fun, just like I did with A Colt is My Passport or Little Knife or any of those. I don't see what makes him such an important director besides being banned at some point, Tarantino liking him and him being the first japan noir director to get in netflix.

Again, Prisoner 701 Sasori is light years beyond that stuff.

>>6367351
>It's interesting how something that just happened never happens
everyone knows Ford, he's cool but so tied to what /mu/would call dad-cinema that a lot of people feel dirty to bring him up.
I really wouldn't put him above a lot of directors that came decades later, but it would be an unfair comparison I think.

>>6367334
Argento started so well and halfway through Rosso Sangre he sort of lost his magic. Opera is really inferior to his first stuff like Four Flies even though he had a huge budget, and out of his 90's stuff I think Trauma is the only decent one. The one about his daughter getting raped into raping isn't too good.

>>6366880
>Godard is just awful.
I still wonder how that hack could become such a critic favourite

>>6366751
I-i like Terry Gilliam.

He's a good story-teller

>>6367383
He absolutely is. Doesn't take himself to seriously, either. Fuckin' Brazil, man; and while Fear and Loathing may not be high art, it's still damn good.

>>6367379
Wonder the same.
I think
>>6366801
nailed it.

>>6366907
I'm firm in my belief that Miyazaki is the best filmmaker ever.

My second pick is probably Kiarostami.

>>6366763
>You realize theres a movie board, right?
Just try and discuss film in that shithole. Go ahead.

Chris Marker, probably.

I do sometimes wonder why I don't really favour more individual directors. I just watch what I think is important and try to appreciate it without ending up loving anything. Maybe I'm too analytical to do otherwise, but I'm very open-minded about films and I've been well into them for a decade now. Even went to school to study Film, which was absolute balls to honest. Don't do that.

>>6367272
>it just felt so rigid. The acting and the pace especially
You might want to research the methods that Bresson used, he surealy made his films exactly as he wanted

>>6367394
>you will never see Jean Rochefort as Don Quixote
>Good Omens will never be adaptated

>>6367399
>I'm firm in my belief that Miyazaki is the best filmmaker ever.
That's a bit of a stretch. Like, a reeeaaaal fucking stretch. Still, nothing wrong with him being your *favorite* director, he's just not done enough for film as a whole, in my opinion, to even be in the running for best.

Best animation director, however, absolutely. East or West.

>>6366832
>He did it first and he did influence others greatly, you can't just ignore that.
I guess you're right in a way, but I hate when people say this because even admitting that he's all innovation and no skill is giving him too much credit. He basically took avant-garde randomness (which had already been done in painting and literature) and used it to put postmodern elements into cinema. Certainly this influenced many later directors, but only because most people in the film industry themselves are only acquainted with non-cinematic art on a very basic level.

Maybe I'm too hard on him, idk. I just feel like I'm being lectured by "that guy" who's read 5 books and think he's a literary genius and marxist scholar whenever I watch one of his films.

>>6366751
based oldmemer

>>6367375
>I don't see what makes him such an important director
He's not important per se besides the fact that he uses really distinctive techniques for his movies. He's just fun as hell.

You said though that someone shouldn't watch his movies and that
>It's worse than community theater.

You seem to have an unnatural hate of what is simply and incredibly fun and energetic director that is praised for his brevity and distinctive techniques.

Stop trying to backpedal, it's clear you really don't like him

>>6367420
>I just feel like I'm being lectured by "that guy" who's read 5 books and think he's a literary genius and marxist scholar whenever I watch one of his films.
Are you me, anon?

>>6367418
To me his consistency in producing some of the most affecting films of all time trump technical innovation and meta/theoretical contributions to form.

>>6367434
>>6367420
Seconded. I don't hate him, but I do find myself gritting my teeth through certain elements of his work (but also genuinely enjoying some others).

Great technique attached to high school insight.

I do wonder if people who hate Godard have watched movies like Sauve Qui Peut, Passion, and Nouvelle Vague? They're very different to the early-works, or even the highly analytical later films.

JLG has always struck me as a very neutral-director taking into account all of his work. I simply don't get how anybody can outright love or hate him.

I'm a pleb compared to you guys but I have a huge interest in cinematography to a level of perhaps pursuing a career. What patrician films are visually stunning and interesting?

>>6367452
a portion of the people who hate him watched breathless & crazy pete, then committed herzog's statement about him to memory and called it a day

>>6367452
to be honest I have just watched A Bout De Souffle, Vivre Sa Vie and Masculin Feminin. I also tried to watch La Chinoise and Pierrot Le Fou but couldn't stand them. Any particular recs?

>>6367440
I don't know. He's great, and some of his films genuinely do have a real impact that I won't try and take away from, but film-for-film, I think people like Bergman did more and with less chaff.

>>6367452
That's mostly my feelings about him as well. He's done some decent stuff and a lot of crap. Apparently his new movie is good but I haven't seen it.

>>6367459
Not true at all, I'm>>6367420
and I've watched all of his "major" films as well as various more obscure ones such as SFTD and Nouvelle Vauge. Honestly, I look down on him more with each new film, I only watched as many as I did because people kept pestering me to.

4. Ingmar Bergman on Jean-Luc Godard:
“I’ve never gotten anything out of his movies. They have felt constructed, faux intellectual, and completely dead. Cinematographically uninteresting and infinitely boring. Godard is a fucking bore. He’s made his films for the critics. One of the movies, Masculin, Féminin, was shot here in Sweden. It was mind-numbingly boring.”
5. Orson Welles on Jean-Luc Godard:
“His gifts as a director are enormous. I just can’t take him very seriously as a thinker — and that’s where we seem to differ, because he does. His message is what he cares about these days, and, like most movie messages, it could be written on the head of a pin.”
6. Werner Herzog on Jean-Luc Godard:
“Someone like Jean-Luc Godard is for me intellectual counterfeit money when compared to a good kung-fu film.”

Just found this, seems relevant, especially the Bergman one
Source: http://write-what-you-dont-know.com/2011/08/13/the-30-harshest-filmmaker-on-filmmaker-insults-in-history/

>>6367457
Firstly, drop that patrician shit, it's an unhealthy attitude to have if you genuinely want to understand anything, especially an entire medium.

Secondly, the basic first-film stuff you should look into is probably all of Kurosawa's major stuff, Bergman (Persona, The Seventh Seal, and Wild Strawberries to start), Tarkovsky (If you like cinematography more than directing, this is your jam. Stalker, Solaris, and Nostalgia are untouchable), and probably Hitchcock for sheer sake of influence.

>>6367088
>>6367065
I am with you boys, amazing actors.

>>6367477
i said a portion
as in,
>>6367484

>>6367472

> He's done some decent stuff and a lot of crap

Pretty good way of summing it up.

It's always very mixed which films are the decent ones though. That's something I like about discussing JLG.

>>6367477
also, if all you can summon regarding his technique are the terms 'avantgarde' and 'postmodern' you might want to dial the posting back and read a bit

>>6366751
>Godard
Dropped

Favourites are Bresson, Bergman, Angelopoulos, Tarkovsky, Fellini and Herzog.

>>6367267
>w-what? has that become one of those films you have to ask people if they saw them? everyone and their mothers were talking about sub par Broken Flowers, and there wasn't even that much to tal about.

I think that it is fairly known, I just wanted to ask for his opinion.

Wow I'm surprised at the amount of JLG hate itt
I thought that I was alone there

>>6367487
Cheers

I only really have an understanding of more modern examples of great visuals (and also of course Kubrick) so i'm keen on getting to watch and study some more classic, influential films

>>6367502
>also, if all you can summon regarding his technique are the terms 'avantgarde' and 'postmodern' you might want to dial the posting back and read a bit
A pathetic deflection. As I said I've heard that he's influential as far as cinematic technique etc and having no knowledge therein I've decided to let that go itt as fact. No amount of cinematic technique, however, can turn lowbrow trash, as far as characters, dialogue, and themes are concerned, into high art.

>>6367527
I'm going to copypaste a list that I made in letterboxd of films that I have found aesthetically impressive:
Man with a Movie Camera 1929
Citizen Kane 1941
The Night of the Hunter 1955
Red Desert 1964
Hedgehog in the Fog 1975
In the Mood for Love 2000
The Tree of Life 2011
A Man Escaped 1956
Meshes of the Afternoon 1943
The Red Shoes 1948
Alien 1979
Days of Heaven 1978
The Cranes Are Flying 1957
Playtime 1967
The Ascent 1977
The Umbrellas of Cherbourg 1964
Singin’ in the Rain 1952
Barry Lyndon 1975
Raise the Red Lantern 1991
The Mirror 1975
Black Orpheus 1959
The Leopard 1963
The Virgin Spring 1960
The Color of Pomegranates 1968

>>6367542
and
Floating Weeds 1959

>>6367525
I think it's because this is /lit/. Anyone who reads a bit can't help but cringe during certain scenes of his work.
inb4
>implying /lit/ reads

>>6366837
It's silly statement like these, combined with '_insert_film_director_ is music, _insert_film_director_ is sculpture, _insert_film_director_ is painting', that make French sensibilities a joke.

Anyone calling Godard postmodern is an idiot. Postmodernism started in the late 70's and Godard is, if anything, a result of the 30's vanguards which were in every sense modernists. His interests in communism is also something that no post-modernist could have since it's a defense of a metanarrative. Late sad Godard is your regular modernist who failed to understand the failure of his thinking and assumes the world is just shit because the great goal never arrived. Pleas stop throwing around postmodernism as a catch all term.

>>6367408
Chris Marker is a genius, Sans Soleil made me love documentary footage. He has three different films that use the same clip of a chilean revolt during Pinochet's time with three different contexts, I had seen two and only noticed it when I read it somewhere else.

>>6367420
If you think it was randomness you're compeltely missing the point. He wasn't postmodern in any sense either, he was quite the modernist.
The nouvelle vague was very influential to film history from the japanese new wave to the first attempts of brazilian cinema. And Godrad was the posterboy of that.
You should hate his fanbase and you are free to dislike some or all of his films. But he was quite honest in what he did and he's directly connected to what film has achieved.

>>6367433
When he has good actors his films are okay, when he tries to do something outside of his confort zone you can see how bad he was directing people. Check Fighting Elegy if you don't believe me.

I'm not backpedaling, it's clear I don't find him too appealing or standing out among others. He only got big because of PR reasons, just like Wakamatsu among the pinku eiga people.

"he uses distinctive techniques" is a lousy argument, he doesn't. At least I think so, you should expand this if you want me to consider that argument.

>>6367472
You mean the 3D one? I mentioned it earlier in the thread. It's okay, it has that "I used to care about politicis too before I saw how shit all is" jaded rich left wing discourse that's so popular in Europe right now. The message is insultingly direct all the time, the first half has some attempts at story telling but it's quickly forgotten.
The 3D part is interesting but not really exploited, just 3 or 5 scenes differ from standar 3D. Gaspar Noe should take a few notes and try his hand at it, that would be great.

>>6367487
>Tarkovsky (If you like cinematography more than directing
I'm wondering what you take for directing. Tarkovsky was really present in every aspect of the film, from casting and props to the edition. His films, if anything, have a huge directorial presence, more than the usual.

>>6367518
Oh, sorry. I was sincerely wondering if time had helped it that much.
It really feels like a subpar Jarmusch film to me, but Broken Flowers comming out the same year might have influenced me a lot. The times, the acting, the way each space is shown, it keeps bringing me back to a mixture of him and fashion magazine adds.

>>6367534
your sensibilities based on this post are actually offensive to me