[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/tv/ - Television & Film


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: 20260111_184101.jpg (146 KB, 900x902)
146 KB
146 KB JPG
Was he right?
>>
literally who
>>
>>217264100
Tar "The Ark" Kovsky
>>
I will NOT watch movies from non mainstream directors. Ever
>>
>>217264100
Burt Reynolds
>>
File: 1722127159192114.png (468 KB, 1100x1007)
468 KB
468 KB PNG
>>217264129
Tarkovsky is about as mainstream as you can get
>>
>>217264002
Yes.
>>217264100
Burt Reynolds.
>>
>>217264100
burt reynolds
>>
>>217264100
Burt "The Man" Reynolds
>>
>>217264002
without 2001 there is no solaris
>>
>>217264002
he's right. 2001 is Kubrick's most overrated movie. It's the prime example of "I'm DIRECTIIIINNGGG. LOOK AT THE ARRRTTTT." The classical music score does all the heavy lifting, the film itself is a pretentious bore that fourteen year olds pretend to like because they're just getting into cinema and it's at the top of many lists. And James Cameron is genuinely an auteur.
>>
What was fake in 2001?
>>
>>217264002
>Kubrick
>filmed in space to fake the moon landing
>Burt Reynolds
>did not film in space for Solaris

I think Kubrick is more qualified to say what is fake and what is not



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.