Arthouse & ClassicsCharissedition>QotDFavourite Cyd Charisse joint?>BonusMost /film/ic legs?Previous: >>220225834
Queen of /film/
waifu of /film/
The ultimate state of /film/
Looking for a pdf copy of 'Dreyer in double reflection' if anyone has it. His thoughts on how colour should be used in film are just superb.
>>220282556found 300G of dolphin porn for youtransfer.it/t/1EDUhRlRGLSB
>>220283846That's a whole lot of autism right there on one spot.
>>220282413>Bonus
>>220282413>Favourite Cyd Charisse joint?Singin’ In The Rain. I love that movie. That and Yankee Doodle Dandy are my two favorite musicals
bumpetic
Slow thread today.
Okay, anons. Topically, tell me what the slowest film is that you have ever seen.Also, recommend me an exceptionally fast film that isn't complete shit.
>>220281946Bacharach in Lost Horizon >>> both of them
>>220285609I'm being a classical musician today*abanico triplets into the thread*
>>220286081I was officially filtered by Ming-liang's Stray Dogs.
:O
What DVD does Joe Hisaishi's score for The General come from? It's a great score, it was on the version I watched on Youtube.
>>220286081>SlowestDunc Pt.1Stupid bullshit I hate it>FastestSpeed RacerActually good
>>220286837That's my favorite TML.
>>220282413>Bonuspic related>>220283676seems to be a white whale so far>>220286081>what the slowest film is that you have ever seen.L'Ange, probably.>Also, recommend me an exceptionally fast film that isn't complete shit.Walking From Munich To Berlin
>>220287434Always loved this picture.
/glacial/
Fuck Harperfag.
>>220289539I did. It sucks but it's sexy.
99% of old classic films is just nazi atrocity propaganda.
>>220289495It's not cold at all, it's actually pretty warm.
>>220289637ROFL your comment made me laugh out loud xD
Get Birkinfag in the Zyklon /b/ chamber
>>220289700Wooden doors?
>mfw someone can't stop bitchin' in the kitchen
>>220289812Go back to /wpop/, lil nig.
O FECALITH
>>220290542Your boyfriend is safe, lil nig.
Costa Ricans drive everyone away.
>>220291032Salty?
>>220291158You mad, bro?
>>220291191Nah.
>I'm seeing DOUBLE here... FOUR Marina Vladys
>>220281302Are you the guy I recommended this to?
saw The Wind (1928) and can't stop thinking about the scene that's just the actor's shoes
>>220282413>>220282556https://youtu.be/mbQuHu9RRkYAvec Cyd Charisse ! Et Gene Kelly !Chorégraphie... de Bob Fosse!
>>220291400>saw The Wind (1928)Good for you. Just don't watch the 1939 sequel "Gone With The Wind". It doesn't live up to its predecessor.
PEOPLE ARE STRANGEWHEN YOU'RE A STRANGER
>>220291774I love gone with the wind. I keep meaning to read the book.
>>220291845>I love gone with the wind.Okay. Why though?
I prefer Hurricane: The Wind Strikes Back, desu.
It's a shame Godard never did a western, actually. He made pastiches of Hollywood musicals and noirs and melodramas. I wonder what stopped him from doing his take on Ford.
>>220291909it's a perfect story. An uncompromising human narrative. Scarlett successes and failures are all of her own making, all born of a single point of sentimentalism. I think people get far too caught up in trying to find metaphors and euphemisms in it. I don't know they're there. If they are, they get completely subsumed under the desire to render Scarlett as a complete human.
>>220291032No shit, Sherlock.
>>220292204The autistic mind is based on constant rituals, I see. Post something different for a change, retard.
>>220292103I mean, fair enough. It's why people love Oidipous/Oedipus as a character.Wouldn't say that it's a perfect story by any means though, considering how much it drags on and how much you could trim without losing much of the narrative or the character work.I also never could quite decipher what it wants to be about: Romance? War? Society? Politics? I suspect it wasn't sure about that itself.
>>220292258/film/ is autism central, what do you expect?
>>220292317Culling them retards until the place is clean, that is my dream...
>>220292317Not even autistic but I agree.
>>220292317Do you think it's a coincidence that Kanye's 12-year-old daughter North just released an album named North Forever or were they referencing Serge
>>220292258The wetback is perturbed.
>>220292375My name is Not Important. What is important is what I'm going to do. I just fuckin' hate this thread. And the human worms feasting on its carcass. My whole life is just cold, bitter hatred. And I always wanted to die violently. This is the time of vengeance and no life is worth saving. And I will put in the grave as many as I can. It's time for me to kill. And it's time for me to die. My genocide crusade begins here.
>>220292291>I also never could quite decipher what it wants to be aboutThat's what I mean. It's about Scarlett. It's relentlessly about Scarlett. That's what makes it good.
>>220292406Probably...
>>220292406>"n0rth4evr" is the debut EP from 12-year-old North West, daughter of Kim Kardashian and Kanye West, released in May 2026.Holy shit. Did they think it funny to name a child "North West"? What kind of a terrible parent do you have to be to even consider this?
Boris - Flood is really freaking good! just throwing that out there
Japanoise sucks.
>>220292434Just kill yourself man, you're a massive cringelord.>>220292763It's not even japanoise, thoughbeit, it's drone / drone metal.
>>220292375My dream is that one day /film/ will be free of cucks
>>220292895We might live to see that come to pass, GadonGod...
>>220282413>"Ew Anon... sorry but I don't fuck Asians"realistically speaking, what should I even do here?
>>220293752Stop rampling, anon.
>>220293752
>>220293752Did someone say that to you? What's the context? What kind of people do you all know where they'd say socially retarded stuff like this (racism is generally considered the worse sin in modern West so hearing stuff like this actually interests me).
>>220294938>racism is generally considered the worse sin in modern West
>>220294938Back in the day, you'd have to try hard to find overt racists even in low IQ places like dive bars and shit, but nowadays you can find tons of retards in social media.
>>220282413brigadoon
>>220293752The only dignified response is to shake your head and walk away.
>>220292763Chinoise is better.
>>220293752probably korea derangement syndrome, there's no cure it seems.
>>220291324no, but I might've seen the post and just added it to my watchlist
>>220282413Imagine licking Cyd Charisse's legs
>>220295781Based.
>>220293752fair white maidens don't discuss "fucking" with foreigners, begone evil spirit.
The darkest souls are not those which choose to exist within the hell of the abyss, but those which choose to break free from the abyss and move silently among us.
Remember "Terayama green"? Underrated /film/ meme
>>220298192Another forced, shitty ass "meme" no one cared for.
>>220298499just like you sugar!
>>220293752I'd fuck you anon
>>220298579Bitch, come on... you've been posting here since the beginning, forcing shitty memes and doing everything you can to make people care about you, and you still have achieved nothing... I'm way more influential to this general than you'll ever be, and I don't even give a shit about it. Just kill yourself my man: no one cares about you, no one ever cared about you, and no one will ever care about you. Goodnight!
I just realize that I effectively use a 4 star rating system2 stars and 1 star could basically be the same, 1 star is just the few movies that fucking offended me in their badness, like that shitty Dr Strange Multiverse movie or DUNC
>>220289539Gladly.
>>220298896>like that shitty Dr Strange Multiverse movie or DUNCWhy even watch those? I mean, I watched DUNC just to verify that it was indeed as bad as expected, and to have an actual basis to argue for why it's crap when its fanboys would stirr shit up and talk down the superior version(s). But that other capeshit thing ... never.And, seriously, come on, you must have at least known what you were getting yourself into with those flicks.
>>220298843Holy newfag.
>>220299091It was back in the tail-end of Marvel being a cultural phenomenon, I saw it with my dad. It was so bad that we both stopped watching Marvel movies after that, and I think most people did too.
>>220299097I guess bro.
>>220299212You're guessing right. Now shine by shoes.
>>220299179Frankly, you should have stopped 20 years ago when they started making them.
>>220299430Suck my penis first.
>>220282437Is this a guy btw?
The smooth (tm) here.Today I did a rewatch of Salt for Svanetia. I watch the old DVDR rip that is slightly shorter. It is my preferred version - more than anything because it by far my preferred score. I have two recent 1080p rips which are the full 60mins, but I can't stand the scores (and one of them has hardcoded subs).Kalatozov's silent flics are fantastic (this along with Nail in the Boot). They both bring a very raw energy. Kalatozov will put his camera ANYWHERE! Quite unique even for today. One shot that stands out is for a brief two second that shot is from a camera that is in a bucket being drawn up a tower.The intertitles are a bit wordy but that is more than made up for in the final sequence in which he produces my favorite intertitle in all of cinema history "TЫCЯЧИ CBAHOB"From this rewatch and logging it, I check out the production studio "JSC “Sakhkinmretsvi”definately will be doing further study if I can find more.4.5/5 - rewatcht. smoothhands
>>220300755really good post -the smooth
/film/ actually rekindled my interest and made me start averaging a film every two days again. In the year or so before coming here i was barely watching one a week. So thanks, /film/
>>220303736Impostor.
Dang, this looks like a fun ahh film!
>>220282413>>220284178Absolutely iconic and even if that was the only film she made she'd be known for it. Cyd recs: Band Wagon (pic) - got that slide in one take. Also the Girl Hunt Ballet (which I can't post because it has sound). Silk Stockings - her solo dance is a must see. Also she does a very good job in the acting department here. Tension - early acting role (no dancing!) in this fantastic film noir. Audrey Totter is such a bitch it's fantastic. LOLMeet Me in Las Vegas (where OP's pic is from) - lame story but she's great and you get to see her dance an actual ballet scene. Kissing Bandit - lame Frank Sinatra flick (he's a latin bandit ... LOL) but has an absolutely sizzling 3 way challenge dance with Cyd, Ann Miller and Ricardo Montalban. Deep in My Heart - only one dance for Cyd but it's a great duet with the guy who plays her manager in Band Wagon. Ziegfeld Follies - another one dance only flick, this time as a ballerina dancing through bubbles. yep. This is also the flick where Lucille Ball tames a bunch of lions that she later parodies on her tv show.
>>220305205>Band Wagon (pic) - got that slide in one takeForgot the pic. Fuck.
>>220282413>Most /film/ic legs?Cyd's legs are rightly considered legendary but don't forget her superior posterior.
>>220305205>Silk Stockings - her solo dance is a must see. Also she does a very good job in the acting department here.Agreed. It's a decent musical remake of a comedy, unlike the similarly-pedigreed High Society a few years later.
>>220305205>Ziegfeld Follies - another one dance only flick, this time as a ballerina dancing through bubbles.It's been years since I've seen that film but I believe this pic is Cyd backstage. Please correct me if that's not the case.
>>220305224>>220305260>>220305386>>220305450She got me hangin' on the ropes!
good mornyan /film/! let's be excellent to each other <3 today feels like a fecund day for cinema after an intolerable period of nadacarpe diem!
>>220306085You won't watch many more films, as I'm obsessed with ending your life.
Would you let him watch one final film before you pull the trigger? And which film would you choose, Birkinfag?
>>220306376No trigger, just slow torture. Yes, he may watch one film.
>>220306444it's not nice ;;;; ill watch 100 Years (2115) so you gotta wait :3
>>220306565I won't. It's just whatever to me, but for you it's a special day.
>>220306565Got his ass.
>>220306910Sent it flying even.
>>220286081>an exceptionally fast film that isn't complete shitTo Be or Not to BeHis Girl FridaySherlock Jr.
>>220307419Based and Lloydpilled.
Speaking of Lloyd... I really like the orchestral version of Ravel's Menuet antique. Just listened to it for the first time, amazing.For Lloyd:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywftQEl8Lks
>>220308062>take a novel that starts with a woman getting raped by 15 men>make a comedy with Fernandelan ...interesting choiceI wonder if Fellini ever saw this movie, because it reminds me about La Strada quite a bit
>>220282413>Most /film/ic legs?
>>220305627Very disappointing to learn that she's not Jewish. Got my hopes up with this.
Watched The CameramanNot as good as The General but much funnier. Funniest Buster Keaton movie I've seen so far. It feels insane to laugh at literally 98 year old gags but while most comedy has an expiration date, this shit feels timeless. He breaks the window with his camera THREE times. Impossible not to laugh unless you have a massive girthy stick up your ass.
i like women with hairy legs and my favourite film is Abraham's Valley. hopefully i fit in with the crowd
>>220309652>i like womenHow do you feel about guns?
>>220309739i love 'em
>>220309807Welcome aboard.
>>220282413>>220286644>>220289146God why are legs so kino?
>>220308810Many such cases :)
Too many schizos out for blood lately…
>>220308887>while most comedy has an expiration date, this shit feels timeless.Yeah. It's slapstick. It either works for you or it doesn't because you have higher standards. Since it has no connection to the sociopolitics or culture of its time, it doesn't need any context it could age out of. It's no coincidence that it's America's preferred kind of humour.Meanwhile, for example, take the British: To understand half the jokes in Gilbert and Sullivan's comedic operas, you first need to understand the societal norms andd etiquette, politics, military and public service hierarchy of the Victorian era, and of course a good general knowledge. You don't need anything of the kind for Buster Keaton or Laurel and Hardy.
>>220310549>British standards are too high for Laurel and HardyL&H was 50% British and were/are pretty popular in Britain.
>>220310367So I'm watchin' and I'm waitin'Hopin' for the bestEven think I'll go to prayin'Every time I hear 'em sayin'That there's no way to delayThat trouble comin' every dayNo way to delayThat trouble comin' every day
>>220310615Yes. They're popular anywhere. It works that way around, but not in reverse.That's my whole argument. Not that "British standards are too high". Many British, especially nowadays, have no standards at all. Just that there are forms of humour which require higher standards higher than slapstick, some of which are quite common in Britain, but also other countries. (The reason I chose Britain as a contrast to the US is their shared language.)
HOLY KINOpeak soviet fantasy right here
>>220310752>It works that way around, but not in reverseWell, Gilbert and Sullivan are popular enough in America (in spite of it supposedly not being coincidental that Americans favour slapstick) to be central to the plot of a Simpsons episode for instance. It's not hard to see live performances of their operas there even today.>They're popular anywhereThey're really not. A lot of Zoomers and Gen Alpha look askance at anything old and they can hardly be accused of having high standards. I'd argue that you'd be more likely to get appreciation for Laurel and Hardy from audience members at a G&S performance and that that isn't a coincidence.>Just that there are forms of humour which require higher standards higher than slapstickI think that this idea of high standards being things that you acquire that preclude you from enjoying slapstick comedy (as if there's some kind of law of progressive development) is deeply wrongheaded and underestimates the conceptual/intellectual content in good slapstick comedy (and indeed flattens distinctions between good and bad examples of different styles of comedy).
>>220310549>>220310752t. Joel McCrea from the beginning of Sullivan's travels
>we had so many cameras set up, we actually ran out of letters in the alphabet to use and began using Greek letters.Holy shit
>>220311380>Gilbert and Sullivan are popular enough in America (in spite of it supposedly not being coincidental that Americans favour slapstick) Are you trying to argue that Gilbert and Sullivan are more popular in America than than slapstick? Or even remotely close? Gilbert and Sullivan are popular with a specific niche of Americans invested in international culture. That's about it. At no point were they popular with the "common man" in America. So, yes, Americans by and large do favour slapstick.>central to the plot of a SimpsonsRight. In like two in-jokes concerning a thespian character. In a series that is otherwise known for its in-jokes about concepts of higher mathematics, which must therefore also be a subject American audiences are intimately familiar with.>A lot of Zoomers and Gen Alpha look askance at anything old and they can hardly be accused of having high standards.Yeah, they're more into toilet-humour internet memes nowadays. That's a whole other problem.>and that that isn't a coincidenceOkay. Explain your logic here.>that preclude you from enjoying slapstick comedyStandards obviously don't preclude you from enjoying anything. My "either-or" was hyperbolic. But you are still missing the main point: There are forms of comedy that outright require higher standards, i.e. a more informed (or at least more intellectually curious) approach than just watching someone slip on a banana peel (again, this is a bit of hyperbole, not meant to accurately summarize all slapstick). Which is, again, why I brought it up to explain why slapstick comedy will necessarily age better than other kinds of humour.>underestimates the conceptual/intellectual content in good slapstick comedyNo, it does not. There is no component in slapstick that requires a high degree of understanding. Of course, slapstick can come with in combination with other jokes that do require such - Chaplin often featured such a mish-mash of styles. But those parts DO age and feel dated.
To reiterate my answer to the bonus question>>220284061
and not to neglect our cat...
>>220310732Livejournal, Facebook etc are better places for this sort of thing, deary.
Bfag should just open a tumblr account.
>>220312582that site still alive? sheesh>>220312578*stab*
>i run
>>220310549You just dropped a truth bomb but /film/ isn’t ready to hear it.
>>220312919I was ready to hear it, I heard it, and I agree with it. Comedy, and movies for that matter, that doesn't rely on the audience knowing specific matters has a much wider appeal. Part of the reason why popular movies can be boring to cinephiles. They don't respect your intelligence. They don't offer the challenge cinephiles revel in.
>>220312353>Are you trying to argue that Gilbert and Sullivan are more popular in America than than slapstick? Or even remotely close?No.>So, yes, Americans by and large do favour slapstickWhich nations don't according to you?>Okay. Explain your logic here.I would say that the kinds of people going to see G&S performances, given how those are old and not particularly mainstream, would be far more inclined to take something being a classic, canonical, etc. as a mark in favour of engaging with it than most (who are led more typically by peers and the media).>Standards obviously don't preclude you from enjoying anything.I'm starting to think that this is largely a verbal dispute because I would say that "standard" is an inherently evaluative term and talk about high and low standards in art would as such be a matter of aesthetic conscience where one would be forced to distinguish what one enjoys in a baser sense from what one truly esteems. If you just mean slapstick requires the least amount of erudition to understand, then I generally agree.>No, it does not. There is no component in slapstick that requires a high degree of understanding.Well it's typically not going to involve as much in the way of various forms of erudition, but that's less what I meant. Good slapstick often plays with audience expectations, engages in fourth wall breaking, etc. or might build layers upon a gag (e.g. the pool gag at the end of Hard Luck going from the merely physical to the absurd). The immediacy belies the complexity.>Of course, slapstick can come with in combination with other jokes that do require suchI think that there's an ambiguity here in limiting slapstick to certain techniques or allowing it to be used more broadly (e.g. a film can be described as slapstick and not merely as containing it).>Chaplin often featured such a mish-mash of styles. But those parts DO age and feel datedWhat are some examples that you had in mind?
Keaton slapstick vaudevilleanGilbert and Sullivan niche operaticsRenoir guignol
>>220313464>Which nations don't according to you?Speaking from my own experience, pretty much all European countries. Britain, obviously, but also France, Germany and Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Austria, Switzerland. They, or at least the larger nations among them, have their own traditions, and very little of that is exclusively-physical comedy, let alone slapstick.>far more inclined to take something being a classic, canonical, etc. as a mark in favour of engaging with itWell, I'd argue that willingness to engage with something doesn't directly translate to enjoyment or appreciation. Of course, there are those unwilling to engage with anything "old", which therefore can't enjoy those things either, but they're at best tangential to this whole issue.>I would say that "standard" is an inherently evaluative termIt certainly has that kind of connotation. Inherently, a standard (subjective or objective) is just a value or set of values that you (or society as a whole) accept as a "default state" to measure things against. This means that "higher standards" are simply expectations that are not met. And that's pretty much what I was saying: If you watch a film that does not provide what you expected it to, that means it does not live up to your standards. And while that usually does result in a somewhat valid value judgement, it could also be twisted into something ridiculous: Star Wars fanboys, for example, have quite high standards for their films, it's just that the things they value have nothing at all to do with good filmmaking or artistic merit.>The immediacy belies the complexity.Sure. Creating effective slapstick does require intellectual input from the creator. But that's true for pretty much all forms of humour.>a film can be described as slapstick and not merely as containing itTrue, but pure slapstick feature films have become a rarity at this day and age, whereas slapstick techniques are still widespread.
>>220313464>What are some examples that you had in mind?The Great Dictator, on a level of plot and themes, works in the context of the time it was created, features a parody of Hitler's mannerisms, and therefore requires at least some knowledge of history to work. At the same time it has a very physical approach to its comedic elements and does feature forms of slapstick, like in the globe scene.Modern Times critiques the politics, society and ecomony of the early 20th century in general and of the "Great Depression" era in particular, and requires a good understanding of those to actually make much sense. Yet it's at the same time one of Chaplin's more outright slapstick features, and those elements work without having said understaning of the context.
So /film/, what tightly-paced Technicolor motion picture do I watch tonight?
>>220314848The Quiet Man
>>220314857>FordSold.
>>220314857>The Quiet Man>starts talking less than a minute into the film.Fucking false advertisement!
>>220315069I'm getting real tired of dishonest cinema.
>>220283846>dolphin pornWhat exactly is that?
>>220315136Experimental camera autism.
>>220314495>If you watch a film that does not provide what you expected it to, that means it does not live up to your standardsI think that this running together of valuation and mere expectation gives rise to a confusion that you seem to want to avoid. A film can be as you expected it to be and earn your disapproval and dislike partly for that very reason (the former because you thought that it was trite and predictable and therefore bad and the latter simply because you knew you were going to watch, say, a typical western and that you don't like them) and vice versa. To my mind, thinking of it this way makes it hard not to sound (or actually be) imperious and entertain rating not merely works, but genres and styles (where it may be said that the greatest slapstick is lesser than the worst satirical light opera for example).>Sure. Creating effective slapstick does require intellectual input from the creatorThat's not what I was getting at. I was thinking more "a picture's worth a thousand words" in that you can be perceiving and laughing at something that you're only able to articulate properly after the fact.
>>220282413>"Ew Anon... sorry but I don't fuck humans"realistically speaking, what should I even do here?
>>220316655enter goblin mode
Big news
>>220315136>he doesnt know
>>220316655enter chimp mode
>>220316773
>>220316655
>>220316010>A film can be as you expected it to be and earn your disapproval and dislike partly for that very reasonExcept that we're not talking about your basic expectations for what the film would be, but your expectations of what it needs to provide for you to consider it worthwhile. In other words, if you have the expectation that the next Marvel flick will be some brainless superhero action bullshit, that's just that, an expectation. Not a value that contributes to your standards of a good film.Meanwhile, when you say that you'd be disappointed by a film not surpassing that base expectation, that itself is an expectation, and it is one that contributes to your general values, i.e. your standards.>I was thinking more "a picture's worth a thousand words" in that you can be perceiving and laughing at something that you're only able to articulate properly after the fact.Okay. But that doesn't mean that it takes much prior knowledge, intellectual commitment or awareness of context to "get the joke". It just means that you can intellectualize it to better understand or explain why it worked. That's also kinda trivial and can be done for basically anything - just the reverse process of what the artist did, in a way.
O CATJEET
>>220282413 Why is she walking like that
Where are you LH? How shall I dispose of your body parts? Tell me.
Are we seated for impending /film/ of the year?https://youtu.be/Lm3N-pXtMSE
>>220317592
>>220317839I'm glad I saw this catunc. Thank you.
Fuck catposting.
>>220317034the full restored version of the Devils?
>>220318008Who's this faggot? Is it Ridley Scott? Talk about a washed up nigga.
>>220318008he is currently being assraped by flaming metal rods in hell for animal abuse and atheism
>>220314848Three Godfathers>>220310896
https://letterboxd.com/film/ken-russells-the-devils/Are they doing viral marketing on letterboxd now????
>>220318526>nowHave you seen the site when that Charli XCX slop was coming out
>>220317592That's gonna leave a mark
>>220317402>Except that we're not talking about your basic expectations for what the film would be, but your expectations of what it needs to provide for you to consider it worthwhile.I'm actually less clear on your meaning now in having reread you. Could you answer this question?>Can a person rightly hold that there is a plurality of incommensurable aesthetic goods (i.e. are a person's standards fixed or relative?)? If so, how are "higher standards" possible?>Okay. But that doesn't mean that it takes much prior knowledge, intellectual commitment or awareness of context to "get the joke"It depends on the joke. It mightn't typically take much knowledge in the form of erudition, but subtler slapstick will require perceptiveness and awareness of of context of a sort (awareness of character nuances, of previous in-film events, etc.)>That's also kinda trivialI think it's incredibly salient when talking about comedy. As I said earlier: the immediacy belies the complexity.
To understand Buster Keaton reels and features you first need to understand about the history of the Great Depression, criminology, criminalistics, anthropology, anarchist theory, vaudeville roadshow art-performance, dadaism, and of course a good general knowledge.
One also needs to be a member of the international Buster Keaton society.
>>220319581We say "The Damfinos" here.
>>220318982>Can a person rightly hold that there is a plurality of incommensurable aesthetic goods (i.e. are a person's standards fixed or relative?)? If so, how are "higher standards" possible?Let's not bring aesthetics into this, because those are indeed incommensurable, and not a question of standards (i.e. sets of values and expectations based upon them). Standards are, by their nature, dogmatic rational arguments. In other words, you can hold standards about something with aesthetic elements, but your standards are not the basis of the aesthetic evaluation/judgement. At least that's how I'd argue from a Kantian perspective. (According to which aesthetics are subjective, but not relative to the individual, but rather shared by virtue of a sensus communis, i.e. the shared makeup of the transcendental mind.)With that out of the way: The purely rational standards that you hold are, of course, your very own, not some objective property of the thing you judge and not intrinsic to your mind (as aesthetic judgement would be). This also means that you ultimately decide what you consider higher or lower standards.There are, as mentioned earlier, also societal standards. Written or unwritten laws and norms. Those are objective and non-individual, but you are free to adopt or simply ignore them. As such, they are not shared and have much less bearing on our discussion.>subtler slapstick will require perceptiveness and awareness of of context of a sortCan you give an example? I find it hard to picture how such a subtle instance of slapstick would play out.>I think it's incredibly salient when talking about comedy.From an academic standpoint, yes. From a film fan's as well. But for most people (i.e. casual audiences) that question never even comes up. For them it's enough that it made them laugh and they'll quickly move on.
>>220318755>Charli XCXJust saw new Wuthering Heights and Charli was the worst part about it to be quite desu
>>220305561There's definitely too little Cyd Charisse itt. Even later in her career she was still hot. Those legs. Damn.
Marilyn Monroe. Now Audrey Hepburn. I bet the next gala they will be dressing up in Cyd Charisse dresses.
>>220318755>>220319976>XCXI'm not that great with roman numerals. But from what I remember from elementary school, I don't think that one makes much sense.C is 100. X is 10. X to the left means subtract 10, so XC would be 90. But X to the right means add 100, which makes XCX 100. But that's just C.Shouldn't she just be called Charli C?
Call him Buster for how he bussin' dat ass back
ayyyy
>Hide
>>220320452X Japan was never the same without him.
>>220320801>X JapanThe Last Live was kino
>>220320801>>220320996>>>/mu/>>>/lgbt/hop in
>>220317592KWAB
anyone else seen this kino
>>220317831>Want to know why I set fire to Kabuki-cho?Not really, probably because you worked there as a whore.
>>220318082You could have just said he's hungarian
>>220303736Crazy given how shit the threads are. Glad for you though.
>>220320996For me it's Blue Blood's solo. Straight up chills every time I hear the song.
>>220321916Lynchian
>>220317831>A runaway teen in Tokyo finds comfort and solace in a group of other young misfits. But she soon discovers that danger can lurk even in what looks like a safe haven.yeah being a homeless teenage girl in Kabukicho really sounds like a "safe haven" where you wouldn't expect to get fucking raped and pimped... good grief!
>>220319813I think that this'll be my last reply. According to you "standard" can apparently mean "approach" >>220312353 , "a value or set of values" >>220314495 , expectations >>220314495 , and "dogmatic rational argument" (is that not an oxymoron?) I can't make heads or tails of it and it's only made the original dispute less clear to me.>Can you give an example?The pool scene in Sherlock Jr.. You have a ridiculous self-flattering, revenge dream version of the film's earlier theft with some cartoonish tricks (falling axe chair, poison, and exploding pool ball) intended to kill Buster getting introduced and all (apparently luckily) failing and even kind of mutually undercutting each other (e.g. Buster nearly accidentally knocking the butler onto the axe chair with his cue) and filling the villains with terror that eventually turns to disbelief and frustration as Buster's increasingly absurd pool shots culminate in nothing but the revelation that Buster knew what was going on all along as he reveals on exiting the house that he removed the exploding ball (which he clumsily fumbles narrowly avoiding catastrophe with a lucky catch).>But for most people (i.e. casual audiences) that question never even comes up.Not true at all in my experience. There's no shortage of ordinary people who like to get into the details of something that's made them really laugh both wrt film and in general.
decent enough ratings but she's a mao hater I can't follow in good conscience
>>220322471Has arirang may started?
>>220322471that godard flick actually ridicules maoists thoughbeit
>>220322672
>>220322651Makgeolli May
>>220322471troon
>>220322885meds
>>220322651>tfw arryrang May through December has just kicked off
>>220322885Autist
>>220300755where do you get old movies like that?I'm trying to set up my plex library
>>220322275>According to you "standard" can apparently mean "approach"No. The word "approach" in this post refers to the form of comedy you watch. Obviously so. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on this one because you could read the "i.e." as refering to the word "standards" as opposed to the subject of the sentence ("forms of comedy"), but come on, mate.> "a value or set of values" , expectationsYes, that post makes it very clear how values result in expectations. You can of course be nitpicky and argue that they're not the exact same thing, but you cannot argue that the connection isn't made clear.>"dogmatic rational argument" (is that not an oxymoron?)No. If anything it's a tautology. Dogmatism, in the traditional sense, is a philosophical (most often ontological) system built entirely on noumenal principles. δόγματα are, in the widest sense, beliefs, opinions, judgement. The verb δοκεῖν means to think or to imagine. Dogmatists of the 17th and 18th century, most notably Descartes, were the opposing movement to empiricists like Hume.Rational, on the other hand, simply means by "manner of reason/thought/logic", from the Latin word "ratio". As you can see, both words I chose are close in meaning. Well, all three, actually, as "argument" here refers to a purely intellectual internal argument, not an external dispute.>pool scene in Sherlock Jr.Thanks for the example. I can see how paying attention does add to the experience. I'm not sure I'd agree that it makes it more humourous for the viewer, rather than just more satisfying. But I guess that is splitting hairs.>There's no shortage of ordinary people who like to get into the details of something that's made them really laugh both wrt film and in general.Well, I do wish I knew the ordinary people you know. My experience is the opposite, outside of online discourse like this one.
Haven't read a single post of this argument.
>>220323132>>220323547u post op yet?
>>220323835It’s two incredibly smart people talking about incredibly important topics. Listen up faggot
>>220323788>As you can see, both words I chose are close in meaning. Well, all three, actually, as "argument" here refers to a purely intellectual internal argument, not an external disputeI've never heard of Descartes described as a dogmatist (the typical contrast I hear to empiricism is rationalism). As far as I can see "dogmatic" on both of our understandings of the word is in tension with "argument" (and more importantly I don't see how something can simultaneously be a value or set of values and an argument).
>>220324285>smart people >generals
What should I watch?
>>220324481Raphael ou le debauche
>>220324481
>>220324388I SAID LISTEN UP FAGGOT !
>>220324808*katana SWISH*
>>220324324>I've never heard of Descartes described as a dogmatist (the typical contrast I hear to empiricism is rationalism).It's Kant's favourite way to refer to the movement, and arguably more common in academia in the 18th century than "rationalism".If you speak German, here's a good systematic summary, if you don't, it still points out where to the most relevant quotes in the original texts:https://www.textlog.de/eisler/kant-lexikon/dogmatismus>how something can simultaneously be a value or set of values and an argumentIf you can accept that there are expectations based on these values, and that the values themselves are reached by means of reason, then that's the argument right there. You could also call it a a lemma, a line-of-reasoning, or a thought-process. Thinking of standards just as static values doesn't do them justice in my humble opinion.
>>220324863The age of stab anon has passed. The era of slicebro has commenced
>>220324481a Jules Dassin joint
>>220324863>>220325002
>>220325656ABSORUTE KINO
>>220325621Based.
The smooth(hands) here, of letterboxd fame, and /tv/ and /film/'s foremost Peleshian expert. I have updated my Peleshian rankings. Bpeмeнa гoдa and La Nature move UP, End moves DOWN.t. smoothhands
>>220326199You sound incredibly autistic and insane and I mean this in the best way
>>220326432It's performative.
>>220326665That only intensifies the autism
>>220321461>tiny tits, big peepersTruly a winning combo.>>220322731Gave this one the same score tbqh
>>220326199Thanks.
>>220327958You are welcome.-smooth
>>220326665Bro's gimmicks are so lame and forced... 0% spontaneity.
>>220326845>Gave this one the same score tbqhBelievable, it's above your level.
>>220325843Woke communist film.
O CRETIN
There is a lot I can say about smoothhands, but for me the quality that admire about him the most is that he cares about cinema.
>>220296753no way center bottom panel goes B&W
If anyone has Marty in their top four, I automatically think you can't some of that sweet, sweet poon tang and you're probably look like sloth from the Goonies. As good as the film might be, that's just how it is.
O BOT: >>220328206
Good night, /film/
The first kiss is always the sweetest, from under some filipino ladyboy's sombrero
>>220329399Sombrero broad smooch.
>>220329399*ladyboy smooch*
>>220329529>>220329571>watch the alternate/extended cut of My Darling Clementine that's supposedly closer to Ford's actual version>it's just the same film but slightly worse except for the ending sceneAuteurbros...
>>220329738Ford's actual vision*Also, it's a shame Victor Mature wasn't in more of his movies. He had a great screen presence and definitely mogged Fonda in that department (no easy task). Certainly would've mogged the Duke if given the opportunity.
>>220328305Based Smoothhands enjoyer.
>>22032973899% of director cuts are inferior to the theatrical releases. They should just do a Cameron and say the theatricals are the definitive versions and special editions are only complementary to the theatrical cuts.
>>220282413>legs?I find conan the destoyers subtexts and subtle allegories that entwine both symbolic and metasphysical signaling on social and cultural iconography and idealism to really define the zeitgeist of cinema and to transcend simple art or entertainment and elevate it to a fresher more intellectual dream state as a communication medium. I like to watch it slowe 10x with beethovens seventh playing, spcifically this movementhttps://youtu.be/sv2QnrCJNk0?si=SotP3NVvMlAH6oMt&t=230I sometimes pasy blonde east european prositutes to polish georgian furniture nude to it too
>>220328437She deserved worse.
Conan the destroyer is one of a sparse handful of art films concerned with the formal exploration of the properties of film itself: the so-called 'structuralist' cinema. This current project is specifically concerned with the relations between the three dimensional space of perception and the two dimensional space of the cinema screen.An examination of the implications of different moments in the making of a film by juxtaposing on two screens in methodical and analytical fashion the different forms of information made available in the treatment of a limited subject; a study of how film images embody and convey meaning.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCHREyE5GzQ
>>220330647>>220331505I like it too.
>>220330623Trvke.
>>220331284Worst, even.
>>220333102It is indeed difficult to think of sufficient punishment for Shelley Winters.
Dominique-nique-niqueS'en allait tout simplementRoutière, pauvre et chantanteEn tous chemins, en tous lieuxElle ne parle que du bon DieuElle ne parle que du bon Dieu
If you're Welles, how do you respond without sounding mad?
What's the deal with Warhol's films, why haven't there been as bluray/4k restoration/release? Legal reasons? Doesn't MOMA own his stuff? I had to watch a VHSrip of Beauty #2.
>>220333552>We all know that cinema has got to be in the present tense."No we don't."
>>220332558The Hegelian philosophical principle that out of a thesis and its opposed antithesis comes the hardy alloy of a synthesis has a seductive power and it's all tremendously postmodern and meta and referential. It elevates cinema into the metaphysical communicating purely via jungian archetypes drawn from the cinematographers eye. In a way he vewer is the thesis, the work the antithesis and the experience the sythesis. When I engage with my first year communications studies students with the question 'Is Cinema Art' if there are unbelievers, I simply have the class sit in silence while Conan the Destroyer plays slowed by a factor of ten on mute with Beethovens sympthony no. 7 allego turned up as far as the auditororium amplifier will allow on loop. Those who live the experience of the full 17 hours are changed and lifted up forever to join the ranks of thinking living cineophiles, among the few that may apreciate the art of he moving image as a swimmer appreciates water.ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCHREyE5GzQ
>>220324324>I don't see how something can simultaneously be a value or set of values and an argument).https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbjjhKaoZKs
>>220333489*smooch*
What are the "O ___" posts are referencing?
>>220334770Oshima?
>>220334826Ōbayashi.
>>220334033>auditororium
>>220334033>thesis, antithesis, synthesisYour "I didn't read Hegel" award has just been mailed to you.
>>220335029Based Conanon. Fuck H*gel.
>>220333552Easily. Welles is way more charming and eloquent than that.
>>220335143And he was charming even when not eloquent (e.g. after overindulging in Paul Masson)
>>220334033I don't think I've ever seen anyone try to reduce hermeneutics to Hegelian dialectics before. Probably because it requires you to say absurd bullshit like>In a way he vewer is the thesis, the work the antithesis and the experience the sythesis.
>>220335394Less absurd than H*gel thoughbeit.
>>220335491TRVTH NVKE
>>220324863>>220325002*stab*
>>220335898He is risen!
>>220282413Favorite Czech sci fi comedy ?
>>220329818>Also, it's a shame Victor Mature wasn't in more of his moviesThis.
THEY LINKED UP
>>220336262Kek.
>>220333552Based and 7/10pilled.
>>220333552Maybe he could isolate the "I am the Indian" line and do a really racist impression (either type of Indian would work).
>>220336262"I'm putting together a team."
>>220335220>Welles not eloquent after overindulging in Paul MassonDid we watch the same video?
>>220329529>>220329571
>>220317034Nice.
"I'm putting together a thread."
>>220336752What's the edish?
>>220336752make a exiled out of hollywood edition
>>220336769Kek.
>>220336577Come on.
>>220336769McCarthyism edition?
>>220336848Wrong kind of exile.
Bake it on me Jim
I'm not actually bakin', y'all go ahead.
NEW>>220336935NEW>>220336935NEW>>220336935NEW>>220336935NEW>>220336935
>>220336949Too late.
>>220336457More like based and 7/11pilled (see >>220336502 )
>>220334770It seems like it's a /film/ original.
>>220330647>>220331505>>220334033>greentexts 'legs'>doesn't mention legs once in the body of the postingWhat did he mean by this?
>>220295555Heh.
>>220324481A Polanski picture.
>>220337198Make it Repulsion.
bump of /film/
