movies and wine

Buxbaum666 said:
Only two of those were even good.
Click to expand...

Pfft... as if you've even seen more than two of those. I bet you don't even watch silent German expressionist films.

Sub-Human said:
then this shows there certainly was a step beyond the average cinematography year
Click to expand...

No, just no. Inception? Fucking Avatar?

Buxbaum666 said:
This can be said for any advice on stuff that depends largely on personal taste. I'd say Slumdog Millionaire and The Artist where amongst the best films of the last decade (that I have seen). *cue ridicule*
Click to expand...

How ridiculous. :roll:

Seriously though, The Artist was a truly pretentious film and you should feel bad for liking it. It's not even one of the top 100 best films of the past decade.
 
Sub-Human said:
Don't get your point. Was Inception and Avatar 2008? Yeah, exactly.
Click to expand...

Just two examples of some films that truly didn't deserve to be nominated for "Best Picture", there are many more.
 
Courier said:
Just two examples of some films that truly didn't deserve to be nominated for "Best Picture", there are many more.
Click to expand...

True, but I was talking about movies that did deserve to be nominated for "Best Picture", and it just so happened that a lot of them were released in 2008.
 
Inception was 2010, Avatar was 2009.

Also most nominees for best picture are either awful or mediocre at best.
 
How was The Artist pretentious? Everyone uses that word to escape the chore of going into detail about anything.
 
You never feel like arguing, do you. Perhaps you shouldn't argue if you don't feel like it.
And nowhere does that article say or imply pretentiousness. Or I don't understand the word.

Courier said:
Pfft... as if you've even seen more than two of those. I bet you don't even watch silent German expressionist films.
Click to expand...
You know me so well.
*googles "silent German expressionist film"*
There seems to be a consensus that key examples of this are, amongst a few others, "Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari", "Nosferatu" and "Metropolis". Those three are in fact part of my film collection. So is Fritz Lang's "M", not a silent film but apparently also filed under German expressionism.
I also fail to see how this is of any relevance for anything.

Courier said:
Seriously though, The Artist was a truly pretentious film and you should feel bad for liking it. It's not even one of the top 100 best films of the past decade.
Click to expand...
You are (mildly) amusing.
 
Buxbaum666 said:
not a silent film but apparently also filed under German expressionism.
Click to expand...

Pfft... he didn't even know those were German expressionist films.


Edit: No I always feel like arguing, that's why I pick fights with people in the first place. I'm a terrible contrarian.

I just had a bad day yesterday and don't feel like arguing today.


Edit: pre·ten·tious/priˈtenCHəs/
Adjective:
Attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed.
 
Courier said:
Walpknut said:
How was The Artist pretentious? Everyone uses that word to escape the chore of going into detail about anything.
Click to expand...

I don't really feel like arguing today so here's an article that points out some of the problems I had with the movie:

http://www.hollywood-elsewhere.com/2011/05/the_artist.php

Edit: Mainly it just felt like a big gimmick. Style over substance and all that jazz.
Click to expand...

So, more catch all terms. A movie does something different = It's pretentious. mmmkay.
 
Walpknut said:
So, more catch all terms. A movie does something different = It's pretentious. mmmkay.
Click to expand...

Filming a movie in black and white isn't "different" dude.

Had The Artist been made forty or fifty years ago it would have been considered mediocre at best. The only reason people like it in the first place is that black and white silent film nostalgia. It's just gimmicky.

Edit: It's a shallow romantic comedy with silent film era gimmicks. People like it for its nostalgic charm, nothing more.
 
So, it's pretentious because if you move it's historical context it wouldn't be serving it's purpouse? What?
 
Courier said:
Had The Artist been made forty or fifty years ago it would have been considered mediocre at best. The only reason people like it in the first place is that black and white silent film nostalgia. It's just gimmicky.
Click to expand...
By that logic only people who are most likely already dead like the film. I doubt that many were alive when silent films were still a thing. Don't pretend that you know why people like stuff, it makes you look rather pretentious. Ha.
And it couldn't have been made ecxactly like this in 1920. But you would only know that if you had seen it.
 
Using the elements of cinema, from this era and a past one to convey a message is a gimmick.
 
Walpknut said:
So, it's pretentious because if you move it's historical context it wouldn't be serving it's purpouse? What?
Click to expand...

No it's pretentious because it tries to impress people through gimmicks, charm, and pure nostalgia rather than having any actual substance or merit.


"To have this is not only to have a story, but to have a subject - a meaning, a belief in something. American pictures usually have no subject, only a story.... A pretty woman is not a subject. Julia Roberts doing this and that is not a subject. JFK is not a subject - the relationship between a Kennedy and the American people may be a subject, but `JFK' does not deal with that. I call it a good script when you know the subject and try to [explore] it.'' - Jean-Luc Godard


Buxbaum666 said:
By that logic only people who are most likely already dead like the film. I doubt that many were alive when silent films were still a thing. Don't pretend that you know why people like stuff, it makes you look rather pretentious. Ha.
And it couldn't have been made ecxactly like this in 1920. But you would only know that if you had seen it.
Click to expand...

wat

Most people today weren't alive when old music (such as you'd find on a Fallout soundtrack) was popular, but many still like it for the nostalgic charm (ex. Fallout).


Walpknut said:
Using the elements of cinema, from this era and a past one to convey a message is a gimmick.
Click to expand...

"A black and white silent film? OMG so deep."

Face it, if you removed the black and white part and silence it would just be another shallow romantic comedy. Thus: gimmicks.

It's a novelty film and nothing more.
 
Gimmick -
In marketing language, a gimmick is a unique or quirky special feature that makes something "stand out" from its contemporaries.


Edit: Nope, I bet you can't name one other film in existence that you could completely ruin simply by adding (or removing) color. It's a fucking novelty film, deal with it.
 
So sound and color are gimmicks too, and camera angles, and the use of sound, and the fact that the pictures are moving, and that it tells a story.

Man films are pretty bland things, once you remove everythign that gives their identity they are just a passage of time.

Same with games, once you remove, their gameplay, mechanics, dialogue and graphcis they become nothing more than a bunch of 1s and 0s in a disc, that also it just a piece of plastic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top