If you like the psychedelic visuals and homoeroticism of this film (of course you do, don't deny it), then you'll probably dig Kenneth Anger.
one of the few comedies that made me feel truly uncomfortable to the point where I couldn't laugh. unsettling but terribly engaging. it feels like the intention is to indicate that you could turn it off at any point but you can't because of morbid curiosity
/tv/, is there another film like this?
I'd like a second opinion from the place I visit regularly before I put money towards buying it. I know, I know, I could torrent it, but I prefer to buy my films physically as I'm a collectorfag.
> 15-hour film that's an authoritative film history lecture
How about patrician documentaries?
It does ride on the single-shot "gimmick" (although I'd rather call it one of its many appeals). it's technically mesmerising with how the director must've choreographed and planned every meticulous detail of movement, from the cinematography swerving inbetween the actors, and the actors knowing just exactly when to move and perform, i.e. early on there's a fantastic little moment where the camera focuses on framing within framing - down a corridor through two doorways - and just before the camera moves away, a woman walks into sight at the furthest end; it's almost like chance and it feels very spontaneous. The film is full of life and if you have a brief interest in history or dream-like filmmaking, it's an amazing film. At least I think so. I loved it, anon.
Holy shit, dude what
I live in the UK and bought the DVD for £15 (maybe £20).
I'd say it's worth it though, I mean, the length is fucking crazy but it's full to the brim with film history as well as filmmaking tips, techniques and interviews.
Just saw pic related this weekend
It looks great, has a great soundtrack, and the dynamic between the two (and how the sex scenes reflected it) were always interesting. If you already knew how it ended beforehand, I'm sure you could get bored, but it has made me want to see more Oshima (especially his later stuff).
i'm just gonna post random pics and not say what film they are from because i'm a dickhead.
It's an image board, anon, images are going to be posted in blank posts. It's not like there hasn't been discussion in the thread but not everyone will have seen everything posted.
The only Bresson film I've seen is A Man Escaped but I hear fantastic things about this film too. Is there any other Bresson films I should check out that are considered essential?
don't mind if i do thanks for the support
posting random pictures is patrician
Discussion of film techniques; vast and detailed film history from the invention of film and the silent era to the present day; interviews with prominent filmmakers; etc. It's basically everything you'd want from a documentary about films.
The narrator puts a lot of people off because of his voice, but I feel that's a small issue, if any issue at all.
I agree with this anon, the list he gave is must watch but definitely watch as much as you can, he is my personal favorite and an amazing filmmaker. But Au Hasard Balthazar is my pick of the lot.
Also, Luis Buñuel's Nazarín
Do people only recommend/post this because of its length making it a challenge to watch or is it actually good?
Like, I admire Bela Tarr's work (at least that which I've seen so far) but from what I've heard about Satan's Tango, the scene everyone seems to mention is the cat scene.
Surprised this hasn't appeared yet.
Me too, it looks unsettling. I hear there's actually not any sex in it (or if there is it's minimal) which makes me more interested in that sleazy/unsettling atmosphere it has about it.
If I remember correctly, there's a message from the director before the film suggesting viewers just watch it visually instead of trying to get meaning from it. It's easier said than done, but once you get into that frame of mind while viewing it, it's absolutely stunning.
pic related it one of these people
wow you can google, you want a cookie or something?
First you purposefully try to piss people off by posting screencaps without the movie title and then you insult me for saving people some time. What a dick.
Unglassed Windows Cast a Terrible Reflection (1953)
that would probably be the ending of La grande Bellezza
pretty kitsch, i know. but to hear this soothing song at the end of this movie was just incredible
Oh I don't disagree, I do really enjoy his works (I actually enjoyed Nymphomaniac and I'm curious to see his director's cut). I find him instantly enjoyable (well, for lack of a better word since his films do focus on taboo subjects).
yeah i already said that
i'm good at what i do
ITT: Safe bets taken directly off some 100 top movies or similar list.
> Berlin Alexanderplatz
Are these films good? I'm curious but I don't want to invest 30+ hours to find out that there's not much substance and that I could've watched much better films.
What does /tv/ think of Jan Svankmajer?
I love the majority of his work. It's distinctive; everything he does, from stop-motion, live-action, puppetry, etc, you can just instantly recognise it as his. I love the ideas he gets for his films too. He can either be very funny or surprisingly unsettling.
I'd agree with a lot on this, anon, nice list. Seeing The Hunt makes me want to re-watch it, but I think you're right. I don't think the role that child had to play in that film would've been particularly easy to direct.
It isn't harder to watch than say, a Star Wars or LotR marathon. Hell, if you've watched more Tarr there isn't any way that you dislike this. And there are some other memorable sections besides the cat scene, like for example
>the first scene with the cows
>the drunken peasants dancing
>the doctor spying on people
Still, >>53683278 is the best from what I've seen from Tarr.
Well, someone posted >>53682988 and >>53684838, and yeah, Spione is just as great.
Faust's work with miniatures (I'm guessing Murnau's version) was also amazing, it was interesting to see a different version from the legend.
Yeah, actually that ending did bother me. It felt tacked on, it would've worked better if the
50 year old virginjust accepted Joe's story after sharing his wisdom throughout it. It just feels immature having that ending. That and Shia LeBouf's accent is really bad.
If an actor can't do a certain accent, either hire one whose accent is natural or allow the actor to perform in their native accent. It's so simple.
> love story between two psychopaths
Haha, that's true. It especially makes sense in that ending, it's like Simmons realises how good Teller is on the drums and is just encouraging him to just push a little further for that ace solo. That day, senpai noticed him.
It has some weird narrative experiments that make it a little difficult to follow at first, besides being spoken in Czech, but it is outstanding in every department.
>Isn't that supposedly the first mockumentary
No, there were many earlier examples and the first I can think of that fits the modern idea of mockumentary is This is Spinal Tap. It goes way back though.
It had been around for a long time before that. Las Hurdes is kind of a mockumentary, but not as evidently as later stuff. David Holzman's Diary was also made in the 60s. Plus, haven't you seen Adaptation? Fellini invented the mockumentary.
BWP isn't a mockumentary: it's found-footage.
And people argue over BWP or Last Broadcast, in terms of first found-footage -- though, BWP had more influence, and more actual "found" footage, TLB was first.
The War Game and Threads came out before it, although Threads is arguably a mockumentary. It's dreadfully realistic and informative, but it's not real, more like hypothetical re-enactments.
saw this on campus cinematheque last wednesday
it wasn't until the ending when i started to ease into the rhythm of things, with the man being demanded to sing twice and then die but i'll be damned if it wasn't the most cryptic film i've seen yet
Alright, cool, that'd be quite interesting to read actually.
Yeah, I felt similarly when I first watched it. Towards the end I started to warm up to its execution. I think I'l probably enjoy it more a second or third time viewing.
>Soon she met and began working as a secretary for Katherine Dunham, who was to have a profound influence on the directions Deren's career would take. Dunham was a choreographer and an anthropologist who had founded an African American dance company. It was while working for Dunham in Los Angeles in 1941, where Deren lived with her mother (Deren's parents ultimately divorced), that she met Alexander Hammid; ten years Deren's senior, he became another influence on her career. Hammid (original name Hackenschmied) was a Czechoslovakian refugee who came to the United States to work as a motion picture photographer for "The March of Time" newsreels. Deren and Hammid were married in 1942 and it was he who provided the stimulus for Deren's filmic imagination. During this time, possibly at Hammid's suggestion, Deren changed her first name to Maya, the Sanskrit word for illusion.
>At the time of her marriage Deren was primarily a writer, with poetry, newspaper articles, short stories, and essays to her credit. One of her essays, written no doubt under the eye of Dunham, discussed religious possession in dancing—a theme that would later command her attention. In 1943 Solomon Deren died and left Deren a small inheritance with which she purchased a second-hand Bolex 16mm camera, which she and Hamid used to make the film Meshes in the Afternoon. While Meshes in the Afternoon is considered her first film by most film historians, filmmaker Stan Brakhage in his essay on Deren (published in Film at Wit's End ) discussed the idea that a study of the photography reveals it is primarily Hammid's film: "For all the unusual things that happen within the film, its whole style of photography betrays the slick, polished, penultimate craftsmanship of the old European sensibility for which Sasha [Hammid] was known." Nevertheless Brakhage does acknowledge "the real force of the film came from Maya herself."
Despite having to use a fuckload of intertitles to make its non-linear narrative structure work, this has to be one of the best silent films ever made.
>Deren and Hammid moved to New York City where her electric personality really took off.Soon she was regularly screening Meshes in the Afternoon and lecturing the audience on independent filmmaking. This caused a natural friction with Hammid who felt he was being slighted. In 1943 Deren began another film, Witch's Cradle, but it remained unfinished. The most notable aspects of the film were that it was shot at an art gallery where a surrealist exhibition was taking place and that it included Marcel Duchamp. Deren followed up this attempt with the 15-minute film, At Land, which featured Deren herself on different landscapes: merticulously crawling on rocks, walking along what appears to be a cart path with a man who changes appearances. The film included brief appearances by poet and critic Parker Tyler, composer John Cage, and Hammid.
>In 1945 Deren and Hammid decided to make a second film together in which Hammid would take the lead in directing and filming. The result was the 30-minute The Private Life of a Cat. Here again Stan Brakhage, who was a friend and something of a protégé of Deren, disputes the claim of film historians who say that Deren's imput was minimal. However The Private Life of a Cat did not boost Hammid's reputation the way Meshes had lifted Deren's. Also in 1945 Deren made A Study in Choreography for Camera, a 2 1/2-minute film that featured choreographer Talley Beatty who was also credited as co-director.
how does this make her a fraud?
i'm not gonna say brakhage is unreliable becuz i don't know much of him outside his work, but this isn't even anything more than pithy scandal bullshit.
Try this comedy. Alec Guinness plays 8 different characters.
I haven't really thought of it, honestly.
Here, have an example of patrician comedy. It's impossible not to smile and smirk while watching this.
dramas/thrillers are probably what most of us think of when it comes to "nameof a patrician film"
Beat you to it, friendo. >>53682942
Let's talk about that film though - how great was the editing? It really adds more personality and life to a film full of it. There's a great moment I loved where somebody pronounces "Budapest" but due to the editing, it's like this interviewee is being interacted by the fraudulent hungarian painter who corrects his pronunciation. It's a subtle detail but I loved it.
Being a national icon means you can't be patrician? Tati's performance as well as his attention to detail as a director is admirable, influential yet well-restrained, subtle and modest, providing films that are full of content - more than meets the eye - but only if you're looking for it.
Slightly off topic but relating to the Orson Welles chat, who else has seen the tv series Moonlighting? There is an episode called The Dream Sequence Rings Twice and it's a pastiche to the 1940s noir films and it is introduced by Orson Welles in one of his last appearences before his death. tl:dr watch fucking Moonlighting.
Soderbergh is one of the best contemporary filmmakers in my opinion
Oh god yes, the editing was the most striking thing about the entire picture, not to mention the fact that he had to edit 10mm and 35mm film together and that itself is an arduous process. The tongue in cheek editing was at its best when Welles was inventing conversations between the two subjects. I also love that ending where you are believing what you are told, only to have it revealed to you that it was just a story. I could not believe I was watching an Orson Welles film, for it was nothing like any of them before. Also, I could watch Orson Welles do magic for hours.
Soderbergh is solid but when you look at the other contemporary filmmakers (not to say these guys are equal) Almodovar, Tarr, Peter Strickland, von trier, the Dardenne brothers to name a few; he doesn't really rate.
I just respect the fact the he does his own cinematography and editing as well. There aren't many directors out there anymore that will take complete charge of their work like that
I'm going to have to re-watch it, honestly, because that film is so densely detailed that I know I would've missed a lot of subtle details (I've only seen it once so far, the film was given to me as a christmas present). Also agreed on Orson Welles and magic - he really knows how to captivate and he's aware of it. He's a charmer. Somewhat cocky, but a charmer nonetheless.
>Muh catholic guilt
You know you have some amateur shit on your hands when the fucking donkey is the only "actor" putting on a performance. But even that got obscured by all that wood at times. Seriously, fuck that film and fuck Bresson.
>tfw I literally didn't get M Hulot's Holiday
The entire time watching it I knew I was looking at something funny but fuck if I could find it. Some parts had me in stitches but there were like 5-10 minutes stretches that I got nothing out of, despite knowing _something_ funny was going on. Tati is the first to have totally beaten me
I would say the 5 hour uncut version but I haven't seen it and holy fuck it is a bitch to find
Yeah, I felt that way with Playtime on my first viewing. It can be a bit daunting as Tati doesn't often focus on narrative, but rather a theme and a location and all of its inhabitants. First time seeing a Tati film, I was surprised that actually Hulot is often not the main focus. It's easier to watch his films knowing this beforehand and to rather watch his films for the visual treats that they are rather than a story. Films like Mon Oncle and Playtime have a satirical side to them that's still relevant too.
>hurhurhurr private mastr raec xDDDD
So I should bust my ass to get into some internet sekrit club just to get a single torrent I'm curious about, and then be a seed slave for a bunch of pimply faced neets thereafter?
Might as well import the fucking blu ray from germany at that rate
>He wouldn't have missed a detail from the book, I just know it
He never read it...
>"actor" putting on a performance
didn't bresson intentionally make his actors lose any affectations and whatnot?
i didn't really like balthazar either, but bresson is pretty awesome. no need to be so angry, anon.
It wasn't until my second viewing I actually "got" this movie. I enjoyed it, but upon rewatching I absolutely loved it and it quickly became a favorite of all time.
It still bugs me how often people misinterpret large aspects of it though.
not quite what i meant. i read somewhere online once he made the actors do the scenes over and over until the performance became like routine without natural mannerisms or emotion. something like that.
Yes, and then he'd shoot out of order, giving them no thematic or emotional context for their scenes, direct every movement and glance himself down to the timing between movements, and have the actors run each scene about thirty times, filming half and choosing whichever take the actor looked least attentive in.
He really didn't want 'actors'.
sacrilege right? Well I think that color gives the jungle a whole new life. I'm in love with the soundtrack, Roy Schneider, and of course.. this scene
Really tired of slav-shit fuck-bags posting this laughapalooza as being serious.
If anyone can literally watch this movie with a straight face, they're either idiots, or never heard about World War 2.
It's sad that sorcerer basically killed his career. Makes me depressed when I hear about people walking out of the theatre en masse because there's no english dialogue for the first 20 minutes or so.
do you ever take a step back and remember that you're on the internet discussing films which are supposed to be fun and interesting?
or do you take every little thing you see on the internet this seriously?
i think he meant balthazar