/film/

>no Griffith

who would be his reddit counterpart, Dreyer?

You

Parasite. More kino scenes than Joker. Film just LOOKS better and that's the most important thing for VISUAL MEDIUM.

just watched this the other day
pretty good hitchcock probably his last good film not quite as good as some of his other earlier stuff but I really liked it

Attached: frenzy.jpg (1389x2048, 374.64K)

Exactly

4channel: murnau, bresson, ozu, chaplin, godard, kurosawa
reddit: murnau, bresson, ozu, chaplin, godard, kurosawa

Yas Forums: Griffith, Bresson, Resnais, Keaton, Kobayashi, Rohmer, Bay, Antonioni, Gance
Reddit: Dreyer, Godard, Truffaut, Chaplin, Kurosawa, Ozu, Dreyer, De Sica, Eisenstein

I wasn't ready for this, I was expecting the usual comfy Ozu film

Attached: 8e02fdc6-6608-4f77-88de-748e4b0ae2ad.jpg (640x360, 22.12K)

Verdict??? What did the ending mean by the way???

Attached: Blow-Up.jpg (314x445, 20.78K)

shadow griffith

What's the film version of pick related, that is, a film that is masterfully made but completely devoid of any emotional value? A movie that fails to engage the viewers beyond an intellectual exercise.

Attached: t100_novels_palefire1st[1].jpg (260x382, 13.63K)

I love this book. Based user.

The Passenger

>Chaplin in reddit
>Keaton in Yas Forums
you got it mixed up

>131565699
No

I'm sick. *cough*

Snooze kino

Godard is pure Yas Forums(nel)

Not sure whether this is a compliment or not

Thoughts on this?

Attached: Stromboli.jpg (1288x1600, 267.98K)

Attached: 1534747997381.webm (886x480, 2.55M)

filtered

Attached: 1558957942756.jpg (1636x1744, 1017.13K)

Attached: You just know.jpg (1600x900, 425.67K)

Average

Anyone have a good download link for pic related ?

Attached: 53D83E23-BD84-4B2C-A74E-D14C76C76CA5.jpg (266x375, 25.08K)

Name?

Funeral Parade of Roses

1080p
rutracker.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4851940
720p
monova.to/612528571513CCD65AA886396FC4943EE9373185

Shura (Demons) is great too

mega.co.nz/#$n33d

Attached: average tv thread.jpg (1600x900, 409.04K)

Thx bro

Attached: A9C7BE3E-3CA7-49DD-95B7-E54062E464E2.png (240x360, 30.96K)

SHIT

you are welcome

based

What's some essential /film/ literature?

Attached: s-l400.jpg (374x400, 33.26K)

Don't know but i will link you to a mega with books if you want.

This is true
/film/ is like the peña’s and cafes of France and Spain where the surrealists would meet
We’re the only true orthodox surrealists around anymore

Antonioni makes some boring shit
>ahhhhhh I’m disillusioned with my romantic relationships
Boooooriiiiiing

Stromboli isn't that bad.

Attached: Swedish milk truck.jpg (1600x900, 368.12K)

What’s a peña’s

Thoughts on Paul Schrader's theory on film?

Attached: 1556714851423.jpg (725x938, 103.24K)

Absolutely 100% filtered. Cure your ADHD

Where did this even come from, I’m convinced this is the work of some user, if not then someone needs to fucking explain this

>In order to better understand the ground field of non-narrative cinema, I’ve created a diagram. The narrative nucleus (“N”) lies at the center. Errant electrons run one of three directions: the surveillance camera, the art gallery, the mandala. These electrons pass through the “Tarkovsky Ring” separating theatrical cinema from film festival and art museum cinema, on their journey to pure concept.

Attached: paul-schrader377871792424_v2_450x600.jpg (450x600, 32.24K)

Meh seems a bit reductionist of him. I’m sure some of it works in theory but the works from these filmmakers can’t be boiled down so easily.

>When cinema broke free from the iron nucleus of narrative, when time became an end rather than a means, when Aristotle’s formulations yielded to Deleuze’s, it headed one of three directions.
>Imagine cinema as an atom, a tight nuclear ball of neutrons and protons bound by the glue (“strong force” in physicist speak) of narrative. Nuclear narrative glue holds the medium in place. But a particle breaks free. And spins of with great energy. Which direction does the errant particle go? One of three anti-narrative directions.
>The further the particle breaks free, the farther it flies, the closer it comes to time itself.
>This is transcendental cinema.

Attached: images.jpg (738x415, 21.76K)

How is Lynch more narrative-centered than Gus van Sant? Is Schrader retarded?

I mean that’s true and all, but non narrative cinema gets dangerously close to being boring and pointless, if there isn’t some of that narrative glue then the film better still be entertaining in its own way.

What am I in for?

Attached: 71v9dXspNIL._SL1500_.jpg (1207x1500, 134.56K)

Mid tier Bergman

Particles and atoms don’t actually exists, they’re purely theoretical
Transcendentalism has to rely on narrative because it’s an escape inward instead of ‘outward’. It relies on a partnership between active thinking of the viewing and the creator sort of coalescing the viewers intuition. It’s delicately built through intuitive efforts and active focus inside the body. The reason the narrative is important is because intuition is peaked through folkish, familiar systems and movements of logic. A system of the logic of movement is the recreation of an action that a person inherently already understands. Non-narrative stuff is really just meta-narrative or illiterate (In a good way)

I liked Blow up. The disillusionment trilogy is shit though, just long winded relationship drama, it doesn’t interest me.