I think I might be low IQ

I think I might be low IQ.
Sometimes I watch some film and think "wow, that was cool, it felt interesting" but I can't quite put my finger on why and then I read some online explanation and it turns out the movie was filled with symbolism that went over my head.
Is there a cure for this, or is the capacity to fully understand films something you are born with? How do other dumbos operate? You also watch a film and then have to look up the meaning, or have you given up and just watch fun summer flicks?

Attached: stupid pathetic worthless tv watcher.jpg (644x560, 42.51K)

read more books

Fiction, or more serious stuff like essays, treaties, etc? Any particular recommendations? Also: are translated works something to avoid?

>symbolism
no one worth a damn does this anymore

>read boring outdated shit so you can watch movies

no thanks

Sometimes it's visual storytelling or I guess "not treating your audiences like idiots", which apparently is necessary because of people like me.

Symbolism is for plens anyway.

rerd more berks

No need to feel bad OP. Those explanations you find online are mostly written after several watches.

Take this test and I'll tell you the answer.

Attached: 1571586899086.jpg (750x864, 98.46K)

Knead more Sneed

Me too fren, I tend to judge movies by the feelings they give me rather than how technically "good" they are. I find Kubrick's movies to be boring but I have watched The Godfather more than 10 times, my favorite movie overall is The Assassination of Jesse James but I've only watched it 2 times. Last movie I really enjoyed and watched more than once was Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.

Attached: cj.jpg (512x341, 61.46K)

Just read all of Hesse over and over again until you understand why books are vestigial media

I tell you it just doesn't matter

Not OP here.
I'm also idiot who doesn't get movies and i'm number 1.
What's the answer?

You need to read more, especially older classics and religious works. To grasp symbolism, you need context for what these things mean to the human mind.

I'm at 1. I can see it very clearly, grab it and turn it around, even kind of smell it, feel it against my lips and taste it. I still don't get the hype over pretentious old movies like The Deer Hunter.

Then see You're not a hylic, the ability to grasp this stuff is there, you just need to refine it.

As long as you didnt like Fast + Furious movies, there will always be someone below you in IQ. Take solace in that.

You're partially right but he's never going to get it if he hasn't came to these conclusions on his own, the desire to empathize and understand isnt going to be there if someone is being led to understand.

I'm a 5. I've never been able to hear or visualise anything purely in my head. All my thoughts are verbal, but silent.

Watch more complex films. Only way to better understand cinema is by studying it. Over time you learn to notice things like cinematography, composition, plot structure etc. and get a better idea of why the film’s been shot the way it has

Wtf how is deer hunter pretentious...I liked it because I liked the scenes of the guys going hunting. Am I missing something?

I'm sorry. Take an earnest approach to learning and discovering truth on your own accord. Drown out the hivemind of societal consensus, and next life maybe you'll be reborn as a psychic.

Attached: 1565284308724.png (3500x1900, 303.02K)

I don't know, I saw it a long long time ago and only remember that it was boring and kinda pointless. But other movies like The Big Lebowski are really fucking pointless and I really fucking like them.

I think it depends. Some people just don't "get" certain shit that I find to be obvious and vice versa.

For instance, if you look at the reviews on letterboxd for Pusher II, you see well-written reviews throughout that nonetheless don't *get* the deeper meaning of the film. "It's a harrowing look at the life of
degenerate with no redeeming value". Basically a rather cliched take on the film. This person is otherwise bright, but wouldn't However, there's one in there that nailed it. Pic related.

It is really a matter of soulless vs soul. You can have excellent processing power but also be an idiot with nothing to say, like Richard Dawkins. Similarly, tons of people could say oh this is a split diopter, they used a wide angle lens for this shot, bla bla bla, but then the deeper meaning(s) of a film sail over their head

dammit forgot the pic related

Attached: 20200411_184846.jpg (1080x1529, 339.36K)

no one can visualize like that, except maybe chimps to an extent. the idea is that you can simulate the properties of an object in your mind. how light might reflect from different angles, rotations, textures, softness.
this ability is enhanced in a dream state or even lucid dreaming.

>the idea is that you can simulate the properties of an object in your mind. how light might reflect from different angles, rotations, textures, softness.
Yes, that's called visualizing.

>I think I might be low IQ.
take an iq test. movies rely on referring to older works, movies/books or ingroup conventions. most people don't employ their problem solving potential when they sit to watch a movie.

you are not visualizing it the same way you visualize in dreaming, you keep an abstract reference to the objects only when you're awake.