I mean he does have a point

I mean he does have a point.

Attached: kino.png (1198x564, 106.77K)

No. Beer's fine, he's just a pussy.

>welles and hitchcock were middlebrow entertainment that even the dumbest people of their day could understand
Standards have fallen so low. And I'm not saying their films aren't great but modern audiences treat them like incomprehensible art house fare when they're very much general entertainment for average people just well done.

>I mean he does have a point

Attached: 2aa.jpg (500x500, 35.36K)

beer is disgusting and any self-respecting sophisticated man only drink wines and spirits

>he doesn't drink craft beer

randall is such a little bitch and his comics are all strawmen so he can feel better about his shitty life

Attached: kino.png (1198x564, 106.17K)

It's not like Citizen Kane or Psycho are weird arthouse films that the average person can derive no enjoyment from. They were very popular at the time and hold up very well.

Welles and Hitchcock made shit that has aged horribly. Welles movies weren't even popular at the time.

>anything's fine
>actually i don't like this
what a fucking FAGGOT

Attached: 1539614886287.jpg (1024x903, 70.42K)

Citizen Kane lost money because people back then had a better taste.

Psycho is a cheap gimmick.

Are you saying you're against brbrbrbbrbb vrrrmmrmrm poopy stinky nigger watermelon nigger stinky cummy poopoo with this comic? Because I don't know if I can agree with that.

>All old movies are bad!
>NOOOOO! you can't just say all new movies are bad! What are you a contrarian?1

I though I sincerely like quite a few of them, I think there is an inherent "fakeness" to old movies. At some point in the late 1960's or early 1970's the movie industry decided that actors should talk more like normal people (or at least how normal people would like to talk), instead of that old stage play "I'm acting!" style. They also seemed to abandon the idea that they needed a pure protagonist and you started seeing more moral grey areas being explored, and obviously there was a general reduction in censorship. This is why most of the 'timeless' movies were made between 1965 and 1980, and I personally think that if 'classic' movies like Sergeant York or Arsenic and Old Lace were made during that time period they would have way better.

yooo... based?

This, when I first watched Citizen Kane I was amazed at how fucking simple it was, everyone lead me to believe it was some extremely cryptic masterpiece of symbolism.

t. dogfucker

>Citizen Kane lost money because people back then had a better taste.
>top grossing movies of 1941 were all biopics, musicals and comedies
OH NO NO NO

>caring about xkcd
ISHYGDDT

Epic thred OP!

Attached: 1578192728252.png (297x767, 161.16K)

I always grin when Kane tells Thatcher he'll have to close his newspaper "in sixty years."

You have to be in the mood to watch a deep movie. It has to be contemplated deeply as you're watching it. It's almost like a mental exercise in itself.

If you spend your entire life thinking a movie is only feeding you momentary passive entertainment, I can get why you think that when a movie requires you to deeply contemplate you hate it.

My favorite movie is from 1927. I don't know why people refuse to touch anything made before the '80s.

I refuse to watch anything made before 1997.

I don't like pre-1970 movies. They are just too fucking slow.

My favorite movie is a clay sculpture made in 5th century BC. I don't know why people refuse to touch anything made before the '80s.

i refuse to watch anything that's been out longer than a week you dusty old fuck
just give me the chip, melt my brain and be done with it, only cowards refuse oblivion

>I think there is an inherent "fakeness" to old movies
No, not really. Movies from the 1940’s (for example) were made for audiences in the 1940’s, who had an entirely different set of expectations/experiences than do you. This causes you to see these films as unnatural or “fake” — and people in 60 years will see current cinema as “fake” for the same reason.

Old movies are great. There were actual white people on the screen, and niggers were treated as the knaves that they really were. But if you prefer modern day filmmaking about women getting abortions and minorities taking the throne more power to you I guess.

Maybe you should watch non-American movies.

I don’t understand why the Birds is praised so much. Honestly think it’s mediocre at best

>implying all alcohol isn't disgusting shit because it's literally, biologically, toxic

>I don’t like beer
>Ok, we have plenty of wine, harder liquor, soft drinks, and water if none of the above are to your taste
>YOU’RE SUPPOSED TO FORCE ME TO LIKE BEER REE
>What? Why?
>Uh... *keep it together Randall, just make a comic where this guy is in the wrong*

That's a complete assumption you pulled out of your ass to defend these movies you think you have to like. Old people absolutely do not think and act like people in old movies, they are different than us but they are still 'dirty' human beings who talk in unpolished, rude manners like everyone else. It's clear to me that these movies were just copying live theater styles, which are today almost the same as they were back then and only people with mental illnesses can watch them without struggling to hold back their vomit.