Absolute shite

Weird movie, but at least we finally see her naked. HNNG.

You're absolute shite.

pretty good movie starring robert pattinson

>filtered unline anyone else
>BTFO by the entire board
Not your day, OP.

Who is this Max R. DeFault

was that nude scene legit or just a double? btw the movie was pretty good and it is a soft filter

>Sci-Fi Caviar
good lord that's pretentious as fuck

filtered lmao

Under the Skin is literally, unironically, sincerely one of the best films of the past decade.

A true pleb filter. Zoomer killer. Brainlet stomper. Plot point casual executioner.

Attached: Under The Skin.mkv_snapshot_00.34.47_.jpg (1920x1038, 604.87K)

I fall into your category. Wasn't my cup O tea despite liking weird artsy shit most of the time. The music was great, some of the imagery was striking, but it just didn't hit for me.

>being this picky
it's only a matter of time before Yas Forums starts hating criterion for whatever reason

Then you're wrong. Jonathan Glazer is an advertising agency bitch, he's not a real person, you don't have to give him the benefit of the doubt.

The only good film in the bunch.

It is, and what's more it's plagiarised shite. Carine Adler's film of the same title is a masterpiece.

But it's really not a bad movie. It's very well done, well acted, lots of good ideas.

I've always hated Criterion for making people believe it's acceptable to like Akira Kurosawa in the 21st century. He was an upper-class airhead.

Is this the most emotionally aggravating scene in cinema history?

Attached: mommy daddy where r u.webm (1200x648, 2.98M)

>t. capeshiter

its silly and pointless. shock value.

>for whatever reason
>huh, kurosawa bad?
yeah some retarded reason like that, just buy disney+ and enjoy your superhero movies

How is it pointless? It perfectly displays the absolute lack of empathy and morals the alien at that point has.

No, it has no good ideas in it, it's not well acted, it's not well done.

Look at the desperate position you're both in. I've never watched capeshit, I watch serious films. Kurosawa was a dunce.

I didnt hate it but felt it was objectively worthless as a film

There's no such thing as aliens. If you're defending a film as a work of art, giving in-universe explanations for why the director did stuff will ruin your argument every time, revealing the film as trash and you as a genre fanboy trying to go straight.

It's pretty funny because caviar is a codeword for shit in sex jargon

Have you seen Birth? Glazer's weird about kids and should be the fuck in prison.

Unironically the best movie of the past decade, a humanist masterpiece.

>feel for fake deep emotional manipulation made by someone who directs car commercials

>proud of it

It's usually spelled as kaviar in that context, but yes, I thought of that too.

Nope.

Yep.

>I watch serious films
>I-I swear I don't watch capeshit Kurosawa bad because yes I have to defend my point no matter what
Ok, Pajeet

It's a car commericial + some candid camera moments making fun of poor people. even the book was better and the book was dumb

For anyone who's seen the original Under the Skin, this is like someone making a film about an alien disguised as a press baron and calling it Citizen Kane.

Best horrorkino of the last 10 or so years.

it has barely anything to do with the book you dense mong

Kurosawa was a dunce and is for people who'll watch hyperbolic disingenuous "humanist" propaganda providing it's in another language.

>There's no such thing as aliens
What? The film is literally about an alien harvesting human flesh.

Correct.

You haven't actually read the book, have you?

Yes. There's no such thing as aliens. Bearing in mind that there's no such thing as aliens, what are you actually being shown in that scene, and for what emotional purpose?

the film is about the human condition

It's a classic example of the kind of alleged intellectual art film whose admirers aren't intellectuals and have no idea how to evaluate art.

Incorrect, see here:

retard

>tfw I don't remember anything about it except fot the soundtrack

absolute pleb filtered

>what are you actually being shown in that scene
Aliens
>and for what emotional purpose
To portray how would an alien creature possibly see humanity so you can further objectively see your own wants and needs and how you treat other people aswell.

Incorrect, see here:

I remember seeing scarjo's fat cheeks.

No, aliens don't exist, try again.

>To portray how would an alien creature
No, that's the plot function. What *emotional* purpose?