What are some GOAT postmodern films?

mulholland drive

>>48737605
cabin in the woods

>>48737846
It says films not trashy movies

under the skin

I would consider Martyrs a postmodern horror film

What does post modern mean? More importantly, what does /tv/ consider to be post modern?
Pls educate me bros.

>>48738184
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxps3oouNiQ

2:52 onwards

Under The Skin
Enemy

eternal sunshine

>>48737605
a great postmodern theatre piece perhaps it was the prequel to Barton Fink

>>48738231
So film that is supposed to be interpreted in many ways?

Because if that's the case most of this shit is wrong

>>48738444
No, a film that doesn't adhere to conventional and contemporary structure, i.e editing, content, themes, score, etc.

>>48738184
What does modern mean actually?

>>48738494
"now"

>>48738502
so does postmodern mean cutting edge?

>>48738473
...seriously?

So like arthouse film in general?

File: 1393114331259.jpg (34KB, 200x201px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 200x201px

>>48738184
>>48738444
>>48738494
>>48738502
>>48738516
Read a fucking book holy shit

>>48738521
not really, would you call Being John Malkovich or Pulp Fiction arthouse?

>>48738596
BANE?

>>48737605
The first scenes of this film made me have severe headaches and paranoia. And those little details of 'can't-hear-correcly' jokes that swiftly go away as the movie goes on and on and becomes more self aware of itself.

Shit, that's a fucking FANTASTIC movie. I couldn't consider that Kaufman was this great.

>>48737862
it's like the definition of a postmodern film.
my apologies if your not a fan

>>48738664
>more self aware of itself.

Bravo,me.

I love how people thought Pulp Fiction was post modern because of the pastiche aspect. But then it turned out Tarantino was just a fucking nerd hack and all the intellectuals quickly ran away. Yet if you ever look up a pleb book on post modernism they always mention Pulp Fiction.

>>48738601
I guess not but the word seems a bit redundant. Arthouse is already perfectly fine phrasing for a film that creatively explores form. Post Modernist just seems a bit broader and less interesting.

>>48737605
The Sea that Thinks

>>48738758
Arthouse sounds exclusive, elitist and hipster.

>>48738596
the only reason I know is because I took a film class in college
It is too much to expect an average autist anon to know these things

>>48738705
because Pulp Fiction is postmodern you doofus. Just because Tarantino's gone full sampling doesn't mean PF isn't a fantastic film

>>48738797
>The Sea that Thinks
>Incredible optical illusions in a story in a story in a story helps the surprised viewer finally to find out that he has been watching himself all along.

>>48738806
who cares how it sounds? Hell, post modern probably sounds elitist and hipster to some people.

It's a much better grouping than just "anything that isn't predictable"

>>48738601
I would say that BJM is modernist and PF is postmodern
PF has too wide an appeal to be art house
BJM definitley is though

>>48738938
>PF has too wide an appeal to be art house
arthouse has nothing to do with popularity

>>48737605
this thread is actually interesting. It also tells a lot about /tv/

>>48738826
It's post modern in spite of itself which I think disqualifies it. Think about it if Travolta wasn't cast and that dance scene was cut nobody would say it was post modern at all. They'd look at it like Reservoir Dogs.

>>48738596
this

>>48739067
I think it is the is nature of Art House films means they will usually not be popular or do well in the box office.
They aren't made to appeal to the film going market.

>>48739186
http://wiki.tarantino.info/index.php/Pulp_Fiction_Movie_References_Guide#Movies

>>48739186
>if Travolta wasn't cast and that dance scene was cut nobody would say it was post modern at all
lmao are you serious

>>48739186
I would say Dog's is postmodern. Not as much as PF or basterds, but still kinda posmodern

>>48739277
it isnt

pf is post modern because it subverts traditional movie story telling and even then Im really only giving it to you because it could be argued and its all about interpretation

Dogs is straight up not postmodern

>>48739239
Arthouse is about creatively exploring the artform itself. There were tons of arthouse films in the sixties in that were widely popular with the majority of their respective countries. I don't consider PF to be arthouse, but it's popularity doesn't have much to do with that

>>48738683
muh self-aware horror film

I hope people don't fall into the stupid trap of thinking something being Postmodern = good; much like how idiots on here often think meta/deconstruction = good.

Most Coen brother's films, but I think their most postmodern is Burn After Reading.

>>48739424
They already did.
>>48737862
>>48739386

Just because something sounds smart doesn't mean it's good on itself. There are adjectives for that.

Art is one of the things that are cruelly misunderstood.

>>48739533
>Art is one of the things that are cruelly misunderstood.
kek seriously?

>>48739323
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105236/movieconnections#references
>constant popculture references
>constant homage to other films
i'd say its pretty postmodern

>>48737605
Starship Troopers

>>48739424
whats the difference between meta/deconstruction and postmodern?

>>48738596
On postmodernism? Why?

>>48738596
I already read the Talmud

>>48739611
Meta/Deconstruction are elements of postmodern art.

Synecdoche, New York is a meta as it can gets, for example.

inception duhhhh

>>48739323
also adding to this
>>48739609
Dogs is a movie about a Diamond Robbery, where you don't actually see the Diamond robbery, only the planning and aftermath
that sounds pretty deconsturcty to me

>>48739258
Sure but loads of references is true for lots of movies of the late 70s into the 80s. Hell lots of those references are to movies full of references themselves. However, couldn't that just be Tarantino's cultural background. He likes movies full of references so he puts them in his movie. Like the cool bad ass black guy, he likes that character so he puts him in the movies. But beyond that he isn't really thinking about why.

>>48739273
Yes because it's a theme restaurant. It's the only part where the movie shows that the references might be more than just things. The whole scene is set up to show how the characters are trying to act like they are movie stars in a movie, which is why they keep looking at all the look alike movie stars around them. Then Travolta is perfectly cast since he's the kind of guy Vince Vega is trying to act like as confusing as that sounds.
Anyway the rest of the movie doesn't have that tone it's a lot more like Reservoir Dogs, the conversations, the music/film/tv/book references etc. are more flavour than any thing else. And that's my point if the theme restaurant wasn't there and Travolta wasn't cast would the rest of the movie really seem postmodern.

>>48739611
I'm not saying they're separate; but, I have seen people say something is meta as if it being meta means it's good. And I get the feeling that there are some people who think calling a movie postmodern is some judgment claim regarding quality, when it isn't.

less arguing, more recs