Is this considered a good film in France? Holy crap is it ever

It's from Belgium you pleb, what didn't you like about it? I thought it was one of the best films of 2014

>>64561004
>Belgium

Belgium is not even considered a country

>>64560905
>le criterion meme
>le RT meme

Never trust their lies.

>>64560905
Who was this movie made for? What social class?

French films are just full on memes these days, we're far from the heights of the new wave by now.

>Rotten Tomatoes

>fench
>marion cotillard
>main character is a woman

you do the math

>>64560905
>>64561074
>>64561207
>>64561255
thanks reddit

>>64561054
>he's never been to bruge or Brussels
>hasn't had the goat Belgium beer and chocolate

Haven't seen the movie but belgium is cool af

>>64560905
Socialist garbage

Miserabilist social cinema is absolute trash, inherently. It only exists to entertain the bourgeoisie, while the lower classes enjoy vulgar auteurs such as Justin Lin or WS Anderson, filmmakers that are very generous in kinema (movement = action = cinéma), films that are filled with joie de vivre and a timeless sense of fun and wonder. It's incredibly ironic. Dardennes films follow ordinary people, but offer no insight about the world beyond "poor people are poor". They are devoid of poetry or spirituality. Godard was at least self-aware enough to admit, when he was doing a movie about factory workers during his Maoist years, that it was useless because the people most concerned by such social issues are the least likely to go watch it.

If you want to see good socio-political cinéma, look at Duck You Sucker! Now that is subversion. Like Chaplin was subversion. Injecting a serious political message in a light-hearted adventure movie, it's popular -for the people, about the people- cinéma at its finest and is an authentic strategy.

It's a film about political disillusion, about how the people gets fucked over no matter who's in power. But it's fun! And filled with truly cinematic ideas. This is like John Carpenter doing They Live. A film about a homeless guy played by a wrestler fighting aliens because he's the only one, due to his place in society, who can see the corruption that has taken place. This is so much more authentic and yes, subversive, than "socio-realistic cinema" because it encourages the people, the masses who actually go see the movies concerned by social issues to question the social order through storytelling, than movies about lower classes shot specifically (you know the festival-bait style, dull colors, drawn-out static shots or handheld to seem documentary-like, no effort in set design or any other truly creative fields) for the intellectual masturbation of festival viewers, who then go sip champagne at a luxury hotel party.

File: 1452093918645.png (229KB, 844x651px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 844x651px

>>64560905
>check wiki
>france
>french, arabic
>into the trash

>>64561506
>Justin Lin or WS Anderson
Just kill me tbqh
Just shoot me in the face

>>64561054
Yeah, I believe it's a Caliphate now.

>>64561207
>far from the heights of the new wave
the best French cinema is non-nouvelle vague

File: S_H_I_E_L_D_50607.jpg (21KB, 480x200px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 480x200px

>>64562860
>weeb thinks his opinions matter

>>64560905
Then you've clearly never suffered from clinical depression and anxiety.

>>64561506
Impressive. Most impressive.

>>64561103
>>64561506
The Dardenne's films don't seem all that concerned with actual socio-political commentary anyway. People who go in looking for it and judge the film by the absence of it tend not to be fans.

>>64560905
It's an auteur film, which means that "patricians" will judge it not for what it is, but for who made it, and how it shows their "style" and other dumb bullshit.

And you can prove it's all bullshit because if you showed that movie to anyone who pretends to appreciate it but blacking out the name of the directors, they'd think it's shit. And somehow the directors name on it makes it stop being shit and become good. That's "auteur" cinema in a nutshell.

>>64563722
Such a useless generalization. What you describe is seemingly the case for a number of people--many of them sadly respected critics--but that doesn't diminish the very real affection many others hold for this and many, many other "auteur" films.

>>64563903
Auteur cinema is literally about judging films according to who is the author. Which is why the whole auteur concept goes against having any sort of criteria when assessing a films quality with a minimum of objectivity.

It's obviously possible that people still like and enjoy the movie regardless of the "author", but those people could actually be considered to be missing the whole point of auteur cinema.

The whole idea of auteur cinema is complete bullshit, and based only on a cult around the director (which also means disregarding anyone else's creative input, which will inevitably be there in practically any movie). This then leads to people like Lars von Trier or Gaspar Noe making apes of themselves trying to expand the cult of personality around them, which is what will give their movies their auteur value.

Search your feelings. You know this to be true.