Why are plays praised while movie scripts hated on?

>>8598163
They're not. It's just this is the literature board, not the tv/film board.

Movies are just garbage desu

>>8598185
what if i told you that you are the garbage

>>8598183
Question-begging. Whether or not movie scripts count as literature is precisely what the OP is asking.

>>8598185
this

>>8598189
Fine. Let me contribute then.

Because most films are garbage. They cater the masses of people who just want entertainment because they hate their lives. There are plenty of films out their that have literary merit, independent movies in particular; which aren't "good" simply because they're independent and I'm a hipster, but because major corporations aren't sticking their noses in on the projects that indie filmmakers want to see done in their image and don't conform to the boring tropes usually shown in movies for people with ADHD.

>>8598208
Are you delusional enough to believe that most books aren't garbage as well?

>>8598215
No, because I didn't say that.

Movies are like graphic novels: they don't NEED to have good writing to function as art, and so most of the time (if not all the time) they do not.

>>8598223
See
>>8598215

>>8598222
You said that movie scripts aren't literary because most films are garbage. I said most books are garbage as well.

>>8598223
They don't need a good prose, they still need good themes, good atmosphere, good concepts and so on.

What's worse a film pseuds or literature pseud?

File: 16435447465389322978322322957951398270917n.jpg (38KB, 469x720px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 469x720px

>>8598208
If watching films to find literary value, you're just going to have your smugness confirmed. Read pic related.

>>8598230
>>8598228
I was more careful than him and simply said all films are garbage.

Nice tu quoque, please come back with a real argument.

>>8598163
I think it's just a matter of time. Theatre in its early days was not studied as literature (you need only look at its treatment in the Poetics by Aristotle, where it is described as a public phenomenon rather than considered artistically).
Something like Paul Schrader's script for Taxi Driver is well-worth literary study (though not necessarily more than the film).
Broadly though, (to contradict myself) my point about theatre only holds up because we no longer have access to the initial performance, thus had to make do with the instruction manual. With film, unlike theatre, the "performance" (I.e the showing of the film) is a stable text, and so we have no real need for recourse to the manual (which is what spurred us to look at theatre as literature in the first place.)

>>8598270
There also isn't really any film out there that is a marvel of the English language the way that Shakespeare is.

>>8598241
Jesus Christ, the autism in this thread.

There's nothing to argue. Both, no, ALL mediums have both garbage and merit. You think books are superior because you're partial to them.

>>8598354
This is a thread about the quality of movie scripts relative to plays or books.

Sorry to tell you that movie scripts are very poor. It is things like cinematography that salvage film.

>>8598298
This is true, but there are plenty of films out here that in terms of sheer visual beauty compete with any classical painter.

>>8598359
I never said that wasn't the case. Instead, I said what concerns the OP: >>8598358

>>8598364
I'm not implying you said it wasn't the case. I was just bringing another consideration into play man.
You okay dawg? You wanna talk some shit out? Cuz I'm cool with that if you do

>>8598369
>Running damage control this hard

I hope you're not the person who tried to argue that because a lot of books are bad, there is no difference in quality between books and movies.

Scripts are really just there to support the visuals.

What are some good scripts that have been made in to bad movies?

File: il_340x270.423605237_jqby.jpg (33KB, 340x270px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 340x270px

>>8598354
Not him, but the question was brought to a board that discusses literature and proposed to people who, being native to the board, are partial to literature. I don't know what you expected.
In any case I agree with the statement of >>8598358
A film's greatest effect is in its camerawork, and has no need to rely on the script at all. A film could be completely silent save for an orchestral score and still be a fine piece, but reading a film script without the visual aspect is like playing marco polo in an empty pool, it needs something to keep it afloat.
On a side note I can think of very many good book to film adaptations but very few good film to book ones.

>>8598375
Nigga calm your shit, what I'm doing isn't damage control, I'm just poking fun at how aggressively you responded to my completely innocuous, non-hostile comment, which you even fucking AGREED with.
This website sometimes man, it kills me

Films are very based on visuals which are only expressed very crudely in the script. Plays are dialogue-based, and the dialogue is completely contained in the script.

>>8598185
Movies are, films are not

File: 1475178629583.jpg (101KB, 1024x904px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1024x904px

>>8598185