Is this worth watching?

>>79070820
A filmmaker used the opening as filmmaking advice in a lecturer.

I never saw the full thing but first 5 minutes was really well done as a 1 camera take.

>>79070820
Yeah, it's a fun, clever watch. /tv/ will try to meme you into hating it though.

It'd a good movie and shits on capeshit saying it's not real art

>>79070820
I'd say so. I didn't like it very much, but it seems a lot of other people did. At the very least, it's technically impressive and full of good performances by a good cast. You could do worse

File: image.jpg (55KB, 300x296px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 300x296px

>>79070820
It's great. Made me actually respect Emma stone as an actress.

File: Michael-Keaton-Vulture-645x370.jpg (63KB, 645x370px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 645x370px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_aQupiaCSA

>>79070895
The beginning scene when Keaton is asking for a certain actor and someone tells him he is doing a super hero movie and Keaton's reaction when he says "THEY PUT HIM IN A CAPE TOO?" was freakin hilarious.

Was funny to see this movie actually make fun of capeshit

the ending made me feel good

>>79070820
all style, no substance
>DUDE LOSING YOURSELF IN THE AGE OF SOCIAL MEDIA YOURE NO MROE RELEVANT THAN THE REST OF US
>DUDE STAGE PLAYS NO ONE LIKES THEM ANYMORE
>DUDE ONE CAMERA SHOT MEME EVEN THOUGH IT CLEARLY HAS CUTS
most overrated film of the past 7 years

Absolutely, it's a great film. I very much enjoyed watching it the first time round. Norton and Keaton's performances are fantastic. If you're at all interested in the theatre as a performance space vs film then this movie does a good job of explaining the difference.

Technically it's very impressive with it's one take illusion which I feel really added.

Give it a watch

>>79070986
Trying to be artsy is the worst kind of artsy

>>79070986
>all style, no substance

heh. pseudo intellectual criticism

birdman? more like tour-de-forced

the virtuosity on display evidently is enough for many to praise this stunt to the sky, but even that virtue isn't all it's cracked up to be: a lot of the performances suffer as the result of the long-take format. keaton's teeth-grinding approach is up and down, and emma stone appears completely lost without the editorial control afforded by traditional cutting. (norton on the other hand is a force of nature and puts everyone else in the cast to shame)
the script is riddled with "punchy" lines that whiff terribly, and the "enigmatic" final shot is a copout (especially frustrating because the film teases us over and over again with faux-suicides).

but mostworst is that the film is a daisy chain of potshots. this is meant to be an "incisive" film but it's more like a manic stabbing at an empty pillowcase with a butterknife. what exactly is this film's perspective, besides the fact that everyone and everything is riddled with bullshit? the only truth "birdman" actually clarifies is that inarritu's purview is hopelessly jaundiced and pathetic. this junk isn't really inside riggan thompson's head (despite the gimmick-laden scenes of "introspection"), it's just underneath his wig. a simpleminded piece of unenjoyable trash whose countless shortcomings are masked by competent execution of choices made in the pre-production process, and in some ways one of 2014s worst releases.

it's condescending as shit

also many of the characters are utter trash yet we are supposed to sympathize for them or whatever since they are designated protagonists or whatever

>hey lets spit on random pedestrians below us because why not
>teehee okay!

the whole thing has a frenetic feel to it as a result of them editing the whole thing to look like one take

most movies about nervous breakdowns strike me as being overdone and the wrong kind of pathetic - insincere writing or something? Birdman was just cool and made me feel like I was off my lithium

>>79070820
of course was directed by le hollywood arthouse chilango helmer AGI

It has substance, but no subtlety. If you like to search for subtext and pat yourself on the back for finding it, you'll find nothing to uncover here. Often very heavy-handed with its messaging, which, even if I agree with the message, is something I personally hate to see in any form of entertainment media. You will probably find the cinematography to be the most interesting part of the movie.

>>79071442
and his epic cinematographer

File: pepemadwojak.jpg (8KB, 277x182px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 277x182px

>>79070820
It's a bad movie. /tv/ used to shit on it, and I miss that. Now we have been taking over by plebbitors and normies who love this shit.

>>79071384
actors are condescending fucks though

not disagreeing with you that the characters are pieces of shit

What did everyone think about the lesbian klss? Born out of desperation or just because it's the theatre and everyone's gay

>>79071527
I agree with this guy's point, actors can be really big jerks.

>>79071547
>actors can be really big jerks.
Same as anyone else.

>>79071547
I thought that the author got clueless about her char (Riseborough's) and tossed out that lgtb moment for no reason.

>>79071630
True but I think there's a tendency for acting to attract those wanting self-validation and to be the centre of attention. For example, after a show an actor would be congratulated on his performance which would really inflate his ego and reinforce this mentality that they really are just that good.

I got my theater major a few years ago. I worked with a clique of students that all considered Birdman the greatest movie ever. None of those graduates are currently working in the performance arts

>>79070820
No it was hamfisted garbage and emma stone can't fucking act, bitch ruined it like she does everything.

>>79070943
The movie is great but, Stone is trash in it.