No Jamal, you be trippin.

>>79135191
was it autism?

Literally the worst movie I saw last year. How is this shit considered good

File: no.jpg (21KB, 720x286px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 720x286px

>>79135191

/ourgirl/

also, best emma

>>79135225
bro. you didn't see a 1/10. snap outta it. you saw a brilliant work of art and you're just a empty-minded shit-wit. your scale is all outta wack cause you talk with inbreds online all day. stupid shithead

>>79135225
It was good faggot. Fantastic direction and two great lead performances. Also, had a coherent plot mixed together with good themes and dialouge.

File: emma roberts qt.jpg (258KB, 1358x984px) Image search: [Google]

258KB, 1358x984px

>>79135288
Best frog Emma maybe

>>79135299
>>79135331
there was nothing remotely redeeming about this movie. The characters were weak, the plot sucked, the songs weren't good or even sung well. Do you just enjoy watching hollywood wankery for 2 hours?

>>79135569
>the songs weren't good
So you're baiting, right?

>>79135607
>>79135299

No it's dishonest. it doesn't have authenticity. it was created to appear a certain way rather than for a real purpose. it has nothing to do with popularity, other than the fact that these films take no risks because they need to be popular to be profitable.

These type of films (Birdman for example) are entirely indistinguishable, which is a bad thing for an artist. they all try to fit in but do subtle things to appear valuable. so there will be limited effort in characterization, or visual expression, but really the creators don't have an interest in creating art. the point is to make 90-120 minutes of content that appears professional and is inoffensive enough to avoid criticism.

>>79135569
what is wankery. what is huh? the movie? or the wonderful balance of appreciation and dissent of this wonderful cinematic landmark? la la land was an incredible film my dude. i dont wanna even go back and watch it cause im afraid to FEEL. so many FEELINGS would arise in my bosom. the coming and going of the lead's relationship.. the impeccable acting .. the incredible soundtrack. little else this decade rivals this amazing movie & no amount of disparaging the fanbase will make it any less of a masterful work-a art. 't your shit together

>>79135607
I honestly can't remember any of the songs except the one when Emma Stone sings (poorly) the movie's message into the camera

>>79135658
>No it's dishonest.

Is this a result of some exhorting newsletter to which you subscribe or are you so desperate for a connection that you'll just parrot whatever these dick-wagging, virgin fags vomit into the ether? Grow up.

File: emma stone qt.jpg (338KB, 717x2999px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 717x2999px

Will Hollywood ever make good musicals again?

>>79135658
nigga talkin bout "taking no risks" and "authenticity" like theres a definitive treatise on filmmaking that automatically qualifies whichever one is high art or not by some nobodyboy's internet meme. 'me a fuckin break.

File: 0480.gif (863KB, 500x197px) Image search: [Google]

863KB, 500x197px

lik dis if u cri evrytim

>>79135607
Really? The songs were terrible, the dancing wasn't good either. Sure, it revived a dead genre, but maybe they should have watched movies in that genre to see how it's done,

>>79135805
All art has value because it exists, it can show us something, even something the artist did not intend. But not all art is honest.

La La Land was dishonest , yeah and before you ask
>hurrr durrr what does dishonest mean?

It MEANS the creator did something with disingenuous intentions. they were pretentious. they did a big landscape shot, but they had no respect for the land they were shooting, it was just to look impressive. basically, using the subject rather than respecting it

In summary 'Dishonest Filmmaking' (a term /tv/ was very smart and right to use) is basically
when a director twists and contrives a narrative and its characters in order to confirm their preconceived world view or opinions.

La La Land is the epitome of DISHONESTY.

File: tumblr_inline_ntgslfKWCu1sysrze_400.jpg (23KB, 385x385px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 385x385px

>>79135191

>ywn hold emma in your arms and affectionally call her 'dumb frogposter'

>>79135950
You must lead a tortured existence

>>79135950

So, it's the exhorting newsletter, then?

Emma's feet were BUILT for face trampling. I'd love to get underneath her soles.

>>79135191
Bitch has terrible delivery. Thanks for ruining another film acting like yourself.
>>79135225
Reddit likes it and 4chan is now full up on redditors

File: La-La-Land-Reviews.jpg (93KB, 986x518px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 986x518px

THIS WAS THE GREATEST MOVIE I HAVE EVER SEEN

I ALMOST CRIED AT THE END AND I NEVER CRY

IM GOING TO SEE IT AGAIN WITH MY GIRLFRIEND THIS WEEKEND TO SAVOR EVERY MOMENT

>>79135950
>even something the artist did not intend

No, you're just misunderstanding the point of the piece in this case.

>>79136056
Quite the opposite actually it means the movies I watch tend to be very philosophical honest films that I actually spend time thinking about because you can tell the director actually gave a shit about what he was doing and the ideas he was sharing.

>>79135331
>two great lead performances
Kek. They were utterly terrible.
>>79135607
The songs were fucking shite. As were the singing.

>>79135950
>Film is about Los Angeles
>Film uses shots of Los Angeles scenery along with people living in Los Angeles

THE FILM IS DISHONEST GUYS!!! I SWEAR!!!

Film dragged in the middle but it was quite good. The chemistry between Stone and The Goose is undeniable.

>>79136810
>chemistry

what? Is this movie about science?

>>79136859
weak joke mate