>watch tv show
>characters talk to other characters and do things
>Im proud of you son and also I love you
>I love you too, Dad
>watch tv show
>characters talk to other characters and do things
>/tv/ thread
>it's shit
>>79259060
>Character has a dad
>>79259040
>watch a TV show
>it's a narrative fueled repetitive structure with countless repeating establishing shots, "let's go have a beer" exposition dialogues, back to back camerawork, lazy twists and turns and total neglect of all the filmmaking elements in the long run besides the character development
>stop watching TV shows
>watch movies
>Its one of the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises.
Each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.
Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.
>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."
I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.
>Character works at cafe and subsists on tips
>Beautiful, spacious apartment in happening urban enclave
>watch "kino"
>characters don't talk to other characters or do things, the film is just two hours of boring freshman philosophy student monologues over highly artificial, dishonest visuals but it's okay because "film is a visual medium" and "Refn/Malick/etc. is fucking based"
>>79261988
>he can't into existential dread
Grow up
>>79259040
This is why I only watch kinos.
>character says that the holocaust never happened
>director thought this wasn't crossing the line and kept it in the movie
>>79261988
What film is that?
>>79262101
I grew out of it.
>>79262101
purge when?
>a
>b
x.
>character hangs out alone with cute girl
>doesn't slam 12 oz of hard liquor beforehand to get rid of crippling anxiety
>>79263162
>tfw had to do this for the first two months of meeting up with my gf