When did film become considered art?

>>82447378

Birth of a Nation.

>>82447521
Birth of a nation is an adaptation.

>>82447521
>adaptation
Adaptations will never be true cinema for they are always in the shadow of the superior medium being extracted from whether it be theater or literature

>>82447583
>>82447589
autism

>>82447615
Next time follow the criteria, monkey. No adaptation of James Joyce or Steinbeck will supercede the written text. They are entirely different mediums.

>>82447640
So the Godfather is shit because it's an adaptation?

>>82447666
>Godfather
Name something good next time you want to make an argument, imdbabby.

>>82447696
Rumble Fish just got a Criterion release, faggot.

2007

>>82447378
I'd say it's Intolerance, Eternal Motherhood shit is so powerful, 100 years later still one of the best films of all time.

>>82447731
>Rumble Fish
Ha.
Certainly not the first impressionist film let alone art film altogether.

>>82447771
I wasn't saying it was the first art film, you fucking autist.

>>82447802
You're the one that brought up it receiving a Criterion Bluray release acting as if that meant anything whatsoever in the conversation at hand.

>>82447845
What about Apocalypse Now?

>>82447874
Adaptation and remake. Double shit.

>>82447915
You're a fucking autist.

>>82447944
And you're a Neanderthal that can't read since you clearly can't follow the criteria and can't come up with an insult other than "autist."

>>82447989
you said can't three times

>>82448015
You failed to answer the OP question 3 times. Strike you're out, Jimmy.

Three Ages>Intolerance

>>82448069
Intolerance actually has four ages. And Three Ages isn't an art film btw.

Birth of a Nation

>>82448105
How come a lot of the 30's films you posted are adaptations?
Do you enjoy inferior films?

>>82448140
Birth of a Nation does not qualify and was already mentioned. Read the thread before you make a fool of yourself, clown. Though, you seem to be very adept at being one.

>>82448148
who are you replying to

>>82448148
>>82448204

>>82448204
Fuck you

>>82447378
>isn't an adaptation
Damn, you got me, OP. That's a tough one. A lot of early silent films were adaptations of plays and books. fuck

Answer my question, /tv/.

What was the first feature-length art film?

A film that exceeds 70 minutes, features social realism, isn't an adaptation, and emphasizes ideas and innovation in technique over standard plot progression?

Film is a shit medium.

File: 220px-Intolerance_(film)_poster.jpg (31KB, 220x327px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 220x327px

>>82448451
How did film make Ulysses before Ulysses was even written?

>>82448483
kek you should actually read Ulysses before you say stupid shit. Stick to cunny threads and capeshit, /tv/

>>82448520
>parallels Homer's poem, Odyssey with appointments and encounters of Leopold Bloom in Dublin

>four stories that parallel Walt Whitman's poem "Out of the Cradle Endlessly Rocking"

You should take your own advice, /lit/.

>>82448547
that's not what Ulysses is about but ok

>>82448580
Oh, that's not what Ulysses is about now? After nearly 100 years, the plot has changed entirely according to you? You're a joke, /lit/. You don't even read books, just use them as referential scapegoats to sound superior. Just leave.

>>82448653
at least Ulysses isn't shit compared to intolerance

>>82448723
At least Intolerance came out over a decade before, features four stories, and actually parallels a good poem.

>>82448830
>shitting on Homer's Odyssey
kek found the pleb

>>82448863
You and I both know you have never read Homer's Odyssey and have no interest in even doing so.

Looks like /lit/ left guys. He got scared because he was exposed.

Now answer my question, /tv/.

What was the first feature-length art film?

A film that exceeds 70 minutes, features social realism, isn't an adaptation, and emphasizes ideas and innovation in technique over standard plot progression?

>>82449087
You were answered in like the 10th reply you autist.

File: image.jpg (144KB, 500x713px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 500x713px

The 1911 adaptation of Dante's inferno could be considered the first film that was indeed a masterpiece.

>>82449282
>is an adaptation
It's like you can't read.

>>82449282
>fantasy
>features social realism

>Dante's Inferno
>isn't an adaptaion

Read the criteria before answering.

>>82449303
>>82449358
I don't care you're a retard

Google says Intolerance so I guess you're right OP.

>>82449406
Enjoy your genre shit, babby. Run off and go watch cartoons. That's all you're capable of processing.

>>82449422
>trusting Google
Do you believe everything you read on the internet? Name an academic source next time.

>>82447378
Cabiria

>>82449535
Cabiria doesn't emphasize ideas and innovation in technique over standard plot progression. Being long doesn't equal art film. If it did, then Titanic and Transformers, your favorite films, would be art films

>>82449603
>dissing robotkino and james Cameron
OP can't into vulgar auteurism

>>82449647
>vulgar auteurism
There goes that term again. I don't think it means what you think it means. And Andrew Sarris was not Moses

>>82449688
>Andrew Sarris
who

>>82449708
I rest my case. Go play in the sand, Jimmy. The adults are busy discussing matters that demand more than a toddler can handle.

>>82449767
fuck you autist

>>82447378
>features social realism
Why?

>>82449794
I've already been called that several times in this thread alone already. Find a new disparaging name, mindless parrot.

>>82449806
Cartoons aren't art, /a/. No matter how hard you imply they are by placing them on an undeservingly high pedestal.

Looks like Jimmy and his gang of cartoon-loving Google-spouting nitwits left guys. They got scared because they were exposed.

Now answer my question, /tv/.

What was the first feature-length art film?

A film that exceeds 70 minutes, features social realism, isn't an adaptation, and emphasizes ideas and innovation in technique over standard plot progression?

>>82449990
I already told you it was Cabiria

>>82449909
Social realism means not cartoon/animation? What the fuck is that? Why can't you answer to a simple question like a normal human being and act like a jerk? Jesus....

>>82450030
Oh you came back, Jimmy? Alright, since you want to sit at the grownup table, tell us all the ideas and innovations that Cabiria brought to the table. It does emphasize ideas and innovation over standard plot progression doesn't it?

File: The_Greatest_Question_1919_poster_DWGriffith_existentialismandspiritualism.jpg (35KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 480x360px

>>82450093
Pic-related is social realism, /a/. Not magical girls and pixie dust.

File: 1491858343983.jpg (44KB, 357x450px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 357x450px

OP is legit autistic, thanks for the giggle senpai

Jimmy, I'm waiting for you to tell me all the ideas and innovations Cabiria emphasized in its bloated mammoth runtime.

>>82450217
human sacrifice and camera movement bitch

All films are art, you imbeciles.

All paintings are art, all drawings are art, all sculptures are art; art is art is art is art.

Art cannot be not-art.

You idiots need to do away with this morning thinking of "if I like it, it's art; if I dislike it, it's not-art." Bad art is art; good art is art; mediocre art is art.

When a film is made, it is art. Stop using art as a description of "good."

>>82450160
Why do you keep calling me /a/? What does "not social realism" have to do with animation and cartoons? Being hostile for no reason and doing mental gymnastics to assume wrong stuff doesn't make you sound smarter...

File: DW Griffith pioneered everything in film - Godard and unmotivated camera movement.png (50KB, 741x591px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 741x591px

>>82450252
Cabiria doesn't emphasize human sacrifice over standard plot progression. If anything, it's only a couple scenes. And unmotivated camera movement was long established before Cabria. Loks like you're not ready to sit at the grown up table. Back to the dunes, boy.

File: Godard definition of cinema.png (207KB, 766x465px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 766x465px

>>82450269
>When a film is made, it is art. Stop using art as a description of "good."
No. Next time know about art history before you sound like a clown. Troubling I know.

File: der meisse antmein.jpg (1MB, 3200x1040px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3200x1040px

>>82450269
Is capekino art?

File: the_big_country-poster.jpg (181KB, 790x1200px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 790x1200px

>>82450473
>capekino
That's a contradiction.

You realize why capeshit is called capeshit, right?

It's because it's superheroes, they're not realistic. They can't die and they have deus ex machine to magically save the day.

That's why it's a horrible comparison to say capeshit is the modern western. Westerns dealt with real social and political issues on a base level, rural developing civilization. Take for example, The Big Country, which is an allegory for the Cold War.

But at the root, what truly separates capeshit from legitimate cinema is not writing. It's the core concept. Superheroes aren't real, they are anti-cinema. Cinema is a reflection of reality, it exposes it and enlightens us about it. That's why the Big Country was shown at the White House and capeshit never will be.

It's why /lbg/ prefers the French New Wave and slow cinema >>81145061 → → https://archive.4plebs.org/tv/thread/81114716/#q81114716

It's why this anon agrees on the proliferation of talking cartoon animals dominating the box office having a systematic relationship with the dumbing down of society. https://archive.4plebs.org/tv/thread/80967606/#q80974789

It's why this anon cares about Jacques Rivette's opinion >>81152322

It's why this anon uses the word "kino" >>81152541 because he's referring to the principles of the kino-pravda to depict reality without plot

It's why this anon >>81152694 calls capeshit capeshit despite having reverence for it. He knows it's excrement. It's why he names shit filmmakers like Seijun Suzuki in relation with the genre

It's why this anon >>82399495 and this anon>>82399370 reference Bazin and Kracauer, strong proponent film theorists in defense of cinema as a fundamentally realist medium

>>82450300
You're wasting people's time and wasting space in this thread. Your teacher and your whore mother lied to you, there are stupid fucking questions. And you're asking one.

>>82450516
>genreshit
'Sup Reddit

>>82450616
Westerns may be genreshit, but they're at least fundamentally better than capeshit.

Looks like Jimmy and his gang of cartoon-loving Google-spouting nitwits left guys. They got scared because they were exposed.

Now answer my question, /tv/.

What was the first feature-length art film?

A film that exceeds 70 minutes, features social realism, isn't an adaptation, and emphasizes ideas and innovation in technique over standard plot progression?

>>82450590
You are wasting thread space. You are clearly coming from /lbg/ but I guess the other elitists there bashed you after asking this question.
I am not asking a stupid question, you chose to begin with a stupid answer. No one is taking you seriously and you should go back to your containment general.
Also your Godard image presents no arguments, like anything you have written in this thread. You are a fucking moron.

>>82450758
The mysterious X.

>>82450793
>You are wasting thread space.
I'm asking what the first art film was, hardly an off-topic question.

>You are clearly coming from /lbg/
They wish

>but I guess the other elitists there bashed you after asking this question.
They wish.

>Also your Godard image presents no arguments
You're supposed to click it and read the text, dumbo. I hope you can read because so far, you haven't proven me otherwise.

>>82450849
Genreshit fundamentally cannot be kino as this poster >>82450616 eloquently pointed out, Reddit.

>>82450961
what genre is it

>>82451045
It's a spy flick. But I guess according to you, James Bond is a series of art films.

>>82451097
No, actually franchises can't be art because they're made for commercial purposes

>>82451134
Glad to see you know the basic tenets of art. Now scurry off. You're wasting thread space arguing tautologies.

>>82451191
>what is irony

>>82450898
Okay maybe it's because you don't seem to have ever functioned properly on the outside world so you don't know how to argue or even use a source I will help you out: When you cite a source, historical text, a critique, a quote, you have to actually say what's your point is. I know swearing is a lot more fun and makes you feel superior, but that's how sources work, they don't do the work for you, they merely support your opinion. Even if to you the point is clear from the context.
Also,
>Director's/Film critic's opinion on art and film is the definitive answer as to what is their relation
Also,
>They wish
kek

>>82451239
Yes, I know. It's ironic that you are still here. How about you leave. There's a thread with your name on it discussing Reddit next door >>82447894

>>82451295
>When you cite a source, historical text, a critique, a quote, you have to actually say what's your point is
You meant to quote Jimmy over here >>82449422
He can't seem to find a source for the first art film. Though, neither can you, so leave or answer the question. You're taking up thread space arguing tautologies like this anon
>>82451239
>>82451134
>>82451045

Looks like Jimmy and his gang of cartoon-loving Google-spouting nitwits left guys. They got scared because they were exposed.

Now answer my question, /tv/.

What was the first feature-length art film?

A film that exceeds 70 minutes, features social realism, isn't an adaptation, and emphasizes ideas and innovation in technique over standard plot progression?

Until I get a proper answer with citations as this anon eloquently >>82451295 stated, I will post this thread every day for eternity.

Now answer my question, /tv/.

What was the first feature-length art film?

A film that exceeds 70 minutes, features social realism, isn't an adaptation, and emphasizes ideas and innovation in technique over standard plot progression?

>>82451742
fuck off autist

>>82451787
That's 7 times now. Since you seem confident and decided to enter the conversation, tell us all what makes film an artistic medium separate from theater, music, and literature?

>>82451845
fuck off autist

>>82451882
I knew you wouldn't rise to the occasion. And your incapability of finding a new insult only cements your stupidity.

Man With a Movie Camera

>>82452195
City symphonies and documentaries were done long before Dziga Vertov arrived.

Now answer my question, /tv/.

What was the first feature-length art film?

A film that exceeds 70 minutes, features social realism, isn't an adaptation, and emphasizes ideas and innovation in technique over standard plot progression?

Definitely not anything that was made up by kikes in Hollywood.

>>82452250
*art* film has not been made, film is consumer product and not art, there is no contemplation of the beauty and eternal truth in *film*, its ltierally the opposite: just turn your brain off bro.

>>82452250
why is 70 minutes the cut-off point
give one actual reason why something that meets all your other criteria and is 69:58 is not art but one that's 70:01 is

>>82452270
Do you have any answers? Also DW Griffith was born in Kentucky. "Hollywood" was in its infancy in the mid-1910's.

>>82452312
This is why film adaptations will never be considered art because they ape their sources from superior mediums. Literature, dance, and theater are art outright. Film is not.

>>82452348
You're right. Just like Homer's Odyssey, the length ought to be epic.

>>82452250
The departed.

>>82452577
If you've read Odyssey can you answer me how Plato subverted Homer's worldview?

>>82452640
You and I both know you've never read Homer's Odyssey and have no interest in doing so.

>>82452695
Btfo, autist

>>82452624
Genre flicks can't be art. See >>82450616

>>82452695
Hah, oh wow, so you are a pseud ok then.
Plato reversed the Homeric world view, the body became a shadow of the soul (instead of Homeric world view where it was the opposite in Hades)

You should start with the greeks, instead of just pretending to be cultured.

>>82452755
You've neither read Homer's Odyssey nor supplied a citation for the first art film. You're a pleb in both mediums.

>>82452830
What was the first feature-length art film?

A film that exceeds 70 minutes, features social realism, isn't an adaptation, and emphasizes ideas and innovation in technique over standard plot progression?

>art film
That's a contradiction. Film cannot be art. If it could, it would be lowbrow pop art. Film doesn't demand the reception and energy that literature and theatre require. With film, you're merely looking at flickering images, a byproduct of photography which in itself is another superior artform.

>>82453229
With theatre it's the same

>>82453285
No, it is not. See "byproduct of photography"

>>82453285
Theater by the way of its nature is already more highbrow than steril, dead images played at 23 fps. It is truly one of the few artforms that can mimick a human and answer "who" he was.

>>82453338
>>82453336


If you're such avid consumers of the superior theatre, then where is the theatre board?

>>82453440
>double-space
'Sup Reddit

Warhol's Empire

>>82453440
>why isn't there a theatre board on a shit site like 4chan
you're retarded we all know this. and theatre is far superior to film since its a live performance

>>82453527
Why isn't that acknowledged on the Sight and Sound list?

>>82453621
because it's a shit list for redditors like you.

>>82453527
o, you can accomplish the same effect through photography. Film will never be art. It fundamentally cannot since it is predisposed to the masses.

>120 posts
>13 IP's
has this autist been samefagging for 4 hours?

>>82453736
when VR films become reality film will become, if not art then something fucking crazy.

>tfw you will be marching in the legions of Holy Roman Empire and purging Carthago fucking shits

>>82453792
Maybe.

he is digging up archived posts of "mega autist" from /lbg/ threads, at least the beginning of the thread was

so he is autist ropleaying another autist

>>82453658
The Sight and Sound list is composed by hundreds of established director, academics, and critics from around the world.

>>82453229
>Film doesn't demand the reception and energy that literature and theatre require
This thread is full of autists, or just one role playing as many, making claims without reasoning behind them.

>>82453960
just because they get paid to make shit doesn't make it any less shit

>>82453995
Then who the fuck are you

>>82454032
better than you bitch

>>82447589
This is retarded logic. What if a film adaptation outdoes the source material? For instance, Kubrick's adaptation of The Shining has a lot more artistry than the novel. Even if you're one of those "Kubrick is an overrated hack" snobs you have to admit he's a better artist than Stephen King.

>>82454077
You want to say that to my face?

>>82454150
>horror
Name something good next time, genrebabby.

>>82454167
I'll beat the shit out of you bitch

>>82454150
Film will always be in shadow of its source due to being extracted from superior mediums. See here >>82453338 >>82453229 >>82452312

>>82454254
I wonder how long it will take for you to die after being ran over by a train.

>>82454361
ooh the retard's gonna run me over with his deluxe thomas the train engine set that mommy bought him

megaautist why do you have such a fixation with trains

>>82454220
Not an argument. Are you going to refute what I said or continue to childish insult me?
>>82454314
So you think ALL literature is superior to film?

>>82454549
>childish
childishly

>>82454549
Green Eggs 'n' Ham>Intolerance

File: tark laughing.jpg (184KB, 1478x1094px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 1478x1094px

>>82454577

>>82454549
Literature, theatre, dance, and music are naturally arts. Film is not, it is a byproduct of photography.
film is consumer product and not art, there is no contemplation of the beauty and eternal truth in *film*, its ltierally the opposite: just turn your brain off bro.

We're getting sidetracked /tv/. Let me steer us back on course.

What was the first feature-length art film?

A film that exceeds 70 minutes, features social realism, isn't an adaptation, and emphasizes ideas and innovation in technique over standard plot progression?

>>82454765
>art film
erm, that's inherently a contradiction. you see, film can't be art plain and simple. it's a series of photographs with no sense of poetry or beauty. it's really just a Frankenstein of other superior mediums

>>82452250
>features social realism
oh fuck off

>>82454872
Film is inherently a realist medium, pleb. Read Bazin's "Ontology of the Photographic Image".

Literature also strives for social realism. Henry James stated that literature's goal was to fully depict reality.

>muh ealism
boy you are in a for a rude awakening when you go into Hume and Descartes after you have started with the Greeks obviously.

>>82454872
Cartoons aren't art, /a/. No matter how high of an undeserved pedestal you place them on.

>>82455026
it's truly an incredible feat that you read that plot summary after I exposed you earlier, babby.

Also.

>start with Greeks

name something good like Occitan poetry

Now that /lit/ has been btfo, let's steer back on course.

What was the first feature-length art film?

A film that exceeds 70 minutes, features social realism, isn't an adaptation, and emphasizes ideas and innovation in technique over standard plot progression?

>>82455394
You've already been proven that film and art in the same sentence is a contradiction. Film will never have an Iliad, Symposion, or Tragedies of Oedipus

>>82455544
>Film will never have an Iliad, Symposion, or Tragedies of Oedipus
Film will never have bare basic stories?

>>82455623
Yes, film will always be below basic. Only for retards like you

>152 posts
>16 unique IP's
Sure is samefag in here.

>>82455881
It's 17 you fucking tard

>>82455881
It's just one dude with legit bad autism, posing as people to debate with, and then people triggering him.

He started posting here like 1 month ago.

Film can be art because it preserves culture in visual terms. If I watch a film from 100 years ago, I'm watching those people interact in a way I couldn't otherwise.

>>82456188
Documentation does not equal art, you fucking pleb. Maybe you should learn what art was before you started this stupid fucking thread.

>>82456146
It's hard not to notice.

>>82456146
>He started posting here like 1 month ago.
I've been here for years.

>>82456243
Then what is art then

>>82456284
>Then what is art then
Definitely not film

>>82456312
Then instead of asking what the first art film was, I should ask what makes film art in the next thread?

>>82456370
>I should ask what makes film art
'Sup Reddit

>>82456370
Does it matter? You're just going to be arguing with yourself.

Birth of a nation

>>82456453
>17 IP's
>arguing with self

>>82456542
That has already been stated several times. But I'll indulge you. How did Birth of a Nation make film art? And I need an academic citation as well.

>>82456542
What makes film its own artistic medium separate from photography, literature, music, and theater?

I'll need an academic citation for this as well.

>>82456573
>17 posters in a 166 reply thread
>implying anyone else here except you gives enough fucks to stay in a thread for hours pretending to be an Internet tough guy

File: olympia.webm (3MB, 417x319px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 417x319px

>>82447378
Olympia?

>>82455394
Why is social realism a requirement?

>>82447378
i LOVE mega autist
t. slept

>>82457031
Namefagging is cancer.

>>82456931
When did cartoons become art

>>82457140
When did film become art?

>>82457140
Fake megaautist.

>>82457289
>when did film become art
That's the question that OP is asking.

>>82457323
it's not though. never was and never will be

>>82456855
There were already hundreds of documentaries before Olympia. nd according to this poster >>82456243 documentation cannot be art.

Why can't it be an adaptation? What is the original book was shit?

>>82457625
Nobody picks a shit book to adapt unless your intentions were to extremely change the source material to the point of nonrecognizability. Which, in that case, wouldn't really be an adaptation. Regardless, the written text will always be a fundamentally superior medium

>>82457746
Why is it a superior medium?

>>82457782
The written word is naturally superior because you can demonstrate the most extraneous of minute subtleties

>>82457928
A picture's worth a thousand words

>>82457970
Photography is also superior to film, and film is a byproduct of photography.

>>82458052
So film is better than literature then

>>82458085
No, film is a hodgepodge of other superior mediums. With its combinative quality, it cancels out any possibly of it being its own separate medium. Film is counterfeit art, a commercial medium for only the lowest of bottomfeeders.

>>82458166
*tips fedora

>>82458208
>*tips fedora
'Sup Reddit

>>82458245
>capitalizing reddit
'sup reddit

I still haven't received an answer /tv/.
I will post this thread every day until I get an answer.
What makes film its own separate artistic medium?

>>82458463
Is this really the point of this thread? Why is this question important to you? Do you not like films?

>>82458463
film can't be art. it's a commercial populist medium.

>>82458568
I require a thorough answer from the designated Television & Film board.

>>82458620
I'm wondering why you think it's a question worth asking.

>>82458620
you got your answer bitch. flickies are for aspies

File: 1477361515310.jpg (384KB, 725x408px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 725x408px

this is the only film that can be considered art

>>82458667
I require an answer from the designated Television&Film board because this anon >>82458678 >>82458577 believes otherwise.

>>82458769
It can't do anything better than which could be done in the theater or on the written word.

>>82458769
>muh realism
boy you are in a for a rude awakening when you go into Hume and Descartes after you have started with the Greeks obviously.

>>82458804
So you don't even care about the answer, you are just upset that somebody else doesn't think film is art and you want us (members of the designated Television&Film board) to argue against somebody who isn't even you?

I just want to make sure I understand your position.

>>82456855
Every shot I've seen of Olympia looks like fucking kino, is it worth watching?

Film stopped being art once they added sound 2bh

>>82458935
what do you think fuking nigger
>>82458895
autistic to copy my post desu

>>82458899
>you are just upset that somebody else doesn't think film is art
No, the question is a topic for a thread pertaining to Television & Film.

>>82458991
go watch your flickies aspie. tell your mom to change your diaper too bitch

>>82458954
Why does it have to be social realism?

>>82458991
I get that it's pertaining to film. But it's hard to argue against it unless I know why you're trying to make the argument in the first place. What are your specific arguments against film as art? Do you not have any? Do you want me to engage with the other anon who thinks that film can't be art because it's "a commercial populist medium?"

I'm just trying to understand what exactly you want from me

>>82459087
Yes engage with the other anon and deliver your supposed defense of film as a separate artistic medium

>>82458895
>still pushing dead white dudes

stopped reading there lmao

>>82459145
its not. film is lowbrow trite shite. get better taste in mediums aspie. clean the drool from your face.

>>82459145
No.

>>82459181
I never said I believed film was art let alone the highest form of art. Quote accurately next time.

>>82459239
Well then you are useless. This thread will be posted every day until an answer is delivered.

>>82459239
It took you 3 minutes to write that.

yall got shit backwards as fuck desu

film, broken down to its core components, is the most transcendent of all art forms/mediums
problem is that it all went in the wrong direction with television, hollywood etc

now its just theater with explosions

>>82459309
>>82459357
clean the drool off your face aspie

>>82459367
>film, broken down to its core components, is the most transcendent of all art forms/mediums
'Sup Reddit

>>82459367
>film, broken down to its core components
and all those components are superior art forms. film is hodgepodge counterfeit art.

>>82458895
>started with the Greeks
Do you hunt with primitive weapons and cook your game over open fires as well?

>>82459441
ebin
>>82459487
nah my dude, its the dream made real

>>82459367
wow just wow. I cant believe you actually think that. stick to cunny threads, /tv/. leave art discussion to actual art boards.

>>82458954
>>82459492

>>82459492
el oeh lol xDDD so wittrty xd

>this autist has been samefagging every minute for 6 and a half hours
Is there anybody on /tv/ with more dedication?

>>82459648
>xD
'Sup Reddit

>>82459668
>what is an argument
This thread and multiple threads each day will stay up every day until an answer is delivered.

>>82459711
fucking man :DD learned ned world word today :D rebibit REDDIt edit damn enw wrold SUP SUP

>>82459648
Ouch. I concede. Now go read your Greek homos and keep pretending it is of any relevance.

>>82459754
what do you even want faggot?

>>82459767
>:D
'Sup Reddit

>>82459791
The OP question needs to be answered.

File: blog_crazy_laugh.jpg (19KB, 320x256px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 320x256px

>A film that exceeds 70 minutes, features social realism, isn't an adaptation, and emphasizes ideas and innovation in technique over standard plot progression?

>>82459559
no offense but i dont think ur quite on my lvl
gotta go now,fun talking to u tho

ps unless ur perception/idea of ~art~ is informed by marxist analysis
it aint worth shit :-)

>>82459828
ayy fucking LOL he said agian fucking mad hatter the mad man he is saying the R-word like a boss bauss straight

File: 1493154375509.jpg (17KB, 187x204px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 187x204px

>>82459905
>>82459905
>>ps unless ur perception/idea of ~art~ is informed by marxist analysis
>it aint worth shit :-)

found the degenerate kike

>>82459905
film cannot be Marxist. it is inherently a commercial populist butchering of other superior mediums.

>>82459918
>the R-word
'Sup Reddit

>>82459993
>film cannot be Marxist
lMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooo

>>82460035
>lMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooo
'Sup Reddit

>>82460147
hiya 4chan
wus poppin

>>82460264
Time for you to go back, reddit.

>>82458052
Could you explain why photography is a superior medium to film

Megaautist, it's been 7 hours give it up.

>>82460588
Because a photograph is naturally art. Film is similar to radio plays in that they are required to lean on the weight of superior mediums in order to stand on their own.

>>82460606
Explain why film is its own artistic medium separate from theater, dance, music, and literature.

This anon >>82459239 >>82458899 clearly didn't have the gumption to answer and thusly departed

>26 posters
This is how pedo autist spends his Saturdays

>>82460721
By this argument painting is superior to photography, as visual composition was already refined prior to cameras. This would make photography the shadow of a painting.

>>82460851
No. The radio play requires play. Film requires photograph. Photograph does not require paint.

>>82447378
>A film that exceeds 70 minutes
What is your rationale for this restriction?

>>82460961
>Photograph does not require paint.
Photograph requires chemical process, so why can't I argue that lithography is more pure?

>>82461007
You can argue whatever you want, but you won't change that film is a shit-tier medium for mass appeal.

>>82460979
That is bare-minimum for what constitutes feature-length. Though, it ought to be exceeding 80 minutes.

>>82461123
>That is bare-minimum for what constitutes feature-length.
citation needed

This thread will be posted multiple times every day unitl you can answer the question /tv/.

What makes film its own artistic medium separate from theater, dance, music, and photography, lithography, and literature?

>>82461179
The 45 minute joints you see at festivals are still called short film, Jimmy.

>>82460721
>naturally art
I agree that photography is art, but what do you mean by "naturally"?

>>82460851
Photography is not the shadow of painting. A photograph uses the authority of reality to convey a conceptual meaning, a meaning that hinges on the recognition of reality. Paintings are the likeness of a mental concept; the artist creates an image that is filtered and shaped by his own experiences, essentially creating the most effective aspect possible within the resources of the medium and his perspective.
>The process by which we understand an abstract, graphic image is almost directly opposite to that by which we understand a photograph. In the first case, the aspect leads us to meaning; in the second case the understanding that results from recognition is the key to our evaluation of the aspect.
- Maya Deren

File: 16 taste in film starter pack.jpg (288KB, 1952x1744px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 1952x1744px

>>82461391
>Maya Deren
next time quote somebody good, r/truefilmbabby

>>82461391
>I agree that photography is art
photography is a shit """art"""" compared to lithography

>>82461334
>The 45 minute joints you see at festivals are still called short film
by what definition?

>>82461492
>>82461579
I love having productive conversations like this on the internet, thanks friends

>>82461597
Screen Actors Guild. Keep rotting your brain watching joints, Jimmy.

>>82461701
>Screen Actors Guild
Academy still says 40+ for feature length

>>82461759
>actually giving a fuck about the oscars
bet you love moonnigger and spotlight too, cuck.

>>82461759
Most feature films are between 70 and 210 minutes long. You're not going to watch a 45 minute joint in theaters, Jimmy.

>>82449990
Rocky

>>82461759
You're only going to find those 45 minute joints on KG and youtube so you can pad your letterboxd list

>>82461884
>Italian beating nigger in boxing
>realistic

>>82449990
Jackass 3D

>>82453736
>you can accomplish the same effect through photography
You really can't, that's the point.

>>82462217
>adaptation of a tv show
fuck off white trash

>>82462251
>no new IP's
It took you 4 hours to write that response. Should've came up with a better one.

The Exterminating Angel

>>82462251
>doesn't even know what Warhol's empire is
should've just said that.

>>82462301
>wannabe Salvador dali
You can accomplish the same through theater and photography

File: 1481119787525.jpg (57KB, 400x533px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 400x533px

>>82454674
>there is no contemplation of the beauty and eternal truth in *film*
>A kinkade painting or a dan brown novel has more artistic value than a Tarkovsky film.

>>82462402
wait, why is theatre better than film again?

>>82462301
>Bunuel
Name somebody good next time, criterionbabby

The General

>>82462463
>>82453338

>>82462456
anything is better than Tarko/v/sky

>>82462545
>slapstick comedy
Name something good next time, genrebabby

holy shit I posted at 8 in the morning

I come back and this autist is still samefagging. it's 280 posts and only bumped up from 4 posters to 30

he's been posting every minute arguing with himself for nearly 8 hours

>>82462602
>Theater by the way of its nature is already more highbrow than steril, dead images played at 23 fps. It is truly one of the few artforms that can mimick (sic) a human and answer "who" he was.
>It is truly one of the few artforms that can mimick (sic) a human and answer "who" he was

You're going to have to elaborate on this, or reword it. I have no idea what you mean.

>>82462711
>>82462748
That's funny because you returned after 8 hours without an answer for the OP. Meanwhile while you were gone, a new question has been developed. I was mistaken in asking when film became art because film isn't art.

>>82462800
Ask that poster to reelaborate. He's the first one in the thread that said film couldn't be art. He's probably left by now, but if he's a moderate user of /tv/ he'll see this thread since it will be posted multiple times every day for eternity until a well-argued answer is delivered with citations.

>>82456819
It is separate from theater as it is not "living", the singular film as an art form is unchanging and eternal, whereas the singular play changes with each performance and production

It is separate from photography as it can be used to demonstrate movement. Please for the love of god, do not be obtuse and use Muybridge as a refutation.

It is separate from music and literature as it incorporates the visual sense.

While these defining factors may be too technical for what you were looking for, they can be used to create unique artistic approaches to old subjects.

I don't need a citation for common sense.

Sunrise

Wild and Woolly

>>82463060
>melodrama
Say something good next time, genrebabby

>>82462931
If you're willing to take his statements as face-value truth (without citation, elaboration, and argument), why not take my statements as face-value truth?

Film is high art.

There you go, I've offered as much to answer your question as he did.

>>82463115
>western
Say something good next time, genrebabby

Germinal; or, The Toll of Labor

>>82461492
>Watching Brakhage film in 144p on Youtube
Guilty

>>82463137
He made a convincing argument towards my OP question. Film is actually lowbrow populist commercialism. Art film would be a contradiction.

>not watching films on nitrate

>>82463167
>adaptation
Adaptations will never be true cinema for they are always in the shadow of the superior medium being extracted from whether it be theater or literature

>>82462363
How would you re-create Empire only using photography?

>>82463234
I'm surprised you think it was convincing when you couldn't even elaborate on it or reword it. I'm not sure you understood it at all.

>>82463272
>watching flicks at all
consume actual art, plebeian.

Why do you do this megaautist? What's the end goal?
Nobody on 4chan wants to listen to you or is even worth convincing. All this energy you spend arguing with strangers online could be better spent having productive discussions with people in your own area's film community, writing essays or books on film, contributing to a publication on film, etc.
You have strong convictions and a good basis for your arguments, use this in a more fulfilling way. What you are doing is not productive. You're wasting your time.

Christus

>>82463309
You clearly incapable of understanding his argument. And if you can't even surpass basic comprehension, you're useless to the thread.

>>82463299
It's still image retard.

The False Faces

>>82463158
>>82463123
Say an actual argument faggotbaby

>>82463418
I already admitted I don't understand the argument, which is why I was hoping you could help. You seem to be accusing me of what I'm accusing you of, after I've already admitted the thing you're accusing me of.

I can only assume at this point that you're just mentally deranged.

>>82463418
The film actually is not a still image. The subject is relatively still, however the image does change over the course of its 8 hour runtime.
Furthermore, you cannot capture the actual concept of Empire with a photograph. That destroys the films entire thesis.

>>82463037
>Please for the love of god, do not be obtuse and use Muybridge as a refutation
You already answered your question, anti-art pleb.

>>82463341
The goal is for someone to answer the OP. Go back to kindergarten so you can learn basic comprehension.

>>82463349
>>82463437
Where are your academic citations, tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum?

>>82463527
>actually considering genreshit art
I don't have to say shit, you already said it all, aspie.

>>82463624
>That destroys the films entire thesis.
Film is not a medium to make arguments. There's already a superior medium for that. It's called the written word.

>>82463634
>The goal is for someone to answer the OP
But you already know the answer. Why even ask anons on 4chan a question like that? Why argue on 4chan for hours on end? Is your time really that worthless?

>>82463788
The goal is for somebody to answer the OP.

How many times did you flunk kindergarten if you can't even comprehend a simple 9-word sentence

>>82463634
>You already answered your question
Funny, because I didn't ask one.
Muybridge's photographs do not come close to capturing movement as it is perceived by the human eye. That's plainly obvious by just looking at his stills versus watching them as a compiled film.

Thread's about to die. We'll be picking it up in the next thread.

This thread will be posted multiple times every day unitl you can answer the question /tv/.

What makes film its own artistic medium separate from theater, dance, music, and photography, lithography, and literature?

>>82464034
sup Rëddit

>>82464034
Film is the only medium capable of capturing movement.

Where's my cookie?

>>82464029
>an experiment to capture motion photography from 1878 doesn't hold up to the perception of movement from the human eye today
you're retarded. if you performed the same experiment with the means of today with more higher resolution photographs and showed them in succession rapidly, you would have something superior to film.

>>82464249
>you would have something superior to film.
Actually, you would have Film, you FUCKing retard.

>>82464226
You can do the same with multiple photographs.

>>82464226
>wut r video games
we all know that video games are the superior medium anyway

>>82464349
Videogames are rendered reality.
Sega CD games are the only true art

>>82464293
No, you would have motion photography retard. Learn about other actual artistic mediums.

>>82464349
>>82464386
Interactive television games cannot be art. Foosball is not art.

>Posters: 33

File: kinesthetic videoexpression vs interactive experience 2-min.png (2MB, 4744x3888px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4744x3888px

>>82464386
>>82464349
>videogames
Use the right term

>>82464505
>what is an argument
also 34 users btw. keep up retard

megaautist really just argued with himself for 9 hours straight

>>82464684
>34 IP's
Next time, read before you speak. You might not make yourself look like a clown.

>>82464761
you just made yourself look like the biggest clown on this site

>>82464524
I prefer kino

>>82464840
>kino
Are you capable of naming the first art film and what constitutes film as a separate artistic medium from photography, lithography, painting, literature, theatre, dance, and music?

>>82464914
im not reading all that. fuck off autist

>>82464946
That's 11 times in the same thread. New record, /tv/.

I'm pretty hyped for the next thread OP

See you next time

>>82447378

Eisenstein's Strike

File: Kubrick bashes Eisenstein soviet propoganda flicks.png (80KB, 949x629px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 949x629px

>>82465093
Nope, try again.

Cute brick :3

Actually don't try again because you didn't even add academic citations the first time. You'll only fail. And learn the basic tenets of art. Propoganda can't be art.