Cannes Winner

lol i heard shakespeare copied some old stories what a hack lmao

>>83291242
>Sofia Coppola just made history at Cannes!
>second woman to wing best director

Does anyone else hate this shit?

If its the second or third to do something it isnt really history making

>>83291554
it is for feminists :^)
>take THAT patriarchy! GIRL POWER

I honestly don't give a fuck because the only thing I was hoping for was that Haneke wouldn't win with his disgusting refugees-are-awesome and white europeans suck flick HAPPY END. fuck that film and fuck haneke.

>>83291242
Aaawwwww, is the little mans wee botty sore? Do you need a hug you pathetic excuse for a human being?

>>83291709
go back

>>83291242
>a feminist adaptation of Clint Eastwood’s 1971 film of the same name.
Yeah that's wrong.
They're based on the same book.

>>83291242
>but wait! there's MORE.
>she's literally the daughter of Francis Ford fucking Coppola.
holy fuck OP I didn't know this
PRAISE KEK

>>83291627
I haven't gotten around to seeing amour yet. I see people jerking off over it all over the place, is it any good?

File: gia_coppola.jpg (175KB, 1044x1044px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 1044x1044px

>>83291242
Fuck off Gia.

>>83291803
You need to be 18+ to post on this site.

>>83292020
shadilay my brothers!

If this is your first time hearing of Sofia Coppola you shouldn't be here. You're either 8 or don't know fuck all about film.

She's not new.

Now, this isn't history as she is the 2nd to do something. But, while I haven't seen it and I doubt you have either, I'm going to assume it's not "butchered" as you say it is. And Logan, a movie which did nothing but steal, gets blown periodically all over this fucking site.

Now, I realize Cannes is not /tv/, so there IS merit in being annoyed about it but let's be fucking Frank Coppola about this. shitposting about a movie you haven't and will never see winning a competition you've never and will never care about for ripping off another movie you've never and will never see is pretty much the most autistic thing in the world.

>>83291242
Who gives a shit?

Lost in Translation was good and Somewhere was competent. She gets a pass.

How do you get buttblasted over some blog in this day and age? Are you 12?

>>83292327
>>83292333
day of the rope when MAGA

>>83292561
the fuck does that mean, faggot?

>>83292840
dank meme fpbp

Sofia Coppola is very pretty.

>>83291242
Finally a woman is having some recognition in this world these days. Damn those privileged guys making movies and complaining muh go take a look at the kids of africa be glad you are here doing almost nothing for nothing man. Let us have this moment please. Let us all watch these beautiful women earning well deserved award and showing how it's so much more pleasant when we are stripped out of this arrogance and animalistic violence please. Lets rise above. This is what we should all be striving for. Makes me wanna go back to school coz theres still a lot for me to learn

>>83291242
WAIT TILL I TELL MY MOM

It isn't a remake, it's an adaptation of a book that had previously been filmed in 1971. Or are adaptations not seen as remotely creative now?

>>83294858
desu, adapting a book to make a movie is pretty pleb tier.

people should use the advantages and strenghts of the film medium. Just filming a story for the sake of it is pretty childish.
>gonna film muh touching story with a feminine tweest based on this GREAT BOOK xD

disgusting really. I respect people that try and make something interesting in the film format. People like Malick at least try to be creative in the field and use the medium for what it is, not just as a device to tell a story in visual form, but rather express something through audio/visuals, if you get what I mean.

>>83291242
How could you not hear about Sofia Coppola befor this? Lost in Translation is literally in every top 10 on /tv/.

>>83291242
>this is your brain on le red pill

How do we fix /pol/ problem?

>ywn be casting couched by Sofia

>>83295133
Fine, but all of her previous films save for her debut had original screenplays.

>>83295773
I can respect an original screenplay as well as when a director tries to convey something through the film medium.

Not saying she's a shit director, my rambling was just regarding the fact that while she only won for best director, the media is again trying to blow this shit up as the second coming or some shit as well as making it sound like she made a great movie when in fact it's just an adaptation (hence why I said butchered even if I didn't see the film yet), and an adaptation of a book is always going to be inferior no matter what.

Yes you can offer a new perspective on a known story, maybe even approach it differently than other people, but at the end of the day the book is superior and the movie form is only ever going to be a bastardization of it.

I would honestly immediately disqualify any film from the Cannes festival that isn't an original screenplay, but that's just my opinion and I'm sure others disagree with it.

>>83295133
>>83296036

What in the fuck are you talking about you deranged lunatic? Why on earth does adapting a book mean anything for the way the film will be made? What are you even saying? You sound so stupid.

Also if you seriously think that books are always superior then you must know very little about film.

>alt right pussies cry about literally anything
The fact that she made a film Eastwood had already made is genuinely brave.

>>83296421
you should go to bed since it's probably getting close to your bedtime, retard.
You don't understand what I'm talking about because you don't understand film and don't understand what it means to create something that plays to a medium's strenghts.

>Also if you seriously think that books are always superior then you must know very little about film.
I already realized you're retarded, no need to confirm it further by showing me you lack reading comprehension.

>>83296544
>You can't adapt a narrative from a book because it's uncinematic
Are you retarded?

>>83296596
seriously, just stop posting if this is what you've understood.

>>83296544

This is one of the funniest arguments I think I've ever read on this site desu.

Have you ever even read a book? Do you think that all books are just simple little stories that are intrinsically impossible to alter or adapt in a visually interesting way?

It doesn't sound like you read books or watch movies.

>>83296036
>an adaptation of a book is always going to be inferior no matter what.

^ that's you, being stupid

>first linklater then weir then wongy wong then delannoy then wenders then korine now eastwood

Why is she allowed to be so talentless?

>>83296644
>my rambling was just regarding the fact that while she only won for best director, the media is again trying to blow this shit up as the second coming or some shit as well as making it sound like she made a great movie when in fact it's just an adaptation (hence why I said butchered even if I didn't see the film yet), and an adaptation of a book is always going to be inferior no matter what.
This is a truly stupid opinion. Just so you know.

>>83296658
jesus christ no wonder this board has gone to shit if idiots like you post here everyday

File: 1491026003006.jpg (28KB, 504x398px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 504x398px

>>83296747
you are truly retarded, just so you know.
see? I can do it too.

>>83296768

literally lmaoing at your idiocy

"books are always better cause movies are different and are not books"

it's quite obvious you're just a panicked Trump supporter who can't handle a woman winning an award

>>83296804
Everyone in this thread is disagreeing with you. That should say something.

>>83296804
Don't reply to this guy -- he needs a movie to point out that he's a fucking moron, books just don't do it justice.

>>83296815
I'm going to try and explain it again to you since you're a bit slow.

an ADAPTATION of a book (what you see when someone turns a book into a screenplay) is never going to be better than the book itself. Why? Because in a movie you can only do so much and can only tackle certain aspects at the expense of limiting other ideas, characters or events in the book due to length.

In a book you can develop everything you want without as many constraints as in a movie (I'm sure you'll manage to misunderstand this too but whatever), and you can focus on many aspects due to the very nature of the medium.
you can develop all of the characters, describe all the events, create and resolve all conflicts.
whereas in a film adaptation you will have to choose what exactly you're going to tackle from the book.

Are you going to focus on a certain relationship between certain characters? Are you going to focus on showing and resolving one or two conflicts (if the book had more than one main conflict), and so on.

You can't do everything in the book because it will make the movie literally 10 hours long or more, I know it's hard for you to wrap your head around that.

I'm not saying books are superior to film, I'm saying that a movie adaptation of a book is going to be shit compared to the actual book. There are countless films you can see that prove my point.
>>83296909
>one samefagging retard or two braindead 15 year old morons with no reading comprehension disagree with me
>everyone
nice try my dude, maybe lay off the poptarts for a second and think about what I'm saying.

>>83297039
I don't understand why you're typing all that nonsense out. Everyone understands that elements of a novel are going to be lost in translation. That doesn't mean the film is going to be inferior.

>>83297039

Oh my god you are such a tasteless moron it is amazing.

If you think PLOT is the most significant aspect of books or films then you have a very superficial, rather pathetic understanding of both artforms.

There have been films that are far better than the books they were adapted from.

It really just sounds like you don't read or watch anything. Why you have deluded yourself into thinking that plot, characters, events, conflicts, etc are the most important aspects of either artform is just beyond informed understanding.

Was the movie good?

The cast seems dope

File: 1490543372443.gif (3MB, 320x272px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 320x272px

>>83297149
>I am mentally retarded - the post

>>83297039
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
You have autism my dude. You know Kubrick's films were mostly adaptions, right? I don't think anyone's lining up to praise the Barry Lyndon novel.

>>83297170

It's been receiving high praise.

>>83297189
>Literally resorting to a babby tactic you called someone else out on a few posts back.
See: >>83296804

since this is a woman director they probably aren't going to let men buy tickets to special screenings

>>83297189

There are many film adaptations that are better than the book. What does this do to your theory?

>>83297269

>crying because he can't go see one screening of a superhero movie made for children

>>83297289
name some and tell me how they are better.
while you're at it, tell me how an adaptation is better than an original screenplay i.e. an original film, which is what I was reeeing about in the first place until that faggot got triggered.

>>83297350
See:
>>83297191
I'm sure you wrote your thesis on Thackaray so I'm excited to hear your thoughts on why the novel is better.

>>83297269
>I can't enter a thread without bringing up capeshit

Pathetic

Best Director (That woman) and Jury Award (120rpm because homosexuals) were the worst awards this year.

Rest were pretty good and the Palm d'or was a fucking top kek and fuck you to the critics

>>83297350

You legitimately believe that a movie can't be better than a book it's based on?

Here are a few examples off the top of my head: The Last Picture Show, Eyes Wide Shut, The Godfather, No Country For Old Men, Goodfellas, Raging Bull, The Wolf of Wall Street, Don't Look Now, Rebecca

Why do you for some reason think that an original plot is such an amazing thing? Look at all of the horrible movies that have "original" screenplays.

Movies are not made good because of their plots or their dialog.

>>83297326
>one screening

give em an inch

>>83297402
>kubrick
my man, this doesn't disprove anything I've said.
I don't think that highly of Kubrick, just so we have that aspect cleared, but regarding his works.
I don't wanna get into Thackeray's shit, but I can give you some insight on clockwork orange.

the author of the book hated how kubrick interpreted the thing, and that's because kubrick decided on a certain aspect he wanted to develop and he developed it in his way and in his style.
basically, he took something from the book (he got inspired in a particular way by it) and approached it in his own way by utilising the film medium.

same could be said for barry lyndon and for 2001. it's not a 100% adaptation, no adaptations are (because it's also impossible).
so where do we stand on this? he go inspired by a piece of literature, either decided on certain parts of the book he liked that he adapted faithfully or observationally, or he simply took certain ideas and translated them to film.
what you're seeing on screen is not the book, it is someone's vision of certain passages, ideas or concepts in that book.

an original screenplay, written specifically to be made in film form, is far superior to any book adaptation.

>>83297620
>an original screenplay, written specifically to be made in film form, is far superior to any book adaptation.

this statement is in no way argued by the previous paragraphs

do you even know what you're saying anymore?

>>83292327
This. OP sound like tumblr faggot of altrights, You can smell the autism from here. It wasn't even top prize, just directing award.

>>83297620
>Let me ignore your example because I haven't read the book
>Here's some anecdote which hasn't mattered in literary philosophy since Death of the Author
>Adapting the book into a film means it's no longer an adaption of the book (fucking genius logic)

That about confirms it. You're retarded.

>>83291490
He was a hack. Politics and mass production has more to do with his popularity than his skill with ink and wit.

>>83297765
Yeah dude Shakespeare is terrible haha

>>83296036
>in fact it's just an adaptation
>disregard entire filmography of Kubrick
You have to be underage

wow those feminists are so stupid, amirite fellow gentlesirs?

>>83297753
>>83297794
I bet you faggots also enjoy such masterful works as avengers or other capeshit
this thread confirms it that nowadays book adaptations and capeshit have reached the rank of great works of art in the eyes of people.

/tv/ is dead
I legit imagine this is what it's like on reddit where you can't make fun of feminists or you get banned and you can't not love OMGKUBRIK or else people sperg out. downright sad tbqhwyfam

>>83297886
Ahahahahahaha you got shit on, nice bail out. Very graceful.

>>83297921
ahahahahahha

>>83297886

You are so sad. Thanks for never responding to this post >>83297463 which I'm sure you couldn't because you likely haven't read/seen half the things I mentioned.

Enjoy being dumb lad.

>>83297886
What a beautiful meltdown.

>>83297811
well they don't seem to learn from their mistakes

>>83298009
haha they're unenlightened sheeple unlike us gamers

>>83297996
I already responded to another poster asking pretty much the same thing. It's a shame none of you can read or understand concepts others than those inside your heads.
Good luck making it in life

>>83298032
>He doesn't realize what he said applies moreso to himself than anyone else.

File: 936.jpg (27KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 625x626px

>all these attempts to get /pol/ to bite

>>83298095
>/pol/ finally bites

>Stop adapting books

>>83298106 earned it :D

Hey guys its me Jorgen McRetard you can't actually adapt book btw because when you adapt a book it is no longer words per se because the medium of film is not a medium of words. So when you adapt a book you lose the book and get a film which is why a film will never be a book.

Don't try to debate me silly boys I'm far too smart. You probably watch capeshit anyway unlike me (who reads the superior comics).

>>83298025
No argument here

File: 1239657071852.jpg (7KB, 150x193px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 150x193px

>>83298181
>unlike me (who reads the superior comics).

Did they already award the Palme d'Or?

>>83291242
ya but shes hot so who cares

>>83298181

literally lmaoed

>>83295133
Are you literally this retarded?
Adapating a book has been done wonderfully times before

You just sound like full blown triggered /pol/ autist, pls end your life

>>83298225
Yes, Haneke won it again for his refugee film, he carefully strode on stage as no music played, dedicated it to Anne and George and after giving a speech saying how Western civilization is cancer shot himself on live TV

>>83298181
>>83297886
>You will never be this blown the fuck out

>>83298225

yes

The Square won

>>83291242
Lost in Translation = pleb

Somewhere = patrician kino

nuff said

>/tv/ defending book adaptations
what a time to be alive

>>83297811
Good one

>>83292333
>Lost in translation was good
So? unless you're implying she's the one who made it (hint: she wasn't, it's got daddy's prints all over it) i don't see your point

>>83298309
Nice

>complaining about SJWs when the president of the jury this year literally said political correctness is dictatorship and a film mocking the contemporary art world won the top prize

>>83298351

wat

Lost in Translation feels nothing like a FFC movie

>>83298291
Didn't Ostlund win it with his museum movie?

>>83298399
YOU DELETE THIS
OSTLUND IS LITERALLY HITLER

File: 1440536295480.png (2MB, 1916x969px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1916x969px

>>83291242
>feminist adaptation
Will this shit ever end.

>>83298332
Somewhere was really good but my god that ending is awful

>>83295701
>>83295596
>>83292327
>>83292020

>>83291709
all me

>>83298381
oh yes, I'm sure the movie is just pretending to be feminist bullshit

the reviews are pretty shit though just from looking at google
"It’s a great dramatic idea, except for the fact that there’s almost no drama to be found."
"Coppola, in attempting to elevate the material, doesn't seem to realize that "The Beguiled" is, and always was, a pulp psychodrama. Now it's pulp with the juice squeezed out of it."

>>83298590

91 is very high

https://criticsroundup.com/film/the-beguiled-coppola/

>>83298644
it has 76 on metacritic

File: 1495082352511.jpg (342KB, 1054x837px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 1054x837px

>>83296036
the original purpose of my post
>while she only won for best director, the media is again trying to blow this shit up as the second coming or some shit as well as making it sound like she made a great movie when in fact it's just an adaptation

my thoughts on an adaptation being allowed to compete with original screenplays at a festival that's supposed to showcase the best of the best in the filmmaking world. currently, the best of the best can be boiled down to whoever can be the bigger hack:
>I would honestly immediately disqualify any film from the Cannes festival that isn't an original screenplay
also
>that's just my opinion and I'm sure others disagree with it.

but then capeshit cucks got triggered
>>83296421
>>83296596
>>83296658
>>83296747
>>83296815
>>83296909
>>83297149
>>83297191
>>83297231
>>83297289
>>83297463
>>83297711
>>83297753
>>83297794
>>83297921
>>83297996
>>83298000
>>83298181
>>83298290
>>83298299

literally all they understood was:
>b-b-but m-muh kubrick was all about adaptatiuns! ur retarded, films r better den books!

it's ok to believe you've won an argument though, there's nothing wrong with you degenerats thinking that.
it's just sad that you are so contrarian that you legitimately disregard what I'm saying and focusing on being as retarded as humanly possible on a cambodgian matchstick forum.

stay pleb and continue to destroy this board with endless post about capeshit and garbage television and never actually discussing films or filmmaking as an artform.
>inb4 cucks get triggered again
>inb4 someone tries to argument that the board isn't shit and there's actual discussion happening on a daily basis
>inb4 LMAO BTFOD SO HARD BRUV xD xD xDDD

>>83298672

You can use whatever site you want but for me Critics Round Up is the far better source. The site's moderator is extremely discriminate in the reviewers that are used. It isn't just a grab bag full of randomness. The critics included on CRU are actual notable, quality reviewers.

Whatever site works best for you is the one to go with obviously but The Beguiled has been well received among critics who have a bit more prestige than the average mainstream critic.

>>83298731
Oh good lord he's back.

>>83298731

holy shit this guy is still going after claiming to bail and he still thinks he makes sense

this is officially one of the most kino meltdowns of all meltdowns

>>83291242
it's an adaptation not a remake (of the book as much as the film), and I can tell you haven't seen either, not least because the first wasn't directed by clint eastwood

>>83298741
>The Beguiled has been well received among critics who have a bit more prestige than the average mainstream critic.
Yes, because the "prestigious" critics aren't at all propaganda shills

>>83298731
Dude, people "discussed" with you. This is what they got in response:
>>83297886
Your argument literally doesn't make sense. You're saying book adaptions are bad films because books and films are different. This guy summed it up: >>83298181
Why are you shitting on /tv/ when you're the kind of poster (look at all the XD's and greentext and low-tier memes in your post) that makes it shit.
Get a clue.

>>83298805

I'm not sure what this means but if you need a justification to keep watching bad movies then go with whatever you need.

>>83298756
>>83298798
>inb4 cucks get triggered again
>inb4 LMAO BTFOD SO HARD BRUV xD xD xDDD
right on cue
>>83298829
>inb4 someone tries to argument that the board isn't shit and there's actual discussion happening on a daily basis
kek

>>83298866
Meltdown: the post.

Nice discussion, man. Some good arguments in there.

Why would someone's direction be unworthy of praise because the story is an adaptation?

>>83298731
>All this text
wew lad

>>83298912

Books are books. Movies are movies and therefore not books. Thus books are better than the movies adapted from them.

It's simple arithmetic bro!

File: 1491867138212.jpg (174KB, 669x429px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 669x429px

>>83298904
>attempting to have a discussion with literal retards
nah mate, I'm done trying to reason, I'll just sit back and enjoy my (((you)))'s from buttblasted teens thinking they've won an argument on the internet.

>>83298989
>/pol/ image
And there you have it, folks.

>>83298989
>B-but I w-won! Ignore that everyone is laughing at me ITT! Fucking teens! I-if you reply to this you're the one btfo btw so don't you d-dare reply!

>>83291709
https://youtu.be/th4Czv1j3F8

>>83298989
Why are you complaining about the state of /tv/ while simultaneously admitting that you're shitposting? Actually, now I understand the Trump paradox. Thanks anon.

I really want to fuck her desu. I'll bet she loves anal and can suck like an industrial vacuum.

>>83299469
Same desu and Gia too

>>83291242
How can knowledge this common be new to you? I'm actually impressed by how dense you are.

File: 2438.jpg (148KB, 1664x894px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 1664x894px

>>83291242
>so the Cannes winner is literally a "LOL I COPIED A MAN'S MOVIE AND WON SO STRONG SO BRAVE!"
are you retarded? Scorsese won 7 oscars for The Departed that is a remake of an Hong Kong movie
>she's literally the daughter of Francis Ford fucking Coppola.
Are you 12 maybe?
she's literally the daughter of Francis Ford fucking Coppola.
>The daughter of a famous director gets to make movies because of nepotism
that's how the world works kid
>This is what feminists are proud of in the year of our lord 1999 + 18
Take your shitty /pol/ ideology out of here
Get some taste in movies kid,you are still young
Don't fall for the racism meme

i love Sofia since Godfather 3(her interpretation was shit but i started liking her thanks to his father's last film in that trilogy)
she also has great taste in music

If Cannes literally didn't just end today, and this thread was posted any other time of the year, it would only get a few replies and some may actually be supporting autismo OP. There are still a few anons who actually know what they're talking about hanging out here, and they're tearing a miserable crossboarder newfag a second asshole. Bless this board around Cannes.

>>83295133
>desu
just kys
>adapting a book to make a movie is pretty pleb tier.
so you don't like Kubrick i suppose
>People like Malick at least try to be creative in the field and use the medium for what it is, not just as a device to tell a story in visual form, but rather express something through audio/visuals, if you get what I mean.
i understand what you mean but that's a different way of making cinema

>>83295701
i am so tired of the same 12 years old sperging their bedroom racism on this site

>>83296036
>an adaptation of a book is always going to be inferior no matter what.
this is so stupid

File: rat face.jpg (710KB, 1910x2135px) Image search: [Google]

710KB, 1910x2135px

>>83291242
She has a rat face, but I still find her attractive. I like women with pronounced noses. More importantly, she really is a great film maker.

>>83296504
>The fact that she made a film Eastwood had already made is genuinely brave.
Fucking this

>>83297146
>Everyone understands that elements of a novel are going to be lost in translation.
>are going to be lost in translation.
>lost in translation
If you did it on purpose you are a genius

>>83297350
Shining for example
the ending of the book ruins everything

>>83300697
>Simple word play is now considered to be genius.
We are truly living in the end times.

>>83292327
t. White knight.

Take a moment to realize that OP was criticizing Cannes, not the movie.

>>83301186
Nice try, OP.
>The daughter of a famous director gets to make movies because of nepotism and her best movie is literally a butchered rip-off of a man's movie.
Don't be a retardo.

>>83301186
love when some little faggot calls me a white knight. lets me know just how retarded the spectrum delves on here.

>tfw I unironically enjoyed Bling Ring

>>83291242
>but wait! there's MORE.
>she's literally the daughter of Francis Ford fucking Coppola.
OP literally how much of a fetus are you

>>83291242
>she's literally the daughter of Francis Ford fucking Coppola.
so this is the power of capeshit loving redditors posting on /tv/

>>83300118
This.

OP is retarded as fuck and probably underage, which is actually the same thing as "retarded" (not mentally sound enough).

Sofia Coppola is a "meh" director. I think the majority of film students can agree on that. I actually love Lost in Translation but I can separate my personal tastes from objective criticism, even though it IS in fact the best movie she made (note: I didn't watch The Beguiled yet and what I'm saying doesn't include this film).

The discussion about film x literature is one of the dumbest discussions in all history of art. Comparing two different art forms is ridiculously idiotic. There are just no limits to argue against or for any art form. I could say music is the best way to tell a narrative because it's short, concise and it sounds just like old oral storytelling, so music > film & literature!!!!!!!!!11111111

Anyway, if there's something I'm genuinely surprised though is that there is a thread about the Cannes Festival on /tv/. People here don't usually care about any other film that isn't in English or doesn't have a character with a mask on.

>>83303604
We had daily Cannes thread this past week, son

>>83303680
Well, I'm glad to read that. Is this board actually evolving?

>>83303723
No, there are always some people here who are actually interested in films but they just get drowned out by the latest BANE? or GOMBLE GUMPF threads

>>83291242
>so the Cannes winner is literally a "LOL I COPIED A MAN'S MOVIE AND WON SO STRONG SO BRAVE!"

What is The Departed?

File: ruben östlund.jpg (146KB, 1109x622px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1109x622px

APOLOGIZE

>>83300512
She isn't.

>>83291554
Tell that to the second man on the moon.

>>83291242
You haven't even seen the movie yet.

Fucking eh, /pol/, if you're going to let your ideology cover a blanket around you every time you're challenged by art then don't fucking watch it. But don't tell me it's shit when you haven't watched a frame just because it says something you don't rigidly agree with.

I liked Lost in Translation and Virgin Suicides. I also thought the Bling Ring had a little moxie. She's a good filmmaker. In this age where we've scraped the bottom of the barrel to remake everything, why not give her a shot to make a movie she wants?

Really, just fuck off /pol/ and let us talk about the faggy movies that play at the faggy French festivals in peace.

i thought this was a lexxxi lockhart thread :(

Coppola is a great director though, OP needs to chill out with the /pol/ bait.

I'm skeptical this is a "feminist" movie (it sounds more like an aesthetic, "chicks going crazy" movie - a tradition in itself). Just because some journalists want to read it as feminist (of course they do) doesn't mean it should be reduced to that. Coppola's work tends to be more aesthetic and apolitical.


Also, I'm really bored of these angry political commentaries on both sides. Yes, leftist commentary is fucking insufferable (I know), but these buttblasted, resentment-fueled tirades attacking anything remotely even related to women is pointless and retarded. You should allow life room to breathe, allow women to make cool art without needing to take some feminist or otherwise stance on it.

File: silence of the fams.jpg (18KB, 580x326px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 580x326px

>>83299012
kys
/pol/ is 4chan culture
>>83298731
>implying films aren't sometimes superior to the books they adapted
Take for example any film based on a Stephen King book. The man is very creative and comes up with great stories, but as a writer he's a total hack. He describes too much.
HOWEVER
his descriptive obsession makes his books great material to base a movie on.

File: reddit is down the hall and to the left.jpg (54KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 600x600px

>>83298731
>>83308043
also 2 things I forgot to say about your post
>reddit spacing
>[mundane activity] [asian country] forum
you have to go back

>>83308043
>/pol/ is 4chan culture
Says the guy who came over from /r/TheDonald about six months ago

>>83308083
>haha, hey guys
>i totally belong because i'm racist and voted trump, right?
>haha fuckin libtards
>reddit sucks, you must be from reddit!
>haha, i fit in, right guys?

>>83308143
>projecting
I came from stormfront, faggot.

>>83308043
>/pol/ is 4chan culture

I'd agree that it probably dominates across most of the boards, or at the very least you could say there's a strong weariness of the current form of leftism.

I feel kind of post-/pol/ by now though.

Like it was really relevant to reject SJW-ism, like post-structuralist theory and its identity politics, but I can remain wholly dismissive of the left, globalism, feminism, Marxism, etc, without it necessarily mean that I have to be consumed with thoughts about my dislike of it, or that this has to translate into feeling any active hate of anybody. I can find multiculturalism flawed (partly in that so-called diversity as the left pushes it actually is anti-diversity in that it demands blending and everyone adopting the same position), and yet not meaning I have to feel any hate towards blacks or Jews or whoever. It was fun to goad leftists with their boogeyman they kept railing against over the years, but in truth I don't hate anyone, and the whole fucking culture war flamewar thing is BORING by now.

File: Drumpf_good_goy.jpg (101KB, 737x647px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 737x647px

>>83308263
/pol/ isn't about hating and nor is white nationalism. Africa for Africans, Asia for Asians, White countries for everyone? That's bullshit. That's what white nationalism is about. You don't even have to be a supremacist.
>>83308224
I'm not a burger, I didn't vote for him. I would have done so if I was a burger though. And while he's far from perfect, he's been useful in shifting the overton window.

>>83308337
>/pol/ isn't about hating and nor is white nationalism. Africa for Africans, Asia for Asians, White countries for everyone? That's bullshit. That's what white nationalism is about. You don't even have to be a supremacist.

Sure. That's one idea out there and it's as reasonable as any other. But then there's threads like this, obviously baiting to stir up hateful feelings. If people want to argue the value of their (ethnic) culture I'm totally sympathetic to that - after all, even leftists do when it comes to indigenous peoples (non-white ones) or black culture etc.

I think it's perfectly fair for that argument to extend to everyone; yes, even European descent peoples.

But I think it's pretty crucial that any notion worth its salt needs to be able to be adopted without it necessarily being seething with hatred and poisonous ideas. After all, if you want a notion normalized again, which means that functional, family-types are to except it, then it needs to be the province of reasonable, kindly people, and implemented from a place of love and reasonableness. Otherwise, like the leftist side, it's just the rantings of the resentful and angry. Anger has its function sometimes, but it can't be the entire engine of a healthy society.

>>83308645
family-types are to *accept it

>>83291242
This is too retarded to be bait.

>>83308645
Of course, we can agree on that. I accept hatred as a reaction to the things that hurt our people, you could even say it's a violent manifestation of love. After all, a parasite can expect its host to love him, can he?

>>83308337
Europe for Europeans then by that logic sure, but then we can't just say America is for Euro-descent people because we've literally been here for only 400 years. Hell, Mexicans didn't even exist until about that timeframe too. The American experiment was "let's just let everyone ever go to that huge place where the natives are mostly dead and melt together and see what happens". America is globalism embodied, I don't understand why there's an arbitrary stopping point on when we stop the pot from melting.

>>83308903
Because it was founded as a white country. Because there was conquest. Then the retards fell for the jewish tricks and brought slaves. That's where everything started going downhill.
Too bad they killed Lincoln before he could send the negros back.

>>83309011
>Because it was founded as a white country. Because there was conquest.
By your logic, if black people and immigrants are taking over the country, it's a matter of conquest just as well.

>>83309011
Nowhere does it say that in the Constitution, faggot.

Your white Utopia is a pipe dream and Continentalism is a stupid idea for simple minded fucks like you who think people should be confined to artificial boundries to suffer because of some made up fear that they'll outperform you.

>>83309239
Yes, it is. Arguing that we should let them is the part I have a problem with. Would you say the redskins shouldn't have fought?

File: what are you doing.gif (497KB, 245x309px) Image search: [Google]

497KB, 245x309px

>Vincent Gallo on Sofia (and Francis Ford) Coppola:
>“Sofia Coppola likes any guy who has what she wants. If she wants to be a photographer she’ll fuck a photographer. If she wants to be a filmmaker, she’ll fuck a filmmaker. She’s a parasite just like her fat, pig father was.”

BASED GALLO

>>83291709
this is some entry level sweetie posting

File: 1481496284276.jpg (88KB, 399x613px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 399x613px

>>83309548
>muh constitution omitting it negates the historic context
>muh open borders
take a hike, kike
everyone has a right to a home, and a home without the owners having a say on who can come in and who can't isn't a home at all