Thoughts on Béla Tarr's films?

Turin Horse was good

>>84218419
not really

>>84217350
I've only seen Damnation and Werckmeister Harmonies. I loved Damnation, but Werckmeister Harmonies wasn't as amazing as I expected. I think people on this board hyped it up to the point where I expected it to be 10/10

>>84219693
my problem with stalker. I think everything i had heard of it majorly impacted my viewing of it and i left feeling nothing.

they're really, really good
but i mainly appreciate them as an in to the literature of laszlo krasznahorkai, who is really, really great

>>84219972
Thomas Bernhard > Laszlo Krasznahorkai

>>84220275
what's bernhard's best? i'm eager to read him

>>84219939
That's a shame. I loved Stalker.

His early films were good.
The later masturbatory pseudo-intellectual movies about nothing are shit.
>muh 10 minute long take of a chair
>so deep

>>84217350
So what films of his are you supposed to watch? Just Damnation, WH, Satantango, and Turin Horse? Is there anything else worth watching?

>>84219939
Your problem is you're a pleb who's unable to appreciate art. Thinking a film is worthwhile because it makes you "feel" something is akin to thinking a film is good because you liked it, and vice versa (that is thinking a film is bad because you didn't like it).

>>84220301
Amras imho but start with the loser or frost
btw I was shitposting they're both good

>>84220350
those films are already fucking great
man from london is worth watching too though even though it's not krasz
and i guess his earlier films if you like? i hear he adapted macbeth, i bet that's interesting

>>84220350
Muhamed pity you'll never watch it because it was shown exclusively here :^)

>>84220333
you're overthinking things
his movies aren't pseudo-intellectual they are just simple and raw
then people who want to be smart either make them out to be grand philosophical statements or criticize them for being pretentious

>>84220401
>thinking a film is good because you liked it, and vice versa (that is thinking a film is bad because you didn't like it)

this is exactly true in my case

>>84220401
>Thinking a film is worthwhile because it makes you "feel" something is akin to thinking a film is good because you liked it
He never said it wasn't worthwhile or that it was bad. Stop being a faggot.

>>84220350
well he doesn't have very many and he's retired so just watch all of them, i'd say start with werckmesiter harmonies or damnation and then go from there, satantango is great but you'll need to set aside some time for it

File: 1346921411374.jpg (94KB, 700x413px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 700x413px

>mfw all these anons have actually seen Bela Tarr films

I thought this was supposed to be /capeshit&waifu/?

>>84220471
>you'll never watch it because it was shown exclusively here
Well at least my country isn't super poor.

>>84220535
>i left felt nothing
Suggests the films worth is based on the posters own inherent emotional response. It says nothing about the film itself. You're the retarded faggot here.

>>84220627
I've only seen 2: Turin Horse, and Werckmeister Harmonies.

>>84220401
It was objectively good. I just didn't feel anything when watching it. The only true way to judge art is how it manipulates your emotions. You are the pleb.

>>84220401
no shit if you didn't like it it's bad, for you of course. I have a feeling your opinions on films are very similar to that of rotten tomatoes, sadly.

>>84220635
Kek

>>84220635
Netherlands is n. 15 richest country in the world

>>84220825
>no shit if you didn't like it it's bad, for you of course
Wrong. This is a baseless critique, an inherent emotional response at best if your unable to articulate in detail a film's deficiencies, and thus more so a critique of yourself than of any given film. A film exists on its own, and you watching it and labelling it "bad" or "good is in fact only relevant in your consciousness; if you're not aware of your biases and cannot remove yourself from unbiased critique, you have no place judging film. It's exactly the same as saying a given film is "boring", as if such blanket statement has any basis, as if suggesting that a director and film have to pander to your and the audiences arbitrary ideals of not-boring to have a film received well. It completely reduces the role of the auteur.
>I have a feeling your opinions on films are very similar to that of rotten tomatoes
Baseless strawman.

what was the god damn whale supposed to represent? what was the significance of his uncle going to look at it other than his nephew told him to.

>>84220983
Adjusted for inflation of course.

>>84220762
>It says nothing about the film itself.
Yeah, that's the point you dumb idiot. He was just saying how he felt. He didn't criticize the film at all. He didn't say the film was bad because he didn't like it.

>>84220983
Ah, Netherlands. I assumed you were from Hungary. My bad. Have a great day.

>>84221079
yes, the director does have to pander to my ideals of a good film, because I'm the one watching it. obviously my opinion on it is subjective, you apparently want to ban all reviews I guess. and yes strawman I'm probably right anyway, you don't know how to watch movies, it's all about how you feel watching it, not trying to figure out why it got good reviews and what the director wants to "say"

>>84221405
You're a spewing imbecile. Stick to your Hollywood flicks and ideals of gross consumption for the sole basis of entertainment.

>>84221642
This