REDDIT WAY OF WATCHING FILMS >"plot" >caring

and waifus

>>84741541
/thread

>>84741496
the tendency to compare 4chan and reddit is the most reddit thing of all

Patrician

>reads IMDB trivias about movie while watching movie
>sees a cool scene, pauses, then goes to IMDB message boards (RIP) to see if anyone else is talking about it
>sees cool scene immediately makes /tv/ thread about it >KINO
>sees qt.patootie from movie, pause, google images, "[ACTRESS NAME] NUDE"
>has 40 mins left from movie
>shut pc off because its 2 or 4 am in the morning and tired af
>repeat cycle tomorrow

>>84741496
You can see right in his eyes theres a complete disconnect with everything...he always has the same expression in every pic i seen of him.
irl i meet a faggot just like him when i was i kid, i assume he has killed someone by now.

>>84741496
A true patrician can learn everything he needs to about a film from the poster and wikipedia page. Watching films is for brainlets.

>>84741496
I actually agree funnily enough. My motto is

>you enjoy the film
>it was a good movie to you
>you didn't enjoy it
>it wasn't a good film to you

I'm tired of this "objectively these are the best films around"

>>84741496
This picture made me laugh so hard, thank you.

>Dr. Chad, I'm Elliot
>you don't get to bring girls
What did he mean?

File: Courtney-Eaton-Feet-1795608.jpg (1006KB, 1912x792px) Image search: [Google]

1006KB, 1912x792px

Patrician:

>Sees a cute actress in film
>Pull out phone and search for "[actress name] feet"
>Click on Wikifeet and look at the first few pics
>If her feet are sexual, then you like her character
>If not, you hope she gets killed off/loses/goes away

>>84741972
take note you plebs

>>84741972
this is the only correct way to watch films in the spirit of /tv/, nobody else should even try

>>84741648
The nude one is so spot on

>>84741972
This is correct. I remember when I first looked up Kate Beckinsale on wikifeet

>>84741972
If you're a sole boy google "celebrity feet in the post dot com"

>>84741762
This. I remember when I used to adhere to what the general public dictated as the objectively best films. Always felt conflicted.

>>84741496
OP is written like bait, but I agree. "This movie has a plothole, therefore it's bad" has always seemed an extremely stupid argument to me.

>>84741496
I agree with you, but it's alright if plotholes bother you. If there are plotholes in the movie then it's the writer's fault for breaking your submersion. But it is kinda plebby to go all autist about them. A lot of "redditors" will start just pointing out things that are convenient for the characters in movies. Things workin out or being convenient for the characters aren't usually flaws.

>>84741648
This.

If you judge bvs or man of steel by either of these standards they still stuck

>>84742178
I'd love to service Kate's soles. I bet her soles are really demanding, too

File: baron trump sad.jpg (349KB, 1961x1067px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 1961x1067px

>>84741648
>has 40 mins left from movie
>shut pc off because its 2 or 4 am in the morning and tired af

Everytime.

>>84741972
>Tfw u look up a feet and that feet is sexier than your gf's feet.

File: 1489085877822.jpg (92KB, 638x479px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 638x479px

HOW TO SPOT A PLEB 101

>only able to discuss literal plot points and the logical order of the narrative of a film
>every film has a singular universal "deep meaning" which you have to "get" to understand it
>"The writing is the most important filmmaking element!"
>thinks that empty pretty pictures means "good cinematography"
>"I don't find this part of the narrative plausible or realistic, therefore the movie is SHIT!"
>treating a film like a puzzle which you have to put together in a certain kind of way to get it
>a film is either utter dogshit or a masterpiece, there is no inbetween
>"Who cares about editing, framing and composition sound and whatnot if the story isn't great."
>considers heavy use of direct symbolism as a positive factor
>using "boring" and "nothing happens" as arguments ever

>>84741496
It depends on the movie. If a movie is built around plot and twists and those fail, then it's a shitty movie. There isn't a right formula to appreciate a movie, because movies can be very different.

>>84741648
>being tired at 2am

>>84742762
This is actually a good post. The last point is especially true. They end up arguing that there was no plot, even there clearly was a plot.

>>84741972
i guess i'm a pleb

>>84741972
>>84742059
>>84742110
>>84742178
>>84742208
>>84742713
REDDIT GOLD!

>>84742649
This image is so beyond amusing... something about it makes me feel good.

File: Buff.jpg (35KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 1024x576px

>>84742762
This is exactly why they get Lynched EVERY TIME

>>84741648
hits home senpai

File: 1480157536055.jpg (218KB, 1176x1116px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 1176x1116px

Can you name a single movie that normies actually DO understand? Protip: I don't think you can.

Have you ever tried watching a movie with a normie? I don't know if it's hormonal or something, but their minds are literally unable to focus on anything.

Have you ever known a normie that had a deep and varied appreciation for any art? Digging around obscure music genres or old filmographies, just for the sake of it and love of the medium, not for potential social status and superficial validation?

When a cinephile watches a movie, he reflects on the themes and subtext, deconstruct the mise en scène and cinematography in order to analyze how the director's choices affect the mood and characters arcs, question the ethos it proposes about its subject matters, judge its authenticity, come up with a list of intertextual references that deepen his understanding, examine the narrative structure as if he were in the writer's head to get his creative process and where he's headed, all this while sensorially appreciating the aesthetics, marveling at the layers in dialogues and noticing many odd details, pondering how this film overall fits into its auteur's oeuvre, observing what it does similarly and what it does differently... as well as its place in film history, among many other active ways of studying and appreciating art... meanwhile normies can barely follow the plot.

File: bf0db28b.gif~c200.gif (339KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 200x200px

>>84742762
>>84744138

>>84741648
>he can still get turned by nude women and hasn't been ravaged by more than a decade of despicable fetish pornography that he needs at the very least unsimulated bestiality rape to even get a semi
Psshh

>>84742259
Damn. I was expecting hostile responses. Nice to see someone agrees. I'm tired of watching movies and liking movies for the sake of liking them.

>watch movie
>immediately make thread about it
>immediately watch every popular review about it

>>84741618
that's because both users aren't mutually exclusive

dude ironic reddit versus 4chan mentality lmao

dude ironic footfag lust lmao

>>84744848
but that's mostly true for garbage boards like this and /pol/ and /v/, the rest of the site it isn't that big of a thing. you're just literally being confronted with the majority of the redditors on 4chan by being on this board.

>>84742762
so basically Red Letter Media?

>>84744704
Plot twist: everyone else ignored your post because you and that other guy are major league pleberinos
Objectivity is an objective fact

>>84745006
>Forcing yourself to enjoy movies because some film school ""graduate"" tells you it's good

For real though, the "dude plotholes lmao" nitpick style of review that reddit and normies love drives me up a wall.

>>84741496
>OP pic
Was Elliott Rodger initiated?

>>84744878
dude dude lmao lmao

>>84745152
Keep believing that's different from
>Convincing yourself everyone else is only pretending to enjoy it for social cred, it's not that I've been pleb filtered, I'm actually smarter than them!

>>84745344
>Strawmanning this hard
Something doesn't become enjoyable just because it's well made

>>84741496

He has to explain where Baby Driver gets his sunglasses. This is reddit tier "I need to know what was not shown despite it not being important" pandering

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/baby-driver-edgar-wright-baby-got-all-sunglasses-1019291

File: 1486512183871.jpg (60KB, 321x322px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 321x322px

>>84745435
It does if you aren't a pleb

>>84745492
Damn I'm not even that guy but you are a fucking retard. I bet your the guy that tends to like every single movie in those pictures people post of the "best movies of all time".

File: inception_blu-ray_1.jpg (74KB, 798x333px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 798x333px

>>84741496
Script heavy means are the definitive way of making films for idiots. They are 100% incapable of understanding any idea that isn't explicitly explained to them. Plebeians are heavily frustrated by lack of explanataion; abstraction and absurdity is notably bane to them. The pleb notices special effects more than rhythm, color palette, and the visually contoured patterns of a scene.

File: alone.jpg (45KB, 525x394px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 525x394px

>fun
>kino
>comfy
>comfykino
>this movie is ___ as fuck
>nothing happens

>>84745730
>t. film student

Just the enjoy the movie retard

File: 1499478491128.jpg (34KB, 500x464px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 500x464px

Elliot Rodger

>>84741648
>pause, google images, "[ACTRESS NAME] NUDE"
All caps is essential

>>84744878
Footlove is inherently honest and moral. It can't be ironic.

>>84742762
And people fall into those traps because filmmakers play into them.
Chris Nolan has to make his "puzzle" films because of his autistic brother's scripts. Tarantino drops those epic references for "film buffs". The clueless make films for morons.