Antonioni Discussion

>>85571978
No offense OP but you may be approaching it wrong. It's not about motivations based in logic, but feelings, passing fancies, moods and gestures. More about feeling than plot logistics. Like a dream or memory recalled. The trilogy does continue very much the same, but to great effect. Red Dessert as well is based in the headspace, raw, maudlin emotion.

>>85571978
>>85572048
It's called Red Desert.

>>85572131
Hey thanks bud

>>85572048
I suppose that ties into what I meant by "lacking morality". The film does seem to be examining the results of leaving that logic and succumbing to more shallow (or perhaps simple is a better adjective) attraction. However I still fail to understand why Claudia fell to these emotions as well. For so long she resists Sandro's advances and has a conscience. And it's clear by her forgiveness at the end that she truly cares and is looking for love. However, even once she gets with Sandro she never loses the guilt, and sees more and more as time goes on that he's shallow and kind of a dick playboy. So shy does she never leave? And again I just felt a lack of clarity for her falling in the first place. They're in the hotel room and she's so happy and in love, but I couldn't see how she got there after so much resistance and so little affection shown. And actually this part does make sense with your idea of passing moods, I understand that now. Sandro just does not seem like the type she would be interested in, and as a result, all of the movie that revolved around their dynamic failed to have an impact on me. I'll watch the rest of the trilogy, the idea does interest me, and maybe the others I will be able to understand/relate to a little better. L'Avventura just never really made me feel anything
>>85572131
lol yes a typo

Bumping with a continuance of my understanding. It seems like maybe Sandro is very specifically shallow and Claudia not, and therefor the whole point is the consequences of putting aside sense for a while and indulging in "passing fancies". But this seems to offer up quite the contradiction. Claudia never shakes her guilt and shame, nor does she approve of her friend's attention seeking affair with the artist. Yet after getting her heartbroken and facing the results of her "indulgence" she learns no lesson. She forgives Sandro, suggesting he was either not a passing fancy (which still fails to make sense to me as it seems the were specifically developed to be different types of lovers) or he still is and she failed to learn any lesson. What does this make the message of the film then? It certainly doesn't seem to condone shallow indulgences, yet Claudia makes no progress. Perhaps if she was floozy and more like Ana, with a similar disinterest in actual love as Sandro, the I could see the point being that the shallowness was a cycle and, yes, no lesson was learned. But Claudia was not like that, thus my continuing to be hung up on her character and actions.

Oh /tv/. You say stop complaining about bad threads and make your own, but in actuality it's true no one wants to discuss. Oh well I'll keep thinking out loud.

Perhaps I'm approaching it wrong. Let's assume Claudia is not feeling a passing fancy and instead is more pure. This would explain her forgiveness at the end, her hesitation all along, and would add a bit more emotion to the film. But it still doesn't explain to me why she would fall for the flippant Sandro. Or stay with him, as his true colors revealed themselves, long enough to forgive him. It seems no matter which way I approach, I just can't get in the head of Claudia

My problem with L'Avventura is not that "rich people problems are boring/unrelatable/whatever". I really enjoyed the setting, form, and even subjects of the film. However with this movie specifically, there is just too little clarity to find either intellectual or emotional payoff, or at least enough to really enjoy the whole experience. Here's hoping that Antonioni's other films are more clear to me, because I'd love to be moved by a director that is so clearly talented

Bump you capeshitters. I agree that people need to orchestrate an effort to push more discussion into the catalogue. It could even be only a few posters, but maybe if we put enough out there for long enough, it'll catch on with some others.

For the most part Antonioni is very widely loved. He's certainly extremely important in the devlopement of the medium, but it seems there are a number of people who he doesn't work for as well. Bergman called him an amateur and Tarkovsky described him as scared. I'm sure there are people that like all 3 directors, but I wonder if there are a couple schools of "cinematicism" and if in general people who do like one really don't care for the other.

Bumping until at least one other person on this board decides to discuss

>>85574603
I'll reply because I enjoy older movies and hate capeshit as much as you do. Unfortunately, I don't have much to discuss when it comes to Antonioni though. I find his films a chore to watch. They're interesting to think about once you're finished with them but it isn't necessarily fun to get to that point. The one thing I've taken from all the films of his that I've seen is that he's critical of the naivete of the bourgeoisie.

>>85574891
Interesting, that's how I felt too. I felt more reward thinking about it and analyzing afterwards then I did actually watching it, because parts of it did seem to drag. Are there other Italian directors you prefer?

>>85575048
I prefer most famed directors to Antonioni personally, he's not one of my favorites. Directors don't get much better than Fellini, but Rossellini, Visconti, and Bertolucci are really good too.

I don't feel like reading a block of text on Antonioni but he is a master, watch L'eclisse and La Notte and Red Desert OP

>>85575341
Yes that's the plan, sucks you don't want to read though, since I was hoping for discussion, not just recommendations.

Antonionini's films are different in logic since you have to think about what you are not seeing

>>85575316
There's two kind of people in the world: Fellini people and Antonioni people.

>>85573383
This is his most elusive film, rest is far easier. This is also his best tho.

>>85577109
ending of L'eclisse was pretty elusive and one of the most genuinely disturbing moments in classic film

File: monica_vitti.jpg (341KB, 677x950px) Image search: [Google]

341KB, 677x950px

monica a cute, CUTE!

File: 1499539328786.jpg (336KB, 1280x926px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 1280x926px

>>85577708
why do cuteposters have best taste on the board

>>85571978
Skip to Zabriskie Point and Blow Up. Mostly, Antonioni tends to be too tedious for his own good, and L'Avventura strangles in its own ennui.

I found L'aventura 2deep4 me. Couldn't stop myself drifting away.
On the other hand I thought The Passenger completely mesmerising. That final shot of the camera going out and in of the room, had to rewind it and watch again it was so good.

And yes op, what did you expect? Try having a bresson thread sometime, the response is even worse

File: Blow-Up.1966.720p.BluRay.X264-AMIABLE 01.25.07-01.25.57.webm (3MB, 844x454px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 844x454px

>>85571978
>La Notte
This is good, and also Blow-Up.