How do I into art house?

Start with The Master like I did, then other PT Anderson films, then Wes Anderson's filmography. After that you're ready for Truffuat and Godard.

>>86474554
https://letterboxd.com/pileofcrowns/list/tv-film-school/

Just watch everything on that, you don't even have to get them, the point is that you can say you've watched them

>>86474616
this is probably bait but artsier mainstream directors are probably a good place to start for most

>>86474647
Isn't the point to enjoy yourself?

>>86474554
Start with super entry-level art films like Citizen Kane, the Seventh Seal, Breathless, and Seven Samurai. Then move deeper into the filmography of those directors, then into associated directors, etc.

>>86474554
Step 1
PT Anderson. Wes Anderson. Stanley Kubrick
Step 2
Lars Von Trier. David Lynch. Werner Herzog
Step 3
Ingmar Bergman. Truffaut. Andrei Tarkovsky. Godard. Cassavettes.
By then you should be able to choose your own

>>86474681
Wasn't bait. The Master was literally where I started. Films started getting artier as I watched more older, foreign films.

>>86474554
Insert head into anus.

>>86474554
Your pic is a pretty good place to start.

File: entry level art house.jpg (945KB, 889x1745px) Image search: [Google]

945KB, 889x1745px

these should get you on your way

didn't make them so chill about telling me what's wrong with them

>>86474616
I've already seen every Wes movie (except Bottle Rocket and Darjeeling Limited), is he seriously considered art house?
>Start with The Master like I did, then other PT Anderson films
I've already seen Punch Drunk Love. He's considered art house too?

>getting into

this is the ultimate pleb mistake, are you from /mu/? You don't 'get into' arthouse, you just watch movies that you enjoy and branch out while you discover what you enjoy. Specifically trying to 'get into' a type of movies just for brownie points is the most basic faggot thing you can do. You won't even enjoy what you're watching, your limited view on films will prevent you from understanding why they're 'classic' in the first place, and you won't notice all of the subtitles in stuff like the camera work/writing to understand what made it so good and why it influenced other types of directors. You're taking on movies like they're homework and not as something that you honestly enjoy as a hobby/passion. You're just going to watch a bunch of old movies people tell you are 'patrician' and you won't even question why. You don't even know what classifies as 'Art House', just stop while you're ahead before you watch all this shit and embarrass the fuck out of yourself when you try and talk movies with someone who has a real love for film. stop while you're ahead op, and just watch movies you like.

>>86474763
Don't listen to him. Like most things worth doing in life it may be a bit challenging at first. Like an acquired taste you just need to acclimate yourself to it and once you do you'll legitametly and easily start to enjoy it.
Or you can just eat Mcdonalds and be intimidated by everything that's different for the rest of your life like this idiot
>>86474977

>>86475180
Wes Anderson is art house, he was influenced by Godard and Truffaut. Punch Drunk Love is especially arthouse.
Try the Three Colors Trilogy if you haven't already. Unless you're thinking of avant garde cinema which gets mixed up with arthouse and is a completely different genre. If that was what you're referring to, try Gummo.

I can't tell who's trolling and who isn't. Wes Anderson is arthouse? No one here knows the different between indie and arthouse.

>>86474882
>>86474882
Add Hitchcock to step 1, Terrence Malick to step 2, Fellini and Jean Cocteau to step 3

>>86475588
He's asking how to get into it. Wes Anderson is mainstream with very minor elements of art house/Avant-garde

>>86475588
Wes Anderson hasn't been "indie" since Bottle Rocket

>>86474554
if you have to ask, you'll never into it

Best way is to start watching classic mainstream films from the 30s-60s so you're more used to films from that era before delving into the more artsy complex stuff.

File: Pierrot.Le.Fou.1965.720p.BluRay.x264-CiNEFiLE_00:57:54.011.jpg (111KB, 1280x544px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 1280x544px

>>86474616
Godard is good. But there's no place to "start". There are too many directors and too many films to go through for one person to be properly able to digest in their lifetime. Although I don't distinguish "art house" from worthwhile film itself.

>>86474647
>Seven Samurai
Saw it, hated it.
>Wild at Heart
loved it.
>Black Orpheus
loved it.
>Possession
>The Mirror
Didn't understand it.
>Valerie and Her Week of Wonders
Bought it on blu-ray. Turned it off 20 minutes in after having to see a 13 year old's tits. Tried to return the very next day and they said they couldn't accept an open movie.
>Pink Flamingo
not into scat.

>>86475295
That's a lot of projection for someone just asking how to get into more films. What makes you think he's only asking so he can get "brownie points"? Is it because that's what you did?

File: 1497807892328.gif (3MB, 418x410px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 418x410px

>>86474554

k so >>86475295 is just getting assblasted for no reason but the point they're making isn't horrible, don't treat arthouse films as a genre. if you want to get into film as in film criticism then you will eventually become interested in this stuff because they tend to be complicated films with lots to dig into and learn from, but you shouldn't make yourself interested in them. on the other hand, wanting to be critical about film and to learn and understand things about filmmaking is great.

i would honestly recommend starting with some essays and learning basic terminology, how shots are composed (especially in traditional photography), maybe read a little about the history of the camera, early history of movies in the US and EU, how to light a scene. if you know literally nothing try some shitty youtube videos like every frame a painting and the nerdwriter, but after you watch their videos you should at least read wikipedia articles on all of those topics. if you want a very tame introduction to film criticism, there's this book on film psychoanalysis and Rules of the Game. i would watch that movie first and then read the book, it's short, the material is easy to understand and is both 1) sensical (much of film criticism is bullshit) and 2) gives you an overview of psychoanalysis as it applies to film/lit criticism so you have an idea when someone is 100% talking out of their ass.

>>86475913
>hated Seven Samurai
U fuckin wot? How is that possible

>>86474882
Oops, what if I started with Lynch?

>>86475681
I hate Hitchcock. I've only seen Vertigo and Psycho, but I really fucking dislike him. Vertigo is one of the worst OAT.

>>86475156
La Haine is art house? I turned it off, It seemed so generic.

>>86475192
Same with The Third Man. Really boring and silly.

>>86476188
Lynch is fine to start with I just put him second mainly because of Eraserhead and Inland Empire. In regards to Hitchcock you may want to watch some other mainstream movies from that time to see why he's so appreciated. He's far from my favorite but I can see why people like him.

>>86476319
Not memeing you need to watch more movies. You can't appreciate movies that break the mold if you've never seen the mold

>>86476078
this sounds like total shit but try to take some photographs, even if you're not filming videos. just when you're alone and you have that thought "this would make a good photograph", take your fucking phone out or something, take some pictures, look how shitty they turn out, try to take some more, etc. without filmmaking/photography experience it's hard to understand cinematography at all, which is why people on /tv/ often can't describe what makes it good or not. this will get you interested in types of lenses, basics of camera equipment, depth of field, you start to get a feeling for why you want to make certain decisions. most of the time you see something but you can't recreate it on film, why? so then you need to think really hard how to do that, so when you see a film that has "good cinematography" it actually becomes very enjoyable to see it and say oh wow how they did this is neat, or how they gave me that perspective and made me feel this way is really difficult.

contemporary arthouse is kind of a silly term. a lot of arthouse decades ago was experimental, but experimental films now are often a way to hide a small budget, but you can call anything arthouse to hide a multitude of sins, or because something is european and a bit obscure. watching old (especially b&w) arthouse is useful, but do it with a purpose. if you're going to watch a bunch of french new wave, for instance, read about it first, learn the history of the directors. a lot of the reasons that these films are important is historical, and it's more fun to watch a movie thinking "oh this way of filming actually wasn't in all those other movies i watched" and then to form an opinion with the full context. this list >>86475156 isn't definite but you could pick any of those films randomly and it will be worth watching for your education, even if some are more or less officially arthouse.

>>86475180
Dude check out bottle rocket, great indie film

>>86475295
>your limited view on films will prevent you from understanding why they're 'classic' in the first place, and you won't notice all of the subtitles in stuff like the camera work/writing to understand what made it so good
That's why I want to watch them though.

>>86475379
>Unless you're thinking of avant garde cinema which gets mixed up with arthouse and is a completely different genre.
What's the difference? What makes something avant garde and what makes something art house?

>>86475192
great
good
okay
overrated
good but overrated
good
crap
great
great
great
good
okay
crap
zzzz
great
okay
great
great but a little corny
great

>>86476319
La Haine is not arthouse and it's the only glaring error on that chart. It's still a decent film, its got some great cinematography

>>86476873
Shit taste

>>86476873
Why do people feel the need to shove their shitty one word opinions into every recommendation thread

>>86476515

if you want a rundown on directors again it's difficult. wes anderson is just an indie/quirky filmmaker, some of his films are gorgeous (even if you don't like them) but they're not particularly complex. same for pt anderson.

obviously watching good directors from the past is important, for america that means kubrick and hitchcock absolutely, worldwide there's too many to name but important ones i don't know bergman, kurosawa, there's a billion lists online. again, find something that is meaningful to you, read about it, then watch the movies. don't watch godard for no good reason, watch him because you're interested in french films in that time period, what happens in the new wave, and what a shithead he turns into throughout his career. if you're going to watch antonioni read about how his films changed italian cinema and more importantly INTO WHAT they changed it, etc.

lynch is experimental, avant garde, idk, but doesn't feel like arthouse, >>86476649 there's no good division, but it just rubs me the wrong way, don't know why. same with malick. contemporary arthouse would be someone like kiarostami (died about a year ago in the middle of his life/career), or haneke, both are much more rewarding. i sort of feel like arthouse describes traditional films with all the bullshit trimmed away, the filmmaker isn't trying to manipulate you with music, there's no moral lesson, these are just very well acted well shot stories, the best a movie can be without some kind of gimmicks whatever. these can still be weird or whatever but usually the weirder something is the more of a crutch that becomes. and then there are just great movies, i don't know if wong kar wai is arthouse, i mean i guess so yeah great, but his films are just unbelievable, easy to watch, you know it's fucking unbelievable, just have a drink and watch it and holy shit you're so content.

>>86475180
Both of them are mainstream but they're both heavily inspired by art house and avant-garde films

>>86476649
Art house generally means a film with a slower pace, less focus on plot, more contemplative and made with a distinct meaning beyond just commercial possibilities. Avant garde is a film made using unconvential and experimental techniques and with pretty much no emphasis on plot

>>86476950
pleb-cuck

>>86476965
for the same reason that people feel the need to insert shit films into recommendations

Watch Eraserhead once.

>>86476976
>haneke
>no moral lesson
>filmmaker isn't trying to manipulate
lol, you art fags are retarded

>>86476976
>the filmmaker isn't trying to manipulate you with music, there's no moral lesson,
Tons of arthouse filmmakers use music to manipulate and have moral lessons in their films.

>>86476089
Toshiro Mifune was great, but the movie was too long and boring. I also hated Throne of Blood. I may just not like Kurosawa, but I'mma keep trying with Ran, Dreams, and Kagemusha.

>>86475156

wheres the ultimate patrician guide at

>>86476649
They're mostly interchangeable and their definitions have changed over the years. Something that used to be completely different and strange can later seem normal and quaint. There was a time when Texas Chainsaw Massacre was considered arthouse.

>>86477249
Try his non-period stuff. High and low and ikiru are great

>>86476078
Rules of the Game, the French film? I almost bought that last weekend. What's the psychoanalysis book called?

>malick

HAHAHHHHAHHHHAHAHHHHAHHHHAHAHHHHAHHHHAHAHHHHAHHHHAHAHHHHAHHHHAHAHHHHAHHHHAHAHHHHAHHHHAHAHHHHAHHHHAHAHHHHAHHHHAHAHHHHAHHHHAHAHHHHAHHHHAHAHHHHAHHH

>>86476369
Eraserhead was a lot. I didn't hate it, but I had no idea what was going on.

>>86477249
Fair enough I guess. You might want to try his non-Samurai movies. Especially Ikiru

>>86476465
>Not memeing you need to watch more movies.
Such as what? I think I've seen enough mold.

>>86476544
I'll download it, I loved Rushmore.

>>86475156
Wild at Heart is an interesting choice.
I'm glad it's got some recognition.

>>86477367
you won't always get a movie on the first watch. You can either watch/read an analysis or watch it again and try to figure it out on your own. Eraserhead is pretty easy to understand for the most part IMO.

>>86477249
I disagree heavily but I do get that 7 Samurai is a marathon. However, did you seriously not like Throne of Blood? It's pretty compact. Do you not like medieval sieges and battles and political intrigue? That stuff just seems inherently cool to me. Plus that arrow death scene, my god...

>>86477408
Watch passion of Joan of arc, persona, a man escaped, army of shadows, Aguirre the wrath of God and wings of desire

>>86477530
It's only on the list because it's the contrarian choice for best lynch movie

>>86477324
yep that it's it

psychoanalytic film theory and the rules of the game

again the book isn't perfect but it's better than a lot of other shit i've had to read and it's short

>>86477183
yeah i don't know i was writing that just off the cuff i didn't mean here is a criteria by which a film either is or is not an arthouse film i just meant arthouse usually means a departure from the current film tropes towards something more authentic, often that authenticity is supposed to be telling some kind of a more authentic story, so frequently arthouse films don't use music, or use it incredibly sparingly, that's the kind of thing i meant, obviously a lot of arthouse a few decades ago was political

>>86477178
i mean ok what do you mean? some of his movies have themes condemning society for enjoying violence, but his characters don't experience this kind of moral lesson learning in the fucking movie, like it's not like you have a character who watches violent tv and is then murdered later because you shouldn't do that

File: picture.jpg (161KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1080x1080px

>>86476515
>this sounds like total shit but try to take some photographs, even if you're not filming videos. just when you're alone and you have that thought "this would make a good photograph", take your fucking phone out or something, take some pictures, look how shitty they turn out, try to take some more, etc

I have some pictures I took on my phone. Cropped and I messed around with the saturation and shit cause of Instagram, but what do you think? 1/4

>>86477653
>his characters don't experience this kind of moral lesson learning in the fucking movie
Dude that was literally the whole point of Cache

>>86477050
>Art house generally means a film with a slower pace, less focus on plot, more contemplative and made with a distinct meaning beyond just commercial possibilities.
I absolutely hated 2001: A Space Odyssey and Blade Runner, but maybe I need to rewatch them.

File: picture (3).jpg (145KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1080x1080px

>>86477684
2/4

>>86477629
The first part of the film is the best work Lynch did though.
The rest of the film is of a lower quality though.

File: picture (4).jpg (163KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 1080x1080px

>>86477782
3/4

>>86477653
>so frequently arthouse films don't use music, or use it incredibly sparingly,
This applies more to avant garde films, or specific movements like dogme 95. Tons of arthouse films have prominent scores, some of the greatest scores of all time came from arthouse films. Guys like assayas, tarr, wenders, carax and wkw are renowned for their use of music

File: picture (2).jpg (210KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 1080x1080px

>>86477829
4/4

>>86477805
It's funny how what you're saying could apply exactly to Lost Highway as well

>>86477629
>>86477805
>>86477893
I haven't seen all of Lynch's films yet, but Wild at Heart is amazing. I don't know what dip in quality y'all are referring to.
Mulholland Drive is true garbage.

>>86477893
I disagree, some of the second half is the best part of the film. Nothing in the first half compares to the Rammstein film.
Many people seem to write off Wild at Heart, unlike Lost Highway, so I feel it's worth mentioning that the first part really is great.

>>86477879
I love 1,2,4. Could be great movie scenes. Not the one you were talking to but still, cool!

>>86477983
Thank you, it means a lot. I was interested in photography before I became interested in filmmaking, but I haven't had much practice.
These were on my phone. I only got a real camera a couple of months ago, but even then it's kind of shitty and I can't use different lenses.

>>86477945
Wild at Heart is great, until they arrive in Texas. The pacing takes a massive hit, and it loses the charm it had. There was a lot of momentum early on as they went on a roadtrip, with constant switching between speed metal and corny romantic music. The life of the film seems to leave it when they arrive in Texas.

>>86477971
>>86477945
Inland Empire, straight story and fire walk with me are objectively the best lynch films and anyone who disagrees is a massive pleb

>>86478175
>inland empire
An overlong film that whilst you can appreciate the experimentation, is just an ugly film to sit through. If may be his most nightmarish film, but it's not often tense or scary throughout it's run time.
>straight story
I haven't seen it - maybe it is
>Twin Peaks
You mean Blue Velvet-lite? Blue Velvet is without a doubt Lynch's best work.

>>86478317
>Blue Velvet is without a doubt Lynch's best work.
Spotted the pleb

File: pleb-filter.png (132KB, 954x693px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 954x693px

Start with the entry level stuff

>>86477653
All of Haneke's film are moralistic, just that his approach is critical. He gets a free pass from far too many because he farts out pretentious Adorno-esq bullshit in interviews and because he tendency is to negate rather than affirms. Also I don't see how directing overly generalized and presumptive moral arguments at an audience the director does not know could be a better approach than the regular technique of using characters with specific contexts to posit cogent moral arguments, unless the goal of the director is to be a pious prig.

File: 1359023648351.gif (513KB, 200x108px) Image search: [Google]

513KB, 200x108px

>>86474616
>Start with The Master like I did
>there are people on this board whose first arthouse was The Master

>>86475913
>Bought it on blu-ray. Turned it off 20 minutes in

lol, get a load of this literal virgin faggot. You literally cannot even separate art from pornography and you're trying to get into art house. Stick to your capshit you fucking retard.

>>86477714
i mean that's fair and i really like cache and i'm not going to say that what you're saying is wrong. i guess to me it is different to watch a movie where it is implied a character shouldn't do something, they do it, then get punished. that's a boring moral lesson. the framing of cache is that you think it's a thriller, so you don't assume he did anything wrong, and you don't see him do anything wrong. then it turns out there's this huge skeleton in the closet, and that's a metaphor for the sins of france during the colonial era, and something of a racist legacy that endures. written out that sounds quite trite, but the movie keeps you empathizing with this guy, because that's what it would feel like to be some random person in france that sort of didn't have anything to do with anything, but sort of does.

it's just funny because haneke's most "dramatic" film, white ribbon or whatever, explicitly doesn't have any moral handholding whatsoever, if anything the point is look some people commit violent acts, maybe it's because of other evil things done in society.

>>86477834
yeah i mean thinking more about it >>86477050 is a pretty good definition i really shouldn't have tried to articulate anything without thinking about it for a while, it's odd the only assays film i like is irma yep which i can't remember any music being in but it's also been a long time, i agree though i don't think that has as much to do with anything as i first kind of imagined.

>>86477684
i mean i don't want to condescend by telling you stuff about photography because i don't know your background and this isn't what i do for a living or anything but i like >>86477782 especially, idk a lot of people think the subject is supposed to be the thing you're pointing at but a lot of the time it's more complicated than that, obviously this sounds retarded and i'm talking out of my ass but in the second image the subject is the street, that's why it's interesting and probably getting the most instagram hearts or whatever because when you look at it you feel like you're on the street, whereas for instance in >>86477684 you see the contrast and the colors but you don't have a good reason to be in the shop and you don't know what in the shop is supposed to be interesting. in >>86477782 you even have a nice little story going with the people walking in front of someone trying to take a photo which gives you a lot to look at.

>>86478556
Maybe he means he finished cumming after 20 minutes so saved the rest for the next session.

>>86478631
that would be pretty understandable desu

Art house
In the middle of art street
Art house!

>>86478767
>houses are in the middle of streets

>>86477829
picture of a dog/10

>>86478586
I'm not trying to deny your interpretation of hanekes films but he clearly likes to put his own personal sense of morality front and center in many of his films. Even in the white ribbon we see that, there's a clear condemnation of the parents actions and an implication that the mindsets of the Nazis rose from the strict Catholic upbringing in early 20th century Germany

>>86476976
>find something that is meaningful to you, read about it, then watch the movies. don't watch godard for no good reason, watch him because you're interested in french films in that time period, what happens in the new wave, and what a shithead he turns into throughout his career. if you're going to watch antonioni read about how his films changed italian cinema and more importantly INTO WHAT they changed it, etc.

I watched Belle De Jour today. Didn't love it, but I didn't look into it all. I guess I should read about Fellini some about before watching Amarcord, right?
>i sort of feel like arthouse describes traditional films with all the bullshit trimmed away, the filmmaker isn't trying to manipulate you with music, there's no moral lesson, these are just very well acted well shot stories
Would Dogtooth or The Lobster count? Loved The Lobster, but the ending left me dissatisfied. I don't know how I feel about Dogtooth, it was sometimes uncomfortable.

>>86477629
>>86477530
I like that it's on the list
it's not about whether it's lynch's best
it's that it's really one of his most accessible. If you're new to lynch and new to arthouse, Wild at Heart isn't so completely out there as to alienate you.

>>86477310
>>86477404
Forgot about Ikiru, I think I have that downloaded. Never heard of High and Low. Is his Hamlet movie worth watching?

>>86477568
The arrow death scene was amazing and I consider myself being into history, but I don't know. I just didn't like it. I remember thinking it "showed not told".

>>86479603
If you liked the lobster I'd actually recommend other bunuel films. The lobster seemed very bunuel-like to me. Belle De jour, which may be great imo, isn't really the traditional bunuel style. It's not as funny as his usual stuff, which is more dark comedy like the lobster. If you liked the scenes with the Asian man in belle De jour , that's a good indicator of other bunuel stuff

>>86478093
I was into the whole movie, it never dropped for me.

>>86479859
The bad sleep well is worth watching if you're a Kurosawa fan but I think it's one of his lesser works.

Also, if you want to see a great Macbeth adaptation I recommend Polanski's. It's one of my favorite Shakespeare films

>>86477564
After I watched it someone on /tv/ told me that Lynch made it when he had just become a father which cleared some things up, but I haven't rewatched it since.

>>86479859
tell me why you're trying to get into art when you can't separate art from pornography you low iq faggot.

>>86477574
>passion of Joan of arc
Really old movies scare me, but I'll try.

>>86480088
It's honestly suprisingl accessible as long as you can handle silent films. The silent film aspect is the only real hurdle, other than that it's pretty straightforward. Maybe try getting a version with music, I first saw it in a theatre with a live score and I felt that really added to it.

>>86477653
>psychoanalytic film theory and the rules of the game
thanks.

>>86478491
wowee, but I like Lynch and IASIP (though the last like three seasons have been shit).

>>86480088
Wait have you seen the new Hollywood classics like Bonnie and Clyde, French connection, etc Scorsese and coppolla stuff? Id recommend you start there instead of going straigjt to foreign films

File: autismo.png (326KB, 728x346px) Image search: [Google]

326KB, 728x346px

>>86474616

>>86478556
>>86478631
>>86478659
I couldn't handle looking at a child's nipples, it was disgusting. I know the female body isn't inherently sexual, but before that there were lingering shots of her 13 year old breasts and her older brother was tryna fuck.

>>86478621
You're fine, I've only taken one black and white photography class when I was like 14 and barely remember anything from it. I haven't even browsed /p/ that hard. Thank you for your input. Maybe I should post my pictures there too.

>>86479890
>If you liked the scenes with the Asian man in belle De jour , that's a good indicator of other bunuel stuff
Fantastic. I'mma start looking for downloads. I bought Belle De Jour because I know he did surrealist stuff and I was interested, but Belle De Jour didn't seem too surrealist.
Speaking of surrealism, I don't know if you've seen it, but if you have do you think Tommy would count? I haven't seen it a long time, but I loved it as a kid, it was kind of disturbing though.

>>86480001
>Also, if you want to see a great Macbeth adaptation I recommend Polanski's. It's one of my favorite Shakespeare films
I tried watching it. I tried watching that and I watched Throne of Blood because I wanted to make my own Macbeth film, but I think I realized I hate Shakespeare.

>>86480141
>as long as you can handle silent films
I haven't tried to yet, I've been too scared. It's ridiculous, but it really freaks me out. Same reason I haven't watched Metropolis.

>>86480227
I've seen Bonnie & Clyde and Taxi Driver. Only other Scorsese I've seen is After Hours, Hugo, and Goodfellas. Hugo was good, but After Hours and Goodfellas were beyond shit (in my opinion).

>>86477249
defo try Ikiru

>>86480812
Ok I think you should start with Charlie Chaplin when it comes to silent films. His stuff is very easy to get into. Watch Modern Times.

>>86480632
Yeah Belle De jour is more of a dramatic rather than surrealist film like bunuels other stuff. I haven't seen Tommy so I'm not sure

>>86481816
black thumbs up emoji

>>86481970
Alright, thank you.

>>86482033
Anything specific out of his early stuff you'd recommend? There's another surrealist director I wanted to check out, I forgot his name, I found about him in a Fandor video essay, I think. This guy wants to cheat on his wife and he dreams that he's driving on his bed through the country and sees the woman he wants to sleep with, but then there's a traffic jam of beds. I need to find that video.

>>86474554
What the fuck even is art house, you're not special for liking things that normies don't like. Just watch great movies without pushing them into arbitrary boxes you can build an identity on. Fags

File: sweetie.jpg (21KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 400x400px

>>86478491
>director of one of the longest films ever made that was only screened once and which is apparently just randomly spliced clips of AIDS Alan Moore reading his junkie poem and hardcore porn
>that Israeli satire show that everyone thinks is proof Jews eat Christian children hosted by a hot redhead in a bikini
>Bjork's husband's latest "art" which is basically 6 hours of poopoo peepee
>along with pedo bait, Brechtian meta nonsense and Jodo's boyfriend
This is actually really good bait

>>86475156

three colours red > three colours blue

>>86482637
>that Israeli satire show that everyone thinks is proof Jews eat Christian children hosted by a hot redhead in a bikini

?

>>86483424
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ta7GJV-pEKk

>>86483626
jesus christ no

Doesn't matter. Your perception of "art house classics" is inherently skewed by how they are viewed. If you see something you don't like, you'll think "oh I don't understand this" or "this is multifaceted." An art house movie is never boring, but "contemplative" and "dreamlike." An art house movie is never sparse on character, it is "stripped down" and "poignant."

File: 1443781799102.jpg (12KB, 258x245px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 258x245px

>>86474616

>>86475818
Best post ITT. You don't make yourself like it. If you genuinely liked it you would look at the plots and directors and willingly search it out.

>>86474616
>Godard

Trash.

File: B0ZqHBIIIAAyWLg (2016_12_08 01_52_40 UTC).jpg (132KB, 798x792px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 798x792px

>>86483965
...damn

File: DW Griffith smirks in disgust.jpg (345KB, 789x994px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 789x994px

Is DW Griffith arthouse?

>>86484331
no just gay

File: 1502416065477.jpg (21KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 500x281px

>>86475913
>Turned it off 20 minutes in after having to see a 13 year old's tits.

Dude wtf, are you a fag or something.

>>86474554
>>86475192
I was just watching 8 and a half and I turned it off after almost two hours, at least 20 or more minutes before it ended because I just couldn't stand it, it's so fucking annoying and not because of the surrealism
I saw two federico fellini films and both are annoying as shit, this and Amarcord and they are not for me, most of it is because I hate how italians speak in his movies and because they speak fast and loud and it hurts my head

Fuck that

File: exit level arthouse.jpg (3MB, 1968x3400px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1968x3400px

>>86477253
is this what you're after?

>>86476873
hey, i said not to bother giving your opinion! if you really think it's bad, make a new one and if it's good i'll post shill it whenever these rec or chart threads pop up. I do applaud your reviewing all the movies though.

>>86477879
>>86477829
>>86477782
>>86477684
i appreciate your going for the 1x1 format, it's certainly not easy to do, but all your pictures come off as excessively cropped and with composure simply an afterthought. post on /p/ if you want actual feedback next time

>>86484812
I don't remember subscribing to your blog. Where is the unsubscribe button?

>>86484823
>Blow-Up
>Le Bonheur
>exit level

>>86484933
they're only cropped because I posted them on instagram

>>86484812
>I don't like movies because the actors talk tot loud and too fast
Are you 90 yrs. old?

>>86484993
>thread about arthouse film
>post opinion on some shit posted here
>"lol you blogging bro fuck yourself"

File: mid level art house.jpg (369KB, 749x1631px) Image search: [Google]

369KB, 749x1631px

>>86485013
let's try this again

>>86474554
watch auteur cinema... maybe watch a good Nolan movie, then move to Kubrick , and then even further deep into art house with Terrence Malick.. but beware... Malick is a total mindfuck and impenetrable ... he's a PhD in philosophy and basically the last boss in the Art house. , abandon all hope ye who enter

File: 1484558764922.png (117KB, 372x351px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 372x351px

>>86474554
Be a pretentious faggot who watches movies in order to validate his own vanity and peer pressure induced superioriry-complex instead of enjoying them.

File: _MG_1730-as-Smart-Object-2.jpg (2MB, 4866x3456px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4866x3456px

>>86477684
Learn some composition, enter the magnum photography webpage and spend a time looking at some works, also you need to understand the importance of the nature of light, sometimes you can see a interesting subject with a cool background but if the light is not compelling enough that you NEED to take the picture in that moment you gonna have an interesting event but not a nice picture, there is a lot of instict in this my friend just go out and start apreciating the way light works.

>>86485130
This is a good picture?

>>86485095
>babby's first Bergman
>babby's first American experimental short
>babby's first half completed jumbled Polish socio-political religious sci-fi
>randshit
>pedoshit

File: 180720140825_0045.jpg (1MB, 4667x2625px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4667x2625px

>>86485130
I start taking high contrasted images with my phone this is one of them, its a good start.

>>86485041
No but a movie has a limit to where it's watchable for me and that movie is a pain in the ass to sit through

>>86485347
damn the symbolism jumps out and barks

>>86485039
you don't need to make everything 1x1 on instagram. you can avoid this by pinching your image in the 'crop' stage. again, having to compose your image after the fact is silly.

>>86485347
chill on the clairty slider bruh

>>86474647
>breathless

You just reminded me that I watched that movie once and I hated it, don't see what the appeal is

>>86474647
>Enter the Void that high

Are you fucking serious man?

>>86485129
That's the problem with arthouse films I think, is that a bunch of losers circlejerk over a movie and if someone didn't liked it then he's inferior and should stick to pleb shit

I think arthouse films are always worth watching but if you hated it for whatever reason then go ahead and be proud of it

>>86474554
La Haine.

How much of art-house is actually watchable?

You don't. Art house is a fucking meme

>>86485851
Problem is no one gives legitimate reasons why they hated it. If they hate it because it's "boring" it gives you the impression they probably only watch action blockbusters and can't pay attention to anything older.

>>86474554
>How do I into art house?
you go through art door

>>86485347
damn wtf
I was feeling pretty good about my pics and you was just like "nah fuck nigga hold up"

>>86486006
>How much of art-house is actually watchable?

Same amount of mainstream movies that are actually watchable. There's good and bad in every genre.

>>86485347
I like this one. One dog goes one way, the other dog goes the other way, and this guy's sayin', "Whadda ya want from me?'

>>86485498
>you don't need to make everything 1x1 on instagram.
oh yeah I forgot about that

I wasn't trying to compose anything at the time I was just taking pictures
I don't know anything about composition
two of those were taken on my way to school in the morning

>>86486024
boring is valid.

>>86476319
>>86476900
>>86476649
>>86477050
>>86482452


"arthouse" refers to arthouse cinemas which would show anything foreign and indie as opposed to mainstream cinemas. It doesn't necessarily mean avant-garde.

File: industrial-scene-from-Eraserhead.jpg (96KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1366x768px

What are other black and white films with the same visual texture like Eraserhead, Elephant Man, and The Trial?

>>86486024
Boring is valid depending on the person who says it

>>86486456
Battle of Algiers. I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet, when it is an excellent entry level arthouse film, absolutely epic.

File: 71kfqxZpfdL._SL1024_.jpg (146KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1024x768px

>>86486456
La Jetee.

File: 1466988864794.png (241KB, 317x346px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 317x346px

>>86486922
>>La Jetee
>30 minutes of still images

>>86487055
It's actually done pretty well. Also there is one moving image scene.

>>86486217
I understand what art house cinemas are in real life, but I find its use in this context to describe some nebulous genre of artistically superior films (with nothing else in common) to be fatuous and inherently self-congratulatory. It's possible to watch great movies, expand your understanding of the medium, and get recommendations from others without jerking off about how sophisticated you are

>>86474554
Start somewhere accessible and then you'll descent into looking for an obscure extremely experimental film because you're too far gone to enjoy common cinema

>>86487055
>having ADHD
Do you ever wonder how all your adderal pills will effect you in the long run?

>>86487055
This is the test you must face to ascend to the house of art. The next involves a partially-nude African man descending a staircase wearing angel wings.

I've been playing GTA V lately because I bought it and after seeing this I can't take art house shit so seriously anymore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xm3E54FXGfo

>>86487213
>The next involves a partially-nude African man descending a staircase wearing angel wings.

My Beautiful Dark Fantasy?

>>86480381
get a load of this anon he has repressed pedophilic tendencies

>>86487344
It was an actual movie, I just can't remember what it was called and was hoping someone here would know.

>>86487443
No, I don't.

>>86474554
make something pretentious in monochrome

>>86475180
>I've already seen Punch Drunk Love. He's considered art house too?
Not in my book. He makes Adam Sandler movies. If you like Adam Sandler movies but also want to seem like you're out there and really informed, PTA is your guy.

>>86475588
Wes Anderson, Paul Thomas Anderson, what's the difference?
Seriously I don't understand the difference and get them confused.
They're mass market trash.
Recommending them here is like saying "Read Stephen King to get into classic literature" and then defending it by saying things like "Well Stephen King has things like THEMES and SYMBOLISM in some of his books, which are elements of classic literature."
Eff off with this. Just watch the greats from 50 years ago. Jump right in. Don't waste your time with the Andersons.

>>86488043
>arthouse is old movies

>>86488043
Wes Anderson and pta good entry level points to get into artsier cinema, stop being a contrarian faggot. Everyone has to start somewhere and they're nowhere near the equivalent of Stephen king, more like DFW

>>86474554
Helps to be a fag or woman. Watching joan of arc is a good way to find out how faggy your taste is. It might well cure your desire to get into arthouse film.

>>86489137
so what are non-fag movies?

>>86489722
batman v superman

>>86490147
Batman v. Superman is literally gay porn.

>>86474647
8-1/2 is definitely *not* the best entry into Fellini, despite it being his masterpiece. Unless you either have a lot of background in his movies or understand the style going in its going to be a bit overwhelming. Start with La Strada, optionally do La Dolce Vita, then try 8-1/2.

Post-8-1/2 Fellini (Giulietta Degli Spiriti, Roma) is all over the place, but it's an incredible pleb filter.

>>86488043
People said the same thing about Hitchcock before his movies were 'old'. Not that I think that Wes Anderson is on the level of Hitchcock, but just because people "know about" something doesn't mean it's automatically substanceless Marvel movie shit.

>>86492372
I only have Amarcord and 8 1/2, would Amarcord be a good starting place?
>Unless you either have a lot of background in his movies or understand the style going in its going to be a bit overwhelming.
That idea never crossed my mind, but watching Eraserhead, Mulholland Drive, and Wild at Heart made me more ready for Twin Peaks S3. I'm able to really appreciate it instead of being mad that it's not comfy like my sister.

>>86493027

Start with Lynch. He's pretty pop.

>>86479603
i think his best is the exterminating angel, haven't finished all his films but many were not my taste, there's lots of good things written on fellini so you'll have plenty of companion essays for each of his films if you look a little bit

>>86479603
given >>86478586 i mean it's not hard and fast and as i said >>86477050 is a good distinction, i mean certainly dogtooth falls into a kind of arthouse category, the lobster is a little more avant garde according to that way of drawing lines. dogtooth seemed overrated but, again, it has something to do with a greek view of film and international recognition and so some of its reception had to do with that.

this is one of the reasons i think it's super important to read up on films before you watch them, which lots of people will disagree with, but dogtooth is hailed as being some kind of really genius movie, but if you temper some of that excitement with the fact that you're not greek and you're not so invested in this situation then i think the movie becomes a lot more enjoyable.

>>86492710
Amarcord is later in his career, but it's a lot less surreal, so maybe. The bigger issue with starting on Amarcord is that it has a lot of similar comedic elements to some of 8-1/2's sequences which, when compared with 8-1/2 right after might only highlight a certain aspect of his films (juxtaposing self-aware raunchy humor against small coastal Italy) that doesn't fully examine the more understated or surreal stylistic elements his other films do with varying success. It would be a good showcasing of *something* he does, but not the full scope.

>>86488043
I think it's worth watching There Will Be Blood (The Master was garbage) but I don't see how anyone can justify saying Wes Anderson is entry level arthouse when they are just quirky mainstream films.

>>86480489
i read a lot of /p/ recommended stuff when looking for a camera and it was very helpful, seems like a nice community.
>>86480689
if you hate shakespeare you should read harold bloom's western cannon, commentary on some of the great works written for actually anyone by one of the most knowledgeable literary historians/critics alive who is also incredibly aggressive, hates liberal modes of criticism, and spawned camilla paglia who is a fucking beast

File: cosmos.jpg (2MB, 2160x1552px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2160x1552px

since this is such a rare topic on /tv/ i'll dump just the few grids i've made

File: fallen_angels.jpg (2MB, 5760x4256px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 5760x4256px

>>86493624

i mean of 'arthouse' of course

File: happy_together.jpg (2MB, 3000x2156px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3000x2156px

>>86493648

File: 2046.jpg (4MB, 3789x2500px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3789x2500px

>>86493672

>>86493382
Alright I'll try to start with the early stuff first, see if I can find any download links.
Do you agree with >>86493263? that I should look for companion pieces and read them before hand? Actually, I probably should've read the little booklet that came with my Belle de Jour Criteron. I barely knew what the movie was about before I watched it.

>>86493263
>this is one of the reasons i think it's super important to read up on films before you watch them, which lots of people will disagree with, but dogtooth is hailed as being some kind of really genius movie, but if you temper some of that excitement with the fact that you're not greek and you're not so invested in this situation then i think the movie becomes a lot more enjoyable.
I'm confused. You're saying you should have context regarding what you're watching, but then saying Dogtooth is more enjoyable removed from the situation.
Usually I try to find something to read about a movie after I've watched it. Look for articles, video essays, or a go through the Wikipedia page. I prefer to watch the video essays focusing on technique though. I watched a video analyzing The Lobster the other day and I felt like his interpretation hampered my enjoyment of the movie.

>>86493672
>>86493706
Know where I can find HD downloads of these?

>>86493571
>if you hate shakespeare you should read harold bloom's western cannon, commentary on some of the great works written for actually anyone by one of the most knowledgeable literary historians/critics alive who is also incredibly aggressive
Sounds like a bit much who hasn't been able to finish a book without pictures in the past 6 years, but I'm interested.
>and spawned camilla paglia who is a fucking beast
quick Google search I see
>Camille Paglia: On Trump, Democrats, Transgenderism, and Islamist Terror
>Camille Paglia is a woman of seeming contradictions. She's a lesbian who thinks homosexuality is unnatural
>Camille Paglia - 'I don't get along with lesbians at all. They don't like me, and I don't like them'
>Camille Paglia on Jews and Feminism – Tablet Magazine
Becoming less interested.

>>86484823
>no Ruiz' The Territory

good call on Oliveira or Monteiro though, barely see any mention of them here or anywhere else
why do the portuguese not care for their stars?

>>86494275
>Camille Paglia is a woman of seeming contradictions. She's a lesbian who thinks homosexuality is unnatural
I see no contradiction in that. In fact I applaud Camille for understanding and fully embracing that she'll always be an outsider to normal roles in a society

Watch what you want, nobody cares if you've seen them or not

>>86493648
That film was absolute garbage and you know it. Who cares if it's shot well when the characters and story are 100% retarded.

>>86493459
Wes Anderson is heavily influenced by satyajit ray but you wouldn't know that because like the rest of this board you've never seen a ray film. Wes is unironically a good entry point into ray

I don't want an art house thread to die
we rarely have those :(

>>86474554
fuck your brain up with drugs

>>86474554
you can't really into arthouse or unorthodox filmmaking by your own volition without feeling lost or like you're wasting your time on something worthless
it will gradually grow on you when you start feeling tired of the regular Hollywood formula and blockbusters just aren't satisfying you

>>86475357
Must you have only the choice between McDonalds and haute-cuisine? There is surely a reasonable middle-ground to find in all of this...

The way i did it was Start the most mainstream and popular film of every director then move down from there like watch the the seventh seal, then maybe herzog' Aguirre.
Or if Maybe citizen Cane and then the third man.
The idea here is to find your general taste more than anything.

Then you start watching the most obscure film.

>>86475913
>>Seven Samurai
>Saw it, hated it.
you are beyond saving. That's as standard and universally likable as a movie fucking can get

>>86480812
>After Hours and Goodfellas were beyond shit (in my opinion).
stop watching movies. youtube is more your speed

File: alphaville.jpg (35KB, 500x362px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x362px

>>86484118
pleb

>>86493789
what i meant with dogtooth is that if you don't read anything about the context of the film, you will likely see it on a bunch of lists or read one blurb about it and get the impression that this is supposed to be some great arthouse film, so you watch it and you go that was alright but why does everybody love it. if you read about it, and in some sense between the lines, you get this picture where greece is more or less snubbed from the european arts community, and and somehow this is the only noteworthy film they've produced in like a decade (don't quote me, i'm not a greek film enthusiast, but you get the idea). so it's a good film, and the gimmick isn't too bad either, but it's not unbelievable, and if you don't think it's going to be unbelievable then i think it's easier to enjoy.

>>86494275
i mean you shouldn't be surprised that the most popular articles about an aggressive outspoken person sound like clickbait. what i will say is that if you've never read a poem she's got a book on the best poems ever written that literally goes through and teaches you how to read them one by one. unfortunately (or not) she's known to be a psychopath but that's sort of besides the point.

>>86506315
>where greece is more or less snubbed from the european arts community
Don't blame them for Angelopoulos not being able to look both ways before crossing a street

File: slavshits.jpg (199KB, 944x617px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 944x617px

read sculbting in dime :D :D :D

what is that shit meme of hating tarkovsky?

I watched Wings of Desire and it's 99% garbage (not even Wim Wenders can make a circus scene boring). It's super slow, the cinematography is nothing special, and it has the least believable romance of any movie.

I also watched Vivre sa Vie, and it's still somewhat boring, but it's a shitload better than Wings of Desire. It has some genuinely interesting camera work, which distracts you from the slow parts. But I was a bit annoyed because I was promised jump cuts and it had barely any.

From what I've seen so far, I think "art film" means anything that deliberately tries to stop you from getting emotionally involved in the movie.

>>86493624
I liked this movie but the music was annoying

>>86508117
You should stop watching films. Watch anime or video games if films are too boring for you.

>>86508232
They're not too boring. People in this thread are calling Wes Anderson "art house" but Moonrise Kingdom was an exciting chase movie. And I can understand (the very boring) 2001: A Space Odyssey being called art house, but A Clockwork Orange? There's no way you can call that boring.

>>86475156
>all directors featured only once

>two Bunuel films

what was meant by this?

>>86476089
It's like The Magnificent Seven, except slow and boring.

>>86508359
Calling something boring is not real criticism and 'art house' label is mostly a meme which nowadays means - old or foreign film, usually in a limited release.

Just watch good films and learn to appreciate slower works because they are often more rewarding.

>>86508479
>slower works because they are often more rewarding
There's nothing rewarding about slow films. I watched Once Upon a Time in America at 1.5x speed (not skipping any frames so I saw the whole thing) and it was still boring. The only possible justification for prolonging a scene beyond what's needed for the plot is "suspense", but that's a bad excuse most of the time. There's no suspense when you're bored, because you stop thinking about the movie and start thinking about all the other more interesting things you could be doing.

>>86508618
>The only possible justification for prolonging a scene beyond what's needed for the plot is "suspense"
No. There is nothing wrong with longer scenes.

>>86508618
stick to watch whatever the fuck you watch until you're tired of it and then come back

>>86476078
>Rules of the Game
All the style of Wes Anderson (obviously where he copied it from), none of the entertainment value.

>>86476188
>>86476369
Hitchcock is shit. Don't give me that "good for its time" bullshit, there are plenty of fast paced and modern feeling older movies. Check out It Happened One Night or The Thin Man.

>>86508681
>All the style of Wes Anderson (obviously where he copied it from), none of the entertainment value.
Some examples?

>>86484823
Landscape Suicide is rather boring.

The Act of Seeing With One's Own Eyes would've been a better choice.

>>86478175
Sorry, but Lost Highway, and Blue Velvet are Lynch's best movies. The fact that you even included Inland Empire shows how little taste you have or are just name dropping for e-points

>>86508737
Mostly the camera movement (eg. favoring dolly shots over zooms, which I strongly approve of), and the long takes with careful blocking to get close ups anyway. I guess the frequent use of symmetrical shot composition is Wes's own style (although maybe it was in The Rules of the Game too and I just forgot it. It's not like I'm going to watch that crap again.)

>>86508890
>although maybe it was in The Rules of the Game too and I just forgot it. It's not like I'm going to watch that crap again
It wasn't.

>Mostly the camera movement (eg. favoring dolly shots over zooms, which I strongly approve of), and the long takes with careful blocking to get close ups anyway.
That's part of Renoir's style. It's not only in Rules of the Game. But in 1930s the camera moved in a different way than today. Zooms weren't exactly common.

>they think they can appreciate art films withour reading about them or knowing the history of film
Poor plebs. This is a problem with people who just watch random "art house classics". Sorry kids, you have to start with the silents.

>>86509151
Any random silent is going to be more entertaining than some "art house" crap. Silents were made for a mass audience.

Charlie Chaplin has made me laugh just as hard as Tom Green/Sacha Baron Cohen/Johnny Knoxville etc.

>>86509282

>t. pleb

>>86509151

You can appreciate art without context. Unless you're studying the medium, context isn't necessary. Some films depend on it (eg. like Breathless), but you dont need context to be moved and appreciate something like Cries and Whispers.

>>86509372
Very often you need context or at least education. If you think that all films should be about plot or characters then you're simply wrong and you will never appreciate many of them.

>>86474554
get a basic understanding of the main philosophical thoughts that shaped the 20th century. Kant, Hegel, Husserl, Heidegger.

you are welcome.

>>86481970
City Lights is better.

Also watch Buster Keaton's The General.

>>86483965
And that's why being a pleb is superior. I don't fall for any of that bullshit.

>>86474554
the best version of this list
https://letterboxd.com/rant423/list/bfi-2012/

>>86509513
City lights is undoubtedly better but not as good as an entry point into Chaplin imo. The general is great too but I feel like keaton should be watched after Chaplin. Modern times is a perfect first silent film IMO

>>86475192
8 1/2 makes 0 sense as an introductory film since it can only be dully appreciated once the viewer is familiar with the rest of Fellini'/ filmography. It's a great film on its own but there'/ so mych more beneath the surface

File: Screenshot_20170816-145357.png (879KB, 1080x1366px) Image search: [Google]

879KB, 1080x1366px

>>86507676
this but seriously

>>86486024
>implying old movies are automatically boring

There are lots of fast paced and exciting old movies. The Adventures of Robin Hood is from 1938 and it's more exciting than any MCU capeshit. It Happened One Night is from 1934 and it feels like it's from a bizarre parallel 2010 where nobody has a mobile phone. Charlie Chaplin did physical comedy better than Rowan Atkinson or Jim Carrey. Horror/sci-fi fans sperg out about practical effects; The General features a genuine train crash.

>>86476609
But he is right about trying to "get into".
The moment is starts to feel forced you should stop.
Like if is starts to feel like homework chances are you are gonna dismiss a potentially good movie experience.

Take your time and mix it with genre movies you like.
Dont try to marathon godard in 1 week like a pretentious hipster.

Any good stuff you recomend reading to get into art house? Will wikipedia articles do the trick or maybe some blog?

File: 410848-xavier-dolan-lors-du-photocall-les-637x0-2.jpg (29KB, 637x423px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 637x423px

>300 post thread
>no Dolan

>>86509804
Why the fuck do they keep recommending 8 1/2 when la dolce vita is his most famous entry level work?. Jesus.

Idk if ppl are just being jerks or they just cant stop being pretentious fags for 1 second.

>>86510513
Watch a film, then watch it with a commentary. It's almost always very fun.

>>86510628
no tearjerker hacks please
>>86510642
81/2 is an amazing film everyone should be able to enjoy, it's fast paced, has strong character tension/conflict and appeals great to depression/nostalgia

>>86509455

Most filmmakers dont care about the comtext of their own films. The quality of a film can be determined by how they get their point accross. If you need to know about the hundred years of film history or be familiar with the works of a number of auteurs, then there's a limit to what those films can accomplish. You dont need to know what the Nu wavers were rebelling against to appreciate Godard, Varda, Trouffant or anyone else. You dont need to "get" the Panic Movement to understand the Holy Mountain or El Topo.

>>86510770
But it helps to appreciate them. I don't believe it's even possible to watch films without any context. Isn't our understanding of what is good and what is bad already a context? Knowing historical context is also very helpful.

>>86502055
It was much better than Chungking Express, I thought the characters were really nice

>>86508232
Not that anon but a lot of anime is really boring just because of how trope-dependent it can be. It's like sitcom levels of spot-the-trope.

>>86474813
This. It's called "entry level" for a reason. They're great movies to help ease you into the wider world of cinema.
I'd keep a notepad nearby and write down things that really stood out to you, then research those aspects to get an idea of who it was influenced by, and in turn who else was influenced by it.
Just build outward from there. Don't be afraid to go outside your comfort zone. Take breaks to watch some dumb schlock mpvies too, so your head doesn't get lost up your own ass.

>>86502055
>Who cares if it's shot well
People interested in the technical aspects of film making?

Recommend me some obscure shit anons

>>86510628
Stupid frog poster

>>86509955
>The Adventures of Robin Hood is from 1938 and it's more exciting than any MCU capeshit.
Flynn is just pure charisma on screen. I'd rec anything he stars in.

>>86508408
>slow and boring.
Literally the plebiest "criticism" ever. I bet you complain about things being overrated too.

>>86513890
About as much as I complain about things being underrated.

>>86513994
You realize those "problems" are entirely based on your subjective expectations, and have nothing to do with the film itself, right? They're not valid criticisms.

>>86514188
Slow is an objective problem, because I am not immortal, and more good entertainment exists than I will ever experience.

Boring is lazy criticism, but as well as just slowness it includes things like never being given a reason to care about the characters (eg. Lost in Translation), things happening shaggy-dog-story style instead of a real plot (eg. The Darjeeling Limited), or being too similar to older works I've already seen.

>>86514387
>entertainment
That's your problem.

>this thread is still alive
holy shit.

Since when did /tv/ get so patrician?
Usually arthouse threads aren't this big.

File: DFgxvtHUQAMmNvT.jpg (67KB, 750x742px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 750x742px

>>86499952
>I see no contradiction in that. In fact I applaud Camille for understanding and fully embracing that she'll always be an outsider to normal roles in a society

>>86504833
I don't know if I've been really into blockbuster or the regular Hollywood formula.

>>86499952
>>Camille Paglia is a woman of seeming contradictions. She's a lesbian who thinks homosexuality is unnatural
that's not a fucking contradiction. jeez normies and/or brainlets

>>86506113
On the art film Wikipedia After Hours is described as
>a comedy-thriller that depicts a man's baffling adventures in a surreal nighttime world of chance encounters with mysterious characters.
which is complete bullshit. The movie is completely devoid of comedy and contains no thrilling elements. There's nothing surreal about it, it's all very regular. The main character, I think his name was Paul, is an unlikeable asshole too. There's not one good thing about After Hours.

>>86506315
Oh, I get what you're saying now. I didn't watch Dogtooth under the guise that it was going to be some phenomenal movie. But I still didn't enjoy it too much because I was under the impression it would be a comedy.

>what i will say is that if you've never read a poem she's got a book on the best poems ever written that literally goes through and teaches you how to read them one by one.
Alright, once I get a job I'm going to look through her and Harold Bloom's stuff.

>>86508117
>From what I've seen so far, I think "art film" means anything that deliberately tries to stop you from getting emotionally involved in the movie.
So complete garbage like Fantasia, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Blade Runner, and Under the Skin?

>>86508479
Is slower and longer interchangeable? I didn't find Prince of the City rewarding, but Love Exposure was.

>>86509476
>get a basic understanding of the main philosophical thoughts that shaped the 20th century. Kant, Hegel, Husserl, Heidegger.
how

>>86517777
well the first obstacle you overcome when you're tired of the formula is starting to appreciate long takes more. Unlike >>86514387 who completely dismisses a slower pace, you start noticing that it really does work in certain occasions and it can be much more powerful than any epic monologue can be.
for example Ruiz movies make a great use of silence and long takes, but if you're not used to it it feels like a chore to go through. However if you are open to it and really get into it, you start understanding why the director insists on those takes.
That's the thing with "arthouse", they're movies that don't make themselves easy for you by abdicating their own integrity. Once you start realizing how deeply some "arthouse" directors can convey feelings and emotions you start to notice how fake everything about the formula really is. I'm not saying the formula is trash, because it's quite enjoyable, but if you confine yourself only to that you're missing out on so much more.
good job on those numbers too

>assuming films are better because they're old, black and white, slow as shit and have no sound.

t. pseud

not even avent-teen, just pure pseud plebbery.

>>86474554
Start with Batman v Superman

>>86518452
>Is slower and longer interchangeable?
No. Eg Batman v Superman is long but fast paced.

>>86518693
>implying long takes have to be slow

>>86514387
>it includes things like never being given a reason to care about the characters (eg. Lost in Translation)

I thought that was just me. I turned that shit off like 20 minutes in, it felt like emotionless copying of WKW.

>>86476089
Slow.
Full of tacky as shit dialogue.
Full of terrible, bad acting.
Awful action scenes, not once do I believe in the threat and danger.
Too fucking long for what happens in it - Lav Diaz can make great long films but Kurosawa sucked dick every time he made a long film.

>>86502976
both Wes and Pajeet are garbage, who gives a fucking shit?

>>86518787
the formula always avoids slow pace which is one of my points

File: 1502578028422.jpg (48KB, 1190x711px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 1190x711px

Isn't Anime supposed to be babys first step to art house???

>>86474554
Start with Rene Clair.

Deliberately seeking out "art house" films makes you a pseud

>>86519632
this made me think

>>86519067
animation, not just anime, is an accessible genre to get into abstraction if that's what you mean

File: Rene Clair on DW Griffith.png (35KB, 914x183px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 914x183px

>>86519097
>Start with Rene Clair.
Whoops

>>86475156
Just great to see that cultural appropriation started as early as in 1948

>>86521296
>cultural appropriation
that's the lamest spook

>>86522680
Yes.

>>86522764
Yes?

>>86523467
Very yes!

>>86524534
super yes

>>86479937
Same here, I loved the whole ride. Bobby Peru is introduced in Texas and he's the 2nd best character in the movie.

>>86524978
brothers.

>>86524784
oh yes

>>86474554
For starters stop calling every film outside of hollywood mainstream cinema "art house". It makes you look like a tryhard retard and a tool. The term "art house" has completely lost all meaning thanks to retards like you.

>>86526433
f*ck yes

>>86526725
はい!

>>86527590
you lost me nigga I don't speak Asian

bump limit

>>86529219
oops bump limit

why do /tv/ threads always die after like 270 posts

>>86508681

This post is shit

>>86518884

Wrong

This thread is 10% good discussion with the rest being tryhards calling "mainstream" films shit

File: 1436133635520.png (53KB, 306x325px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 306x325px

>>86474616

>Start with The Master like I did

Eternal Spetember.

>>86531165
can you highlight the good discussion?

oh shit! bump limit reached. goodbye, everybody.

>>86526514
The only person looking like a tryhard retard here is you. The only movie referenced in OP is passion of Joan of arc which is as arthouse as it gets

File: vivresavie08.jpg (67KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 640x480px

>>86484118
turbopleb