[ / / / / / / / / ] [ b / news+ / boards ] [ operate / meta ] [ ]

/film/ - Film

add to your favorites by clicking this ↑ star

Catalog

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types: jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 2 per post.


Welcome to /film/ discussion. Subscribe to our new RSS Feed! Email: film [at] 8chan [dot] co. For mainstream movies visit /tv/.
Featured Topics: March Film Club - Last Watched - Best of 2014 - /film/ Charts - /tv/ Charts - Doc - Pod - OST - webm - KG - Posters - Stills - Resources

Film Club #15 - The Strange Color of Your Body's Tears (Hélène Cattet & Bruno Forzani, 2013)


YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

 No.2584

Can we have a thread dedicated to Carlos Reygadas?
Personally I've found that no other director can capture reality the way he does. His films Silent Light and Post Tenebras Lux are the hands down the two most beautiful films I've ever seen.
He also has the exact same philosophy on film and storytelling as I do. He's probably my favourite dorector of all time.

 No.2585

File: 1417093538362.jpg (317.57 KB, 960x1280, 3:4, image.jpg)

*"I really think most of what we call cinema is not cinema. It's really film theatre or, even worse, illustrated literature. The object of the film is the story and the characters are just technical people representing something. Most cinema is comic books. In my opinion that is not real cinema. Real cinema is much closer to music. Music doesn't represent anything, it is just something that will convey feeling. It doesn't mean anything. I hate the idea that film is actually telling a story! The great part of film is to make you feel, not by the narrative. For example the first shot of Silent Light (2007) is cinematic. The light itself is beautiful. In literature, that does not exist. You can just write, "The sun came up." The beauty in my film is the sun itself. You don't have to recreate it. In cinema, the story and the photography are the same thing. It's not like, "I don't like the story, but great photography." The photography is the film itself; it's not a vehicle for the story. I don't want a story and then you illustrate it, in a way that there will always be a division between form and meaning. I think in art, form and meaning are the same thing. In that sense, music is the most noble of arts, because it does not permit you to separate the music from the meaning. When cinema is true, it is a language in itself - that is why it is an art. I hate the idea that a good film is a good story, as Hollywood people say. That's not letting cinema be totally free."*

 No.2586

I've only seen Battle in Heaven but I'll have to check out his newer stuff.
I do like his perspective on filmmaking. Especially since it's common to hear more about the _limitations_ of film in comparison to literature (usually in the context of adapting a story).
This also reminds me of the conversation about tv vs. film. Even today, tv is essentially _all_ narrative and can't really match the poeticism/creepiness/atmosphere/etc in a well-crafted film.

 No.2587

File: 1417114577940.jpg (110.83 KB, 566x749, 566:749, image.jpg)

>>2586
Yeah his last two films are his best by far his first feature Japon is pretty excellent as well.

I'd agree for the most part with tv not being able to capture the atmosphere of a film, but I see that changing in the years to come. A lot of directors (David Fincher, Cary Fukanaga) are seeing the limitations of the formulaic Hollywood industry and are moving into high-budget TV. A lot of shows (True Detective for example) are easily capturing the same mood and darkness of an average crime drama. Mainstream actors are starting to turn to TV also. TV on the whole is shit, but new & better stuff is emerging that's actually attempting to be moderately artistic.

And lets not forget Bergman did a whole bunch of films made as TV series. Fassbinder too.

 No.2589

>>2587

Yeah television is essentially filling the void of entertainment for grownups, which (at least in the US) has been mostly abandoned by the studios. So the quality and creativity associated with the medium has seen a great improvement.
Even so I still think there are certain limitations that come with being tied to a longform narrative structure. Perhaps that too will fall by the wayside as time passes.

Anyway, sorry for the threadjack…

 No.2590

File: 1417160831387.jpg (24.43 KB, 240x285, 16:19, image.jpg)

:3

 No.2596

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
Reygadas is even better than Malick at making the mundane beautiful. Take this scene for example: family and friends having a picnic on the beach. Beautiful, no?

 No.2597

Thanks for sharing.
I need to see more from Reygadas. This looks quite promising.

 No.2600

>>2597
I'd say watch his films chronologically in reverse. That's the way I did it and I think that the way it would work best. His earlier stuff is a lot more personal, and you really need to 'get' him as a director before you start on films like Japon

 No.2605

>>2600
Interesting, I might try that
I'm trying to think of other directors who are best suited to watching in reverse, but can't come up with one offhand. It may only work with a smaller filmography, as in this case.



Delete Post [ ]
[]
[Return][Go to top][Catalog]
[ / / / / / / / / ] [ b / news+ / boards ] [ operate / meta ] [ ]