Well Rishi you can check out my film when it comes out and judge for yourself. But it seems like you are taking things really personally. And I think if you actually cared to dig a little deeper into the users of this site you’ll find a diversity of thought and opinion regarding the form/consumption/merits of film and its makers. You are the one throwing labels and expletives around here. And please elucidate how liking Rohmer makes one self centered?
Look, your claims are insubstantial and ludicrous—casting wide swaths over all these people you don’t even know. That’s a little silly.
And I’m happy to be ignored by you, but since you post a thread a day (practically), I’m afraid I can’t say the same. There is a search function on this site, btw. Some threads have been thought of before.
I aggree ,everone here is stupid ,vey stuppid ,and they’ll never be able to make a good film ,never !All they care about is theirselves ,not like me ,I love everyone, except for people like them ,narrow minded peeples .Can’t you see what cinema is ?Not what you think !Someday you watch my films ,then you see what cinema is !!!
Man is this a wierd conversation. First off I think logically your premise is based on the fallacy of a sweeping generalization. It is really complicated when you think of the problem of being a great director and what ideological or asthetic positionality you have. On the one hand a critical knowledge of cinema and diffrent styles is absolutly neccessary but so is the knowledge of what audiences inherently ecpect and require. I do not understand why you have such a bitter tone. To sum up I do agree that most people on this site will not be great directors but it is not because they lack the ability as much as how hard it is to get a film made.
“My standard for verisimilitude is simple and I came to it when I started to write prose narrative: fuck the average reader. I was always told to write for the average reader in my newspaper life. The average reader, as they meant it, was some suburban white subscriber with two-point-whatever kids and three-point-whatever cars and a dog and a cat and lawn furniture. He knows nothing and he needs everything explained to him right away, so that exposition becomes this incredible, story-killing burden. Fuck him. Fuck him to hell.”
- David Simon
I dont even know what to say here. I have been sitting here writing and re-writing things to say and eventually I realized that Rishi has no idea what he is talking about and has no relavence whatsoever in the cinematic realm. You, my fellow homosapien, are full of poop.
Rishi, I may be a movie buff but I am not against film lovers who spend most of their viewing time on movies that are considered ‘artistic’. Cinema is all about personal preferences. Every film-maker chooses (or is forced to choose) their screenplay & here they embed their personal signature to their work. If film-makers create flicks that are designed to appeal to the general public, then that’s the choice of the film-maker. I’m sure you already know this but many members of The Auteurs are likely to be sick of conventional Hollywood flicks because they have reduced themselves to clichéd formulas & they fail to build beyond that premise. The experience is considerable for the viewer the first time around but when you see it again & again… hopefully, you understand that it can get repetitive & boring.
Besides… I don’t think members of The Auteurs have joined this website because they desire to be film-makers. They’ve joined this website because we all share a universal appreciation of film.
Many film buffs like ‘artistic’ movies because they explore challenging themes, their involvement to the view, their presentation etc. I am partial to ‘artistic’ movies because I go to the movies for many reasons & one of them is that I have a variety of movies to view. I’d like to see an action flick at one time, a contemplative drama at another time. If someone goes to the movies just to watch ‘art’ movies; well, that’s their choice. But I don’t believe that they’re being self-centred because they watch flicks according to their preference. They should only be considered self-centred if they haven’t even given conventional flicks a chance.
Which comes to my argument: artistic movies & commercial cinema should be equally treated with respect. But many of those who love film tend to ‘artistic’ flicks because they want NEW; they want an experience that challenges their pre-conceptions & their opinions. I can respect their preferences but… as much as it’s nice to see ‘art’, it’s also respectable if we keep an open mind for commercial cinema. I’ve met film-goers who only watch ‘artistic’ movies & refuse to watch commercial flicks because of the negative impressions previous flicks have incurred on them. I don’t agree with their decision but it’s their preference.
So I see where you’re coming from Rishi, but I don’t believe they’re being self-centered or if they can’t be good film-makers because of their opinions. Cinema is about choices. What we watch is what we watch. So if they prefer artistic movies… it’s their choice.
If anyone disagrees with me, just say so cos this thread interests me…
How is he going to respond to all of our comments?! Lets all just jump ship and swim to the nearest Tarantino thread!
I took you that long to realize that? Your brain is full of nothing!!!!! :D
@ scooter no you didn’t get my point ,see what i wanna say is everyone here knows micheal bay or tony scott doesn’t make artistically driven films .but even then what they do not all the directors have guts to do that .so we should respect that .coz as a film maker it takes years to get into the position when someone is ready to put millions on u .so what i want is people should understand how industry works .and they should respect mainstream commercial directors coz these are the ones who actually earn money ,so that big studios can open up a substitute to make artistically driven films which has less audiences.
So we can’t trash M. Bay as a filmmaker, but you can trash everyone on this site as a filmmaker? Gotcha. Perfect sense.
Rishi, I respect all filmmakers. Is that what you want me to say?
I also respect chimpanzees but they tear peoples faces off.
Out.
Re: OP
I LOVE IT!
This has to be one of the greatest posts ever made on this forum.
It’s like saying a certain pro football player sucks, even though you could never play as well as he does. Sure, he’s way better than 99% of people in the world, but there are probably others who are way better than him. So we compare him to other pros, rather than ourselves. I couldn’t make a film as good as Transformers, but Michael Bay probably couldn’t make a film as good as There Will Be Blood.
“so we should respect that”
By respect of course you mean like their movies. And I thought your point was that nobody here were good filmmakers because they like Rohmer? Care to support that ridiculous argument?
also, punctuation comes before the space, not after. like this. see how i’m doing that?
@matt yeah my grammer sucks i know u dont to make me realize that .
Rishi, Michael Bay and Tony Scott make shitty films. When they do that, they help to make the world a shitty place. Do you want the world to be a shitty place? If you do, that means you’re a bad person.
Don’t be a bad person, Rishi. Be a good person.
I signed on to look at something real quick before I went to bed and found this winner of a thread. Rishi’s insight into the soul of an Auteurs member is something he should be commended for. After all, who wants to talk to an elitist film snob? Well, sure, maybe other elitist film snobs, but that’s neither here nor there. We should all respect the hard work Michael Bay and Tony Scott put into making sure stuff “blowed up real good.”
Hats off to you, Rishi. You’ve changed my whole outlook on film, and maybe my whole outlook on life with your deeply heartfelt and very wise words. Thank you, sir, thank you.
I am the next Scorsese
Kai—I should have called you recently, but I’ve seen A Serious Man and Antichrist in the last two weeks. It was during the day, tho, and I know you work.
Kai—Best post on this thread yet.
Y’all crack my shit uppp.
Is Kai being ironic?
People are self-centered critics that make films on this site which are being cared about by the general public in an attempt to respect filmmakers thought of as entertaining from a different point of view while making films in the neighborhood of Spielberg and other directors while not understanding the industry this site is based on from a subjective perspective and essentially changing opinions on art while discussing to be a filmmaker for whom entertainment means to be wrong which is why Rohmer doesn´t add to the shallow individualism of a discussion that centers around art which make a director become big even though not imitating the outside world which is thought about to be understood by the general public in a less than ordinary way the industry could only dream about while making a director big who entertains people that are interested to discuss art with filmmakers who are entertaining the public.
Hope this adds to the general discussion…
Rocky: Not anymore. Congratulations, you’ve just been nominated for “Best post on this thread”!
I believe that each kind of film that was ever made did something for the viewer. That is why it was remembered or forgotten. That is the beauty of film, that it can reach to all kind of individuals or to the mases. It all gives something to someone. Either by giving hope, faith, love, truth, inspiration, warmth, a headache, laughter, sadness or anger. They all give an image of life or of a dream, they can also give you something to escape from; only if it is for a few hours, or it can educate and open your mind. There is also art in mainstream movies just like an art house film… it is called entertainment. I don’t think that that should go under valued just because it’s mainstream/popular. There are many forms of entertainment in every kind of films. Just like there are masters directors in every kind of genres, some are more talented at their own ideas/stories, while there are other talented directors who know what the mases what to see. Isn’t that what film is and should be?
Apur: Dude, that was one AWESOME sentence!
Ben.
I understand ones idea for wanting everyone to like everyone else. Truth be told it’s a lie. I don’t have to like a film maker if I don’t want to.
Also, english is most likely not his first language as he is from India so let’s look past the grammar in his posts.