Budite ljudi iako ste srbi i ostali

Летећи Полип wrote:

zvezda je zivot wrote:
doduse ovo je moje musko misljenje da zenska deca najbolje da gledaju zenske filmove. moja devojka kaze da su u tim godinama nju vise zanimali mafijaski i detektivski filmovi lol)

Pa to, jebi ga. Žene su cerebralnije nego što mislimo. 

William Murderface wrote:

Filmofil postaješ jer je film bekstvo u neku drugu stvarnost, jer pobegneš iz škole u bioskop i gledaš šta god se daje, jer ostaneš budan da ponoći da gledaš strašan film za koji ti roditelji kažu da nije za tvoj uzrast (Rozmerina beba u mom slučaju), jer ti bude mnogo kul kad Istvud kaže "Go ahead, make my day", jer se zaljubiš u neku glumicu ili glumca, itd. Ukratko, jer počneš da otkrivaš nešto što ti je zabavno i prijatno i uzbudljivo i neobično.

Ali ne tako što ti neko da spisak must watch filmova i onda te tera da ih gledaš, for fuck's sake. To je pouzdan način da mladoj osobi ogadiš i film i sve ostalo.

We generally become interested in movies because we enjoy them and what we enjoy them for has little to do with what we think of as art. The movies we respond to, even in childhood, don’t have the same values as the official culture supported at school and in the middle-class home. At the movies we get low life and high life, while David Susskind and the moralistic reviewers chastise us for not patronizing what they think we should, “realistic” movies that would be good for us—like “A Raisin in the Sun,” where we could learn the lesson that a Negro family can be as dreary as a white family. Movie audiences will take a lot of garbage, but it’s pretty hard to make us queue up for pedagogy. At the movies we want a different kind of truth, something that surprises us and registers with us as funny or accurate or maybe amazing, maybe even amazingly beautiful. We get little things even in mediocre and terrible movies

Because of the photographic nature of the medium and the cheap admission prices, movies took their impetus not from the desiccated imitation European high culture, but from the peep show, the Wild West show, the music hall, the comic strip—from what was coarse and common. The early Chaplin two-reelers still look surprisingly lewd, with bathroom jokes and drunkenness and hatred of work and proprieties. And the Western shoot-’em-ups certainly weren’t the schoolteachers’ notions of art—which in my school days, ran more to didactic poetry and “perfectly proportioned” statues and which over the years have progressed through nice stories to “good taste” and “excellence”—which may be more poisonous than homilies and dainty figurines because then you had a clearer idea of what you were up against and it was easier to fight. And this, of course, is what we were running away from when we went to the movies. All week we longed for Saturday afternoon and sanctuary—the anonymity and impersonality of sitting in a theatre, just enjoying ourselves, not having to be responsible, not having to be “good.” Maybe you just want to look at people on the screen and know they’re not looking back at you, that they’re not going to turn on you and criticize you.

Perhaps the single most intense pleasure of moviegoing is this non-aesthetic one of escaping from the responsibilities of having the proper responses required of us in our official (school) culture. And yet this is probably the best and most common basis for developing an aesthetic sense because responsibility to pay attention and to appreciate is anti-art, it makes us too anxious for pleasure, too bored for response. Far from supervision and official culture, in the darkness at the movies where nothing is asked of us and we are left alone, the liberation from duty and constraint allows us to develop our own aesthetic responses. Unsupervised enjoyment is probably not the only kind there is but it may feel like the only kind. Irresponsibility is part of the pleasure of all art; it is the part the schools cannot recognize. I don’t like to buy “hard tickets” for a “road show” movie because I hate treating a movie as an occasion. I don’t want to be pinned down days in advance; I enjoy the casualness of moviegoing—of going in when I feel like it, when I’m in the mood for a movie. It’s the feeling of freedom from respectability we have always enjoyed at the movies that is carried to an extreme by American International Pictures and the Clint Eastwood Italian Westerns; they are stripped of cultural values. We may want more from movies than this negative virtue but we know the feeling from childhood moviegoing when we loved the gamblers and pimps and the cons’ suggestions of muttered obscenities as the guards walked by. The appeal of movies was in the details of crime and high living and wicked cities and in the language of toughs and urchins; it was in the dirty smile of the city girl who lured the hero away from Janet Gaynor. What draws us to movies in the first place, the opening into other, forbidden or surprising, kinds of experience, and the vitality and corruption and irreverence of that experience are so direct and immediate and have so little connection with what we have been taught is art that many people feel more secure, feel that their tastes are becoming more cultivated when they begin to appreciate foreign films. One foundation executive told me that he was quite upset that his teen-agers had chosen to go to “Bonnie and Clyde” rather than with him to “Closely Watched Trains.” He took it as a sign of lack of maturity. I think his kids made an honest choice, and not only because “Bonnie and Clyde” is the better movie, but because it is closer to us, it has some of the qualities of direct involvement that make us care about movies. But it’s understandable that it’s easier for us, as Americans, to see art in foreign films than in our own, because of how we, as Americans, think of art. Art is still what teachers and ladies and foundations believe in, it’s civilized and refined, cultivated and serious, cultural, beautiful, European, Oriental: it’s what America isn’t, and it’s especially what American movies are not. Still, if those kids had chosen “Wild in the Streets” over “Closely Watched Trains” I would think that was a sound and honest choice, too, even though “Wild in the Streets” is in most ways a terrible picture. It connects with their lives in an immediate even if a grossly frivolous way, and if we don’t go to movies for excitement, if, even as children, we accept the cultural standards of refined adults, if we have so little drive that we accept “good taste,” then we will probably never really begin to care about movies at all. We will become like those people who “may go to American movies sometimes to relax” but when they want “a little more” from a movie, are delighted by how colorful and artistic Franco Zeffirelli’s “The Taming of the Shrew” is, just as a couple of decades ago they were impressed by “The Red Shoes,” made by Powell and Pressburger, the Zeffirellis of their day. Or, if they like the cozy feeling of uplift to be had from mildly whimsical movies about timid people, there’s generally a “Hot Millions” or something musty and faintly boring from Eastern Europe—one of those movies set in World War II but so remote from our ways of thinking that it seems to be set in World War I. Afterward, the moviegoer can feel as decent and virtuous as if he’d spent an evening visiting a deaf old friend of the family. It’s a way of taking movies back into the approved culture of the schoolroom—into gentility—and the voices of schoolteachers and reviewers rise up to ask why America can’t make such movies.

Xexoxical Endarchy wrote:
forest gump (ko god da je radio)

bela maca wrote:Meni su u tom periodu bili zanimljivi fight club, v for vendetta, gordost i predrasude, velika očekivanja

ontheotherhand wrote:
Podseti me ovo tvoje na ovaj klasik:

Because of the photographic nature of t...

http://www.paulrossen.com/paulinekael/trashartandthemovies.html

zvezda je zivot wrote:
zemeckis zasad vodi sa 4 preporucena filma: imamo forresta gumpa i back to the future, celu trilogiju. jos neko da preporuci death becomes her (zenski je film).

Xexoxical Endarchy wrote:jbg, realno je najveci i eye-candy i najveci epski spektakl ran. tu story-line moze da se cak ne prati uopste, jer 

Hubert de Montmirail wrote:Trading Places, Beverly Hills Cop 1 i 2, Spies Like Us, Blues Brothers, Ghostbusters 1 i 2, Groundhog Day, Back to the Future sva tri dela, Dragnet (sa Tomom Henksom i Denom Arkrojdom), 1941 i ima verovatno jos neki dobar

Sotir wrote:ПС Момци,
јесте ли ви икад ишли у биоскоп да гледате филм по девојкином избору?
Можда сте приметили да оне имају другачији укус од нас, ово што сте наслагали досад јесу добри филмови, али занимљивији момцима.

Пустите мало девојке да напишу шта је њима било занимљиво у том периоду.

Sotir wrote:ПС Момци,
јесте ли ви икад ишли у биоскоп да гледате филм по девојкином избору?
Можда сте приметили да оне имају другачији укус од нас, ово што сте наслагали досад јесу добри филмови, али занимљивији момцима.

Пустите мало девојке да напишу шта је њима било занимљиво у том периоду.

Utvara wrote:

Nema smisla navikavati decu na filmove, kada se zna da će filmovi biti sve gori o gori. Neka se navikavaju na serije. Živimo u eri najgorih filmova i najboljih serija ikada, tzv. peak TV.

ontheotherhand wrote:
Što manje skrin tajma to bolje.

ontheotherhand wrote:
Kad shvatiš koliko je život kratak, da gubiš vreme na nepotrebne gluposti i da se kaješ zbog toga u prošlosti, onda ga zaista gubiš.