/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11885845]

Film has been THE artistic medium for over 100 years. Why aren't screenwriters taken more seriously? The best playwrights get adulation of the highest order.

[Anonymous No.11885859]

>shilling for (((film))) as an artistic medium
never gonna make it.

[Anonymous No.11885968]

>>11885845
Film is for teenagers, nothing more

[Anonymous No.11885974]

cinema is dead asshole

[Anonymous No.11885978]

Tarantino is a poor screenwriter, but moviegoers are easily swayed by gimmicks.

[Anonymous No.11885979]

>>11885845
I'm typing while eating so not much thought has gone into this post, but I'm going to assume that Tarantino will be as adulated as Shaw or Wilde are when he's been dead as long as they have.

[Anonymous No.11885989]

>>11885845
Because film has too many moving parts. You need angles and costumes and a producer and on and on until you have mediocrity in all aspects being more profitable than excellence in one aspect

[Anonymous No.11885997]

>>11885845
Greatest screenplay ever written. Easily on par with the greatest plays of the 20th century.

[Anonymous No.11885999]

>>11885997
Maybe if it didn’t end so fucking stupidly.

[Anonymous No.11886033]

>>11885845

Because it's still a living medium, with all the gross effluvium that comes with life, and only those forms that have been castrated, groomed, and penned into a particular academic box or are functionally dead, stuffed, and mounted, get taken seriously by the serious people.

[Anonymous No.11886034]

>>11885999
Justify your absurd statement

[Anonymous No.11886042]

Because now it's shit. And Tarantino's only value has been to offer forgotten cineclub nostalgia that turned 21st century cinema into a copy-paste pit

[Anonymous No.11886049]

>>11886034
how are you going to have the movie end on some random tag along to a side character shooting a main character. All of the character build was pointless not because she died but because she died a retarded death.

[Anonymous No.11886065]

>>11885845
Woody Allen should have won the Nobel not Bob Dylan.

>>11885859
It is, though.

[Anonymous No.11886071]

The matrix trilogy is unironically a masterpiece of story telling.

[Anonymous No.11886082]

>>11886049
You gotta rewatch the film and see how literally every theme and piece of foreshadowing is tied together in that last scene.

[Anonymous No.11886113]

>>11885845
Because films are much easier to sell. I saw the first moving images on screen probably around the age of 4-5, and there has been an exponential increase in the amount of moving image I've seen throughout my whole life. And all moving image is curated, and somewhat artistic. Even commercials, or safety videos, they have to grab your attention and try to do so with the large variety of tools they have on hand to work with - color, camera angle, animation, etc..

I probably read my first words when I was around three as well, but most words I encounter have no artistic merit.

Therefore: films and screenwriters can be discredited as a genre because it is way too mainstream. In cultured circles, you'll find appreciation for playwrights, films, and literature, without much jerking off over which medium is better. But when it comes to society in general, well.. the average person is pretty dumb. Don't let society dictate your opinions on what should or shouldn't be taken seriously.

[Anonymous No.11886145]

>>11886113
Cool and unpilled

[Anonymous No.11886521]

>>11885997
Lol. Just LOL!

This is just a decent mystery story. You watch it once and there's no point in going back.

[Anonymous No.11886575]

>>11886033
This is actually not a bad answer, but academics broadly do take film seriously. Tons of great books programs have film requirements as well.

It's just uptight lit types desperate to fashion themselves as some platonic form of an intellectual that don't see the inherent worth of any artistic medium

[Anonymous No.11886592]

>>11885974
I promise I’ll finish what you started Guy... I won’t let you down

[Anonymous No.11887607]

>>11885845
I think because in most movies (especially in Hollywood) it's a big and complicated thing, where a lot of people are actually involved in the writing. People like Tarantino or Woody Allen are the exception.

[Anonymous No.11887618]

>>11886521
Yeah, the father raped his daughter.

[Anonymous No.11887645]

>>11885845
What exactly is artistic about the film industry today?

[Anonymous No.11887649]

>>11885845
there aren't too many films you would just want to sit and read, though. films are great when a lot of different elements come together, not just that screenplay.

[Anonymous No.11887730]

>>11885845
nope

[Anonymous No.11887756]

>>11886065
Nah, shoulda been Kaufman

[Anonymous No.11887859]

>>11886113
>I saw the first moving images on screen
>increase in the amount of moving image
>all moving image is curated

[Anonymous No.11888336]

>>11885978
embarassing

[Anonymous No.11888399]

>Why aren't screenwriters taken more seriously?

But they are? It's just that only the best ones are and your pic certainly isn't among them. Tarantino is boring and uninteresting.

[Anonymous No.11888402]

>>11885845
literally auteur theory you fucking idiot

[Anonymous No.11888422]

>>11888399
absolutely insightful criticism

[Anonymous No.11888455]

>>11888422

If there was anything to be insightful about Tarantino maybe we could stretch up a bit, but even his fans can't talk about anything apart from "his dialogues are awesome" and "WOW VIOLENCE", not to say a lot of those dialogues he's so known for are just dumb. His movies are fun, but Tarantino pales even in comparison to Spielberg in basically everything, and to Cronenberg in everything but directing ability.

[Anonymous No.11888483]

>>11888455
tarantino wields cliche as a tool, using it to allow him to describe a narrative arc with few strokes of his pen and allowing the viewer to fill in the rest by virtue of having seen all the movies that tarantino has also seen. by doing so, he can write surprisingly complex narratives with incredibly simple building blocks and it gives him pretty great control over pacing. GOAT consideration for the man is ridiculous but his merits aren't that hard to figure out

[Anonymous No.11888489]

>>11885845
Because they're usually not very good writers.

Films are great but they're made by directors. A screenplay is by and large a very dry and frequently changing list of suggestions with no literary or artistic value in itself. Screenwriters who do not also direct their own films are not real artists.

[Anonymous No.11888495]

>>11886575
It's in fact a terrible answer, because it conflates film with screenwriting. It really could only be dumber if he used fag-talk like effluvium oh wait he did

[Anonymous No.11888511]

>>11886521
This board’s incorrigible contrarianism is enervating.

[Anonymous No.11888529]

>>11888511
so american

[Anonymous No.11888574]

>>11888511
You do know we see right through your fag-talk, right?

[Anonymous No.11888578]

>>11888402
t. read auteur theory wikipedia page last week

[Anonymous No.11888590]

>>11888483

Of course he has merits, but they are usually centered around his ability to draw in the viewer and create a compelling narrative, but even superhero movies are able to do that. Tarantino just appeals to both the general public and elitists.

His characters are never remarkable because of their substance, only because of their style. The only characters I recall finding actually interesting were those two last guys from Reservoir Dogs, and even then it wasn't his merit but Ringo Lam's. The dialogues almost never works for us to know more about the characters or add depth to them, but to make the narrative even more exciting and cool.

The violence as well is never there to make a point, or because it should be there or otherwise the whole movie wouldn't work. It is there because it's cool. It is there because it's something people expect out of it. Of course I'm not saying this is wrong, I enjoy a hell lot of action movies (Die Hard and The Raid 2 are between my favorite movies), but there's a reason most action movies aren't taken very seriously.

>>11888511

I need to rewatch Chinatown. I honestly didn't like that movie, but it has been a few years already.

[Anonymous No.11888594]

>>11886113
>he thinks only film desplays this gross aesthetic and commercialism
It is inherent in man to 'sell'

[Anonymous No.11888598]

>>11886575
Art is subjective. And objective is always best.

[Anonymous No.11888605]

>>11888483
>>11888455
I remember when I was 13 too

[Anonymous No.11888621]

>>11885845
Movies are a complex medium but that's not a good thing. They're not respected in the same way that competitive Starcraft will never be respected as much as competitive Chess or Go (far simpler, "purer" games).

[Anonymous No.11888638]

>>11888511
This list is pretty stupid. Even in terms of witty repartee Casablanca falls below something like All About Eve, and the rest is your standard classical melodrama. And Chinatown isn't even Polanski's best film compared to Repulsion. Citizen Kane is acceptable. Godfather is too but Woody Allen's best films have better scripts in terms of range (blending humor and drama, realistic character portraits, and he has even covered crime in a more realistic manner than Godfather's grandeur)

[Anonymous No.11888641]

https://rateyourmusic.com/films/chart

What does /lit/ think of this list?

[Anonymous No.11888875]

>>11888641
pseud tier

[Anonymous No.11888877]

>>11888641
go back there

[Anonymous No.11888895]

>>11885845
Because cinema is a medium far removed from written language. It's driven by image and time, which is closer to music. Theater is a medium driven by dialogue, the spoken word. The playwright's written word is thus the primary driver.

Film is still a new medium, eventually it will come onto its own and audiences will molt their insistence on cinema based in the literary culture of print.

[Anonymous No.11888975]

video games are the only art form still alive
sorry chumps

[Anonymous No.11888978]

>>11885845
>a picture says more than a thousands words
Its true. Its a superior medium. Deal with it, its the 21th century

[Anonymous No.11888982]

>>11888978
what form of brainletism is it to genuinely think that pepewojak memes are the most interesting art created in the 21st century

[Anonymous No.11889049]

>>11888574
You’re on a literature board, philistine. >>11888638
It’s debatable whether repulsion is a better film (I would disagree) but it’s no contest which screenplay is better. Chinatown’s script is a masterpiece. Literary every line and small event ties in with major themes or other events. Every single one. It’s paced wonderfully and the reveals are huge, gratifying, and done memorably (think of the scene where Jake slaps the truth out of Evelyn). Also, Jake’s bantz are legendary throughout the whole film:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dqgCog3fRoo&t=0h0m0s

[Anonymous No.11889141]

>>11889049

Do you have a video analysis of the movie? I honestly couldn't get anything of what you're saying out of it.

[Anonymous No.11889151]

>>11885979
lmao

[Anonymous No.11889292]

>>11889141
I don’t have one ready to hand but I’ve watched the movie like four times and by the last watchthrew I realized nearly every piece of it fits together perfectly. I’m sure there are some analyses out there, but try watching it twice in a week and each time with a critical eye.

[Anonymous No.11889550]

>>11888641
Like all rym charts, it has good shit and overrated shit in mostly equal proportions