[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 13 KB, 274x373, jean.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14381502 No.14381502 [Reply] [Original]

>Film is the highest form of art
>The book is better than the movie

Pick one you fucking plebs

>> No.14381511

>>14381502
They're both nice. I don't know why there needs to be a competition between two wildly different mediums.

>> No.14381512

Movie has higher ceiling but books hit their ceiling way more often, the shining happens once a decade and great books happen once a year. My hot take of the day.

>> No.14381524

>>14381502
Film could be higher but considering the take liberties with the source text they're usually worse. Then again motion picture is very boring. You can only watch the movie as fast as it plays but you can read the book as fast as you can read. If you're a subvocalizing brainlet ofc movies would be preferable.

>> No.14381545

>>14381512
was down for this till you used the example of the Shining lmao

>> No.14381562

>>14381502

>Muh moving lights
>Muh beautiful people
>Muh 2 hour attention span

Cinefiles are apes

>> No.14383139

>>14381502
Films are tryhard pretentious shit.

>> No.14383142

>>14381502
FILM IS NOT THE HIGHEST FORM OF ART!! ALL ART IS ON EQUAL GROUND, OTHERWISE ANIME AND PORN ARE TO BE CONSIDERED THE HIGHEST W/ FILM!

>> No.14383146

movies are no longer being made for art but cash grabs targeted towards people that have relationships with big corps

>> No.14383147

>>14381562
>2 hour attention span
You don't need more than that to read some books anon

>> No.14383156
File: 156 KB, 1242x1394, 1558672334612.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14383156

>>14381502
Both are wrong. Non-fiction is above everything.

>> No.14383162

>>14381502
Vladimir Lenin said film was the highest art because even illiterate peasants could understand it.

>> No.14383164
File: 15 KB, 399x388, pepe vomiting.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14383164

>>14381502
>>Film is the highest form of art
What a fucking pleb.

>> No.14383170

guys can someone explain to me why i hate movies so much? i find them entertaining but they feel so vacuous compared to novels. something about the medium just irks me. can anyone who relates shed some perspective here?

>> No.14383181

>>14381502
Basically what this guy >>14381512 said.
Movies have so much more going on in a frame compared to a sentence that it's impossible to create a universal hierarchy of best to average films. This is also why people's tastes differ so much in film, because different people focus on different aspects of cinematography, and so it's very rare that films which more or less everyone likes are created. "Popular films" just excel at aspects of film that hits the largest demographic, like how every superhero movie just has extremely flashy action scenes, whereas the "best films" are hard to come by because it has to be amazing in all aspects of cinematography not just flashy cgi.

>> No.14383206

>>14383170
a movie has two hours to say everything it wants/needs to, a novel has near endless limits

>> No.14383219
File: 165 KB, 1024x768, 1559481544325.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14383219

>>14383146
>only Hollywood exists
brainlet take

>> No.14383221

>>14383181

I can say Chinatown is easily the best movie i've seen to date. although i haven't gotten around to watching many classic films. However chinatown is not my favorite film, for a few reasons, I happened to get bored a few times during the movie, because it is created in such a way where you have to be conscious at all times, there are many details that you have to be aware of that it's hard to watch it with a turned off brain. Anyways the point i'm trying to make is if I turn off my bias, I can admit that Chinatown is objectively a good movie due to my analysis (not to be confused with critique), but I can also say it's not my favorite in that regard. Every second in the film was counted to show something meaningful that you couldn't look away. For that reason it is beuatiful in its work but truly en captivating for a certain type of audience that can appreciate it

>> No.14383302

>>14381545
Good book

>> No.14383411

>>14383162
Wouldn't that make it the lowest art?

>> No.14383416

>>14383411
What are you gonna call Lenin wrong? You think you know better than him? Who are you to say he's wrong? Why should your opinion matter? Are you Lenin? Well are you? Huh?

>> No.14383420
File: 358 KB, 572x450, 1523741860845.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14383420

Love watching anti-cinema virgins seethe.

>> No.14383425

if there's any medium better than literature it is music.

>> No.14383427

>>14383420
*whinnies*

>> No.14383434

>>14383221
Forget it Jake, it's 4channel

>> No.14383693

>>14383146
This.

The new star wars is just mere spectacle, people don't come for the movie itself. The movie didn't take place.

>> No.14383699

>>14383420
CINEMA IS PRODUCT OF WEIMAR HEDONISM TRANSFERRED INTO CALIFORNIA. LOOK AT THE IMPACT THAT IT HAS DONE TO THE WESTERN CULTURE AS WELL AS SOME PARTS OF THE WORLD.

>> No.14383759

>>14383699
Cinema is easily the least hedonistic medium of art.

>> No.14383774

>>14383759
I won't deny.

>> No.14383846

>>14383759
>Cinema is easily the least hedonistic medium of art.
>combining moving pictures, story, sound and music
It's clearly the most hedonistic, it's second only to video games. Literature is the highest art because it is thought itself as opposed to the lower sensory forms. I don't know how you could even be confused about this. You can't express the highest reachings of the human mind in a movie, you couldn't make a movie out of Ulysses. It only adds layers of obfuscation, distracting, entertaining sounds and images meant to dazzle you, each layer of sensory input only making it exponentially more difficult to communicate abstract meaning. It's a demiurgic imitation of the sensory experience of the world, a simulation, a simulacrum. The meaning extracted from it still takes the form of thought when abstracted from the layers of sensory fluff, literature deals directly in abstraction and thought.

>> No.14383878

>>14383846
You have no idea what you're talking about. Please read more before trying this hard to sound intelligent in the future. Maybe it would be better if you never voiced your thoughts again if that rotten corncob brain of yours could ever consider this worth typing out. Maybe spend some time in nature, admire some trees. You may be too far gone (or just nonfunctional) to save, but admiring nature is a fine way to build a sense for aesthetics and how they can move a human being. I hope you're able to become a human being one day.

>> No.14383906

>>14383878
Aesthetics is the last romance of the ego before finding God, the last infirmity of noble minds. I hope you will eventually see beyond the dazzling lights and colors and noise of this world and find God.

>> No.14383923

>>14383906
You just repeated what I said in worse prose.

>> No.14384148

>>14383923
I'm ESL and I only speak my mind, I don't care if you find my writing pleasurable. That and projecting "trying to sound intelligent" on me is just more manifestations of that vanity. Aestheticism is vanity, it's nothing but the masturbation of smug midwits drunk on their own intelligence and what they think is "refinement", because they're able to appreciate subtler things. It's only slightly subtler than food or sex and hedonism just the same. You're wrong if you think you can see God by becoming entranced with the illusions beautiful of art or nature, God's presence is scarce in this world. Stop worshipping the demiurge and imitating him.

>> No.14384154

>>14384148
>You're wrong if you think you can see God by becoming entranced with the illusions beautiful of art or nature
You're just spoiled

>> No.14384172

>>14384154
What's that supposed to mean?

>> No.14384177

>>14381502
Film was supposed to be higher form of art
Books suck because they are tied to words. If you knew how to send people to certain stories or locations via psychedelics, they'd be better.

>> No.14384204

>>14384172
You've probably seen literal miracles in your life on a daily basis and just treat them like it's another day, that's the problem with getting older, you become jaded, and less infatuated with the world. At one point your mother's face was enough to keep you occupied for hours, it's not that the whole world is drab, and without miracles, there's just so many that you forget their miracles. Do you remember the first time you saw snow fall from the sky? Or the first time you ever really felt you loved someone? There are people, usually religious, who live their lives as glad as they were in those moments just whenever they see there neighbor alive and well in the morning, people who aren't jaded, people living their lives with gratitude for all they have, that's all I mean when I say you're spoiled.

>> No.14384239

>>14384204
I'm not jaded at all. I'm wide awake and sensitive to what you're talking about but I know that it's an illusion in the end, no matter how persuasive. It's the last illusion for the older souls, it's not the end.

>> No.14384280

>>14384239
>I know that it's an illusion in the end
That is jaded imo, if you hadn't known anything besides the illusion, and can't ever know anything more than the illusion, is there even a point in calling it an illusion besides being jaded? Taking away the option of the red pill at all, why would you ever choose not to believe the illusion?

>> No.14384285

>>14383878
Curiosity is born from wonder, the appreciation of one's involvements and relationships with the world that inspires greater communion through active inquiry with nature. Every great scientist, philosopher, and artist isn't driven by their "intelligence" but this spirit of personal discovery that they have fallen in love with through experience of it, or more correctly they managed to find conditions to enhance the innate curiosity of childhood instead of destroying it. Here's two videos describing this rhythm, one in the context of music and the other science:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxVVm75k_8Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLigBYhdUDs

>> No.14384306

>>14384280
>can't ever know anything more than the illusion
This is where you're wrong. Go meditate more instead of reading books and masturbating to trees.

>> No.14384367

>>14383181
Agreed, but I think that books can be a lot more precise in their crafting of something. The concentration on one particular medium, the word allows for greater absolute “control”of presentation.it takes movies a whole hell of a lot more effort to even approach the refined nature of a book due to dialogue just being one of many factors. While it is messier, it does slow for more avenues of expression so it is a tightly lawded medium.

>> No.14384397

>>14384306
You realize that meditation encompasses a wide variety of practices, right? You may as well recommend someone "go think more." Also you're clearly ignorant about meditation as experiencing/appreciating the present moment is a big component of mindfulness practices.

>> No.14384442

>>14384397
I'm not trying to be your personal guru here, I'm only saying that it comes down to your lack of experience of the transcendent. This is where the conversation ends.

>> No.14384519

>>14384442
Ah so you're a bullshitter and you're trying to quickly exit the conversation when someone who actually knows what they're talking about from experience shows up.
Yes, the conversation truly ends here, coward.

>> No.14384695

>>14384148
Keep buzzing little bee. I know you'll never sting, all you can do is regurgitate garbage like a mother bird poisoning her young. Buzz buzz.