/film/

Obviously.
And everybody'll keep missing too until the full cut of MML:I is available

He is basically a man who thinks he's Bergman but only has the intelligence for genre shlock. The contrast between his pretension and the notes he actually hit in his work, create one of the most unbearably off putting directors in modern times. He is a child playing with grown up toys. Zoomers are so desperate to have their own in the film canon they crown him the king of cinema after a single film, and already fantasize about his long filmography full of Batman sequels and Starshit.

I feel you're projecting a lot here

The kind of artistry calibre you're describing doesn't exist since the 70's (in the west anyways), it's not great but we have to take whatever we can get and be content with it

There is currently only the first one to watch. To answer your question further, if you want a fairly comfy, summery, yet faintly wistful slice of film, then you're missing something in not watching Canto Uno. If you're just interested in butts, then you're missing a particularly beautiful broad with a big beautiful ass being filmed incredibly attentively and affectionately by the incomparable king of coom, M. Kechiche.

my problem with eggers is he wants it all ways at once, and then hides behind his angles however it benefits him. I think he's an actual sociopath.
>trashes blockbuster franchises but fills his films with moments aimed at teenage boys
>grovels for far left media approval telling them the lighthouse is a takedown on toxic masculinity, and the northman is meant to expose the alt right and vikings
>yet instructs his PR guys to fill every board on Any Forums with northman spam saying that it's a pro-white film. See how he tries to have it both ways? He's a sociopath.
>meanwhile he shittalks capeshit and cgi blockbusters every chance he gets.
>fills his films with cgi capeshit scenes with scenes like a sword fight with a giant CGI ghost and CGI spears being caught mid air and thrown back.
>only casts capeshit actors like Robert Pattinson (The Batman), Willem Dafoe (Spider-Man 2), Anya Taylor Joy (The Mutants), Skargard (Godzilla vs Kong), Nicole Kidman (Aquaman).

Like Jordan Peele, he's a scam artist who rode in on far left wokeism, whose films are skin deep genre exercises, and also like Jordan Peele, are being received by the critics as high art masterpieces. I hope you are not falling for it.

*slice of life film

There is no need to project when his pretension is visible on screen.

> The kind of artistry calibre you're describing doesn't exist since the 70's
Yes, and this problem needs correcting

>we have to take whatever we can get and be content with it
NO.

This is pure schizo ramblings

Agreed. The only thing worse than Eggers is if Eggers did not exist.

What did I say that is wrong? You are the Eggers fan, not me so it is your duty to defend him. Eggers is a Zoomer director aimed directly at people like Silent Dawn and Sean Baker to caw about his cinematography.

Your projections about zoomers are on which screens?

> are being received by the critics as high art masterpieces
This is the bigger issue. Filmmakers making total garbage- fine. But when everyone then looks at it like it’s an absolute masterpiece and the peak of cinema, you’re actively contributing to the demise of the art form. I don’t know if it’s lack of experience and lack of education regarding the history of cinema (a high possibility) or something more sinister (“critics” paid off by studios).

Film is a spectacle based medium. Spectacle has always been the main driving force pulling people to the theaters, beginning with the very first films when the spectacle was the very existence of the moving image. It was new, it was amazing, and people had to see it. Of course, spectacle is short-lived, so filmmakers had to begin showing things in movement that the audience couldn't experience in reality. That eventually led us to the fantastic visions of Méliès putting men on the moon, the death-defying stunts of Keaton, and the gigantic set-pieces of Griffith's epics. These were the films that people came to see, and the films that will be remembered, as time is already showing us. The lure of spectacle has never died down. Show something truly visionary and the crowds will arrive. The seats filled with common folk, the plumbers and the soccer moms. They remember the exhilaration of Star Wars, the prehistoric beasts of Jurassic Park, the groundbreaking action of The Matrix, the sinking of the Titanic, the vistas of the planet Pandora, and the universe-threatening menace of Thanos. Even now, the year's most successful film is defined by it's spectacular stunts performed by real fighter jets. Top Gun: Maverick and Tom Cruise brought people back to the movies, or perhaps they gave movies to the people.
Storytelling, performance, dialogue, cinematography... They're all there to serve the larger spectacle, man's desire to see the unseen. The filmmakers' duty is to show the audiences something they've never witnessed before.

It's a-him! Pattinson!

> if Eggers did not exist
Don’t tempt me to put a bullet in his head like he deserves, along with getting rid of you.

Oh, it's you, of course. Obsessed with trannyboxd and the likes

>people like Silent Dawn and Sean Baker
No one cares about literal nobodies on a film review site, please don't turn these threads into gossip and stalking.

I like Eggers. Good films about interesting and often unexplored periods. Looking forward to his next works.

Damn. I've not seen a Director cause so much seething since PTA. Eggers is the great new master of cinema, and you can't do a thing about it.

Attached: 21396176-6A97-4B74-BA20-8C819B5D46A8.jpg (1242x821, 553.28K)

They're fine for what they are, basically high budget/high concept versions of 60s/70s horror, adventure, swashbuckler B movies

Yes Eggers is a master director. The Lighthouse is future Sight & Sound.

Mistah Monstah ya gonna scare wittle ole me ooooooooooooooooo meez likey does horror films Un un un

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Exactly.