World of KJ :: View topic - Eisenstein vs. Tarkovsky

yoshue wrote:

This thread is making a valid point.

trixster wrote:

Rather pretentious showdown, don't you think?

Gullimont wrote:

yoshue wrote:

This thread is making a valid point.

That Guybrush is a deeply unlikable condescending prick?

Oh and since all i've seen is Stalker i can't judge.

Jeff wrote:

Gullimont wrote:

yoshue wrote:

This thread is making a valid point.

That Guybrush is a deeply unlikable condescending prick?

Oh and since all i've seen is Stalker i can't judge.

Too bad you missed his "Top 100" that took like...well over a month.

GuybrushX McMurphy wrote:

I was discussing this very topic with a friend of mine today and I thought putting it up here - on a film forum - would be a nice idea. It's also pretty odd for Gullimont of all people to state such a thing, since I just recommended a Tarkovsky film (Ivan's Childhood) to him a few days ago, after he had made clear to like Idi I Smotri.

Gullimont wrote:

I never did, the question mark (or the cavuto as the daily show calls it) absolves all blame, i shall be using it more often in future to spook people. :sweat:

Shack wrote:

or Guybrush's 300 review and the fun we had with that.

GuybrushX McMurphy wrote:

But I don't understand how creating this thread makes me a "deeply unlikable condescending prick", seeing as both directors are well-known, highly important/influential and among my favorites (especially Tarkovsky). I don't really see the point in starting a thread about Michael Bay or Paul W.S. Anderson, since I'm usually not really interested in their work.

GuybrushX McMurphy wrote:

Gullimont wrote:

I never did, the question mark (or the cavuto as the daily show calls it) absolves all blame, i shall be using it more often in future to spook people. :sweat:

The question mark makes it a rhetorical question, which is why the blame for its devilish content, that came straight from the deeps of your sick, twisted and malevolent mind, is still as valid as ever.

Groucho wrote:

GuybrushX McMurphy wrote:

Yeah, just ignore it.

There are people on this Board who think film started when they grew old enough to notice it. Mention "Casablanca" and their instant reaction is "Not interested in seeing that; the new special effect film comes out this weekend!"

There are also people who think any music older than 10 years isn't relevant, that classic literature is boring, and that any art form that happened long ago is pretentious.

Ignore 'em.

Shack wrote:

There's a difference between having a liking towards older films, a la say yoshue or you or Jon in some cases, and what Guybrush is.

... A pretentious motherfucker.

kypade wrote:

Link to the list?

I don't think there's anything wrong with a Eisenstein vs Tarkovsky thread, though. I mean, there's something wrong with expecting more than a handful of people on this board to be familiar with them, but I don't think he necessarily was expecting that. Seems like others were bringing that.

Author:	GuybrushX McMurphy [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 3:40 pm ]
Post subject:	Eisenstein vs. Tarkovsky
Showdown of the Russian directing legends - which one do YOU prefer? Sergei M. Eisenstein (Battleship Potemkin, Ivan Groznyy I+II, Aleksandr Nevskiy) vs. Andrei Tarkovsky (Ivan's Childhood, Andrei Rublev, Solyaris, Zerkalo, Stalker)

Author:	Shack [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 3:56 pm ]
Post subject:
Yeahhhh, never seen a film from either. In no mood to.

Author:	trixster [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:12 pm ]
Post subject:
I've only seen Potemkin from that list, so I guess it's Eisenstein by default. Rather pretentious showdown, don't you think?

Author:	Jonathan [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:58 pm ]
Post subject:
Alas, the only film I've from either was Potemkin. I've wanted to see Solarys or Stalker though.

Author:	neo_wolf [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 5:20 pm ]
Post subject:
I have seen Andre Rublev and Potemkin, andre rublev is the greatest visual film i have seen, its a must see.

World of KJ http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/

Eisenstein vs. Tarkovsky http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=28877	Page 1 of 3

Author:	Johnny Dollar [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 5:24 pm ]
Post subject:
This thread is making a valid point.

Author:	Gulli [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 5:31 pm ]
Post subject:
yoshue wrote: This thread is making a valid point. That Guybrush is a deeply unlikable condescending prick? Oh and since all i've seen is Stalker i can't judge.

Author:	Groucho [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:01 pm ]
Post subject:
Only seen Potemkin so don't feel right in voting.

Author:	Jeff [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:19 pm ]
Post subject:
Gullimont wrote: yoshue wrote: This thread is making a valid point. That Guybrush is a deeply unlikable condescending prick? Oh and since all i've seen is Stalker i can't judge. Too bad you missed his "Top 100" that took like...well over a month.

Author:	Johnny Dollar [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:51 pm ]
Post subject:
Guybrush's top 100 list, whether real or not, was brilliant. I strongly encourage everyone to check out all of the Eisenstein pictures listed above, as well as Andrei Rublev.

Author:	Gulli [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 8:37 pm ]
Post subject:
GuybrushX McMurphy wrote: I was discussing this very topic with a friend of mine today and I thought putting it up here - on a film forum - would be a nice idea. It's also pretty odd for Gullimont of all people to state such a thing, since I just recommended a Tarkovsky film (Ivan's Childhood) to him a few days ago, after he had made clear to like Idi I Smotri. I never did, the question mark (or the cavuto as the daily show calls it) absolves all blame, i shall be using it more often in future to spook people.

Author:	Dr. Lecter [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 8:45 pm ]
Post subject:
Seen only Potemkin, Stalker and Solyaris, really want to see Ivan Grozny, though. From those three, I'd say Eisenstein because I really didn't like either Solyaris or Stalker and Potemkin was very well-directed.

Author:	Shack [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 9:14 pm ]
Post subject:
I don't know what's funnier, Guybrush's top 100 and the revealing of it(complete with Algren), or Guybrush's 300 review and the fun we had with that.

Author:	Heinrich Himmler [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 9:35 pm ]
Post subject:
i voted for tarkovsky, you fucking assholes.

Page 1 of 3	All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Groucho [ Sat Mar 31, 2007 11:37 pm ]
Post subject:
GuybrushX McMurphy wrote: But I don't understand how creating this thread makes me a "deeply unlikable condescending prick", seeing as both directors are well-known, highly important/influential and among my favorites (especially Tarkovsky). I don't really see the point in starting a thread about Michael Bay or Paul W.S. Anderson, since I'm usually not really interested in their work. Yeah, just ignore it. There are people on this Board who think film started when they grew old enough to notice it. Mention "Casablanca" and their instant reaction is "Not interested in seeing that; the new special effect film comes out this weekend!" There are also people who think any music older than 10 years isn't relevant, that classic literature is boring, and that any art form that happened long ago is pretentious. Ignore 'em.

Author:	DP07 [ Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:13 am ]
Post subject:
GuybrushX McMurphy wrote: Gullimont wrote: I never did, the question mark (or the cavuto as the daily show calls it) absolves all blame, i shall be using it more often in future to spook people. The question mark makes it a rhetorical question, which is why the blame for its devilish content, that came straight from the deeps of your sick, twisted and malevolent mind, is still as valid as ever.

Author:	Shack [ Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:20 am ]
Post subject:
Groucho wrote: GuybrushX McMurphy wrote: But I don't understand how creating this thread makes me a "deeply unlikable condescending prick", seeing as both directors are well-known, highly important/influential and among my favorites (especially Tarkovsky). I don't really see the point in starting a thread about Michael Bay or Paul W.S. Anderson, since I'm usually not really interested in their work. Yeah, just ignore it. There are people on this Board who think film started when they grew old enough to notice it. Mention "Casablanca" and their instant reaction is "Not interested in seeing that; the new special effect film comes out this weekend!" There are also people who think any music older than 10 years isn't relevant, that classic literature is boring, and that any art form that happened long ago is pretentious. Ignore 'em. There's a difference between having a liking towards older films, a la say yoshue or you or Jon in some cases, and what Guybrush is. ... A pretentious motherfucker.

Author:	Jonathan [ Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:32 am ]
Post subject:
Shack wrote: There's a difference between having a liking towards older films, a la say yoshue or you or Jon in some cases, and what Guybrush is. ... A pretentious motherfucker. Seriously. I've seen a lot of (Awesome) films most people here probably don't even know exist (The Passion of Joan of Arc, Faust, Open City) and I was scratching my head though 80% of his list. Considering the perverted nut case he was at BOM, I'm almost certain it's not real.

Author:	kypade [ Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:36 am ]
Post subject:
Link to the list? I don't think there's anything wrong with a Eisenstein vs Tarkovsky thread, though. I mean, there's something wrong with expecting more than a handful of people on this board to be familiar with them, but I don't think he necessarily was expecting that. Seems like others were bringing that.

Author:	Jonathan [ Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:40 am ]
Post subject:
kypade wrote: Link to the list? I don't think there's anything wrong with a Eisenstein vs Tarkovsky thread, though. I mean, there's something wrong with expecting more than a handful of people on this board to be familiar with them, but I don't think he necessarily was expecting that. Seems like others were bringing that. http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopi ... 009#152009 Warning: Goes on for about 5-10 pages.