วีดีโอ

🎥 I so did enjoy this movie! 🍿

Ts'ai Ming-liang is the greatest living film-maker, and one of the greatest of all time, up there with Ozu, Tarkovsky, Antonioni, Fei Mu. Thank you for this.

🎉Merci pour cette scène finale où Timothee revit tout son amour de l'été devant la cheminée en hiver. Quel magnifique acteur et quel film réussi. Merci de ce moment.. ❤❤

So cool man thank you

thanks for this content

Thank you boy$

Very glad to find this on my recommendation, great video!

Clear argument, beautifully put

"promosm" 💥

I despise the term Slow cinema to no end. Its reductive, its lazy and insulting.

Satantango is such an amazing film and it’s long shots are so beautiful and impactful it literally makes you feel like your there in that environment at that time very immersive. and by the way this video was great 👍🏿

Slow cinema is a broad subject. For example, there is a lot to unpack in the comment quoted in this video that Bela Tarr's long takes are, alternatively, immersive and alienating. I rewatched Werckmeister Harmonies this week. Is it that slow moving a film? More slow than a contemporaneous Malick, Haneke or Claire Denis film? They're probably all about the same. I think that "2000's art film" is a pretty useful label in place of slow cinema or contemplative cinema. Although I think slow cinema is an OK term to use interchangeably with "2000's art film," I also think that it could be used better, if applied more specifically to more really slow movies than Malick or Denis. A blog called Unspoken Cinema which was very active during the 2000's worked hard to nail down what its authors meant by Contemporary Contemplative Cinema. In short, for its primary writer, Alan Clark's film Elephant was a contemplative film because it lacked characterization or the possibility of identifying with its characters, whereas Gus Van Sant's film Elephant was a lesser or not-quite contemplative film because, while formally unusual, it is still a relatively dramatically conventional narrative film. So, Elephant 2003 is slow cinema, but perhaps counter-intuitively it isn't contemplative, at least according to one authority; for simplicity's sake, though, it is, unarguably, a 2000's art film. The phrase "thresholds of lingering and ambivalence" also quoted in the video is basically a restating of the dichotomy of immersive and alienating as characteristics of 2000's art films. I agree with this as a characterization of how films by Tarr, Haneke, Claire Denis, Ceylan, Reygadas, Dumont, Mingiu and the Dardennes, to name a few, typically feel. These filmmakers' storytelling to a greater or lesser extent involves long takes, but I don't know if that's the ultimate common denominator. I think it is more that they are all quite sparing in the narrative information that they dispense, and we the audience consequently become involved in the characters' stories unfolding before us, but remain uncertain, either about just what it is that we're watching, or we're tense about the outcome, which we can't very confidently anticipate, because I think the sophistication of the filmmaking craft cues us to a comparable sophistication in narrative, which is hard to second guess. More than slow pacing then, what for me unites the above filmmakers (and a few others) is a combination of great formal accomplishment with a particular reticence, a preference for laconic narrative and demonstration of character through action over exhaustive exposition and exploration of psychology through dialogue. Ceylan is somewhat of an exception here, but he also--as do many others to a lesser degree--disrupts his storytelling with visionary interludes, or, while his characters might easily be understood by us, sometimes their stubbornness makes them hard to fathom, or for us to guess what resolution could be in store for them. During the 2000's mainstream cinema also got in on long takes, beginning with Children of Men, dp'd by Lubezky, who also dp'd for Malick, and was assisted in this and eventually succeeded by Jörg Widmer, who was the Steadicam operator (an important job indeed) on Werckmeister Harmonies. For me, in the category of the immersive, virtuoso long take "slow cinema" and mainstream cinema have intersected. Schrader has said that criticism is not a question of being 100% indisputably correct, but rather about having a good enough hit rate with one's takes as to be reliable. There are still lots of practitioners of a slow cinema, but is he nevertheless more correct than incorrect about a slow death of slow cinema? I think so. After all, as I say I refer to Bela Tarr-like films as 2000's art films, and indeed Tarr retired in 2011.

I really started to appreciate the long take with Godfrey Reggio's Powaqqatsi. Although not a narrative exactly, there are moments where the scene you are watching will transform into something magic. I keep thinking of this one shot of a street that seems to go on forever until a man and his young daughter walk past, but the little girl stops just at the edge of the frame and stares at us. The music slightly shifts and it just becomes magic. No other way to describe it. Great video! Thank you!

Great video! I'm making my own animated romance short right now with Paperman as one of my big inspirations, and this video essay came just in time.

can you turn on the subtitle?

𝓹𝓻𝓸𝓶𝓸𝓼𝓶 💞

Lovely video!

It's a great video, nice work!

This is terrific. Thank you for this.

enjoyed seeing this and remembering all the great things we did at MWFF this year

Thank you so much for sharing

Great job 👏 thank you for sharing. New subscriber. Stay connected and have a great day

has the deadline ended then

Can We update Indian film??