(oh and stupid thread)

(but movies obv.)

also there is no golden silent era of television

films every time. i’ve never fully been able to get into tv as a regular thing (wasn’t brought up in a tv-heavy household, living in a few houses with no tv at all completely weaned me off the habit). i actively resent it when tv is default “background noise” in a house.

i’m kind of all-or-nothing when it comes to getting into things, and tv series aren’t very conducive to that. remembering to be around for it every week is a massive commitment! and the minute i miss an episode that’s it, have to stop completely. last time i tried to do this was the lost/desperate housewives era and i didn’t even make it to the end of the first series.

which leads into the most important point to me—films = socialising for me. you go out to the cinema, meet friends, maybe go for a meal or a drink, you talk about it afterwards. tv = a block on socialising. instead of going out you have to stay in at the same time every week.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Lex have you heard of VCR, Sky+, Tivo, iPlayer even? Totally removes the need to be in a room at the moment something is broadcast.

VCR—never could work out how to record on videos

sky+—haha I haven’t heard of this

tivo—didn’t think we had this in the UK?

iplayer—oh god this just makes me too lackadaisical about catching up and then when i finally get round to it the programme’s been taken off iplayer the day before. EVERY TIME.

bear in mind i genuinely struggle with, like, turning the tv on and changing the channel

the absence of time constraint for TV means even the best shows just blather along until they stop being profitable, plot—not that i’m a big fan of plot but still—is just a structuralist sausage machine now designed to keep the show junkies strung along as long as poss

Twin Peaks kinda foresaw, satirised, then invented this method

and if that’s yr bag fine, whatever, but i have other time-murdering habits to sustain like video games kthx

goddamn threads are long these days

i got up to this part:

I am sure there were at least 20 movies I didn’t see this year that I would have enjoyed very much, it’s hard to figure out which 20 those would be, but still

this is a big problem with great, say, iranian movies, or indie budget flicks—they are just not available, even on the pirate bay, much less reviewed or written about; there is a huge failure to push these things up into anyone’s consciousness even though the internet is supposed to make distribution and associated “conversation” smooth as butter

speaking of video games, i love video games, but i have this weird feeling that i’m “wasting time” when i play them—even the very best games—which i almost never feel with TV or movies, even when they are terrible

i feel more or less the opposite re: tv

but then i feel like most drama series are written by fanboys and slash authors now and again i just can’t be bothered to engage—season-long plot arcs and never-solved “mysteries” that are made up as they go along, whole thing really designed for DVD buyers rather than an audience that might wanna casually watch the odd ep of something if they happen to be in that evening

shdn’t be on this ting hungover i’m just gonna go full mental about the evil that is 21st century tv

i hear that. to bring it back to videogames again there is maybe a need for the “pick up and play” model to have a renaissance, for us casual viewers

re: time-wasting, even if it’s some horrible shit on TV like “i’m a celebrity get me out of here” i feel like i’m connecting up with the unseen millions out there who have also seen it, or are seeing it; particularly if some of those unseen millions actually LIKE IT (which some of them must) i feel like i’m getting some purchase on their mentality, which feels socially useful—and curiously i don’t have this feeling of socially useful communion with videogames, even online multiplayer games

i get no sense of social usefulness from video games really but a deep brain-tickling pleasure, whereas i don’t get much sense of social engagement from tv either but i feel like i’m slaughtering hecatombs of precious time. i’m purely talking from my own perspective here tho, i’ve got no judgement on people who love their tv, if i was of a mind to smoke weed nowadays i’d probly suck up a lot more tv than i do

live sport is the most tv i watch, tbph, i’m taking ‘tv’ as dvd boxsets and d/l series, i’m assuming everyone is too?

this is a big problem with great, say, iranian movies, or indie budget flicks—they are just not available, even on the pirate bay, much less reviewed or written about; there is a huge failure to push these things up into anyone’s consciousness even though the internet is supposed to make distribution and associated “conversation” smooth as butter

― his venerable escutcheon, Tuesday, 13 December 2011 11:05 (25 minutes ago) Bookmark Permalink

this is interesting—do you mean there’s no canon for arcane stuff, outside of individuals enthusiasm? bc i think that’s kinda true. i think it is harder to embrace things that are imperfect in a climate where there’s such a voluble conversation about the ‘best’ things, so repping for some kind of idiosyncratic if nobly failing personal work is hard to get traction for.

i think there might come a point where seasons of television are released all at once rather than week-by-week, which would make tv dramas more novelistic in scope and cinematic in presentation.

― zachylon, Tuesday, December 13, 2011 1:11 AM (5 hours ago) Bookmark

why would this business model ever make sense

boxsets

schlump no i mean that there are an unbelievable number of great movies that get made every year that we will NEVER know about (to take just one of many reasons: the producer doesn’t have enough money to subtitle it) whereas there is very little great TV that passes unnoticed

actually maybe that last bit’s not true; there have been approximately one (1) metric fvckton of interesting-looking docs on BBC4 that i haven’t watched, not to mention an incredible miniseries like “the promise” that i only saw because i randomly happened upon someone’s tweet about it

by the way i watched “outnumbered” last night—cause it was on—and it was much worse than i had imagined

ahhhhhh ha ha ha ilx! you almost fooled me into caring about this.

anyway the answer is tv because it’s more like books

schlump no i mean that there are an unbelievable number of great movies that get made every year that we will NEVER know about (to take just one of many reasons: the producer doesn’t have enough money to subtitle it) whereas there is very little great TV that passes unnoticed

ah okay. i mean this just reminds me of life!, though. & is maybe a negative result of the generally positive democratisation of film, the opening up of film to people who aren’t necessarily w/a studio, who can shoot digitally &c&c&c. but yeah obv this is true. but i have hope for this though. the internet has engendered a swing back to curatorial input, & to people being able to defer to experts’ choices rather than just listen to the loudest voices; there are even those communities who’ll subtitle the unsubtitled film for wider consumption. I think that there are going to be, somewhere, bbc4 programmers or Iranian film nerds doing some of the legwork is what we have to invest in, but i still think escaping the shadow of the canon is a big deal — there is that guy writing a column for film comment about lost hollywood-era “”auteurs“” (prob not his term), arguing that a lot of the basic spadework hasn’t been done in watching through & organising that stuff in postmortem

Poll Closing Date: Saturday, December 29, 2012

TV preferred by clowns who don’t know what year it is.

How many of you watch TV and movies at home while doing other things, btw? cuz none of that counts.

the answer is tv because it’s more like books

i do really like the way characters in a TV series live in your headspace for weeks or months

this is a big problem with great, say, iranian movies, or indie budget flicks—they are just not available, even on the pirate bay, much less reviewed or written about

100% RONG

well karagarga won’t give me an invite

morbs i only watch tv while jacking off over dennis perrin tweets, i highly recommend

u might as well be ethan or someone just as boring

morbs i know there are a few specialist outlets that write about totally unobtanium films but i don’t read them for the most part, why because i would have to be available at 2:30pm in new york city on a particular wednesday in order to see them and you know, i work for a living so the whole exercise would just make me cry with futility

sorta otm ^

another reason i’m giving TV the edge is that even the artiest shows have to be middlebrow to an extent, they have to straddle the line between art and product; like stand-up comedy they have to at least attempt to work on a functional level as entertainment regardless of whatever other artistic ambitions they have, whereas by my lights movies have been shoved towards opposite poles, either machine-tooled product or plangent meditation on postmodern subjectivity (or whatever)

guys lets start our own TV channel

cd call it F U Tube

another reason i’m giving TV the edge is that even the artiest shows have to be middlebrow to an extent, they have to straddle the line between art and product; like stand-up comedy they have to at least attempt to work on a functional level as entertainment regardless of whatever other artistic ambitions they have, whereas by my lights movies have been shoved towards opposite poles, either machine-tooled product or plangent meditation on postmodern subjectivity (or whatever)

i would hate to be arguing for art refusing to try to engage people, but i think in a world in which there are ~a bunch of other shows~, a bunch of other films, it’s okay to have outliers & idiosyncratic shows/films. to invoke louis ck’s efforts re: making louie, he was mad at the punch-up & grooming that was done to tv to make it broadly pleasing. cinema is doing god’s work imo in plangently-meditating-on society

The majority of anti-TV peeps in this thread seem to dislike TV because they don’t know how to do it right. Because I actually agree with a lot of their points (TV sucks if you just sit and passively watch it for 8 hours at a time, it sucks to be locked into a schedule of watching shows, it’s hard to judge the quality of quality television when you haven’t actively engaged with television in 5+ years, etc.). To me, this isn’t that far off from someone saying that they hate movies because people are always getting shot in the theater they go to. Or that every time they get bored and go see some random movie they’re always disappointed. There are different and better ways to enjoy it.

An hour of programming on ABC Family, for instance, is almost enough to make me wish that Western culture didn’t exist.

Tv, by a lot. The only movies I like these day are big budget action/scifi flicks or documentaries.

The majority of anti-TV peeps in this thread seem to dislike TV because they don’t know how to do it right. Because I actually agree with a lot of their points (TV sucks if you just sit and passively watch it for 8 hours at a time, it sucks to be locked into a schedule of watching shows, it’s hard to judge the quality of quality television when you haven’t actively engaged with television in 5+ years, etc.). To me, this isn’t that far off from someone saying that they hate movies because people are always getting shot in the theater they go to. Or that every time they get bored and go see some random movie they’re always disappointed. There are different and better ways to enjoy it.

I have never had a problem w/ gun violence at the theaters I go to fwiw

bringing a gun to a movie theater is pretty bad gun etiquette

speaking of video games, i love video games, but i have this weird feeling that i’m “wasting time” when i play them—even the very best games—which i almost never feel with TV or movies, even when they are terrible

didnt we have a long & p interesting thread abt this like a year or so ago on real ilx???

like stand-up comedy they have to at least attempt to work on a functional level as entertainment

Ingmar Bergman was an entertainer, and a good one.

why do we have to choose?

serious question.

agreed, morbius!

(i was talking broadly about current movies)

xxpost

You have to choose because we’re going to shoot one of them in the street like a dog.

put movies out of their misery, and do it in 3-D smellovision

Jean-Luc Godard is an entertainer. He put a llama and a mule at a gas station in his latest film.

Best part is when the mule says to his friend “do you believe in god?” and the other animal nods and says “yes, I follow the dali llama.”

damn those Navajo subtitles

And then the camera pans to a llama sporting an eccentric upturned mustache.

Anna Karina and Jean Paul Belmondo were told by Godard to put a mule in the barn. When they led the mule over to the barn, they decided that the mule’s ears were to long and he would not fit into the barn. So they put their heads together and decided to get a ladder and a saw and saw the overhead of the barn out so the mule could walk right on in the barn.

They began their job and Godard walked over to them and asked them why they were sawing out the top of the barn. When they told him the mule’s ears were too long to go into the barn, he said:

“Why don’t you just get a shovel and dig the dirt out of the ground below, then the mule could walk on in”

Anna and Jean Paul looked at each other and said “We told you his ears were too long, not his feet.”

The majority of anti-TV peeps in this thread seem to dislike TV because they don’t know how to do it right. Because I actually agree with a lot of their points (TV sucks if you just sit and passively watch it for 8 hours at a time, it sucks to be locked into a schedule of watching shows, it’s hard to judge the quality of quality television when you haven’t actively engaged with television in 5+ years, etc.).

this is not it at all, at least for me. the simple fact is that the number of pleasurable viewing hours to be derived from movies (and I mean ALL movies going back to the dawn of film) is larger than the number of pleasurable viewing hours to be derived from TV (and I mean ALL of TV going back to the dawn of television). Some of this is attributable to the fact that so little TV bears re-watching—even the stuff that is pretty good (I never need to see an episode of Cheers, or MASH, or the Wire, or Happy Days ever again, for example). There are some exceptions (Simpsons, Sopranos, Twin Peaks, Twilight Zone, KITH, Mr. Show) but they’re pretty rare.

This is not the case with films—decent films bear up under repeated viewing. And then there’s the simple fact that the vast majority of TV is total shit. I simply think the hit:miss ratio for films is better.

don’t understand why this thread got hung up on NEW TV shows and movies, that seems like a totally irrelevant and outdated way to assess viewing material in this day and age, when everything is available all the time.

SMC OTM —

voted movies, because I didn’t assume n/a was talking about current tv and current movies in the OP

― William (C), Monday, December 12, 2011 5:15 PM (Yesterday)

this is a big problem with great, say, iranian movies, or indie budget flicks—they are just not available, even on the pirate bay, much less reviewed or written about

also yeah this is nonsense I can get this shit from my local video store

tbf you do live in iran

love this place - bros for all time and they’re going to put in a screening room in their basement! awes

most people don’t have hipster videostores nearby, including most people in sf or brooklyn

heaven forbid you should actually have to find a physical place, walk somewhere, and talk to an actual person to find a movie

you should print that out and post it on their window when they go out of business in 2 years

A major source of international films for me is the New York Public Library.

(I imagine other major cities’ libraries stock many, many fewer)

including most people in sf

there’s at least 4 throughout the city that I know of (Le Video and Lost Weekend are the best ones tho)

okay so I guess you should print out 4 copies

you should print that out and post it on their window when they go out of business in 2 years

people have been saying this for at least 5 years and not only are they still in business, they’re expanding so whatever

anyway the point is these things are available if you are interested and willing to look for them on something that is not an internet service

don’t understand why this thread got hung up on NEW TV shows and movies, that seems like a totally irrelevant and outdated way to assess viewing material in this day and age, when everything is available all the time

I totally get this. But I’m judging this silly poll in terms of “What brings the most pleasure to my life right now?”

hipster videostore economics aside, it’s pretty easy to film relatively obscure films in 2011, 100x easier than it was in the 90s

esp if you don’t live in a big city

There are going to continue to be niche video stores even after everything [sic] is streaming, the same way there are vinyl record stores for fanatics.

A major source of international films for me is the New York Public Library.

Yeah, my father-in-law actually gets lots of international films from his local suburban library and does interlibrary loan for the titles he can’t find there.

so basically you guys are saying that movies are better than tv, but only if you do research to find the few obscure foreign movies that are actually good and have a niche hipster video store in your area that stocks these movies

eh I doubt it, everything is digital, there’s no real difference between walking to a store to get those 1s and 0s or pressing 3 buttons on your computer, whereas record stores offer something ‘different’ from downloading on mp3

xxp

an

like there is such thing as vinyl fetishism there is no such thing as ‘borrowing a dvd for 2 days fetishism’

afaik

this is not it at all, at least for me. the simple fact is that the number of pleasurable viewing hours to be derived from movies (and I mean ALL movies going back to the dawn of film) is larger than the number of pleasurable viewing hours to be derived from TV (and I mean ALL of TV going back to the dawn of television). Some of this is attributable to the fact that so little TV bears re-watching—even the stuff that is pretty good (I never need to see an episode of Cheers, or MASH, or the Wire, or Happy Days ever again, for example). There are some exceptions (Simpsons, Sopranos, Twin Peaks, Twilight Zone, KITH, Mr. Show) but they’re pretty rare.

i guess it’s impossible to crunch the numbers on this but i feel like there are more shows with like 50 hours worth of episodes that are all watching at least once than there are movies that are worth watching 25 times or whatever.

I am saying it’s stupid to choose one or the other. AKA what is the purpose of this poll

lol “few”

like I said before the hit:miss ratio for movies is just better for me. If I want to find something decent to watch for two hours I just walk to the store—odds are I will enjoy whatever I rent there more than whatever new 22-minute episode of the one halfway decent show currently in production available on demand. for example.

I don’t do “research”

many xp

there’s no real difference between walking to a store to get those 1s and 0s or pressing 3 buttons on your computer,

this is wrong and you know it!

the best thing about Lost Weekend is actually going there, hanging out and shooting the shit with the people there, discovering new stuff I didn’t know about etc.

i guess it’s impossible to crunch the numbers on this but i feel like there are more shows with like 50 hours worth of episodes that are all watching at least once than there are movies that are worth watching 25 times or whatever.

yeah see the problem is I have seen all those shows that have 50 hours+ that are worth watching already. And I don’t need to see them again. Whereas with film I feel like I’ve barely begun to scratch the surface of all the material worth watching 25x.

I meant w/r/t to the product you see not the ‘experience’

but I don’t think very many people actually care about ‘the video store experience’

heaven forbid you should actually have to find a physical place, walk somewhere, and talk to an actual person to find a movie

― Shakey Mo Collier, Tuesday, December 13, 2011 6:23 PM (11 minutes ago) Bookmark Permalink

this snark is so misplaced. there is, honestly, not a single place within walking distance where I can rent a video that isn’t bolt ii: hamster of death. the closest two places are blockbusters, and after that I’d need to take a bus to a train to another bus to get a place that charges a $90 annual membership to take out the remaining half of the criterion collection and old miss marple VHS tapes

you don’t have a library?

ha ha ha you know nothing about public libraries in 99% of this country do you?

You can ILL all kinds of DVD’s via ILL as Jaymc pointed out.

if you are really that into movies and you don’t live in a place w/ an enormous library you should prob just get netflix?

Every interlibrary loan request I’ve ever made has been like pulling impacted wisdom teeth. “WHY in god’s NAME would you ask me to do something like THAT, you think you’re too good for these Touched by an Angel videotapes? ok, FINE. FINE!”

Whereas with film I feel like I’ve barely begun to scratch the surface of all the material worth watching 25x.

for ex. y’know, one day I will get around to going through all of Sam Fuller’s films. Or Ozu. Or De Palma. I am fairly confident that these are treasure troves that I am likely to enjoy. I do not feel this way about diving into the entire run of, say, Lost.

xps

Yeah, and I’ve seen everything I want to see from them. Unless I take up a marathon viewing of Armenian miniseries concerning the effects of genocide and the problem with Turks, that is. ILL is a great option in theory, but the wait time for anything that isn’t Anne of Avonlea is +/- 6 months. I still do it sometimes, but by the time I get the movie I’ve ILLed, I’ve often moved on to something else or forgotten why I put it on the first place. I live in a suburb that’s suburby enough (sorry, iatee) that I don’t have access to the large city collection that I did even 5 miles on the other side of town. I do netflix, greencine, hulu, and DVDs by mail from Sprockets when I need, and I see a ton of movies through them but there is honestly _no_ local option for watching them.

ha ha ha you know nothing about public libraries in 99% of this country do you?

hahaha I was raised by a librarian, have two close friends that are public librarians in the SF library system, and go to our branch on a weekly basis. and get ILL all the time (primarily for sci-fi books and not for movies tho)

in conclusion, fuck you

Every interlibrary loan request I’ve ever made has been like pulling impacted wisdom teeth. “WHY in god’s NAME would you ask me to do something like THAT, you think you’re too good for these Touched by an Angel videotapes? ok, FINE. FINE!”

― William (C), Tuesday, December 13, 2011 6:46 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Permalink

that’s a function of a person at your library being a total dick, not ILL itself as an idea.

Yeah, I loved the SF library system. And the LA library system. And the Seattle library system. And the Boston library system. Unfortunately I’m not near any of them.

remy is there stuff you can’t find on those internet services? (I’ve never used any of them)

xp