Talk:Surrealist cinema

message: Should this entirely unreferenced proseline article simply be converted to a list? Skomorokh incite 18:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Something drastic certainly needs to be done.  As it stands, it requires major surgery to be brought into line with Wikipedia standards.  I agree with the proposal.  This, I assume, would require a page move to List of Surrealist films, yes? ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 18:58, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oui. Skomorokh incite 19:05, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So, when do we get started? ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 02:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Give it a few days so that others have a chance to object/reform the article? Skomorokh incite 02:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I am in no hurry, believe me... ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 03:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Well, it's now been more than a week.  I think we should get started.  The only change in the interim is an anonymous user adding more unreferenced and dubious information. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 04:40, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: On it. Pile in! скоморохъ ѧ 04:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Convert to list 

message: No?
--Jerome Potts (talk) 05:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure we could all contribute additional examples (Peter Greenaway?), but is this intended to be an exhaustive list?  Or would it be a better idea to morph this toward a true article about surrealist film, instead of a list? 12.233.146.130 (talk) 19:59, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Federico Fellini]] 

message: Tarsem did The Cell and The Fall; would either of those count as surreal, I could see the cell not being so much, but I have strong feelings that The Fall should be included in the modern surreal film list.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.91.38 (talk) 21:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tarsem  

message: There has been a dramatic expansion of this article in recent months, with a great many films, directors, and subcategories of "surrealistic" films being added.  Now, while I do not object to this, in principle, most of these changes have been made by anonymous editors who offered no explanation for the additions, either here or in their edit summaries, and no references have been added.  This is no good.  I have begun the process of fixing some of the changes, including removing those items which do not seem appropriate.  ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 16:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent changes 

message: Hi there, I'm a Wikipedia-noob, so I hope, I'm doing this here correct...
I added two very important directors: Roy Andersson from sweden and David Cronenberg; Cronenberg has done many surreal movies, like the adaption of the book "Naked Lunch" from William S. Burroughs, a book written completely on
drugs (and also the movie is very weird) or the movie "Crash" in which crippled people have sex in damaged cars.
I wouldn't count Peter Greenaway a surrealistic filmmaker, not at all. Also Michel Gondry is questionable. 
Ever thought about Matthew Barney? I think what he does is more "art" than "movies" - what do you think?
(Greetings from Elwood)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.168.121.118 (talk) 23:01, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roy Andersson added 

message: I think that paragraphs at the top of the section "Modern films considered surrealist", showed cofused text between Fantasy/Sci-fi and Surrealism. For example, Hayao Miyazaki's most films are not surrealist works except Princess Mononoke. Instead of surrealism, they are fantasy genre films. By the way, I agree that Hideaki Anno's movie, The End of Evangelion is included in surrealism. -- Kookyunii (talk) 01:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In general, a lot of films added here are not, in any way, surrealist.  The problem is that "surreal," and by extension "surrealistic," is a term with no clear meaning, due to years of misuse.  You are correct, the films you mention are fantasies, but they are not surreal. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 01:39, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confused text with Fatasy/SF 

message: should we include paprika? http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/paprika  —Preceding unsigned comment added by ArielGenesis (talk • contribs) 01:09, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, why would we?  Nothing in that article to which you linked gives any indication this film is surrealist. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 01:37, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  paprika 

message: I disagree on the decision to remove Aqua Teen Hunger Force from the list of surreal animation. I don't see how it fails to match the criteria of surrealism; going purely by the definition on the main page, "surprise, unexpected juxtapositions and non sequitor" are its bread and butter. It fits perfectly under the umbrella of surreal comedy, and as such I don't understand why it should not be mentioned on this page, along with similar shows such as Sealab 2021. 173.72.41.37 (talk) 19:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aqua Teen Hunger Force & similar 

message: I have removed the arbitrary lists of modern films from the article. Some of these entries are relevant for the topic, in how they represent the impact surrealism has had on film history, but they need to be presented within a (sourced) context, not just be listed at random. The vast majority of the entries however had pretty much nothing to do with surrealism, which is why I chose to remove them all. Anyone who plans to readd sections on surrealism beyond the original movement, please make sure that you provide a proper context, explain what the work's relation to surrealism is, and use reliable sources for those claims. Smetanahue (talk) 13:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: So how do we categorize and/or describe El Topo by Alejandro Jodorowsky or The Saragasso Manuscript by Wojciech Has?..Modernist (talk) 13:59, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Describe them as what they are. An allegorical Western and an adaptation of an early 19th century novel. Jodorowsky is actually a strong critic of the surrealists, he thought they were too bourgeois. Smetanahue (talk) 14:08, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough - by the way have you seen the Has film?..Modernist (talk) 14:24, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely, one of my all-time favourites. Would love to expand its article but unfortunately there doesn't seem to be much info available in English. But Has in general is great, also his early Polish Film School stuff. Smetanahue (talk) 14:32, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of modern films 

message: It is superfluous to specify that films from the 1920s and early 1930s are black-and-white or monaural, when colour and stereophony were not introduced into cinema until later. I suggest we remove blank and white and change monaural to with sound. Verbcatcher (talk) 19:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Black and white, and monoaural

message: The article mentions a quote about it and other films as "surreal martial arts".  Likewise, we have an article here stating ""Surreal" is an overused and misused adjective, and yet applicable here.".
What do you think?
http://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/aug/26/scott-pilgrim-vs-the-world-review 
Cameron Nedland (talk) 01:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Scott Pilgrim vs the World]]