nes Banned

It’s nice to be heard, I’ll try to repeat the question. You can find the Italian subtitles on emule/torrent/opensubs/etc... Thank you.

I have listened to other stuff by them, but this is the only one I like.

"In addition to the shots, the dialogues of the characters and the director's notes are also included (for each single shot). It's good that it's not about editing! No, it's not about editing, but they force it, and if you really like to have confirmations from those who actually make cinema, go watch the special features of Raging Bull where the Oscar-winning editor claims that the Oscar should have been given to the director since the scenes were already all ready in the shooting plan. It's the direction that makes the difference in a film; otherwise, you end up with damn good editors at the mercy of semi-idiot directors and you get the last films of Tony Scott.
"Someone who says that they know and fill their mouth only with the big names that everyone knows and you bring me two other directors is a bit too few," as I already said, I find the exam thing pathetic. I read this phrase on these pages: 'never argue with an idiot; first, they bring you down to their level, then they beat you with experience.' I have no intention of lowering myself to your level. You wanted valid directors, not the most famous? I gave them to you. Moodysson I don't know, but I think he hasn't made 'essential' films... Keep on criticizing films and directors without having seen anything of theirs and calling others know-it-alls. Think before you speak, come on. You call me a know-it-all and you want to give me exams... stop it, go listen to Zappa, you'll make a better impression. Ah, I recommend you keep watching all the comments I leave, maybe one day you'll find something to latch onto in hopes of proving that editing is the most important thing in cinema! Make sure to check them all, but really all of them. (Don't you have anything better to do?)"

"Putting acting and editing on the same level" I never said that. I simply stated that editing is not the most important thing in a film. "The directing level is the choice of shots" very true, in addition to the shots, the characters' dialogues and the director's notes (for each individual shot) are included. "On the front page until a few days ago there was a film by Kim Ki Duk (to say now that he is unknown is risky) but a director of great value who has recently appeared, I haven't seen your comments on Avatar, which 6-year-olds know, you wrote poems... well, these arrogant little kids today!" I didn’t comment because I have only seen Ferro 3 by Kim Ki Duk. Should I agree with you on everything because I haven't seen the entire filmography of the Korean director? Fine, if it makes you happy... You are right about everything! PS: I find the film exam pathetic (did you really check to see if there were my comments??? come on...) Anyway, if you want to stay in Korea I like Park Chan Wook, who is also not exactly unknown anymore to tell the truth (I'm a cyborg but that's ok is my favorite of those I've seen, though it is only available in subtitled version, or at least it was the only one when I watched it). If, on the other hand, you want to move to Europe, I find the Swedish Lukas Moodysson pleasant. I hope to have good chances of passing the entrance test. Please note the time at which I am responding to you, Professor.

Are there also Italian subtitles available?

No one has contradicted themselves, I'm sorry. The fact that you are unable to engage in a discussion due to your general superficial knowledge on a topic like cinema, filled with big names to impress (and then you call others pedantic... don’t worry, you’re not annoying, you’re comic...) and nothing else (confusing a shot list with editing is not absolutely a grave thing; one can very well not even know what a shot list is, but wanting to argue about editing without having in mind what it is, and worse, pretending to your interlocutor that you know exactly what it is (the shot list, not the editing which even a fool today knows what it is), is at the very least counterproductive). If we also add a complete willingness to contradict the other without thinking for 2 seconds about what they are saying, we are headed towards the total defeat of reason. But you keep going, from your pulpit made of Zappa, Eisenstein, Wells, Godard, saying that others are being pedantic. One piece of advice: if you want to impress with your incredible audio-video culture, throw out some names that are a bit less obvious. PS: On one thing I agree, though; this discussion has given everything it needed to give, and it can very well be closed.

It takes quite some courage, though, to consider Def Leppard heavy metal.

His appeal in the film is more or less this: take me around so everyone can see how you (addressed to the doctors) have reduced me. With this, I don’t mean to say that there isn’t anti-militarism in the film, nor that the message of the book is purely a pacifist one. However, the film is from '71, and I believe Trumbo adapted that discourse following his reflections over the years (it seems entirely plausible to me since 33 years passed). In my previous comment, I was only talking about the film and not the book, which I won’t comment on, but I’ll just trust what you reported since I haven’t read it.

"I didn't talk about directorial plans but about sequences shot in such a way that they can only be edited in one manner... And indeed, this happens through the writing of the directorial plan... 'A star is not synonymous with a good actor but with a famous personality... even Angelina Jolie is a star, but is she a good actress?' ... absolutely true... however, I don't recall Jolie being one of the stars who worked with Hitchcock. Marlon Brando (who was an actor) used to say that in cinema you go to see the director; in theater, the actors... Who ever said otherwise? Sorry? I merely pointed out that Alfred sometimes exaggerated, and that he claimed actors were completely useless while he cast Gregory Peck, Cary Grant, Ingrid Bergman, James Stewart, Sean Connery, Paul Newman for his films...
To conclude: 'Battleship Potemkin' do you know why it's a film that started modern cinema? Because of its dynamic editing, which had never been that way before... Do you know why 'Citizen Kane' is the turning point of modern cinema, not just for the shots, depth of field, and long takes, but also for the decomposition of editing (flashbacks)... Do you know why 'Breathless' was innovative? Because it 'de-temporalized' actions; they are irregular, disconnected, and you know how it's done through editing... Funny how innovative films often start with editing... (A recent example? 'Reservoir Dogs' and 'Pulp Fiction' do you know why they are groundbreaking films for their particular editing, not just because they casually drop f-bombs and shoot up the place?) Yes, of course I know that, and so what? Editing is essential; what a discovery. Editing is important; who ever said otherwise... but editing is not the most important thing in a film. I would also point out that you call others pretentious after the two ridiculous comments you left up there... Come on, a little self-reflection, please! :)"

Alex, I just wanted you to explain to me, rewrite in a way (for me, poor ignorant) more understandable the previous sentence. That's all, because the more I read it, the more I'm convinced that it says there that the screenplay and the plot in the end are the same thing.