What's your favourite art house film?

Sorry, I can't pick one.

Cache

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lS4VVUYsK44

Mulholland Drive

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzdNrWmAV0E

Broken Flowers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_TB7MkrGyc
 
I'm never quite sure what qualifies as arthouse. Can foreign films that were not originally 'arthouse' but are now viewed by arthouse audiences count? If they do then I would say Tokyo Story or Late Spring. If not then Rashomon and In The Mood For Love are my choices. I guess most of my favorite films can be considered 'arthouse' so its not easy to choose!
 
I'm having trouble finding an extensive list of art house films, so I don't know which ones I've seen. This list isn't very helpful to me since I've only seen a few of those. Google seems to only want to list top choices lists. Anyone have a truly comprehensive list?
 
richy said:
I'm having trouble finding an extensive list of art house films, so I don't know which ones I've seen. This list isn't very helpful to me since I've only seen a few of those. Google seems to only want to list top choices lists. Anyone have a truly comprehensive list?
Click to expand...

Wow that RT list shows how useless RT really is. I loved Poetry (2010) but it does not compare with classics from Kurosawa, Ozu, Renoir, Tarkovsky, Fellini, Bergman, etc.

A good start on art house films is looking at the list of Criterion films:
http://www.criterion.com/library/list_view?pp=all

Also if you've seen a foreign film, that isn't very mainstream it's probably 'art house.' I'm sure even something like Amélie can be considered 'art house.'

I don't like the term 'art house' because it is not really accurate. There are a lot of films that are now considered 'art house' that were supposed to be popular films in the past. 'Art' cinema is a mode of filmmaking as defined by David Bordwell in his essay, I think that's fine. But 'art house' usually includes both 'art' cinema and 'classic narrative cinema' so it's hard to distinguish what is 'art house.'
 
Can't pick a favourite but off the top of my head, La Teta y la luna is pretty good and undeniably art house.

Loved Mullholland Drive, enjoyed Blue Velvet.

The teenage me loved Rumblefish, all in black and white except the fish. Today, it's not that good but at the time... wow.
 
baoliun said:
I seriously can't understand how can Rashomon or M be art house?
Click to expand...

As I stated before, there are certain films that are now considered art house that were not originally intended as art house films. I think that Rashomon has always qualified as art house though because it is when Kurosawa started making distinctly artistic films that broke conventions and did not make much money in Japan unlike his earlier films. When I think of essential art house films, Rashomon is actually one of the first that comes to mind. Kurosawa, Bergman, Fellini, and even Welles are the most art house directors I can think of since they defined that type of cinema.
 
Last edited:
I guess it is a matter of definition. I think the director's you are listed are great auteurs,rather than arthouse directors. Would you classify Kubrick as arthouse director?
 
baoliun said:
I guess it is a matter of definition. I think the director's you are listed are great auteurs,rather than arthouse directors. Would you classify Kubrick as arthouse director?
Click to expand...

I think I see your point. That's why I hate the term 'art house' in the first place. But generally I think being classified as 'art house' or not has more to do with marketing and financial success than the actual films themselves. You make a good point with Kubrick, if he wouldn't be as popular as he is he would definitely be considered art house.

Well they (the directors I mentioned in previous post) could be defined as auteurs today, but I think that auteurs were originally Hollywood directors (and other commercial film directors) who didn't write their scripts or edit their own films but left a unique mark on their films. Directors that defined auteur theory are guys like Alfred Hitchcock, John Ford, John Huston, and Howard Hawks. Once you get to defining 'art house' you have less conventional directors (usually from outside the U.S.) like Bergman, Fellini, Antonioni, Godard, Truffaut, Bresson, Tarkovsky, etc.

Today I think both 'art house' and 'auteur' are terms that have changed their meaning. 'Autuers' can now also be directors who do many things on their films (edit, write, score, act, etc.) rather than just outstanding commercial film directors with a distinctive mise-en-scene or common themes. 'Art house' films now include just about any foreign film that's not too mainstream, as well as unconventional films.

If Bergman or Fellini are not art house though, then I don't know who is. I mean of course guys like Tsai Ming-liang, Bela Tarr, Hong Sang-soo, and Apichatpong Weerasethakul are definitely art house. But I think that those original European directors of the 50's and 60's (along with Kurosawa) are the original 'art house' directors (whatever that means).
 
Last edited:
Thanks, James. =)

Solaris Though I'm sure they didn't intend for it to be art house. I suppose it does have that art house "feel".

The Last Temptation of Christ

Mulholland Drive

Short Bus

Hedwig and the Angry Inch

The Darjeeling Limited

Valhalla Rising
I'm not fond of the unhappy ending. I do have to admit that the unhappy ending does holds some power, though.

The Secret of Roan Inish Though I haven't seen it for a long time. For a long time I've meant to pick it up on home video.

Passion Fish

Lone Star

In the Mood for Love

Happy Together

Old Boy

Ju Dou

Raise the Red Lantern

A Single Man

The Last Tango in Paris

The Dreamers

Naked Lunch

Romance Watch the subtitled version. The dubbed version sounds pretty atrocious.

Ran

Taste of Cherry

The White Balloon

City of Lost Children

Delicatessen

The Red Violin

Cloud Atlas Isn't Cloud Atlas a big ol' art house movie?
 
Last edited:
Everybody's already named all the good ones! Kieslowski, Wong Kar-Wai, Chanwook Park and all the older masters!


Pulp Fiction is definitely arthouse! Hell, I would say all of Tarantino's films are art-house!
 
baoliun said:
How is Tarantino an art house???
Click to expand...

I recall when Pulp Fiction was released. In the town I was in at the time, it wasn't shown at the big theater-chain multi-plex; it was at the local two-screen art-house cinema.

Make of that what you will.
smiley_mystery.gif


.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top