Every frame a painting

>every frame a painting
>a picture worth a thousand words

so, Veeky Forums, why aren't you studying film, the ultimate literary form?

I study both.

Because for some reason the people who teach kids in film school have a tendency to fill their heads with pretentious memes about art. It must be something like that, especially with the way things are going now.

Because novels have more than a thousand words, duh.
Proust 1 - Bergman 0

most films have about 27 pictures in one second

The average eye sees 150 frames per second. Why watch a movie when real life is almost six times as literary?

Wait, wasn't the industry standard of frame rate 24 frames a second?

The interest rate on the frames increased the principal over time.

Real life doesn't count because it's lived experience and not crystallized art, which is what literature is. The tragic existential paradox of experience against awareness, etc.

You are dumb as all fuck. You are aware of this, yes?

Ehi that's cool. Maybe one day we'll finally have action sequences that are not blurry

An average film has something like 150000 frames, that's 150 million words, easily thousands of novels.

You're not exactly articulating any sort of argument so I have no reason to believe that...

Film is superior in terms of conjuring images, literature is superor in terms of presenting ideas.

How hard am I being meme'd right now?

>he doesn't realize that literature is the highest and most spiritual art

the point is that film "is" literature, ばか

I was not presenting an argument, merely a fact.

Not at all once you get used to watching cutscenes at 80-100fps action sequences in movies do look blurry, especially if you're watching them closely. Try focussing on the movement of an arm and you'll see what i mean

>he doesn't take in entire art galleries at 144 paintings per second

According to some dumb a priori marketplace definition this thread is adhering to. Really it's not. Literature is literature, sculpture is sculpture, painting is painting, and film is film.

"A picture is worth a thousand words and thus it follows that a movie which is 24 frames per second is 24,000 words per second" isn't exactly Aristotlean artistic theory.

A picture may have more detail, but the derived expression is infinite. There is so much information a lot of it becomes meaningless. Whereas in poetry, the scope is limited and more deliberate. One detail can have infinite depth instead of in film where they are near infinite but shallow and banal.

...